Kobe, LeBron, the MVP Award and the NBA Championship

by WildYams on Apr 16, 2009 11:13 AM PDT Comment 18 comments

[Ed. Note: Folks, please welcome Wild Yams, our first community volunteer author here at SS&R. Like many of you, I'm sure, I've seen Wild Yams' comments on various blogs across these internets, and have always been impressed with the insight and analysis he provides. SS&R is lucky to have him on board. He kicks off his tenure here at SS&R with an excellent discussion of the 2009 regular season MVP race.]

I'm new around here, but then again I guess we all are, and Josh gracefully asked me to help out with some of the writing duties on SS&R, so I thought I should hurry up and make my first post. With the regular season over there's a lot to talk about, from the upcoming series with the Jazz, to the speculation that Kevin Garnett is done for the year, to other playoff matchups around the league, including who the Lakers might meet in the second round ~~after beating~~ if they beat the Utah Jazz. But as always seems to be the case at this time of year, the thing that is foremost on everyone's minds is who will win the MVP, and this year is no different.

For me I think the debate about who should win the MVP this year is somewhat silly, because I expect LeBron to win it in a landslide. The press has tried to paint it like it's a 2 or 3 man race with Kobe and Dwyane Wade thrown into the discussion, but I think realistically it's been LeBron's award to lose for quite some time this season. He probably would have won it last year if his team had won more games, and now that his Cavs have finished with the league's best record, there's really no chance he won't win it. This news may anger some Laker fans, but I think we have to ask ourselves why shouldn't LeBron win it?

The reasons why LeBron will win are simple and obvious, and there are two of them: he was the best player on the team with the league's best record, and his individual stats were astounding. Now I know the arguments from Laker fans against these two reasons would be that the only reason the Cavs finished with a better record than the Lakers is because they play in the Eastern Conference, which is much worse overall than the West is; and that the only reason LeBron's stats are so much better than Kobe's is because he simply has to do more for his team, and that Kobe shouldn't be penalized simply for having a better team around him. While on the face those are valid objections, allow me to show you why they're going to be ignored by virtually anyone who has a vote.

For one thing, the East may be a weaker conference, but it's not as weak as you think. Three of the league's top four teams this year were in the East, while six of the league's seven worst teams were in the West; so while the middle of the pack was better out West, the tops and bottoms in the East had the edge. Additionally, last year the Celtics (who we Laker fans should be willing to acknowledge was a really great team) had the same record that Cleveland has this year, and you could argue the East was worse last year than they were this year. 66 wins is a great record for any team to have, and I think it's especially impressive that the Cavaliers were able to achieve that many wins.

This brings us to the second part of the argument for MVP: LeBron's individual stats vs the fact that Kobe wasn't asked to do as much for the Lakers this year. LeBron's personal stats aside, I think it's downright incredible that he was able to take that collection of players to anywhere north of 50 wins, let alone to the league's best record with 66.

Let me ask you a question: as Laker fans, how many players on Cleveland's roster would you be willing to have LA give up a roster spot for? I mean, if you took out whatever every player's salary is and didn't factor in whether they'd be better in the future or whatever, and instead were just going to collect the best 12 players on one team for this season, how many of them would be from Cleveland's roster and how many would be from the Lakers'? Obviously you'd want LeBron, and you'd probably want Mo Williams (though you might wonder if there'd be enough basketballs to go around with him at the point instead of Fish/UPS/Farmar), but how many guys after that?

Assuming you'd drop Mbenga (or Morrison, depending on who the real 12th man is) to make room for LeBron, would you then want to drop Josh Powell to make room for Zydrunas Ilgauskas? I guess so, but how many more minutes would Z get over what Powell is getting, now that the 3 man rotation of Drew, Pau and Lamar is back? Presumably Trevor would go to the bench in favor of LeBron, so maybe Luke would then become expendable, so you could drop him for Mo Williams. But then who else? Drop Farmar for Delonte West probably, but honestly that's probably about all you'd want to do. I mean you could also drop Brown and add either Ben Wallace, Anderson Varejao, Boobie Gibson or Wally Sczerbiak, but really you're talking about the 12th man at that point. So even assuming you did that, the new Laker rotation would still be Drew & Pau up front, with Lamar off the bench in probably the same substitution patterns they're in now, then you'd have LeBron at SF with Trevor backing him up, Kobe at SG with Sasha, Mo Williams or West behind him, and you'd start Mo Williams at PG with either Fisher or West coming off the bench. In other words, only LeBron and Mo Williams would be players who would ever see significant minutes if they were added to this Laker team, and that to me says a lot about how much less LeBron has had to work with this year, and how much more impressive it is that his team won the league's most number of games this year.

But I'll tell you what else it tells me: if the Lakers and Cleveland do meet in The Finals, the Cavs are going to have one hell of a time trying to contend with all the weapons and all the depth that the Lakers have. The MVP award is an individual award, but the championship goes to the best team. It also should be noted that just because LeBron is going to be this season's Most Valuable Player that it doesn't mean he's a better player than Kobe is. If Kobe played on a team with me and three other random guys who don't play professional basketball, it wouldn't make Kobe any worse of a player, but it would certainly make his value to that team jump astronomically. If at the end of the year Kobe is holding the Larry O'Brien trophy in one hand and the Bill Russell award in the other, I know you, me and every other Laker fan will be perfectly content, even if LeBron's got the Maurice Podoloff Trophy sitting on his shelf at home.

3 recs | Comment 18 comments | Add comment | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

I get the roster comparison

But what’s hard to value is the commitment to defense that Mike Brown has instilled in his players, even without Lebron. Put it this way: if Kobe played with the Cavs under Mike Brown with Lebron’s roster, who’s to say the defense wouldn’t be just as good, if not better? If Lebron played on the Lakers, would the Lakers team defense get better, or would you see the same blown rotations and assignments? I don’t automatically buy into the conventional thought that Lakers would have had a better record with Lebron, and the Cavs would have a worse record with Kobe.

I don’t think enough attention is paid to just how good Cleveland’s team defense is: the Cavs led the league in opponent FG% at 43.1%, while the Lakers were in 6th at 44.7%. That is a team effort. I guess to me, I would try to figure out how much defense each would bring to the other’s team. I’m not sure if I have an answer. If you think having Lebron on the Lakers would make the Lakers have the best defense, then by all means, Lebron is the better player. But I believe it’s possible that Cleveland would play the same brand of defense with Kobe, that he might play defense differently under that San Antonio-influenced system of Mike Brown’s. And on the flip side, the Lakers would still have many of the same defensive challenges if Lebron were to replace Kobe.

by Gils_Keloids on Apr 16, 2009 12:03 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I think a Kobe for LeBron swap would be bad for both teams

If LeBron went to the Lakers straight up in a trade for Kobe, the Laker offense would be far, far less effective than it is now. With all the inside scoring and size the Lakers have it would be far too congested for LeBron to be anywhere near as effective on offense as he is with Cleveland. It’s no surprise that Cleveland’s frontcourt is made up of a center who specializes in outside shots and a couple forwards with no offense to speak of. This leaves the middle of the floor wide open for LeBron’s drives to the hole, or his drives and kicks. With Kobe on the Cavs though it would be way too easy to swarm Kobe on the perimeter without having to commit anyone to guarding any kind of post up scorer. Kobe would have to either try to run the offense through a series of post-ups, or he’d have to start driving all the time (which IMO is not where he’s most effective).

Defensively one of the reasons LeBron works so well in Cleveland is because with his size he can frequently end up guarding power forwards when the Cavs go small. That’s not something Kobe could do. At the same time, LeBron wouldn’t be anywhere near as effective on defense with the Lakers where he’d be asked to only guard smaller players on the perimeter. You’re definitely right that so much credit for Cleveland’s success this year should go to the team defense of the Cavs, of which LeBron is just one part. But I still have a hard time imagining Kobe being able to take that group of players to 66 wins the way LeBron did. I’m honestly still completely puzzled that the Cavs were able to win that many games. They won about 15 more than I ever would have thought possible before the season started.

My point above was essentially this: LeBron’s gonna win the MVP award, in no small part due to him having to do so much by himself for that team; but while that’ll help him with the MVP, it’s going to hurt him a lot if the Cavs face the Lakers in The Finals.

by WildYams on Apr 16, 2009 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Some good points. You’ll read below that I disagree with some of them. I think that the Cavs with Kobe would still be great defensively, and I think Kobe’s offensive versatility would easily compensate for the size differential.

I’m really not that surprised at Cleveland’s record this year. What produces consistent greatness, offense or defense? When the Lakers have lost games they shouldn’t have, was it because their offense was struggling, or because they didn’t play defense? I’d say the answer to both is that defense is the key. Boston was a force of nature last year, but I wouldn’t say I was all that impressed with their offense. Defense was what gave them that strength and consistency, and enabled them to perform at a high level every single night.

The Cavs have that defense. It’s not a new thing, either, it just got better. They also play against significantly fewer good teams (though your points about the top and the bottom being better in the East are very good ones). So, combined with the improvements to the rost made last year, I’m not that surprised.

However, I will also say this: The research I referred to below, regarding assists? In the course of that research, I also discovered that everything for the Cavs revolves completely around LeBron, much more so than Kobe. It’s why he gets more assists, but it’s also why he deserves the MVP.

But your closing point is excellent, and right on the money: This is a regular season award, and LeBron deserves it, because of the way the team revolves aroundh him. But note also that his style works much better in the regular season, when few of the teams he meets have the ability to take away his drives to the basket. Since he doesn’t have the offensive versatility to punish teams in other ways when that one option is taken away, the team struggles when teams like LA, Boston, and Orlando take away the dunks and layups. And in the playoffs, those good teams do exactly that.

Strength & Honor

by Josh Tucker on Apr 16, 2009 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

I’m really less interested in the whole “would the Lakers be better with LeBron” or “would the Cavs be better with Kobe” argument since it’s all purely speculative and hypothetical. I’m more interested in “can the Cavs beat the Lakers” and vice versa :) IMO because Cleveland is so reliant (overly so, I would say) on one player, it makes them easier to stop than teams that have more of a diverse attack. This is true even if that one player is as good as LeBron James or Kobe Bryant. I think the Lakers even proved this fairly emphatically this season in their two matchups with Cleveland, as they shut down James almost entirely, and won both games by double figures.

What I said above about how LeBron’s ability to drive would be impaired if he was on this Laker team is true when the Cavs play against LA: it’s just too much size in the middle for LeBron to be able to get to the rim the way he likes to. Additionally the length of the Laker defense effectively closes all lanes that LeBron would prefer to drive in, and if you can take this away from Cleveland then they are dead in the water. As I said above, Cleveland’s offense is designed to stay out of the middle so that LeBron can do his drive and dunk or drive and kick thing, so if you take that away then the Cavs are suddenly turned into a highly inefficient team that is completely reliant on jump shooting to score.

Brown typically uses a center like Z to try to pull interior defenders away from the basket, but as we saw in the Lakers-Cavs game in Cleveland, Phil wasn’t going for that. If you recall, Ilgauskas had a big first quarter, hitting a bunch of open jump shots, and at the 1st quarter break during the interview with Phil Jackson the sideline reporter asked him what the Lakers were going to do to stop it. Phil wisely answered that he just didn’t think Z would keep hitting those shots all game, and he was right. Phil knew that it was much better odds to let Cleveland try to beat you with Z shooting 18-20 foot shots than by opening up the lane for LeBron, and it worked like a charm. In Cleveland’s two games against the Lakers LeBron had only one dunk. That should tell you all you need to know about how effective the Lakers were at defending Cleveland.

Cleveland’s D is good enough to similarly disrupt the Laker offense, but unlike last year the Lakers just have too potent of an attack inside, and Cleveland doesn’t have the size and muscle inside that Boston did. Ben Wallace, Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Anderson Varejao can all present problems, but only Z has the height to effectively guard Pau or Bynum down low. Wallace and Varejao might try to muscle them away from the basket, but they are far too short to really stop either player, and they’re going to give up rebounds as well due to the height difference. And as we saw in the last Lakers-Cavs game, Cleveland has absolutely no answer for Lamar.

I think we probably are headed for a Cavs-Lakers Finals, and that doesn’t worry me much at all, even if Cleveland’s got the MVP on their team.

by WildYams on Apr 16, 2009 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yes, quite

I’m really less interested in the whole "would the Lakers be better with LeBron" or "would the Cavs be better with Kobe" argument since it’s all purely speculative and hypothetical. I’m more interested in "can the Cavs beat the Lakers" and vice versa :) IMO because Cleveland is so reliant (overly so, I would say) on one player, it makes them easier to stop than teams that have more of a diverse attack.

Couldn’t have said it better myself. Purely speculative. Meanwhile, Lakers fans know a thing or two about playoff teams that are too reliant on one player.

Brown typically uses a center like Z to try to pull interior defenders away from the basket, but as we saw in the Lakers-Cavs game in Cleveland, Phil wasn’t going for that. If you recall, Ilgauskas had a big first quarter, hitting a bunch of open jump shots, and at the 1st quarter break during the interview with Phil Jackson the sideline reporter asked him what the Lakers were going to do to stop it. Phil wisely answered that he just didn’t think Z would keep hitting those shots all game, and he was right. Phil knew that it was much better odds to let Cleveland try to beat you with Z shooting 18-20 foot shots than by opening up the lane for LeBron, and it worked like a charm.

Man, sometimes you’ve absorbed so much basketball information that things get lost in your head… thanks for bringing this concept back to the front of my mind. It reminds me of why we’re so good against Cleveland, and gets me pumped up to meet them. It’s really just so simple — challenge the role players to make tough jumpshots. They may fall for a stretch, but they won’t be able to carry their team consistently. Leave the bigs in the middle to frustrate LeBron, clog up the middle, muck up their offense. And people say Phil has lost a step? Phooey!

Strength & Honor

by Josh Tucker on Apr 16, 2009 8:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Right on the money

This is a common mistake. People look at the two players’ supporting casts, and immediately jump to the conclusion that Kobe’s is significantly better than Bryant’s. However, they’re typically looking at these players and lineups from an offensive perspective, and rarely consider defense.

Recently, TrueHoop quoted Kurt Rambis, discussing the Lakers’ defensive abilities, and the system he put in place to make the most of them. The conclusion? Outside of Kobe, most Lakers suck at defense. They have very poor defensive instincts. The Lakers’ system is actually designed to mask their defensive flaws, to compensate for their defensive inefficiencies, because they cannot be trusted to play traditional defense with good defensive instincts.

The Cavs’ run to the Finals in 2006? Lots of credit for that has to go to their outstanding defense. That’s a team thing, not a LeBron thing. Imagine what Kobe could do if he was playing with guys that had good natural defensive instincts.

Let me say this much: The Cavs with Kobe instead of LeBron would be just as good, if not better. Kobe is still the better defender, though with the Lakers, he still picks his spots more. That’s necessary, because it would be really tough for him to be “The Doberman” all the time when his teammates can’t support that kind of effort.

Meanwhile, Kobe may not get to the whole as much, but his versatility on offense would keep the defense constantly off balance. I’ve done some statistical analysis (as yet unpublished) that suggests that LeBron is, in fact, not a better passer than Kobe, but that his higher assist numbers are a result of essentially being the point guard on his team. With Kobe in that position, he might be even more effective in that role, as he is a threat from close, mid, and long range, giving him more ways in which he can put the defense off balance and then distribute to his teammates.

I don’t buy that LeBron on the Lakers would make the team even better. Not for a minute.

Strength & Honor

by Josh Tucker on Apr 16, 2009 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Great read Yams. LeBron will take the Maurice Podoloff, but I Kobe will be alright with winning the Bill Russell/Larry O’Brien awards.

"There's a thin line between to laugh with and to laugh at." - Richard Pryor

by DennardC on Apr 16, 2009 2:13 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

You Faker fans are too cocky.

Don’t be so quick with saying that the Lakers are going to win the championship for sure. Cleveland has the best record in the NBA for a reason, which means that they have gome-court advantage. The Cavs are the best team in the NBA. I’m not saying that they’re going to lose for sure, but it’s definitely not a given.

by ZaMzAm FiRe on Apr 16, 2009 4:26 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I hate to nitpick spelling mistakes........

but actually it’s Lakers, not Fakers. Don’t sweat it, happens to the best of us.

"Don't I know you from somewhere"?. "Nah, that ain't me, I'm from Buffalo" - Axel Foley

by pslakerfan on Apr 16, 2009 4:49 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

While I appreciate the subtle approach

I’m gonna take a firmer stance. Disagree with our opinions all you want, but keep the 3rd grade insults out of it. We’re aspiring for something a little more high-brow than that

by C.A. Clark on Apr 16, 2009 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

You can always tell a Warriors fan.......

but you can’t tell them much.

"Don't I know you from somewhere"?. "Nah, that ain't me, I'm from Buffalo" - Axel Foley

by pslakerfan on Apr 16, 2009 5:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I hate to nitpick spelling mistakes......

but it’s home-court advantage, not gome-court advantage.

by Gils_Keloids on Apr 16, 2009 5:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

he stole my line!!!!!!!!!!!

nice one.

"Don't I know you from somewhere"?. "Nah, that ain't me, I'm from Buffalo" - Axel Foley

by pslakerfan on Apr 16, 2009 6:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

True the Cavs to have home-court advantage,

and I am not going to guarantee anything. However if the Cavs and Lakers are in the Finals, remember one thing: The Lakers have beating the Cavs in their house this season.

GO BRONCOS IN 2009 AND BEYOND!!
http://www.silverscreenandroll.com/

by weazel on Apr 16, 2009 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's true. I'm not denying that, but when you read the main post, it says several times

that the Lakers are a better team than the Cavs, and we don’t know that. Especially since the Cavs have a stronger record.

by ZaMzAm FiRe on Apr 18, 2009 1:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

i wish i had the time to read and write as much as you guys. lol…darn, but with 7 courses and working, almost impossible at this time. i always read and write on the run…go lakers. picks: lakers over jazz in 5 (5 instead of 4 just because it’s tough to win in utah). blazers over rockets in 7. nuggets over hornets in 6. mavs over spurs in 7.

hawks over heat in 6. cavs over pistons in 4. celtics over bulls in 6. who is made the playoffs in the east? lol oh, orlando over sixers in 5.

by chaucer on Apr 16, 2009 8:35 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs

I have to say...

nice article and I have to say I agree with you, I never thought of switching the players and I don’t want to adopt any of Lebron players. But also I think it works for lebron because he’s in that drive and kick system surrounded by shooters accept Varejo and Ben Wallace so all Lebron has to do is draw five players all to the basket and kick out to an open man. Any body can do that if you ask me, it isn’t hard to rack up the stats he does in his system and Lebron had a great season but they shouldn’t take nothing away from Kobe because he plays in a different system with different role players, Kobe isn’t surrounded by all shooters so there are major differences to each game and no one on ESPN takes that in account and that’s what I hate.

by BrittneyM on Apr 16, 2009 8:53 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs