Hoops

NBL 2019 MVP is Andrew Bogut

[LV, do you think they got the voting right in the coach of the year award?]

Check coty thread for my response

I doubt anyone would have factored Cotton’s performance in a dead rubber.

"So by that logic you're suggesting Mitch Creek not Bryce Cotton should've won the league MVP award last season?"

I think Creek was the most valuable player to his team last year.

The votes failed to count two games, one of which was Cotton's worst game of the season.

Had cottons last few games counted would the vote have been different? May not have mattered, was always a three horse race. But imagine a brownlow medal that failed to include 3 rounds of performances.... besides coach of the year may have been the biggest embarrassment for the league.

LV, do you think they got the voting right in the coach of the year award?

Think because of his name he got the award, you can't comment on his achievements. Longley got a threepeat with Jordan and for me is the most successful player to play overseas.

Bogut is arogant no deniying that, might be funny for him but would he pull a stunt like that at a nba event?

Facebook voting after each game!

We could have a fans mvp won by the team with the most fa....oh, wait a minute!

I'm sure players would rather win fans mvp than the real thing which is clearly rigged

I reckon a few Cats fans are drowning in the hate Bogut pool, and are equally butthurt by losing their money after getting on Cotton at $7 pre season

I took that bet too, but fair's fair, Bogut deserved to win. As would Cotton....

Sorry, typo above. Cotton is the real and only MVP cos he's the fan MVP. My bad.

I’m all for the award as selected by the fans, even though it’s based on ‘entertainment’ value (ugh).
I’m all for one based on votes by ‘knowledgeable people’. But who’s going to have a better understanding of the game and the impact of the players without skewing the votes seems to be the issue. Surely it would be the coaches who would be more objective than the players who are caught up in the emotion and are just focused on their immediate surroundings.

Have 3 awards:
MVP voted on as at present but allowing teams to vote for their own players
Players’ award, voted on by all players
Fans’ award, cos we want to maximise and reward fan involvement cos it is critical to revenue

I would think that the coaches’ one would be voted on every game, the players’ at various points during the season to make it accurate, and the fans’ one only at the end of the season. If the fans’ one gets skewed by the size of the team’s market, so what? At least there will be a greater number of fans involved in the voting.

I have a hypothetical. If you swapped Bogut and Long how do you think the Kings and Breakers would have performed. not much to do with MVP but I'm interested in peoples opinion.

That’s a fair response Angus.

I'm fine with the fan's MVP award, but not pretending like it means more than the actual MVP. And I'll happily admit that my opinion of Aylen is my own, and the players and coaches around the league might feel exactly opposite to me. And they'd know more than I do about it, sure.

Angus why so much hate for the fan MVP which is based on the unprofessional fan vote and your hate for Aylen as referee of the year as just a fan? You kinda come across as slightly hypocritical!

Cotton won fan's mvp. He did it despite NSW has more fans and any social fan would most likely choose a Sydney player.

Fan's MVP should be the award players go for, as it's voted by people passionate about the sport, anc are not too directly involved in the politics.

Great idea Trev, how does it work, an anonymous internet form? Ballot boxes at the arena? An sms message to a 1-800 number? Anything to take the power away from the knowledgeable professionals currently voting for the wrong guys.

Only koberulz can speak for himself

The fans should be able to cast a 3,2,1 vote in each and every game during the season. You then tally up the votes for a particular game and the three players with the most votes for that game are given an official score of 3,2,1

Then come gala night each game is displayed on a screen Sydney v Perth 1. BOGUT 2. KAY 3. COTTON revealing one by one for each round with a table showing cumulative votes earnt. Then end of round 18 the winner of the mvp is determined.

They do.

The notion that players would feel better about winning an award voted on by a group that collectively knows almost nothing about the game than about winning one voted on by their peers is laughable.

Hoopie, they do, but the selected mvp is a farce.

Ffs, why not just have both - a selected MVP and a fan favourite MVP?

OK, now fan's MVP has become the true MVP, got it. Too political having other teams vote for MVP (excluding their own players).

Cotton won fan's mvp. He did it despite NSW has more fans and any social fan would most likely choose a Sydney player.

Fan's MVP should be the award players go for, as it's voted by people passionate about the sport, anc are not too directly involved in the politics.

I'll be generous and say that the Wildcats have a loyal and passionate fanbase and Bogut in his 'feud' with Angus Brandt had become to them a target of vitriol and hostility and that is playing a large part in the somewhat childish reaction to Bogut winning MVP and the ensuing belief their guy Cotton was robbed.

If Ware had won MVP this conspiracy theory/illegitimacy nonsense likely wouldn't be happening. It's got more to do with Bogut (the enemy) winning than Cotton being passed over.

The idiocy of some people has no boundaries... The process behind MVP voting is pretty transparent, how can it be rigged?

So basically your argument boils down to "if you exclude the people who think Bogut should have won, nobody thinks Bogut should have won"?


Then there are those who just like to be dickheads and pick on anyone with a dissenting view. Same same.

Idiot.
They changed the entire voting system supposedly to make it more easily understood and followed by the public.
So on that basis alone it is an epic fail.

There are always those who think it makes them appear smart, and/or morally superior, to agree with the official result. Such people add nothing to the discussion.

Then there are those who just like to be dickheads and pick on anyone with a dissenting view. Same same.

Then of course there are those who consider that the favourite was Cotton, and therefore turn this into yet another Wildcats bashing thread. Again, no value.

Take those people out of the discussion, and who seriously thinks this is a correct result?

They had to change the way the mvp was voted because he would never have won if it was the old system

He probably only signed to play nbl if it was in his contract that he would win MVP. If Boone averaged the same everything that bogut did would he win it. No way.

[Of course it would be great if we could simply see the votes published. That would completely remove any stigma of illegitimacy, allow the fans to clearly understand how the result was arrived at, ans also expose any cockhead votes.]

There's probably only a small handful of people who think the MVP result is illegitimate

And they're all anonymous posters on internet forums.

Firstly, the purpose of any thread is to be debate and discuss. If all you want to do is endorse the official result and insult people who disagree, piss off, go to facebook, and give Bogut a heart emoji.

There are always those who think it makes them appear smart, and/or morally superior, to agree with the official result. Such people add nothing to the discussion.

Then there are those who just like to be dickheads and pick on anyone with a dissenting view. Same same.

Then of course there are those who consider that the favourite was Cotton, and therefore turn this into yet another Wildcats bashing thread. Again, no value.

Take those people out of the discussion, and who seriously thinks this is a correct result?

Obviously Bogut (by NBL standards) is a great player. You can certainly produce lots of evidence to back that up.
But he was neither the best nor the most valuable.

As for those saying "there's more to basketball than points" or "points are easily replaced" That's only partially true. Games are won by points, and the other attributes are only relevant relative to scoring or denying points. Furthermore, none of the other top players were bums in the other departments.
Also, if points are so easily replaced, why don't more teams do it?

For the record, my votes would have gone as follows:
5 - Ware
4 - Long
3 - Cotton
2 - Trimble
1 - Bogut

Which I think in of itself highlights the problem with this voting system.
Having 3 voters from each club, simply compounds the problem. From some they probably got 3 completely different votes, whereas I am sure some would have discussed it.
With only 8 clubs voting, it is ridiculously subject to manipulation. If you stand for parliament, nobody really cares if you, and all your family and friends, put your main opponent last. In the scheme of things its irrelevant.
But imagine if say the Wildcats had all agreed to give no votes to Bogut, ware, etc. take those 45 votes out of circulation and it makes a huge impact.

I also don't agree that you can vote down Ware and Cotton on the basis of bad games, but ignore the great games they had to end the season.

You also can't escape the cringe factor, and the suspicion that something, somewhere, just stinks. From day 1, Bogut has been feted as the Saviour of the NBL. The "NBA Great" who deigned to come down and play with the mere mortals.
Now, low and behold, he takes out the two top awards.
This, you see, is the problem with a league with apparently low levels of transparency and accountability.

Of course it would be great if we could simply see the votes published. That would completely remove any stigma of illegitimacy, allow the fans to clearly understand how the result was arrived at, ans also expose any cockhead votes.

We often have these arguments.

It's not the first time either.

Few years ago it was Ennis, Goulding and Clarke with many expecting Ennis to win, but Clarke won. Each of them had a strong argument for MVP, can't deny that.

i.e. cotton is good but not actually that valuable for winning games.

A good case could be made for any of those 3. All 3 would've been deserving winners.

I'm also just resisting those who seem upset Bogut won. It's pretty ludicrous.

For the record, although it was a small sample size, Perth did just as well without Cotton this year as with him:

Won 91-86 vs NZ at home Nov 25 (Also missing Martin)
Lost 72-77 at Sydney Dec 6
Won 93-78 in Cairns Dec 31

White and Kay stepped up and averaged about 20ppg in those games. They're both quality players, as Kay's NBL 1st team status shows. Just proves it's silly to claim Cotton was single handedly carrying Perth. He was the biggest single influence on his team and their success- just like Bogut for Sydney and Casper for United- but it's ridiculous to claim he was a lone hand or something.

I'm not dismissing Cotton in the slightest. All teams ended up with 18 wins and Ware/Cotton/Bogut were huge parts of that. If you read what I've written in this thread I would be fine with Cotton having won MVP - I actually expected him to win it, to be perfectly honest. I'm just not surprised Bogut won because he was a huge impact on both ends of the court (not scoring - his whole impact on the Kings' halfcourt). I also wouldn't have been surprised if Ware won. They all had strong cases. I'd have ranked them Cotton-Bogut-Ware, and I was surprised that it was Bogut-Ware-Cotton, but hey, it's clear how the voting process works.

"Even the finished first argument doesn't hold much weight when three teams all had 18 wins"

Finishing first is massive. 9 out of the past 10 champions have been won by the team with HCA. Look at what had to happen for one of those "tied" teams to finish first - Cotton had to carry his team with unbelievable record-breaking performances. To dismiss that while just focusing on Bogut's rebounds is a pretty poor analysis.

wnbl tonite....if i didn't have to guess ....i'd gladly confess....
....it is griffin....

Even the finished first argument doesn't hold much weight when three teams all had 18 wins. Again, can make a case for all three guys but it's lunacy to argue that one of the three doesn't deserve it - all three did, only one can win though.

cat fan logic - our team finished 1st therefore our guy must be mvp
it is flawed thinking
cats had the best 1-2 punch in the league with cotton and kay. no other team had 2 guys in the all star 5. that is part of the reason they could win when cotton was hurt. i.e. cotton is good but not actually that valuable for winning games.

"No Cotton and Perth are scoring 40ppg; Their defense would have to be extra special ;)"

didn't cats have a winning record in the games cotton missed?

[No one in their right mind would play Kickert in Centre. Kings would have an import Centre.]

And if Perth didn't have Cotton they'd have a Lisch instead. Another stud import. Ennis, Lisch, Cotton- their number 1 imports are generally good

But that's stating the obvious and misses the point

"[so true. not only does he shoot threes but he also flops onto the floor after shooting threes which for some reason results in him shooting free throws.]

Best comment of this thread"

It is actually one of the most uneducated comments you could make.

"No Cotton and Perth are still a good defensive team, a good rebounding team with a proven system. Steindl could play more time and would come off some of those screens that Cotton usually comes off. "

No Cotton and Perth are scoring 40ppg; Their defense would have to be extra special ;)

"Sydney without Bogut would be regularly overpowered, out muscled, and teams would attack the hoop relentlessly against them. They'd be a high scoring team who lost most of their games- a bit like that United team a few years ago who had Kickert playing Centre."

Not relevant.

No one in their right mind would play Kickert in Centre. Kings would have an import Centre.

Bogut can not defend the on ball screens or perimeter. Too old and slow. Sure he averages 10 blocks pg, but gives away 10 jumpshots pg.

not saying it isn't valuable or that he isn't a good player just saying he is one dimensional and is effective at one end of the floor only. also he is far more easily covered if he is missing from the team as proven by cats having wins without him. someone who is multi dimensional is much harder to cover for.

[so true. not only does he shoot threes but he also flops onto the floor after shooting threes which for some reason results in him shooting free throws.]

Best comment of this thread

A big reason why Perth now deserve favoritism

Cotton will average about 10 undeserved free throw attempts per game in front of that raucous 13,000 strong crowd

BTW Cotton averaged about 13 more points per game than Bogut.

And before you say scoring isn't everything, its a massive part of the game and Cotton has single-handedly won massive games with his scoring. That is valuable to a team no matter which was you spin it.

btw bogut averaged 0.6 assists per game more than cotton

"some people evidently think that 3 point shooting is the only valuable thing that Cotton does. no idea."

so true. not only does he shoot threes but he also flops onto the floor after shooting threes which for some reason results in him shooting free throws.

As in, I reckon Steindl could step up and play a bigger role if Perth's roster was reshuffled, a bit like how Barlow stepped up this year after Tai Wesley's departure