NBA MVP Harden or Curry

1235»

Comments

  • coop9889
    coop9889 Members Posts: 7,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2015
    ATL_D wrote: »
    coop9889 wrote: »
    ATL_D wrote: »
    coop9889 wrote: »
    The key is imagining the teams without the respective candidates.

    Try to imagine the Rockets this year, without Dwight the majority of the season, and without Harden.

    Then try to imagine golden state without curry.

    The rockets would be Lakers bad, and the warriors would still contend for the playoffs imo.

    Harden was definitely more VALUABLE to his team, this season.

    The advanced stats don't agree with you. You have been deceived by the eye test and the court of public opinion. As good as the Dubs are as a team they are 9.15 points better when Curry is on the floor vs when he is not (1st in the league). As bad as most people claim the Rockets are, they are only 8.43 points better when Harden is on the floor vs when he is not (3rd in the league). curry is more efficient and a better facilitator all while many of the time not even playing the 4th quarter of games. I would argue it is harder to make a good team great than to make a bad team good.

    But like I said earlier it is a close race and you really could go either way.

    The eye test is, and rightfully should be, an important factor when placing a vote. The whole "imagine the teams without them" is a product of the eye test. The statistic you bring up is basically "the warriors with steph are a better team than the rockets with harden". That's what I get from that statistic. Which I don't think anyone would disagree.

    Who is #2 on that list?

    No, what I take from that stat is that Curry's presence raises the Warriors MORE than Hardens Presence raises the Rockets (in terms of points per 100 possessions). This is regardless of how each team fares against the other. It is one of many metrics for measuring how valuable a player is to his team. The core argument for Harden as MVP is that he makes the rockets soooooo much better when he is on the floor, without him they would be a lottery team, etc. While Steph is just riding a team of All Stars. That argument is blown way out of proportion, and looks to be outright invalid, when you look at the stats. Curry makes as much OR MORE of a difference on the Dubbs as Harden does on the Rockets. And I would argue, that for a great player, it is easier to make a difference on an ok team and make them good, than to make a difference on a good team and make then great.

    The stat is plus minus. A more accurate list has Harden at #4, 2 full points behind curry. Westbrook is second.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015_leaders.html

    The eye test is important. What I intended to convey was that seeing Harden put people in a blender and score in bunches, and get emotionally tied up in how he should be the MVP, does not replace every aspect of the game and the overall impact that Curry has made. Look at what Curry did while he was in the game- he didnt even play one minute in 18 fourth quarters. He doesnt have to score 40 every night, and he is smart enough to know that. The Dubs record shows that, and he is the engine that makes them go.

    The funny thing about "advanced stats" is you can use them to solidify just about any argument.

    For example, Harden is the league leader in win shares, which is "estimated number of wins contributed by a player"

    Idk about you, but I feel like THAT is more valuable that any other single statistic, including plus/minus, ppg, spg, apg etc...

    That "more accurate" list you were referring to (offensive plus minus, correct me if im wrong) has isaiah thomas and lowry ahead of Anthony Davis. I'm pretty sure you'd take AD in a heartbeat over either of those. So how valuable is that stat, really?

    Advance metrics are OK, but not the end all be all.
  • Shizlansky
    Shizlansky Members Posts: 35,095 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Harden
    coop9889 wrote: »
    ATL_D wrote: »
    coop9889 wrote: »
    ATL_D wrote: »
    coop9889 wrote: »
    The key is imagining the teams without the respective candidates.

    Try to imagine the Rockets this year, without Dwight the majority of the season, and without Harden.

    Then try to imagine golden state without curry.

    The rockets would be Lakers bad, and the warriors would still contend for the playoffs imo.

    Harden was definitely more VALUABLE to his team, this season.

    The advanced stats don't agree with you. You have been deceived by the eye test and the court of public opinion. As good as the Dubs are as a team they are 9.15 points better when Curry is on the floor vs when he is not (1st in the league). As bad as most people claim the Rockets are, they are only 8.43 points better when Harden is on the floor vs when he is not (3rd in the league). curry is more efficient and a better facilitator all while many of the time not even playing the 4th quarter of games. I would argue it is harder to make a good team great than to make a bad team good.

    But like I said earlier it is a close race and you really could go either way.

    The eye test is, and rightfully should be, an important factor when placing a vote. The whole "imagine the teams without them" is a product of the eye test. The statistic you bring up is basically "the warriors with steph are a better team than the rockets with harden". That's what I get from that statistic. Which I don't think anyone would disagree.

    Who is #2 on that list?

    No, what I take from that stat is that Curry's presence raises the Warriors MORE than Hardens Presence raises the Rockets (in terms of points per 100 possessions). This is regardless of how each team fares against the other. It is one of many metrics for measuring how valuable a player is to his team. The core argument for Harden as MVP is that he makes the rockets soooooo much better when he is on the floor, without him they would be a lottery team, etc. While Steph is just riding a team of All Stars. That argument is blown way out of proportion, and looks to be outright invalid, when you look at the stats. Curry makes as much OR MORE of a difference on the Dubbs as Harden does on the Rockets. And I would argue, that for a great player, it is easier to make a difference on an ok team and make them good, than to make a difference on a good team and make then great.

    The stat is plus minus. A more accurate list has Harden at #4, 2 full points behind curry. Westbrook is second.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015_leaders.html

    The eye test is important. What I intended to convey was that seeing Harden put people in a blender and score in bunches, and get emotionally tied up in how he should be the MVP, does not replace every aspect of the game and the overall impact that Curry has made. Look at what Curry did while he was in the game- he didnt even play one minute in 18 fourth quarters. He doesnt have to score 40 every night, and he is smart enough to know that. The Dubs record shows that, and he is the engine that makes them go.

    The funny thing about "advanced stats" is you can use them to solidify just about any argument.

    For example, Harden is the league leader in win shares, which is "estimated number of wins contributed by a player"

    Idk about you, but I feel like THAT is more valuable that any other single statistic, including plus/minus, ppg, spg, apg etc...

    That "more accurate" list you were referring to (offensive plus minus, correct me if im wrong) has isaiah thomas and lowry ahead of Anthony Davis. I'm pretty sure you'd take AD in a heartbeat over either of those. So how valuable is that stat, really?

    Advance metrics are OK, but not the end all be all.

    Word?

    Harden for MVP
  • coop9889
    coop9889 Members Posts: 7,299 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 2015
    ATL_D wrote: »
    coop9889 wrote: »
    ATL_D wrote: »
    coop9889 wrote: »
    ATL_D wrote: »
    coop9889 wrote: »
    The key is imagining the teams without the respective candidates.

    Try to imagine the Rockets this year, without Dwight the majority of the season, and without Harden.

    Then try to imagine golden state without curry.

    The rockets would be Lakers bad, and the warriors would still contend for the playoffs imo.

    Harden was definitely more VALUABLE to his team, this season.

    The advanced stats don't agree with you. You have been deceived by the eye test and the court of public opinion. As good as the Dubs are as a team they are 9.15 points better when Curry is on the floor vs when he is not (1st in the league). As bad as most people claim the Rockets are, they are only 8.43 points better when Harden is on the floor vs when he is not (3rd in the league). curry is more efficient and a better facilitator all while many of the time not even playing the 4th quarter of games. I would argue it is harder to make a good team great than to make a bad team good.

    But like I said earlier it is a close race and you really could go either way.

    The eye test is, and rightfully should be, an important factor when placing a vote. The whole "imagine the teams without them" is a product of the eye test. The statistic you bring up is basically "the warriors with steph are a better team than the rockets with harden". That's what I get from that statistic. Which I don't think anyone would disagree.

    Who is #2 on that list?

    No, what I take from that stat is that Curry's presence raises the Warriors MORE than Hardens Presence raises the Rockets (in terms of points per 100 possessions). This is regardless of how each team fares against the other. It is one of many metrics for measuring how valuable a player is to his team. The core argument for Harden as MVP is that he makes the rockets soooooo much better when he is on the floor, without him they would be a lottery team, etc. While Steph is just riding a team of All Stars. That argument is blown way out of proportion, and looks to be outright invalid, when you look at the stats. Curry makes as much OR MORE of a difference on the Dubbs as Harden does on the Rockets. And I would argue, that for a great player, it is easier to make a difference on an ok team and make them good, than to make a difference on a good team and make then great.

    The stat is plus minus. A more accurate list has Harden at #4, 2 full points behind curry. Westbrook is second.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2015_leaders.html

    The eye test is important. What I intended to convey was that seeing Harden put people in a blender and score in bunches, and get emotionally tied up in how he should be the MVP, does not replace every aspect of the game and the overall impact that Curry has made. Look at what Curry did while he was in the game- he didnt even play one minute in 18 fourth quarters. He doesnt have to score 40 every night, and he is smart enough to know that. The Dubs record shows that, and he is the engine that makes them go.

    The funny thing about "advanced stats" is you can use them to solidify just about any argument.

    For example, Harden is the league leader in win shares, which is "estimated number of wins contributed by a player"

    Idk about you, but I feel like THAT is more valuable that any other single statistic, including plus/minus, ppg, spg, apg etc...

    That "more accurate" list you were referring to (offensive plus minus, correct me if im wrong) has isaiah thomas and lowry ahead of Anthony Davis. I'm pretty sure you'd take AD in a heartbeat over either of those. So how valuable is that stat, really?

    Advance metrics are OK, but not the end all be all.

    I agree with you. You can craft any number of arguments with all of the data at your disposal. I don't dispute that Harden is a premier candidate, and the MVP In the mind of many. What I am saying is that one shouldn't marginalize a candidate and disqualify Curry based off of ludicrous arguments that dont stand up when you look at the numbers. Don't pretend like Curry isn't close in th race.

    I'm assuming this whole section is just a generalized statement and not directed towards me in particular... seeing as how you won't find a single post where I insinuate it isn't a close race or that Curry isn't 2nd in my mind.

    If my assumption is correct then yes, we are on the same page
  • DOPEdweebz
    DOPEdweebz Members, Moderators, Writer Posts: 29,364 Regulator
    Curry
    Curry slightly edges Harden for the Western conf MVP, but overall its clearly Lebron still.
  • freshb651
    freshb651 Members Posts: 8,240 ✭✭✭✭✭
    damn,I was gonna say Steph should get it. But I went and looked at the stats and Harden averages more points,

    rebounds,and Steph avgs .7 more assists (7 vs 7.7). You can't really go wrong with either pick,but most likely Curry

    will get it because his team had the better record.