Jun 20, 2016 Championship aside, what's the better accolade? Being head and shoulders above any other player in the league over the course of a 82 game season, or being the best player on the floor on basketball's biggest stage? @NBAsxn
Jun 20, 2016 I vote for Steph. 82 games span over a very long time, and to do it at a level consistently enough that no other player in the league is considered for the award, that's impressive.
Jun 20, 2016 I'd give it to LeBron but Kyrie did get 30+ 3 games a row. I thought he had a better game than LeBron when they both got 41 and he arguably sinked the most important shot of the series right at the end.
Jun 20, 2016 LeBron played a much better all around game than Kyrie. Kyrie just couldn't miss in game 5. To answer OP tho, I think Curry getting the unanimous MVP in the regular season is more impressive, considering it was the first ever. We have never seen anything like it before. Curry's regular season deserved it just as much as LeBron's Final's did tho.
Jun 20, 2016 Thought this question was a joke when I saw it but I guess not. It's all about the end result to me and it doesn't matter if you don't win a ring, Bron's is clearly the bigger accomplishment imo.
Jun 20, 2016 Impressiveness is completely different than accomplishment in this situation. LeBron's accomplished more by getting unanimous Finals MVP, but I think it's fair to say Curry's feat was more impressive.
Jun 20, 2016 Finals MVP has that allure about it in that you've stepped up in that pressure cooker situation and delivered on the biggest stage ever. Coming up big/clutch. It is a smaller sample size though. Season MVP has that mystique about it in that you've been elite for the whole duration of the season. A level above your peers. Leading your team to pole position for Playoffs. I dunno guys I'm torn. I think I value players who step it up at the pointy end of the season so Unanimous Finals MVP for me.
Jun 22, 2016 I think that the American sports media places a little too much emphasis on these narratives we create around great players. LeBron will be better-remembered because he dominated the last three games of these finals so thoroughly; not simply because he got another ring. (So by extension, Kobe is not automatically and immovably ahead of him just because he has more.) I think that the MVP is more historically significant.
Jun 22, 2016 Agreed. In many ways, he willed this championship into existence. From the triple double, to the 40-pt games, to that block to even landing on his wrist, his performance this series was instantly memorable. A perfect confluence of heart and ability.
Jun 22, 2016 Yeah. It was thoroughly dominant when you look at the raw stats, or the historical context (his importance to Cleveland; the fact they beat a 73-9 team; the fact they came back from down 3-1), or just by the symbolism of those two huge blocks, the second of which ended the Warriors' scoring completely.
Jun 22, 2016 The players have one goal at the beggining of the season, winning a championship. Lebron is the one who achived that goal so his run is more impressive.
Jun 26, 2016 It's a weirdly framed question. Typically, if a player wins a unanimous finals MVP, that means his team likely won the championship. With that being said, I'm willing to bet all NBA players would rather have a unanimous finals MVP than a unanimous league MVP. But.... I'd argue that the unanimous league MVP is more impressive simply because of the length of the regular season. The level you have to play at and the consistency you have to display throughout the entire season is just ridiculous. Not to mention, with a finals MVP, you just have to stand out amongst your teammates and the opposing players. With a league MVP, you have to stand out among all the stars in the league.
