MVP: Kevin Garnett
All Star MVP: Tracy McGrady
Finals MVP: Tim Duncan
Defensive Player of the Year: Josh Smith
Scoring Champ: Kobe Bryant
Rookie Of The Year: Kevin Durant

All of my picks are pretty safe the way they can happen. Kevin Garnett playing in the Celtics offense around Paul Pierce in Ray Allen, as well as seeing Rajon Rondo anchor the offense, and last but not least standing as another big beside Kendrick Perkins in the starting lineup sounds pretty nice. I still think Toronto has a great shot at winning the Atlantic, and I believe they will (not going to debate this here, I will however explain my prediction in future), but we are talking about the Most Valuable Player of the regular season and Garnett has the credentials and/OR could at least build on them this season to earn it.

For the NBA Finals this season a lot of people are going with the more sexier pick in the Dallas Mavericks or the Phoenix Suns. While I’m standing biased, but bias backed with facts, I’m shielding my pick with Tim Duncan leading the Spurs to their first ever consecutive titles streak. They have never accomplished that before, but I believe it’s time to shut the critics up and force them to say that the Spurs are a dynasty, even though they already are one now.

As for the Josh Smith pick, if you have never watched this cat play then you need to watch some film of his defensive abilities. He plays hard and gets after the ball; he’s fast which gives him a leverage to keep up with the offender. Going to the Kobe Bryant pick for scoring: isn’t that safe? Who would be more safe than that? I still think he will be in a Los Angeles Lakers uniform for the entire season, and believe in a lot of scoring, as usual, by the man.

Last but not least, a seemingly other “safe pick.” Without seeing Greg Oden in action this season, at least we’ll be able to watch Kevin Durant. However, there are other rookies that could snatch this away such as Al Thornton, Corey Brewer, and a shocker in Mike Conley.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “Troy’s NBA Award projections

  1. You’re presuming no NBA:

    rape charges
    sexual battery
    spousal abuse
    drunk driving arrrest
    meth amphetamine bust
    steroid disclosures (none so far, yet all are doped daily)
    more Nike scandal (doping, dog fighting, out-of-wedlock kid lawsuits)

  2. The Spurs are already a dynasty? Only if we dumb-down the definition of what that is. The Russell-led Celtics, winning 8 in a row, and 11 out of 13, are obviously a dynasty. The Yankees with their incredible runs, certainly fit the bill. But how can one use the rarified air of “dynasty”, implying true dominance over the competition for a sustained period, on a team whose 4 in 9 claim means there were more years in that “dynastic stretch”, 5, that they didn’t win the Championship than years that they did? And in those 5 non-Championship years, was another team, the Lakers, that won 3 in a row themselves.

    No other dynasty has had more years of non-winning than winning and had another team within that timeframe winning 3 titles in a row. This does not at all mean the Spurs are not a very good team. But reaching back to the strike-shortened title of ’99 to connect this current iteration of the Spurs is a bit of stretch. Duncan is obviously the only player that connects the two, and one player does not make a dynasty. Skipping past 3 straight titles by he Lakers from ’00-02, to connect the present 3 out of 5 Spurs to attempt to make it sound more impressive that they won 4 titles in 9 seasons is dubious at best. It just does not fit the definition of dominance by one team over a protracted period of time, when there are more non-title years than title years, and a chief rival managed to win 3 in a row during that stretch. This simply does not match the previous teams that established the concept of dynasty in the first place. If they win this year, taking out the ’99 strike-shortened title season, we can begin to make those claims. But if they don’t, they will never even have won 2 in a row during their run, while another team managed to win 3 straight during that same period of time. No, not a dynasty, merely a very good team who came out on top frequently, but not even a majority of the time.

  3. I don’t quite understand Peter’s response, but I assume it’s a bad joke.

    I like your picks, but I’m not going with Garnett for MVP. I think he’ll get penalized by having other scorers on his team. Now, if the Celtics win 60 games that’ll be a different story.

  4. While you make SOME good and valid points, I respectfully disagree. Dynasty has several user-defined terms tagged to it. You have your own, which is shared by many, as you made that exist in your comment. I, however, like a more broadened view for “dynasty.” Championships do come into effect, and how in the world could they not? However, did you forget about how well the Spurs played even in the years they didn’t win the title, even after all the ridicule from the media and those ignorant fans who touted them as “old”, “boring”, and for 2007 being most recently, “dirty”? Let’s take a look at how many times they won 50 or more games, shall we?:

    1999-2000: 53 games won
    2000-2001: 58
    2001-2002: 58
    2003-2004: 57
    2005-2006: 63

    I can prognosticate a reply, which I usually get from people refuting the Spurs argument, that will say “oh, the regular season doesn’t matter, Troy, what they did in the playoffs was completely defaced by a better team.” Well, the regular season does matter or else you wouldn’t see some teams in the playoffs (even though the playoff system is flawed having half the league in the freakin’ postseason, the Spurs are ALWAYS in the top 1-3 teams in the NBA every year, so don’t give me any of that “weak team BS”.)

    In 2000-2001, the Los Angeles Lakers were the most dominant team in the league in their respective league’s playoffs. If anything should be noted in any sport is the fact you can’t stop a team that’s destined. Look at the 2006 St. Louis Cardinals. The so-far-so-good 2007 Colorado Rockies. Now, look at the ’00-’01 Los Angeles Lakers who were 11-0 going into the NBA Finals. The Spurs were an inferior team, the Lakers were building on their impending dynasty. How were the Spurs are going to stop a team that swept their previous two rounds? They couldn’t. The Sixers even struggled to win the first game of the NBA Finals, having to ‘pull one out’ in overtime in game one. The rest of the series was pure domination by the Los Angeles Lakers, back-to-back champs. 58 wins for the Spurs; damn good season I say

    In 2001-2002, reminiscent of the year before, ran into the Los Angeles Lakers. The Lakers were still, the superior team, and still destined to win. The Spurs picked up one win, but it didn’t matter anyway; the better team defaced them. Five games to one. You can’t beat that. Another 58-win season for the San Antonio Spurs; another damn good season. They just ran into the eventual NBA champs who were coincidentally 3-peating.

    In 2003-2004, the Spurs saw 57 wins. While at times streaky, Duncan had some knee problems and still played through them. They ran into the Lakers in the postseason as the previous year the Spurs ran all over them in six games and went on to become the champions. The Spurs took a 2-0 series lead. ESPN covered that story like nothin’. The Spurs were riding a 17-game winning streak. However, the Spurs had a tough time shooting and shot a law field goal percentage the next two games as Los Angeles knotted up the series at 2-2. Game 5; the Spurs were down 73-71. Time expiring, Tim Duncan, while being draped by Shaquille O’Neal, popped a 3-pointer in his face while falling down. Looked like the series was gonna be getting serious for game 6 in San Antonio’s favor. And yeah, yeah, Derek Fisher..0.4 seconds..fade-away..boom. Over. Good night. Goodbye all motivation and anything to be excited about for game 6 as the Lakers dance to the NBA Finals and eventually lose to the Detroit Pistons.

    2005-2006: the Spurs saw its team reach 63 wins. They took on their rivals, the Dallas Mavericks in the semi-conf. finals. The Spurs took the first game. However, Dallas dominated the next 3. The Spurs, not giving up, stole two games in a row as they were going down to the wire. In game 7, I sat in my room and watched. Glad to see the Spurs getting ready to advance to the Western Conference Finals after Manu Ginobili hit a 3 with about 5-6 seconds left. I then had my mood dampened when Dirk Nowitzki, on the other end of the court, hit a shot under the basket while being fouled by Manu Ginobili. And one. Bittersweet. OT hits, and the Spurs can’t find a rhythm. Jason Terry goozes on the Spurs defense and for the most part along with one or two of Dirk’s fadeaways in the post led the Mavs to victory, to the WCF in a 4-2 victory over the Suns, a 2-0 lead to the Mavericks in the NBA Finals before losing the series 4-2 in close games that some were decided by Dwyane Wade’s free throw shooting and well Dirk Nowitzki’s and his failed shooting at the charity stripe, too.

    Do you see a pattern there? Every year the Spurs failed to reach the NBA Finals the past 8 seasons were years where the Spurs lost to a team that went to the NBA Finals and won at least a game in the Finals to show for it. Keep in mind that the Spurs also in the first 3 years without that coveted and precious second title lost to the 3-peat Lakers, who won the title. In 2004 during that game 5 vs. the Lakers that featured the “Fantastic Five” (who wasn’t very fantastic), and in 2006 during that game 7 in the closing minutes against a Dallas Mavericks team that was hungry and tired of losing to the Spurs in the past, had we just seen Fisher’s fade be blocked or clank off the rim or Dirk’s shot only be a 2 instead of a 3-point play (due to Ginobili’s foul), we could have perennially seen this Spurs team be holding 6 titles in 10 years. Then there wouldn’t have been a question about being a dynasty. And I know — coulda, woulda, shoulda, it didn’t happen; but look at the circumstances and the two junctures the two moments I wrote concurrently and think about them. “Merely a very good team who came out on top frequently,” sure, but I’ll go with the “great team who ran into an unstoppable (for the time) team that was feeling it during the time pulling out all the stops to take down a tough team more than not” moniker instead.

  5. Cliff, thanks for the comment. Peter’s comment; well, Peter, the guy, is rather another one of the people that go around on WordPress or blogs in general EVERYWHERE leaving a comment on things to abash sports and interpret hate. I’m not condemning what they do, but it gets old.

    As a Celtics fan, my mouth is watering for a dominating-in-the-Eastern-Conference-season so it was a biased thought from myself. But I think he’s going to score the most points this year for Boston, and if he looks like he did defensively in the pre-season (so far in the pre-season, rather) then I think he has a pretty good shot.

    The consensus has LeBron James and Dwyane Wade.

  6. Joking about NBA off-court violence?

    Better guess again. David Stern makes $130 MILLION on drugged circus freaks.

    Ron Artest: battery against a fan, spousal abuse and staving dogs.
    Kobe Bryant: rapist and philandering
    Shawne Kemp: drink driving and out-of-wedlock kids
    Michael Jordan: philandering, out-of-wedlock kids, illegal gaming and cigar lit M-80 hillside fires
    Jason Kidd: drunk driving car wrecks, spousal abuse and wife beating
    Magic Johnson: philandering and aids
    Latrell Sprewell: strangulation of coach
    Chris Washburn: doping, loitering
    Kevin Johnson: low income housing slum lord, multiple civil violations
    Charles Barkely: battery and assault upon a fan

    No joke. The WWE-ESPN-NBA is a steroid based freak show.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s