Kudos for the NBA, specifically David Stern, for coming up with another horrendous idea. It's almost as bad as MLB having the winner of the all-star game get home field advantage in the World Series. Actually, you could probably argue that both of the ideas are bad.
Although, bad ideas seem to be what Stern is good at. Some examples of these bad ideas were the introduction of zone defenses, defensive three seconds, changing the distance for the three point line, and rules designed to prevent more physical style of play.
Now, you would think that the NBA would have learned from the fiasco with the all-star voting that giving the fans the power to vote is just one major headache. At one point during the season, both Allen Iverson and Tracy McGrady were among the league leaders in all-star voting, and I believe Yao Ming was too but he took his name off the list.
What happens when there's a fan that thinks they're so smart or funny, whichever way you look at it, and votes for someone who isn't even on the radar for MVP and then that same fan recruits others to vote for that player?
Another question that comes to mind is what happens when the votes are so close that the fans vote is what decides the MVP?
I'm not saying that voting method the NBA has right now is perfect, but it's better than having the fans decide. The all-star game has proven this year in and year out that giving the fans the power to vote is not in the best interest, and now having it decide an award, the NBA has got to be kidding itself.
Sure, it may have been beneficial back when Steve Nash won his two MVP awards, yet one vote would not have changed the outcome. Other then Nash not deserving of a MVP award, you'd really be hard-pressed to say that the media, who votes on the MVP, made a mistake when they chose one player over another player.
Then there's the question of how many votes does an individual get? Is it going to be like the all-star game where you have a certain number of times that you can vote? Would that mean a person could vote for 20 different players for the MVP award?
The sad part is that all this voting is going to count for only one vote. So, let's say it's a landslide MVP choice, it means fans will cast their ballots and the vote is meaningless because do they really need to vote if a player is having a season where it's easily known he's going to win? So why would a fan even vote if it doesn't mean anything?
As mentioned before, should a MVP race be awarded by the fans? I believe the answer is no because more often then not the fans are going to be voting for their favorite player and not take into consideration a player that is having a better season than their favorite player.
For example, Lebron James and Kobe Bryant are having incredible seasons. Kobe leads the league in points per game while James is near the amount of points per game, has a higher three point percentage than James, as well as a higher free-throw percentage. James, meanwhile, averages more rebounds, more assists, more steals, more blocks, and shoots for a higher percentage from the field.
You'd have Cavalier fans voting for James and Laker fans voting for Kobe. Yet, by comparing the points per game, assists, rebounds, steals, blocks, field goal percentage, three point percentage, and free throw percentage it would be James on top, but fans wouldn't be looking too deeply into the numbers they just want to vote for their favorite player regardless if their player wasn't the one deserving the vote for the award.
Stern wanted to get fans involved in the voting process for the MVP, which was definitely a gutsy call, but like baseball has seen with the all-star game determining home field advantage, the idea of having fans decide the MVP is just as bad!