• Have something to say? Register Now! and be posting in minutes!

The 2017-18 Game-By-Game MVPs Discussion Thread

MHSL82

Well-Known Member
16,720
883
113
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Hoopla Cash
$ 500.92
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Moving the discussion posts to this thread because I want the data on one page. DO STILL COMMENT IN THE OTHER THREAD, AS THAT WILL BE UPDATED AND DISCUSSION POSTS WILL BE MOVED LATER.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Can there be games with no MVPs if it's a bad loss?
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
It took me a while to figure out what "HM" stood for. As you might know, I'm bad with acronyms.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Nuggets vs. Jazz - Box Score - October 18, 2017 - ESPN

MVP1: Ricky Rubio - 10 assists accounted for 20 points, plus 9 points, plus 5 rebounds.
MVP2: Joe Ingles - 11 points, 6 assists (12 points), and 5 rebounds.
HM3: Rudy Gobert - 18 points, 1 assist (2 points), and 10 rebounds. Blocks underwhelming though altered shots and offenses staying away from him is beneficial. 6 turnovers disappointing.
HM4: Derrick Favors - 14 points, 4 assists, and four rebounds
HM5: Donovan Mitchell: Didn't shoot well, but still managed double figures, dished the ball out four times, played defense (block and steal), had a great +/- (+22), and as a rookie, given the tiebreaker.
HM6: Joe Johnson - 13 points vs Burks 16, but more assists and rebounds.
HM7: Alec Burks: Simply playing in not getting injured should give him a mention. Just kidding. 16 points off the bench is a good contribution.


I think it's too much data to rank every player, every game.

I think either someone falls into MVP and HM awards, or they don't.

Going as deep as HM7 is too much. Maybe that's only applicable for 52 point wins.

I think only players who deserve MVP or HM should be awarded as such, for every game.
 

MHSL82

Well-Known Member
16,720
883
113
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Hoopla Cash
$ 500.92
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I think it's too much data to rank every player, every game.

I think either someone falls into MVP and HM awards, or they don't.

Going as deep as HM7 is too much. Maybe that's only applicable for 52 point wins.

I think only players who deserve MVP or HM should be awarded as such, for every game.

Thanks for your feedback. This is the way I stay interested. This is how I follow along. When my life gets busy, I will drop a few things unless it is interesting to me. Unfortunately, I know that it is not interesting to most people. I want to see an accumulative thing at the end of the year that seems as exact as possible. I used to do three MVPs and two Sixth Man's but I kept finding four MVPs and three sixth man's.

To clarify, really only one MVP or two who are arguable. But I had three people or four people I wanted to mention in some way. I am just taking this to the extreme.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Thanks for your feedback. This is the way I stay interested. This is how I follow along. When my life gets busy, I will drop a few things unless it is interesting to me. Unfortunately, I know that it is not interesting to most people. I want to see an accumulative thing at the end of the year that seems as exact as possible. I used to do three MVPs and two Sixth Man's but I kept finding four MVPs and three sixth man's.

To clarify, really only one MVP or two who are arguable. But I had three people or four people I wanted to mention in some way. I am just taking this to the extreme.

Thanks for explaining.

I didn't know you did this in the past, and felt too constrained with 3 MVPs and 2 6th mans.

It makes sense then as to why you are expanding it so much to this level.

What do you think about not having MVPs when it's a bad loss?

On the MLB postgame radio show, they have each of the 4 broadcasters pick MVPs. And they can't pick the same one. And they have to come from the local team.

It frustrates me to hear 4 players mentioned as MVPs when it's an obviously bad loss.

I think if they have to pick 4 MVPs for every game, then they have to pick some from the opposing team during a bad loss.

It's insulting to hear someone mentioned as a MVP after a bad loss, nonetheless 4 MVPs.

Or if they have to pick 4 MVPs, and can only pick the local team, then they should be allowed to pick the same as one of the other broadcasters.

Hence, for your system, I think it's fine then to mention as many people as you want to mention. I just think to be fair, then you should also mention what they did wrong during bad losses.

I think your example of how you mentioned a mistake by Favors, in the next post, is a balanced assessment.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Jazz vs. Timberwolves - Box Score - October 20, 2017 - ESPN

1. MVP1: Ricky Rubio - 19 points, 10 assists, and 5 rebounds? Yeah, that's MVP.
2. MVP2: Rodney Hood - 20 points and 4 assists.
3. HM3: Favors: Had a chance to be MVP with the game winner, but way off and then a turnover.
4. HM4: Gobert - Couldn't put him lower but more egg than ahh.
5. HM5: Joe Ingles - Dependable, but not as good as the Game Opener.
6. HM6: Sefolosha - Good contribution off the bench.
7. HM7: Udoh - Good defense - 3 blocks.

What does this mean?
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Also, I just realized your HM count started from # 3.

When I posted about possibly having too many rankings, I thought HM started from # 1.

So I thought there were 2 MVPs and 7 HMs, hence for 9 players being ranked. That's one reason why I thought ranking 9 players was too much.

With 7 players being ranked, that seems about right, in order to say something about the players that impacted the game.

I'm not sure if you can say something about 9 for every game. But 7 seems like a more useful number.
 

MHSL82

Well-Known Member
16,720
883
113
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Hoopla Cash
$ 500.92
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Thanks for explaining.

I didn't know you did this in the past, and felt too constrained with 3 MVPs and 2 6th mans.

It makes sense then as to why you are expanding it so much to this level.

What do you think about not having MVPs when it's a bad loss?

On the MLB postgame radio show, they have each of the 4 broadcasters pick MVPs. And they can't pick the same one. And they have to come from the local team.

It frustrates me to hear 4 players mentioned as MVPs when it's an obviously bad loss.

I think if they have to pick 4 MVPs for every game, then they have to pick some from the opposing team during a bad loss.

It's insulting to hear someone mentioned as a MVP after a bad loss, nonetheless 4 MVPs.

Or if they have to pick 4 MVPs, and can only pick the local team, then they should be allowed to pick the same as one of the other broadcasters.

Hence, for your system, I think it's fine then to mention as many people as you want to mention. I just think to be fair, then you should also mention what they did wrong during bad losses.

I think your example of how you mentioned a mistake by Favors, in the next post, is a balanced assessment.

I thought about starting at 5 points for a loss, so it would be:

1. MVP1 - 5 points
2. MVP2 - 4 points
3. HM3 - 2 points
4. HM4 - 1 points

I could even do:

1. MVP1 - 5 points
2. MVP2 - 4 points
3. HM3 - 3 points
4. HM4 - 2 points
5. HM5 - 1 point

But then I wanted to be consistent.

I thought the MVP1 and MVP2 could be close but should be clearly better than HM3. HM3 and HM4 be close, but HM5 clearly be the fifth wheel. So that's why I had the points staggered in the regular and hypothetical loss.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I thought about starting at 5 points for a loss, so it would be:

1. MVP1 - 5 points
2. MVP2 - 4 points
3. HM3 - 2 points
4. HM4 - 1 points

I could even do:

1. MVP1 - 5 points
2. MVP2 - 4 points
3. HM3 - 3 points
4. HM4 - 2 points
5. HM5 - 1 point

But then I wanted to be consistent.

I thought the MVP1 and MVP2 could be close but should be clearly better than HM3. HM3 and HM4 be close, but HM5 clearly be the fifth wheel. So that's why I had the points staggered in the regular and hypothetical loss.


I think I like it. Use the 5/4/2/1/0 if it's a bad loss.

Use the 5/4/3/2/1 if it's a good game or good win.

Maybe that wouldn't be consistent across 82 games, but it would be consistent within Wins and Losses.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Thunder vs. Jazz - Box Score - October 21, 2017 - ESPN

Difficult.

1. Rudy Gobert - Tempted to give Rubio the third in a row, but Ricky's 6 turnovers, poor shooting, and Rudy's 3 offensive rebounds are three strikes. Plus, I assume defensively Gobert is contributing more than his numbers.
2. Joe Ingles - Yeah, I know. It doesn't make sense to deliberate between Ricky and Rudy, but then give the second spot to someone else than the runner up. Oh well. Shot well, defended well.
3. Ricky Rubio - Still, 16 points and >5 assists and rebounds each is good.
4. Derrick Favors - Box Score check athalf suggested Favors contributed most to their halftime lead. Counts for something.
5. Donovan Mitchell - 6 assists! But mostly, Westbrook did poorly, was he Mitchell's guy?
6. Joe Johnson - 12 points off the bench and got rebounds and defenses
7. Alec Burks - Did more and shot better than Sefolosha.

It makes sense to me.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Thunder vs. Jazz - Box Score - October 21, 2017 - ESPN

Difficult.

1. Rudy Gobert - Tempted to give Rubio the third in a row, but Ricky's 6 turnovers, poor shooting, and Rudy's 3 offensive rebounds are three strikes. Plus, I assume defensively Gobert is contributing more than his numbers.
2. Joe Ingles - Yeah, I know. It doesn't make sense to deliberate between Ricky and Rudy, but then give the second spot to someone else than the runner up. Oh well. Shot well, defended well.
3. Ricky Rubio - Still, 16 points and >5 assists and rebounds each is good.
4. Derrick Favors - Box Score check athalf suggested Favors contributed most to their halftime lead. Counts for something.
5. Donovan Mitchell - 6 assists! But mostly, Westbrook did poorly, was he Mitchell's guy?
6. Joe Johnson - 12 points off the bench and got rebounds and defenses
7. Alec Burks - Did more and shot better than Sefolosha.


Favors lack of rebounding is worrysome.

At the end of the playoffs, I said Favors was about done being a good starting caliber player.

I didn't think his decline could only be explained by injuries.

He's shown some resurgence with his scoring, but 3 games in and he hasn't topped 4 rebounds in any of them. :doh:.

I like a lot of things about this year's lineup. But for this team to be as best as possible, it will need Favors to rebound a lot.
 

MHSL82

Well-Known Member
16,720
883
113
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Hoopla Cash
$ 500.92
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Favors lack of rebounding is worrysome.

At the end of the playoffs, I said Favors was about done being a good starting caliber player.

I didn't think his decline could only be explained by injuries.

He's shown some resurgence with his scoring, but 3 games in and he hasn't topped 4 rebounds in any of them. :doh:.

I like a lot of things about this year's lineup. But for this team to be as best as possible, it will need Favors to rebound a lot.

Agree. I need the big men to get rebounds and blocks. I need the point guards to get assists and steals. I would like the shooting guards to score. Small forwards should do a bit of everything and fill in everywhere else.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
Agree. I need the big men to get rebounds and blocks. I need the point guards to get assists and steals. I would like the shooting guards to score. Small forwards should do a bit of everything and fill in everywhere else.

The way the game is played now, everyone should rebound. Sometimes PGs have an easier time rebounding because they can use their speed to track down balls.

Guards are also in a better position to get long rebounds, which are increasing due to how many more long shots are attempted in the NBA now.

Gone are the days when someone can brush off a 2 or low 3 rebound per game average from a guard.

Steph Curry, for example, has averaged at least 4.3 rebounds every season except for twice, and 2 years ago had 5.4.

Another theory which I agree with, is that the more that guards can rebound, the faster the team can get into its offense. Hence why it's ok if some of Russell Westbrook's teammates boxed out in such a way so Westbrook could get the rebound, because ultimately that was better for the Thunder.

But bigs should still be rebounding a lot too, and Favors rebounding numbers are guard like right now.

As for blocked shots, it depends on how the person blocks the shot. A steal will always result in a change of possession. A block may not. If someone can block shots in such a way that his teammate or himself can get a rebound, then good. But others tend to block the ball out of bounds, which does not yield the change of possession.

There seems to be an increase in guards and other perimeter players blocking shots, which I think is more likely to be beneficial. Because a guard is not likely to block the ball out of bounds, at least.

Dwayne Wade and Eric Bledsoe started the trend of guards blocking shots (Wade blows everyone away for players 6-4 or under with 802 blocks; Stockton is surprisingly 10th with 315 blocks).

http://bkref.com/tiny/O6LfA

Personally if a ball comes a big's way on defense, I just want him to force the missed shot and get the rebound (unless the big is on the perimeter, in which anyone can get the rebound). It he forces the missed shot via blocked shot, fine, but it's not necessary.

But, I guess this thread is about box score watching and game MVPs. I guess blocked shots help there.

I'm also not as strong on offensive rebounds. The way I see it is that chances for defensive rebounds happen the most on a possession. Hence I want to see a lot of defensive rebounds. That doesn't mean I don't value offensive rebounds, but that I don't place as much extra value as others. Especially because an offensive rebound can come on one's own missed shot.

I remember a Ilgauskas possession when he missed 4 layups in a row, and kept getting his own rebound. That might be an extreme example in terms of number of missed shots in a row, but the point remains that offensive rebounds can come at the expense of one's own FG%.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
One of the coolest box scores I remember is Bonzi Wells having an 18 rebound game the 2nd game of a year against Houston.

TJ Ford, a 5'11" player, had 11 rebounds and 7 assists in his debut. That was also cool. (basketball-reference lists his height as 6'0 but I don't believe it).
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I remember an Ilgauskas possession when he missed 4 layups in a row, and kept getting his own rebound. That might be an extreme example in terms of number of missed shots in a row, but the point remains that offensive rebounds can come at the expense of one's own FG%.

Sigh. A long post, and it's still not perfect.

There's a grammatical mistake.

It should be "I remember an Ilguaskas possession".
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
NBA Power Rankings: Time to believe in the Magic?

18. Utah Jazz
2017-18 record: 3-3
Previous ranking: 11
rd-arrow.png


Finding quality shots in life after Hayward has challenged the Jazz, who rank 26th in offensive efficiency. The starting lineup of Rubio-Hood-Ingles-Favors-Gobert has been particularly unproductive with the ball, with a net rating of minus-11.3. But rookie Donovan Mitchell showed promise this week, with two big games, including a 22-point effort in a win over the Lakers on Saturday.
 

nuraman00

Well-Known Member
14,603
443
83
Joined
Sep 19, 2012
Hoopla Cash
$ 1,000.00
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
I wonder if Favors will ever earn MHSL82's MVP honor more than a few times this season. :(

I don't even want to post the Valentines pictures of Officer Sexual Favors. It's only funny if he's playing well.
 

MHSL82

Well-Known Member
16,720
883
113
Joined
Aug 6, 2011
Hoopla Cash
$ 500.92
Fav. Team #1
Fav. Team #2
Fav. Team #3
That's all I could get done now.

Here's where it stands after 10 games. I anticipate Mitchell rising and Jerebko being higher after I do the next 11 (12 including tonight).

Ricky Rubio: 85 (5)
Rudy Gobert: 75 (2)
Joe Ingles: 59
Donovan Mitchell: 57 (3)
Derrick Favors: 44
Rodney Hood: 34
Thabo Sefolosha: 19
Joe Johnson: 10
Alec Burks: 8
Jonas Jerebko
Epke Udoh: 2
 
Top