What would your NBA MVP ballot look like?

[wadesworld]

1) Kawhi
2) Harden
3) IT
4) Russ
5) LBJ

Bonus Question: Who is your Rookie of the Year?  Mine is Brogdon.

[reinko]

1. Harden
2. Russy
3. Kawhi
4. Bron

ROY: Brogdon, but Saric is a close 2nd.  Dude was a baller after the all-star break

[MerrittsMustache]

1. LeBron
2. Harden
3. Leonard
4. Westbrook

LeBron may not even finish in the top 3 of the actual voting, but let's be honest here, it's ALWAYS LeBron.

ROY: Brogdon. He had a very solid rookie year, especially for a second rounder, but this rookie class was really sorry.

[flash]

Really tough one this year.  Hard not to give it to Russ. I think he's  the most deserving, I'll go with,
1. Westbrook
2. Harden
3. Lebron
4. Kawai


It is a regular season award so Russ losing first round can't be held against him. 

[Pakuni]

1. Russ
2. Harden





3. LeBron
4. Leonard

ROY: Embiid

[wadesworld]

1. LeBron
2. Harden
3. Leonard
4. Westbrook

LeBron may not even finish in the top 3 of the actual voting, but let's be honest here, it's ALWAYS LeBron.

ROY: Brogdon. He had a very solid rookie year, especially for a second rounder, but this rookie class was really sorry.

Was it really LeBron though?  Just think of him vs. IT.  I understand LeBron is a better player by stratospheres.  But if it's really an MVP, LeBron clearly has a ton more talent around him, but his team finished with a worse record than IT's.

[HouWarrior]

Harden
LeBron
Kawhi
Russ

[wadesworld]

Harden
LeBron
Kawhi
Russ
Leonard

So does Kawhi at 3 and Leonard at 5 bump him up to 1? 

[Pakuni]

So does Kawhi at 3 and Leonard at 5 bump him up to 1? 

Meyers Leonard.
Duh.

[Jockey]

1. LeBron
2. Harden
3. Leonard
4. Westbrook

LeBron may not even finish in the top 3 of the actual voting, but let's be honest here, it's ALWAYS LeBron.

ROY: Brogdon. He had a very solid rookie year, especially for a second rounder, but this rookie class was really sorry.

It's Lebron every year - just as it was MJ very year. Whether they get the hardware or not.

Brogdon was ROY and yes, it was a pathetic rookie class. One of the worst ever.

[🏀]

LeBron
Westbrook
Harden
Leonard

LBJ is still the best player in the league.

[BM1090]

Definitely wouldn't include IT. He is arguably the worst defender at his position in the entire league, although most of that is just physical limitations and carrying the offensive load. Not effort related.

1. Harden
2. Kawhi
3. Russ
4. LeBron (he's the best player in the world, but he coasts in the regular season sometimes. Can't fault him for it)

[Jockey]

4. LeBron (he's the best player in the world, but he coasts in the regular season sometimes. Can't fault him for it)

He set career highs in rebounds and assists this year while scoring almost 27 a game.

I have to wonder when exactly it was that he coasted. And if he put up those numbers while coasting, he is far far and away the greatest of all-time

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

1. Westbrook
2. Harden
3. Leonard
4. James
5. Durant/Curry

*These are not my best player rankings. James is #1 on that list.

ROY=Brogdon

Embiid missed too much time. Being on a playoff team gives Brogdon the edge but it's a weak year for rookies.

[wadesworld]

LeBron is the best player in the world and the best player of this generation.  That doesn't mean you automatically give him the MVP.  He didn't have the best season statistically and his team wasn't the best team in his conference.  He didn't have the most important impact on his team either.

LeBron is having the best postseason and if the Cavs win the title he will undoubtedly and deservedly win the Finals MVP.  But for regular season MVP I don't see a case for him being #1.  Certainly on the ballot though.

[reinko]

He set career highs in rebounds and assists this year while scoring almost 27 a game.

I have to wonder when exactly it was that he coasted. And if he put up those numbers while coasting, he is far far and away the greatest of all-time

Not too mention led the NBA in minutes played this year, which re-cock-u-lous

[wadesworld]

Not too mention led the NBA in minutes played this year, which re-cock-u-lous

*in the games he played.

[MU82]

LeBron is the best player in the world and the best player of this generation.  That doesn't mean you automatically give him the MVP.  He didn't have the best season statistically and his team wasn't the best team in his conference.  He didn't have the most important impact on his team either.

LeBron is having the best postseason and if the Cavs win the title he will undoubtedly and deservedly win the Finals MVP.  But for regular season MVP I don't see a case for him being #1.  Certainly on the ballot though.

As folks know from my past comments (which all have memorized, I hope, as there is a quiz tomorrow morning), I'm a big LeBron fan. I say he already is the No. 2 player in history and I like his chances to narrow the gap to the point where MJ is 1 and LJ is 1A.

However ...

I agree with what wades says here. LeBron gladly accepted 8 "rest" days this season - that's nearly 10% of the schedule. He has a team with two other All-Stars, yet they weren't good enough to even get the best regular-season record in a weak conference. They had a couple of major slumps this season and he couldn't pull them out of them. I'm sure there were some extenuating circumstances ... but that doesn't mean you reward him by making him MVP.

My voting would be:

1. Westbrook: Had one of the great regular seasons ever, took only one game off only after OKC's seed was decided, carried a team that would have been lucky to finish in the top 12 in the conference if OKC had a "normal" PG. I get that some don't like his game, but I don't know how one could define "value" and not have him really, really high. I say it's No. 1.

2. Harden: Transformed himself from a me-first player to a great PG who could still take over games as a scorer.  The team was built well around him, as his supporting cast fits his style wonderfully, but they still are mostly role players. I'd have no problem with him finishing ahead of Westbrook even if I'd mildly disagree. The falloff to No. 3 is fairly steep this season.

3. Leonard: The Spurs have some very good players, obviously, but they're not what they once were and yet they won a lot of games because they have the best two-way player in the league.

4. LeBron: The best basketball player on the planet. I could see flip-flopping him and Leonard.

5. Thomas: Little big man carried a good-not-great Boston team to the best record in the conference.

6. Nic Batum. Just seeing if anybody has read this far.

[GoldenDieners32]

1) Westbrook
2) Harden
3) Bron
4) Kawhi
5) John Wall

ROY: HENRY

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

1. Harden
2. Westbrook
3. LeBron
4. Leonard
5. IT

[Jockey]

As folks know from my past comments (which all have memorized, I hope, as there is a quiz tomorrow morning), I'm a big LeBron fan. I say he already is the No. 2 player in history and I like his chances to narrow the gap to the point where MJ is 1 and LJ is 1A.

However ...

I agree with what wades says here. LeBron gladly accepted 8 "rest" days this season - that's nearly 10% of the schedule. He has a team with two other All-Stars, yet they weren't good enough to even get the best regular-season record in a weak conference. They had a couple of major slumps this season and he couldn't pull them out of them. I'm sure there were some extenuating circumstances ... but that doesn't mean you reward him by making him MVP.

My voting would be:

1. Westbrook: Had one of the great regular seasons ever, took only one game off only after OKC's seed was decided, carried a team that would have been lucky to finish in the top 12 in the conference if OKC had a "normal" PG. I get that some don't like his game, but I don't know how one could define "value" and not have him really, really high. I say it's No. 1.

2. Harden: Transformed himself from a me-first player to a great PG who could still take over games as a scorer.  The team was built well around him, as his supporting cast fits his style wonderfully, but they still are mostly role players. I'd have no problem with him finishing ahead of Westbrook even if I'd mildly disagree. The falloff to No. 3 is fairly steep this season.

3. Leonard: The Spurs have some very good players, obviously, but they're not what they once were and yet they won a lot of games because they have the best two-way player in the league.

4. LeBron: The best basketball player on the planet. I could see flip-flopping him and Leonard.

5. Thomas: Little big man carried a good-not-great Boston team to the best record in the conference.

6. Nic Batum. Just seeing if anybody has read this far.

I agree with all you say, but......

I think even you who has repeatedly talked about Lebron's greatness, still possibly underestimate Lebron a bit.

Yeah, he took games off, but I think we need to consider the fact his team (like the Bulls with MJ) plays 100+ games a year. Every Year. Westbrook never has to worry about that much of a beating on his body. And while Irving and Love are very good players, neither is a great player. The Cavs are a borderline playoff team without Lebron.

When the greatest player on the planet leads the league in minutes per game, sets career highs in rebounds and assists, scores 27 point per game, and is one of the premier defenders in the league - that is an MVP season.

I have rooted against the Cavs and against the Heat in the playoffs - in other words against Lebron - but I have to give him the MVP for the way he has elevated his team to being a co-favorite to win the title again in addition to his stats.

All the same, I hope Westbrook gets the trophy..

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

I agree with all you say, but......

I think even you who has repeatedly talked about Lebron's greatness, still possibly underestimate Lebron a bit.

Yeah, he took games off, but I think we need to consider the fact his team (like the Bulls with MJ) plays 100+ games a year. Every Year. Westbrook never has to worry about that much of a beating on his body. And while Irving and Love are very good players, neither is a great player. The Cavs are a borderline playoff team without Lebron.

When the greatest player on the planet leads the league in minutes per game, sets career highs in rebounds and assists, scores 27 point per game, and is one of the premier defenders in the league - that is an MVP season.

I have rooted against the Cavs and against the Heat in the playoffs - in other words against Lebron - but I have to give him the MVP for the way he has elevated his team to being a co-favorite to win the title again in addition to his stats.

All the same, I hope Westbrook gets the trophy..

I think your above statement says something about the quality of play we are lucky enough to see right now. This thread could go 100 pages and we would still have 4 different answers. Love it.

[reinko]

*in the games he played.

LBJ played in the same # games as Kawhi this year, 2 less games than IT, but played substantially more total minutes than both. 

https://www.sportingcharts.com/nba/stats/player-minutes-per-game-leaders/2016/

[wadesworld]

LBJ played in the same # games as Kawhi this year, 2 less games than IT, but played substantially more total minutes than both. 

https://www.sportingcharts.com/nba/stats/player-minutes-per-game-leaders/2016/

AKA, he did not re-cock-u-lously lead the league in minutes played this year.

[StillAWarrior]

AKA, he did not re-cock-u-lously lead the league in minutes played this year.

No, but he was top ten.  And, as you acknowledged, did lead the league in MPG.

[StillAWarrior]

LeBron is the best player in the world and the best player of this generation.  That doesn't mean you automatically give him the MVP.  He didn't have the best season statistically and his team wasn't the best team in his conference.  He didn't have the most important impact on his team either.

LeBron is having the best postseason and if the Cavs win the title he will undoubtedly and deservedly win the Finals MVP.  But for regular season MVP I don't see a case for him being #1.  Certainly on the ballot though.

I know how you feel about LeBron, so I know that's not necessarily easy for you to say.  I agree with almost everything you said in your post.  I would change "his team wasn't the best team in his conference" to "his team didn't have the best record in his conference."  I'm picking nits.  I'm a big LeBron fan, but agree that he doesn't deserve MVP this year.  Westbrook. 

[wadesworld]

I know how you feel about LeBron, so I know that's not necessarily easy for you to say.  I agree with almost everything you said in your post.  I would change "his team wasn't the best team in his conference" to "his team didn't have the best record in his conference."  I'm picking nits.  I'm a big LeBron fan, but agree that he doesn't deserve MVP this year.  Westbrook.

You are right, his team didn't have the best regular season but will be in the NBA Finals.

[MU82]

I agree with all you say, but......

I think even you who has repeatedly talked about Lebron's greatness, still possibly underestimate Lebron a bit.

Yeah, he took games off, but I think we need to consider the fact his team (like the Bulls with MJ) plays 100+ games a year. Every Year. Westbrook never has to worry about that much of a beating on his body. And while Irving and Love are very good players, neither is a great player. The Cavs are a borderline playoff team without Lebron.

When the greatest player on the planet leads the league in minutes per game, sets career highs in rebounds and assists, scores 27 point per game, and is one of the premier defenders in the league - that is an MVP season.

I have rooted against the Cavs and against the Heat in the playoffs - in other words against Lebron - but I have to give him the MVP for the way he has elevated his team to being a co-favorite to win the title again in addition to his stats.

All the same, I hope Westbrook gets the trophy..

Well, thanks for mostly agreeing, but I don't think I underestimate LeBron one iota.

As for this line - I think we need to consider the fact his team (like the Bulls with MJ) plays 100+ games a year. Every Year.  - here's a fact for you:

Jordan played EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1995-96, EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1996-97 and EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1997-98, and averaged 38.1 mpg (even more mpg than LeBron played this season in his 74 games). All while the Bulls were playing 100+ games every season. When the Bulls planned to rest Jordan for a PRESEASON game in Detroit, Stern strongly recommended the team reconsider because the Pistons had sold out the exhibition game. And yes, Jordan ended up playing about half that game.

So yes, LeBron is amazing. I've said it repeatedly. But once again, he pales in comparison to something Jordan did.

Thanks for bringing it up!

[wadesworld]

I would like to edit my MVP ballot after tonight.

1) MANU!

[MUBurrow]

As for this line - I think we need to consider the fact his team (like the Bulls with MJ) plays 100+ games a year. Every Year.  - here's a fact for you:

Jordan played EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1995-96, EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1996-97 and EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1997-98, and averaged 38.1 mpg (even more mpg than LeBron played this season in his 74 games). All while the Bulls were playing 100+ games every season. When the Bulls planned to rest Jordan for a PRESEASON game in Detroit, Stern strongly recommended the team reconsider because the Pistons had sold out the exhibition game. And yes, Jordan ended up playing about half that game.

So yes, LeBron is amazing. I've said it repeatedly. But once again, he pales in comparison to something Jordan did.

I want to stay agnostic about the value of playing every game, and it doesn't necessarily bear upon the single-season MVP award, but comparing LeBron's and Jordan's PT requires bearing a couple of other important points in mind. First, Jordan skipped the 93-94 season altogether and played 17 games in the 94-95 season, so in highlighting his GP and MPG from 95-98, you have to compare that against LeBron's occasional days off. Second, Jordan's first NBA season was his age 21 season, while LeBron already had played 159 NBA games by that point, averaging more than 40 minutes per. Third, it will be a minor miracle if LeBron's body holds up as well and as long at 6'8", 250 as Jordan's did at 6'6" 195.

[MU82]

I want to stay agnostic about the value of playing every game, and it doesn't necessarily bear upon the single-season MVP award, but comparing LeBron's and Jordan's PT requires bearing a couple of other important points in mind. First, Jordan skipped the 93-94 season altogether and played 17 games in the 94-95 season, so in highlighting his GP and MPG from 95-98, you have to compare that against LeBron's occasional days off. Second, Jordan's first NBA season was his age 21 season, while LeBron already had played 159 NBA games by that point, averaging more than 40 minutes per. Third, it will be a minor miracle if LeBron's body holds up as well and as long at 6'8", 250 as Jordan's did at 6'6" 195.

Fair points, although I'm guessing LeBron's body - chiseled from steel - will be just fine.

I was just responding to a comment in which LeBron resting was because his teams historically play 100+ games, like MJ did.

I'd say your comment especially has merit for the 1995-96 season, as Jordan was coming off of having not played for most of the previous two seasons - although he wasn't really "resting," he was learning how to play baseball. By 1997-98, and after having gone through two 100-game seasons, I'd say the "MJ rested a lot from 1993-95" factor was pretty much erased.

[reinko]

Fair points, although I'm guessing LeBron's body - chiseled from steel - will be just fine.

I was just responding to a comment in which LeBron resting was because his teams historically play 100+ games, like MJ did.

I'd say your comment especially has merit for the 1995-96 season, as Jordan was coming off of having not played for most of the previous two seasons - although he wasn't really "resting," he was learning how to play baseball. By 1997-98, and after having gone through two 100-game seasons, I'd say the "MJ rested a lot from 1993-95" factor was pretty much erased.

Total games LBJ played the last six seasons, not that far off from the hundo game season MJ played during his prime

2010-2011: 100
2011-2012: 85
2012-2013: 99
2013-2014: 97
2014-2015: 89
2015-2016: 97
2016-2017: 74 + # of playoff games (most likely another 18-22)

[StillAWarrior]

I would like to edit my MVP ballot after tonight.

1) MANU!

That was awesome.

[GGGG]

Jordan played EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1995-96, EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1996-97 and EVERY SINGLE GAME in 1997-98, and averaged 38.1 mpg (even more mpg than LeBron played this season in his 74 games). All while the Bulls were playing 100+ games every season. When the Bulls planned to rest Jordan for a PRESEASON game in Detroit, Stern strongly recommended the team reconsider because the Pistons had sold out the exhibition game. And yes, Jordan ended up playing about half that game.

So yes, LeBron is amazing. I've said it repeatedly. But once again, he pales in comparison to something Jordan did.

Thanks for bringing it up!

This is another silly criticism.  Resting players due to the length of the NBA season is a pretty common practice these days.  Jordan was about LBJ's age when he came out of retirement.  The next three years he ranked #12 (3090), #18 (3106), and #9 (3181) in overall minutes.  This year's leader (Andrew Wiggins at 3048), would have finished at 16th, not in top 20, and 16th in those three seasons.

Lebron is #10 this year at 2794.  This is not a "Michael Jordan is just tougher than LBJ" issue.  This is a "The NBA is getting a lot smarter about how to allocate minutes" issue.

[MUBurrow]

Fair points, although I'm guessing LeBron's body - chiseled from steel - will be just fine.

I was just responding to a comment in which LeBron resting was because his teams historically play 100+ games, like MJ did.

I'd say your comment especially has merit for the 1995-96 season, as Jordan was coming off of having not played for most of the previous two seasons - although he wasn't really "resting," he was learning how to play baseball. By 1997-98, and after having gone through two 100-game seasons, I'd say the "MJ rested a lot from 1993-95" factor was pretty much erased.

Totally on board with that - the 95-96 season is almost akin to Adrian Peterson's bounceback year after his ACL tear. AP was 30 that year and ran for 1485 yards on 327 carries. Also agree that the baseball rest was pretty much irrelevant by 97-98, and the relevancy was probably somewhere in between for 96-97.

I hope LeBron's body holds up, but the way he's built, he may start breaking down in the Tiger Woods kind of way. Then again, I think LeBron's body is naturally more made to carry all of that muscle, whereas Tiger forced it (against the advice of his coaches) for a number of years and his body just started giving up.

[MU82]

This is another silly criticism.  Resting players due to the length of the NBA season is a pretty common practice these days.  Jordan was about LBJ's age when he came out of retirement.  The next three years he ranked #12 (3090), #18 (3106), and #9 (3181) in overall minutes.  This year's leader (Andrew Wiggins at 3048), would have finished at 16th, not in top 20, and 16th in those three seasons.

Lebron is #10 this year at 2794.  This is not a "Michael Jordan is just tougher than LBJ" issue.  This is a "The NBA is getting a lot smarter about how to allocate minutes" issue.

I wasn't really "criticizing" LeBron. I was just trying to state facts about the number of games and minutes Jordan played.

It's funny that I'm now seen as a LeBron "critic," as I'm one of this board's biggest LeBron fans. The man is amazing, and I believe it is fully possible that he could surpass Jordan as the game's greatest of all-time. I don't think it will happen, just as Tiger couldn't supplant Jack, but I think it's possible.

[GGGG]

I wasn't really "criticizing" LeBron. I was just trying to state facts about the number of games and minutes Jordan played.

It's funny that I'm now seen as a LeBron "critic," as I'm one of this board's biggest LeBron fans. The man is amazing, and I believe it is fully possible that he could surpass Jordan as the game's greatest of all-time. I don't think it will happen, just as Tiger couldn't supplant Jack, but I think it's possible.

But when you say, "he pales in comparison to something Jordan did," and then not place it in historical context, it is criticism.  James plays as much as Jordan did relative to their eras. 

Jordan is the best of all time.  James isn't there yet and likely won't get there.  And there are a number of valid reasons to support that.  But "he had to team up with guys in Miami," and "he takes games off" aren't valid reasons.

[wadesworld]

But when you say, "he pales in comparison to something Jordan did," and then not place it in historical context, it is criticism.  James plays as much as Jordan did relative to their eras. 

Jordan is the best of all time.  James isn't there yet and likely won't get there.  And there are a number of valid reasons to support that.  But "he had to team up with guys in Miami," and "he takes games off" aren't valid reasons.

I wasn't arguing that James wasn't an all time great because he had to team up with guys in Miami.  My point is nobody is losing out on a chance to win an NBA championship because of LeBron, which is what Tyrone Lue claimed.  Like what really great teams has LeBron beat in the Playoffs in his career?  The Celtics big 3, who already had a title so he didn't prevent them from a title.  The Warriors last year, who already had a title so he didn't prevent them from winning a title.  The Spurs in 2013, who already had 4 titles so he didn't prevent them from winning a title.  The Pacers in the past, or the Raptors the last 2 years?  Come on.  The Thunder?  But were they a great team who just couldn't beat LeBron?  Or were they a solid team that also has lost to the Spurs, Warriors, etc.?

LeBron really hasn't prevented any great teams or great players from winning a title like MJ did, and I'm not sure that's even remotely debatable.

[GGGG]

nm

[MU82]

On another note ...

In Game 5 vs the Spurs, especially the 4th quarter and OT, James Harden was guilty of pretty much all the stuff Russell Westbrook was ripped for in the Rockets' previous series. Harden took numerous crappy shots, didn't get the offense initiated, and the Spurs won without Leonard and Parker.

Now, D'Antoni definitely gets a share of the blame for refusing to use his bench, and Harden probably was tired. But Westbrook almost never leaves a game, and his detractors didn't seem to accept that as an excuse for his poor 4th-quarter play (and decision-making).

[wadesworld]

On another note ...

In Game 5 vs the Spurs, especially the 4th quarter and OT, James Harden was guilty of pretty much all the stuff Russell Westbrook was ripped for in the Rockets' previous series. Harden took numerous crappy shots, didn't get the offense initiated, and the Spurs won without Leonard and Parker.

Now, D'Antoni definitely gets a share of the blame for refusing to use his bench, and Harden probably was tired. But Westbrook almost never leaves a game, and his detractors didn't seem to accept that as an excuse for his poor 4th-quarter play (and decision-making).

Westbrook took 43 shots in a 48 minute game.  Harden took 24 shots in a 53 minute game.

[GGGG]

I wasn't arguing that James wasn't an all time great because he had to team up with guys in Miami. 

"MJ essentially won 6 straight Titles when he was actually playing in the NBA.  LeBron has won 3 total, and 2 of those came when he convinced 2 other top 20 players in the NBA (at the time) to take less money so that they could all be on the same team."

OK wades...

[wadesworld]

"MJ essentially won 6 straight Titles when he was actually playing in the NBA.  LeBron has won 3 total, and 2 of those came when he convinced 2 other top 20 players in the NBA (at the time) to take less money so that they could all be on the same team."

OK wades...

Lol.  Okay Sultan...

I understand there's a reason you put just one sentence in quotes rather than actually quote my response, it makes it easier to take a portion of a response and spin it into something it wasn't and harder for people to go back and look at the context.  That's always fun to do.  Now let's go back and look at the entire response.

I did have to laugh at Tyrone Lue's comments about how LeBron is like MJ in that in the 90's players weren't able to get rings because MJ was winning them all and today it's the same with LeBron.  MJ essentially won 6 straight Titles when he was actually playing in the NBA.  LeBron has won 3 total, and 2 of those came when he convinced 2 other top 20 players in the NBA (at the time) to take less money so that they could all be on the same team.

As far as where he stands in the greatest of all time, I'm pretty confident in saying MJ is one but beyond that it's really hard to "rank" these guys.  The game was so different back in the 70s than it is today and the players aren't playing against the same players.  To me it's pretty hard to rank all time.  What I can say is that LeBron is the best player of this generation.

Conveniently, you left off the part that preceded that about laughing at Tyrone Lue's comments about LeBron doing the same thing MJ did in blocking everyone from winning a title.  So, no, it wasn't about where he stands on the list of all time greats.  It was about, well, exactly what I said it was about.  Tyrone Lue's comments on LeBron blocking everyone from winning a title like MJ did in the 90s.

So I'll ask for the...umpteenth time.  Who has LeBron prevented from winning a title?  What great players and teams would have had a great shot to win a title if LeBron James wasn't blocking them from doing so every year?

Or, we can just cut out the entire response except for one sentence and claim it was about something it wasn't.  Either way works I guess.

I'll hang up and listen.  Again.

[GGGG]

Right.  So I'll ask for the...umpteenth time.  Who has LeBron prevented from winning a title?  What great players and teams would have had a great shot to win a title if LeBron James wasn't blocking them from doing so every year?

I'll hang up and listen.  Again.

First, I wasn't defending Lue's comment.  It's a coach saying coachy things about his player.

Second, the OKC Thunder.  But you argued they weren't a "great" team.  But if we apply the same "great" standard to the Jordan era, I would argue that was really only one "great" team that he prevented from winning the title - the Utah Jazz.

You could make an argument to include the Bird-era Pacers as well.  But the Knicks had their shot after Jordan left - stealing home court in the 1994 Finals only to blow it...again.  And I wouldn't call the Blazers, Sonics or Suns any better than the Thunder.

[MerrittsMustache]

On another note ...

In Game 5 vs the Spurs, especially the 4th quarter and OT, James Harden was guilty of pretty much all the stuff Russell Westbrook was ripped for in the Rockets' previous series. Harden took numerous crappy shots, didn't get the offense initiated, and the Spurs won without Leonard and Parker.

Now, D'Antoni definitely gets a share of the blame for refusing to use his bench, and Harden probably was tired. But Westbrook almost never leaves a game, and his detractors didn't seem to accept that as an excuse for his poor 4th-quarter play (and decision-making).

Harden was not good in the 4th/OT. He only shot 2-7, but his main issue was the TOs. He had a charge, threw a bad pass and had the ball stripped a couple times. He was flat-out bad. The difference when compared to Westbrook is that Harden's poor late game performance hasn't been the norm in the playoffs. In the 5-game series vs Houston, Westbrook shot 14-45 (31.1%) in the 4th quarter. He shot 45-107 (42.1%) in Q1-3.

[MU82]

Harden was not good in the 4th/OT. He only shot 2-7, but his main issue was the TOs. He had a charge, threw a bad pass and had the ball stripped a couple times. He was flat-out bad. The difference when compared to Westbrook is that Harden's poor late game performance hasn't been the norm in the playoffs. In the 5-game series vs Houston, Westbrook shot 14-45 (31.1%) in the 4th quarter. He shot 45-107 (42.1%) in Q1-3.

I agree with all of this.

One needs to look past the pure numbers wades states and to have actually watched the game. Harden was brutally bad down the stretch in G5 and his Rockets found a way to lose to a Spurs team that was playing without arguably the best 2-way player in the NBA and a no-doubt Hall of Famer.

But yes, one reason this stood out is because it was not Harden's norm. He has generally played much better and more efficiently than Westbrook did. I don't dispute that. All I said in my comment was that Harden was bad in G5 and did many of the same things Westbrook did to draw so much criticism.

[BM1090]

He set career highs in rebounds and assists this year while scoring almost 27 a game.

I have to wonder when exactly it was that he coasted. And if he put up those numbers while coasting, he is far far and away the greatest of all-time

Faster games. More possessions. Higher counting stats. Believe I read somewhere that while his per game stats were higher his  per 100 posession stats were lower.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Tony Parker is a no doubt Hall of Famer? Will his plaque read, "Pretty good player that had the good fortune of playing with Tim Duncan."

[MerrittsMustache]

Tony Parker is a no doubt Hall of Famer? Will his plaque read, "Pretty good player that had the good fortune of playing with Tim Duncan."

6x All-Star
4x NBA Champion
3x NBA Second Team
Finals MVP

That's a pretty strong resume.

Basketball Reference puts his HOF probability at 93.9%.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/hof_prob.html

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

6x All-Star
4x NBA Champion
3x NBA Second Team
Finals MVP

That's a pretty strong resume.

Basketball Reference puts his HOF probability at 93.9%.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/hof_prob.html

That is a nice resume. IMO, he's more of a fringe HOF. Surprised his HOF probability is that high. I would have guessed closer to 60-70%.

[wadesworld]

Here's the question.  How much did James Harden get worn down throughout the course of the game because he was trying to defend either 7'1" Pau Gasol or 7' LaMarcus Aldridge down in the post, leaving him less legs down the stretch to be effective offensively?  I hated that strategy for the Rockets even though he's physical enough to stop Pau and LaMarcus from bullying all the way to the rim.  Even if Pau and LaMarcus continue to play soft against him and shoot fadeaways rather than just accepting that maybe they don't get to the rim but they can at least turn and just shoot right over the top of him without a running fadeaway through the lane, Harden is going to get worn down physically trying to hold his ground defending 2 guys with 8 inches and 50 lbs on him.

[Pakuni]

Here's the question.  How much did James Harden get worn down throughout the course of the game because he was trying to defend either 7'1" Pau Gasol or 7' LaMarcus Aldridge down in the post, leaving him less legs down the stretch to be effective offensively?  I hated that strategy for the Rockets even though he's physical enough to stop Pau and LaMarcus from bullying all the way to the rim.  Even if Pau and LaMarcus continue to play soft against him and shoot fadeaways rather than just accepting that maybe they don't get to the rim but they can at least turn and just shoot right over the top of him without a running fadeaway through the lane, Harden is going to get worn down physically trying to hold his ground defending 2 guys with 8 inches and 50 lbs on him.

This is all built on a false premise, i.e. that Harden plays defense. 

[wadesworld]

This is all built on a false premise, i.e. that Harden plays defense. 

I agree, and honestly if it didn't play any part in wearing him down for his offensive purposes I actually would like the move because he defends in the post a ton better than he defends a guard handling the ball.  But again, even though he held his own fairly well, there's no way a 6'4" guard, no matter how strong he is, isn't going to get worn down trying to cover a 7 foot post player all game.

[MU82]

Tony Parker is a no doubt Hall of Famer? Will his plaque read, "Pretty good player that had the good fortune of playing with Tim Duncan."

Lazar, I'm not one of Scoop's "frequent wagerers," but I would gladly bet you many 6-packs that Parker will be a Hall of Famer.

I'd be surprised if he didn't go in on his first attempt, although I wouldn't bet on that. The guy was a huge part of a 4x NBA champion, for cripe's sake, and has some terrific regular-season stats, too.

[BM1090]

Harden actually graded out as a very good on ball defender this year. Much improved from the past.

He has been awful tonight though.

[Pakuni]

Tonight's game ought to disqualify Harden and Leonard from the MVP race.

[Jockey]

Tonight's game ought to disqualify Harden and Leonard from the MVP race.

I guess you are joking (?), but what does being injured for a game that has zero effect on the MVP race have to do with anything?

[Jockey]

6x All-Star
4x NBA Champion
3x NBA Second Team
Finals MVP

That's a pretty strong resume.

Basketball Reference puts his HOF probability at 93.9%.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/hof_prob.html

Very strong resume, but you left a lot out. He was an outstanding International player before joining the Spurs.

The basketball HOF is not an MBA HOF - it covers basketball, period. Parker and Manu are sure-fire HOFers

[Pakuni]

I guess you are joking (?), but what does being injured for a game that has zero effect on the MVP race have to do with anything?

Yes, I was joking.
Though I suppose one could legitimately ask how much of a most valuable player a guy is when his team can win a playoff elimination game by 39 points on the road without him.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Very strong resume, but you left a lot out. He was an outstanding International player before joining the Spurs.

The basketball HOF is not an MBA HOF - it covers basketball, period. Parker and Manu are sure-fire HOFers

Parker was 19 when he joined the Spurs. What are his international accomplishments we should consider?  That is a serious question.  How long was his pre-NBA career? What noteworthy accomplishments does he have? How about Olympic and other international competition?

As for Ginobili, Basketball reference has Manu's HOF probability as 20%.  I actually thought that would be a little higher given his work representing Argentina. Gold and bronze in the Olympics, silver in what is now called the Basketball World Cup. Plus a very distinguished European career before joining the Spurs at 25.

[MU82]

Harden totally spit the bit when his team needed him most.

He went 4-for-18 in the fourth quarter/OT of G5 and then all of G6. In the Spurs series, he committed 31 turnovers and had a ghastly 19.3% TOV. Nine Spurs had a better eFG% than his .505.

During the playoffs, he had games in which he shot 3-17, 8-25 and 5-16, and he averaged 5.4 turnovers per game.

Yikes!

I'd take Westbrook over him in a heartbeat, but I know he had his own troubles and his own damning stats. I certainly understand why others would take Harden.

Neither can carry LeBron's cape, though I'm not sure anybody here is saying otherwise.

[Pakuni]

Neither can carry LeBron's cape, though I'm not sure anybody here is saying otherwise.

LeBron is the league's best player. He's just not this year's most valuable player.
The Cavs probably are still a playoff team without him (yes, I know their record without him isn't good).
And the Spurs are still really solid without Leonard, as we saw last night.
Without Westbrook, the Thunder are picking in the top 10 on draft night.

[wadesworld]

LeBron is the league's best player. He's just not this year's most valuable player.
The Cavs probably are still a playoff team without him (yes, I know their record without him isn't good).
And the Spurs are still really solid without Leonard, as we saw last night.
Without Westbrook, the Thunder are picking in the top 10 on draft night.

Agreed with your first line.

Agreed with your second line and I'd take it a step further and say they're still a top 4 seed in the East without LeBron.

Not really sure about your third line as I think coming to conclusions based on a sample size of one is very reliable.  Patty Mills, Jonathon Simmons, Kyle Anderson, David Lee, Dejounte Murray, and Manu Ginobli (at 39) can all play a good game or even a good series, but if they're being relied on to be key contributors over an 82 game season are they really going to be that good?  I'm not sure I'm sold.

And you can probably say the same thing about Harden and the Rockets as you can Westbrook and the Thunder.  Lou Williams and Eric Gordon are decent scorers, Patrick Beverly is a good, dirty defender, Trevor Ariza is a solid 2 way player, Capella will eventually be really good, Anderson can hit some 3s, but really it's Harden making everyone around him way, way, way better than they are.  It's Harden and a bunch of guys who do one thing well and that's it.  There's a reason that you see guys like Ariza and Gordon take steps forward this year, and that reason is Harden.  Harden makes those guys a lot better.  Can you say the same about Westbrook?  I'm not sure he really makes anybody on his team better.  He puts up gigantic numbers, but it's not all that surprising that suddenly Waiters is a really good player and Durant is more efficient than ever when they leave the Thunder.

[WarriorFan]

Back to the list making:

1.  Leonard - best all around player of the top 3 candidates this year
2.  Westbrook - because of an incredible year, but no team with him doing what he does will ever get beyond the first round of playoffs.
3.  Harden - as much as I hate him because he pushes off on nearly every drive/shot and travels badly (like 5 steps) on most of his drives, he is good in this Steve Nash role. And he needs to be hidden on defense.
4.  LeBron - best player in the NBA, not the MVP.  Hard to explain why.  Probably because his team didn't live up to expectations in the regular season...
5.  Kyrie / Wall / IT - fun to watch all of them
6.  Greek Freak... and moving up the list fast

ROY = Brogdon.   I'll be very disappointed if he doesn't get it.

[Jockey]

LeBron is the league's best player. He's just not this year's most valuable player.
The Cavs probably are still a playoff team without him (yes, I know their record without him isn't good).

Well, we know Love can do the job. Didn't he lead Minnesota to the playoffs every year?

And Stephon Marbury, oops... I mean Kyrie Irving, sure looks like a star. At least for 30 or 40 games a year.

I think this team would be lucky to get a 7th or 8th seed without Lebron.

Sorry for the sarcasm.

[wadesworld]

Well, we know Love can do the job. Didn't he lead Minnesota to the playoffs every year?

And Stephon Marbury, oops... I mean Kyrie Irving, sure looks like a star. At least for 30 or 40 games a year.

I think this team would be lucky to get a 7th or 8th seed without Lebron.

Sorry for the sarcasm.

Really?  You think the Bulls, Bucks, Pacers, and Heat or Pistons would've all been better than the Cavs without LeBron?  I wholeheartedly disagree.

I'd argue Kevin Love's inability to get the Wolves to the Playoffs has more to do with the Wolves organization than with Love, and being in the Western Conference.  Otherwise you must think KAT is an empty stat hog who will never do anything in his career unless a LeBron comes and saves him.

Not sure what to tell you if you don't think Kyrie Irving is any good.

[BM1090]

Back to the list making:

1.  Leonard - best all around player of the top 3 candidates this year
2.  Westbrook - because of an incredible year, but no team with him doing what he does will ever get beyond the first round of playoffs.
3.  Harden - as much as I hate him because he pushes off on nearly every drive/shot and travels badly (like 5 steps) on most of his drives, he is good in this Steve Nash role. And he needs to be hidden on defense.
4.  LeBron - best player in the NBA, not the MVP.  Hard to explain why.  Probably because his team didn't live up to expectations in the regular season...
5.  Kyrie / Wall / IT - fun to watch all of them
6.  Greek Freak... and moving up the list fast

ROY = Brogdon.   I'll be very disappointed if he doesn't get it.

No. He doesn't need to be hidden on defense. He was a good defender this year. His lack of defense was always about lack of effort/desire, and he corrected that this year.

I also think Curry gets dismissed way too easily just because KD signed on. Why in the world would Kyrie be put ahead of Curry? In a down year for Steph he was still far more efficient than any of those guys. And he's better defensively than Kyrie and IT.

I can see an argument for Wall, because they are far different players. I'd disagree, but I can see an argument.

[MU82]

Can you say the same about Westbrook?  I'm not sure he really makes anybody on his team better.  He puts up gigantic numbers, but it's not all that surprising that suddenly Waiters is a really good player and Durant is more efficient than ever when they leave the Thunder.

Silliness, wades.

Adams has gotten progressively better while playing with Westbrook, as have Kanter and Roberson; I guess you'd say it's despite Westbrook and be able to offer some kind of proof. Oladipo had his most efficient year as Westbrook's teammate. Meanwhile, since leaving OKC, Ibaka's numbers have been less impressive. Anybody can find a handful of examples to prove any point about anything.

And Durant? Really? So you're saying that it good to have Curry, Thompson and Green as teammates? Call CNN ... we have a Scoop scoop!

Come on, wades, you can do better than that!

[wadesworld]

Silliness, wades.

Adams has gotten progressively better while playing with Westbrook, as have Kanter and Roberson; I guess you'd say it's despite Westbrook and be able to offer some kind of proof. Oladipo had his most efficient year as Westbrook's teammate. Meanwhile, since leaving OKC, Ibaka's numbers have been less impressive. Anybody can find a handful of examples to prove any point about anything.

And Durant? Really? So you're saying that it good to have Curry, Thompson and Green as teammates? Call CNN ... we have a Scoop scoop!

Come on, wades, you can do better than that!

I would say Adams, Kanter, and Roberson have gotten better because they are no longer 20 year olds, not because they play with a great point guard that gets them the ball in spots that they can succeed.  Giannis didn't get better because he was playing alongside Thon Maker this year.  He got better because he's 22 years old and his game is developing.  Same deal with Adams, Kanter, Roberson.  That tends to happen early in players' career.  Now if McDermott and Gibson came over and were suddenly producing like guys like Ariza and Anderson are on the Rockets then maybe I'd agree.  Both of those guys came over to OKC and played worse than they were with Chicago.

This is Serge's first year away from OKC and his numbers were better this year than they were last year.  He was better 3 years ago because he wasn't playing the Nigel Hayes roll and was actually sticking around the basket.  But since he started deciding he was a shooting guard offensively this was definitely his best year.  '14-'15 was the first year he shot more than 0.7 3 pointers/game.  Since then this was his best shooting year from the field, from 3 point land, and from an efficiency standpoint while averaging his most points/game.  Highest assist percentage, lowest turnover percentage, highest usage, etc.  He did get worse over the last few years, but that was due to a change in his style of play, not in a change to his team.  The team change actually saw him improve.

I don't know, I thought Westbrook was better than any of the players listed?

[Jockey]

Not sure what to tell you if you don't think Kyrie Irving is any good.

I think Irving is one of the top 10 "talents" in the league. I also think he plays that way only about half the time. Thus, my comparison to Marbury.