NBA 2017: Take That For Data - MVP Edition

[Relic]

Other thread is over 420. 

Are the Clippers done? Can GS sweep its way into the Finals? Have the Raps figured out the Bucks? Is Russel Westbrook the biggest ballhog or the most valuable player? 

So many questions. 

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

5 hours ago, aeu said:

Ultimately, we will never know what would have happened if Russ has a slightly better fitting roster.  For example take: any guard / wing from OKC's bench.  (Grant? Abrines? Cole? whoever). Switch him with Lou Williams.  Or even Eric Gordon.  There is no doubt in my mind that  OKC will win that series.  But obviously, there is no way to know. And that's why this MVP discussion is so fascinating.

 

Lol. Yes we do. Just look at the Thunder over the last 5 years. Russ isn't any better than he was last year, his usage rate just went through the roof. 

 

[Jaime L]

13 hours ago, James Arryn said:

Plus/minus isn't an effective stat to use on isolated games. Way too little discretion. For example, last game Gibson had the highest +/- . On Friday Olapido lead the team in +/-. On Wednesday Kanter's and Adams were heads and shoulders above everyone else on the team, and in game 1 Westbrook's +/- was worst on the team. It's a pretty useless stat in isolation like that. So he was worst more often than he was best. But I'd not use this as an argument against him, rather to point out how useless +/- is in isolation over small samples. Much more a reflection of sub/rotation patterns, match ups, late-game tactics, etc. Over a season it can have some meaning. Over 1 series or 1 game it's just meaningless.

Can't agree with you here, JA. Yes, it's possible to read too much into plus/minus as an end all, be all - as an example Wall's often suffers because he's asked to stay on longer and play with 4 bench guys to keep that unit from completely cratering - but if you watch the OKC-Houston series, it's really the cleanest example of plus/minus being a really good measure of Russ's impact. Especially the last 4 games where the second Westbrook went to the bench everything went instantaneously to shit.

If anything, I'd argue plus/minus probably understated Westbrook's impact. I mean I watched almost the entire series...and in those disastrous 4th quarters Westbrook was out there on fumes playing at like 60-70% of his usual energy level trying to make things happen. If he could just get the normal rest every other superstar in the playoffs seems to get, the contrast would be even more stark. 

[Relic]

A lot of people (online) have been debating the actual meaning of the MVP title, specifically the V part. What does Valuable mean? And does Most Valuable represent, when discussing basketball? I've heard the argument that MVP doesn't stand for Best Overall Player, but rather the player that brought the most value to his team, over all. The player that helped his team get the most W's, most consistently. So, if Russ DIDN'T make his team mates better, is he really the most valuable player? If Harden could potentially be replaced by an average point guard and the Rockets win only 5 less games is Harden truly the most valuable player in the league (puling the 5 less games out of my ass, sorta)?

This line of reasoning begs the question if either of these guys brought more value to their teams than Leonard or James.  

 

[DunderMifflin]

Well we can be fairly sure that Westbrooks individual stats need to go down in order for the team wins to go up. It's pretty obviously going to have to happen via surrounding him with better talent or finding ways to get the current teammates  producing at a higher level.

MVP often boils down to popular or "feel good" narratives. Otherwise you'd probably just have to give it to the lebrons and jordans every single year.

[DunderMifflin]

And players have egos, how much does a good offensive player want to play on the same team as somebody that ballhogged as much as Russ. This is a unique case because everyone knows Russ can play less selfishly because he proved it for years with Durant. But any other players that hero balled as much as Russ did this season is going to make other potential stars think twice about playing with that kind of guy.

[Fez]

29 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

MVP often boils down to popular or "feel good" narratives. Otherwise you'd probably just have to give it to the lebrons and jordans every single year.

Works for me. Pretty much every full year that Jordan played from '88 onwards that he didn't win MVP, he was robbed. 

LeBron wasn't robbed every year that he didn't win MVP; Curry really was fantastic the previous two seasons. But the Rose and Durant awards should've gone to LeBron.

[DunderMifflin]

I still think team success should be one of the heavier requirements for mvp, which it has been every year that I'm aware of until this year. Has there ever been an mvp with less winning than Westbrook did this year? I can't remember any. I know there have been MVPs who had big regular season success and got knocked out of the playoffs in the first round but as far as I'm aware they were considered contenders and were upset.

[Rhom]

30 minutes ago, Fez said:

Works for me. Pretty much every full year that Jordan played from '88 onwards that he didn't win MVP, he was robbed. 

LeBron wasn't robbed every year that he didn't win MVP; Curry really was fantastic the previous two seasons. But the Rose and Durant awards should've gone to LeBron.

Maybe I'm just forgetting how good he was in the blurry lens of time, but I really feel like all the years Steve Nash won MVP should have gone to someone else.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

1 hour ago, DunderMifflin said:

Well we can be fairly sure that Westbrooks individual stats need to go down in order for the team wins to go up. It's pretty obviously going to have to happen via surrounding him with better talent or finding ways to get the current teammates  producing at a higher level.

The Thunder's record this year was 47-35. They went 33-9 in games that Russ had a triple double. Your assertion is simply not true.

[DunderMifflin]

17 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

The Thunder's record this year was 47-35. They went 33-9 in games that Russ had a triple double. Your assertion is simply not true.

A triple double is just a nice round number meaning at least 10 of something. Three somethings.

And if his averaging of triple doubles is so vital to the success of his team then why wait until Durant leaves to start doing it? 

[briantw]

2 hours ago, Relic said:

A lot of people (online) have been debating the actual meaning of the MVP title, specifically the V part. What does Valuable mean? And does Most Valuable represent, when discussing basketball? I've heard the argument that MVP doesn't stand for Best Overall Player, but rather the player that brought the most value to his team, over all. The player that helped his team get the most W's, most consistently. So, if Russ DIDN'T make his team mates better, is he really the most valuable player? If Harden could potentially be replaced by an average point guard and the Rockets win only 5 less games is Harden truly the most valuable player in the league (puling the 5 less games out of my ass, sorta)?

This line of reasoning begs the question if either of these guys brought more value to their teams than Leonard or James.  

If you're going by that definition, I think it's clearly LeBron.  The Spurs are a system team, and as such I think losing Leonard hurts since he's an amazing player, but not nearly as much as any team LeBron has played on losing him since they always design the team around his strengths.  The Spurs without Kawhi are still good.  The Cavs without LeBron are abysmal.

Granted, if you gave the Cavs an offseason without LeBron and they used that thirty million on other players, I think they'd be good too, but if we removed LeBron and Kawhi at the start of the playoffs, the Cavs don't get out of round one.  The Spurs might not either, but I wouldn't bet against them.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 hours ago, DunderMifflin said:

A triple double is just a nice round number meaning at least 10 of something. Three somethings.

Dude, you said his numbers need to go down to increase the number of wins. I demonstrated that their record was best when his numbers were higher. 

2 hours ago, DunderMifflin said:

And if his averaging of triple doubles is so vital to the success of his team then why wait until Durant leaves to start doing it? 

Is this a serious question? If so, you really have a lot to learn about the game of basketball.......

[DunderMifflin]

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Dude, you said his numbers need to go down to increase the number of wins. I demonstrated that their record was best when his numbers were higher. 

No, their record was best when they had Durant. And Westbrooks stats were far less gawdy than they are this year. Meaning it's pretty obvious Russ continuing hero ballin it by himself is not going to get them much farther if any than a 6th seed and a first round playoff knockout.

2 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Is this a serious question? If so, you really have a lot to learn about the game of basketball.......

But if his individual stats are so important to winning, why not do it when you have Durant on your team rather than waiting until he leaves so the losses can be blamed on your scrub teammates not producing.

[Michael Seswatha Jordan]

I'm with @Relic here, this MVP talk is never going to come to an end. We all have different feelings as to what constitutes the MVP. Of course, if we went by who truly is the most valuable and best player, LeBron gets it every year. But, I think it tends to represent which player dominated the season and defined the season in a way also.

Was Steph better or more valuable to the Warriors the two years he won it over LBJ? I'd say no. But did he deserve it? Certainly. He defined the league those years, he was the story. An amazing story at that. Russel Westbrook defined the NBA season this year and I say he deserves it all the same. I hate how I hear people downplay the significance of the triple-double and having 42 of them, the most 50 point triple -doubles ever, all  in one season. And, anyone who is anyone from former players to coaches, say the never thought they would ever see it accomplished. He deserves it.

[Fez]

2 hours ago, Rhom said:

Maybe I'm just forgetting how good he was in the blurry lens of time, but I really feel like all the years Steve Nash won MVP should have gone to someone else.

The first one should've gone to Shaq (and very nearly did) in his first Miami year. The second one I don't remember very well.

I think Dirk probably would've been a better option both years as well.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

2 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

No, their record was best when they had Durant. And Westbrooks stats were far less gawdy than they are this year. Meaning it's pretty obvious Russ continuing hero ballin it by himself is not going to get them much farther if any than a 6th seed and a first round playoff knockout.

But if his individual stats are so important to winning, why not do it when you have Durant on your team rather than waiting until he leaves so the losses can be blamed on your scrub teammates not producing.

Oh for the love of god. This is like asking, "Why didn't Westbrook set the single season usage rate record when he had a top three teammate?"

Look dude, when Durant and Westbrook were teammates they had the highest combined usage rate of any two teammates in the league. What you need to ask yourself is "after Durant left, would the Thunder have been better off if Russ filled most of the void Durant left or should his scrub teammates have?" This. isn't. hard......

[DunderMifflin]

20 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Oh for the love of god. This is like asking, "Why didn't Westbrook set the single season usage rate record when he had a top three teammate?"

Look dude, when Durant and Westbrook were teammates they had the highest combined usage rate of any two teammates in the league. What you need to ask yourself is "after Durant left, would the Thunder have been better off if Russ filled most of the void Durant left or should his scrub teammates have?" This. isn't. hard......

You are starting something new here.
In order for the Thunder to get more wins they are going to need more production outside of Russell Westbrook and that will presumably make his individual numbers  go down. As evidenced last season when Thunder were a much better team without the display of individual statistics he had this season.

 Russ got a sentimental pass this year for ballhogging because he was more or less stranded after the departure of Durant. But if he continues that hero ball style next year and beyond its going to really hurt the chances that any other stars will want to play with him. I saw the first Teen Wolf, nobody actually wants to be a spectator on their own team.

[DunderMifflin]

Probably something to do with that organization maybe. 3 mvp tier players drafted. Only one left.  2 of them spent a fair amount of time together with less results than you'd expect from 2 mvps on the same team.

Thunder quickly went from the model of how to rebuild a struggling franchise via the draft to "wtf happened????"

[Rhom]

Just now, DunderMifflin said:

Probably something to do with that organization maybe. 3 mvp tier players drafted. Only one left.  2 of them spent a fair amount of time together with less results you'd expect from 2 mvps on the same team

Was it though?  They were together when LeBron was at the height of his Miami days.  The Spurs were still milking the last bit from Duncan.  And the Warriors were on the rise. 

That's a bit like saying Stockton and Malone were two MVP caliber players on the same team and didn't do much...