CelticsStrong
Around the League => Around the NBA => Topic started by: slightly biased bias fan on April 14, 2017, 07:34:03 PM
-
I thought I would run some ideas by you guys and see if people like them as an alternative to the current award system.
The award of MVP will actually become three seperate awards, through three seperate organisations; the NBA, the Press, the Players Association. The press will give their MVP award the same way they do now but it is their own 'unofficial' award along with the players association offering 'Players Players award' of who the players believe is the best of the season. Now the NBA's MVP is the official award and will be picked by a learned panel who will give a 3-2-1 system for every game in the season, and for those who say this is too much NBA to watch, when you watch a condensed version of each game it turns each game into just 48 minutes. So the 3-2-1 system is a score card for the game with the best player getting 3 points, second best getting 2 points and so on. This is the fairest system as current voting system is biased to the last part of the season when the vote is cast and fake stats (Westbrook's triple doubles). The 3-2-1 system will also be a huge instigator in stopping players resting as a MVP candidate will risk getting no points if they don't play and could cost them down the road, it also punishes losing as if you lose by a significant margin you don't deserve any points either.
What do you think of this system? Any better?
-
I don't think the system needs fixing. The whole point of having the awards is to generate discussion, and the current system does that very effectively.
Having the media make the selections means there's greater transparency and public debate about the choices before votes are cast.
-
I thought I would run some ideas by you guys and see if people like them as an alternative to the current award system.
The award of MVP will actually become three seperate awards, through three seperate organisations; the NBA, the Press, the Players Association. The press will give their MVP award the same way they do now but it is their own 'unofficial' award along with the players association offering 'Players Players award' of who the players believe is the best of the season. Now the NBA's MVP is the official award and will be picked by a learned panel who will give a 3-2-1 system for every game in the season, and for those who say this is too much NBA to watch, when you watch a condensed version of each game it turns each game into just 48 minutes. So the 3-2-1 system is a score card for the game with the best player getting 3 points, second best getting 2 points and so on. This is the fairest system as current voting system is biased to the last part of the season when the vote is cast and fake stats (Westbrook's triple doubles). The 3-2-1 system will also be a huge instigator in stopping players resting as a MVP candidate will risk getting no points if they don't play and could cost them down the road, it also punishes losing as if you lose by a significant margin you don't deserve any points either.
What do you think of this system? Any better?
If you go game by game, the award is biased toward players with fewer other good players in their division/conference. It's entirely possible that system would give us Isaiah Thomas as the 2017 MVP.
-
Also I agree with Pho, all of this public gnashing of teeth is fun.
-
i love the idea and it would be fairer than what we have now.
but having a committee watch 82*15 games seems unlikely.
-
I thought I would run some ideas by you guys and see if people like them as an alternative to the current award system.
The award of MVP will actually become three seperate awards, through three seperate organisations; the NBA, the Press, the Players Association. The press will give their MVP award the same way they do now but it is their own 'unofficial' award along with the players association offering 'Players Players award' of who the players believe is the best of the season. Now the NBA's MVP is the official award and will be picked by a learned panel who will give a 3-2-1 system for every game in the season, and for those who say this is too much NBA to watch, when you watch a condensed version of each game it turns each game into just 48 minutes. So the 3-2-1 system is a score card for the game with the best player getting 3 points, second best getting 2 points and so on. This is the fairest system as current voting system is biased to the last part of the season when the vote is cast and fake stats (Westbrook's triple doubles). The 3-2-1 system will also be a huge instigator in stopping players resting as a MVP candidate will risk getting no points if they don't play and could cost them down the road, it also punishes losing as if you lose by a significant margin you don't deserve any points either.
What do you think of this system? Any better?
If you go game by game, the award is biased toward players with fewer other good players in their division/conference. It's entirely possible that system would give us Isaiah Thomas as the 2017 MVP.
and what exactly is wrong with IT winning the award?
I like OP's suggestion that there should be an Association MVP award, a players MVP award, and a sport's writers' MVP award. The Association should have a nomination process and then have the fans vote for the nominated players.
-
How many times has the MVP award winner universally been panned 10+ years later? I honestly can only think of a couple and they were the ones that Steve Nash won both times (and there are still people that would choose Nash both years). Other than those two, I can't really think of a time where you look back at the winner and say, yeah he shouldn't have won it. Sure there are some debates here and there and certainly some people would have selected someone else, but a universal panning, there just aren't that many. I mean even the 61/62 season you don't see too many people panning Russell even though Chamberlain went for 50/23 and Robertson averaged a triple double.
-
There is no real need to fix it.
I mean the only time I scratched my head was when the voters get sick of voting the same guy every year so they vote for someone else.
-
How many times has the MVP award winner universally been panned 10+ years later? I honestly can only think of a couple and they were the ones that Steve Nash won both times (and there are still people that would choose Nash both years). Other than those two, I can't really think of a time where you look back at the winner and say, yeah he shouldn't have won it. Sure there are some debates here and there and certainly some people would have selected someone else, but a universal panning, there just aren't that many. I mean even the 61/62 season you don't see too many people panning Russell even though Chamberlain went for 50/23 and Robertson averaged a triple double.
I think the only really bad selection was Derrick Rose. All other league MVPs you can make a valid argument for 10+ years later
-
How many times has the MVP award winner universally been panned 10+ years later? I honestly can only think of a couple and they were the ones that Steve Nash won both times (and there are still people that would choose Nash both years). Other than those two, I can't really think of a time where you look back at the winner and say, yeah he shouldn't have won it. Sure there are some debates here and there and certainly some people would have selected someone else, but a universal panning, there just aren't that many. I mean even the 61/62 season you don't see too many people panning Russell even though Chamberlain went for 50/23 and Robertson averaged a triple double.
I think the only really bad selection was Derrick Rose. All other league MVPs you can make a valid argument for 10+ years later
I certainly thought James should have won it that year, but Rose had a pretty darn good season leading a 62 win team. I mean 25 ppg, 7.7 apg, 4.1 rpg with a TS% of 55% as the best player on the best team in basketball isn't exactly anything to sneeze at. I though James had the better season, but his first year in Miami he would have had to have an unbelievable season to win the award.