Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/060414


    By Bill Simmons
    Page 2


    Say what you want about the NBA, but the league offers seven superior features to every other professional sport: a wildly entertaining draft, a new dress code that caused "Big and Tall Store" stock to jump eight points, the wit and wisdom of Mr. Jalen Rose, cheerleaders who dress like hookers, a ridiculously surreal All-Star Weekend and, of course, the only "Most Valuable Player" award that truly matters.



    Can you name the last 10 NFL MVPs? Of course not. Can you remember the last 10 MVP's in each baseball league, and definitively say which guy was better every year? Nope. Do you even know the name of the NHL trophy? Unless you're Canadian, probably not. The MVP concept works best in the NBA: Every player is eligible, everyone plays against one another, it's relatively simple to compare statistics and, if you watch the games, you can always figure out which players stand out over everyone else.



    Of course, the experts seem just as confused as they were last season, when Steve Nash stumbled into the award because some people thought it would be fun to vote for a white Canadian dude with bad hair who didn't play defense. As it turned out, Nash raised his game in the playoffs and vindicated everyone who picked him. (Note: I thought Shaq should have won the award and still do.) But that raises a bigger question: What makes for an NBA MVP?



    I concentrate on three questions:



    1. Ten years from now, who will be the first player from this season that pops into my head?



    2. In a giant pickup game with every NBA player waiting to play, and two fans forced to pick sides with their lives depending on the outcome of the game (by the way, I think this is how the annual Rucker League tournament works), who would be the first player picked based on the way everyone played that season?



    3. If you replaced every MVP candidate with a decent player at their position for the entire season, what would be the effect on their teams' records?



    The first two questions are subjective. You might think the 2004-05 season belonged to Nash, whereas I thought it belonged to Shaq. And until this season, I would have picked Shaq first in any pickup game, you may have picked Kobe or LeBron. But the third question isn't nearly as subjective, it's also crucial to this year's dilemma. We're dealing with the deepest pool of potential MVP candidates ever (eight by my count). And I think the choice is pretty clear. But before we get to that, check out some of the names who didn't make the cut:



    Shawn Marion, Elton Brand, Pau Gasol, Rasheed Wallace: All of them were indispensable to winning teams. Marion was the most explosive, Brand was the most consistent, Gasol carried the biggest burden and Rasheed is the one you would pick for one big game. You can't say one was more valuable than the others. (Although Gasol's straggly, Survivor-like beard had a Plummer-like impact on him and the Grizzlies, insuring its place in the NBA Beard Hall of Fame with Mike Newlin, Mike Gminski, Coby Dietrich, Bill Walton, Phil Jackson and Aaron McKie.) The important thing to remember is that all of them were better than ...



    Kevin Garnett: Can you name another alleged "superstar in his prime" who missed the playoffs for two straight seasons? How was his supporting cast worse than Gasol's crew in Memphis, or even Chris Paul's team in New Orleans? Did you know that, in the HISTORY OF THE NBA, we haven't had an MVP miss the playoffs in consecutive seasons in his prime? Isn't it his job to carry a crappy team? What do you think Barkley was doing in the late-'80s and early-'90s in Philly? Nobody in the league gets more of a free ride than KG. Nobody.



    (Note: There's a difference between being "competitive" and being "no fun whatsover to play with," and KG crossed that line about five years ago. You can't carry yourself that way for eight months each season without eventually committing a homicide. You just can't. He's wound too tight. So if you're reading this 50 years from now and wondering why KG only made it past Round 1 once in his career -- as well as why he murdered everyone in Minnesota's locker room after a 20-point blowout loss during the 2007-08 season -- please consider everything in this parentheses. Thank you.)



    Gilbert Arenas, Paul Pierce: Two splendid individual seasons; two guys who were probably worth 12-15 wins for their respective teams. And I could barely make room for them in the top 15.



    Jason Kidd: Firmly entrenched in the "Heather Locklear on 'Spin City' " phase of his career -- he doesn't look good as he once did, but he's still Jason Kidd. And he gets credit for two things: First, he's the only player who could have salvaged Vince Carter's career (like Tarantino taking a chance on Travolta in "Pulp Fiction," only if nobody was hiring Travolta because he didn't try in his last five movies. And second, this current Nets team could win 50 games without rebounders, shot-blockers, and any semblance of a low-post game, as well as a rotation that includes Cliff Robinson, Zoran Planicic, Jacques Vaughn, Lamond Murray and Scott Padgett. Only Kidd could have salvaged this mess. And this is why I hate stats sometimes, because someone like KG will always come off better than someone like Kidd. But the overall objective is to win games, and no matter where he is, Kidd's teams always seem to win more than they lose.



    Allen Iverson: Mortal lock to be playing somewhere else next season.



    Ben Wallace: In theory, he should be a top-10 pick for starting the Artest melee. Just think, if Wallace had calmed down after the initial shove, Artest never would have lounged on the scorer's table, John Green never would have tossed that drink, the ensuing melee never would have happened, and Detroit's most dangerous rival (an excellent Pacers team) wouldn't have completely self-combusted. Instead, Wallace kept carrying on and trying to reach Artest, and eventually, one of his fans turned into the NBA version of Lee Harvey Oswald. Eighteen months later, the Pacers are floundering and Larry Legend is making noises about blowing everything up.



    (By the way, this seems like a good time to mention that Wallace was only suspended for six games. Although David Stern admits privately that, had Wallace handed Lee Harvey Green the cup of soda and screamed, "Throw it at him! Throw it!" ... they probably would have raised it to eight.)



    Tim Duncan: In many ways, this isn't his greatest season -- thanks to his Phil Plantieritis or whatever it's called, he couldn't move laterally, couldn't get any lift, wasn't getting as many putbacks, had trouble filling the lane on fast breaks, never looked even remotely comfortable -- and yet, his team kept winning and his numbers didn't look much different than normal. You can't judge a great athlete until he's playing hurt, and in Duncan's case, his consistency was almost heroic. But he wasn't nearly as dominant, and I watched too many Spurs games in which he wasn't even the fifth-best player on the court. So I can't call him an MVP candidate. With many regrets.



    Shaquille O'Neal: The best center alive by default (although Yao made a nice run in February and March). He still commands a double-team in every fourth quarter. The referees still call the game differently when he's out there. He's developed into an exceptionally smart passer from the low post. And he remains the league's most entertaining personality, maybe its most popular ambassador since Doctor J.



    And with all of that said ... old Shaq is starting to look a little long in the tooth. You knew it was coming; all the stats from every great center forecasted it. Now, it's happening. Justin from Pasadena sums everything up: "With $100 million and 5 [years] left on his contract, and knees that bend no more than 5 degrees, how long do you think it will be before the Knicks make a run at getting Shaq? I'm already getting ready to pre-order my soon-to-be classic Knicks/O'Neal jersey."



    (Two notes about that e-mail: First, it's funny because it's true. There's no doubt in hell that Isiah is trading Curry, Crawford and 25 future first-rounders for Shaq in the summer of 2007, followed by Knicks fans rejoicing for the first few months, then eventually turning on the trade and claiming they never liked it in the first place. And second, until last month, I had never received a "Shaq is starting to look washed up" e-mail. Not once.)



    All right, enough foreplay. My top eight choices for MVP, in reverse order from eighth to first:



    8. Chauncey Billups
    The best player on the best team this season. But can you really call anyone "the best player" on a team that works solely because they play so well together?



    For instance, "24" wouldn't work without Kiefer Sutherland as Jack Bauer; nobody else could play that part. But "Lost" relies on a number of quality actors, all of whom play a role in the show's success to varying degrees: Jack, Sawyer, Locke, Kate and Hurle (that's their starting five). Personally, I think Sawyer is the best character, not just from an acting standpoint, but from an entertaining/interesting/dramatic standpoint). He's the Rasheed Wallace of the group, someone who doesn't need to carry every episode, brings a ton of stuff to the table and takes nothing off (and they're both funny as hell). As for the rest, Locke is probably Ben Wallace (does all the little stuff); Kate is Tayshaun Prince (the token chick/fifth man); Hurley is Rip Hamilton (totally underrated, always rises to the occasion); and Billups is Jack (the leader of the group).



    So here's the question: Does the show work because of Jack, or does it work because of the group as a whole? Obviously, it's because of the group. Well, the same goes for the Pistons; calling Billups a bonafide MVP candidate demeans the contributions of everyone else involved. Would they slip that much with Jason Terry in Billups' spot? Probably not.



    (Of course, if Jack ends up taking down The Others, and Billups takes down every contender this spring, maybe we have to re-evaluate.)



    7. Chris Paul
    The great John Hollinger covered Paul's case in his "third greatest season by a rookie guard ever" column yesterday, even if he didn't give Magic's rookie year nearly enough credit. Remember, Magic was playing out of position that season because of Norm Nixon, and he and Bird DID save the league and all, and he DID average nearly a triple-double in the playoffs and play one of the 10 greatest games in the history of the NBA Finals. (Whatever, we'll have to settle this over fisticuffs at the company barbecue in July.) For the purposes of this column, Paul had the lamest supporting cast of any candidate, played his position about as well as it can be played, and his team overachieved mainly because of him.



    Let's say the Hornets finish with 40 wins ... how many would they have won with Deron Williams or Raymond Felton instead of Paul? Twenty? Fifteen? What about the baggage the Hornets had coming into the season, what with the hurricane in New Orleans, new digs in Oklahoma City and everything else? What about how much this team depended on Paul from night to night, even though he was a rookie? I just don't see how anyone can list him lower than seventh. And yes, that screaming is the sound of everyone from Atlanta. Just give them a few seconds.



    6. Carmelo Anthony
    The best clutch scorer alive -- seven game-winners and a game-tying shot just since Jan. 1, as well as the best clutch numbers of anyone in basketball over the past three seasons (according to 82games.com) -- to the point that we should be using his full name like we do with every other famous assassin. If your life depended on somebody making a game-winning shot in the last 10 seconds, would you pick anyone BUT Melo? I sure wouldn't.



    So there's that. He also carried a division-winning Nuggets team that dealt with numerous injuries and numbers problems, a significant trade in mid-February, a glaring lack of outside shooters, and Kenyon Martin gimping around like Ken Reeves on the Bulls. And it's not like he's in his prime; actually, he's only seven months older than LeBron. Maybe there have been some minor flaws here and there -- he takes some quarters off, doesn't rebound enough, acts out sometimes -- but nothing that can't be fixed down the road.



    Here's the thing: I'm starting to wonder if LeBron-Wade-Carmelo could become the most important sports rivalry of this generation. Each is great in his own way, each brings something different and unique to the table, and each seems to feed off what's happening with the other two guys. For instance, the Wade-LeBron duel two Saturdays ago (LeBron finished with 47-12-10, Wade with a 44-8-9) wasn't just the most thrilling game of the season, it was a significant experience for anyone who truly gives a crap about this league. Here were two fantastic young players absolutely KILLING it, doing everything they could to win the game, bringing out the absolute best of one another, raising everyone to a higher place.



    This was like Pacino and DeNiro sharing a scene in "Heat," only if they made the movie together in 1974. This was like Pearl Jam and Nirvana saying in 1992, "Screw it, let's go play at the same tiny club in Seattle and see who the crowd enjoys more." This was like nothing that's ever happened before. I haven't stopped thinking about it for three straight weeks. Could this be where we're headed -- magical game after magical game, like those Celtics-Lakers games in the mid-'80s, only for 12-15 years? What's the ceiling here? Do we even have a ceiling? Ali had Frazier, Bird had Magic, Russell had Chamberlain. Is it possible that LeBron, Wade and Carmelo all have each other? And do you realize that these guys are a combined 66 years old?



    Maybe I'm biased as an unabashed NBA junkie, but I truly believe that the collective emergence of LeBron, Wade and Melo could eventually become the most significant thing that ever happened to this league -- bigger than MJ, bigger than Bird and Magic, bigger than everything. I guess we'll see.



    5. Steve Nash
    Kudos to him for increasing his scoring and seamlessly integrating seven new teammates into Phoenix's offense; in many ways, he was better than last season. He's the only current player whose unselfishness seems to transfer (almost by osmosis) to everyone else on his team. On the flip side, he's even worse defensively than last season; just in the past two months, I watched Shaun Livingston, Delonte West and Kidd completely outplay him in separate games, capped off by Billups simply CREMATING him in Detroit two Sundays ago. Would an MVP ever get decimated like that by someone who plays the same position? Please.



    Put it this way: Nash was a cute choice last season, mainly because none of the other candidates stood out, and I could see why someone would have been swayed. (It was like ordering one of those fancy foreign beers at a bar, the ones in the heavy green bottles with the 13-letter name that you can't pronounce, only someone else is drinking it, so you say to yourself, "Ah, screw it, I'm tired of the beer I always drink, lemme try one of those.") But this year? I'm not saying he should be ignored, but if you actually end up picking him, either you're not watching enough basketball or you just want to see a white guy win back-to-back MVP's.



    4. Dwyane Wade
    Even as recently as four weeks ago, he was my MVP pick ... and then he started struggling, and so did Miami, and now he's hurt. The next three guys just passed him. It's that simple.



    3. Dirk Nowitzki
    Averaging an astonishing 29-and-10 since the All-Star Break (the only two forwards to average 29-and-10 since the ABA/NBA merger were Bird and the Mailman). He's the only All-Star on a 60-win Dallas team. He shows up for every game. He's an underrated rebounder and superior free-throw shooter in crunch time. He solved the whole "Let's stick a smaller, more athletic guy on him!" strategy by punishing defenders with a variety of herky-jerk moves on the high post. He's German, which makes him fun to dislike whenever he starts sneering at his teammates or arrogantly celebrating after a big bucket. Out of any over-25 player, he made the biggest leap this season; it's hard to imagine anyone meaning more to his team.



    Quick Nowitzki story: Clips-Mavs, Monday night, tie game, 18 seconds left. Nowitzki is 5-for-18, but we all know he's getting the final shot -- right at the top of the key, where he's been thriving all season. Naturally, we assume that Dunleavy will send a second guy at him, since you never want to get beat by a franchise guy. So Dallas brings the ball up and feeds Nowitzki on the high post, only Chris Kaman (a gawd-awful defender) switches onto him. And we're waiting for the second guy. And we're waiting. Hell, even Dirk is waiting. Never comes. Finally, with the clock winding down, he puts a quick move on Kaman, upfakes him and drains a 16-footer to win the game, followed by a goofy gesture in which he coldly pulled his jersey out with both forefingers, almost like dueling shotguns. And then his teammates practically chest-bumped him to death.



    Here's the point: I wasn't even remotely surprised. Not by any of it. (Well, except for Dunleavy being dumb enough to single-team Dirk with Kaman.) There are franchise guys, and then there are FRANCHISE GUYS. This season, Nowitzki added the caps.



    2. LeBron James
    Twenty-five months. That's how long it took before one of the Cleveland coaches (and there have been three since LeBron joined the team) made the astounding realization, "Hey, instead of sticking LeBron in the corner or the wing and having entire possessions where he never touches the ball, maybe we should run the offense through him!"



    In the words of Colonel James, "Oh, you think so, Doctor?" Really? You want to stick him at the top of the key and run the offense through your best playmaker, as well as someone who's completely unstoppable whenever he decides to drive to the basket? You think that might work?



    Now he's putting up 33-8-7 every night, which makes me wonder what would have happened had he handled the ball that much from Day 1. And it's not a very good Cavs team -- nobody plays defense, nobody rebounds, Ilguaskas doesn't fit in at all (terrible signing), even the alleged "shooters" (Damon Jones, Donyell Marshall, etc.) rarely make open shots. Replace LeBron with Mike Miller, throw in the Hughes injury and this was probably a 27-win team. Instead, they'll win 50.



    The intriguing subplot: LeBron is figuring out how to take over down the stretch, personified by what happened on Saturday in New Jersey (17 in the final quarter). At least once a game, he does something so explosive, so athletic, so incredible, you can't even believe it happened. The last time I remember feeling this way about a professional athlete was Bo Jackson, who wasn't just great ... he stood out. I attended a spring training game once when Bo scored from third base on a 180-foot pop fly -- standing up. It was awesome to watch.



    Well, LeBron reminds me of Bo. On those plays when he says, "Screw it, I'm scoring" and heads toward the basket like a runaway freight train. He's like a young Barkley crossed with a young Shawn Kemp crossed with young Magic, but with a little Bo thrown in. Out of anyone in the league, he's the only player who can cripple the other team with one monster play.



    There's a perfect example that Hollinger wrote about on Sunday, but screw it, I'm retelling the story. On Saturday afternoon, I TiVo'ed the Nets-Cavs game because the Nets had won 14 straight and officially reached "record all our games" territory. LeBron completely took over the game in the fourth, capped off by one of the most startling plays I have ever seen: Trailing in the final two minutes, LeBron seized some open space in transition and pulled the Runaway Freight Train move, careening toward the basket as one Net reached in and hacked him, followed by another Net on the other side reaching in and fouling him, and then a third guy just to make sure he wouldn't score. LeBron was cradling the ball, taking two giant steps toward the basket and absorbing those karate chops. BOOM-BOOM-BOOM. Any normal human being would have either lost the ball or lost their balance and tumbled to the ground.



    Well, LeBron kept going -- almost like a tight end bouncing off three safeties in the open field. As the last guy walloped him, LeBron jumped in the air (where did he get the strength?!?!?), regained control of the ball, hung in the air, hung in the air for another split-second, gathered the ball (at this point, he was drifting under the right side of the rim), and finally unleashed a righty layup that banked in. The shot was so BLEEPING INCREDIBLE, the referee practically jumped in delight as he called the continuation foul. The Nets were done after that. He ripped their hearts out, MJ-style. Unbelievable. Absolutely unbelievable. I couldn't believe it. I still can't believe it.



    And he's 21. Even more unbelievable.



    So why isn't LeBron James the 2006 MVP? Two reasons. First, he hasn't committed himself on the defensive end yet. It's not even an effort thing, I think he's just been poorly coached. Bird and Magic couldn't guard anyone either, but they were always great help defenders, and Bird actually controlled games on that end like a free safety (just watch Game 6 of the 1986 Finals, you'll see what I mean). Defensively, LeBron is a complete non-factor.



    More importantly, the next guy has just been a little bit better ...



    1. Kobe Bryant
    You don't know how much this kills me. Actually, you probably do. But Mamba passes all three MVP questions ...



    Question No. 1: When remembering this season 10 years from now, which player will pop into your head first?



    Answer: Kobe. The dude scored 62 in three quarters against Dallas, then 81 against Toronto a few weeks later. He's about to become the fifth player in NBA history to average 35 points a game (along with Wilt, MJ, Elgin and Rick Barry). He made up with Shaq. He made up with Phil. He made up with Nike. He appeared on the cover of Slam Magazine with a Mamba snake wrapped around him. He did everything but make the obligatory cameo on "Will and Grace." No player took more abuse from writers, broadcasters and radio hosts this season, but Kobe seemed to feed off that negative energy. It was almost Bondsian. And just when it kept seeming like he might wear down, he'd toss up another 50 just to keep you on your toes. Kobe was relentless. That's the best way to describe him this season.



    Question No. 2: In the proverbial giant pickup game with every NBA player waiting to play, who would be the first player picked this season?



    Answer: Kobe. He's the best all-around player in the league, the best scorer, the best competitor, and the one guy who terrifies everyone else. Plus, if you DIDN'T pick him, he would make it his mission to haunt you on the other team.



    Question No. 3: If you replaced every MVP candidate with a decent player at their position for the entire season, what would be the effect on their teams' records?



    Answer: If you replaced Kobe with a decent 2-guard (someone like Jamal Crawford) for the entire 2005-06 Lakers season, they would have won between 15 and 20 games. I can say that in complete confidence. Terrible team. When Smush Parker and Kwame Brown are your third- and fourth-best players, you shouldn't even be allowed to watch the playoffs on TV. Throw Kobe in the mix and they're headed for 45 wins. So he's been worth 25 victories for them. Minimum.



    In a weird way, Kobe ended up getting what he always wanted: The Lakers completely revolve around him. He gets to shoot 25-30 times per game. He gets to take every big shot at crunch-time. He gets all the credit. Nobody else on the team dares to challenge him. And even better, because he lucked out with the only possible coach who could make this cockamamie situation work, his supporting cast kills itself to make him look good.



    Basically, he's Elvis and everyone else is Joe Esposito. And it's working! That's the crazy thing.



    Now they're a sleeper in the West -- seriously, do you think Phoenix wants any part of them in Round 1? -- and have the only player in the league who can win a playoff series by himself. He's the Black Mamba, he's Kobe Bryant, he's the 2006 MVP, and since we finally have that settled, I will now light myself on fire.
    The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

    I'm just stunned....Simmons doesn't like Kobe much..he's always respected him, but doesn't like him much at all (or any other Laker, for that matter)

    I still don't understand how its anyone but Steve Nash, but Kobe would probably be my second choice.

    I'll also say this..its easy to rail on Kobe's supporting cast..but if you just look at the last 2 months, Odom and Kwame have been playing pretty damn good basketball..their games are stepping up and if they play that way in the playoffs, they'll beat the Suns...I'm sure of it.

    Comment

    • #3
      Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

      I always enjoy reading Simmons but this time he could've checked how to spell Ilgauskas.

      Comment

      • #4
        Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

        The things he says about KG are so true.

        ----------
        (By the way, this seems like a good time to mention that Wallace was only suspended for six games. Although David Stern admits privately that, had Wallace handed Lee Harvey Green the cup of soda and screamed, "Throw it at him! Throw it!" ... they probably would have raised it to eight.)

        LMAO

        Comment

        • #5
          Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

          No surprise he voted Kobe.

          No other player in the NBA is really at his level right now. Not only that, but Kobe has that extra gear in the 4th and is generally a pretty clutch shooter. Without him, the Lakers would be another lottery team at least 10-15 games below .500. The same could be said for Lebron and how he's played recently, but he hasn't been as good as Kobe has all year long. Melo is also another candidate that I wouldn't mind seeing win the MVP.

          Comment

          • #6
            Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

            The MVP typically goes to a starplayer that has carried his team to the absolute top of the NBA. There are only three really good teams in the league this year: Detroit, San Antonio and Dallas. Detroit had four allstars which pretty much rules out a mvp from that team. Duncan has not been really great this season, and Gino or Tony don't deserve the mvp either.

            That means that normally, Nowitzki is the mvp this year. His team will end with over 60 wins and with the second or third best record in the league. He was the only allstar on the team and the Mavs have dealt with major injuries the whole season. He absolutely carries the team, has improved his defense a lot and is one of the best clutch players in the league. Just a week ago, he absolutely dominated San Antonio in a big away win.
            Detroit, with the best record, plays in the east which is considerably weaker (3 or 4 teams with negative records make the playoffs, is that a record?).

            Now, Nowitzki is german, which changes the thing a bit.
            That's why we look at the major stars in weaker teams. Kobe has been extremely great and has lead his team to the playoffs. They managed a 7th seed with about 50 percent basketball. Normally, no matter how good an individual season has been, MVPs don't come from mediocre teams but from good ones. Lebron has been really strong and is second on my list. But playing with Ilgauskas and Hughes in the weak east, the Cavs are far behind the big three teams, which means normally the MVP can't go to Lebron either. Nash is simply not good enough to win MVP two years in a row. Phoenix record is too bad and he plays with a guy that is also mentioned as a MVP candidate, Shawn Marion.

            I'm pretty confident, and don't even find it controversial to claim, that Nowitzki would win the MVP if he was american. But him being german, I expect Kobe Bryant to be this years MVP on his 50 percent ball team with the more deserving Lebron James on a second place.

            Comment

            • #7
              Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

              I'd pick LeBron, and calling him " a complete non-factor" on defense is a little harsh.

              Both Cleveland and LA Lakers have a suspect supporting cast, but I think LeBron is carrying even more of the load than Kobe is.

              Some way or another Kobe, Nash, and LeBron are 1-2-3 IMO. I just can't elevate Dirk to that level yet. Maybe I'm biased since he's such a whiner.
              The poster "pacertom" since this forum began (and before!). I changed my name here to "Slick Pinkham" in honor of the imaginary player That Bobby "Slick" Leonard picked late in the 1971 ABA draft (true story!).

              Comment

              • #8
                Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                Originally posted by pacertom




                Ben Wallace: In theory, he should be a top-10 pick for starting the Artest melee. Just think, if Wallace had calmed down after the initial shove, Artest never would have lounged on the scorer's table, John Green never would have tossed that drink, the ensuing melee never would have happened, and Detroit's most dangerous rival (an excellent Pacers team) wouldn't have completely self-combusted. Instead, Wallace kept carrying on and trying to reach Artest, and eventually, one of his fans turned into the NBA version of Lee Harvey Oswald. Eighteen months later, the Pacers are floundering and Larry Legend is making noises about blowing everything up.



                (By the way, this seems like a good time to mention that Wallace was only suspended for six games. Although David Stern admits privately that, had Wallace handed Lee Harvey Green the cup of soda and screamed, "Throw it at him! Throw it!" ... they probably would have raised it to eight.)



                It's good to see he's still bitter. No I'm serious it is good to see.

                Comment

                • #9
                  Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                  Originally posted by Unclebuck
                  It's good to see he's still bitter. No I'm serious it is good to see.
                  Yeah, I saw that too. Good to see indeed .
                  2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                  2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                  Comment

                  • #10
                    Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                    Originally posted by pacertom
                    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/060414 Say what you want about the NBA, but the league offers seven superior features to every other professional sport: a wildly entertaining draft, a new dress code that caused "Big and Tall Store" stock to jump eight points, the wit and wisdom of Mr. Jalen Rose, cheerleaders who dress like hookers, a ridiculously surreal All-Star Weekend


                    Originally posted by pacertom
                    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/060414 Kevin Garnett: Can you name another alleged "superstar in his prime" who missed the playoffs for two straight seasons? How was his supporting cast worse than Gasol's crew in Memphis, or even Chris Paul's team in New Orleans? Did you know that, in the HISTORY OF THE NBA, we haven't had an MVP miss the playoffs in consecutive seasons in his prime? Isn't it his job to carry a crappy team? What do you think Barkley was doing in the late-'80s and early-'90s in Philly? Nobody in the league gets more of a free ride than KG. Nobody.


                    (Note: There's a difference between being "competitive" and being "no fun whatsover to play with," and KG crossed that line about five years ago. You can't carry yourself that way for eight months each season without eventually committing a homicide. You just can't. He's wound too tight. So if you're reading this 50 years from now and wondering why KG only made it past Round 1 once in his career -- as well as why he murdered everyone in Minnesota's locker room after a 20-point blowout loss during the 2007-08 season -- please consider everything in this parentheses. Thank you.)
                    The only thing that worries me about Garnett really. But, also something that's quite serious.



                    Originally posted by pacertom
                    http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2...simmons/060414 Shaquille O'Neal: The best center alive by default (although Yao made a nice run in February and March). He still commands a double-team in every fourth quarter. The referees still call the game differently when he's out there. He's developed into an exceptionally smart passer from the low post. And he remains the league's most entertaining personality, maybe its most popular ambassador since Doctor J.


                    And with all of that said ... old Shaq is starting to look a little long in the tooth. You knew it was coming; all the stats from every great center forecasted it. Now, it's happening. Justin from Pasadena sums everything up: "With $100 million and 5 [years] left on his contract, and knees that bend no more than 5 degrees, how long do you think it will be before the Knicks make a run at getting Shaq? I'm already getting ready to pre-order my soon-to-be classic Knicks/O'Neal jersey."


                    (Two notes about that e-mail: First, it's funny because it's true. There's no doubt in hell that Isiah is trading Curry, Crawford and 25 future first-rounders for Shaq in the summer of 2007, followed by Knicks fans rejoicing for the first few months, then eventually turning on the trade and claiming they never liked it in the first place. And second, until last month, I had never received a "Shaq is starting to look washed up" e-mail. Not once.)
                    2012 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2011 PD ABA Fantasy Keeper League Champion, sports.ws

                    2006 PD ABA Fantasy League runner up, sports.ws

                    Comment

                    • #11
                      Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                      From Bill Simmons!
                      Ben Wallace: In theory, he should be a top-10 pick for starting the Artest melee. Just think, if Wallace had calmed down after the initial shove, Artest never would have lounged on the scorer's table, John Green never would have tossed that drink, the ensuing melee never would have happened, and Detroit's most dangerous rival (an excellent Pacers team) wouldn't have completely self-combusted. Instead, Wallace kept carrying on and trying to reach Artest, and eventually, one of his fans turned into the NBA version of Lee Harvey Oswald. Eighteen months later, the Pacers are floundering and Larry Legend is making noises about blowing everything up.

                      (By the way, this seems like a good time to mention that Wallace was only suspended for six games. Although David Stern admits privately that, had Wallace handed Lee Harvey Green the cup of soda and screamed, "Throw it at him! Throw it!" ... they probably would have raised it to eight.)

                      ----------------------------------

                      Finally, someone states exactly what I've thought all along!! And states it in the media!!

                      When history is written, Wallace will be remembered for starting the fire that burned up the Indiana Pacers and Artest will be "the sucker" that got caught up in the fire storm!

                      Water

                      Comment

                      • #12
                        Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                        Originally posted by 3ballinhoop
                        I'm pretty confident, and don't even find it controversial to claim, that Nowitzki would win the MVP if he was american. But him being german, I expect Kobe Bryant to be this years MVP on his 50 percent ball team with the more deserving Lebron James on a second place.
                        Umm, Nash? O Canada? A foreigner can win the MVP...although him being from Canada and speaking perfect English helped. I wonder what would have happened if he was from the boonies of Quebec, spoke poor English and didn't give good interviews.

                        I guess there is some truth to what you said. Nowitzki rubs people the wrong way, cause he's loud and arrogant and all the things that Kobe is without being psychotic (and yes, he's German, and it bothers people that they have better healthcare and nicer cars). But, to sum up what you said, he is hands down the MVP this season: top player on a top team who has taken his game to another level while staying healthy and coming up big in the clutch all year. Plus the 29-10 doesn't hurt.
                        2010 IKL Fantasy Basketball Champion Baltimore Bulldogs

                        Comment

                        • #13
                          Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                          Olajuwon won the MVP 12 years ago....

                          It wasn't about being the team everyone loved, it was about beating the teams everyone else loved.

                          Division Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 1989, 1990, 2002, 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008
                          Conference Champions 1955, 1956, 1988, 2005
                          NBA Champions 1989, 1990, 2004

                          Comment

                          • #14
                            Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                            That Hollinger article was so bad, Simmons, who, regardless of what he says, hates on Magic every chance he gets, is willing to throw down over it.

                            And Cleveland wouldn't have even won 27 with Mike Miller instead of LeBron. With Hughes going down, they'd be fighting for the #1 pick.
                            Come to the Dark Side -- There's cookies!

                            Comment

                            • #15
                              Re: Sports Guy: MVP candidate breakdown

                              I can't disagree with making Kobe MVP. Between the 81 point performance, the 62 point performance, him averaging 35+ points per game and playing much better defense than LeBron, and taking a Lakers team that shouldn't be in the playoffs and getting them in, I can't see a reason to argue against him. I'd also still put Wade above LeBron just because I don't think James is quite there on the defensive end, and I've seen Wade play tough defense all year long.

                              Comment

                              Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X