The NBA MVP race holds a grip over most fans and analyst every year for some reason or another. It is the preeminent discussion piece between the All Star break and the start of the playoffs (and depending on whom the front runner is, some time after). One point of contention that never seems to away is, no one at this point quite knows how to judge it from year to year. A few have decided that some sort of mathematical formula should be used to determine the best candidate (whether it be a combination of simple stats, win shares, PER, or something even more complicated). Others just assume that it should just be the best player in the league for every season (however that’s really determined). There’s another camp that feels that it should go to the best player on the best team (this line of thinking ignores several factors that go into winning). Therein lies the problem, is the best player (or the best player on the best team) in the league necessarily the most valuable?
The Western Conference looks to be slightly open ended. The Eastern Conference cannot have the same thing said about it. The Eastern Conference at this point in the season has a very definitive hierarchy. The Cavs are the clear favorite in the conference, the Magic, Celtics, and Hawks are vying for second place, the Raptors bridge the gap between the contenders and the bottom rung playoff contenders, the Bobcats, Heat, Bulls, and Bucks are playing for the final three playoff spots, everyone else is jockeying for lottery positions, and the Nets are bringing up the rear.
I’ve talked a good bit about the teams at the top of the standings (and one team who refuses to ascend to the top of the standings). I’ve also talked a little bit about the bottom feeders of the league (and one good team benefitting greatly by the Knicks incompetence) and what their chances are in the draft. The group that is normally overlooked (unless you cover the team or blog about them) are the middle of the road borderline playoff teams or in some cases the playoff locks that haven’t quite played their way into the upper echelon.
The time leading up to the trade deadline is both frustrating and, historically, boring. Trade rumors start swirling and every insider and fan begins putting together packages to get certain players. Bad teams are going to get worse and good teams are supposed to get better. But how often does that happen, especially at the deadline?
Much to my surprise, as I was looking over scores from last night, the Cavaliers have nearly reached the halfway point in the season. So I figured it was as good a time as any to do the midseason (or so) awards. To me this makes much more sense than doing them at the trimester point (like a certain ESPN writer) because it allows for a large sample size and no one has to sit there scratching their heads as to why Pau Gasol is the MVP even though he’s only played about eight games.
This was supposed to be the return of the dominant teams. A return to a time when there was a clear cut hierarchy in the NBA. Essentially a return to the 80s when such revered teams as the Bird Celtics, the Magic Lakers, the Dr. J Sixers, and the Bad Boy Pistons (ignore that the high water marks of all those teams didn’t really intersect, but that’s how people like to remember it). It was going to be a five team race for dominance in the NBA. The four strongest teams from last season (Cavs, Lakers, Celtics, and Magic) and an old favorite (Spurs), all added pieces without giving anything way and were going to leave the rest of the league in the dust. It hasn’t really turned out that way though.
