Yeah Cris, i've been keeping my fingers crossed all season, hoping for that Boston vs. LA finals. I think those are the two best teams in the league right now, and i honestly don't know who would win. It would be such a great matchup!
Man, Bry, the Cavs have much more spine that i thought. Now Boston took Game 1 yesterday even with a frustrated performance by Bron Bron, but still, they kept the Celts under 80 points. Unbelievable!!! For a split second towards the middle of the fourth quarter, i actually thought the Cavs could come back and take it. Based on how they played, i still believe they have a chance even if they should lose Game 2. Cleveland has become somewhat of a fortress in the playoffs so if they can steal Game 2 in the Garden, the Cavs still can make the Eastern Conference Finals. Oh yeah, and props to my man KB24 for becoming the fourth Laker to win the MVP trophy - the other legendary three are Wil Chamberlain, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and Magic Johnson of course. Here's my take, if Kobe can win 2 or 3 more rings, i believe he has a legitimate shot at ranking right next to His Airness as the greatest player of all time. Now that might sound like sacrilege to some, but i mean what i say. Especially if he takes this team far.
Cris, you didn't include Shaq in that list along side Wilt the Stilt, Kareem and Magic. So that makes it 5 MVPs for the Lake Show. And because Jordan's shadow is unimaginably large, my opinion on the Kobester is that he'd have to just about double what Jordan did just to be considered equal.
The MVP balloting is a complete joke. It's a popularity contest. Kobe won the lifetime achievement award, but if you try and tell me that Kobe Bryant was the best player this season, you are wrong. Chris Paul has been the best player this season. I don't see how anybody can deny that. A few other examples as to why the MVP balloting is a complete joke: Shaquille O'neal, arguably the most dominant big man ever, only has 1 MVP? Steve Nash has won back to back MVP awards, but Chris Paul doesn't win it even though he statistically went above and beyond what Steve Nash did? Also, how can you justify John Stockton having none? He's probably the best point guard of all-time behind Magic. I'm sure i could come up with more, but you get the hint. Kobe has been the best player for the past five years or so, but he was NOT the best player this particular season. I'm not even a Hornets fan. Just telling it like it is. Chris Paul got robbed.
Hah Bry, we might disagree with result, but we def see eye-to-eye on the workings. I've said repeatedly to a friend of mine who's a sportswriter for the Miami Herald that the MVP balloting in the NBA is a complete bag of horse manure. It's simply based on two things - who has been the most popular player of the season and who the media thinks should win. That is all there is to it. That's why Steve Nash has two MVP trophies, whilst Shaq has one. I know it's the regular season MVP, but i really think the true test of an MVP is who can take his team deep in the playoffs. Because that's what counts the most.
Right...exactly. Kobe should have won the MVP in 2005, when he carried that Lakers team on his back, and took the Suns to 7 games pretty much by himself. I think that's the best season he's had in his career, and he wasn't even top 3 in MVP balloting if i recall that correctly. I don't understand the regular season MVP either. They should definitely wait to award the MVP until after all of the conference championship games. They can still make the finals MVP, and the regular season/playoff MVP separate that way. I admit that i went overboard in saying that he will never be MVP material, but my gripe comes from the fact that this wasn't his most MVP worthy season, and there were other candidates who did more for their teams (in my opinion) than he did (during THIS particular season). I think Chris Paul was the most outstanding player this season, and i think Kevin Garnett was the best player on the best team. Why can't they just have a set standard of giving it to the best player on the best team? If that was the case, it would work out perfectly, because more often times than not, a team gets to be the best because they have a great player carrying them anyway.
Well I guess that means your vote would've gone to Paul, which still would've left him over 200 votes behind Kobe in the balloting. Que sera sera . . .
I'm a Kobe fan, but word. By the way, the Spurs-Hornets series will be decided in Game 6 in my opinion. Whoever takes Game 5 will have the edge. And based on how it has shaped up, i have to go with Naw'lins. The Spurs might even it in San Antonio but i think the Hornets will regain the edge and grind it out in San Antonio to close it out. The Lakers-Jazz is still hanging there too. A 2-0 lead is no guarantee of progression. Countless teams have blown a 2-0 lead advantage and one team that knows very well how to come back in Utah. Remember last year when they got clobbered by the Rockets in Games 1 and 2 of the Western Conference first round, but ended up winning? I bet you do. But the Lakers are standing strong right now and are just playing some Bulls-esque ball right now and if they keep it moving, they could get another sweep, or at least close it in Game 5. If they win Games 3 or 4 in Salt Lake City, that'd be how it will happen because they're the best home playff team.
The Bulls haven't won a title in 10 years and didn't even make the playoffs this year. "Bulls-esque ball" = early vacation.
When you say 45, are you talking about 1945, or a player whose jersey number was 45? just making sure lol By the way, the playoffs have been great this year, and this nba season has been one of the best in years. I'm definitely hoping for a Lakers vs. Celtics final (i hate the Lakers and that prick Sasha Vujacic ) :lol:
:lol: #45 (as Jim Rome refers to him as). but actually, I lied, I saw a live playoff game back in '02 (Lakers v Spurs).. @ San Antonio..great game.
Here's what i say about this; we are all entitled to our views on the NBA but i know this one thing - those who say the NBA is unentertaining, unimpressive and boring simply don't know what they are talking about. Seriously, this season, right from the opening to the postseason, has got to be one of the most interesting in recent years. The NBA is as competitive, entertaining and full of stars as it was in the Jordan era. Now, clean your eyes properly and read it again because i know that some of you will get this wrong. I am NOT, i repeat, NOT saying that the NBA today is just as good or even better as it was in previous years. I am, however, saying that it has so many solid teams and the competition is as dynamic as it was in years gone by. In the 80s, it was the Lakers vs Celtics and occasionally the Bad Boys. In the 90s, it was the Bulls vs everybody else out west. In the early 2000s, it seemed like the Lakers would regain their place as the generals of the NBA until the Shaq trade temporarily put the ballclub in disarray. Whilst all that was happening, San Antonio picked up where the Lakers left off and that has how the pendulum has been swinging in recent years. Because let's face it, the last three world champions from the Western Conference have come from either Texas or California so let's not bullshit ourselves. Say all you want, but the argument that the NBA isn't fun is a dump of horse manure.
