I would agree if Curry was putting up Jordan-like numbers. He's not, though. His numbers aren't any better than Harden/Westbrook/LBJ/etc., but he's getting praise for an individual award largely because of his team success. Some of that is Curry, obviously, but a large portion of it is just him having better teammates and coaching. Harden is doing everything Curry is doing with less support.
That my friend was my exact argument during the NFL MVP debate as to why JJ deserved the award over Rodgers. Replace the player with an average player at his position and then see what changes. Replace Curry with Kyle Lowry, Ty Lawson, Mike Conley(all in the #10-20 range of point guards with the best PER while Curry is #2) and how bad would the Warriors really be? Maybe one can take away 5-10 games won but otherwise they'd still be a high playoff seed and possible division winner. Replace Harden with DeMar DeRozan or Victor Oladipo(looked for actually star SG's on their teams averaging more than 30 mins/game and in the 5-15 range of best SG PER's) and there's no doubt the dropoff in games won would be way more significant.
Rodgers is worth probably 8 wins to Green Bay. i doubt they could even go 6-10 replacing him with an average guy
When he's on the floor, the Warriors outscore their opponent by 16.8 points per 100 possessions. Consequentially, he doesn't have to play a lot of minutes. When he's off the floor, his team and the opponent are just about break even. That's a huge +/- differential. And amazingly, even though Curry has played 365 less minutes than Harden this season, his aggregate plus/minus is +840 to +348 for Harden. The argument for Harden as MVP is he plays more minutes and his teammates aren't as good. Curry has been a more brilliant individual player (statistically speaking, better RPM, BPM, WS/48, PER) and his team is historically great. Also, historically, MVP goes to the best player on one of the league's top contenders. The Rockets may have a small chance to win it all, but they are by no means a top contender. I think the notion that the MVP race is really close this year is overblown. To me, its an easy choice, and the choice is Curry.
I have Three Questions on the MVP between Harden and Curry 1. Who id better DWIGHT or BOGUT? 2. What is Harden's records with out Dwight? 3. What is Curry's Record without Bogut? If Bogut is out as long as Dwight was out . . ..they are not looking at 66+ wins Since that is the case . . . I think Curry getting credit for Team Wins is BS I would contend . .. Curry *may not* be the MVP of his team . . .. much less the NBA If Bogut goes down for the rest of the season and playoffs . . . .. DOES *ANYONE* See them going to the Western Conference Finals muchless the NBA Finals??? Rocket River
If we are going on hypotheticals, Lebron deserves the MVP. The Cavs looked like the worst team in the league without him (with Love and Kyrie) and a top 2-3 team with him.
MVP values wins. When do you see the MVP given to a player whose team didn't win or make the playoffs? In recent member, just AROD in baseball. There's a reason guys like Nash or Rose and guys like that have won (and Curry isn't having a season like that; his PER is top 3) b/c their teams won.
Worth repeating this. Just because as rockets fans you're jealous at another player getting praised, you don't have to undermine the player's impact on his own team. If you watch the dubs more, you'll find that Curry makes the team go, and not by hogging the ball in the style of Westbrook. Curry provides spacing and flow of game with his movements, dribbling and passing. He is the center of their play style, in which every role players is rewarded, thus you seem to consider them being "stacked". I contnd that on a good day, you will feel the rockets as more "stacked" than the dubs with all players performing at their optimal level. However, Harden still takes it upon himself more than he should to "carry" his team by ISO and drawing fouls. For instance, when Ariza made a steal and charged ahead the court for a easy dunk, Harden came in, stole the pass and dunked it himself instead of rewarding Ariza for his effort. A more mature player will "make his teammates better" here every time. It's still all good but the way Curry affects his team makes the whole team more special. The result is reflected on the numbers and team wins. Harden is having a great season but Curry does things a level above him today.
When did you see I write that the MVP award doesn't value wins or that the award isn't given to a player on a team that doesn't win or make the playoffs? I think that's pretty much a given. Thankfully members of the media and most fans don't think like that or consider it an "easy choice", instead realizing that both players are playing at an MVP level and both are worthy choices to win the award hence the race being a close one. I'm also quite sure that the Rockets with Harden and Dwight are considered a top contender. We know they aren't getting to the finals but to say they are by no means a top contender then requires further clarification as to what a "top" contender is. I believe as long as the team is one of the "top" teams in its conference then it's a contender to go all the way. The Rockets meet that criteria whether it is realistic that they go all the way and win it all or not.
I found this one http://espn.go.com/sportsnation/post/_/id/12607997/oklahoma-stands-alone-nba-mvp-everyone-else-stands-stephen-curry#comment
If you asked a million knowledgeable people to rank the teams most likely to play in the Finals, where would the Rockets fall on average? If not top 4, then not a top contender. I think its pretty clear that the top teams would be GSW, SAS, CLE, and ATL.
Golden State's record without Bogut is 9-6. They barely beat Phoenix without Draymond Green (who has missed 1 game the entire season).
The injury free season is really lucky for them. Don't think they would be anywhere near our record if they had to deal with half the injuries + having to incorporate an entirely new bench. Steph hasnt really been tested but I guess that's not his fault.
Using PER is like using Darwin's original theory for evolution, While they're not good stats in the first place, nba.com created the PIE stat with input from the teams to at least address some of its more obvious holes
When you're using an entirely subjective range of viewpoints and claiming an objective answer, you've started in the wrong place and only gotten worse. These are the same knowledgeable people who said we had the worst offseason and would barely make the playoffs even if our team was healthy right? If you want to be objective, yuo need to start with a definition of contender and apply it without bias For example, only one team in the history of the nba has won a title outside the top 3 seeds.
Shows you how much Harden is disliked outside the city of Houston when even the state of Texas thinks Curry is MVP.
That's exactly my point. Jordan had Pippen and Phil Jackson. So he's not as valuable to the Bulls as Harden is to the Rockets. Is that what this thread is all about?
I don't think the point of the argument is that Curry's stats aren't impressive. The argument is that he's not as important to his team than Harden because he has better teammates. I say that's a flawed logic. Michael Jordan had fantastic teammates. They could win almost as many games with or without him. And as durvasa pointed out, Curry's on-off court numbers is far more impressive than Harden's. That is an indication that his presence on court is a lot more important than you guys give him credit. Besides, Curry played a lot less minutes than Harden because his teams blows out their opponents a lot. Thereby limiting Curry's numbers. If you look at their per 36 minutes, Harden scores only slightly more and Curry has much better TS%. It all comes down to the definition of MVP, which is not clear at all. If it's sheer production, Harden should win hands down. If it's "best player on the best team" Curry is the indisputable choice. And don't forget LeBron, how much he has improved the Cavaliers. This is why I think arguing who deserves the MVP is pretty pointless when the definition of what MVP means is so vague. The award doesn't have much meaning to me because it is mostly subjective.
Harden's on/off is better, unless you feel that the defensive shift is caused by either player (and not that for example, Bogut is replaced by Speights and Green is replaced by Lee...) The number of minutes he loses relative to Harden over those blowouts is about 1 mpg (and about 1.3 if he played every 4th quarter), he doesn't play all of the 4th quarter regardless of the result, it's not like Jordan saw a dropoff of his minutes from 38 to 33 because he was on a team with the greatest point differential of all time and missed 15-20 4th quarters. If you're going to go with best player on best team, fair enough, but stop using stats that specifically reward that and act like it's anything but
