



Part of the tremendous appeal and attraction of the NBA is the one-on-one game embedded within the team game. All NBA fans have at least once made a comparison between players of the same era, like Kobe Bryant vs. LeBron James , or across eras, like Kobe Bryant vs. Michael Jordan . Often these comparisons are what drive individual NBA players to true greatness because one title simply is not enough when you are compared to players with five or six. One MVP award is not enough when Kareem Abdul-Jabbar and MJ own more than just a few.





most valuable player. In determining a player’s greatness, often MVP awards are the most legitimate and withstanding measures of comparisons. Rule changes and paces of play distort statistics from the early days of the NBA to the modern era. Nobody will ever again average 50 points in a season like Wilt Chamberlain did in the 1961-62 season. But being the most valuable player of a year means that, for an entire season, you were the best of the best. This is pivotal in comparisons. There is something to be said for being named the. In determining a player’s greatness, often MVP awards are the most legitimate and withstanding measures of comparisons. Rule changes and paces of play distort statistics from the early days of the NBA to the modern era. Nobody will ever again average 50 points in a season like Wilt Chamberlain did in the 1961-62 season. But being the most valuable player of a year means that, for an entire season, you were the best of the best. This is pivotal in comparisons.





The big question is which more important: a regular season MVP award or a Finals MVP award?





Great teams vs. great individual players





An NBA Finals MVP solidifies a player’s success on the stage where the pressure is greatest to perform and stars either shine or they choke. Although players before 1969 are at a disadvantage for comparison, the majority of the greatest NBA players of all time hit the NBA hardwood after the end of the 60s so the Finals MVP award is far from obsolete in comparing cross-generation legacies.





and the scoring title. Despite that unparalleled individual success, the Chicago Bulls finished the regular season with the seventh best record in the league and third in the Eastern conference. In the playoffs, MJ’s Bulls were eliminated by Isiah Thomas and the Bad Boy Pistons in five games where the average margin of defeat was almost 15 points a game. Finals MVPs fail when you consider that great teams beat great individual players in the post-season. Case in point: Michael Jordan during the 1987-88 NBA season. That year, Jordan won the regular season MVP award, All-Star game MVP award, Defensive Player of the Year award,thescoring title. Despite that unparalleled individual success, the Chicago Bulls finished the regular season with the seventh best record in the league and third in the Eastern conference. In the playoffs, MJ’s Bulls were eliminated by Isiah Thomas and the Bad Boy Pistons in five games where the average margin of defeat was almost 15 points a game.





Michael Jordan, in all of his individual greatness, stood no chance against a powerhouse of a team.





One season means more than one series





It sounds too simple to be true but that doesn’t make it any less valid. The NBA season is a marathon—not the sprint that it may appear if you only look at the final best-of-seven series. Take the 2001 Lakers, for example. Shaq ran away with Finals MVP honors, but if you look at the rest of the NBA season, there’s no way that he was the sole reason that the Lakers nearly swept the Philadelphia 76ers.





FINALS Points Rebounds Assists Steals FG % FT % O’Neal 33.0 15.8 4.8 0.4 .573 .513 Bryant 24.6 7.8 5.8 1.4 .415 .842





PLAYOFFS Points Rebounds Assists Steals FG % FT % O’Neal 30.4 15.4 3.2 0.4 .555 .525 Bryant 29.4 7.3 6.1 1.6 .469 .821





REGULAR Points Rebounds Assists Steals FG % FT % O’Neal 28.7 12.7 3.7 0.6 .572 .513 Bryant 28.5 5.9 5.0 1.7 .464 .853





two of the best scorers in the league and it was something more uniquely unstoppable than any duo or trio since because it was a formidable inside-outside combination of superstars. Shaq definitely earned those Finals MVP honors but the numbers show that clearly Kobe Bryant was a valuable contributor to their success and a major reason that the Lakers even had the opportunity to win the 2001 NBA Finals. Those Lakers hadof the best scorers in the league and it was something more uniquely unstoppable than any duo or trio since because it was a formidable inside-outside combination of superstars.





singularly most important to his team was not even on the winning side of the 2001 NBA Finals. Allen Iverson put up 31.1 points per game that year and the second highest scorer, the ever-intimidating Theo Ratcliff, put up 12.4 a game. The Lakers were tough to beat because they could score from multiple angles but with the Sixers, you knew who you needed to stop in order to win. Even so, AI still managed to power his team through three playoff teams. In fact, you could argue that the player who wasmost important to his team was not even on the winning side of the 2001 NBA Finals. Allen Iverson put up 31.1 points per game that year and the second highest scorer, the ever-intimidating Theo Ratcliff, put up 12.4 a game. The Lakers were tough to beat because they could score from multiple angles but with the Sixers, you knew who you needed to stop in order to win. Even so, AImanaged to power his team through three playoff teams.





Iverson, the 2001 regular season MVP, carried his team as an individual more than Shaq, the 2001 Finals MVP, carried the eventual champions.





pair of future Hall of Famers in Tony Parker and Tim Duncan, as well as a defensive specialist (Bruce Bowen) and someone who would be the 2008 Sixth Man of the Year (Manu Ginobili). Another prime example of this disparity in singular contribution is the 2007 Finals. LeBron James carried the Cleveland Cavaliers single-handedly to the Finals but got demolished by aof future Hall of Famers in Tony Parker and Tim Duncan, as well as a defensive specialist (Bruce Bowen) and someone who would be the 2008 Sixth Man of the Year (Manu Ginobili).





as an individual that he was able to take the Cavs as far as he did. If you put Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Kobe Bryant, or Shaquille O’Neal on those Cavs teams by themselves, there is no way that they have the success that LeBron did. And let’s not forget that both the '07 Spurs and the '01 Lakers had Hall of Fame coaches in Gregg Popovich and Phil Jackson. LeBron and the '07 Cavs had Mike Brown. It's blasphemous that this series is counted against LeBron’s legacy. He took a team to the Finals with a bunch of barely-average players and lost to a seasoned group of eventual Hall of Famers. If anything, I would argue it says great things about LeBronthat he was able to take the Cavs as far as he did. If you put Tim Duncan, Tony Parker, Kobe Bryant, or Shaquille O’Neal on those Cavs teams by themselves, there is no way that they have the success that LeBron did. And let’s not forget that both the '07 Spurs and the '01 Lakers had Hall of Fame coaches in Gregg Popovich and Phil Jackson. LeBron and the '07 Cavs had Mike Brown.





Even though Tony Parker took home Finals MVP honors in 2007, he would not have been in that situation without The Big Fundamental, whose overall regular season and playoff numbers were more impressive than Parker’s.





FINALS Points Rebounds Assists Steals FG % FT % Duncan 18.3 11.5 3.8 1.25 .446 .625 Parker 24.5 5.0 3.3 0.75 .568 .526





PLAYOFFS Points Rebounds Assists Steals FG % FT % Duncan 22.2 11.5 3.3 0.7 .521 .644 Parker 20.8 3.4 5.8 1.1 .480 .679

REGULAR Points Rebounds Assists Steals FG % FT % WS Duncan 20.0 10.6 3.4 0.8 .546 .637 13.0 Parker 18.6 3.2 5.5 1.1 .520 .783 9.6





team won the Finals in 2001 and 2007, but the best player in those series The betterwon the Finals in 2001 and 2007, but the best player in those series did not get a ring





that valuable considering the Cavaliers didn’t even win a game? In contrast, every regular season MVP award is earned over the course of the season. While there can certainly be some healthy debate as to whether or not somebody should have won an MVP, there is no doubt that the consistency of a regular season MVP winner is present. As such, when comparing great players, MVPs are important because they prove durability for the players who won them. Moreover, the mismatches that occur in some NBA Finals are also worth taking into account. Sticking with those 2007 Finals, was Tony Parker’s Finals MVP reallyvaluable considering the Cavaliers didn’t even win a game? In contrast, every regular season MVP award is earned over the course of the season. While there can certainly be some healthy debate as to whether or not somebody should have won an MVP, there is no doubt that the consistency of a regular season MVP winner is present. As such, when comparing great players, MVPs are important because they prove durability for the players who won them.





---------------------



