Apparently there are many candidates for MVP, but two front-runners. Some people favor LeBron James. Others insist on Kobe Bryant. What do these two candidates have in common? Each are currently ranked first and second in the points scored per game rankings (MVP voting is about more than scoring, but scoring certainly plays an important role).
The case for LeBron is actually fairly strong, although I don’t think he should be the final choice. That story, though, will have to wait for another day. Today I want to talk about why Kobe shouldn’t be among the front-runners for this award.
And before I get to the details, let me summarize the basic argument.
– Yes, Kobe is a great player. He just isn’t the most productive player in the NBA.
-The Lakers improvement this year is not about Kobe.
– Kobe, who has not been voted MVP in the past, is actually not much different from what he was in the past. He just has better teammates.
Okay, here are the details supporting these points.
Let’s start with what the Lakers have done since Shaq left town.
The Won-Loss Record
Here is the team’s won-loss record in the first three seasons of the post-Shaq era:
2004-05: 34-48
2005-06: 45-37
2006-07: 42-40
For three seasons without Shaq, the Lakers won 49% of their regular season games. In sum, this team was about average.
This year the team is much improved. After 74 games the Lakers have a record of 50-24. But here is how this record breaks down:
With Andrew Bynum: 24-11
Without Andrew Bynum (before Pau Gasol): 6-5
With Pau Gasol: 15-4 (15-3 if you ignore the game where he was hurt and played only 2 minutes)
Without Pau Gasol: 5-4 (5-5 if you count the game where he was hurt and played only 2 minutes)
With either Bynum or Gasol in the line-up, the team is 39-15 (or 39-16 if we count the Gasol-injury game). Without Bynum and Gasol the team is 11-9 (or 11-10 with the Gasol-injury game), or pretty much what they were the past three seasons. In sum, it looks like the Lakers have improved because the talent around Kobe has improved.
The Wins Produced Story
The story of this team’s won-loss record is also told when we look at Wins Produced.
Table One: The Lakers after 73 games
Table One presents two projections of the Lakers. The first presumes each player offers as much – on a per-48 minute basis – as he did last year. The second is based on what the players did this year.
As Table One illustrates, the Lakers are improved this year. Based on last year’s numbers, this team should have 41 wins after 73 games (Sunday night’s game is not included), or be on pace to win 46 games. It’s important to note that without Gasol, the Lakers would be on pace to win about 42 games, or right about where they were last year.
The Lakers, though, have had the services of Gasol. In addition, this team has made a leap forward because it has seen improved production from existing players. The biggest jump we see is in the production from Andrew Bynum. Given what Bynum did last year, the Lakers should have expected about three wins from Bynum’s 1,008 minutes. Instead, the Lakers have received 8.3 wins, or an additional 5.5 victories. Bynum’s improvement accounts for about half of the leap we have seen in this team’s win total. The other half can be traced to the improved play of Lamar Odom and Derek Fisher.
Turning to Kobe, the numbers do tell us that he has improved, but not by much. And that point brings us to the last story.
Comparing Kobe to Kobe
Here is how Kobe has done in voting for the MVP award since Shaq departed.
2004-05: No Votes
2005-06: 22 first place votes (out of 125), 4th place finish
2006-07: 2 first place votes (out of 129), 3rd place finish
Yes, Kobe has gotten some attention. But he has not come close to winning. Suddenly, though, Kobe is considered a favorite. The numbers seem to suggest, though, that Kobe is not really a different player.
Table Two: Comparing Kobe to Kobe
Table Two compares Kobe to Kobe. Specifically, Kobe in 2007-08 is compared to both Kobe last season and his career averages (before this season).
Relative to last year his shooting efficiency from the field is basically the same and he is slightly less efficient from the line. He is also more prone to turnovers. But he is somewhat improved because he is getting more rebounds and steals. Specifically, per 48 minutes, Kobe is grabbing one more rebound and 0.6 additional steals.
So let’s ask this question. Did Kobe fail to win the MVP award in the past because his rebounding numbers were slightly lower (in the mind of the voters)? I find that story to be implausible.
What I think has happened is that the Lakers have improved. As a consequence, people’s view of Kobe has changed. But the value of Kobe really hasn’t changed much. All that really changed was the value of his teammates. So if you didn’t think Kobe was MVP last year (and 127 of the 129 voters did not), I don’t think you can change your story this year.
Comparing Kobe to Manu
One last observation: The last column of Table Two reports the numbers posted by Manu Ginobili this year. A few weeks ago John Hollinger argued that Manu is as good as Kobe. I will say slightly more. I think the numbers tell us that Ginobili is offering a bit more.
With respect to most stats, Ginobili and Kobe are about the same. The one difference is shooting efficiency from the field, where Ginobili is the better player. Consequently, Ginobili offers a higher Win Score (and Wins Produced per 48 minutes).
So should Ginobili be MVP? No, there are a few players offering even more. None of these players, though, are named Kobe.
– DJ
Our research on the NBA was summarized HERE.
The Technical Notes at wagesofwins.com provides substantially more information on the published research behind Wins Produced and Win Score
Wins Produced, Win Score, and PAWSmin are also discussed in the following posts:
Simple Models of Player Performance
What Wins Produced Says and What It Does Not Say
Introducing PAWSmin — and a Defense of Box Score Statistics
Finally, A Guide to Evaluating Models contains useful hints on how to interpret and evaluate statistical models.
Wages of Wins Journal 
Gareth Lewin
March 30, 2008
The link to John Hollinger you gave also talks about the raptors.
You haven’t talked about the rap’s since January 29, and you didn’t give much commentary, since you pasted a tsn.ca article.
So basically I’m asking you to update us on your analysis of them so far.
dberri
March 31, 2008
Gareth,
Okay, next story is on the Raptors.
Mustafa
March 31, 2008
Prof. Berri, I am a huge fan of your work (I loved your book) and I had a question for you…where does Chris Paul stand compared to these guys now?
Your last post on his behalf was at the half-way mark, but after the All-Star break his numbers seem to have gotten a lot better (higher shooting percentage, more net possessions) and I think at this point he really should be featured more prominently in the MVP talks.
antonio
March 31, 2008
from what i have been reading on websites, the mvp race is down to chris paul or kobe bryant, with many taking the view of whichever of their teams has a better record at the end of the season deserves the mvp because they say it is such a close battle
Sri
March 31, 2008
I think a big problem with the MVP award is the lack of a good definition. Though you offer a statistical measure to rate players and pick the most productive player, the award seems to be chosen by a myriad of factors including production, star power, team record, history in the league, deservability? (as is the argument for Kobe, and/or a ridiculous stat (as was nash’s assist numbers his 2 MVP years).
Tim
March 31, 2008
Historically the MVP has not been defined as the best player, but the best player on one of the better teams. Most of the people who vote on the award would therefore find Professor Berri’s argument puzzling. Yes, Kobe is no better now than he was before, yes, it is the players around him who have gotten better, but so what? As far as they are concerned, Kobe is one of the best players in the league, and now that his team has risen to his level, he deserves consideration for MVP. They would say the same about Kevin Garnett, who is no better now than when losing with Minnesota, but has a better team around him.
So the real issue is whether Kobe is really one of the best players in the league, and that comes down to the importance of scoring, and especially scoring when the game is on the line, and the ball is in the hands of the MVP candidate. That’s why Kobe and LeBron are considered favorites for the award, Garnett is only grudgingly given consideration, and Dwight Howard isn’t mentioned at all. Chris Paul is a mix because he can score, but his more startling stats are assists vs. turnovers. Paul also benefits, though, from the fact that Chandler is not given enough credit because he doesn’t score.
Ndzimba Kaya
March 31, 2008
Well done Prof. Berri, great post and by the way I agreed 100% on the fact that Kobe is just as good as he was last year, but the guys around him (Bynum, Gasol, Odom, Turiaf…) are just better.
Tim/
The fact that the Lakers have already won 50 games and seen as a strong favorite to win this year doesn’t suddenly mean that Kobe should be MVP, I mean you talked about Garnett not been as good in Boston as he was in Minnesota, which is fair but he is the main reason why the Celtics are so competitive right now, his impact on the team and the entire city of Boston is just amazing and he is my MVP.
LB James and CP3 are the future of the league and they both have time to win 1 or 2 MVP trophy.
But for Kobe it maybe this year or never….
Animal
March 31, 2008
Yahoo Sports on how Wizards are still good without Agent 0, http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AofW3dyiJq23CtBfXQs5.0C8vLYF?slug=jy-arenaspaycut033108&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
How has the performance of the Wizards without Agent 0 been compared to what win score would have been predicted? I think win score would have given a good prediction here.
jarutski
March 31, 2008
ummm….actually PER rates Manu higher (4th in the league), and Hollinger basically says that /minute numbers are =, but that Manu is more efficient.
Exactly the same argument.
Tim
March 31, 2008
Ndzimba Kaya — I agree that Kobe should not be MVP, and I agree that Garnett is a legitimate candidate for MVP. I’m just noting that the performance of the team does, traditionally, have a great deal to do with the MVP award. Professor Berri argues that perhaps it shouldn’t, but realistically no one from a losing team will win the MVP award, regardless of personal stats.
On the other hand, even if we accept that only superstars from winning teams qualify for the MVP award, what really distinguishes Kobe’s story from Garnett’s story is that Kobe has always been overrated — not just this year, but throughout his career — while Garnett has always been underrated, and continues to be underrated, even now that he is on a successful team. Even Garnett’s fans keep talking about intangibles, when he really has plenty of very tangible stats in his favor — moreso than Kobe, at any rate.
Ndzimba Kaya
March 31, 2008
Tim // Well I agreed with you on Kobe been overrated throughout his career, I still do agree that maybe this year the league should reward his amazing talent and competitiveness but I think that Garnett too deserved to win the MVP trophy just because the way he amazingly transformed the Celtics…
Anyway would be nice to have a post to compare Manu G. to Kobe….
Is he really a better player than Kobe…….
now
March 31, 2008
So who’s your MVP? Let me guess- James Jones. Professor, I hope you become an influential advisor on a team I hate. That would be a joy to watch.
Harold Almonte
March 31, 2008
It’s not Kobe who is overrated, but the SG position and how determinant this position is to win a game. It’s, and always will be, very though for a SG not named Jordan, to win an MVP. He finally has a very good team where he doesn’t need to share the leadership and the consideration of best of the team. This could be his year, but the next two could be too.
antonio
March 31, 2008
the reason why people think kobe deserves the mvp this year compared to last year actually is in fact the improvement of his teammates (minus gasol). a big argument is that kobe has started to sacrafice personal stats for the good of the team and he is the reason for the improvement of his teammates. much like the reason why many people said they chose nash because of his effect on his teammates. so essentially dberri, many people in favor of kobe for mvp agree with you that statistically he has not improved but it was his teammates that have. the media just believes kobe is the reason for their improvement, while you believe kobe does not effect his teammates play
tre
March 31, 2008
prof. berri i think you are obscuring the issue a bit by harping on kobe’s lack of improvement from previous years. he is competing against everyone playing in the nba this year, not against prior versions of himself. if he has been better or more important than all other players this year then he should get the mvp. whether he has become better or more important than he was in the past when he did or did not win the mvp should have no bearing on his deserving it now. the only reason it should be brought up at all is to assess his chances of actually winning it since unfortunately others will be led astray by this line of thought as well
andrew
March 31, 2008
That’s true, but if you look at Kobe relative to the other top players in the league, his case just gets weaker.
Kent
March 31, 2008
Harold, welcome back.
sirk
March 31, 2008
blah blah blah.. you just proved that you are a kobe hater and you want somebody else to win the mvp award that is why your doing this hate thing. first of all, every team needs a center in their line up so why are you comparing those stats where bynum and gasol where out? ofcourse they will lose to any team that will play them becaues they don’t have a legit center that can contend and battle for the rebound ( because i think rebounding is one way to win a game and who ever controls this have a higher chance of winning the game) so they ever emphasize these matter. secondly have you asked your self that if the lakers don’t have kobe in their line up? do you think they will have those wins the last 3 years and also these years? if you take kobe ou in the lineup the lakers would suck more than the teams in the lower standings. the last 3 seasons kobe is putting up phenomenal numbers and have anyone considered it? no.. so basically it’s just numbers with team success just like steve nash and dirk won the award. so you can’t take away the mvp award to kobe because if you take him ou in the lakers lineup the lakers will not be one of the top in the rugged and powerhouse western conference… give the man some love…
sirk
March 31, 2008
oh and may i add, you are comparing kobe to manu. that manu is as better or much more better thatn kobe. then let me asked this to you. if we switch kobe and manu. kobe to the spurs and manu to the lakers. what do you think will be the impact? let me answer it for you, the spurs will become a dynasty for the next 5 years or so and no one even the celtics 3 headed monsters can compete with them when kobe is in their line up. and for manu i think he will have better self stats compare to his previous when he will be in the lakers line up, but sure thing the lakers will suck even if manu is there. or may be lets switch them 3 years ago and put kobe in the spurs. im sure he spurs will have those 3 championships and the lakers will not be in the playoff picture 3 years ago, and let me add atleast kobe manage to get the lakers in the playoff even their lineup is not that competitive that time. i have every answer to what you are saying about kobe doesn’ deserve to win the mvp…
Tim
April 1, 2008
Here’s more fuel for the fire from Rick Bucher:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/dailydime?page=dime-080401
Key quote:
“MEP (Most Excellent Player): Kobe Bryant, Lakers. No one in the league has disputed this for at least four years, but that hasn’t been enough for him to finish higher than third in overall voting. Ever. Which suggests that how a player is perceived is as, or more, important than how he plays. “
andrew
April 1, 2008
The facts will bend to the will of Bucher’s premise. Gotta love him for that.
Tim
April 1, 2008
Here’s a vote for Garnett from Dave DuPree at SI.com, again despite his statistics instead of because of them:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/david_dupree/04/01/mvp.voting/
Key quote:
“[Garnett’s] statistics aren’t that earth-shattering, as this is the first time in 10 seasons that he hasn’t averaged at least 20 points and 10 rebounds (18.9 points and 9.4 rebounds going into Tuesday’s games). He is shooing a career-best 53.7 percent and committing a career-low 2.0 turnovers, but he is also averaging a career-low 1.2 blocked shots and his assists average of 3.5 is his lowest in the last 11 seasons. He’s also playing the fewest minutes (33.6) since he was a rookie. But his impact is immeasurable.”
Part of the problem seems to be explaining why, if Garnett is the MVP this year, he hasn’t been the MVP before. Instead of pointing to intangibles, DuPree could just point to other criteria he has adopted for the award:
“• The best player on the best team (record-wise) has to be given strong consideration.
“• A player’s team has to make the playoffs.”
In other words, Garnett is the best player on the best team, while in most previous years he was the best player on a team that did not make the playoffs, or just barely made the playoffs and then lost. He wasn’t any less intense in Minnesota. He just has better teammates in Boston.
Tim
April 1, 2008
Okay, I know Garnett was MVP once before, again when his team had some success.
David Friedman
April 1, 2008
Someone else already pointed out the fallacy in comparing Kobe this year to Kobe in previous years, namely that this year’s MVP should be the most valuable player of this season; Kobe’s performance in other seasons is not relevant and does not disqualify him from winning the award this season if he is the most qualified candidate.
Here are three relevant issues that the author failed to consider:
1) When looking at the Lakers’ record with various player combinations (with Bynum, with Gasol, etc.) did you factor in the home/road balance of those various schedules and the quality of the opponents that the Lakers faced? As I pointed out in my article about the Lakers’ “three seasons” (http://www.probasketballnews.com/friedman_032608.html), their schedule without Bynum and Gasol has been heavily slanted toward road games and/or games against good teams. Their 11-9 record with Kobe and without either Bynum or Gasol is very impressive considering that fact, even with the two recent losses to poor teams (Fisher has come up lame now as well).
2) The author claims that Kobe should not be the MVP because most of the team’s improvement has come from the other players but he fails to consider how much of that “improvement” is the result of playing with Kobe. For instance, the Lakers have spot up shooters who get wide open shots because Kobe must be double-teamed; Kobe’s presence gets them open opportunities whether or not Kobe is credited with an assist on those shots. Kobe is the victim of a form of “double jeopardy”: when those players failed to make those shots the past two seasons he was “disqualified” for MVP consideration because his team did not win enough games; this year they are making those shots and he is being “disqualified” because he supposedly has such a strong supporting cast. Nash’s supporting cast of Amare, Marion and others was not held against him, so why should the improvement of Kobe’s supporting cast be held against him?
3) Paul’s top two big men have been healthy and played together for the entire season. Kobe has played with Bynum, then without either big man, then with Gasol without Bynum and now has endured another stretch without either big man. Yet, despite all of this turmoil, Kobe’s team is right in the thick of the race with the Hornets. Last year, the Hornets and Lakers both had injury problems and the Lakers had two starters (Kwame and Smush) who would not have even played for any other playoff team, let alone being starters; Kobe guided his team to the playoffs, Paul did not. Yes, last season does not directly relate to this season but if we are going to compare Kobe this year to Kobe in previous years the above analysis is much more to the point and highlights the fact that Kobe consistently has done more with less talent around him than Paul has. Put Kobe with West and Chandler for a whole year and give Paul the proportions of Bynum, Gasol and Turiaf/Mbenga that Kobe has had this season and do you really believe that Paul would do as much with that group as Kobe has?
Tim
April 2, 2008
Here’s another column I would love to get your take on, Professor Berri:
http://proxy.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?page=Under23-Intro
Several ESPN writers vote on the best 23 and under players in the NBA.
1. LeBron James (Unanimous first choice among the writers. Is he really better than Howard and Paul?)
2. Dwight Howard (Why isn’t he being mentioned for MVP?)
3. Chris Paul
4. Deron Williams
5. Carmelo Anthony (Does he really deserve this?)
6. Kevin Durant (!!!)
7. Greg Oden
8. Andrew Bynum (Should he be higher on the list?)
9. Brandon Roy
10. Monta Ellis
Something tells me the WoW list would be different, and might include names we don’t see.
Tim
April 2, 2008
Yet another article about the MVP race, this time arguing that the box score does not measure Garnett’s defensive ability:
http://myespn.go.com/blogs/truehoop/0-32-3/The-Numbers–Kevin-Garnett-is–Snuffing-Them-Out-.html
Key quote:
“‘Players that KG is guarding are shooting 13.1% below the league average at their position. So he’s guarding power forwards, and they’re shooting 52% league-wide, or whatever it is. Guys that he’s guarding are shooting 39% all year. That’s just KG, one on one, against his man, when he’s on the court.
“‘LeBron’s guys are shooting 2% below the league average for their position. Kobe’s are 3% below. Chris Paul’s are 4% below. And KG is keeping people 13% below. In other words, he’s snuffing them out. ‘”
(Henry Abbott quoting Celtic owner Wyc Grousbeck.)
What do you think, Professor Berri?
In that same article Abbott links to a USA Today article statistically analyzing the MVP race. It doesn’t look like a very sophisticated analysis, but it does take into account more than just scoring.
One more thing about Garnett. Do his stats suffer from all the blow-out wins the Celtics have had, where he sat in the fourth quarter? Should that matter?
dberri
April 2, 2008
Tim,
The study of young players will have to wait until the season is over. But KG I can comment on in a few days. There is something very obvious about his stats that the media is missing.
mrparker
April 2, 2008
So I looked up Kobe and Manus last 10 games played against each other. Lets everyone remember that Kobe plays about 10 more minutes per game.
The 4 biggest factors in any game are as follows in order of importance. fg%, to, reb, getting to the line.
*Manu has shot better than Kobe in 5 games.
*He has had more rebounds in 2 games but has tied him in 2 others while playing less minutes. He has also finished 1 rebound short of Kobe while logging significantly less minutes in 2 other games. Per minute Manu beats Kobe in the category
*Manu has beating kobe at getting to the line in 5 games. Again this is while playing less minutes. And also while taking about 1/2 the amount of shots kobe has taken. Anyone want to argue that Kobe has outplayed him in the category even though he shoots more while getting to the line less? And thats with Kobe getting the superstar benefit of the doubt
*Manu has had 34 turnovers over this span. Kobe has had 40 turnovers. Kobe has been playing about 11 more minutes per meeting than Kobe so the turnover category belongs to Jordan’s apprentice.
With all that being said you have to at least say that the battle between these two has been even. Yet Manu is not in anyone’s top 100 players of all time.
So someone needs to start reminding me why we all think this guy is so great. If I had time I’m sure I could compare him head to head with more players and get similar results. He’s just not as good as skip bayless thinks he is
andrew
April 2, 2008
“Do you really believe Paul would do as much [as Kobe]?”
Yes, except probably more.
antonio
April 2, 2008
its not the best 23 and under players, it best potential really where they expect the players to be
Chris P.
April 2, 2008
mrparker,
Simply comparing Kobe and Manu head to head doesn’t do justice to how good they are in relation to each other. I’m a huge Ginobili fan, but even I’ll admit that playing with Duncan, Parker, and a cast of smart veteran players does a lot for him.
Comparing field goal percentage is skewed b/c Kobe is always the #1 option in the Lakeshow, whereas Manu is sometimes #1, sometimes 2 and sometimes even the third option. He’s going to get a lot more open looks than Kobe, and face a lot less, if any, double teams.
As for turnovers, you’re comparing Kobe’s turnovers that occur when he’s facing the Spurs, one of the top defensive squads in the NBA for each of the past 10 years. The Lakers defense is vastly improving, but is still not comparable to what the Spurs do day in and day out.
So really, when you get down to it, those numbers don’t prove anything other than Manu does better in certain categories when he plays the Lakers than Kobe does in those categories when facing the Spurs. Not a real groundbreaker there.
I’m not even that much of a Kobe fan, but if you want a reminder of why he’s so great, I’ll give it a shot. First of all, if I was going to form my best starting 5 of active players, I’ll let it be said that I’d rather have Ginobili than Kobe, since I consider him more of a team player. However, if I was told I would have a terrible team and that I could have any single 2 guard in the league, I’d pick Kobe hands down over Ginobili. I’m not sure anyone who really knows about the NBA would pick differently unless you’re just a Manu-maniac, which is fine.
However, Kobe is probably safely within the top 5 players of all time never to win an MVP award. The others? Elgin Baylor, Jerry West, John Stockton, and then either Clyde Drexler, Isiah Thomas or Scottie Pippen, although if Kobe ended his career without the award I’d put him ahead of any of those last three.
Sure Kobe plays lots of minutes and jacks up lots of shots. He also hits lots of shots. Sometimes with 2, 3 and even 4 defenders coming at him. You think Toronto was satisfied with playing a simple double team on him all game when he hit for 81? Watch the tape, and you’ll be amazed at the different defenses thrown at Bryant and how he kept on making baskets.
And he’s not just a scorer. His versatility for a two guard, typically looked at as grabbing rebounds, getting assists, and playing d on the other end, is among the tops all time: including this season, Kobe will have had 7 seasons averaging 20(points) 5(rebounds) and 5(assists). Only three guys have ever done that more times: Oscar Robertson(10), Larry Bird(10), and MJ(9). And the only other guys who even have 6 are equally impressive: Jerry West, John Havlicek, Walt Frazier, Clyde Drexler, Kevin Garnett and TMac.
There’s only a handful of players who can take over a game, and he’s one of them. I don’t think that the fact that he’s been one of them longer than the other guys being mentioned for MVP means that he deserves it more. But the last two years, although he finished 4th and 3rd in the actual voting, he was among the top two or three mentioned all year long. And while he was being mentioned with Nash and Nowitzki, the main criticism launched against him was that his team wasn’t near the top of the conference. And now that’s different. And yes, his numbers aren’t hugely different from past years. In fact, I’d say that two years ago his stats make his current numbers pale in comparison. But part of role players being able to step it up and play better is having a star player who is supportive, which apparently Kobe is doing. And the impact that Kobe has on guys like Jordan Farmar, Sasha Vujacik and Andrew Bynum cannot be measured in numbers.
mrparker
April 3, 2008
chris p,
Your entire argument revolves almost solely around putting the ball in the basket. Actually putting the ball in the basket is only about 20% of the game. Thats my own number but thats basically the entire purpose of this website.
Manu outrebounds Kobe head to head and gets to the line at a higher rate. I don’t think his supporting cast can help him in that regard.
Kobe is better with regards to not turning the ball over.
There are a good number of #1 options who shoot high fg percentages but Kobe is not among them.
I am not a Manu maniac, I just looked up therir head to head numbers because its pretty obvious that a majority of fans would assume that Kobe has outplayed Manu head to head, however this just hasn’t happened.
Whenever arguments are made for Kobe they are never based on the numbers. However, as Berri has showed basketball is a sport where the numbers explain 90%+ of the story.
Chris P.
April 3, 2008
mrparker,
Arguing that Kobe puts the ball in the basket wasn’t my intention at all. But I think its safe to say that doing so, whether or not its 20 percent of the game, is probably the single most important part of the game.
Putting the ball in the basket indicates to others that you possess the ability to do so. That draws additional defenders, makes it easier for teammates to get open shots, and generally attracts more attention in a defensive setup than would a player without such an ability.
Simply put, a team couldn’t realistically build around Manu Ginobili a championship caliber team, nor could they do so around most shooting guards in the NBA. Kobe is among the few, if not the only, to fit this profile. I love Manu to death, and I think he’s safely an All-star caliber player, but saying that he’s an MVP caliber player, or on par with someone who is, is like saying the same about Byron Scott or Dennis Johnson during the 80’s.
Those guys put up some solid numbers for some very successful teams. And when Jordan first entered the league, he put up far superior numbers but his team didn’t match the success ofthe Lakers or Celtics. Does that mean they were on the same level? Of course not.
Then, when Jordan’s team did start winning at a high clip, and his numbers weren’t significantly higher or different(he did have a statistically terrific year his rookie season), did he not deserve the MVP awards that came to him?
I think that’s the same as saying that Kobe doesn’t deserve an MVP award now b/c his numbers are much different than when he didn’t win the award. I’m not arguing the numbers. In fact, I’ve always been impressed to some degree by the analysis that WoW provides. But my argument is that numbers don’t tell the whole story, nor even such a significant part of the st ory that we can do without watching the games.
The fact that Kobe puts up the same big numbers that he did when the team wasn’t winning, and that now they ARE winning, is the argument for him to win MVP.
Does that mean I think he should win it? You might be disappointed to hear that after all this argument, I myself am not fully convinced. Paul, James and KG are all still guys that deserve credit. But Paul’s teammates(Chandler, West and Stojakovic in particular) have been more consistent than the most important of Kobe’s teammates. James’ team isn’t overly impressive in the depressing East, despite his gaudy numbers. And KG, well, it would be ridiculous to say that he’s the only reason for the turnaround and the terrific season the C’s are having. The turnaround of a city? That’s irrelevant to winning the award. The turning around of a team? That is, but you can’t simply disregard the impact of 1) Pierce playing an entire season healthy 2) Ray Allen being added to the mix 3) the emergence of Rajon Rondo in playing as a fulltime starter for the first time 4) the defensive expertise brought by new assistant Tom Thibodeau, a noted specialist and expert and 5) all the veterans (Cassell, Posey, etc.) that jumped at the chance to play with the big 3.
There are probably other factors too, but I’m not completely sold on any of these guys yet. But Kobe has just as good an argument as anyone else.
Logic
April 3, 2008
David Friedman rocks.
I believe that Kobe is the most productive player in the NBA, and contributes the most wins out of any player.
Joey
April 3, 2008
Do you base all of your arguments only on statistics or do you also take into consideration what a player does to force defenses to adjust to him, allowing others to have an advantage. I also wonder is on-ball defense taken into consideration? Shane Battiers performance on Kobe was awesome, and was the main reason Houston won the game because they didnt need to worry about doubling Kobe and allowed them to keep the other guys in check. How is this measured through statistics? And if it can be,do you take it into consideration when determining how much value a player has to his team?
mrparker
April 4, 2008
chris p,
We agree on one thing. Putting the ball in the basket is the most important aspect of the game.
However, it is still only 20 percent of the game.(my number).
After that you’ve got
1. keeping the opponent from putting ball in basket(20%)
2. your turnover(15%)
3. creating turnovers(15%)
4. off reb(10)
5. def reb(10)
6. getting to line(5)
7. keeping them off line(5)
These are all my numbers but whatever you want to make them, one thing that will that will never be true is own pts > 50%.
My original post was for an earlier poster who wanted to see Manu’s numbers vs. Kobe’s numbers and wasn’t intended on an MVP argument.
Kobe is a championship piece I will not argue that. My arguement has always been if he’s the most productive guy on your team than you’re in trouble. If the voters want to hand this out as a lifetime achievement award then I can understand that. KG already has an MVP.
Harold Almonte
April 4, 2008
Mr. Parker, what Chris wants to explain is that the most of statistical metrics can’t accurate compare stats between two players, in this example, Kobe and Manu, because even being two SGs, their situations are not the same, the defensive stress Kobe needs to confront to built his numbers, in the game and in the clutch, are not the same than Manu. It’s what some metrics attempt to define as strenght of opponents and playing time on the stat, and why this should change the “win” value of the stat.
About KG, he is the anchor of the Boston defense, his own and teammates’s, who by the way aren’t as bad defenders (different to the situation with Camby and his teammates). He needs to be in the talk about MVP, but again the strenght of the conference hurts a bit.
barnarc
April 7, 2008
for those arguing in favor of Kobe Bryant receiving MVP, i wonder how you respond to this:
lakersfiction.blogspot.com
mrparker
April 8, 2008
Harold,
Again, I can’t disagree with your point however it focuses solely on scoring. Putting the ball in your own basket is not the only important aspect of basketball.
Harold Almonte
April 8, 2008
Kobe has the advantage at defense too. And I’m not talking about DPOY teams. Kobe is called to defend the best opponent scorer almost allways; in SAS, this job is mainly assigned to Bowen. Then, Kobe has more stress at defense than Manu. Could be the metrics account for individual strenght of opponents, and not be dominated by averaged and illusional regressions and stats, we wouldn’t be discussing this thing.
If it’s pleasant to you, I’ll confess that Kobe-SG is not my favorite for MVP. Garnett-big man is at his level, and Paul-PG is above the two. For a SG to be MVP, it should not have big mens or PGs with better or similar season successes.
Harold Almonte
April 8, 2008
On this point (positions production), common knowledge and WOW agree. Although the rebounding issue makes it appear exaggerated a bit.
Johnny Utah
April 10, 2008
This is a terribly biased article and I’m almost ashamed to have read it. WTF is the Chris Paul or Kevin Garnett mention? LBJ is absolutely not the MVP this year. I am always amazed at how much Kobe is hated and disrespected by the media and fans. However, most current/former players and coaches all say Kobe is the best player in the game today, which he is. This MVP award has become a joke (see: Nash wins MVP in 06).
Harold Almonte
April 10, 2008
Johnny. MVP is more about team success than best player in the game. If it’s so. then Kobe should deserve it every year since this century started.
Paul and Kobe are the clear frontrunners for MVP this year. Paul subjectively just a bit ahead because he is a PG, but who say Kobe isn’t the true Lakers’s playmaker? He also has been the all #1, 2 and 3 scoring option at the same time in a lot of games. Whoever wins is a good and fair selection.
derf
April 11, 2008
Hey Tim.. I don’t see how you can say that KG is underrated and that Kobe is overrated. FYI, KG has already won an MVP and is largely credited for the Celts’ turnaround. Kobe has never won an MVP and was always second fiddle to Shaq during their championship run even if he almost singlehandedly destroyed some of the opponents during its championship years (Note their series vs. Portland and Sacramento).
KOGI
April 12, 2008
FOR ME KOBE IS A MVP, YES HIS TEAM MATES DONE THEIR SHARE BUT YOU HAVE TO GIVE CREDIT ON KOBE’S ALL AROUND GAME. AND BASKETBALL IS A 5 MAN GAME SO THEY NEED A HELP FROM A BIG MAN LIKE BYNUM OR GASOL TO MAKE THEIR TEAMS COMPETITIVE. HOW ABOUT KOBE LESS LAKERS DO YOU THINK THEY’LL BE ON TOP?
nohater
April 13, 2008
another kobe hater on the loose.. give some love, man.. you’re just to insecure that kobe will win the mvp today.. your overrated lehype james is not going to win his mvp this season… look at his dirty records man..
nohater
April 13, 2008
yeah the number are high, he was with drew gooden and hughes but did he make them play much better? no.. lebron killed their chance..
billy
April 15, 2008
ur stupid and dont know anything about basketball
jack
May 3, 2008
ur dumb, ur such a kobe hater… Number 1 Bynum and Gasol weren’t with the lakers for most of the season, Kobe has overall good play, he’s a good defender who is also a good jumpshooter. So your really stupid. Yeah the players improved but the two centers weren’t playing most of the season. They had to use Kwamwe Brown for a while!! Your logic really sucks