PDA

View Full Version : MVP voting bias?



cheesenose
08-30-2009, 03:09 PM
Seems like there's a huge bias for big men, in terms of the MVP voting and selection process. Can't really remember a time when a perimeter player won the award. Personally, I think this is because it's easier to get double-figure rebounds than double-figure assists, simply because if you're rebounding, it's all on you, while if you want to get an assist, you're dependent on your teammate making the basket after you pass the ball. The great weight that's given to statistical points seems to indicate a bias for bigs, IMO.

Any thoughts?

machine101
08-30-2009, 06:19 PM
james yap won mvp during 2003 i think ???

cheesenose
08-30-2009, 08:03 PM
james yap won mvp during 2003 i think ???


That just proves my point. He's the only perimeter player to win it, since the current statistical point computation was installed (in that same year, if I'm not mistaken). Kawawa naman sina LA Tenorio, Mac Cardona, Patrick Cabahug, etc, and all of those other perimeter players who simply didn't have enough stat points to qualify.

Ewan ko, just seems kinda unfair to me.

fujima04
08-30-2009, 08:51 PM
I got your point pero even prior to that year puro big men na rin naman ang nananalong MVP.

Enrico Villanueva, Rich Alavarez, Don Allado, Mark Telan, Chris Cantonjos, Dennis Espino at Jun Limpot.

The last small guy who won a UAAP MVP Award is Johnny A. back in 1991.

Maybe it only shows that in basketball, may advantage talaga ang mga big men. Hindi dahil yung current basis of computation ay binago after manalo ni James Yap.

I assume you mean dapat bigyan ng mas mabigat na weightings/percentage ang mga stats na kadalasan dominated ng small guys like assist and steal para maging balance.

agdlc
08-30-2009, 09:34 PM
good point. i remember back in 2006(?), ken bono won the award over jc intal by a very slight margin just because the latter was scoring and rebounding monster numbers on a mediocre team (although they did manage to reach the f4). intal was averaging double digit scoring, and something like 7 rebs and 5 to 7 assts per game as a sf. that 5 to7 assts stat, for me, stood out the most. current point guards have a hard time averaging 5 assists at the college level were the game is very erratic. for a 6'3 to 6'4 forward to do that in a season was just amazing. he wasn't even doing it from the low post.

is it harder to score or to get an assist? is it harder to block a shot or to get a rebound? maybe the mvp standings should adopt the player efficiency formulas most fantasy basketball leagues have, and base the award on the "standard 8-cat"

atenean_blooded
08-31-2009, 02:16 AM
I think there's a formula based on the stats. I guess it's a question of factoring and assigning weights to different stats.

One of the things that's considered, as far as I know, is if the player's team wins. May plus points yun.

fujima04
08-31-2009, 02:33 AM
I believed atenean_blooded is correct. Me plus points pag nanalo yung team.

Kaya malabo manalo ng MVP kahit magjock-up sa stats ang isang player kung nagtatatalo naman yung team or in case pag one-man team.

oca
08-31-2009, 06:58 AM
Kung di ako nagkakamali, "walang nagaganap na voting sa paghirang ng MVP".

paul0220
08-31-2009, 09:26 AM
Can anyone cite exactly the rules in selecting the MVP from the UAAP's rule book for us to exactly know how an MVP is chosen.

bg_eagle
08-31-2009, 10:55 AM
good point. i remember back in 2006(?), ken bono won the award over jc intal by a very slight margin just because the latter was scoring and rebounding monster numbers on a mediocre team (although they did manage to reach the f4). intal was averaging double digit scoring, and something like 7 rebs and 5 to 7 assts per game as a sf. that 5 to7 assts stat, for me, stood out the most. current point guards have a hard time averaging 5 assists at the college level were the game is very erratic. for a 6'3 to 6'4 forward to do that in a season was just amazing. he wasn't even doing it from the low post.

is it harder to score or to get an assist? is it harder to block a shot or to get a rebound? maybe the mvp standings should adopt the player efficiency formulas most fantasy basketball leagues have, and base the award on the "standard 8-cat"




IMO, bad example yung kay Bono. Bono was really deserving because he made them into a final four team. He made Adamson that much better and was practically unstoppable and that's the criteria most people apply in voitng. Ken Bono took Adamson from mediocrity to a Final Four team. JC Intal had lots of help from Kramer, Arao, Escalona and Tiu.



Kung di ako nagkakamali, "walang nagaganap na voting sa paghirang ng MVP".


Meron by sportwriters and if I'm not mistaken, coaches as well. Again, I might be wrong, but I think Jervy Cruz had more statistical points than Rabeh last year but since UST didn't even make the final four, most voters went with Rabeh.

50 percent lang ata ang statistical points?

nastrans
08-31-2009, 11:22 AM
Wala nang MVP voting this year. Purely stats na lang basehan sa pagpili ng MVP this season.

No wonder why Dylan's non-suspension is a questionable one.

maroonmartian
08-31-2009, 12:55 PM
Pero I think I add yung winning percentage ng team. What is the point of having a good stat if banban naman team mo. Pero yung 3 na candidates this year (Ababou, Al-Hussaini, Ramos) di naman banban so anyone of them deserves it. Pero I'll go to another bigmen, Al-Hussaini.

agdlc
08-31-2009, 01:23 PM
IMO, bad example yung kay Bono. Bono was really deserving because he made them into a final four team. He made Adamson that much better and was practically unstoppable and that's the criteria most people apply in voitng. Ken Bono took Adamson from mediocrity to a Final Four team. JC Intal had lots of help from Kramer, Arao, Escalona and Tiu.


[/quote]

agreed! bono was more consistent and had to deal with much more being the focus of the opposing team's defense.

if media votes for the mvp would not be inlcuded in the equation anymore, is there a formula that would effectively "include" all of the intangibles mvp candidates bring to the table, instead of just adding up all of the points, rebounds, assists and other stats to determine who the mvp is?

- comparative stats,i think, would improve this (using percentile rankings to balance out the numerically inferior categories such as steals, blocks and assists against the numerically superior categories- therefore standardizing the mvp statistical point categories into 100 pt scales). para naman ma-recognize yung worth ng assists, steals ,and blocks.

- maybe going for a more precise approach, and implementing the nba's player efficiency ratings, which takes away the advantage of a high-scoring offense which score in bunches and does "point farming", but contribute little else to the wins of the team. (zach randolph?)

- maybe this is too technical for a 14 game regular season. stats fluctuate wildly per game in this very short period of time. maybe that's the weakness of a UAAP mvp award. you're basically just the best player for 14 games. so again, maybe statistical points should be thrown out the window for short seasons because the "n" is too small to infer a statistically sound conclusion. confounders like "pag tambak na kalaban, the best players are taken out", "high octane offenses are rewarded more because of stat padding", "siya lang magaling sa team kaya siya lang gumagawa nang lahat", aren't ironed out at the end of the season because of lack of games.

therefore (sorry for the long post, got caught up in the issue), maybe the best way to go (for a 14 game season) is to do away with stats and just pick the "best player on the best team" as the MVP.

atenean_blooded
08-31-2009, 02:03 PM
If you do away with stats, and insist on these so-called "intangibles," how do you assure objectivity? Or is the choice of the season's most valuable player something that should not be decided objectively?

As far as I know, the previous MVPs (Alvarez, Villanueva, Yap, Santos, Bono, Cruz, Al-Hussaini) were given the award due to their statistical points (75%) and media votes (25%).

If I'm not mistaken, the statistical points are computed using a formula that factors in points, rebounds, assists, blocks, and other stats, averaged over games, while deducting fouls, turnovers, etc., also averaged over games, then given a bonus for each win. Is this the same as the "efficiency" thing?

The media votes, I think, are meant to factor in the "intangibles."


If we agree that stats fluctuate, then we might agree that those who are usually candidates for MVP are those who consistently put up good numbers. That makes sense, because if we are to agree that stats fluctuate, those with consistently good stats are probably the most reliable and most valuable players.

agdlc
08-31-2009, 03:46 PM
thanks for the reply, this issue is something that interests me

--> as for "objectifying" who the mvp is, i don't have an answer for you. even the nba has a hard time "objectifying" what an mvp is in the first place... is it: a) the best player on the best team- the one who doesn't put up great stats, but is the heart of that 1st place team (kevin garnett, celtics championship team '08), b) the game's best player - amazing stats on an "ok" to good team (kobe bryant, 81 pts, lakers '06), c) the catalyst - someone who isn't on the best team, who doesnt put up the greatest stats, but someone who makes the people around him better (steve nash, suns '04 and '05). these are just recent examples of mvp's on the nba- examples lang, not meant to compare uaap and the nba, since we're talking about the award only, not the leagues. and of course, we do not have the luxury of having a lebron james who can be all 3: best player on the best team, the most dominant player, and makes everyone around him better.

i agree, there should be some measure of objectivity in recognizing the mvp. but short of just adding up stats like points, rebounds and assists in a simple calculation, being objective in the correct way entails a deeper analysis and a reliable mathematical computation (which includes fts, 3pts, fg%, wins, etc) than just simple addition of stats. yun nga, is an assist harder to get than a bucket? how do you apply that into the equation? so i mentioned some of the different and simpler formulas that may be more objective in determining the mvp. but then again: a reliable mathematical formula is still dependent on the figures you input into it, and does an unpredictable 14 game statistical pool equate into a reliable objective equation? if it doesn't, and we can't find a good formula suited for the UAAP, should we even use statistics? or should we just give it to the best player on the best team after 14 games?

--> media votes. i'm not sure who, how many of them, get to vote (how much they watch the uaap, which schools are they from, how much they know about basketball), so i don't know if the "intangibles" do get considered in that 25%. not saying they're incapable, i'm in no position to declare that. i'm sure they're all number freaks and all, but how does the 25% contribute to picking a good mvp? does it become a popularity contest? the 25% makes it more variable, but it does not necessarily mean it completely covers for the intangibles the mvp candidate brings. what if members of the uaap board or each team's coaching staff gets 1 vote each and they aren't allowed to pick their own player, instead of getting media votes (which has been scrapped this year pala)?

--> i guess it all boils down to what the definition of "valuable" is in MVP. does it mean, "best statistics", "most value to the team", or "makes other teammates better"? kobe, kg, or lebron? ababou, rabeh, or barroca?
if we were to take last year as an example, "best stats guy" would be jervy. "most value to the team" would be rabeh. "makes teammates better" would be chris tiu or casio. rabeh won last year.

for this year, how do we define what an MVP is? (1) "best statistics guy". kung simpleng addition lang, ababou would be a very deserving winner. BUT how do we input those statistics into a reliable equation that measures all of the intangibles? is it a dependable formula? in my opinion, no. it's a very variable 14 game season and we need a better formula to determine who the mvp is if we're relying on statistics alone this year. (2) "makes teammates better". is there a steve nash-like player who can be pinpointed as the reason for great improvements in his teammates this year comapred to last? mmm, hard to tell. not one player stands out for me this year. ababou and barroca maybe. they elevated their team's level of play i think. (3) "best player on the best team". the season isn't over, but based on the standings now, it's rabeh.

statistically, given the mvp standings, ababou should win. but MVP aka "best player on the best team" should go to rabeh.

atenean_blooded
08-31-2009, 04:40 PM
thanks for the reply, this issue is something that interests me

--> as for "objectifying" who the mvp is, i don't have an answer for you. even the nba has a hard time "objectifying" what an mvp is in the first place... is it: a) the best player on the best team- the one who doesn't put up great stats, but is the heart of that 1st place team (kevin garnett, celtics championship team '08), b) the game's best player - amazing stats on an "ok" to good team (kobe bryant, 81 pts, lakers '06), c) the catalyst - someone who isn't on the best team, who doesnt put up the greatest stats, but someone who makes the people around him better (steve nash, suns '04 and '05). these are just recent examples of mvp's on the nba- examples lang, not meant to compare uaap and the nba, since we're talking about the award only, not the leagues. and of course, we do not have the luxury of having a lebron james who can be all 3: best player on the best team, the most dominant player, and makes everyone around him better.

i agree, there should be some measure of objectivity in recognizing the mvp. but short of just adding up stats like points, rebounds and assists in a simple calculation, being objective in the correct way entails a deeper analysis and a reliable mathematical computation (which includes fts, 3pts, fg%, wins, etc) than just simple addition of stats. yun nga, is an assist harder to get than a bucket? how do you apply that into the equation? so i mentioned some of the different and simpler formulas that may be more objective in determining the mvp. but then again: a reliable mathematical formula is still dependent on the figures you input into it, and does an unpredictable 14 game statistical pool equate into a reliable objective equation? if it doesn't, and we can't find a good formula suited for the UAAP, should we even use statistics? or should we just give it to the best player on the best team after 14 games?

Good points.

If the 14 game statistics are generally unpredictable, then maybe the MVP IS the one who consistently puts up good numbers for a team that manages a considerable amount of success.

If we aren't going to use statistics, though, how do we determine who the "best" player is? This is a question that is probably as difficult to answer as the one that asks for what an MVP is.

Re assists and buckets, I'm not so sure. But the assists aren't counted if the buckets don't go in, and I don't think an assist is awarded if the "assisted" player has to create a bit after receiving the pass, so assists are probably harder to come by?



--> media votes. i'm not sure who, how many of them, get to vote (how much they watch the uaap, which schools are they from, how much they know about basketball), so i don't know if the "intangibles" do get considered in that 25%. not saying they're incapable, i'm in no position to declare that. i'm sure they're all number freaks and all, but how does the 25% contribute to picking a good mvp? does it become a popularity contest? the 25% makes it more variable, but it does not necessarily mean it completely covers for the intangibles the mvp candidate brings. what if members of the uaap board or each team's coaching staff gets 1 vote each and they aren't allowed to pick their own player, instead of getting media votes (which has been scrapped this year pala)?

I think the media votes are just added to round out the statistics. Of course, I will not be surprised if the guy with the best stats gets the most votes.



--> i guess it all boils down to what the definition of "valuable" is in MVP. does it mean, "best statistics", "most value to the team", or "makes other teammates better"? kobe, kg, or lebron? ababou, rabeh, or barroca?
if we were to take last year as an example, "best stats guy" would be jervy. "most value to the team" would be rabeh. "makes teammates better" would be chris tiu or casio. rabeh won last year.

"Best statistics," I can understand, because we can deal with figures.

But "makes other teammates better" or "most value to the team?" Those are as fuzzy as "valuable."

Re Rabeh and Cruz: Rabeh won because his stats were great, and if I am not mistaken, even better than Cruz's for whole stretches of the season. In addition to that, Rabeh's team kept winning, which gave him the bonus. And that makes a whole lot of sense, because I do no see how we can award the MVP title to someone whose team keeps losing and does not even qualify for the semis.

Of course, that also shows a problem with just relying on stats: If some guy averages 100 (or to use a more realistic example, 30-40) points a game, but his teammates don't know how to play ball, and his team keeps losing, he'll probably be a statistical leader, but he probably won't be worthy of being the MVP.



for this year, how do we define what an MVP is? (1) "best statistics guy". kung simpleng addition lang, ababou would be a very deserving winner. BUT how do we input those statistics into a reliable equation that measures all of the intangibles? is it a dependable formula? in my opinion, no. it's a very variable 14 game season and we need a better formula to determine who the mvp is if we're relying on statistics alone this year. (2) "makes teammates better". is there a steve nash-like player who can be pinpointed as the reason for great improvements in his teammates this year comapred to last? mmm, hard to tell. not one player stands out for me this year. ababou and barroca maybe. they elevated their team's level of play i think. (3) "best player on the best team". the season isn't over, but based on the standings now, it's rabeh.

statistically, given the mvp standings, ababou should win. but MVP aka "best player on the best team" should go to rabeh.


Again, it is possible to have an objective discussion about a statistics-oriented race. At least, it is easier.

As for using the fuzzy criterion "best," there are no rules.

agdlc
08-31-2009, 05:31 PM
in any case, one can make a case for all of the mvp candidates this season. it's really difficult to choose one, based on reasonable parameters, when there are 3 or 4 deserving players i personally would like to see win the award. i hope that these players at, least, are recognized as part of the mythical 5 or given other modes of appreciation like the maaasahan player award.

as a side note, before the season, i predicted that one of my favorite current uaap players, james mangahas, would contend for the mvp award this season. man, was i wrong. i'll leave the mvp-pickings to the experts!

bchoter
09-01-2009, 11:46 AM
good point. i remember back in 2006(?), ken bono won the award over jc intal by a very slight margin just because the latter was scoring and rebounding monster numbers on a mediocre team (although they did manage to reach the f4). intal was averaging double digit scoring, and something like 7 rebs and 5 to 7 assts per game as a sf. that 5 to7 assts stat, for me, stood out the most. current point guards have a hard time averaging 5 assists at the college level were the game is very erratic. for a 6'3 to 6'4 forward to do that in a season was just amazing. he wasn't even doing it from the low post.

is it harder to score or to get an assist? is it harder to block a shot or to get a rebound? maybe the mvp standings should adopt the player efficiency formulas most fantasy basketball leagues have, and base the award on the "standard 8-cat"




IMO, bad example yung kay Bono. Bono was really deserving because he made them into a final four team. He made Adamson that much better and was practically unstoppable and that's the criteria most people apply in voitng. Ken Bono took Adamson from mediocrity to a Final Four team. JC Intal had lots of help from Kramer, Arao, Escalona and Tiu.



Kung di ako nagkakamali, "walang nagaganap na voting sa paghirang ng MVP".


Meron by sportwriters and if I'm not mistaken, coaches as well. Again, I might be wrong, but I think Jervy Cruz had more statistical points than Rabeh last year but since UST didn't even make the final four, most voters went with Rabeh.

50 percent lang ata ang statistical points?
If the point system/matrix was not changed DURING the tallying of MVP points, Jervy would have been the MVP.

bg_eagle
09-01-2009, 11:56 AM
If the point system/matrix was not changed DURING the tallying of MVP points, Jervy would have been the MVP.


Care to elaborate?

atenean_blooded
09-01-2009, 02:26 PM
Kung hindi ako nagkakamali, Cruz's statistical point lead over Rabeh last season was tiny. And I do not think the win bonuses were factored in yet.

And besides, it made a lot of sense to reward a player on a winning team. With due respect, Cruz had nice numbers, but his team didn't make the Final Four. Didn't seem valuable enough, compared to Rabeh, whose individual stats added to already impressive numbers from his teammates AND helped push his team to a good record.

Joescoundrel
09-01-2009, 04:19 PM
As explained to me about two years ago by a UAAP Board Rep, choosing the MVP is basically an exercise in number crunching and popularity, with the numbers making up 75% of account as correctly pointed out by Blooded.

Numbers include stats like scoring, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks. I no longer recall if it also included "negative" stats like turnovers and personal fouls. All these make up the so-called statistical points.

Also included in the statistical points are games won: the more games your team wins the better your chances of making MVP.

Then there are the media votes. The UAAP press corps, meaning all the usual UAAP-accredited media denizens that hang out at the Araneta press room, all get to vote as well.

Take all this together and you get your MVP.

Because of the games-won bonus, it stands to reason that mainly the Final 4 teams get an MVP candidate, unless maybe just maybe, say a player averaged something like 60 points, 30 rebounds, 15 assists and 12 blocks per game, and never got called for a technical or never fouled out, even if his team in such a case did not make the Final 4, MAYBE he has a chance to still get considered thanks to the massive SPs.

true.blue
09-01-2009, 07:41 PM
SPs are computed by adding a player’s points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, and won-game bonus (15 per win), minus technical fouls (5 points) and ejections (10) divided by the number of games played. - gmanews 2007

bg_eagle
09-02-2009, 11:24 PM
I thought ejections merited automatic disqualification from MVP consideration?

bchoter
09-03-2009, 12:00 AM
Kung hindi ako nagkakamali, Cruz's statistical point lead over Rabeh last season was tiny. And I do not think the win bonuses were factored in yet.

And besides, it made a lot of sense to reward a player on a winning team. With due respect, Cruz had nice numbers, but his team didn't make the Final Four. Didn't seem valuable enough, compared to Rabeh, whose individual stats added to already impressive numbers from his teammates AND helped push his team to a good record.
But making the final four was not part of the selection process, although it helps in the voting. In the voting system, points are given according to the ranking (Not sure about the exact weight but it could be 1st place vote = 5 pts, 2nd = 3 pts, 3rd = 1 pt). According to highly reliable source (who actually would rather not have this known), Jervy got the lion's share of votes in one of the voting groups (not sure if it was the players') and was still leading until it was decided (can't recall who decided but it must be the UAAP board) to do away with the points matrix and just get one name in (wala ng 2nd place pababa) in the 4 or 5-man panel of voters (whose composition I can't recall, please excuse the memory gap). In that voting, Rabeh got most (or maybe all of the votes). If the pts matrix was followed, I'm sure Jervy would have had a fightin chance since the final tally was not in a runaway fashion.

IMHO, Rabeh deserves the title because he led his team to the crown but, if we go by the rules in place, Jervy could have taken the title.

atenean_blooded
09-03-2009, 12:33 AM
Kung hindi ako nagkakamali, Cruz's statistical point lead over Rabeh last season was tiny. And I do not think the win bonuses were factored in yet.

And besides, it made a lot of sense to reward a player on a winning team. With due respect, Cruz had nice numbers, but his team didn't make the Final Four. Didn't seem valuable enough, compared to Rabeh, whose individual stats added to already impressive numbers from his teammates AND helped push his team to a good record.
But making the final four was not part of the selection process, although it helps in the voting. In the voting system, points are given according to the ranking (Not sure about the exact weight but it could be 1st place vote = 5 pts, 2nd = 3 pts, 3rd = 1 pt). According to highly reliable source (who actually would rather not have this known), Jervy got the lion's share of votes in one of the voting groups (not sure if it was the players') and was still leading until it was decided (can't recall who decided but it must be the UAAP board) to do away with the points matrix and just get one name in (wala ng 2nd place pababa) in the 4 or 5-man panel of voters (whose composition I can't recall, please excuse the memory gap). In that voting, Rabeh got most (or maybe all of the votes). If the pts matrix was followed, I'm sure Jervy would have had a fightin chance since the final tally was not in a runaway fashion.

IMHO, Rabeh deserves the title because he led his team to the crown but, if we go by the rules in place, Jervy could have taken the title.


Points well-taken, manong bchoter, but I'm not sure how much credence I can give hearsay information, even if from a "highly reliable" source.

I know that making the Final Four was not part of the selection process, but 13 wins vs. 6 wins probably gave Rabeh enough bonus points to close the gap (it will be helpful if we have the final statistical points tally), which allowed him to take the title via the votes cast by the different groups.

Here's the article about Rabeh winning the MVP plum. I've reproduced it in full (from an e-mail of the article I received), and emphasized a possible key paragraph.



Rabeh lives up to his name, bags MVP title

By Jasmine W. Payo
Philippine Daily Inquirer

Posted date: September 24, 2008

MANILA, Philippines—Quite fittingly, his name literally means “winner” in Arabic.

That’s exactly what Rabeh Al-Hussaini will be when the UAAP honors the Ateneo de Manila University center as the Most Valuable Player of Season 71 on Thursday.

“He’s exceptional,” said Ateneo coach Norman Black. “If there’s any question about the award, I think he answered those questions [in Game 1].”

Whether Al-Hussaini becomes a winner twice over on Thursday will all depend on the outcome on the match that follows the awards ceremony.

Al-Hussaini will formally receive the top individual plum at 3 p.m. at the Araneta Coliseum, an hour before the Blue Eagles shoot for the championship over rival De La Salle University Green Archers in Game 2 of the best-of-three men’s basketball Finals.

“I’ve been working really hard in practice,” said Al-Hussaini, whose first name, Rabeh, means winner in Arabic. “The award is just a bonus. I want the [championship] ring for everyone in the team.”

The 6-foot-6 Al-Hussaini—whose averages shot up to 18 points and 9.6 rebounds—ended the reign of 2007 winner and University of Santo Tomas star Jervy Cruz.

“Rabeh led this team to the Finals,” said Black. “Being the Most Valuable Player is really based on how you produce for your team and whether you can make your team win or not. I think he’s done the best job of that.”

Al-Hussaini and Cruz (19.8 points and 13.7 rebounds per game) also made it to the Mythical Team along with Ateneo star Chris Tiu (14.4 ppg, 6.1 rpg, 3.6 apg) and the La Salle duo of JV Casio (17 ppg, 4.1 rpg and 3.6 apg) and Rico Maierhofer (13.1 ppg and 10.1 rpg).

“It’s all about hard work, patience and a lot of heart,” said Al-Hussaini. “If you don’t play with heart, it won’t matter even if you’re good on court.”

The 20-year-old Al-Hussaini, a former NCAA high school standout from the Philippine Christian University, also picked up the Most Improved Player citation after tripling his scoring production from an average of only 5.9 points last year.

A son of a Filipino mother and a Bahraini father, Al-Hussaini’s breakout season came six years after Ateneo seized the MVP award for three straight years from 2000. Enrico Villanueva captured it in the Eagles’ title run in 2002 and Rich Alvarez nabbed it back-to-back from 2000.

Although Cruz narrowly beat Al-Hussaini in statistical points, which comprise half of the total tally, the impact of the senior Ateneo cager’s contribution wasn’t lost on the voters from the media (20 percent), players and coaches (15 percent) and game officials (15 percent).

And Al-Hussaini made his performance speak of his worth last Sunday with a phenomenal game of 31 points and nine rebounds that keyed the Blue Eagles’ 69-61 Game 1 triumph over the Archers.

Teammate Ryan Buenafe, named Rookie of the Year, also shared the glory by stepping up with 12 points and 11 rebounds in the series opener.

“We still have to win one more to become champions,” said Black. “And I think it will mean a lot more to Rabeh if we win the championship.”

bchoter
09-03-2009, 12:53 AM
The article did not exactly say how many percentage points Rabeh got from the ballots. From my hazy memory, we were told that Jervy led in the players and coaches and the officials but lost out in the media votes. Instead of asking the media to rank players they were just asked, DAW, to put in one name. Rabeh (IMHO) rightfully got majority, if not all, of the votes. It's not hard to imagine Jervy winning over the players and game officials because of his on court demeanor compared to Rabeh. Having said that, I think that is the bad side in putting in votes because of certain biases or other reasons (like the James Yap PBA MVP controversy).

atenean_blooded
09-03-2009, 03:05 AM
The article did not exactly say how many percentage points Rabeh got from the ballots. From my hazy memory, we were told that Jervy led in the players and coaches and the officials but lost out in the media votes. Instead of asking the media to rank players they were just asked, DAW, to put in one name. Rabeh (IMHO) rightfully got majority, if not all, of the votes. It's not hard to imagine Jervy winning over the players and game officials because of his on court demeanor compared to Rabeh. Having said that, I think that is the bad side in putting in votes because of certain biases or other reasons (like the James Yap PBA MVP controversy).


I agree that the article does not say how many percentage points were obtained by either player. But the tenor of the article seems to show that Rabeh didn't do badly in any of the voting groups (of course, the tenor of the article is determined largely by the author, and I am no fan of Jasmine W. Payo). What is clear, though, is that he did well enough to beat Jervy Cruz.

As for his demeanor, Rabeh's demeanor last year was far better than it was in years, and even better than what he's shown this year.

If his individual game and demeanor didn't clinch votes enough to make it a choice between him and Cruz, it might have come down to a choice of who played better during the Ateneo vs. UST matches (a vote determined by who the voters thought had better numbers). And in those two games, the two players put up the following numbers (all taken from inboundpass):

Round 1

Al Hussaini: 17 pts. (55% FG shooting, 83% FT shooting), 6 rebounds, 1 assist, 0 steals, 0 blocks, 0 turnovers, 2 fouls in 32 minutes

Cruz: 8 pts. (36% FG shooting, 0 FT attempts), 15 rebonds, 1 assist, 1 steal, 1 block, 1 turnover, 3 fouls in 33 minutes



Round 2

Al Hussaini: 24 pts (69% FG shooting, 33% FT shooting), 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 1 steal, 2 blocks, 0 turnovers, 3 fouls in 30 minutes

Cruz: 23 pts (42% FG shooting, 78% FT shooting), 18 rebounds, 1 assist, 0 steals, 1 block, 5 turnvoers, 5 fouls in 35 minutes


Now, if we recall, the Blue Eagles won both matches, 64-57 and 85-76. In the first match, Rabeh led the Blue Eagles in scoring, whereas Cruz was behind Ababou and Allera. In the second match, Rabeh's score was only outdone by Chris Tiu, who scored 29.

I will concede that thanks to his rebounds, Cruz can be said to have done better than Rabeh in the second round, but whether he was a better player in the first round is debatable. And what matters in determining a win or loss is which team scores better, and Rabeh's scoring in both matches was better than Cruz's. Bottom line is, Rabeh's performance in both games gave them the wins over UST, no matter how well Cruz played in both games.


So that might have been a possible reason he got picked over Jervy, aside from the fact that his team lost only 1 game (a game in which he scored 33 points).

Of course, manong, I am speculating.

I agree that biases might affect the outcome. But I still think that the mix of stats and voting was the acceptable compromise that would hopefully balance the seemingly cold statistics, which do not factor in "intangibles," and the voting, which can be based on objectivity, or other "intangibles" like "voter's bias."

A-boy97
09-03-2009, 12:42 PM
Actually, the entire individual awards thing of the UAAP is weird.

Although not as glamorous as the senior's division, there was a year when a guy winning the MVP(Marata now playing for dlsu I think) ended up not making the mythical 5! ???

atenean_blooded
09-04-2009, 01:07 PM
Actually, the entire individual awards thing of the UAAP is weird.



It's also commercialized to a sickening degree. "PS Bank Maaasahan Player of the Game." WTF is that? How is that supposed to be different from the Samsung MVP? Or the Jollibee Champ of the Season?

The commercialism is pretty sickening.

cheesenose
09-06-2009, 02:10 PM
I might actually have a solid suggestion for the UAAP, regarding determination of the individual awards. Let the statistical points determine the ranking of the players in terms of vying for the award (as is done currently, if I'm understanding the rules correctly), then, based on the shortlist created, allow the players and the media to vote, with the understanding that their voting, and not the statistical points, determines the winner. Also, players and media should be given a blank on their ballot, to allow them to name a player who they consider deserving of the award, despite not having accumulated sufficient stat points to join the ranking.

That way, players like Nonoy Baclao, who may not necessarily rack up big numbers but have a huge impact on the game nonetheless, are given an opportunity to get their due.

Whatcha tink? ???

pio_valenz
09-08-2009, 02:56 PM
^Player and media votes were discontinued this year because of payola.

atenean_blooded
09-10-2009, 01:08 AM
The statistical points computation used in Seasons 69, 70, and I think 71 and 72 goes like this:


{[(Total Pts + Total Rebs + Total Asts + Total Stls + Total Blks)*2] - Total TOs - Penalty Pts + Bonus Pts} / No. of games played


Penalty points = 5 for every Technical & Unsportsmanlike Foul, 10 for Ejection

Bonus points = 15 points for every game won wherein the player played


I tried using the formula based on the statistics available on Inboundpass.com, and PBFantasy.com, which, unfortunately does not indicate the total number of technical or unsportsmanlike fouls or the number of ejections.

I chose 1 player from the 5 teams that are likely to compose the Final Four (Ateneo, FEU, UE, UST, La Salle).

After 13 games, the statistical points (without penalties), rounded to the second decimal place, are as follows:

1. Dylan Ababou (UST) = 63.92
2. Rabeh Al Hussaini (Ateneo) = 63.69
3. Alrech Ramos (FEU) = 62.31
4. Elmer Espiritu (UE) = 60.92
5. Joshua Webb (La Salle) = 31.77


These stats are likely to change after tomorrow, if someone can verify if this is the formula used to determine stat points, and/or if someone can get me the total number of technical and unsportsmanlike fouls for each of these players. Rabeh's stat points are pretty close to Ababou's mainly because of his bonus points, and Ramos is close to both of them for the same reason. This is why winning is important.

Now, assuming the stats of the top 3 hold, and the distance between each of them remains more or less the same, then the choice of MVP may be decided by votes from coaches (assuming that they, and not the players, get to vote) or officials (assuming they are still allowed to vote).

bcn0804
09-10-2009, 08:08 AM
pari llagas should be in the season 72 mvp contender list too.

bg_eagle
09-10-2009, 10:56 AM
Number 5 si Joshua Webb or guess lang ba yan? Agreed that Llagas should be on the list. Unfortunately, I think an ejection is automatic disqualification from MVP consideration.

atenean_blooded
09-10-2009, 12:34 PM
Number 5 si Joshua Webb or guess lang ba yan? Agreed that Llagas should be on the list. Unfortunately, I think an ejection is automatic disqualification from MVP consideration.


No. There are other players with far better stats than Webb, but I chose Webb just to make sure all 5 Final Four contenders are represented.

I did not consider Llagas because as far as I know ejection or suspension = disqualification from being MVP. Which is why the whole "let's move on" of the board rep who said Ababou shouldn't be suspended is absolutely hilarious.

bcn0804
09-11-2009, 08:37 AM
Number 5 si Joshua Webb or guess lang ba yan? Agreed that Llagas should be on the list. Unfortunately, I think an ejection is automatic disqualification from MVP consideration.


No. There are other players with far better stats than Webb, but I chose Webb just to make sure all 5 Final Four contenders are represented.

I did not consider Llagas because as far as I know ejection or suspension = disqualification from being MVP. Which is why the whole "let's move on" of the board rep who said Ababou shouldn't be suspended is absolutely hilarious.


ah ok. i remember that incident with pari and reil.it's a good ruling on the mvp selection criteria.players should be role models.but too bad uaap can't keep up with some consistency on a quite similar fracas involving dylan.double standardism?well it's for the uaap board or commish to bear.

many thanks for the info.

eightyfiver
09-11-2009, 09:17 AM
^Player and media votes were discontinued this year because of payola.


You're so candid sir.

atenean_blooded
09-11-2009, 02:51 PM
Got a message saying that as of yesterday, before entering the game versus FEU, Rabeh and Ababou are still in the lead in terms of statistical points. Ababou is ahead of Rabeh by less than 0.01 stat points (62.9286 for Ababou, 62.9231 for Rabeh). And this is before Rabeh and the Blue Eagles face off against FEU.

I don't have enough data to confirm this, though because as I said, there are no stats online that show the items that go into penalty points, but I'm glad the computation I posted earlier isn't too far off.

bchoter
09-12-2009, 09:39 PM
The article did not exactly say how many percentage points Rabeh got from the ballots. From my hazy memory, we were told that Jervy led in the players and coaches and the officials but lost out in the media votes. Instead of asking the media to rank players they were just asked, DAW, to put in one name. Rabeh (IMHO) rightfully got majority, if not all, of the votes. It's not hard to imagine Jervy winning over the players and game officials because of his on court demeanor compared to Rabeh. Having said that, I think that is the bad side in putting in votes because of certain biases or other reasons (like the James Yap PBA MVP controversy).


I agree that the article does not say how many percentage points were obtained by either player. But the tenor of the article seems to show that Rabeh didn't do badly in any of the voting groups (of course, the tenor of the article is determined largely by the author, and I am no fan of Jasmine W. Payo). What is clear, though, is that he did well enough to beat Jervy Cruz.

As for his demeanor, Rabeh's demeanor last year was far better than it was in years, and even better than what he's shown this year.

If his individual game and demeanor didn't clinch votes enough to make it a choice between him and Cruz, it might have come down to a choice of who played better during the Ateneo vs. UST matches (a vote determined by who the voters thought had better numbers). And in those two games, the two players put up the following numbers (all taken from inboundpass):

Round 1

Al Hussaini: 17 pts. (55% FG shooting, 83% FT shooting), 6 rebounds, 1 assist, 0 steals, 0 blocks, 0 turnovers, 2 fouls in 32 minutes

Cruz: 8 pts. (36% FG shooting, 0 FT attempts), 15 rebonds, 1 assist, 1 steal, 1 block, 1 turnover, 3 fouls in 33 minutes



Round 2

Al Hussaini: 24 pts (69% FG shooting, 33% FT shooting), 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 1 steal, 2 blocks, 0 turnovers, 3 fouls in 30 minutes

Cruz: 23 pts (42% FG shooting, 78% FT shooting), 18 rebounds, 1 assist, 0 steals, 1 block, 5 turnvoers, 5 fouls in 35 minutes


Now, if we recall, the Blue Eagles won both matches, 64-57 and 85-76. In the first match, Rabeh led the Blue Eagles in scoring, whereas Cruz was behind Ababou and Allera. In the second match, Rabeh's score was only outdone by Chris Tiu, who scored 29.

I will concede that thanks to his rebounds, Cruz can be said to have done better than Rabeh in the second round, but whether he was a better player in the first round is debatable. And what matters in determining a win or loss is which team scores better, and Rabeh's scoring in both matches was better than Cruz's. Bottom line is, Rabeh's performance in both games gave them the wins over UST, no matter how well Cruz played in both games.


So that might have been a possible reason he got picked over Jervy, aside from the fact that his team lost only 1 game (a game in which he scored 33 points).

Of course, manong, I am speculating.

I agree that biases might affect the outcome. But I still think that the mix of stats and voting was the acceptable compromise that would hopefully balance the seemingly cold statistics, which do not factor in "intangibles," and the voting, which can be based on objectivity, or other "intangibles" like "voter's bias."

sorry for the delayed reply (blame pahiyang that, in the larger scheme of things, worked :D).

Fact is, ultimately, the changing of the rules in tallying percentage points did Jervy in. The voting for the two blocks went Jervy's way. Again, that's a fact. I was just specualting when I said that Rabeh didn't get the votes from the players and officials because he was less likeable than Jervy. But fact is Jervy won over these two blocks. And, if the same points tallying was applied with the last group, Jervy would have garnered enough points to win the award. I don't think Jervy will rank lower than 3rd if the last block followed the same voting procedure as the first two.

atenean_blooded
09-13-2009, 12:44 AM
sorry for the delayed reply (blame pahiyang that, in the larger scheme of things, worked :D).

Fact is, ultimately, the changing of the rules in tallying percentage points did Jervy in. The voting for the two blocks went Jervy's way. Again, that's a fact. I was just specualting when I said that Rabeh didn't get the votes from the players and officials because he was less likeable than Jervy. But fact is Jervy won over these two blocks. And, if the same points tallying was applied with the last group, Jervy would have garnered enough points to win the award. I don't think Jervy will rank lower than 3rd if the last block followed the same voting procedure as the first two.


Well, Manong, this is all very interesting, but I still have no solid basis to agree with you regarding these claims of yours, sorry. I have no idea if it's true that the rules were changed, or that Jervy Cruz indeed won both blocks. All I have to work with is an article that seems to say that Rabeh didn't do too badly in any of the blocks.

I don't think Jervy would have ranked anywhere lower than second in any of the votes.

atenean_blooded
09-14-2009, 12:01 AM
Dylan Ababou wins, thanks to the new rules and for the decision of the UAAP Board not to suspend him. :)

Congrats, Dylan Ababou! :)


http://www.gmanews.tv/story/172206/season-72-mvp-tiger-ababou-is-king-of-the-uaap-jungle

Season 72 MVP: Tiger Ababou is king of the UAAP jungle
His consistency and steadfast performance all throughout the double-round eliminations paid dividends for University of Santo Tomas team skipper Dylan Ababou as he copped the seniors' division Most Valuable Player award for the UAAP Season 72 basketball tournament.

The 6-foot-3 Ababou, the league’s leading scorer and most consistent performer among the Tigers, posted averages of 18.9 points and 7.1 rebounds per game and boasted of a 40.4 percent marksmanship emerge as the runaway winner for the plum.

The lone UAAP player to score at least 10 points in all their 14 games in the eliminations, Ababou nosed out Ateneo’s ace slotman and Season 71 MVP Rabeh Al-Hussaini and Far Eastern University’s top center Aldrech Ramos for the most coveted individual award.

“Naalala ko pa noon nasa team B pa lang ako ng UST, sinabi sa akin ni Danny Pribdhas na magiging MVP ka rin. Hindi ko nga alam kung bakit n’ya sinabi yun pero hindi ko pinansin yun, ngayon nagkatotoo," said Ababou, only the second UST player after former teammate Jervy Cruz (2007) to win season MVP in the last 14 years.

And now the reigning MVP sets his sights on the bigger prize – the UAAP championship.

Ababou and his fourth-ranked UST teammates face a tall order, though, as they face defending champion and No. 1 seed Ateneo in the Final Four, needing to beat Al-Hussaini and Co. twice to advance into the finals.

“Magiging kumpleto sana ang kasiyahan ko kung makakapasok kami sa finals at mananalo kami," said Ababou, who was only a second stringer when the Tigers captured their last UAAP crown in 2006 at the expense of a Chris Tiu-led Ateneo.

A member of the SMART Gilas Pilipinas team tasked to earn a slot to the 2012 Olympics, bested Al-Hussaini who averaged 16.5 points and 7.1 rebounds per game and his fellow Gilas stalwart Ramos, the only player to post a double-double average of 11.5 points and 11.6 rebounds this season. - GMANews.TV

Mel
09-14-2009, 09:03 AM
Usually sa game 2 of the finals nalalaman ang season MVP. Inagahan nila ngayon. This will definitely motivate Rabeh in the final four.

glock23
09-14-2009, 01:52 PM
Hmmm no offense manong, pero i think medyo sinigurado yata ni Fr. de sagon na si Dylan ang MVP. That sucker punch on jovet by Ababou was clearly more blatant and obvious than the phantom call on Nico on the flop by Knuttel. Talagang garapalan na ang mga "judgement calls" sa UAAP ng kahit sinong referee group and the board will just make a mockery of the rules to suit their best interest. Matindi!

pablohoney
09-14-2009, 08:37 PM
Yes, the MVP voting is biased. ;D

Paano na kaya sa ROY? Ay mali off-topic na pala ako. :D

bg_eagle
09-15-2009, 12:57 AM
If this is the way they want it, then so be it. Last year, Rabeh truly deserved the MVP because he was the most valuable player for the team who dominated the competition last year. And he was very consistent and clutch. You can say that Jervy was valuable to UST but they didn't even make the top half of the league.

This year's MVP is very controversial. True, he was the best statistically but so what? He should have arguably been suspended and been declared disqualified for the MVP race but curiously, it was their own Fr. de Sagon who spoke of moving forward. Baket kasi di nahuli during the game?

I am actually of the belief that nobody deserves the MVP this year. If at all, maybe the award deserves to go to either Llagas (who is disqualified) or Espiritu of UE. Honestly, after the drop of Rabeh's play from last year, its understandable for him not to repeat and maybe due to his inconsistency, he might not deserve to. But to award the MVP to a player in a team (no disrespect meant to UST) that won only 2x in the second round and at the same time was the only team to lose to DLSU and made it to the final 4 only because of a surprise win by NU even if they had numerous times to close it out themselves?

I don't care if voting encourages or makes it possible for payolas to exist. But voting makes it more possible for the real valuable players to be considered. Its not all about the stats, its about the intangibles. If you can't help your team win games when it counts, then what value do you bring to your team? Last few games of the MVP... against Ateneo disappeared in the 4th. Against DLSU... same story. Against Adamson... well the game was over way before the 4th. UE game was no bearing.

But I guess kung ganon ang rules wherein only the stats matter and technicalities are ruled inconsistently then congratulations to the new MVP.

BTW, awarding is still during the finals right? I pity the guy when he receives his award... unless they happen to score unlikely upsets. Very hostile crowds.

atenean_blooded
09-15-2009, 01:23 AM
I understand that Ababou got better stats. You have to hand it to him, too. He works hard, and tries to make the most of his extended minutes.

bowtoBLUE
09-15-2009, 04:59 AM
in my humble opinion, the mvp should lead his team to new heights. ababou did no such thing. he led his team to a so-so performance that just happened to be a little better than the bottom teams (though it was enough to get his team to the final four). this is why voting is important. what if we had a player who scored 40 pts a game and the rest of his team combined for 15. naturally this team would be at the bottom end of the standings. would anyone consider him the mvp? i believe the mvp should be the statiscal and emotional leader of a team with more wins than loses. dylan only fits the first category.

i'm an atenean, so saying rabeh should be mvp would have been a given. but the way i see it, aldrech ramos is this years mvp. the voting would have gone rabeh's way but this guy had stats that were just a little under dylan's but he lead his team in winning ballgames and played great in their loses (not so much against ue but against ateneo).

in short, a purely statistical mvp should be reserved for fantasy leagues (if they gave out awards) and i know all you tigerfans will hate me, but this is just my opinion.

oca
09-15-2009, 06:31 AM
Why is it there are 2 MVP awards during the season, one at the end of elims and another at the conclusion of the finals?

Simple, the first recognizes the player who contributed significantly to make his team a contender. The second recognizes the player who made his team a champion.

As to statistics being the sole criteria, that was made know at the start of the season. So, there shouldn't be any issue on that.

Oh, the suspension that wasn't levied on Ababou.... Kayo naman, parang di nyo kilala ang Board pagdating sa ganyang bagay. ;D

bg_eagle
09-15-2009, 11:14 AM
Why is it there are 2 MVP awards during the season, one at the end of elims and another at the conclusion of the finals?

Simple, the first recognizes the player who contributed significantly to make his team a contender. The second recognizes the player who made his team a champion.



Agreed that the second recognize the player who made his team a champion. Walang stats stats na tinitingnan and no arguments there but that's just for the finals and doesn't include performance in the final four. In the same way, the first should recognize the player who got his team past (passed?) the elims. True, UST made the final 4. But based on their 2nd round performance, was it really based on their own, and their MVP's performance that got them through to the final 4? It was more of everyone else's doing that gave them a chance to get it. In the second round, they only beat the 7th and 8th ranked team, was beaten twice by the 6th seed and beaten badly by the 5th in games that were so crucial for them.

For me, the MVP plum really deserves to go to someone from UE or maybe even FEU. I have to agree with bowtoBLUE. Even Rabeh is undeserving of this award because in numerous games, it was guys like Salamat, Buenafe, Reyes, Monfort, Long who actually lead the team in some of our games.

tigerman
09-15-2009, 11:30 AM
The problem with the MVP award is that it has evolved as the years go by. It can no longer be confined in its usual definition. Even in the other leagues like the NBA, the awarding of the MVP is not excluded from controversies (e.g. Steve Nash's 2 mvp awards).

We can break down the MVP in the following categories:
1) the best player on the best team
- The term speaks for itself. The best player on the best team record-wise.

example: Dirk Nowitzki (2007 mvp) led Dallas to the best record

2) the heart and soul of the team
- He's not necessarily the leading scorer but no doubt is the undisputed leader of the team.

example: Kevin Garnett - the acknowledged leader of the 2007-2008 champion Boston Celtics

3) the one who makes his teammates better
- This category usually applies to the player considered by many as responsible for the sudden turnaround of a team (from a losing season to a winning season).

examples: Steve Nash (2005 and 2006 mvp), Jason Kidd (2002 and 2003 mvp contender)

4) the most valuable player on an average team
- His presence alone determines how far a team would go.

example: LeBron James (2007 mvp contender)

I humbly submit that Dylan falls within the 4th category. Of course, this doesn't mean that he is comparable to LeBron but as already explained above, his absence alone makes UST a non-final four team.

just my 2 cents



USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!

oca
09-15-2009, 12:10 PM
Kulay. Kulay Kulay. Makulay ang buhay...

Tanong.

When was the last time a team with a losing record made the F4?

Dagdag na kulay....

Dapat kasi na-suspend si Ababou, pero hindi...

Mantakin nyo, bagong processo, at ang tumanggap ay isang player na dapat disqualified dahil may ginawang dapat pinatawan ng suspension, at mula sa isang team na mas marami ang talo sa panalo pero pasok pa rin sa F4.

Kakaiba, di ba? ;D

Imo, yang dalawang puntong iyan ang puno't dulo ng usapin ngayon. Aminin man ng iba o hindi, pero kung winning team at walang issue ng "suspension", palagay ko wala ang magagandang kulay na nakikita natin ngayon.

eightyfiver
09-15-2009, 12:51 PM
Pag talo, talo. Kasama yan sa buhay.

Congrats to Dylan Ababou!

bchoter
09-16-2009, 12:14 AM
Isn't the 15 bonus points enough reward to the winning teams? Take Ramos for example. I wouldn't put him ahead of Barroca and Garcia as the best player in his own squad. Yet he could have been the best player in the entire league. His meal ticket? He had better stats than the two simply because he was more consistent. Even if he was consistently 2nd-3rd-fiddle in his own team. Contrast that to Dylan who was able to top the stats race even if they missed out on bonus points. He was head and shoulders the best player in his team and, wins and losses aside, was clearly the best in the entire league. Oh, because he was "supposedly" suspended he shouldn't be a contender? C'mon. He wasn't. That's it.

If we really think that won ball games should be a huge factor, even bigger than the 15 bonus points, why don't we just pick the MVP from the team who topped the elims (use the quotient system in case of tie)? Or better yet, shy don't we just pick one MVP for the entire season from the champion team? Remember Gerard Francisco in the 90's where he woin the award inspite of the giddy numbers put up by Paolo Mendoza in the elims? Not a few argued that Paolo should have won the award because of his numbers even if his team didn't really challenge the Tigercubs for the crown.

bg_eagle
09-16-2009, 12:16 AM
4) the most valuable player on an average team
- His presence alone determines how far a team would go.

example: LeBron James (2007 mvp contender)

I humbly submit that Dylan falls within the 4th category. Of course, this doesn't mean that he is comparable to LeBron but as already explained above, his absence alone makes UST a non-final four team.

just my 2 cents

USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!


Before I dispute this, let me say that I have nothing against Ababou because he does seem like a nice guy. What I am contesting is the system that allows something like this to happen.

Back to your point, I don't think it is a very good example because Lebron James made a mediocre team into an elite team. Yes we are not comparing Ababou to Lebron but this is not the NBA either. In any case, the absence of Ababou will obviously make UST a worse team that it currently is. Would probably have a lower record than Adamson and/or DLSU. However, you can say that also of Teng or Mirza. Without just one of the 3, UST would not be in the final four. The bigger problem to that argument in this year's final four is that it doesn't even seem that any other team other than the top 3 seeds deserve to be in the final 4.

In reference to Oca's post about the losing record, I would even accept having the mvp from a team with a losing record but I would have preferred it that they did won some games with the help of the MVP to make them deserve the final 4 slot. Its the way UST got in is the problem. They lost all 3 of their last games that should have clinched the final 4 slot. 2 of those losses to teams that have worse records than they had... and they had gotten in only because NU pulled off another upset. The league MVP could not do anything to get his team over the hump. That's the problem.



Isn't the 15 bonus points enough reward to the winning teams? Take Ramos for example. I wouldn't put him ahead of Barroca and Garcia as the best player in his own squad. Yet he could have been the best player in the entire league. His meal ticket? He had better stats than the two simply because he was more consistent. Even if he was consistently 2nd-3rd-fiddle in his own team. Contrast that to Dylan who was able to top the stats race even if they missed out on bonus points. He was head and shoulders the best player in his team and, wins and losses aside, was clearly the best in the entire league. Oh, because he was "supposedly" suspended he shouldn't be a contender? C'mon. He wasn't. That's it.

If we really think that won ball games should be a huge factor, even bigger than the 15 bonus points, why don't we just pick the MVP from the team who topped the elims (use the quotient system in case of tie)? Or better yet, shy don't we just pick one MVP for the entire season from the champion team? Remember Gerard Francisco in the 90's where he woin the award inspite of the giddy numbers put up by Paolo Mendoza in the elims? Not a few argued that Paolo should have won the award because of his numbers even if his team didn't really challenge the Tigercubs for the crown.


I beg to differ, but Dylan is not clearly the best in the league. If it was so clear, we wouldn't even have this discussion.

In any case, I do not subscribe to the idea that the MVP should come from the best team. But at least he should come from a team that has proved something. Pangalan pa lang ng award, most valuable player. What value would any player have, if that player can't even help his own team win. Sa akin lang, even if a player scores a 100 points in a game, but they still lose in a blowout, walang kwenta yung 100 points niya.

Again, nothing against Dylan... congratulations to the kid.

bchoter
09-16-2009, 12:27 AM
UST was down 2 players, one of which (Maliksi) is a vital cog while the other (Green) could have added, to the team's size, no matter if it were only by heft. I would dare say that UST would have had a bigger chance in beating DLSU if Maliksi was there with his PPGs and RPGs plus he could have spelled Dylan a couple of minutes. Dylan would not have been too dog tired in the last couple of minutes and would have made that missed free throw that led to the Mangahas 3.

Again, let me remind everybody that before the season started UST was ranked as low as 7th by pundits. They may have a losing record but they were expected to lose even more. And Dylan was the biggest reason for that.

bg_eagle
09-16-2009, 12:39 AM
UST was down 2 players, one of which (Maliksi) is a vital cog while the other (Green) could have added, to the team's size, no matter if it were only by heft. I would dare say that UST would have had a bigger chance in beating DLSU if Maliksi was there with his PPGs and RPGs plus he could have spelled Dylan a couple of minutes. Dylan would not have been too dog tired in the last couple of minutes and would have made that missed free throw that led to the Mangahas 3.

Again, let me remind everybody that before the season started UST was ranked as low as 7th by pundits. They may have a losing record but they were expected to lose even more. And Dylan was the biggest reason for that.


With all due respect, di ako nang-aaway... nahiya na nga ako sumagot... but I want to. So bare with me.

You're talking of hypotheticals sabi mo nga in reference to the non-suspension... "c'mon, he wasn't."

So I bring that same argument back. Maliksi wasn't healthy. You could also argue that if Kish Co or Andrada didn't get injured, they would have beaten NU. But they were.

But since we're talking of hypotheticals, if Maliksi were healthy, he would take some minutes and scoring opportunities from Ababou. Considering how close the statistical race ended up, if Maliksi were there, Ababou might not have been leading the statistical race.

Anyway, I'm beating a dead horse... do not want to take anything from Ababou. He had a somewhat great season.

But I think a change is in order because stats aren't and shouldn't be everything.

tigerman
09-16-2009, 01:01 AM
Back to your point, I don't think it is a very good example because Lebron James made a mediocre
team into an elite team.

I was referring to the 2006-2007 season and not on LeBron's MVP season on an elite Cavs team.

By the way, Dylan made a no. 7 ranked team into a final four team.



Yes we are not comparing Ababou to Lebron but this is not the NBA either.

I used the NBA as an example because of the susceptibility of the term "MVP" to numerous interpretations nowadays.



In any case, the absence of Ababou will obviously make UST a worse team that it currently is. Would probably have a lower record than Adamson and/or DLSU.

Precisely. This is the reason why I thought that Dylan belongs in the 4th classification.



However, you can say that also of Teng or Mirza. Without just one of the 3, UST would not be in the final four.

While your what-if argument might have a point, Dylan is clearly more valuable than Teng or even Mirza.



The bigger problem to that argument in this year's final four is that it doesn't even seem that any other team other than the top 3 seeds deserve to be in the final 4.

We already overachieved for this season and such accomplishment is enough for me to make us a deserving semifinalist.



USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!

atenean_blooded
09-16-2009, 02:31 AM
The problem with the MVP award is that it has evolved as the years go by. It can no longer be confined in its usual definition. Even in the other leagues like the NBA, the awarding of the MVP is not excluded from controversies (e.g. Steve Nash's 2 mvp awards).

We can break down the MVP in the following categories:
1) the best player on the best team
- The term speaks for itself. The best player on the best team record-wise.

example: Dirk Nowitzki (2007 mvp) led Dallas to the best record

2) the heart and soul of the team
- He's not necessarily the leading scorer but no doubt is the undisputed leader of the team.

example: Kevin Garnett - the acknowledged leader of the 2007-2008 champion Boston Celtics

3) the one who makes his teammates better
- This category usually applies to the player considered by many as responsible for the sudden turnaround of a team (from a losing season to a winning season).

examples: Steve Nash (2005 and 2006 mvp), Jason Kidd (2002 and 2003 mvp contender)

4) the most valuable player on an average team
- His presence alone determines how far a team would go.

example: LeBron James (2007 mvp contender)

I humbly submit that Dylan falls within the 4th category. Of course, this doesn't mean that he is comparable to LeBron but as already explained above, his absence alone makes UST a non-final four team.

just my 2 cents



USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!


This goes back to my earlier problem: There is no agreed-upon definition of "best," leading to circular logic because the categorizations which refer to a "best player" of a given team is no easier to define than a "most valuable" player.

Further, #s 2 and 3 have no clear objective basis. There is no objective way to determine #2. And if we were going for some sort of objectivity, then #2 fails. As for #3, again, how do you objectively say that someone makes his teammates better? # of assists? Again, no clear objective basis.




Isn't the 15 bonus points enough reward to the winning teams? Take Ramos for example. I wouldn't put him ahead of Barroca and Garcia as the best player in his own squad. Yet he could have been the best player in the entire league. His meal ticket? He had better stats than the two simply because he was more consistent. Even if he was consistently 2nd-3rd-fiddle in his own team. Contrast that to Dylan who was able to top the stats race even if they missed out on bonus points. He was head and shoulders the best player in his team and, wins and losses aside, was clearly the best in the entire league. Oh, because he was "supposedly" suspended he shouldn't be a contender? C'mon. He wasn't. That's it.

If we really think that won ball games should be a huge factor, even bigger than the 15 bonus points, why don't we just pick the MVP from the team who topped the elims (use the quotient system in case of tie)? Or better yet, shy don't we just pick one MVP for the entire season from the champion team? Remember Gerard Francisco in the 90's where he woin the award inspite of the giddy numbers put up by Paolo Mendoza in the elims? Not a few argued that Paolo should have won the award because of his numbers even if his team didn't really challenge the Tigercubs for the crown.


I think that the win bonus has its problems.


I actually think that the formula for statistical points does not take into account a possible key stat: Minutes played.

Let's just use a theoretical example.

Let's take 2 players, both leading in the statistical points race, with the MVP being decided solely on stats.

Let's say they both their teams post identical 12-2 records with exactly the same winning margin for every game and even in their wins over the other, and the players post exactly the same stats except for one: minutes played.

Which player would you consider to be more valuable? The one who played for more minutes, or the one who played for less minutes?

One might argue along these lines:

The player with more minutes is obviously more valuable, which is seen in his being kept on the floor longer. Or you might say that the one that plays for less minutes is more valuable, because he's much more efficient.



All that said, I do not think that Dylan Ababou was the most valuable player this season. He wasn't the best player in the league. He won because this year's rules were changed to rely solely on stats, and did away with voting that could have factored in the "intangibles" we were talking about earlier.

Not to take away anything from Ababou, but maintain that the main reason he was able to post better stats than the runner-up is because he logged in more minutes.

Of course, kudos to Ababou for playing on, and for making the most of the time he was given to play.

Again, congratulations.

bowtoBLUE
09-16-2009, 04:11 AM
medyo out of topic ito but i'll say it anyway:

remember 2006 finals game two, when anthony espiritu was caught throwing a punch at escalona. if i remember he was ejected but not suspended. needless to say he sent game 3 into ot with a 3-ball and they won it all there.

for some reason ust has a way with avoiding suspensions. ababou's case is very similar to alvarez's and that espiritu's case similar to salva's, yet the outcomes came out differently.

i have to say i'm not trying to start a controversy. i just noticed a trend and wanted to know what you guys thought.

oca
09-16-2009, 04:56 AM
Clarification.

Did they actually give 15 pts bonus for every win?

Ang natatandan ko lang ay manggagaling sa F4 teams ang tatanggap ng award.

tigerman
09-16-2009, 10:41 PM
Further, #s 2 and 3 have no clear objective basis. There is no objective way to determine #2. And if we were going for some sort of objectivity, then #2 fails.

The 2nd category I think is clearly exemplified by Garnett on that Boston champion team of 2 years ago. If you've been following the NBA, you should be aware of how much he changed the dynamics of the fabled franchise as far as intensity and championship-calibre defense are concerned. Of course, he was not solely responsible for this but no doubt that he was the captain of that ship.



As for #3, again, how do you objectively say that someone makes his teammates better? # of assists? Again, no clear objective basis.

Perhaps on the transformation of the team from a non-playoff team to a playoff or contender type of team? Or by comparing how his teammates performed before and after his arrival to the team.

Sorry mods if you feel that I'm too much out of topic already as regards my nba argument.


USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!

atenean_blooded
09-17-2009, 12:20 AM
The 2nd category I think is clearly exemplified by Garnett on that Boston champion team of 2 years ago. If you've been following the NBA, you should be aware of how much he changed the dynamics of the fabled franchise as far as intensity and championship-calibre defense are concerned. Of course, he was not solely responsible for this but no doubt that he was the captain of that ship.

So what is the objective basis for saying someone is the "heart and soul" of a team?



Perhaps on the transformation of the team from a non-playoff team to a playoff or contender type of team? Or by comparing how his teammates performed before and after his arrival to the team.



Again, what do you mean? How do you express this in clear terms? How do we objectively measure this?

tigerman
09-17-2009, 12:49 AM
So what is the objective basis for saying someone is the "heart and soul" of a team?

My best guess is - leading by example.



Again, what do you mean? How do you express this in clear terms? How do we objectively measure this?

By looking at the offensive production of one's teammates from the previous season and comparing it to the present.



USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!

bg_eagle
09-17-2009, 12:57 AM
I don't understand how UST has overachieved. Except for them reaching the final four through the graces of NU and the UAAP board, even after losing their last 3 assignments, what have they really achieved? As claimed, Ababou is clearly the best in the league. So even with the "best" player and the top rookie of the league and guided by a UAAP championship coach, the team still managed to end up with a losing record and with only 2 wins in the second round? That's overachieving?

I think its clear that preseason rankings doesn't mean a thing especially in the UAAP. At the start of last season, there was doubt whether Ateneo would even make the final four. Would we say that the Blue Eagles overachieved? No. Players step-up. We had the MVP. We had the rookie of the year. We had the finals MVP and also members of the Mythical 5 and the all-rookie team. Ateneo did not overachieve. They just showed the so-called experts their proper place in the rankings.

As mentioned, UST was ranked 7th this year. I'm not sure who was supposed to end up number 8 or 6 or whatever ranking for that matter. DLSU with the all-rookie team was obviously overrated just because they were DLSU. UST should have been able to handle them, but they didn't. In the end, DLSU just had a worse meltdown than the Tigers. On the other hand, Adamson was just so unlucky and sorry to say... stupid. Too many mental mistakes in the end-game cost them that final 4 slot.

So to say that this year's MVP lead an overachieving team does not hold too much water in my humble opinion. If he was really that good, overachieving would have been to carry the team into the final 4 on its own merits and not just because NU upset DLSU and not just because DLSU only won 1 game in the 2nd round.





So what is the objective basis for saying someone is the "heart and soul" of a team?

My best guess is - leading by example.



And Leading by example is... throwing a punch and not getting caught then after review, just being told by the UAAP through a board member, who just so happens to be the representative of the same school to just move forward?

In any case, since this year's MVP has been defined by the UAAP as the guy with the best stats, then undoubtedly, Ababou would be the undisputed MVP.

Again congratulations. I'm sure the Blue Eagles are excited to see the new MVP this Sunday.

Speaking for a lot of Ateneans, we like UST. We have no qualms against any of your players and we admire the spirit of your crowd. But we have a problem with a certain lady of yours and... kulang pa rin ang bawi namin for 2006. Sobrang sakit talaga nun eh. hehe... See you on Sunday.

atenean_blooded
09-17-2009, 01:00 AM
My best guess is - leading by example.

Same problem - what's the objective way of measuring this?



By looking at the offensive production of one's teammates from the previous season and comparing it to the present.


Aha, so statistics?

Here's a question, since you brought up improvement in offensive output (which we can measure statistically): How do we create a correlation between the player and the improvement of his teammates' offensive output? # of assists? Sounds like too much of a stretch.

But if it's a question of statistics, then it might boil down to a choice of picking the best player--based on statistics--on the best (record-wise?) team, and the best player on an "average" team (of course, we have yet to define what "average" is.).

Or it might simply be a question of picking the player with the best statistics, period, but as we can glean from the discussions here, stats don't lie, but they don't tell you everything.


But hey, at least we're on to something.

john_paul_manahan
09-17-2009, 01:48 AM
i think we are going to need the high-faluting stats the nba tracks to really understand this.

tigerman
09-17-2009, 01:52 AM
I don't understand how UST has overachieved.

We lost 6 players (Jervy, Japs, Canlas, Allera, Gile and Taylor) from last season's team and most if not all of them were core players of our '06 cinderella team. Heck, Jervy's departure alone created a huge hole. To still make it to the final four despite being a rebuilding team is already an overachievement in my opinion.



Except for them reaching the final four through the graces of NU and the UAAP board

I was looking forward to some healthy exchange of point of views from you until I read this part. I think you should shed light on this matter since you seem to know something that we don't know.



So to say that this year's MVP lead an overachieving team does not hold too much water in my humble opinion.

No problem.



If he was really that good, overachieving would have been to carry the team into the final 4 on its own merits and not just because NU upset DLSU and not just because DLSU only won 1 game in the 2nd round.

I don't understand why some people use this NU win against us as if it was our only chance of making it to the final 4. Assuming arguendo that DLSU won the said game, does it ipso facto mean that we would not have qualified to the next round?



And Leading by example is... throwing a punch and not getting caught then after review, just being told by the UAAP through a board member, who just so happens to be the representative of the same school to just move forward?

You obviously didn't follow the flow of our discussion. The leading by example reply was in connection with blooded's question on how to determine the "heart and soul" of a team (the 2nd classification) and NOT on Dylan's place in the 4th classification,



Speaking for a lot of Ateneans, we like UST.

The fact that you put malice in our inclusion in the final four with the "through the graces of the UAAP board" crap says otherwise (at least for you).



USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!

tigerman
09-17-2009, 02:00 AM
Same problem - what's the objective way of measuring this?

Baka nga wala talaga. ;D That 2nd classification is probably the hardest to justify.



Aha, so statistics?

Here's a question, since you brought up improvement in offensive output (which we can measure statistically): How do we create a correlation between the player and the improvement of his teammates' offensive output? # of assists? Sounds like too much of a stretch.


Ayan sinagot na ni JPM. :D



USTE LO MEJOR!
VIVA SANTO TOMAS!

bchoter
09-25-2009, 01:18 AM
Clarification.

Did they actually give 15 pts bonus for every win?

Ang natatandan ko lang ay manggagaling sa F4 teams ang tatanggap ng award.
Yes they did. That is why Ramos cried a river daw after they lost to Ateneo because the bonus points could have given him the award outright.

IMHO, Dylan played consistently better than the rest. Ramos was #2 by virtue of the won ball game. He was probalby the best player in his own team once or twice. Rabeh was great in about half the season but was hindered by foul trouble most of the way.

wahsuck
06-16-2010, 08:09 AM
MVP has nothing to do with Stats......if it were stat based, I would say Baron Davis. But....its exactly what the initial stand for....Most Valuable Player. In my opinion you gotta look at Peja Stojakovich in there too....hes picknig up ALL of the slack while Webbers hurt...and keeping Sacramento semi-competitive.



^ ^ ^ ^ hey man. we are talking about the UAAP here. not the NBA. :P

the NBA and the UAAP are two different worlds.

machine101
08-06-2010, 03:45 PM
i just want to ask, is there a possibility that a player playing for a team, whose record is not good enough to enter the final four, be a member of the mythical team? because paul lee has been averaging a ton of points and contributing to every stats per game but unfortunately for him if no one else steps up in the red warriors roster, their chances of entering the final four maybe small.

Mel
08-06-2010, 03:55 PM
I think it was around 2002...NU did not make the final four but Alfie Grijaldo was in the Mythical 5.

Mel
08-06-2010, 04:26 PM
^ did some googling. Mukhang 2001 yun. The last time NU made it to the final four. :)

BigBlue
08-06-2010, 04:27 PM
^AFAIK, the won game bonus points play a big part in a player's MVP stats. so unless the player dishes out Lebron-type numbers, it'd be difficult for them to be in the running for post-season awards.

Mel
08-06-2010, 04:28 PM
http://dolores.pinoyexchange.com/forums/showthread.php?t=274722

year 2000 pala...hehehehe

2000

MVP: Rich ALVAREZ - ADMU

Mike CORTEZ - DLSU
Ramon JOSE - DLSU
Alfie GRIJALDO - NU
Rich ALVAREZ - ADMU
Rico VILLANUEVA - ADMU

ROY: Mike CORTEZ - DLSU

pio_valenz
08-06-2010, 05:57 PM
Marvin Cruz was Mythical 5 in 2006 even though UP finished sixth. I also remember Edwin Asoro making it to the Mythical 5 twice yata despite NU finishing last or near the bottom.

yungha
08-07-2010, 11:38 AM
wala pang final four nun but for 4 straight years from 1990-1993, ritchie ticzon of ateneo was mythical 5 despite the blue eagles finishing either 5th or 6th every season.

machine101
08-07-2010, 10:44 PM
oh i see. tnx po! so there's still a chance for paul lee to make it to the mythical team!

nastrans
08-07-2010, 11:26 PM
Players likely to make top 5 in MVP race after 1st rd:

RR Garcia (FEU)
Aldrech Ramos (FEU)
Reil Cervantes (FEU)
Emmanuel Mbe (NU)
Paul Lee (UE)
Chris Camus (UST)

RuckuS
08-09-2010, 02:50 PM
i just want to ask, is there a possibility that a player playing for a team, whose record is not good enough to enter the final four, be a member of the mythical team? because paul lee has been averaging a ton of points and contributing to every stats per game but unfortunately for him if no one else steps up in the red warriors roster, their chances of entering the final four maybe small.


cant seem to remember if Danny I. was able to "sneak" into the Mythical 5 even if NU had a losing record.. or Gabby Cui during the "dark ages" ..

eustacia
08-11-2010, 06:45 PM
i just want to ask, is there a possibility that a player playing for a team, whose record is not good enough to enter the final four, be a member of the mythical team? because paul lee has been averaging a ton of points and contributing to every stats per game but unfortunately for him if no one else steps up in the red warriors roster, their chances of entering the final four maybe small.


cant seem to remember if Danny I. was able to "sneak" into the Mythical 5 even if NU had a losing record.. or Gabby Cui during the "dark ages" ..


Parang hindi naging Mythical 5 si Danny Ildefonso, although I'm not 100% sure. I remember that Grijaldo and Asoro made it to the Mythical five though.