As we head into the final stretch of the season, the MVP discussions have began to heat up. As they have, one thing has become painfully obvious. Whether he has earned these honors or not, he will not receive them. It's not my place to decide if Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Chris Paul, or Kevin Garnett is most deserving of this award. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Each of those players have staked a rightful claim to the award with their play this season. What is unfortunate though is that one of the favorites to win this award is not being given a fair and objective chance at winning it.
Prior to Colorado, and the sexual assault allegations, Kobe was the NBA's golden child. Similar to Lebron James the media had latched on to him early. A boy wonder with a squeeky clean image. That image would forever be shattered after those allegations. The story then became that of a fallen hero. Like a greek tragedy, people were entertained by the idea of an ego-driven star who had broken up a dynasty, driven out it's other stars and Hall of Fame Coach. Kobe the villain sold newspapers and improved ratings. That is not to say that he has not deserved the criticism he has received. There is one question that deserves to be asked though. Is it truly possible that Kobe was once a model citizen and a great guy, only to one day decide do a complete role reversal and turn into the Anti-Christ? A much more feasible explanation is that he was never as clean, or as evil as his media portrayal.
The reality is that journalists are just people. They take sides. They become offended if they are snubbed by a player, and sometimes they can be vindictive. Yet the NBA's Most Valuable Player award is determined by the sports media. Two seasons ago Steve Nash walked away with MVP honors for the second straight season, joining an elite cast of multiple time winners. Nash had a great season, and kept the Suns afloat without the injured Amare Stoudemire. Kobe Bryant would finish fourth in MVP voting despite averaging 35.4 points, 5.3 rebounds, 4.5 assists and 1.8 steals. His 35.4 points was the most the league had seen in nineteen seasons, since Michael Jordan averaged 37.1 in 1986-87, and he led that Lakers team to a 45-37 record and pushed them to the brink of an upset, going up 3-1 against the Phoenix Suns in the playoffs.
Allow me remind you of his roster at that time. That team featured Smush Parker, Kwame Brown and Luke Walton as 3/5 of it's starting lineup. Kwame Brown is stinking it up on one of the leagues worst teams and Smush Parker has been on paid vacation for most of this season by the league's worst team. Luke Walton had his break out season the next year, but averaged just 5 points and 3.6 rebounds that season. To have led that team to 45 wins and the brink of an upset was truly an accomplishment for Kobe. Say what you will about the Cavaliers supporting cast this season, but they are innumerably better than Kobe's Lakers team two seasons ago.
Yet 22 members of the media didn't even feel that Kobe was worthy of a top five vote. The 125 man panel gave him 22 first place votes, 11 second place, 18 third place, 22 fourth place and 30 fifth place votes. If cornered with the question of why Kobe Bryant failed to receive more two votes the de facto response were that his Lakers team simply wasn't good enough. The MVP usually goes to the best player on one of the best teams. Okay, I can respect that. The media backed up that notion last season by voting Dirk Nowitzki as the league's MVP.
What I don't understand is that many members of the same media have suddenly done a 180 on the criteria of MVP this season. Kobe has taken more of a backseat role this season. He has allowed his teammates to do more, and in the process the Lakers have become a better team. Even before the acquisition of Pau Gasol, the Lakers were the top team in the West prior to Bynum's knee injury. His 28.3 points, 6.1 rebounds, 5.3 assists and 2.0 steals is more impressive than the 24.6 points, 8.9 rebounds, 3.4 assists and 0.8 blocks that Nowitzki posted en route to the MVP last season.
Yet, there is an alarming trend in the media. Suddenly they have decided that the old criteria didn't make much sense after all. In recent weeks the Lebron for MVP talk has picked up. The Cavs are 35-27 and in 4th place in the much weaker Eastern Conference. The Lakers are 43-18 and second in the Western Conference, despite battling injuries all season. Let's put that into perspective. Despite playing in the much weaker conference, and thus having a lighter schedule, the Cavaliers current record would place them as a 10th seed in the west, or two seeds away from the last spot in the playoffs.
ESPN's John Hollinger answered some questions on his choice of Lebron James, followed by Chris Paul as his MVP candidates earlier this week. He began by explaining that 58 of the 82 games are identical between the two conferences and that it shouldn't make a large difference in the win/loss column. I'm sorry John, but that just won't fly. That leaves a whopping 30% of the eason where western conference teams are battling it out with much stiffer competition. Mr. Hollinger knows this well, as his power rankings are determined by a statistical analysis which calculates the Strength of Schedule. According to his own power rankings the Cavs would place as the 15th best team. The Cavs have faced the 18th most difficult schedule in the league this season. The Lakers meanwhile are even with the Mavericks for the 7th most difficult. Of the ten most difficult schedules to date, only three of those teams were in the eastern conference, topped by the Knicks at #4. If the strength of schedule means so little, then why does he weight it so heavily in his standings? In the end he would explain that he felt that Lebron was head and shoulders above the rest of the league right now, and for that reason he would get his vote. If that were the case then why didn't he vote for Kobe two seasons ago?
Kelly Dwyer shared his sentiments in a recent article at Yahoo Sports. He would say in that article that Kobe probably should have been the MVP in the 2005-2006 MVP race, and not have been punished for playing on an otherwise poor team. He would then explain his thoughts of why Lebron has been a better player this season and deserves the award this season. The problem here is that Kelly Dwyer wrote an article two years ago at when he picked Lebron James as his MVP then. Why the change of heart now? Does anyone honestly believe that the Cavs supporting cast is weaker right now than the Lakers was two seasons ago? If next season Kobe averaged 50 points a game beause the rest of his team died in a plane crash but the Lakers struggled, would the criteria change yet again?
Has Lebron really surpassed Kobe as the games best player? If you look at statistics, then a strong case can be made. Lebron outdoes Kobe in just about every statistical ranking at a glance. Lebron averages 2.3 more points, 2 more rebounds and 2.3 more assists per game than Kobe. He also shoots a better field goal percentage and has more blocks. Kobe has a higher free throw and three point percentage, as well as averaging more steals. He does play a couple more minutes per game than Kobe. On the surface it seems like an easy choice if the criteria is purely on who is the better player. Numbers can be deceiving though.
The most important difference is defense. You know, the activity that occurs during the other half of the game. Kobe has been on the all-defensive team seven times in the past eight seasons, including five first team appearances. Lebron meanwhile is an average defender. The interesting thing is that some members of the media have attempted to do the jedi mind trick on us, and convince us that Lebron has turned into a good defensive player. While I agree that his defense has definitely improved, to call him a good defender would be a stretch. Effective Field Goal Percentage is a representation which takes three point baskets into the equation of field goal percentage. Opposing small forwards have shot a 50% eFG against Lebron this season. Meanwhile, Kobe has held opposing shooting guards to a mere 44.1% eFG against him. That's a huge difference.
Next up is rebounding. Both players are good rebounders at their positions. The difference is the positions they play. Kobe plays 77% of his minutes as a shooting guard, and the remaining 23% as a small forward. Meanwhile Lebron plays 73% of his minutes as a small forward, and the remaining 27% as a power forward. Rebounding is primarily a responsibility of forwards, and not guards.
Assists is a no brainer. Lebron is a better passer and more willing passer than Kobe. Kobe leads his team in assists year in and year out though. Over the past seven years Kobe has averaged 5.4 assists per game. His primary role though, is as a scorer. As a scorer, Kobe is second to none. Despite chasing Lebron for the scoring lead this season, Kobe is still the better scorer. His field goal percentage as a result of 74% of his shots being outside shots, as compared ot 61% of Lebron's shots. Kobe shoots 45.8% efG on his jump shots though, as compared to James' 39.3%, that's the difference of 6.5%. The big difference difference here is that Lebron is taking 22.3 shots per game, as compared to just 20.4 by Bryant. That is nearly 7 shots less per game than Bryant took two seasons ago.
At the end of the day you can make a strong argument for either player as the games best. Do you value Lebron's passing or Kobe's defense? What you can not argue though is that Lebron makes his teammates better and that Kobe does not. This is an argument that gets used seemingly any time the two are compared. Apparently averaging more assists equals out to making your teammates better. Nevermind the fact that the triangle is not an assist-friendly offense. Let's just stick to the undeniable facts and compare the teammates of both players. The only player who has shown any significant improvement prior to being traded to play with Lebron are Drew Gooden and Carlos Boozer. Boozer was a rookie the year before Lebron came, and had a decent year with him before heading to Utah. His field goal percentage dropped with Lebron but his scoring average went from 10 to 15.5. They only played together one season. Drew Gooden saw his field goal percentage leap by 4.7% in his first season with Lebron, and his scoring average jumped by 2.8. His scoring would drop back down in later seasons.
Ilgauskus was an all-star before playing with Lebron. He has not shown any improvement. In fact the only career high he can boast since the arrival of Lebron is in blocked shots. What has been most confusing about Lebron's game though is that they have brought in a number of guys who have played absolutely terribly with him. One would have to wonder why Kevin Ollie saw his shooting percentage drop from 45.1% the season before playing with Lebron to 37% in the season playing alongside of him. He was only 31 years of age. Ricky Davis was traded mid-season in Lebron's rookie season. He responded by lifting his shooting percentage by 5.7% and his three point percentage by 2.6%. Eric Snow had averaged 12.1, 12.9 and 10.3 points in his three previous seasons, while shooting 44..2%, 45.2% and 41.3%. He joined Lebron at age 31 and plummeting to 4 points per game on 38.2% shooting, despite playing a 22.8 minutes per game.
The next season they made the moves that were supposed to move them into contention. They brought in Donyell Marshall, who had long been a deadly shooter. He had averaged 11.5 points on 41.6% from beyond the arc the season before, and had shot 40% or better from that range for the past two seasons and routinely averaged in the low teens. Yet in three seasons with the Cavs he never shot better than 35.1% from that range or averaged more than 9.3 points. Damon Jones was also brought in to space the floor. The 29 year old averaged 11.6 points on 43.2% shooting from beyond the arc and 45.6% from the field the season before in Miami. Those numebrs dropped to 37.7% shooting and 6.7 points playing under Lebron, however. The largest disappointment though was Larry Hughes. Hughes was an all-defensive player who was coming off a year in which he averaged 22 points on 43% shooting. He had averaged 18.8 points the season prior to that. Yet he never averaged more than 15.5 points or 40.9% shooting in three seasons with Lebron. He was recently traded to the Chicago Bulls and saw a 4.1 point and a 4% leap in his field goal percentage in the seven games since the trade. It's way too early too make any determination on the impact of his latest shooter, Wally Szczerbiak, but it should be noted that in the six games since joining the Cavs he has seen his fielg goal percentage plummet by 13.6% and his three point percentage drop by 4.9%.
I don't want to hear how Lebron makes his teammates better ever again. There simply is no statistical analysis to support this. In fact, he seems to destroy the shooting stroke of the guys brought in to spread the floor for him. Oddly enough, the guy who for years the media has said does not make his teammates better, has indeed done a much better job.
Perhaps the best indication is Smush Parker. Smush bounced around from team to team for a couple of years, never having averaged more than 6.2 points or shot better than 41.9%. The previous season he averaged 3 points per game. Yet he averaged 11.5 and 11.1 in two years with Kobe, having career best numbers in both shooting and three point shooting in each of those seasons. He left to the Miami Heat thsi season, where he saw his average drop by 6.3 points, his shooting percentage by 12.1% and his three point shooting by 11.5%. Chris Mihm was a 45% shooter on his career, with a career high 48.8% from the field. Not only did he have career highs in scoring average during each of his first two seasons with the Lakers but he also shot above 50% in each of those seasons prior to his injury. Kwame Brown had never shot above 49% in his career, yet he shot 52.6% and 59.1% as a Laker. He was traded mid-season this year and since that trade he has seen his field goal percentage drop from 50.3% to 35.3%. The other big man in that trade, Pau Gasol has seen his field goal percentage raise from 50.1% in Memphis to a whopping 59% alongside of Kobe, as well as raising his scoring average by 1.8 per game. Gasol is a 51.1% career shooter who had never shot better than 53.8%. The third piece of that trade, Javaris Crittenton, has sene his shooting percentage drop from 49.1% to 38% since it was made. Another mid-season acquisition in Didier Ilunga-Mbenga has seen a similar rise. He shot 31.3% from the field last season, and 39.1% in 16 games with Golden State this year. He has shot 45.5% in 14 games with the Lakers. Derek Fisher's three years away from L.A. saw him shoot 39.3%, 41% and 38.2% from the floor. Since returning to the Lakers he has shot 44%. Laron Profit suffered a career ending injury in his first season as a Laker. In the 25 games prior to his injury though he shot 47.6%, his previous career high was 43.8% with two seasons under 40%. Jumaine Jones shot 39.1% from beyond the arc and 43.2% from teh floor playing alongside Kobe, after shooting 34.4% from teh floor and 29.5% from beyond the arc the season before. Since leaving he has never shot better than 40.5% from teh floor or 34.3% from long range. Chucky Atkins also had arguably his best season alongside of Kobe, scoring 13.6 per game while shooting 38.7% from beyond the arc. He hasn't matched either number since.
Lamar Odom has in the eyes of some struggled to co-exist with Kobe. In many ways this is true, as both guys like to have the ball in their hands. In reality though he had shot under 43.9% in each of his three previous seasons before joining Bryant, and never above 46% in his career. He has shot 47.3%, 48.1%, 46.8% and 50.4% in his four seasons with the Lakers. His scoring has dropped slightly, by a couple of points a game. The other odd case is Caron Butler. Caron became an all-star after being traded from the Lakers, and some might use that as justification that Kobe held him back. The reality though is that Caron averaged a career high in both points per game and in field goal percentage in his season with Kobe. His field goal percentage jumped 6.5% from the season before and was 2.9% higher than his previous career best.
In the end, there is plenty of evidence to support Kobe making his teammates better, but not much at all to support Lebron doing so. In fact the evidence would seem to point the opposite way. You can read into that what you will. But at the end of the day members of the media will soon determine who is the NBA's next MVP. It's a reasonably safe bet that the name on that trophy will be Lebron James and not Kobe Bryant. In the aftermath of that you will hear a lot of rhetoric and hyperbole about why they gave him the award. What I would like to see from those very same writers though is to address the things written here. Kobe has been among the best, if not the best player in the NBA for a very long time. Yet he has never won the trophy. At just 23 years of age, Lebron is going to have many chances to hang that trophy. Kobe Bryant is not. He has earned it by the very criteria that they set out. In a perfect world he would be the 2007-2008 MVP. In reality though, that is not likely to happen. Not because he hasn't earned it, but because too many of the people who have earned a vote simply do not like him.
