Nah. Lebron was in dead the middle of a 5-year (at least) span of leading the league in nearly any and every holistic statistical measure you can come up with (despite being a bit lower than the 4 MVP seasons around it). Rose was the Bulls’ best offensive player, sure, but was still not as good a player overall nor…

So in 2013-14, when the Spurs had the best record, who deserved it over Durant, with his 19.2 win shares? Duncan (7.4) or Parker (5.9)? (Edit: or Leonard, at 7.7, who got zero votes.)

Hey, remember when this guy won league MVP because everyone was salty about The Decision?

They should start their bench for the next month. Finish the season 3-25 and they’d still make the playoffs as a 7-seed and breeze through the East.

“He had Kyle Korver right there - he had - right there - he had Kyle Korver right there”

I mean, Calvin Natt was pretty good, but c’mon.

My point is that while consumers put their dollars into what they want to be entertained by, an award show shouldn’t solely look at sales as equivalent to “good.” Awards shows are pointless if they just reiterate what the obvious results have shown (see: ESPYs).

Right, but was BvS or any Marvel movie up for an Oscar for best picture? The Oscars have their own problems, but at least they attempt to award movies that have artistic/social value, and not just cash cows.

He would have had a point if Adele’s album was actually better.

Counterpoint: No They Don’t

My main point is that it’s a novelty that’s fine for movie trilogies. For anything past III, it’s a fucking stupid way to number anything.

No, it’s easier to mentally convert XL into a decimal system number (50-10) than longer numbers like XXXVIII (10+10+10+5+1+1+1). My point was that XL also means “really big,” so that’s cooler than just saying 40.

Browns :(

My dad drives a Saturn Ion with hand controls and suicide doors (like this one) - lets him put his chair in the backseat. He likes it, not sure if they make them like that anymore.

At least L is easy to figure out what number it is. Roman numerals were cool when it’s like Super Bowl XL, but trying to figure out what year or how long ago Super Bowl XXXVIII is a pain in the ass.

For all intensive purposes, that’s what I’m saying. Yes

I believe it’s shoo-in.

WAR over the last 4 years, since Carter started playing regularly, according to B-R: Bautista 16.3 / Carter 3.3. (Prior to that, 21.4 / -0.2.)

[catches ball]

And he’d go in for a dunk, hang on the rim & flex about it, and they’d lose by 1