BuzzerBeater Forums

To you suggest that in most BB leagues no player should be crowned MVP?

Wow, you have a strange way of concluding things.

To answer this question, of course not. I didn't say that the only parameter for a MVP should be that he carried a terrible team to the playoffs, it's just one of many.



Last edited by BB-Patrick at 8/15/2008 5:40:10 AM

It might be be missunderstanding what you said, by I interpret this

A MVP should be able to carry his team to the playoffs no matter how worse his team is imo.

like you are suggesting that only players that are able to carry a team (almost) by them self to the playoffs. The consequense of this for most leagues wuld be that there are no worthy MVP players, but of course you might mean something else with the statement, even though I fail to see what you mean in that case.

first should the MVP be based on the Season or on the Playoffs??

Most VALUABLE Player= probably should go to player who, buy his own ability, carries his team to Finals of Playoffs, if not the Title

Most OUTSTANDING Player= The guy who had the most outstanding season, regardless of how his team did.

Last edited by dennis54 at 8/15/2008 11:03:04 AM

I don't agree that it should be limited to that. Suppose that a player has carried his team so it does not relegate while without him they would have relegated. I think this kind off performance should make him eligable for an MVP.

As an example I won my league this year, but there is most defintely no standout player in my squad, so why should any of my players beat the player in the example above?

In american professional sports, e.g. the NBA, where the leagues are closed avoiding relegation is no feat, while here it most definitely is, so this should be taken into account when deciding the MVP, otherwise it should be renamed to MVPPT (Most Valubale Player in a Playoff Team).

like you are suggesting that only players that are able to carry a team (almost) by them self to the playoffs. The consequense of this for most leagues wuld be that there are no worthy MVP players, but of course you might mean something else with the statement, even though I fail to see what you mean in that case.

Are you serious? Or are you just joking?

There is a huge difference between this; "A MVP should be able to carry his team to the playoffs" and this "There should only be a MVP if all players in the team except the MVP are terrible so that the team normally shouldn't be in the playoffs at all."

MVP depends on team record and player stats. Not on whether the team is in the playoffs or not.

Yeah that's a great oneliner. But in many sports the MVP comes from teams who reach far in tournaments/off season.
Check out soccer for example. Van der Sar is probably (one of) the best goalkeepers in the world. He played perfect last EC. But who got the title of the best goalkeeper? Right Cassilas.
Why is that? Cassilas made 2 terrible mistake, 2 goals due to his mistakes. The Netherlands washed away Italy and France in the 1st and the 2nd game, with great soccer. 4th game, the quarter finals, they had a off-day, played terrible and were eliminated. Only Sneijder was in the EC2008 Dreamteam.

I believe i've never seen a MVP in the NBA from a non playoff team (i'm happy to see if anyone got one)

About the Big 8 Great 8 thing, good point, although you can only expect he would have been in the PO in the other conference, he might have finished 3rd there.

like you are suggesting that only players that are able to carry a team (almost) by them self to the playoffs. The consequense of this for most leagues wuld be that there are no worthy MVP players, but of course you might mean something else with the statement, even though I fail to see what you mean in that case.

Are you serious? Or are you just joking?

There is a huge difference between this; "A MVP should be able to carry his team to the playoffs" and this "There should only be a MVP if all players in the team except the MVP are terrible so that the team normally shouldn't be in the playoffs at all."

Sorry I was a little bit unclear. I am not saying that "There should only be a MVP if all players in the team except the MVP are terrible so that the team normally shouldn't be in the playoffs at all" (and if you read my post again I am confident that you will see that I am not saying that).

I am saying that I have no sush star player in my team. There is actually non that is really more valuble than the rest of my team. I have chosen to build a pretty evenly matched team so saying that a player in my team is partuclary valuable is kind of rindiculous, and saying that he is the one that adds most value to any team in my league is definetely not right even though I won it.

The most valuebale player is the player that adds most value to his team, thus candidates are:

1) Someone that carries his team to the victory
2) Someone that carries his team to the playoff
3) Someone that carries his team to a position where they avoid relegation
4) The guy that improved his team record the most

In that order. If there is no player from cathegory 1) and 2) then 3) should win if available, because he has clearly added more value to his player then someone that "just" improved his teams record.

He played perfect last EC. But who got the title of the best goalkeeper? Right Cassilas.

Beacuse Casillas was better. I admit that generally it gives an advantage to play in a winning team (and according to me many times too big advantage), but in this particular case Casillas was simply better.

I believe i've never seen a MVP in the NBA from a non playoff team (i'm happy to see if anyone got one)

Which makes sense to me. Because the NBA, as I mentioned earlier, is a closed league so the only real thing to value is if a team makes the playoffs (and advances there), while in open leagues it is also important to avoid relegation.

The NBA seems to award the MVP to the best player on the best team in an overwhelming percentage of the cases. I am not sure I like that, although it will probably be extremely easy to code in BB

Yes, this seems to be the case currently, probably because this is the easiest choice to make (rather than the best). The problem for me is that the award becomes more of a team award rather than a player award.