Arenas most improved

by **Brave Sir Rubin** on Fri May 02, 2003 7:18 am

http://www.nba.com/news/arenas_most_improved_030501.html

defenatly deserves it...

meanwhile...lol...penny got a vote

by **Rens** on Fri May 02, 2003 7:32 am

Hurray for Gil, he deserved it... now for a big pay check (Y)

by **Colin** on Fri May 02, 2003 9:29 am

Brave Sir Rubin wrote:meanwhile...lol...penny got a vote

and Tracy got 4. Dion Glover got one too.

I'm happy for GilbertToo bad he didn't deserve it and Ricky Davis shoulda got it, him first then Harpring

by . on Fri May 02, 2003 9:34 am

congrats G. Its so strange, I know someone who played against him in college and now hes the Most Improved Player in the NBA

by **air gordon** on Fri May 02, 2003 9:52 am

congrats to arenas. hope he stays with GS

by **Boyk** on Fri May 02, 2003 12:07 pm

man ricky only got 43 votes!!

that sucks, i spose his attitude cost him.

Good on Arenas, i had a feeling he was gona win it anywayz.
what a pick lol, 2nd rnder :roll:

by **Matthew** on Fri May 02, 2003 12:14 pm

Ricky and Gilbert almost had identical improvements (+8 ppg, similar jump in assists etc) so I think the voters went on how sucessful the warriors were this season.

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Fri May 02, 2003 12:57 pm

This certainly helps his stock this offseason. Teams who have the ability to outbid the Warriors and who are in need of a point guard probably won't have any second thoughts about making an offer Golden State can't match.

by **Matthew** on Fri May 02, 2003 1:13 pm

Where do you think Gilbert will be next season? Denver? San Antonio? Milwalkee?

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Fri May 02, 2003 1:49 pm

Most reports place him in either Denver or Golden State next season, so my guess would be Nuggets or Warriors - in my opinion, most likely Warriors.

by **Bill Russell** on Fri May 02, 2003 2:52 pm

Kudos to Arenas, hope he stays with the Warriors... (N)

by **Venom** on Sat May 03, 2003 5:00 am

colin826 wrote:
Brave Sir Rubin wrote:meanwhile...lol...penny got a vote
and Tracy got 4. Dion Glover got one too.

I'm happy for GilbertToo bad he didn't deserve it and Ricky Davis shoulda got it, him first then Harpring

wrong...davis didn't deserve it more than arenas

YouTube · by **mp3** on Sat May 03, 2003 5:54 am

come on... Ricky's the man !! Gilbert's in his 2nd year , he should be improving. Ricky's in his 5th and has shown the most improvement. at the end of the day it went down to team records.

oh yeah.... well done Gilbert :evil:

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Sat May 03, 2003 3:56 pm

Statistically speaking, Ricky Davis has improved in leaps and bounds this season, but I think his attitude and degree of selfishness cost him the award, because those aspects of his game and character certainly haven't improved.

Obviously it was near impossible to make a winner out of Cleveland, but there were incidents along the way that showed while the talent and production are there for all to see, but there's still something lacking in maturity and team spirit.

Gilbert Arenas showed similar improvement in fewer minutes per game, while establishing himself as a player who could be a good replacement or upgrade at point guard, making him a coveted yet still somewhat underrated free agent this offseason.

by **Clinton** on Sat May 03, 2003 5:00 pm

They might have also taken into account Arenas' smooth move to point. He had never been a point guard until last season, but it looks like he has dedicated his life to the position.

by **paul_pierce_the_truth** on Sat May 03, 2003 6:40 pm

Imagine the numbers a player like Arenas could of put together on Cleveland!! Just look at Andre Miller for example. Ricky Davis was a huge ego and ballhog in disasterous situation. I believe Arenas is better than Ricky Davis for sure, but is he more improved than Steve Nash, Bonzi Wells, Matt Harpring or a player like Dirk Nowitzki? If you really think about it, what difference did Arenas make with his team? They went from a loser to a loser. I agree completely with the theory that this award is not intended for a player who virtually has no major role in his rookie year and becomes a starting point guard in his second. The most improved player should at the very least have some change in his team's success. Sorry I believe the awards are just non-sense most of the time. I will not disagree with everything and every award. Certainly the Spurs coach deserved his award as will Kevin Garnett or Tim Duncan when one of them wins MVP.
Now if they name Kobe Bryant the MVP, then I will disagree.

by **Matthew** on Sat May 03, 2003 7:12 pm

Lol you can't be serious by saying "If you really think about it, what difference did Arenas make with his team? They went from a loser to a loser"

His team had the best turnaround in the nba, and guess who helped them becuase, well, he is the starting pg on their team. Thats right... GILBERT ARENAS.

As for if Kobe gets the mvp, well how can you say he hasnt improved. This Laker team was depleted with injuries, suspensions, crap play from role players. Kobe has improved by leaps and bouns over last season, and just becuase his individual improvement and skills werent enough to give the lakers more wins than last season, it certainly kept them afloat and they are in the position today becuase ok the K.O-B.E.

Duncan, while having another terrific season, is a legitimate MVP in your eyes, I'm assuming thats becuase the Spurs won more games, right? Did you take into account the other guys on the roster, like the additions of Ginobili (spelling) and Stephen Jackson or the improved play of Parker?

Remember, these awards are individual, and while team succes is a factor, its not the be-all or end-all for MVP, MIP or Rookie of the year candidates.

by **paul_pierce_the_truth** on Sat May 03, 2003 7:28 pm

What?

Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett are the only two I see as canidates for MVP.
First of all they did more than anyone else
Second there teams won.

Gilbert Arenas did nothing okay? NOTHING!
His team sucked last year and sucks now.
Maybe going from hardly any wins to some wins, but not many is a marked improvement for some people.

I think going from Dirk Nowitzki the german guy who can really play pretty good, to Dirk Nowitzki maybe should be the MVP is quite a bit of improvement. Dirk Nowitzki last year was better than Gilbert Arenas is right now and Dirk Nowitzki today is better than two Gilbert Arenas'.
I also believe Matt Harpring played a great deal better than a year ago in Philadelphia as compared to this year with Utah. Steve Nash is now considered a top 5 point guard, is Gilbert Arenas?? I believe Steve Nash was just some scruffy haired Canadian last season and now is considered much much more. The great players are often just overlooked while sub-par going from nothing to a starting point guard on a poor team looks to be something, I see his improvement, but the improvement of Nash, Nowitzki and Matt Harpring made more impact. As did Bonzi Wells.
Jason Terry and Ricky Davis can make the same arguements as Gilbert Arenas, they just didn't win the poorly selected award.

by **Matthew** on Sat May 03, 2003 7:45 pm

How can you say Tim Duncan did more than T-Mac or Kobe? And why isnt Iverson among your mvp candidates? His team won more games than last season, so going by your formulae he is more of a MVP than Kobe.

Lol, Nothing eh? So averaging 8 more points, nearly 3 more assists, and playing 11 more minutes without seeing his turnovers go through the roof is nothing? lol, no Gilbert arenas is not a steve nash, however, Gilbert Arenas improved ALOT more statistically than what Nash did, and Golden state had a bigger turnaround than what Dallas did. So, in your opinion is Ron Artest a more deserving player for the MIP than Ricky Davis or Arenas?

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Sat May 03, 2003 7:52 pm

Gilbert Arenas did nothing okay? NOTHING!

With all due respect, raising his scoring average by 7.4 ppg, his rebounds per game by 1.9 (for a 6'3" point guard, that is significant), dishing out 2.6 more assists per game while establishing himself as a starting point guard having been a second round pick is not nothing. Neither is being a key player on an improved team.

His team sucked last year and sucks now.

In 2001/2002, the Warriors went 21-61. In 2002/2003, they went 38-44 - still a losing record, still out of the playoffs, but it's a 17 game turnaround. That's a pretty good improvement from one year to the next. For a while, they were over .500 and looked like they might be able to join the race for the 8th spot in the West. But they are playing in a tougher conference. Their record against the East was 19-11 - imagine if they played there (which of course could never happen, unless they relocated from California).

I believe Steve Nash was just some scruffy haired Canadian last season and now is considered much much more.

Steve Nash was an All-Star last season as well, and for the last few years has been recognised as being better than just a "poor man's John Stockton", which was one of the labels he had when he was drafted in 1996. For the record, Nash's numbers are actually down from last year.

Similarly, Dirk Nowitzki was an All-Star in 2002 as well. His numbers are also more or less the same as last season, and the areas in which he has improved are not notable enough to warrant a Most Improved Player selection (23.4 ppg to 25.1 ppg is the most notable improvement).

Dirk Nowitzki last year was better than Gilbert Arenas is right now and Dirk Nowitzki today is better than two Gilbert Arenas'.

Of course. But since Dirk Nowitzki doesn't exactly warrant a selection for Most Improved Player, it doesn't make Gilbert Arenas any less worthy a recipient of the award.

by **paul_pierce_the_truth** on Sat May 03, 2003 8:05 pm

Team improvement or Player Improvement has nothing to do with my theories on Most Valuable Player. Sorry if thought so.

Allen Iverson is not a subject I want to even get started on. He by no means an MVP canidate in my mind, ever, not this year not in 2001 when he won the media frenzy in Philly award. The same year Aaron McKie started a bunch of games padding his stats, then wins the sixth man award, the same year Mutombo won over now known defensemen Ben Wallace. You can't have the best coach, sixthman and defensive player on a team and then consider a single player as most valuable, it's an oxymoron. Iverson shoots shoots shoots shoots the ball and his mouth into consideration. Complete value is doing everything, a la Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan and Tim Duncan. Iverson has guts and can do many things, win a championship with 48 in game one and ??? the rest of a series. The guy is a player, no doubt. But most valuable? Best player?

Answer this question: Who would you rather have:

A) Tim Duncan
B) Kevin Garnett
C) Allen Iverson

Gilbert Arenas is just an average guy and that's it. He deserves no awards at this point. Don't throw his numbers at me, he did nothing at all last year, not because he couldn't, but because he was not asked to.
He was given the chance and produced average numbers, he did not become so much better, it's glaring with joy. He just got a chance.
He has no more talent this year than last, he made little improvement with his game. Steve Nash became a player, a real leader, a scorer, a passer and a clutch player, he did so in three years, showing the most improvement over the last year. Gilbert Areanas might someday become great, until then nothing.......

by **paul_pierce_the_truth** on Sat May 03, 2003 8:19 pm

My response was being authored while Andrew was posting, I didn't respond to his.

Numbers are not everything, Steve Nash has become a feared player. He was not that in years past. Nowitzki has become an MVP canidate, something new and improved for him. What I am saying is these players have improved greatly as leaders, as true top level players. These things are just overlooked when the improvement is slight in numbers perhaps, but not in opinion of the level the player has reached. I refuse to get into the stats game.... Ricky Davis, Jason Terry and others can get into that agruement. Let's not talk about if Golden State played in the east... they do not and that's that, please do not tell me you are talking about someone's height??? 6'3" point guards???? C'mon you are not seriously going there??? Steve Nash is what 6'8"?

I just think to become a top player from an All-Star is a marked improvement, many players have been All-Stars one year and have jumped up to Superstar the next. I think Nash and Nowitzki have done
this. Showing marked improvements. I guess Gilbert Arenas doesn't
impress me. In my opinion what round you are drafted in doesn't mean you are the most improved player, it means the scouts were wrong.

When you go from a role player to the starting point guard, your numbers go up along with your minutes and role with the team.

I don't know maybe I am just blind or something.... :shock:

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Sat May 03, 2003 8:22 pm

You can't have the best coach, sixthman and defensive player on a team and then consider a single player as most valuable, it's an oxymoron.

I don't think that having all those awards on one team is "a figure of speech in which contradictory terms are used together", so you might have the wrong word there. For a start, the coach isn't a player, so his ability to coach doesn't really affect how valuable a player is to the team.

Secondly, the sixth man award is given to the player judged to be best reserve. Aaron McKie started fewer than half of his games that year, which made him eligible for the award. In basketball, the sixth man is generally thought of as the player who will be the first choice to step into the starting lineup when a regular starter is unavailable, and is usually the first player off the bench - almost definitely the bench player with the most minutes. It doesn't mean he's the most valuable player to the team.

Thirdly, the defensive player of the year is awarded to the player who has shown brilliance at the defensive end, generally statistically speaking. Does it mean he's the most valuable to the team? Of course not. It just means he's recognised as the best defensive player in the league.

Therefore, Allen Iverson could easily be named the league's Most Valuable Player. It suggests that without him, the team would falter and play nowhere near as well. The other awards have nothing to do with how valuable the player is to the team - that's what the MVP is about.

Gilbert Arenas is just an average guy and that's it. He deserves no awards at this point.

Opinion, not fact.

Don't throw his numbers at me, he did nothing at all last year, not because he couldn't, but because he was not asked to.
He was given the chance and produced average numbers, he did not become so much better, it's glaring with joy. He just got a chance.

I don't see why his numbers are irrelevant. I don't see how increased playing time disqualifies him from being a Most Improved candidate. But if it does, then Ricky Davis, a player you mentioned of being worthy of the award, should also be exempt from winning the award, since his minutes increased by almost 16 per game.

Steve Nash became a player, a real leader, a scorer, a passer and a clutch player, he did so in three years, showing the most improvement over the last year.

Steve Nash was an All-Star in 2002 as well, and his numbers were actually down from a year ago. I don't see how that makes him the most improved player for 2003.

by **Matthew** on Sat May 03, 2003 8:23 pm

Depends what kind of team i have. If I have a bunch of scorers, I'd take KG. If I had a young team that is developing, then Tim Duncan. If I have a team that is ok defensively, but needs a scorer, then id take Iverson.

As for your post, lol, its 100% opinion. The Bulls in 96 had the MVP, coach of the year and 6th man of the year not to mention THREE guys on the all defensive team.

So whats your reasoning for Iverson not being an mvp this year yet Tim Duncan is, and Kobe isnt. If its all about team improvement, surely Iverson would get consideration. If he doesnt, then team improvement ISNT important, and guys like Kobe or tmac would be legitimate in your eyes. Or would it be safe to say team improvement doesnt have anything to do with it, and you'd hate to see another swingman get the award over your boy, Paul Pierce?

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Sat May 03, 2003 8:36 pm

These things are just overlooked when the improvement is slight in numbers perhaps, but not in opinion of the level the player has reached. I refuse to get into the stats game

The Most Improved Player award is, and always has been, a combination of improvement in not only in skill, but also statistically. Statistics are significant, that's why I mention them. That's why Michael Jordan didn't win any MIP awards, despite going from being an All-Star to a player that could lead a team to an NBA title. Statistics are one of the factors that determines the MIP, like it or not.

Let's not talk about if Golden State played in the east... they do not and that's that

With the balance of power in the Western Conference's favour, it's a common debate about how teams in the West would fare if they were in the East. In fact, it's been mentioned several times this season, especially with all the talk of conference/division realignment. You've obviously missed the point I was trying to make.

please do not tell me you are talking about someone's height??? 6'3" point guards???? C'mon you are not seriously going there??? Steve Nash is what 6'8"?

Again, you have missed my point. I mentioned it because an increase of 1.9 rpg probably wouldn't be that significant for a centre or power forward, but for a 6'3" point guard to raise his average by almost 2 rebounds per game, it's a fairly significant increase.

Arenas most improved

Arenas most improved

Re: Arenas most improved

Re: Arenas most improved

Who is online