Comments on: The Coase Corollary

By: Caleb

Caleb — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:38:17 +0000

This is exactly why we need to step up our defense. I know you can’t press and trep the whole game without wearing everyone out… but when our 2nd unit started putting the pressure on the Blazers the other night? That was some of the best defense the Hornets have played thus far this year… and it worked! I think we need to do that more, especially when the 2nd unit comes in… we need see a bench that comes in and brings out the lockdown D, forcing bad shots and turnovers.

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:08:18 +0000

I see what you guys are saying, but I seriously believe there are no defining characteristics (more akin to mW’s belief on the prioritization). The year Dirk won, yes. He was the best player on the best team. If you took him off the team, however, the Mavericks would have still destroyed. They were just that good that year. I don’t care what anybody says about Golden State. The Mavericks were just cruising that year. Also Jason Kidd should have won in 2002. Just have to say that.

Unfortunately, with Chris Paul, he is our best player on our team, and we run everything through him. Without him, we’re no longer a force. Similar with LeBron, but definitely not with Shobe. Their team is so capable (credit their bench for developing so quickly mid last season) that he could rest until the playoffs and they’d still be a playoff lock.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 03:41:29 +0000

Just because people voted for the wrong person last year doesn’t mean there are no defining characteristics, it is most valuable player and anyone who speaks the english language understands that that means the player who if removed would make the team the most useless. The lakers can’t be mentioned for having such a great bench and then say they need bryant, I understand James being up there but I’m sick of a team of guys who once lead their respective teams(Odom, Pau) being mentioned as needing bryant blah blah. There are lots of players out there who are good on crappy teams and without Paul to create the offense and encourage his teammates to better themselves they would not have made the playoffs last year.

By: mW

mW — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 01:54:08 +0000

I think is a combination of things. You have to have excellent stats, obviously. You have to be pulling your team to victory, and you have to be a good guy. Stephen Jackson could have scored 80 points a game the year of the Brawl and he wouldn’t have gotten it. It’s also historical, like it or not. Kobe had to earn a few years before he could get real consideration. So did Nash. So did Iverson. For this reason, CP might have to wait another year, but Lebron is “ripe”. I see also that you need to be on a winner. You shouldn’t get MVP consideration for being Ricky Davis. I think this has been the other knock on Lebron. Sure he’s on a playoff team, but a mediocre one, just like most of the East. My big gripe was when so many people last year thought the Lakers having one or two more wins (##1 and 2 seeds) meant he deserved it over CP.

I think the criteria is about the same for most people, they just put greather prioritization on certain of those criteria, and this is where the disagreement comes from.

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 00:25:13 +0000

Remember Michael, there’s no defining term for ‘MVP’ anymore. If it’s highest stats, it’s always going to be Bron Bron. If it’s most valuable, it’s CP3. If it’s best player on the best team, it’s Shobe. The award’s characteristic is transient, and solely dependent on some form of self-validity and media hype.

By: ticktock6

ticktock6 — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 22:56:43 +0000

Besides, we have seen the ROY, and it’s Rudy Fernandez.

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 22:10:47 +0000

Okay so how does the guy at nba.com who writes the mvp race article keep his job, so OJ Mayo is first in rookie of the year ahead of Derrick Rose so how is it that Rose is even mentioned as an MVP candidate on that side of things. Also for the lakers bryant has been one of their worst starters so far this season and his name is second now…..honestly wouldn’t it be the best player on that team. Where do they find these guys to base MVP judgements on jersey sales or merchandise because right now it’s between the spokesman for sprite and…..well whatever the hell kobes name is on(tampons or something who knows).

By: mW

mW — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:43:25 +0000

@ Michael, definitely, the NBA is the league of conspiracies. I think that there is a definite possibility of what you’re saying is true. But I also want to make clear that what I’ve proposed above is distinct from those kind of targeted assessments. I think it’s just a general approach to calling games that favors “defensive” teams or even players.

That said, the “Stern Button” is real question on a lot of fans’ minds. I guess there’s no ad revenue and end product purchasers in the big markets. But, the NBA should encourage small markets, not look to pass them over for the bigger ones. I mean a lot of those “smaller” cities turn out great teams, and have even greater fans. Look at the Green Bay franchise in football, one of the most fervent fan bases in sports. How is that not good for everyone in the NFL? On the other hand, look at Kansas City in baseball. They just can’t hold on to any good player they draft because he’ll go to a big market team with no salary cap. In the NBA, with both a salary and luxury cap, there’s no reason any given market can’t succeed. I think the goal of the NBA at large should be on making sure every team is successful and legitimately has a chance every year. For example, they shouldn’t be nosing into stadium deals and telling cities they might lose their franchise (a la Seattle).

But that’s just me.

By: Michael

Michael — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 08:22:28 +0000

I still find it a slight coincidence that stern was talking about how great a lakers celtics showdown would be and then all of a sudden the right teams lost last year making la number one in the west to go with number one in the east boston, the hornets were screwed out of two games with calls which let us slide to second it would not surprise me if they fixed those games for some sort of marketing strategy

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 17:36:27 +0000

Certainly the league will address bad calls (as I would hope they did), but if they neglect to call a slight off-ball hinderance (aking to football’s past interference), I seriously doubt they would hold that against the referees. My friend played competitively in high school and the coach deliberately taught to be underhandedly dirty, pulling jerseys and the like. And if you can get away with it, you don’t change much transitioning to the league. It’s prominent, but due to the business of the league, it would severely slow the game down and also force the game to become too structured; both detriments to the game’s entertainment. Plus nobody cares about whether Ilgauskasis being held; they’re all paying attention to LeBron. I feel no-calls are probably a bigger problem than actual calls.

Nice read too Niall. It reminds me of the Steelers’ Hines Ward getting fined this year for his brutal blocks. In-game no calls, and nothing dirty with replay, but it involved some strong blocks. There was no explanation for his post-game fine, which is something that article addresses: the constant need to explain the violation committed by the player. I feel the players are justified for feeling entitled to the right as well, but always envisioned the player just yelling ‘#^!@’ instead of actually demanding an explanation.