The question must be asked....

[Diesel]

Should the league MVP be an award that is choosen after the playoffs?

[DJlaysitup]

The way things seem to be working out this year, I would have to say yes. Of course that doesn't mean that a team has to go to the finals for their best player to contend for MVP.

[Diesel]

My point is that the Playoffs is the place where the stars of the game step up.

I am reminded of the year that David Robinson won the MVP and was CRUSHED in the playoffs by Hakeem Olajuwon. All the while the crowd chanted MVP.

I agree that a player doesn't have to go to the finals...

But it seems silly to have the MVP after the regular season when non-playoff people are not eligible for the distinction anyway?

[Lascar78]

MVP is a regular season award.

Finals MVP is for players who were able to win in the postseason.

I like the current system

[Diesel]

The finals MVP only pertains to the Finals.

I'm talking about expanding the MVP award til conference semifinals.

The point is a MVP is not determined when there's nothing to play for. The real MVP shows up when everything is on the line.

Let's say Kobe takes the Lakers past the Suns and Nash still has done a minimum effort in the games that count the most...

Is he still worthy to be considered League MVP.

After watching Hakeem destroy Malone and Robinson the year that Robinson won it, it made me say... why did they give this guy the MVP??

There will still be a conference MVP and a Finals MVP.. but the League MVP determined over the season is kinda weak if it doesn't take into consideration what happened when the big money games showed up.

[Lascar78]

well in that case have a season MVP, a playoff MVP and a final MVP

The MVP is a regular season award, I don't know what's so hard to understand.

If you include the playoffs, people will basically forget about the regular season because the playoffs are "newer" and more important. So it will basically become a playoff award.

All of the rewards are for regular season, so should the MVP be.

If not, are you going to add the first couple of rounds of playoffs for the rookie of the year? Most improved player? Sixth man of the year?

All of the yearly awards are regular season awards, I like it. Great play is rewarded by winning in the playoffs, and a title if you're the best. Finals MVP rewards the best Finals player, typically a champion.

I like the current season. I don't see the problem with saying that Nash was the most valuable player and meant the most to his team this regular season, even though they weren't able to do much that offseason.

[Diesel]

Most valuable.

When is most valuable really tested?

When you're beating the Warriors 87 to 40 and you decide that you want to try to get the triple double on a team that's not talented enough to play against yours.

OR

When your down 3-2 against Kobe and the Lakers and you have to work to get all your players to come back from that deficit.

Anybody can pile the stats on in the regular season. Hell if that's the case, Shareef should have been nominated for an MVP?

However, game time is the playoffs.

That being the case, maybe the regular season should only be a footnote. Seeing that only Playoff players can be considered for the MVP anyway.

None of the other awards measures a players value to the league so they should be reg. Season awards...

However, the MVP is the guy that you should want MOST. I don't want a guy who gets to the playoffs and can't perform.

[Lascar78]

yeah but it's understood that it's most valuable of the 2005-2006 regular season.

Like I said, get a MVP of the playoffs if you want, that's not what the MVP is about. If you want to push your reasoning to the extreme, the true MVP should be able to lead a team to the title, so the Finals MVP is the true MVP. Isn't winning a title what it's all about? Why stop at the playoffs? By your reasoning all that matters is finals MVP

[AHF]

I think Diesel is arguing that the award should be for the most valuable player for the entire 2005-06 season, not just for the regular season. He is trying to reframe the definition of the award and asking whether that would be an improvement on the existing regular season award.

[Diesel]

Not neccessarily.

I think the Finals MVP is not always the Most valuable player.

For instance, Shaq carried the Lakers past the Blazers, past the Spurs, Past the Kings, and Kobe showed up against the 76ers. Who is the real MVP?

I do believe that there should be a difference in the Finals and Conference finals MVP..

But there are players who put the blood sweat and tears into the games before during the quarterfinals and the semifinals.

I think that's where you need to redefine MVP.

Most teams take it easy during the season anyway. How many times have you heard a team say that we want to cruise to the playoffs and then the season starts...

My point is yes, you consider what they did in the season, but a higher weight should be given during the playoffs.

Moreover, a lot of emphasis has been placed on Regular Season MVP and hardly none on Playoffs and Finals MVP? There needs to be some clarity.

Players are made in the playoffs...

[Weez]

who says that they want to cruise till the playoffs?

[Lascar78]

that's why I'm saying if you want to include the playoffs, add a playoffs MVP

If you have a MVP that includes regular season and playoffs, it will end up being the playoffs anyhow because the playoffs are more important. If you want to have one that includes the regular season it has to be just the regular season

[Diesel]

This season — more than any before — is the perfect example of why the voting for NBA awards should not conclude until after the playoffs.

Game after game, month after month, the analysts, players and coaches drone on and on about how you can't tell if someone is really special until the playoffs.

Well, here we are, and, beginning Saturday, we'll find out the questions that have yet to be answered.

Let's start out West ...

Kobe Bryant led the Los Angeles Lakers to the seventh seed by smashing Lakers scoring records and leading his team to wins in their last five games — helping the Lakers avoid a first-round matchup with the San Antonio Spurs. The Lakers are (quietly) thrilled they'll be playing the Phoenix Suns. And here is the point, so to speak, with Steve Nash leading the Suns. Bryant and Nash — along with Cleveland's LeBron James and Chauncey Billups of the Detroit Pistons — are the top candidates for Most Valuable Player.

If this is how the pundits all want to decide on the MVP award, then why not wait until after the playoffs? We all know the Suns and Lakers overachieved because of Nash and Bryant, respectively. Maybe it's more about how Lamar Odom handles his matchup with the Suns' Shawn Marion, or if Kwame Brown can dominate Boris Diaw inside — but we will know more about the Bryant-Nash MVP debate after the first round of the playoffs.

You want to make it real? We'll know for sure just how much defensive energy and focus young Avery Johnson — in his first full season as coach of the Dallas Mavericks — has brought to that organization.

Oh, they'll have to get by the first round with Memphis, as the Mavs' Dirk Nowitzki and the Grizzlies' Pau Gasol duke it out to prove who is the best European power forward in the NBA (though Nowitzki no doubt is). The real question will come in the next round with the defending champion Spurs, as we find out how Johnson matches up with perennial coach of the year candidate Gregg Popovich.

But that's assuming a lot. That's assuming the Spurs roll through the Sacramento Kings. And it's hard to tell how presumptuous that really is. After a horrid and surprising 18-24 start, the Kings traded Peja Stojakovic for Ron Artest, and the volatile Artest has led them to a 26-14 finish — including nine wins in their last 11 games down the stretch. But for all this chatter about the vulnerability of the Spurs and the relatively mediocre season for Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili, the Spurs did set a franchise record with 63 wins.

Will Tony Parker, Tim Duncan and Co. roll through the West like they did last season? (Jesse D. Garrabrant/NBAE / Getty Images)

That leads us to the expectations of an exceptional second-round showdown between the Spurs and Mavs. And that takes us to the one first-round meeting in the West that has upset written all over it, with the Northwest Division champion Denver Nuggets meeting the upstart Los Angeles Clippers.

Indeed, the Clippers earned the sixth seed with 47 wins — the second most in franchise history, trailing only the 49 wins during the 1974-75 season, when they were the Buffalo Braves and coached by Jack Ramsay.

Elton Brand has been touted as an MVP candidate all season, despite the obvious difference being the addition of Sam Cassell that has altered the previously inevitable losing pattern of the team. But how real are they? Although they have not won a playoff series since 1976, they have homecourt advantage over the injury-crippled Nuggets (44-38).

Meanwhile, the Nuggets have been carried all season by third-year forward Carmelo Anthony, with Nene out for the season, while Kenyon Martin and Marcus Camby have been in and out of the lineup for George Karl. Nonetheless, this was the first division title for Denver since 1988, and the Nuggets have not won a playoff series since 1994 — ironically when, as the eighth seed, they upset Karl's top-seeded Seattle Sonics. The historical significance for both franchises promises plenty of drama here.

Moving East

This is the next step for 21-year-old LeBron James and the Cleveland Cavaliers. They have not been in the playoffs since 1998, and with the fourth seed, they have the homecourt advantage against the Washington Wizards. But the Wizards won a playoff series last season, have an emerging superstar of their own in Gilbert Arenas and won the season series 3-1.

Every step of the way, the expectations have been enormous for James, and stunningly, he has answered in his three seasons. Not only is this a huge series for James but for his sidekick Larry Hughes, who missed more than half of the season with a broken finger; Hughes has a chance to showcase the value of the more than $60 million free agent contract he signed by helping eliminate his former teammates.

But that's just the start. What about the disappointing Indiana Pacers meeting the New Jersey Nets, those guys who suddenly have high expectations? Until the last 10 days, the Pacers had begun to look as if they could slide out of the playoffs altogether, only to work their way back to .500. They won two of three with the Nets this season — a Nets team that had winning streaks of 14 and 10 games and were 25-33 the rest of the season. Like the Nuggets and Clippers in the West, this is the series that smells like an upset.

Shaq and D-Wade hope the Bulls don't give them too much trouble on the perimeter. (Victor Baldizon/NBAE / Getty Images)

Another matchup that is gaining momentum as scary for a high seed is what the Miami Heat have waiting from them with the Chicago Bulls. The Bulls won 12 of their last 14 games — including the final six — to leapfrog from being completely out of the playoff picture to the seventh seed.

Scott Skiles has the Bulls playing great defense as usual, but more importantly, they run the high pick-and-roll to perfection — something that is an Achilles' heel for the Heat because it pulls Shaquille O'Neal out of the post.

Granted, with Heat star Dwyane Wade playing in his hometown on the road and adoring fans at home, it's hard to fathom the Bulls actually winning this series. Nonetheless, the Heat — picked to win the title by many pundits before the season — have been a conundrum all season with their hot and cold play. This series could be a lot more interesting than many people may think.

Lastly, we have the Detroit Pistons, who aren't likely to have anything to worry about in the first round with the Milwaukee Bucks. Granted, Bucks All-Star Michael Redd sure looks ready for prime time, but the only problem the Pistons may have is being too full of themselves. The Pistons set a franchise record with 64 wins, have the top seed throughout the playoffs and are seeking their second NBA title in three seasons )after losing to the Spurs in seven games in last year's finals).

This is just a taste of what could happen as the 2006 playoffs unfold — and to think, we've got two whole months to go for the ultimate NBA award.

Veteran NBA writer Mike Kahn is a frequent contributor to FOXSports.com.

[drzachary]

Quote:

---

that's why I'm saying if you want to include the playoffs, add a playoffs MVP

If you have a MVP that includes regular season and playoffs, it will end up being the playoffs anyhow because the playoffs are more important. If you want to have one that includes the regular season it has to be just the regular season

---

On a related note, I'd like to see the regular season become more important again (in not just basketball, but all sports, especially baseball.) Having so many teams in the playoffs really makes the regular season less important in the end. Again, this is primarily in baseball, where the wildcard team is the winner the majority of the time.

[Lascar78]

well the thing is it does matter a lot in the NBA because the team with more wins gets home court advantage, and in game 7s the home team wins 75% of the time. I like the current system. The only thing I don't like is the automatic top 3 seeding for division winners but it looks like they're going to adress that.

The regular season sure seems to matter for teams like us...

[Diesel]

I think in Baseball and Football, that's 100% correct.

But only 16 out of 30 teams make it to the NBA Playoffs. I think it's a nice number to work with.

I do believe however, that the NBA draft lottery should be limited to the worse 5 teams.

[Diesel]

What wrong with the automatic seeding??

I like it.

It gives identity to the division.

Otherwise, there should be NO divisions just the Eastern and Western conference and the games should be configured differently.

Maybe have a 90 game schedule...

Divisional teams get 4 games.

Cross divisional teams get 2 games.

Either that or drop it down to a 75 game season..

Divisonal teams get 3 games.

Cross divisional teams get 2 games.

[Lascar78]

Personally I think the division winners should automatically be in the playoffs, but seeding by record.

Also the point of the division is still that you play those teams more often than anyone else

You don't see anything wrong with the seeding out west this year?

San Antonio won a franchise high 63 games, and their reward is to play a 60 win team in the second round? That's crazy.

I think Stern has said that next year it will be the top 3 division winners + the next best team are all top 4 seeds, but seeded by record.

So this year it would be

1)SA

2)DAL

3)PHX

4)DEN

5)MEM

6)LAC

7)LAL

8)SAC

So even then Denver would have the 4 seed despite the worst record of any western playoff team, but at least the top 2 don't meet until conference finals. That would be significantly better at least

[Diesel]

About Divisions.

You play the teams in your Divison 4 times... vs. 2 and 3 ...

If you have a tough division, then you're record is not going to be as good... or possibly not going to be as good.

That is to say that divison winners should be rewarded...

What sense does it make to have 5 playoff teams...

let's say:

63 game winner. - Division winner A

64 game winner. - Division winner B

60 game winner. - Division A.

51 games - Division C

47 games Division C

46 games Division C.

40 games Division B.

38 games Division A.

Now if this were the playoff scheme.

How can you penalize the Division C winner. He comes from a Much stronger conference than Divison A or B.

You play 16 division games.

Both San Antonio and Dallas were 13-3 in division.

That tells me that there is no parity in that division. Whereas both Phoenix (2 seed) and SacTown (8 seed) were 10-6 in divisional play.