MVP, Winning, Playoffs.....It Gets Interesting by The Day!

In case you're wondering if Kobe Bryant deserved it more than CP3, I'll say it to you now: yes, yes, and YES. 

If CP3 was just as amazing and inspirational as Kobe: yes, yes, and YES. 

If LeBron got duped and screwed in the MVP race: yes, yes, and YES. 

Was Dwight Howard deserving or overrated? Yes, yes, and YES.

Sure, the Pistons are no easy opposition, but as an All-Star, an NBA First-Teamer and an MVP candidate, you're supposed to elevate your teammates.

For chrissakes, go down 4-3, not 4-1! Losing 4-1 is for chumps like the Hawks and the Raptors. 

I've read a lot recently about how we should centralize the MVP race or even divide it, with one each for the regular season, playoffs, and NBA Finals. This is a valid thought and argument, and I do support it.

It makes the MVP race more valid, because as we've regularly seen, sometimes your regular season MVP just can't do a thing in the playoffs. Just ask Dirk, Steve Nash, and so many others. 

Speaking of Nash, his two MVP titles are just a scam. Hate me for saying this, but if he just enhanced his teammates and led them to the best records, then this whole MVP debate would be a facade.

The MVP is supposed to be the most valuable to your team, the one that your team just can't do without. Those two years he won it, I'm not sure if he was any more valuable to his team than Kobe Bryant was for his Lakers, or LeBron for his Cavaliers.

This is the problem with the MVP race now. When Michael Jordan won his first MVP award back in 1988-89, he did so because he accomplished something. His Bulls won 50 games for the first time in history, and they did so on the back of his all-around impeccable game. The guy scored, defended, stole, rebounded, dished, blocked, and led his team in all departments. That is the definition of your MVP: the one indispensable star. 

Like LeBron was for his Cavs, Like CP3 was for his surging Hornets. Like KB24 was this season for his Lakers.

But not KG for me.

Granted, he's one of my all-time favorites, but this year, for all the talk about the Boston resurgence, he was no more valuable for his team than Ray or Paul (or even Rondo, for that matter!). And don't even get me started about the 7-2 Celtics in his absence.

This is where it gets so heated. And confusing.

For me, an MVP isn't just the best player on your team. It's about the intangible value and worth of a star, of an individual so head-and-shoulders above everyone else, combining the physical with the mental to lead his team to success. 

And with the game on the line, or down by a deficit, a true MVP stirs his team up and inspires them to believe it's never over until it's truly over. That winning is still possible.  

Jordan was one of the few who strived for this immaculate perfection. He hardly ever missed a game. Even in the midst of such a horrendous off-court existence (packed to the brim with endorsements and other engagements), he consistently delivered.

Commitment? He had plenty. Desire? He had plenty. He topped 30-6-6 on a daily basis, and also won. 

Most importantly, he dominated. Teams knew that it was never over until MJ said it was over. No one else before or since has demanded that level of respect, that level of intimidation. 

You're currently logged into Facebook

Do you want to share your Bleacher Report activity on Facebook?