solenstyle wrote:honestly,.. who gives a crap if LeBron claims himself as the leader. I can't believe you people are upset about this.
Whoever said Kobe should have gotten finals MVP in the final championship clearly knows so little. He shot I believe 41% in that series, if anything he could have gotten the finals mvp against the Sixers when he was shooting 51%
but who cares?
Anybody can be a leader, a leader doesn't have to be the best player on the court.
Iverson won the season MVP shooting 42% in 2001. Your opinion fails!
Shooting % has very little to do with winning the MVP. It's all about the impact a player has. IMO, Kobe played a huge role in sweeping the Nets in the 2002 finals. He should have at least got co-mvp for his performance.
My mistake, I got the Sixers & Nets years mixed up stat wise... Although you were correct on the year finals mvp (arguably could have gotten it) you're assessment in the shooting pct was wrong. The shooting pct has a lot to do with it... so stop trying to argue that. It means he was more efficient & contributed more on the offensive portion of the win.
Impact?? I'll take an efficient scorer over any day than just the fear a name brings. And actually, the fg% does have a lot of impact so...???? I don't get what you're saying???
wow how can my opinion fail?
2002: 36.3 ppg, 12.3 rpg, 3.8 apg, 2.8 blocks, 59.5% shooting,
2002: 26.7 ppg, 5.2 apg, 5.8 rpg, 1.5 steals, .75 blocks, 51.4% shooting
*It still amazes me why anyone would be upset over this. Who cares who's the leader? We'll just see who plays the best. Leadership can come from off the bench. It just means the leader motivates/protects/etc... to the players.