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. 

If only individual excellence were the criteria, Jordan should have won it all those years from 1987 till 1993. Let's face it, he was the supreme athlete, the one that your best player feared because he could just lock you down, the one your coaches advised you to stay clear of because you just couldn't stop him. He was the one who dominated night in and night out, led his team night in and out, and never gave up. That should be your MVP. 

Alas...that criteria just doesn't exist. We are just enamored with success, with results, with the obvious. It's much better that a team is 65-17 rather than 45-37 but with comparatively more heart and soul.

This is the problem.

That is why the 1995-96 Bulls are the team of my generation. And if I may dare suggest, the team of the last 30-35 years, before the Boston Celtics. It's not just the 72-10 season, it's a lot deeper than that. 

It was Jordan's first full season since his surprise retirement in 1993, and that came alive with equal skepticism as expectation. It was also the year that saw Dennis Rodman become a Bull, and Scottie Pippen found a new meaning to the idea of a team leader, that it warranted patience, understanding of not just the physical aspects of basketball, but also of the mental ones.

Jordan's will, determination, strength of mind and purpose, was just the tonic for his team. He led them night in and out, inspiring lesser men to greater glory. They ravaged the entire league and dominated.

And oh, by the way, they scampered off with the top individual and group awards as well.

You think it was all a given considering they had that season? No, it's because they were the best team that season. They carried on uninterrupted for a fourth championship, because they didn't stumble like other regular season leaders did. They went all the way. 

What's more, they won it all again the next year. And the next.

By the way, those next two seasons, they were pretty much neck-and-neck with the Utah Jazz for the best winning percentage.

The 2007-08 Boston Celtics and LA Lakers will do well to remember this. The regular season and its glory are over. This is where it all counts.

LeBron just might find it a lot tougher to scrape by, and he should. This Boston team is just that good.

Their defense is stifling. Their offense stands up when it counts. Their resilience? Just ask KG if he thinks his Celts are just a blip on the Lakers' radar and you'll get the answer. 

What about the Lakers? After 3-2, can it be 4-2 next, or are we headed for another Game Seven? If it's Game Seven, it's a hell of a worry for the Lakers. Not just because it's one more unnecessary night of sweating, but because they've just not come through as they should have. 

Kobe and Co. can say the Jazz were just tougher and feistier but the truth is obvious. They just messed it up in Games 3 and 4. At least, Game 4 should have been taken.

But then again, in Utah, Deron and Carlos are just two angry souls. And the fans...well, LA can surely take heart from their last regular season win there when they came and beat the Jazz' home-winning streak by almost 20. 

It means the impossible is possible.

And also, remember, LA won two straight in Denver. There is no reason why they can't win at least one now.

What then of New Orleans-San Antonio? Is Game Six the end of the playoffs for the Spurs? or will it be one more road deja vu for the Hornets?

As I remarked earlier, the playoffs just get more interesting, and this is what you need now. Intensity. Winner takes all. High stakes. Dead important.

Champions are moulded from the deepest cores of desperation and hopelessness. How will Kobe, KG, LeBron, and Duncan respond? 

Man...Game Six is where it's all going to come alive.

Raise your hands and cheer...we're seeing something historic in the NBA.