Blazersedge 2009-10 Season Awards: Results and Analysis
by Dave on May 8, 2010 11:25 PM PDT
in News
Email
Print
The voting is now closed on the Blazersedge 2009-10 Season Awards. Here are the results and my brief thoughts.
Most Inspirational Player
- Juwan Howard 45%
- Martell Webster 32%
- Andre Miller 8%
I would tend to go with Blazer Nation on this one. I'd certainly mention Marcus Camby's effect on the late season. His contributions went beyond blocks and rebounds. The team regained much of its swagger after his first couple of games on the floor and started to believe they really could win big-time again. But it's hard to give a season award to a short-timer. My vote would go to Howard who not only came to the rescue of the team in its darkest days but also started to lay playoff-level hammers on opponents as the season wore on and the games became more critical. Seeing the old guy out there giving his it best shot (in every sense of that last word) was something.
Most Improved Player
- Nicolas Batum 47%
- Greg Oden 24%
- Jerryd Bayless 23%
Oden made the biggest strides affecting the game. Batum made some major offensive leaps. But for my money Jerryd Bayless was the most improved player. Despite the headlines and affection his progress all but stalled last season. He wasn't slated for much time this year either. After injuries opened the door he fought his way into the rotation, developed his passing game, coaxed a little more variety out of his heretofore paste-predictable offense, and made the team comfortable enough to trade away Steve Blake with the playoffs on the horizon. Bayless also played well during said playoffs. Coming that far from from next to nothing earns him my vote.
Biggest Disappointment
- Rudy Fernandez 46%
- Greg Oden 34%
- LaMarcus Aldridge 8%
- Brandon Roy 6%
I didn't expect as much from Rudy as some did. It was an open question how well he'd perform with more minutes. His injuries also dampened my expectations. I was more disappointed with his lack of three-point-shooting consistency than anything else. Neither LaMarcus nor Roy disappointed me at all even though neither had a thrilling season. Martell could be mentioned here. He improved defensively but couldn't follow through with a complete game night-to-night, let alone for the season. With the door wide open he had one great month and a bunch of ups and downs. But when you say "disappointment" you have to look at Greg Oden. The fact that he was rounding into great form only heightens the tragedy of the injury. You could argue (correctly) that injuries aren't his fault but the closer he gets to an injury-wracked career the closer that entire career gets to being labeled a disappointment. This season was a microcosm of that effect. Since it's his third go-'round with the stretcher, I'm going to bite the bullet and vote for him.
Most Valuable Player
- Andre Miller 62%
- Brandon Roy 25%
- LaMarcus Aldridge 5%
- Marcus Camby 3%
I'm in an odd place with Miller. I appreciate what he did this year. But if the vote is about consistency of production instead of just talent I also have to look at LaMarcus Aldridge. Both players had strengths and weaknesses. Both helped with and cost the Blazers some games. Both were stalwarts when the tempest blew. By these criteria I could consider either for MVP. If the criteria involve talent, enduring importance to the team, and singular contributions to wins I'd have to go with Brandon Roy. I could see the Blazers doing decently with another point guard. In fact they'll have to pretty soon. I can't see the Blazers going far without Roy or a player exactly as talented as he. Heck, the Blazers didn't even do well that well this year in his absence. The problem is that this wasn't another breakout year for Roy and the way the injuries went we really benefitted from 'Dre's presence. Basically it comes down to the definition of "valuable". By the first definition both Andre and LaMarcus might edge out Roy this year, if nothing else because they played more. But Roy still played in 65 games so the gap isn't as large as it seems. By the second definition Roy is head and shoulders above everybody. For that reason I'm keeping my MVP vote with Roy.
Thanks to all who voted. This was easily the most interesting awards year ever. Let's hope next year is somewhat boring because everything is going so obviously well and the Blazers win 70.
--Dave (blazersub@yahoo.com)
86 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Good analysis
I actually started out voting Dre for MVP with the mindset of the definition being the first one, but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that the accepted definition is more in line with the second one. So I’m going with Roy.
Yeah no
The second I see LaMarginal Aldridge and MVP in the same sentence I dismiss everything I read before…like even if you’re just speculating on it. Roy was the MVP followed closely by Miller. Camby was more valuable to this team than LaMarcus. The guy disappears in the 4th quarter all season and he’s a mess in the playoffs.
The Sun's double LmA twice as much as they do Duncan
Think on that.
by Sabonis4Ever on May 8, 2010 11:48 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Wellllllllllllllllll
Part of that is because Duncan makes them pay for doubling him by making the right pass.
Not to pile on LMA, but he gets flustered with hard doubles and does what the defense wants him to do. He doesn’t find the open man, or hit cutters, or anything to make the bad guys pay. He just passes it out and the offense starts over.
Morticai
#52
Well
LmA also beasts Duncan head to head.
by Sabonis4Ever on May 9, 2010 12:23 AM PDT up reply actions
And how long has Duncan been in the NBA? And who is his coach?? I think LMA may learn
some of what Duncan knows in the next few seasons. Esp if the Blazers decide to get a big man coach. Or Maurice Lucas goes back to work. I hope it is the former and sooner rather than later.
A mess in the playoffs?
Hold up.
Suns solution for LMA: Doubling him every time he touches the ball.
Suns solution for Andre Miller: Switching their worst defender off of him to be replaced by a 37-year-old.
And despite that, Aldridge managed to be as efficient and productive as Miller. (That said, I agree that he could certainly improve at punishing those double teams)
Wait, how is this the 3rd stretcher trip for Oden? I only count 2.
But I agree with most everything.
Morty
#52
I bet we see Paul Peirce one day being taken off on a stretcher for a broken hand
I can’t imagine what kind of ridiculous tantrum he would throw if he actually had a REAL injury.
Who is that in my profile image? Is it Nicolas Batum or Wentworth Miller?
He did okay after being stabbed 11 times in 2000.
CKTK: A music blog. We write about what we want to write about.
"Newspapers are an important part of our lives. Not to read, of course, but, when you’re moving you can’t wrap your dishes in a blog."
-Stephen Colbert
so that knee "injury" in game 1 of the 2008 finals
was most likely a reenactment of the stabbing? Being carried off in agonizing pain only to run back onto the court a couple minutes later.
picture me rollin'
Just pointing out that he’s had a REAL injury before, and he played all 82 games that season. I’m inclined to believe that he’s a tough mamma-jamma.
CKTK: A music blog. We write about what we want to write about.
"Newspapers are an important part of our lives. Not to read, of course, but, when you’re moving you can’t wrap your dishes in a blog."
-Stephen Colbert
My gosh, Dave!
Doing all this work to tabulate our opinions into percentages! I’m not sure that our opinions are not worth that much of your blood sweat and tears, but thanks very much for doing it! You did it, and I appreciate it.
I’ll repeat a comment I made previously about MVP. This season turned out to be really half a dozen different seasons and so many different players stepped up and were MVP’s at different stages. So once again I have to say that the whole TEAM deserves the most valuable award.
-jayfisher
That's JIM Fisher
"I come to you now, at the turn of the tide." -- Brandon "Gandalf" Roy, April 24th, 2010
TEAMVP.....!
It’s a craze that is catching on..! TEAM-V-P! TEAM-V-P! Everybody scream it out loud, like AC/DC…!
by 1ofthe7 on May 9, 2010 12:41 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
70 wins?
Come on, Dave. Let’s be realistic. With a healthy team, I’m hoping for 80. Less than 75 would be my biggest disappointment for next season.
Still on the Rex bandwagon.
by dan_the_man on May 9, 2010 12:47 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Looks like the masses can still sway the vote...
"Seek the wisdom of the ages, but look at the world through the eyes of a child."
-Ron Wild
Andre deserved MVP over Roy
Roy hurt more than helped the Blazers against playoff teams since January. Just look at his stats in those games and compare them to the non playoff teams he played. Millers numbers are better against the good teams. Can you imagine if Miller only played 65 games and healthy in only 40, give me a break. I like a healthy Roy but he was not healthy half the year. Nate gave Roy every chance in the world to be the champion you wanted him to be, but he couldn’t even pull up to the bar let alone drink. So wipe the stardust from your eyes and give Miller the credit he deserves for being healthy, stepping up, and putting up with the Nate/Roy love affair.
Thoroughly disagree
You’re overlooking major numbers Roy put up like his 41 pt performance on Christmas Day. Heck, he had a whole streak of 20+ point performances after January!
We could not have made the playoffs without Miller – that’s true. We give the credit he deserves here. He was an absolute warrior on the court, carrying us to so many victories. But the truth remains that without Brandon, we would’ve missed the playoffs by an even larger interval. That makes Brandon MVP.
Miller had a better +/- than Roy.
The team improved more when Miller was on the floor than it improved when Roy was on the floor.
Defense is important and Roy didn’t have it this year. I blame the hammy.
by Nick Van Excellent on May 9, 2010 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions
MVP involves more than the +/- rating
I’m looking at the season as a whole. Roy was subpar after the hammy, but he was torching it up before the hammy. All in all, I say Roy is still our MVP because he changes the whole atmosphere when he’s on the court. Even if he’s not full health, he makes the opposition pay attention to him in a manner no other player on the team could manipulate.
the atmosphere could be
considered stale by many points of view (if you look at the above 500 teams that generally have a counter or at least a game plan to force the team into other options)They always seemed to reduce the effectiveness of Roy or at least made him work harder ….this only spells one thing fatigue and possible injury as well…less energy to play defense, etc…..
So getting into an offense that has more variations and less predictability is what Miller, Camby and even Bayless( to an extent) bring to the party. I am not saying Roy and LMA are not variations, but they have been so signature that good teams will counter. …. it is a rational approach, to not only taking some of the heat off of Roy, but also a new avenue at getting to the next level by utilizing all your resources…
Even the so-called rational approach to MVP, by assigning statistics to confirm value. have fallen into question…given Portland’s playoff success vs offensive efficiency. The stats don’t lie, individually, but where does this measure in terms of a successful team? it don’t….. and MVP is a beside the point value attributed to an individual player in a team sport.
Even if Miller won the vote on popularity, there is a reason why he became popular. and it wasn’t because of his bubbling personality… But it could have been; his workman-like approach to the game, his ruggedness, and determination that people noticed…. How much value does your star player bring when he doesn’t play because he is hurt or he can’t play to his full potential?
It’s all about what you put value on, how much it’s weighted and simply an individual point of view.
by WyEast on May 10, 2010 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
position by position, SG had a much better +/- vs. opposing SG than did PG
and Roy’s individual +/- was far, far greater than Millers.
The biggest problem with attributing a better overall +/- to Miller, however – is that his numbers increased at exactly the same time that LMA’s increased – the second half of the season.
Miller had his moments, but by far was most replaceable of the Roy/LMA/Miller trifecta.
by blacknoiseNW on May 9, 2010 12:24 PM PDT up reply actions
I would argue that LMA was the most replaceable
You have your superstar, Brandon Roy, but apart from that, the PG position is the most important on the team. LMA easily comes in as the third most important player by modern basketball standards.
People like to ignore stats that don't fit with their view of reality.
We’ve all seen the numbers. You can make a very strong case for Roy, but to pretend like there isn’t a rational argument for Dre is pretty silly.
There’s a reason people voted for him.
It’s the smugness and indignation over the whole thing bugs me. I couldn’t care less if people think Roy, LMA, or Camby were the better MVP, but acting like people don’t understand is silly.
by Nick Van Excellent on May 9, 2010 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
deriving personal attacks from facts is why facts should rule over intuition
there is a reason people voted for Miller – but the supporting evidence hasn’t been what Miller actually did on the court (measurable stats), but rather his “intangibles”.
The problem with using anything other than actual performance to measure worth is precisely because of the difference between subjective and objective.
You simply cannot have a meaningful discussion over subjective merits – because subjective is a moving target with no common ground. It is this fact – and no other – that drives my objection to the pro-Miller camp. If you cannot agree on parameters, you cannot have a rational consensus. It is a problem about method – not about results. In this regard, its a popularity contest – and I will always object to subjective popularity being the basis for meritorious commendation.
Not for lack of trying, eh?
You simply cannot have a meaningful discussion over subjective merits
by Nick Van Excellent on May 9, 2010 8:50 PM PDT up reply actions
I hope you're not suggesting that Miller is more 'popular' than Roy amongst fans....
and that is why he got the MVP this year. That is simply not true. The vote for Miller as MVP is legitimate not on the basis measurable statistics but on the very ‘intangibles’ you mention. Everybody has their own definition of what MVP means to them. Just because it doesn’t necessarily reflect your definition of MVP (in what appears to be statistics based), doesn’t mean other’s definintions are not legitimate. The vote reflects this in that the sum of these definitions points to Andre Miller.
The only way to remove the subjectivity from the discussion is to have an agreed upon definition of MVP prior to voting but if it was purely statistics based, then you wouldn’t have to vote. Regardless, Dave mentioned that their was no definitive measure for MVP to stimulate this discussion amongst the fans here. We play by the rules and in this case you make up your own rules. Nothing wrong with that.
"You kill a mosquito with an axe. Nothing personal, but this is what I've got to do. You're in my way right now so I've got to get rid of you and I'll see you next year." -Monty Williams
well said
Glad someone could explain why argument/discussion has 2 sides…( no discussion/debate and we just let the stats decide) An autocratic method of view when you instantly invalidate anyone who doesn’t use your avenue or definition (in this case statistics) to decide….
The votes don't lie...
"You kill a mosquito with an axe. Nothing personal, but this is what I've got to do. You're in my way right now so I've got to get rid of you and I'll see you next year." -Monty Williams
It's a good observation point
Some people notice the little things that do make a difference (In this case stepping up play in the big games.)
You can always make individual cases for each player and also assign any significance or weight, to any value you deem important……….while some will get a little “starstruck” with their favorite player and this could influence their vote..(you can open and close a lot of doors if one chooses to do so)
Fans don’t generally pay much attention to the fundamental part of the game…noting that it’s a team game and MVP is an individual award. Offensive skills take the forefront and will generally leave the other details of a players contribution lagging far behind. The best “team” atmosphere was clearly generated from the Miller, Camby, Howard group….It was they who did the most to help salvage the season.You could add in LMA as a person who was there battling along with them..And that’s what this season was all about (salvaging)( IMO)
You have to consider blocking out prior contributions when you vote…The case is simple…the system was and still is, geared around Roy and gives him the best opportunity to show his stuff. When the system evolved into it’s present situatuion, Roy struggled. While no one was really dynamic, so to speak, Roy’s adjustment struggle was much more noticeable.(although health must be considered) As a team, most of the other players moved on without a hitch(performance wise)
So if the ones who choose to give Roy the ’individual" award for MVP they could have a case. But by my definination where the word “team” is heavily weighted, Miller wins this award by default…..
An MVP vote can be qualified by deeper definitions, but in most fans eyes, Miller was a more “significant” player on this years team than Roy.( in other words Roy was not the difference maker that consistantly stood out during the course of the season.) Which is likely why Miller won the MVP vote on BE or al least why Roy lost it
Roy doesn't deserve the MVP because he "struggled" by not be the featured player?
Miller had a top 10 performance as a point guard – Roy had a top 4 season as a SG, so yeah – individual performances clearly favor Roy.
But consider this before you anoint Miller as the greatest thing since sliced bread:
The Blazers regressed this season with Miller. They were worse offensively, and they were worse defensively. When Roy was out, the team struggled to play .500 ball. Miller for MVP? I don’t think so.
by blacknoiseNW on May 9, 2010 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions
many other factors went into this season. Oden, Przybilla, Batum, even Rudy
were all injured and this just may have affected the Blazer’s offensively a tad don’t you think?
I think…where would the Blazers have been with all of these injuries if Miller was NOT on the team?
Does it?
I’ve never argued that Miller wasn’t an important piece – but as noted above – I will always argue against those that think he was the most important piece because it is virtually impossible to make any rational case that Miller was more important. It’s not a popularity contest – its a value contest.
You seem to be quite agitated
This is an (all in fun) MVP vote in BE.. Just Opinions…….get over it.. It’s your choice to lock yourself into the stat room ( your basketball world ?)….But it’s not mine…my boat floats down a different river than yours and like I have said , fundamentally different than many in here. Sometimes it creates good debate…sometimes not……
…..But consider this before you anoint Miller as the greatest thing since sliced bread:
Your words, not mine….You see I prefer the whole loaf (I’m a slice your own, kinda guy…this way I never cut off more than I can eat. Besides, sliced bread has all those preservatives in it)
however. if you can find anywhere that I have made this statement then, please advise, and I will bring it into context for you.
This stuff has been overcooked …….I’m movin on
by WyEast on May 9, 2010 2:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Sliced bread does burn more easily
The eternal optimist
by I can't think of a good screen name... on May 9, 2010 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Miller won the MVP because a large number of BEdgers have an irrational love for him which overpowers most everything.
"Seek the wisdom of the ages, but look at the world through the eyes of a child."
-Ron Wild
I think he won the MVP because
“MVP” was left open to a billion various interpretations. And with Roy’s iffy performance in Game 6 still fresh in people’s minds, the MVP vote was molded to fit the criteria Miller fulfilled, no matter how irrational it was.
Very well put and I agree. Love Roy but thought he didn't display leadership/maturity
that I wanted to see from him. I think I was expecting too much from a 24=25 yr old and I do think he matured over the season.
Miller was the most selfish player on the team
so he doesn’t win any leadership/maturity awards from me.
by blacknoiseNW on May 9, 2010 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, he insisted on playing all 82 games for one thing. If he had been out for at least some of the
games OTHERS would have had more opportunity to play.
Miller does exactly what he feels will help the team in that particular game or moment.
That’s why he scores 52 points in a game where we need every single point and then shoots 3 for 6 the next game with 10 assists to get the win. How many players out there would have a 50+ point game like that and then be perfectly fine only taking 6 shots the next game? Miller could care less about stats, he’s just a competitor.
by Coastie07 on May 9, 2010 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I hope you know that my comment about playing 82 games was facetious!!
Miller is a great unselfish competitor.
he considered being asked to come off the bench to be an insult
we can start there….
Wouldn't you consider it an insult
if you had been starting all your life, came to a new team, outplayed the starting PG by miles, and was still forced to sit?
And Nate admitted he was wrong about sitting Miller too
So there ya go. New players are going to have chemistry issues, it’s inevitable. It’s nothing to get all up in arms about.
Unless your name is Brandon Roy
New players are going to have chemistry issues, it’s inevitable. It’s nothing to get all up in arms about.
Can’t have it both ways
Phil Mickelson: "A Great shot is when you pull it off.....a smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try it"’
by 92wastheyear on May 11, 2010 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions
Don't agree with the paragraph on MVP
We actually did play well without Roy, if you take into account the strength of schedule. That stretch without Roy was brutal and set us up for a season ending downward spiral, especially with timing after everything else that had happened. Miller kept the ship afloat though, just like he did most of the season when we needed someone to step up. And if you really look at the losses we’ve had without Roy, then you’d see that most of those games were losses with Roy too.
I voted for Miller
Not necessarily because he was the MVP though, the main reason I voted for him is because when he wasn’t the one running the offense, it just got so so so so so sos oso sososososososo ugly. Not just when Bayless was running the point, but even when Blake or Roy were. The ball movement and the entire offensive flow was about 1000000000 times better when Miller was on the floor. It seemed like when he was off the floor the offense just degenerated into players taking turns trying to do isos and just completely failing. I honestly feel that without him the Blazers would have been bottom 5 in the league in offensive efficiency.
Like last year
I honestly feel that without him the Blazers would have been bottom 5 in the league in offensive efficiency.
Phil Mickelson: "A Great shot is when you pull it off.....a smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try it"’
by 92wastheyear on May 11, 2010 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions
People seem to forget how Miller sucked for most of the first 1/3 of the season
Aldridge was consistently pretty good.. not awesome but pretty good. I mean, how bad is 18 & 8 with 2 assists to boot?
by collectiveshane on May 9, 2010 10:05 PM PDT reply actions
That was because Nate McMoron sat him way too much!
by thebigoutdoors on May 11, 2010 10:59 AM PDT up reply actions
This is one of those things that is said ...but that I have never seens actual stats for
as it turns out, during his 1st 25 games with The Blazers, Andre averaged a little over 28mins a game. His average for the entire year was …..30.5mpg. That is not that big of a difference.
Phil Mickelson: "A Great shot is when you pull it off.....a smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try it"’
by 92wastheyear on May 11, 2010 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions
It was WHEN he sat Miller that made the difference
For the first time since his rookie year he did not start in sixteen games. He sat only one game between his rookie year and the day faced the great basketball mind of Nate McMoron. Nate not only banished Dre to the bench to start the game but once Miller did finally start; Dre to his disbelief, found himself sitting the bench during the most crucial last minutes of a close game. This all had an adverse affect on his energy, his stats, and quality of play. His game was in the toilet until Miller got in Nate’s face in January and convinced the ?genius? of his worth. Why Nate sat Miller is unclear but it is evident that Miller’s numbers changed drastically after December.
by thebigoutdoors on May 11, 2010 5:38 PM PDT up reply actions
I get you don't like Nate....but I ain't digging the Nate McMoron monicker
As far as his decision not to start Dre at the start of the season….well I guess that is part of the coach’s job description…he picks the starting lineup. The player ….any player….needs to be professional enough to do his job when something like that happens. I didn’t like Dre’s reaction to the situation….at all
Phil Mickelson: "A Great shot is when you pull it off.....a smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try it"’
by 92wastheyear on May 11, 2010 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions
Nope.
You’re putting Rudy over Aldridge for biggest dissapointment? Horrible, horrible, horrible. Aldridge is the second highest paid player on the team. He’s a great player, but for what we’re paying him, he should have been twice as good. People say, “He’s been doing great.” Yeah, great for a B+ player, not the A+ force we need him to be. Andre’s been carrying his slack all season.
Next, Juwan Howard???!! Awesome for a bench warmer, but he did far, far more harm than good. His unnecessary hard fouls costed us too many games.
Bayless: TRAAADE. I’m tired many will agree with me here of the obsessive Bayless love. He helped us out against the Suns, but even in that series he threw away more than he made. He makes plays like he’s posing for basketball cards…plays that go nowhere.
-B.
Uh ...no
Aldridge is the second highest paid player on the team. He’s a great player, but for what we’re paying him, he should have been twice as good.
He is the 5th highest paid player
Behind
Miles
Camby
Przybilla
And…
Andre Miller
Phil Mickelson: "A Great shot is when you pull it off.....a smart shot is when you don't have the guts to try it"’
by 92wastheyear on May 11, 2010 10:50 AM PDT up reply actions
Intersting
Brandon is by far the best player on the team, and was the MVP of the first half of the season. Dre may have been the MVP of the second half of th season, but it was close.
How long has been Andre been in the league? Shouldn’t he have won a playoff series by now if he’s so great? Just sayin…
This is Jack burton from the PorkChop Express and I'm talkin to whoever's out there.....
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Blazer's Edge
Related FanShots on Blazer's Edge
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Behind the Box Score, where the Boston Celtics are moving on to the conference finals
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Indiana Pacers? Gone till November
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
