When voting for MVP of the league?

Question

Do the voters care whether the players play defense or not?

So as long as they play one side of the court very well (offense), is that good enough to win the MVP award?

Why don't the writers place enough emphasis on defense when considering who the MVP should be?

Answer 1

Actually the voting is based on a couple of things: for a individual:

- A Winning Record (Usually 50 Wins Or More)

- Making Teammates Better

- Being able to dominant and change a game.

- The Media Perception of the indivdual

- If the record part and the image didnt matter Kobe Bryant would probably be a 2 time MVP right now. But he didnt have the record so Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki got them, and as far as the image goes he is rebuilding that. But we all know Kobe is the best in the game today anyways.

Answer 2

Its not based on individual play, its how that player makes
others on the team better. Rodman and Artest and
Bowen play defense and help their teams, but none of
them made the rest of the teammates better or
make the play to win game. Generally the centers that
can dominate down in the post like Shaq, or players
that can make the big shots and get lots of assists
like Magic and Nash win MVPs.
You have to be a team player not someone with
good invidual stats.

So no its Valueable as in helping win games not
valueable as in playing defense.

There is the defensive player of the year, which Jordan
as an MVP won. So thats pretty uncommon for the the
best defensive player and the scoring champion
to be the MVPs. Thats why Jordan is by far the
most complete player ever to play the game.

Answer 3

You'd have to ask the media members who are allowed to vote for MVP. The MVP award itself has no qualifiers to it. So each member could have their own criteria. More often than not, they pick players who play both sides of the court. In the last three years, they've not followed that with Nowitzki (07), Nash (06) and Nash (05).

Moving backwards Garnett (04), Duncan (03) and Duncan (02) (all definite 'D'). Even offense-heavy Iverson (01) was great at steals.

Personally, I can't see how a player can be very "V" to their team without playing "D".

Answer 4

Yes I believe they do consider it as well as their win percentage. But it seems to be overshadowed by a player's value to the team. Look at past MVPs of the league. Shaq was a former MVP he's a great intimidator and that's one form of defense but what made him stood out? His outstanding court presence!

When Shaq was traded the Lakers immediately felt what they have lost. Think of another one: Tim Duncan. When ever Tim was out on an injury or if he plays sub-par the Spurs usually loses. Steve Nash was MVP because he lead the Phoenix team to become one of the best franchises nowadays. Before he came back to Phoenix, the team was a usual First round play-off dweller. He came back, and he made instant impact even leading them to Conference Finals on his first year back.

MVPs are called so because of their impact to their teams not because of their stats but their OVERALL impact to the team their playing.

Hope that this helps.

Answer 5

An emphasis usually is placed upon defense, but if your offensive efficiency is outstanding, like Steve Nash's is with his terrfic shooting percentage, insane 3 point percentage and assists numbers, this helps to overcome defensive woes. Magic Johnson won 3 MVPs, but was never a terrific defender, just a good one.

Answer 6

The MVP usually goes to the most outstanding player, while there are other awards for great defensive performances

Answer 7

The MVP goes to the all round best player

Answer 8

protection would not play as super a place because it might in determining the MVP. the difficulty is that the baseball writers who've vote, (as they do in the hall of popularity balloting) have in no way performed an inning of baseball of their lives. they might't relate. inspite of this imperfect gadget the terrific guy generally gets picked. Blind success i assume.

Answer 9

its just team record and player stats