Most Overrated Player in the NBA

[PartywithDirk]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

It's a 4-5 matchup. You expect it to be close. I don't know anyone who says that OKC is more than an up and coming team with a lot of potential. At most, people are looking out for a lightning strike in which they get to the WCF. People rank Durant in the top category of whatever, but nobody places anyone else there. Maybe Westbrook gets discussed as someone in the top category of second rank players or something. Anyway, I think that team and the players on it get rated pretty accurately.

Yes, I would expect it to be close (4-5 matchup)....if the Thugs were a legit playoff team. Any of the other 7 in the West would've beaten the Thugs....just not sure they'd have been such close games. The Thugs are the Mavs....without Dirk and Caron.

And if Westbrook and Durant are such superstars, as they are portrayed....they should've dismissed of them in much easier fashion.

[Mav Addict]

Originally Posted by kenny_817

this is where I stopped reading^ if ANYONE thinks D. Rose is better than CP3 they are insane. Please be aware that people think Rose is great because he can score. Who can't score 24 a game when they lead the league in shot attempts? He averages more shots than Kobe...as well as everyone else. He is overrated

I stopped reading when i noticed those two red boxes next to your name..

[kenny_817]

Originally Posted by Mav Addict

I stopped reading when i noticed those two red boxes next to your name..

that's fine...I lose no sleep at night. Go Mavs

[wilmtalk]

Originally Posted by deamon

Kidd -> NJ was last team in East, when he joined they played in NBA Finals twice. Now he's old, so don't say he's overrated.

If you read the post correctly you will find that he was not referring to Kidd being overrated for his entire career but only for his latest stint with the Mavs. The Later is true. Barkely was the first commentator who stopped refering to Kidd as being a major impact player for the mavs about two seasons ago. Most of the others still saw him as a co-superstar with Dirk for the Mavs. It took entirely too long for most people to see things in a more realistic perspective. I also remember the window for the Mavs winning a champianship for this team being narrowed on these threads to include Kidd and not just Dirk.
The post that you critique made it plain it was only refering to the national perspective on Kidd in the present but not his entire career. Also that most mav fans no longer overrate Kidd but that the national media and national fan base still does because he still does produce enough really good high stat games which are showcased on ESPN to perpetuate that image. Which is what ESPN tends to do with a lot of players- promote them though highlights.

[Murphy3]

I'd say that KG is likely one of the handful of most overrated players in the NBA.

[lone laker]

Kendrick Perkins?

[PartywithDirk]

Originally Posted by lone laker

Kendrick Perkins?

LOL. Yes, no doubt after the freaking love affair the media had over him when he was traded.

But I think most people knew who Kendrick Perkins really was.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by PartywithDirk

LOL. Yes, no doubt after the freaking love affair the media had over him when he was traded.

But I think most people knew who Kendrick Perkins really was.

He fit better on the Celtics - chemistry helped mitigate his deficiencies.

[Murphy3]

This guy isn't a current player, but I recently took a look at his playoff stats... Chris Webber was a very good regular season player, but his numbers dropped significantly in the playoffs. I think we can list him as overrated.

[wilmtalk]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

This guy isn't a current player, but I recently took a look at his playoff stats... Chris Webber was a very good regular season player, but his numbers dropped significantly in the playoffs. I think we can list him as overrated.

Thats very true. Weber got the all credit for the upsurge in the Kings when he came to the team. What people forgot was that Divak got there at the same time. It was actually Devak and his kick out ball movement that was the key to the Kings success. When Weber was out of the line ups they were still efficiant and won. But when Divak was out they began to struggle.

One example is that during one of their last years together the Kings were playing better than ever in the second half of the season with Weber out of the line up. When the playoff began there was questioning whether playing a now heathy Weber would destroy the goond chemistry. Well they reinserted Webber back into the lineup it did change the chemistry and they tanked. Weber was a ball movement killer and that was the bread and butter of the Kings. Also after Valdi was not resigned Peja no longer got the ball in his spots and struggled and the Kings started their downhill slide. Divak was the team leader and quarterback. Most Kings fans realized that only after he left. The national media still thinks it was mostly Weber who was the key player.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by wilmtalk

Thats very true. Weber got the all credit for the upsurge in the Kings when he came to the team. What people forgot was that Divak got there at the same time. It was actually Devak and his kick out ball movement that was the key to the Kings success. When Weber was out of the line ups they were still efficiant and won. But when Divak was out they began to struggle.

One example is that during one of their last years together the Kings were playing better than ever in the second half of the season with Weber out of the line up. When the playoff began there was questioning whether playing a now heathy Weber would destroy the goond chemistry. Well they reinserted Webber back into the lineup it did change the chemistry and they tanked. Weber was a ball movement killer and that was the bread and butter of the Kings. Also after Valdi was not resigned Peja no longer got the ball in his spots and struggled and the Kings started their downhill slide. Divak was the team leader and quarterback. Most Kings fans realized that only after he left. The national media still thinks it was mostly Weber who was the key player.

Not to nitpick or anything, but his name is Divac.

[mac222b]

Rondo

[spreedom]

Originally Posted by mac222b

Rondo

Talk about the worst timing ever. He just returned from a dislocated elbow and destroyed the Heat in the second half.

[pwd81]

Carmelo Anthony.

Chris Bosh.

Russell Westbrook.

Kevin Garnett.

James Harden.

David West (been exposed though).

Kobe Bryant.

Pau Gasol.

Paul Pierce.

Just off the top of my head...

[CadBane]

MVP now shooting just a hair over 40% in the playoffs. 25% from three (but that doesn't stop him from hoisting them up). Oh, and almost 4 turnovers a game to boot.

He's just lucky they had a cupcake waltz to the ECF.

[OSU_MAV]

I always thought Gilbert Arenas was way over rated up until he was packing heat in the locker room, now he doesn't seem to be talked about much.

[Mavericks Rockets Fan]

Derrick Rose

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Mavericks Rockets Fan

Derrick Rose

no doubt that when an MVP, whose primary focus is scoring does so at barely 40% clip (37% first round, 36% ECF) there is terrible hype going on

[luckyflop777]

I say Kevin Durant is the most overrated

He seems sorta one dimensional to me. People are hyping him up to be the next Dirk ect. but I personally think he has limited potential/growth.

Hes not a great passer, no handles, without an open lane he cant really dunk over any solid defender because hes too skinny, constantly gets away with flops, the list goes on.

He is a great shooter yes but once teams figure out how to guard him effectively he will be pretty average IMO.

[luckyflop777]

Also the current Thunder team he is on is STACKED. This has been a Seattle team 5 years+ in the making.

I dont see KD leading even an average team to a championship. Overrated player...

[mac222b]

Originally Posted by luckyflop777

I say Kevin Durant is the most overrated

He seems sorta one dimensional to me. People are hyping him up to be the next Dirk ect. but I personally think he has limited potential/growth.

Hes not a great passer, no handles, without an open lane he cant really dunk over any solid defender because hes too skinny, constantly gets away with flops, the list goes on.

He is a great shooter yes but once teams figure out how to guard him effectively he will be pretty average IMO.

The thing about KD that bothers me is that he has should be a much better defender, passer and rebounder RIGHT NOW. He's by all accounts a good teammate&good guy but he doesn't seem to care about getting his teammates involved and really cares about being the "scoring champ".

Well guess what, if you play that way all year it's gonna manifest itself at some point. No doubt Dirk could lead the league in scoring if that was his goal. But tacking a few ppg. on to his average would lead to a resultant decline in FG%, wins and having teammates(and a team) ill prepared to step up and hit big shots when it matters.

My guess is Durant figures this out sooner than later. It wouldnt surprise me though if he continues to chase the scoring title every year to the detriment of the team. Maybe they'll improve enough that it wont matter. He'll become more efficient& a better passer and maximize each possession. He'll find his spots on the floor and the team defense will improve. Westbrook will become a better distributor. Not unreasonable to imagine. If they can figure some of those things out they'll make to at least 2 Finals.

[Mav Addict]

Rose deserved the MVP...he led his team to best record in the league...unfortunately the MVP is a regular season award, not postseason... also he is not overrated IMO, he is just struggling against a good MIA defense.

I loved Durant when he played at UT, but for some odd reason this series has changed that...I do think he is overrated....I also don't like the Thunder anymore as I used to root for them

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Mav Addict

Rose deserved the MVP...he led his team to best record in the league...unfortunately the MVP is a regular season award, not postseason... also he is not overrated IMO, he is just struggling against a good MIA defense.

I loved Durant when he played at UT, but for some odd reason this series has changed that...I do think he is overrated....I also don't like the Thunder anymore as I used to root for them

The "best player on the best team" should only be used as a TIE BREAKER (like when you can't decide between Dirk and Kobe), it shouldn't automatically qualify somebody for an MVP award - if so, what's the point in voting?

He was anointed by the media off the bat, whereas every other MVP in the last 30 years got snubbed time and time again before they eventually earned it.

It's a damn shame that Rose already has as many MVP awards as Kobe when he hasn't proven ANYTHING in the NBA yet (take these playoffs for example) - no battle scars, no war stories, no victories, but the kid has already been titled "the best in the NBA" because he plays in the same city as "the best in NBA history" - it's a damn shame...

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Underdog

The "best player on the best team" should only be used as a TIE BREAKER (like when you can't decide between Dirk and Kobe), it shouldn't automatically qualify somebody for an MVP award - if so, what's the point in voting?

He was anointed by the media off the bat, whereas every other MVP in the last 30 years got snubbed time and time again before they eventually earned it.

It's a damn shame that Rose already has as many MVP awards as Kobe when he hasn't proven ANYTHING in the NBA yet (take these playoffs for example) - no battle scars, no war stories, no victories, but the kid has already been titled "the best in the NBA" because he plays in the same city as "the best in NBA history" - it's a damn shame...

But that's not what the MVP award is. The MVP isn't a "lifetime achievement" award. If it was, I'm pretty sure Steve Nash wouldn't have twice as many of them as Shaquille O'Neal. It's an award that's completely self contained and limited to one single regular season. Anything that happened in a player's career before the season began is completely irrelevant. If you want to make the argument that someone else was a better choice THIS SEASON, then that's one thing. But to say Rose doesn't deserve it because he "hasn't proven anything" and doesn't have "battle scars" or whatever, that just doesn't work. That's not the criteria for the award, never has been.

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

But that's not what the MVP award is. The MVP isn't a "lifetime achievement" award. If it was, I'm pretty sure Steve Nash wouldn't have twice as many of them as Shaquille O'Neal. It's an award that's completely self contained and limited to one single regular season. Anything that happened in a player's career before the season began is completely irrelevant. If you want to make the argument that someone else was a better choice THIS SEASON, then that's one thing. But to say Rose doesn't deserve it because he "hasn't proven anything" and doesn't have "battle scars" or whatever, that just doesn't work. That's not the criteria for the award, never has been.

It has never been the criteria, yet nobody has ever won the award without being consistent for SEVERAL years... except Derrick Rose.

Hit me back in a few years when you turn on ESPN and hear, "Rose won MVP just a few years ago, and he's still a great player, BUT..." - nobody could say that about any of the past MVP's because it was pretty obvious based on several years of evidence that those players were, indeed, the best player in the league... A long track record provides little doubt that the season at hand isn't just a fluke.


And Chicago won plenty of games this season when Rose played like ass - their defense more than makes up for his chucking on most nights... Orlando, on the other hand, pretty much lived & died by the play of Dwight Howard - when he was good, they won, when he was bad, they lost... Same with Dirk and the Mavs - they were definitely a much worse team when he was injured. Hell, even Durant had a better individual performance as the league's top-scorer...

So, yeah, I'd say there were definitely other candidates who could have earned the award based on more than just "best player on the team with the best record," which seems to be the ONLY defense that anybody can give for Derrick Rose's MVP award... It's a damn shame.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Underdog

It has never been the criteria, yet nobody has ever won the award without being consistent for SEVERAL years... except Derrick Rose.

Hit me back in a few years when you turn on ESPN and hear, "Rose won MVP just a few years ago, and he's still a great player, BUT..." - nobody could say that about any of the past MVP's because it was pretty obvious based on several years of evidence that those players were, indeed, the best player in the league... A long track record provides little doubt that the season at hand isn't just a fluke.


And Chicago won plenty of games this season when Rose played like ass - their defense more than makes up for his chucking on most nights... Orlando, on the other hand, pretty much lived & died by the play of Dwight Howard - when he was good, they won, when he was bad, they lost... Same with Dirk and the Mavs - they were definitely a much worse team when he was injured. Hell, even Durant had a better individual performance as the league's top-scorer...

So, yeah, I'd say there were definitely other candidates who could have earned the award based on more than just "best player on the team with the best record," which seems to be the ONLY defense that anybody can give for Derrick Rose's MVP award... It's a damn shame.

Like it or not, the "best player on the best team" USUALLY is the guy that wins the award. There are exceptions here and there, but that is pretty much 90% of the criteria (or at least I think it is; the criteria is extremely vague. I'm not even sure there is a common consensus among the voters)

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by Underdog

It has never been the criteria, yet nobody has ever won the award without being consistent for SEVERAL years... except Derrick Rose.

Hit me back in a few years when you turn on ESPN and hear, "Rose won MVP just a few years ago, and he's still a great player, BUT..." - nobody could say that about any of the past MVP's because it was pretty obvious based on several years of evidence that those players were, indeed, the best player in the league... A long track record provides little doubt that the season at hand isn't just a fluke.


And Chicago won plenty of games this season when Rose played like ass - their defense more than makes up for his chucking on most nights... Orlando, on the other hand, pretty much lived & died by the play of Dwight Howard - when he was good, they won, when he was bad, they lost... Same with Dirk and the Mavs - they were definitely a much worse team when he was injured. Hell, even Durant had a better individual performance as the league's top-scorer...

So, yeah, I'd say there were definitely other candidates who could have earned the award based on more than just "best player on the team with the best record," which seems to be the ONLY defense that anybody can give for Derrick Rose's MVP award... It's a damn shame.

+Rep

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Thespiralgoeson

Like it or not, the "best player on the best team" USUALLY is the guy that wins the award. There are exceptions here and there, but that is pretty much 90% of the criteria (or at least I think it is; the criteria is extremely vague. I'm not even sure there is a common consensus among the voters)

07-08 Kobe Bryant, Lakers 2nd place.
05-06 Steve Nash, Suns 3rd place.
03-04 Kevin Garnett, Timberwolves 2nd place.
01-02 Tim Duncan, Spurs 2nd place.

Obviously the cream rises to the top, but 40% of MVP's in the past 10 years don't fit the "best player on the best team" criteria - they were simply the "best player in the league" (which is a least partially determined by their overall body of work as a player, since it's not always easy to quantify...)

[fluid.forty.one]

Originally Posted by EricaLubarsky

no doubt that when an MVP, whose primary focus is scoring does so at barely 40% clip (37% first round, 36% ECF) there is terrible hype going on

Dirk in 07: 19.7 ppg, 38% shooting, 21% shooting from 3 (11.7 boards though, 2 assists and 2.3 TOs) lost in the first round.

Rose in 11: 27 ppg, 40% shooting, 24% shooting from 3 (4 boards, 7.7 assists, 3.7 TOs though) lost in the 3rd round.

Now before everyone freaks out, I'm not implying that Dirk didn't deserve the MVP or that Rose has out played him, but I find the comment to point out that Rose doesn't deserve the MVP because of shooting % in the playoffs that year a little ironic.

edit: and yes I understand that Dirk rebounded awesomely, but does a 11.7board/2assist advantage over 4boards/7.7assists really make the difference between justifying an MVP and not.. because I don't think 1.4 less TOs per game would make the difference.

edit 2: Seriously, though. Before anyone freaks out.... I'm not even taking a stance on if Rose deserves the MVP or not and I'm NOT saying he is better or more deserving than Dirk. I'm just pointing out that the comment was funny.. If Rose doesn't deserve the MVP, this isn't the whole reason. I just don't want any bad vibes of anger on game day.

[Dirkadirkastan]

I've always felt Derrick Rose is a bit overrated.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Underdog

07-08 Kobe Bryant, Lakers 2nd place.
05-06 Steve Nash, Suns 3rd place.
03-04 Kevin Garnett, Timberwolves 2nd place.
01-02 Tim Duncan, Spurs 2nd place.

Obviously the cream rises to the top, but 40% of MVP's in the past 10 years don't fit the "best player on the best team" criteria - they were simply the "best player in the league" (which is a least partially determined by their overall body of work as a player, since it's not always easy to quantify...)

Without looking up the records (too lazy), if I remember correctly, with the exception of Nash, all those guys' teams were the best in their conference. Whoever wins the MVP almost always has the top spot in their conference or at the very least in their division. Take the best player on the respective top seeds in each conference, and the one that had the better individual season statistically is usually your MVP.

With regards to Steve Nash in 05-06... to this day I feel that was the biggest crock of bullsh*t in the history of the award. He had a nice season, but Dirk was so obviously the real MVP that year. As phenomenal as Nash was, I still feel he was more than a little overrated after going to Phoenix. The argument for him as MVP in 2006 boiled down to "HE'S DOING ALL OF THIS WITHOUT AMAR'E STOUDEMIRE!!!!" Guess what, media idiots, Dirk didn't have Amar'e Stoudemire either.

[PartywithDirk]

Still sticking with Bosh, Durant, Westbrook, Rose, Amare (not necessarily in that order).

[MaverickOutlaw]

Originally Posted by LonghornDub

Bosh.

Bosh is is soft and he looks like Barney the Dinosaur.

[OneLove22]

Rose fo sho. Most inefficient MVP I have ever seen.

[Buddhabrot]

I go with Blake Griffin.

Hes the NBAs favorite Child, very marketable. The Dunk Contest was handed to him so he could dunk over a sponsors Car.

He wouldve won that with a Lay Up.

I dont like all the fuzz made around him.

[Thespiralgoeson]

Originally Posted by Buddhabrot

I go with Blake Griffin.

Hes the NBAs favorite Child, very marketable. The Dunk Contest was handed to him so he could dunk over a sponsors Car.

He wouldve won that with a Lay Up.

I dont like all the fuzz made around him.

I didn't watch the dunk contest, so I don't know whether it was handed to him or not. But seeing as how the dunk contest has no bearing whatsoever on one's actual worth as a player, I'll go ahead and put in my two cents by saying that Griffin is a f*cking BEAST and is in no way shape or form "overrated."

[Underdog]

Originally Posted by Buddhabrot

I go with Blake Griffin.

Hes the NBAs favorite Child, very marketable. The Dunk Contest was handed to him so he could dunk over a sponsors Car.

He wouldve won that with a Lay Up.

I dont like all the fuzz made around him.

I wouldn't call Griffin overrated, but I do get your point...

I'd say the term you're looking for is "over-hyped," which has more to do with the marketing side than the talent side...

[Buddhabrot]

Originally Posted by Underdog

I wouldn't call Griffin overrated, but I do get your point...

I'd say the term you're looking for is "over-hyped," which has more to do with the marketing side than the talent side...

Fair enough. Over-hyped sounds about right.

I absolutely agree that he is a incredible Player and that he will be for very long but this over the top hypemachine is what kinda kills him for me.

But personality and skill-wise, there is nothing to say against him

[sike]

Originally Posted by Murphy3

I'd say that KG is likely one of the handful of most overrated players in the NBA.

In NBA History.

[Blackspider]

Let's go ahead and add Lebron James