Quote:
Originally Posted by Underdog
LeBron James shot 30% against Iguodala, 42% against everyone else in this series...
|
Wow, that is amazing. That does make him a reasonable choice for the award then.
Still, when one guy averages 38.5 ppg 13.3 rpg 8.8 apg, and another guy averages 16.3 ppg 5.8 ppg 4.0 apg- and an utterly atrocious .357 FT% and not even starting in the first 3 games, I tend to go with the first guy as the "most valuable." Especially considering that the first guy's team had about 1/8th the talent the second guy's team had.
Quote:
Iggy didn't win Finals MVP for being the best player on the best team -- he won it by slowing down the best player in the world just enough that his team could win the Finals.
When David slays Goliath, David gets to be MVP.
|
I don't necessarily have a problem with that line of thinking- (and like I said before, I like Iggy quite a bit and I'm glad to see him have his moment in the sun-) but that makes the criteria for the award even more subjective and arbitrary- which is why I've always sort of disliked MVP awards in general. If it isn't "best player for the best team" then what is it? It seems like everyone has a different idea of what an MVP is, and NOBODY can quite define what their idea is when asked. That's why I like the Heisman Trophy. No subjective nonsense about who's more "valuable" to what team- just simply who is the best player.