And lastly, talk a little about your feelings on the awards in general…
Leniart: I have no problem with the NBA awards. It always nice to recognize players, coaches, and executive for their accomplishments on and off the court. If there was one thing about the awards I dislike, it would be that voters tend vote for players in a given category who have not won that award recently. This problem seems to arise the most frequently in the MVP voting. In order to win the award two years in a row, a player has to be insanely productive and hope that the other candidates for the award do not have strong cases. There have been some snubs in recent years that left fans scratching their heads.
Eyrich: Overall I thought this past season’s awards were pretty accurate. There might have been one or two categories that I would have had a different winner for, but most of those were a toss up for me in general. Rookie of the Year was one of those, but I had no problem with it because of the drama it caused during the season. If anything, we know there’s a great future for the game.
Rahming: I think it’s great for the players and families that these awards exist. It provides players and executives an opportunity to be recognized on the national stage. There seems to be some level of politics involved in the voting process though. I believe every season that James is the Most Valuable Player in the NBA. I will continue to maintain this belief every season until he retires. Let’s go back… James won the award for consecutive years in 2012 and 2014. Enter Derrick Rose. Somehow James is the second best player in the league behind the youngest MVP in league history. He was almost swept out of the Eastern Conference Finals by the Heat. After the voters realized they fell for the new shiny toy again, James was crowned MVP for the next two seasons. All is right with the world. Kevin Durant finishes second in both seasons, and in 2014 the voters become ‘The real MVP’ and turn to Durant. Can anyone believe James’ last MVP was in 2013? Steph Curry deserves both MVP’s he got in 2015 and 2016. He literally took over the league. There wasn’t a steal Curry couldn’t get. Not a jumper he couldn’t swish. Not a contested layup he couldn’t hit. Then the league felt terrible for Westbrook, and he capitalized on that on his way to tying (not breaking) history, with a season-long triple-double for his first career MVP. Who finishes second? James Harden. Like clockwork, he becomes the latest MVP to be crowned, despite James playing all 82 games, despite James crushing him in every statistical category besides steals (The D’Antoni Effect), points per game and free throw percentage. They even tied in 3-point percentage. Sound familiar Tyler Johnson?
Mora: I like them, but I feel they are biased somehow. Draymond Green beating Rudy Gobert for Defensive Player of the Year after the Golden State Warriors won the NBA championship… I feel it’s more of a popularity contest more than anything, and that hurts the NBA. The league shouldn’t focus on the Warriors and the Cavaliers and that’s it. They are 30 teams in the league, all with incredible talent that shouldn’t be overlooked. I think while the awards, in general, are a good idea, how they are currently set up and how they display favoritism is just awful.
Johnson: In 2017, I wrote a piece critical of the awards-giving process. Entitled “Sage Steele voted for MVP,” I was questioning how qualified of a voting field the NBA uses, considering Steele was removed from her post as ESPN’s NBA anchor halfway through the season, but still had a media awards vote. I don’t agree on only giving media personnel votes, particularly because sports journalism in the 2010’s comes with an inherent partiality that wasn’t as heralded years ago. These voters are now more connected to their writing and podcast subjects than ever, so what’s to stop a personal grudge or misunderstanding from influencing their vote?
And there you have it.