Can The Real MVP Please Stand Up
Stephen Curry made history in 2016, becoming the NBA’s first unanimous Most Valuable Player. Curry’s feat is 35 years in the making.
Since the 1980-81 season, the award has been decided by a panel of sportswriters and broadcasters who could never agree on a unanimous vote... until now.
Receiving a unanimous MVP vote appeared to be almost as improbable as a unanimous 1st ballot entry into the Baseball Hall of Fame.
Ken Griffey Jr, who was virtually the Michael Jordan of baseball in regards to playing ability and marketability, couldn’t even receive a unanimous vote, earning 99.3% of the first ballot vote this year -- currently the highest percentage in Major League history.
Historically, there have been various reasons why sportswriters and broadcasters refuse to submit the popular vote, such as having issues with how the player treated his teammates, or how the player handled the media... or the journalist simply wanted to be a contrarian.
In 2000, Shaquille O’Neal was one vote away from being the first unanimous MVP, but one lone vote was given to Allen Iverson.
In 2015-16, Curry averaged 30.1 points and 6.7 assists and led the league with 2.1 steals per game while maintaining a 50% field goal percentage, 45% three point percentage and 90% free throw percentage.
He become the 7th player in NBA history to reach the legendary 50-40-90 plateau: Larry Bird (2), Mark Price, Reggie Miller, Steve Nash (4), Dirk Nowitzki, and Kevin Durant. Lastly, Curry led his team to an NBA record 73 wins.
When describing Curry as the most valuable player, it instantly triggers the debate of, ‘Is Curry really the most valuable player in the league?'
When questioned on the subject, four-time MVP LeBron James said it best to reporters, “He averaged 30, he led the league in steals, he was 90-50-40 and they won 73 (games). Do you have any debate over that, really, when it come(s) to that award?”
“If you do it by a year-to-year basis, I think sometimes the word ‘valuable’ or best player of the year, you can have different results,” added James. “ When you talk about most ‘valuable’ then you can have a different conversation, so, take nothing away from him, he’s definitely deserving of that award, for sure.”
After digesting James’ soundbites, I started to ponder if he actually has a strong case. It opens the door to debate what the MVP award really means.
This season, James averaged 25.3 points, 7.4 rebounds and 6.8 assists while leading the Cleveland Cavaliers (57-25) to the first seed in the Eastern Conference, but finished third in the MVP voting behind Curry and Kawhi Leonard. Does that mean that Curry and Leonard are more “valuable” players than James?
Consider some of the great players in this league's history who have won the MVP award only once, such as Shaquille O’Neal (1999-00) and Kobe Bryant (2007-08).
Yet Steve Nash won back to back MVPs in 2006 and 2007. Does this mean “Two Time” Nash was more valuable to his team throughout his career than the "Big Aristotle" or the "Black Mamba" ?
I don’t think so!
During the prime years of Michael Jordan's playing career, from 1987-93 and throughout the years of the second repeat, MJ really should have won MVP every single season.
This would have given Jordan 10 league MVPs, more than Kareem Abdul Jabbar’s record of six. Yet Jordan only won the award five times. Does this mean that Jabbar was a more valuable player than MJ in NBA history?
In the 1961-62 season, Wilton Norman Chamberlain averaged an NBA record 50 points and 25.7 rebounds while clocking in 48.5 minutes for 80 straight games that season, yet he still didn’t win MVP that year.
The award was given to Bill Russell who averaged 16.9 points and 23.9 rebounds per game.
Russell had the better teams, which led to better records and more rings. But was he ever more valuable of a player than the "Big Dipper?" Did Wilt deserve to win the award only four times in his career?
When thinking of the real MVP, I don’t think of the most valuable player to his or her team, or where a team would be without that player, or Kevin Durant’s courageous mom, Wanda (She will always be the real MVP) -- I think of someone who truly is the most dominant player in the league.
To this day, James has yet to be dethroned as the most ‘valuable’ player in the NBA.
The only advantage that Curry has over James is his ability to shoot the basketball, and the fact that his adorable daughter, Riley Curry gets more air time during press conferences than LeBron James Jr.
Curry is certainly a better shooter, but James is still more dominant and a better scorer when he actually chooses to be "King James" the offensive juggernaut, rather than the timid, deferring James. Case and point:
James has averaged over 30 points twice in a single season, and in the 2015 NBA Finals, he averaged 35.8 points to Curry’s 26 points.
Despite the fact that Curry is a point guard, James as a point forward makes for a better point guard because of his court vision, passing and ability to make his teammates better. James is certainly a better defender.
Curry leading the league in steals doesn’t equate to being a great defender.Did Curry ever make a first, second or even a third NBA All-defensive team?
James has made the NBA All-Defensive First Team five times in his career. Has Curry ever truly put the handcuffs on the opposition? Just ask Damian Lillard who was dropping dimes, dropping dimes, dropping 51 points on Curry during the regular season this year.
In 2010, after James made the infamous, “Decision,” he took the Miami Heat to four straight finals appearances.
Thus causing Cleveland to have the worst record in the NBA the very first year without him. Upon returning to Cleveland, James instantly took a non-playoff Cavs team from 2013-14 (30-52) to back to back finals appearances.
Despite the Eastern Conference being “watered down”, I don’t think Curry could lead a team in the East to six straight Finals appearances as James did.
In fact, The Warriors were able to easily advance to the Western Conference Finals this year even with Curry sitting out due to his sprained knee.
The MVP award will always be marred in controversy and debate, however, I think the easiest way to limit the debate is by taking a page out of the NHL's handbook and have two most “valuable” player awards.
The NHL has the Hart Memorial Trophy, which is awarded to the most valuable player to his team, judged by the Professional Hockey Writers’ Association.
The NHL also awards the Ted Lindsey Award to the most outstanding player in the regular season, but the Ted Lindsey winner is judged by the members of the NHL Players’ Association.
Last year, the NBA players association looked for a solution to the debate by hosting the first ever “Annual Players’ Awards,” where James Harden was voted as the MVP over Stephen Curry, who actually finished with 262 voting points and 75 first-place votes ahead of Harden to win last year's traditional NBA MVP award.
Although having a winning record is an important part of earning the MVP award, there is too much emphasis on the team's record. The voting should be more heavily based off the player’s individual performance.
The MVP award has always been an individual award, it is not awarded to the individual's team. When Curry accepted his award in front of the podium, the entire team took a picture with him.
Curry is not about to get a hammer and break his MVP trophy into little pieces to share with the rest of his teammates.
It won't be like the film Mean Girls where Lindsay Lohan haphazardly breaks pieces of her Prom Queen Crown to share with Regina, Gretchen, Janis and Damian. And this isn’t the Larry O’Brien Trophy either. You don't share the MVP award.
Ultimately, the best way to define most “valuable” or “best” player is by determining who the most dominant player is in the NBA.
Curry deserved to win the MVP award as the most valuable player to his team this year, given his statistics and helping lead his team to 73 wins. But James deserves to win an award for being the most “outstanding” (valuable) player in the NBA, and the best player on the planet.
I rest my case.