shyt was a pretty well thought out OP, with maybe a little bias towards Bron but nikkas acting like he posted some brazy, off the wall shyt 
NBA MVP race - the top ten candidates ten games in
LeBron is probably going to win it, especially because he's coasting right now and still showing he's the best player in the league, and we all know that post-All Star Game turn up is gonna be incredible once again.
letti cook
Superstar
im developing a Derozan agenda like shyt.. How the fukk can a nikka average 30 +, win the east and NOT be in serious consideration 
its super early but to just
his chances is some bullshyt.
its super early but to just
his chances is some bullshyt.
It's still early but nothing wrong with the early MVP talk. People already started saying who will win the chip this year after one or two games.
If I had to pick though I'd go with Harden, and Bron is a close second.
If I had to pick though I'd go with Harden, and Bron is a close second.
Bilz
Superstar
According to many coli experts, the Warriors lost their most important player last offseason. If the Warriors get the #1 seed and Durant puts up the best numbers, he absolutely deserves it 
shyt was a pretty well thought out OP, with maybe a little bias towards Bron but nikkas acting like he posted some brazy, off the wall shyt
My OP has ten daps already, far more than any of their posts, so I ain't sweating it. We'll be re-upping this thread at the end of the season, and besides some of those numbers regressing to the mean in predictable but insignificant ways, I'm betting that 80% of the healthy players will still be described the exact same way.
They just in their feelings. Of course my post is biased towards Lebron - I think he's the MVP so far. Breh is acting like I should have posted some crap journalist's "both sides may be right" shyt when I actually have an opinion about who looks like the front runner. You could have bet on Lebron winning MVP with your eyes closed the last eight years and you would have made some money.
Now, did I say anything factually wrong? Leave anything important out? That would be worth complaining about.
And I'm laughing that the guys who think I'm "obviously" wrong can't even agree on who the "obvious" favourite is. Like Curry/Durant and Westbrook/Harden/DeRozen ain't going to be splitting the minority of voters in their camps the same way. Most of the voters are going to be "Best stand-out player on the best team that ain't the Warriors" still, and in that camp, Lebron's only real competition will be Kawhi (barring injury).
For what it's worth, Basketball-Reference's MVP probability tracker thing has CP3 at #1, Harden at 2 and LeBron at 3
If the same team without you won more games than anyone in history, then you come on board and they win less, then no, what happened last season is not irrelevant.
That's one of the easiest ways to prove whether a player was valuable or not. "How did the team perform without him?"
Westbrook was the favorite among gambling addicts dumb enough to toss money at stuff like that before the season even started.
But among people in the league and people who cover the league, Lebron was the favorite.
Those things are all relevant when they demonstrate a precedent, especially when that precedent challenges the absolute rigidity with which you're defining the "best player on the best team" notion.
I AGREE that "best player on the best team" is the main criteria, like I said in the OP, and that's why Lebron has the best chance to win - because whether the Cavs finish with the #1 record in the NBA or not, Lebron will be viewed as the best player on the best team outside of the basically disqualified Warriors. And that is true because what happened last year and in the offseason really does matter, not to mention that Durant/Curry votes are getting split.
i)The Warriors don't have a single standout performer either. Even in this thread there is serious disagreement over whether Curry or Durant is more likely. And besides that, they've disqualified themselves for a lot of voters for multiple other reasons.
ii) And I'm saying that the Cavs will have the #1 seed in the East, and that Lebron will have better all-around individual stats than anyone on a team with more W's than them.
iii) How could you have a clearer "exception to the rules" than "The team that set the wins record with the MVP last year, and still couldn't win a ring, added the most recent MVP to the same team and actually performed worse"?
Sorry bout that - my mobile was acting up fierce and had quoting the wrong thing. When I edited it to fix the quote, I saw that you also had that other sentence there and I needed to respond to that too. Still fixed it before you replied.
But I have no wins against you?
Let's check the scoreboard on the epic-length arguments we've had that could actually be settled with facts from the court:
* I said during that Cavs/Chicago series that the Cavs needed to just sit Kyrie until they absolutely needed him, and only play him the limited essential minutes then. You claimed they needed to keep playing him significant minutes so that he would "stay in rhythm" because "the injury isn't going to get any better and he can't make it worse."
When Kyrie repeatedly re-aggravated the injury against Chicago and Atlanta BEFORE they actually needed him, THEN got knocked out playing too many minutes on the aggravated injury, I was right. The injury did indeed get worse, and they sure as hell should have sat him until they needed him and limited his minutes even then. That might have been a title decision right there.
* I said during the 1st round last year that the Warriors caught a lucky break when CP3/Blake got hurt, because it killed any chance the Warriors had of the Curry injury costing them in the 2nd round, and Curry would probably be back long before the Warriors were in danger of losing a series. You claimed that the Curry injury was way worse for the Warriors than any break they had caught and that Curry might be out much longer than we thought.
When the 2nd round proved to be just a warm-up like I predicted, Curry came back on the schedule I predicted and scored 40+ points, setting the NBA record for points in overtime, and yelling "I'm back, I'm back", and the Warriors nearly won the title (and only lost it due to a string of factors in games 5-7 of which Curry's soreness didn't even make the top 5), I was right.
* I said that the Warriors caught a break the previous year when Tony Allen got injured in Game 3. You claimed that Tony Allen didn't get injured in Game 3 and repeated yourself on that claim about 75 times over the course of weeks and multiple different threads.
When I showed you an ESPN article from before Game 4 which clearly stated that Tony Allen had gotten injured in Game 3, I was right.
* I said that Durant wasn't going to the Lakers, he was going to go to a contender. You mocked me and said that he would resign with OKC.
Oh look, Durant went to a contender. I was right.
The best part about all four of those is that you still have never once admitted that you were wrong about Durant resigning with the Thunder, wrong about Tony Allen not getting hurt in game 3, wrong about the Warriors not catching the lucky injury breaks from the 2015 WCSF all the way to the 2016 WCSF, and wrong about Kyrie really needing to stop re-aggravating his injury before they needed him.
I'm looking forward to Durant/Curry NOT winning the MVP even if the Warriors take the #1 seed, and you still claiming that you were somehow right.
If you're so confident, are you going to take that ban bet I offered or not?
Last edited:
i think there are only 5 people in the race this year: harden, westbrook, george, paul, and bron.....think harden or westbrook are the favs cause they both gonna put up ridiculous numbers, with not so talented teams compared to others...they just need to make the playoffs, and whomever has the better record would get the nod....paul and george are in the running if their teams finish top 2 in their respective conference....bron just cause he really might avg a triple double, while being on a top 3 team in the league....
dont think durant or curry are in the running cause they gonna hurt each other....unlike bron/wade situation, both durant/curry are still healthy, playing a lot, will put up numbers, and will share the load...
dont think ad cause he gonna get hurt/not play enough, and his team just not good enough to make the playoffs....if they somehow make the playoffs though, he has an outside shot to get it if he continues to put up ridiculous numbers.....
edit - forgot about derozan....if he keeps putting up these numbers, and they finish top 2 in the east, he has a chance....he's in the chris paul, paul george category.....
dont think durant or curry are in the running cause they gonna hurt each other....unlike bron/wade situation, both durant/curry are still healthy, playing a lot, will put up numbers, and will share the load...
dont think ad cause he gonna get hurt/not play enough, and his team just not good enough to make the playoffs....if they somehow make the playoffs though, he has an outside shot to get it if he continues to put up ridiculous numbers.....
edit - forgot about derozan....if he keeps putting up these numbers, and they finish top 2 in the east, he has a chance....he's in the chris paul, paul george category.....
Last edited:
If he were to do this for the whole season and they finish with the two seed how could anybody dismiss him? I agree he'd be one of the favorites.im developing a Derozan agenda like shyt.. How the fukk can a nikka average 30 +, win the east and NOT be in serious consideration
its super early but to just
labelplant
Wilt Chamberlain
I'd say CP3 is for sure MVP. Playing all nba D again, since he has Blake to help with the offense now. Lost some more of the explosiveness but is now become one of the best three point shooters in the league. and of course smartest player in the league as always.
I'd say LeBron is second then Harden, Westbrook, curry
after that probably Kemba and Giannis.
Shout out Lou Williams, as far as the annual "guy who will never actually be in contention at the end of the season but is a legit top 10 player through first 10 games" award.
I'd say LeBron is second then Harden, Westbrook, curry
after that probably Kemba and Giannis.
Shout out Lou Williams, as far as the annual "guy who will never actually be in contention at the end of the season but is a legit top 10 player through first 10 games" award.
If the same team without you won more games than anyone in history, then you come on board and they win less, then no, what happened last season is not irrelevant.
That's one of the easiest ways to prove whether a player was valuable or not. "How did the team perform without him?"
Different team (it’s not just Durant replacing Barnes), different season, different opposition and different variables. Neither he nor Curry will be amerced if the Warriors grab the #1 record in the league, but fail to win more than 73 games.
See this is your problem, picking and choosing shyt to suit this LeBron agenda of yours. I've seen you often use the bookmarkers when referring to favoritism before, and in general when one talks about a team/player being the favorites - they're talking about the odds. Not some survey done across the league.
This LeBron shyt has you outta your mind. The best player on the best team is the one who grabs #1 seeding - not the Cavs just because you want them to be the best. I can't believe this even needs explaining. What happened in the postseason doesn't matter. This romanticizing of what happened in the Finals [*cue the SF for that LeBron agenda*] is nauseating and it's affecting your ability to judge shyt in an impartial manner.
If the Warriors grab the #1 seed, Curry and Durant could very well be co-MVPs.
i) Durant has been their best performer up to the point, and that could either remain the same or change throughout the season, Besides as I said above, it could come down to both of them winning MVP. It doesn't just have to be one or the other. How the fukk can you say that nonsense in bold when you do not know how "a lot of the voters" will react to a WHOLE season that has barely started?
You're unbelievably transparent.
Because what happened last season is irrelevant. When it comes to voting that narrative will be barely be alive - it'll be drowned out and barely recognizable with all that happens in a season. Exception to the rules are usually down to what happens during that season (whether that be voters having an affinity with a particular player's path; a player taking his game and his team to a new level; a player coming outta nowhere to blindside the league, a player posting #s never seen before etc etc) not what happened in seasons prior.
i) Don't use quotations marks if that's not what I specifically stated.
ii) I never said play him significant minutes or insinuated as such, I simply said play him enough minutes so that he stays in rhythm - I didn't give a set period of time he should play.
iii) I NEVER said he couldn't make his injury worse. Why the hell would I say that when I brought up limiting his minutes, surgery/rehab and needed the offseason to recover? There you go making up shyt again. This is you saying my foot was on the line, when I was standing 6ft behind the arc type shyt.
iv) I said he wasn't going to get any better during the postseason because he needed surgery/rehab or whatever it took to get him back right (a timeframe that extended well past the duration of a postseason). It needed to be moderated from day-to-day and his minutes adjusted to how he felt and to keep his rhythm in prep for the Finals.
v) Sitting him until they needed him wouldn't have made a difference - not ONE iota. He was a ticking time bomb. Like I said, the only way he was going to get over that was rehabbing in the offseason. He could've sat until G1 of the Finals and then landed awkwardly or had a misstep during the first minute and ruled himself out for the rest of the series. Who knows..... what we do know is that his body was never going to be in a healthier enough state to rule the distinct possibility of him going down again at any time within the period of a postseason.
He had an eight-day break between the ECF and G1 of the Finals and yet clearly that still wasn't enough - (I know you'll bring up it would've been longer than eight days if he sat out of the ECF completely); he needed an EXTENDED period of time to get over his knee tendinitis (longer than whatever period it would've been had he sat until they needed him), especially for someone like Kyrie who has a history of leg-related injuries.
The best course of action (besides ruling him out for the entire postseason) was to monitor him day-to-day and find a balance of playing him enough minutes to keep his rhythm in prep for the Finals.
i) I NEVER said it was worse for the Warriors than any break they had caught - LIES. Can you stop making up shyt?
ii) This all started because one poster said "the Warriors get all the luck" when CP when down injured - clearly they didn't because their best player injured himself and his return and ability to get back to near-100% was unknown.
Curry never fully recovered and the Warriors ended up not winning the title.
i) Yelling ""I'm back, I'm back" is simply him living in the moment, it doesn't mean that he still wasn't feeling the affects of his injury or that it meant he couldn't re-aggravate with more games he played and stress he put on it or having issues with conditioning. Use your brain. I'm not interested in what your "top 5" is, his injury clearly affected his play - you're not in a position to say how important/unimportant it was in deciding the Finals result.
i) He didn't get injured in G3 - he re-aggravated his hamstring during G3, like he had been for most of the postseason. He was listed as unquestionable during a game in the first round against the T'Blazers because he re-aggravated it then. (basically extending back to when he initially was injured, back in March if my memory serves me correct). Yet he still was able to play on. He wasn't able to play on when he injured it in G4.
ii) He actually injured it to the point where he had to be taken off in Game 4 -
He was injured in the third quarter of Game 4, causing him to miss the 4th quarter of Game 4 and the entirety of Game 5. He was injured in Game 4.
I've posted this many times before, why do YOU continue to ignore it?
Let me quote myself again -First of all I said the most probable outcome was that he was going to stay in OKC, which at the time of post was true. Which was reflected by him wanting Horford in OKC during FA weeks later. I never said he was definitely going to stay in OKC, just that it was the most probable scenario at the time.
Kevin Durant had been recruiting Horford to OKC, but Horford eliminated OKC with no assurance Durant/Westbrook staying long-term.
— Adrian Wojnarowski (@WojVerticalNBA) July 2, 2016
You made it seem he was already gone at the time of the post - he clearly wasn't. You were wrong, same goes for all of the above. Either wrong or a failure to admit your reading comprehension had you digging holes you couldn't climb out of.
@The Dankster I've given up count how many times you either blatantly lie by adding in shyt I never said or purposefully ignore what I say just to get your point across when it doesn't negate my position at all or not reading properly or a complete misunderstanding of how to use stats or references properly, only for the cause of furthering your agenda.
The fact you did all that maneuvering in regards to Paul's defense on Lillard during the postseason when I called you out on it and didn't end up responding despite me posting actual footage of what happened speaks volumes on what type of poster you are (you even have the nerve to keep up this corny ass 'I've never lost to you' routine').
The fact you did all that maneuvering in regards to Paul's defense on Lillard during the postseason when I called you out on it and didn't end up responding despite me posting actual footage of what happened speaks volumes on what type of poster you are (you even have the nerve to keep up this corny ass 'I've never lost to you' routine').
Yagirlcheatinonus
Icon Poster
Where's Melo? 
Yagirlcheatinonus
Icon Poster
Where's Melo?