The NBL have coaches vote after every game. The NBA have selected media vote at the end of the season. I think the NBL system has more credibility, even if it isn't perfect.

The problem with the NBL voting system is that the best player on the worst team can win the MVP and is more likely to than the best player on the best team due to the points getting spread more. If there was some extra weighting for win percentage or similar that might help.

I think the NBL also needs to hype the MVP more throughout the season. The NBA has a ROTY and MVP leader board every week (not actual leading vote getters but the opinion of a knowledgeable beat writer) that gets the conversation going. And have a proper structure to the awards!

"The problem with the NBL voting system is that the best player on the worst team can win the MVP and is more likely to than the best player on the best team"



This is a myth. The NBL has had 39 MVP winners. Here are the stats on their teams in those seasons:

Average winning percentage = 67%
Number to make playoffs = 34*/39
Number with winning records = 34/39

Those numbers since the turn of the millennium:

Average winning percentage = 66%
Number to make playoffs = 14/16
Number with winning records = 13/16

*There were no playoffs in 1979, just a GF, and Ken Richardson's West Adelaide finished 4th with a 12-6 record.

I understand what you're saying Slammin' 80, but it makes me ask whether you'd prefer a Best Player award rather than a Most Valuable Player award?

Maybe there shoudl be a couple of additional awards - Fans' Choice best player and Players' Player. A number of NBL clubs do the former and the AFL does the latter. Both are good ideas, I reckon.

Leader board idea is good. It would also be good to have a formal NBL awards' night, otherwise you're only promoting it to existing NBL followers and it carries no value in the wider community. e.g., ask 20 people in the street to name 2 NBL MVPs or 2 Brownlow medallists. You need an event where you give the media some free food, a good time and photo opportunities, so they'll write about the NBL MVP.

Something needs to change, Conklin isn't MVP calibre, team MVP yes, but not league.

This sounds like a conspiracy theory but I reckon if an NBL import has an mvp-type year they'd be less likely to win it over an Australian with similar stats as they'd be more likely to get a great European gig with an NBL MVP under their belt.

Not enough decent NBL media guys out there that watch all (most) of the games throughout the year.

"This sounds like a conspiracy theory but I reckon if an NBL import has an mvp-type year they'd be less likely to win it over an Australian with similar stats"

This is one hell of a conspiracy theory because the coaches would have to be in on it, helping opponents keep their best player!

Anon two above's suggestion is the first common sense alternative I've read in a while.

I like round-by-round as that actually factors in how well people play, not just the perception of it. However, there's a good argument the best player shouldn't miss MVP because they missed one or two games.

FWIW, as someone who'd be considered basketball media, after Childress was injured my first choice this season was Conklin.

PeterJohn what I am getting at is that we don't want a team MVP we want a LEAGUE MVP. This means the most valuable player to the league as a whole. This doesn't just mean he puts up the best stats. I think that the NBA has it more "right" than the NBL as it is not necessarily the best player that wins but the one who is the most valuable to the league. What are the current voting criteria? Coach picks the top 3 players for contribution in 1 game? That basically would end up with stat stuffers getting more votes than guys who truly influence winning and bring value to the league.

yeah lets make it the same...... someone will probably for for Melo..... someone always votes for Melo...

"Coach picks the top 3 players for contribution in 1 game? That basically would end up with stat stuffers getting more votes than guys who truly influence winning and bring value to the league."

I think the coaches understand who influences winning better than anyone else.

I hear you Slammin' - that's clearly a different perspective from what I thought. More of a marketing/brand value perspective.

However, there's a good argument the best player shouldn't miss MVP because they missed one or two games.

I agree.

Boti - would vote for the best 36er
Ward - would vote for the best United player.
Tuxworth - would vote for whoever he bet on

I don't think you're giving these professionals enough credit.

Slammin, stat stuffers don't fool coaches. See DMac's frustrations with McRae in Melbourne. Ennis was a completely different player - might've sulked when he didn't win the award, but he had a well-rounded season, just had another decent option up against him.

not necessarily the best player that wins but the one who is the most valuable to the league.

Not sure if your wording is right there. "Most valuable to the league" is what puts shallow fan favourites in the NBA ASG rather than the current contributors.

They could potentially tweak the method so it's a mixture of what they do now, plus some post-season voting. I think it's sensible to involve the media as well. Anything to keep them involved.

I used to get to vote on the monthly awards and always appreciated that, plus took it seriously and avoided any bias I could.

I don't think there really is a correct answer unless you were able to have totally impartial voters at every game.

There are so many ways to look at the MVP award.

Typically it goes to a high scorer who has some huge games offensively.

Quite often a coach will have a different view on who their mvp is.

As example I would think that Damien Martin is the MVP of that team. If you look at all the other players, they could be covered if they were injured etc. If Martin wasn't there then other teams would have an easier time getting into there offense and running their structures.

This being said, Damo will never win MVP as he doesn't score enough points.

As long as people are aware of the voting system then it is understandable how guys win the award.