Why does Rose get more shit for winning the MVP than anyone else?

[pegasus]

"Declining" Lebron has better stats than MVP Rose.

/thread

The difference is one of them carried his team in the 4th quarters all season long, whereas the other one has been an hindrance to his team.

[LEFT4DEAD]

The difference is one of them carried his team in the 4th quarters all season long, whereas the other one has been an hindrance to his team.

No.
Their defense and Thibs had much more to do with winning than Rose being clutch or some shit like that. He had couple of great games, but that MVP was a very discutable one.

P.S. I dont even care so much about it, because there were, and there will be somehow undeserveable MVPs.
Im just sayin`why so many people are not satisfied with it.

[j3lademaster]

How are you gonna sit there and say Kobe had the biggest impact on the court in the 2000s?

Though I do agree that the MVP shouldn't go to a big every year, certainly not this decade (so far). LeBron isn't a big man and he's clearly been the most impactful player of the past 8 years.

Bird, Magic and Lebron are tough to define. You can put those guys at the power forward position without feeling like they are out of position. I don't want to argue semantics, but I've always imagined those guys as bigs because they can comfortably fill a power forward role, not because of their natural positions.

My post was originally just aimed at the fact that the league is biased towards small flashy guards and are inclined to give MVP's to the Roses over the Howards and FMVP's to the Parkers over the Duncans... if the bigs don't create huge separation.

[j3lademaster]

Jordan played in the greatest bigman era and he rightfully could have been the MVP every healthy year. And Magic and Bird the previous seven years before that. What are you saying??? Shaq, the most dominant player I ever saw, could not carry the offense of a team to a championship round himself. Or at least not like Kobe, Jordan, Isiah, Lebron, Rick Barry or AI. Shaq or Kareem didn't stay in the finals like Bird or Magic. Most impactful players: 80's Magic and Bird. 90's Jordan. 00's Kobe, '10's Lebron thus far. Did I miss something?

Magic won a ring playing center, Lebron was primarily a power forward and lead his team in rebounding in the deep Heat championship runs and also ran the offense from the high post often, Bird would guard the power forward against a team like Dominique's Hawks because McHale had better lateral movement to defend the perimeter(and you can even argue Bird's the better rebounder). Hell, Magic would often guard the power forward and leave the guard defending duties to Cooper/Scott. Guys like Lebron, Bird, and Magic can all play the perimeter and interior(at least in their respective eras). They're really impossible to define as just an outside or inside guy.

Semantics aside, okay. Lebron, MJ(who I already did kind of imply as the exception in my original post), Bird, Magic are some guys who can be seen as the most impactful players for multiple years of their careers. How does that affect my premise: "If MVP went out to the rightfully most individually impactful player(which is my interpretation of "most valuable") then it'd be going to a big man ALMOST every season." Historically bigs were more impactful on the floor were they not?

[j3lademaster]

Shaq, the most dominant player I ever saw, could not carry the offense of a team to a championship round himself. Or at least not like Kobe, Jordan, Isiah, Lebron, Rick Barry or AI.

Okay let's keep defense out of this, because that's where bigs create the most separation for themselves as "more impactful". Strictly speaking offensively, you believe Isiah Thomas and AI were more impactful on the court than peak Shaq?

[nathanjizzle]

No.
Their defense and Thibs had much more to do with winning than Rose being clutch or some shit like that. He had couple of great games, but that MVP was a very discutable one.

P.S. I dont even care so much about it, because there were, and there will be somehow undeserveable MVPs.
Im just sayin`why so many people are not satisfied with it.

27 points and 7 assists againt the top 8 teams in the league. about 20 games. "a couple of great games" you dont know what you are talking about.

[ILLsmak]

Okay let's keep defense out of this, because that's where bigs create the most separation for themselves as "more impactful". Strictly speaking offensively, you believe Isiah Thomas and AI were more impactful on the court than peak Shaq?

Maybe... if dude's cant make shots. You can't stop little guys like you can stop a big. I see what he's saying. They gotta bring the ball up and feed it to the big. Seen many plays where Shaq couldn't even get the ball cuz his team was too incompetent to feed the post. At that point, yes, they are more impactful.

That's why having someone like Kobe, Penny or Wade is good for a guy like Shaq. You don't even need an all time great SG just someone who can score. Someone better than Eddie Jones. Klay Thompson would be gg. You can't score in today's NBA with one big and nothing else. Now, on a well rounded team of course Shaq is more impactful.

-Smak

[Mr. I'm So Rad]

No.
Their defense and Thibs had much more to do with winning than Rose being clutch or some shit like that. He had couple of great games, but that MVP was a very discutable one.

P.S. I dont even care so much about it, because there were, and there will be somehow undeserveable MVPs.
Im just sayin`why so many people are not satisfied with it.

They had the exact same, or even better defense after Rose got injured but ended up losing in the first round then not even winning 50 games the next season.

Before Rose's injuries started flaring up in 2012 the Bulls were on pace to win almost 55 games. They missed Noah and Boozer half the season in 2011 and still won 62 games. The one constant in that was Rose. I don't understand how that doesn't correlate to an MVP.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Before Rose's injuries started flaring up in 2012 the Bulls were on pace to win almost 55 games. They missed Noah and Boozer half the season in 2011 and still won 62 games. The one constant in that was Rose. I don't understand how that doesn't correlate to an MVP.

Thank You ...

Meanwhile you have Western Conference stans proclaiming Curry as definitive MVP in early December, saying he's a "level above 2011 Rose" even though the raw numbers are exactly the same, Curry scores 1 less PPG, on a much higher pace team with more talent.

He's better why? Because they like the way his push shot looks in comparison to Derrick?

Rose was carrying, and delivering BIG time in 4th quarters that season to win games. Totally took over whenever the situation called, and dominated the best teams, or elite contemporaries at his his position. With little consistent offensive help. Boozer, and Noah both missed a ton of games that season.

Dwight wasn't leading the Magic to clutch wins like Derrick.
Dirk was hurt, and missed too many games unlike Derrick.
LeBron, and Wade teamed up to cancel each other out for MVP votes.

It's very simple, Derrick was the obvious 2011 MVP. 2011 Bulls had no business winning 60+ games. And the East that season wasn't terrible either.