Taking a Stand - Kobe is the MVP

The last few weeks have yielded some pretty on-the-fence debates about who the NBA
MVP should be. From what I have been able to gather, there are a lot of people who feel that there really isn't a bad argument against KG, CP3, or Kobe and that any of those three would really be a good choice. But I'm not interested in a "good" choice. I am interested in the best choice. Saying all 3 (or even 4 if you include LeBron) were possible candidates a few weeks ago was ok, but the season is over and it is time to step up and take a stand. Kobe is the MVP.

Lets start with LeBron. He has had a ridiculous statistical year which has put him in the argument, but I think one fact automatically disqualifies him from being this years winner: his team went backwards. Last year the Cavs won 50 games in the regular season (and since this is a "regular season" award, I'll stick to those facts). This year they won 45. That would be ok if the conference had somehow gotten significantly better over the last year, but the East hasn't. In fact, 7 of the 8 playoff teams had winning records last year compared with 6 of the 8 this year. The reality is they may have gotten worse. Simply for this, LeBron can't be the winner, although he deserves some dap for a great year.

Moving on to KG. I love KG. He has always been one of my favorite players and I am glad he has found his way into a great situation with a very legit chance at winning a title. With that said, I don't think he can be the MVP this year. The fact that he has missed about 15% of his teams games this season has to disqualify him. On top of that the Celtics had that 9 game stretch without KG around the All-Star game and they went 7-2 (remember, the main criteria for Nash winning the award 2 years ago was the fact his team's record stunk when he was hurt and they played without him).

KG also has to take a hit because of the East, and it is not just that the East is, as Barkley calls it, the "JV" league, but because the West this year has routinely been called the best conference the NBA has ever seen (whether that is true or not is besides the point, as the point is the West is not good, but great). Although the Celtics have a great record against the West, they played less than half of their games against Western Conference opponents. On top of that, slightly less than 20% of their games came against playoff teams from the West. All the while a team like the Lakers or the Hornets had upwards of 30% of their games against that type of competition (not including Golden State, Portland, or Sacramento AKA the Western teams that would have made the playoffs in the East). Yes the Celtics had a good record against the high caliber teams, but isn't there something to be said of the grind teams that play them night in and night out go through? I certainly think so. To compound that, John Hollinger on ESPN.com shows the Celtics as having the weakest strength of schedule of any "Top 10" team on his power rankings. On the other hand, the Lakers and the Hornets are number 1 and 2 in strength of schedule, in that order. Its not to say that KG is not great and that he hasn't had a profound impact on the Celtics, but it is to say there are guys who have had to do more for their teams to be great and were there for the whole ride.

That brings us to CP3. I am not going to debate whether CP3's 21.1 ppg, 11.6 apg, and 2.7 spg are more valuable than Kobe's 28.3 ppg, 6.3 rpg, and 5.4 apg. Much like with KG, I love CP3. I like his attitude, I like his game, I like his leadership, and I think he has firmly established himself as the best point guard in the league right now. I read an article yesterday by some schmoe that writes for FOX Sports. He said CP3 deserved the MVP, in part, because he does more to help his team as he is, after all, the point guard. As for myself, I am partial to PGs. My favorite player ever was a PG and I always thought of myself as a wannabe PG, but saying that CP3 deserves the MVP because he is the PG is pretty absurd. After all, since the 1990's began, only two teams that won the title have done so with an All-Star PG; the Spurs won with Tony Parker and the Pistons won with Chauncey Billups (and Billups wasn't an All-Star that year). That doesn't speak volumes to the inherent "value" of a point guard in the modern era of the NBA as this writer seemed to insinuate. And as far as the Lakers go, they run an offense that doesn't use a PG in the traditional way. The triangle offense uses Kobe in the way that many traditional offense utilize a point guard. It places him as the facilitator and distributor. I just don't see the fact that CP3 is a PG as being something that should determine who wins the MVP.

There is another factor that no one has talked about and that seems pretty important to me. A lot of people are talking abut the chemistry that Hornets have had and how CP3 is the main cause for that and he very well may be. He has had a fantastic year (better than Nash's 2 MVP years) and the Hornets have far surpassed most peoples expectations. But to make my point let me paint to pictures.

#1: The season begins with moderate expectations. You and your team begin to win and the winning keeps on coming. The season went by smoothly. So smoothly in fact, that between all the starters there were only 17 missed games due to injury. Your main contributor off the bench only missed 1 game too and you acquired a few key bench guys that have done well in their limited roles.

#2: The season begins with mixed expectations after a crazy off-season. You begin 9-8; not a great start. You begin to pick up steam as a team and your second best player so far goes down with a severe knee injury and ends up missing 47 games, has yet to return, and there is no set return date. But to help stem the tide, your team makes a big trade and gets you a great player to help. There is not the luxury of adjustment time and your team rattles of 16 wins in the next 19 games. Then the new guy goes down with an injury and misses 10 games. When all is said and done, he only actually played in 27 of your 82 games. To top off all of that, you play the remaining 1/3 of the season with a shooting hand that needs surgery and your key reserves have missed numerous games due to injury as well.

It is no surprise that the first scenario is a description of CP3's task and the second is a description of Kobe's. Maybe it is just me, but keeping team chemistry alive during the first scenario seems like it would have been easier than maintaining it in the second. Some may say that the Lakers getting Gasol shouldn't be looked at as a chemistry issue at all, but look at the Mavs and the Suns. They made big trades and it took them both weeks to get their teams playing well again. That lapse in team chemistry by our previous two MVPs' teams has put them as the 6th and 7th seeds in the West. Kobe took the lead in welcoming Gasol and the Lakers did not miss a beat. They immediately played well with Gasol and Kobe carried them to a better than .500 record minus Bynum, Gasol, and others with one good hand. The Lakers came out as the best (regular season) team in the best conference the NBA has seen in at least 35 years and they did it with a slew of challenges in their way. I think the leader that held the team together and put them on his back during the times other teams would have folded should be seen as the most valuable. So without further adieu, Kobe Bryant is the MVP.