National Basketball Association

The illogical NBA Finals MVP vote

Published Jun. 26, 2015 9:12 a.m. ET

foxsports

By Marty Gitlin

I often advise my teenage kids on a variety of issues in their lives. They listen … sometimes. They put my advice into practice far less.

Anyway, one nugget I often pass along is that they should always think with their brains, not with their emotions. Consider every challenge you meet logically, I tell them. The fairest and best solution will follow.

Now if I can only convince those who vote on sports awards to take the same mental approach. The trend toward selecting the Most Valuable Player only from playoff teams in the regular season and championships clubs in the finals would be shunned by Dr. Spock as illogical. It is shunned by yours truly as just plain stupid.

The latest example was probably the most ridiculous in history. That was the vote that declared Golden State forward Andre Iguodala the NBA Finals MVP over Cavaliers superstar LeBron James, who was forced to pretty much go it alone against the Warriors. Let’s examine the numbers and the achievements of the two players in the series to uncover the injustice.

James averaged 35.8 points, 13.3 rebounds, and 8.8 assists per game. Iguodala posted a slash line of 16.3/5.8/.4.0. No comparison. And what did Iguodala do defensively? He covered James, the guy that nearly averaged a triple-double.

This is not to claim Iguodala performed poorly. His insertion into the starting lineup proved to be the turning point in the series because it allowed Golden State to go small. But it wasn’t Iguodala that made the most significant difference. Rather, it was the configuration against which a Cleveland team depleted by injury and dealing with poor performances from its guards could not match up.

James was practically playing one-on-five offensively. He was forced to remain in action to exhaustion. He sat just 23 total minutes in the six-game series, which included two overtime periods. Not one teammate performed well offensively aside from very range-limited center Timofey Mozgov. Streaky J.R. Smith wasn’t hitting. Iman Shumpert was playing through a bad shoulder to the point of being an offensive liability. And let’s not forget that the Big Three had been shrunk to the Big One by injury—both Kyrie Irving and Kevin Love were out pretty much the entire way.

Those obstacles made it virtually impossible for the Cavaliers to win; their early 2–1 advantage a testament to James’ greatness. If LeBron could not win MVP for his performance in the Finals, no player on a losing team is any longer capable of doing so.

James declared before Game 6 that he did not want the award if his team did not win the title. That does not mean he shouldn’t have won it. The MVP is the MVP whether he embraces it or not.

And it’s not just the NBA Finals. The entire voting world in sports seems to have come to the conclusion that one cannot be the Most Valuable Player or win other awards if not on a playoff or championship team. But why? Brilliant third baseman Ernie Banks won the National League Most Valuable Player award on losing Cubs teams in both 1958 and 1959. Lefty Steve Carlton snagged NL Cy Young Award honors in 1972 for a Phillies bunch that stumbled to a 59–97 record.

Their heroics despite a lack of talent surrounding them proved to strengthen their candidacies rather than weaken them. Now the argument revolves around the vague notion of “making your teammates better.” It doesn’t work that way. Banks could not make his pitchers throw strikes. Carlton could not prevent his bat-wielding teammates from striking out. James could not stop J.R. Smith from clanking three-pointers off the rim.

Let’s stretch the bounds of reality to make a point. Say there is an NBA team with a starting lineup consisting of LeBron James, Joe Biden, Weird Al Yankovic, Hillary Clinton, and your uncle Pete. That team wins 25 games (I never claimed this was realistic). That is 25 more games than it would have won without James, but it is the worst record in the league.

Should James win MVP in that scenario? Absolutely.

The award should go to the player whose performance on the season creates more victories for his team than anyone else. The same holds true for Manager (or Coach) of the Year. If a candidate is judged by his performance and that of his players to have increased the team win total by more than what any of his peers accomplish, he should win the award. If that means taking 25-win talent in the NBA or 60-win talent in Major League Baseball to a .500 record, so be it.

Some have suggested that a Player of the Year award should be created to supplement the Most Valuable Player. The argument is that they are two different things.

Bull.

They are one in the same. Only the perceptions have changed. They have changed because the voters have time and again dismissed what I have been telling my kids for years. And that is to always think logically.

More from The Sports Post: