knickscity wrote:3G4G wrote:knickscity wrote:3G4G wrote:knickscity wrote:tkf wrote:knickscity wrote:Rose dont win without the record....think otherwise if you want.
I don't think he said that.. he said it was a compilation... record plays a part, but the bulls didn't need the best record... in other words you could easily say... without his stats he doesn't win... think otherwise if you want as well..
His stats actually weren't that good which is why there was alot of debate on that.
Did you even look at the NBA link that I posted Rose did you see what company he was in, IN NBA HISTORY...7th player in History to post those numbers and you say his stats weren't that good...SHEESH!
Sure i did, and no they weren't, he put up alot of numbers but he wasn't efficient at all.I'm amazed you're still trying to debate something so damn simple.
Shaq has put up some ridiculous numbers as well and only has one MVP, so stats aren't always a factor.
I've always said it's many variables, which determine an MVP although some yrs very few and far in between their might be an edge/angle some voters are looking at. Sure the record helped Rose, Nash making his teammates better helped him, Kidd before he smacked his wife record turnaround would have helped him, but Rose...Rose to the Top early because of the absence of Noah and Boozer while they were winning...
Even in the article I posted to start the thread ESPN is focusing on Lebron and Durant's HISTORICAL seasons more so than record(record is a helper) although 1 of them has the 4rth best record in the NBA.
You're focused on record, I'm not, I only stated that's the only way melo would have a chance meaning an EXCEPTION.You think there is a magical formula when there isn't.
I don't think it's a magical formula I believe many things are thrown into the pot. Sometimes the league wants to favor a player in advance to help market or carry the league. I feel that was another factor in Rose's case, the league wanted to market him badly. He's the "GOOD GUY" of the league
