My unexpected BBL Most Valuable Player
(Edit: This article didn’t finish the way it was meant to. I originally set out to write about all the factors that play a role in deciding an MVP. That was until I wrote a single sentence that provided me with a moment of clarity and convinced me who my BBL Most Valuable Player should be. Like I say, it wasn’t expected but I’m glad it happened).
Trying to explain how you pick a Most Valuable Player from the 2011 BBL season is like asking someone to explain why one Superhero is better than another (the answer is Batman). It’s impossible because everybody has different criteria with which they judge a players worth and until somebody is able to explain how variables such as a ‘team’s winning percentage’ and the importance of ‘points scored per contest’ impact a debate, the MVP conversations will continue.
Most MVP arguments are based upon numbers and why not? After all, they’re easily available and can be poured over until you find a number that backs up your argument.
But what about factors like the number of seasons a player has played in the league? Should a greater number of years in the BBL mean that a player has an MVP advantage over a player with fewer years in the league?
Look at the Eagles’ Charles Smith and the Riders Ayron Hardy for example: Both are strong MVP candidates and yet both have different BBL backgrounds.
Charles Smith is a veteran of the league with 11 BBL years to his name. Does the fact that Smith’s game is known around the league help his MVP argument? This season he has once again been undeniably impressive, producing 18.4 points per game despite every coach around the league knowing where he likes to catch the ball, how he defends the pick and roll, any tendencies he has on offense etc. I guess on the flip side you could argue that because he’s been in the league for so long, Smith has an advantage over less seasoned BBL players because he knows the subtleties of each player and arena.
Hardy on the other hand, is in his first year in the BBL. His game was largely unknown for the first half of the season, meaning teams were still trying to figure out how best to stop him up until the turn of the year (even now they can’t stop him). Does the fact he could attack the first half of the season without drawing added attention from defences negatively impact his stock in the race for MVP?
If you look at things from the other side of the mirror, his status as a player in his first year in the BBL means he has achieved everything to date (12 TotW inclusions, two BBL Player of the Month awards, 15.7 ppg, 8.3 rpg and 66% shooting from the field) whilst learning to adapt to new team-mates, new coaches, new arenas, new officials and a new country….
…If ever there was an argument for Hardy to be awarded the MVP trophy, that might just have nailed it for me:
“He has achieved everything he has whilst learning to adapt to new team-mates, new coaches, new arenas, new officials and a new country.”
Argument over.
Without meaning to, I think I’ve just discovered who my MVP vote would go to.
Hardy’s personal numbers speak for themselves, although it’s not just the points and boards he posts that impress me, it’s the efficiency of his play. His ability to post numbers in every statistical category known to man whilst shooting at such a high percentage from the field is ridiculous. Players just shouldn’t be that good.
And when you look at the records his team have broken this year, it’s hard to say that he’s not been instrumental in that, especially when you look at what has become of his Jacksonville University team since he left *cough* 8-22 *cough*.
Add all that together and thrown into the mix that he has done all this in his first year in a new country and you’ve got yourself the 2011 BBL MVP.
And I bet he could beat up Batman too.