[EGarrett]

Best - Player responsible for the most baskets.
Most Valuable - Player responsible for the most wins.

[Sir Patchwork]

Originally Posted by Hakeem

Most Valuable should be exactly that. For example, a dominant center in a league in which there are very few good centers would likely be the most valuable player in the league.

And I must say, this answer makes the most sense to me. This kind of "valuable" has a clear seperate meaning.

[Nightfly]

Some MVP History worth thinking about:

Bill Walton was voted the MVP of the '77-'78 season, despite the fact he ended the season with an injury. Prior to his injury, the Blazers were a phenominal 50-10. With out Walton, they finished the season 8-22 (but still managed to have the best record in the league.)

In the 58 regular season games he played that year, Walton averaged 18.9 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 5.0 apg and 2.52 bpg.

Some might say that Kareem was a better individual player that year, but his impact on his team wasn't as great as Walton's was. For the record, Abdul-Jabbar averaged 25.8 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 4.3 apg and 2.26 bpg in 62 games that season.

[HB]

Just one example

Best player: Amare Stoudemire
MVP: Steve Nash

And am not talking about the league here, thats how I personally define their roles on that team. (If everyone is healthy)

[PauloCatarino]

Originally Posted by HearToTemptYou

Some MVP History worth thinking about:

Bill Walton was voted the MVP of the '77-'78 season, despite the fact he ended the season with an injury. Prior to his injury, the Blazers were a phenominal 50-10. With out Walton, they finished the season 8-22 (but still managed to have the best record in the league.)

In the 58 regular season games he played that year, Walton averaged 18.9 ppg, 13.2 rpg, 5.0 apg and 2.52 bpg.

Some might say that Kareem was a better individual player that year, but his impact on his team wasn't as great as Walton's was. For the record, Abdul-Jabbar averaged 25.8 ppg, 12.9 rpg, 4.3 apg and 2.26 bpg in 62 games that season.

That's a good example.

Another historic sceneries:

61-62: Wilt goes for 50ppg-25rpg (wich should be the most dominant season for a player ever). He is selected to the All-Nba first team. Russell is the MVP (and second teamer). That same year Oscar pulls 30-12-11 for the season (the second most dominant season ever?).

72-73: Cowens is awarded the MVP. His stats: 20.5-16.2-4.1. Kareem's: 30.2-16.1-5.0. All.Nba teams: Kareem on first, Cowens on second.

[Kirk64]

Originally Posted by Sir Patchwork

Give me your definition for both terms and expand on the difference between them. Thanks.

The best player in the league is, by definition, the most valuable player in the league. How can you be more valuable than to be the best player in the league?

[HB]

Originally Posted by Kirk64

The best player in the league is, by definition, the most valuable player in the league. How can you be more valuable than to be the best player in the league?

If Steve Nash wins it this year, does it mean he is better than Wade, Kobe, Bron, Dirk?

[Sir Patchwork]

The Utah Jazz are something like 32-28 with Andrei Kirilenko, and 2-10 without him. Could he be a primary candidate for MVP, based on the definition you guys are giving me (value to the team)?

[SPMJ]

Pretty much every MVP winner over the last 20-25 years was also arguably the best player that season. The year Shaq, Magic, Bird, MJ, Kareem, TD, AI, KG etc won whose to say they weren't the best player in the league that regular season? Best player and a great record has ALWAYS gone hand-in-hand. That's what great players do.

As far as Malone and Barkley winning in the MJ era goes, in Barkley's case I can understand since he put up ridiculous numbers and nobody won more games than Phoenix. Bulls somewhat underachieved with 57 wins and were blamed for looking disinterested(MJ still up 33/6/6 on 50% shooting). Malone's was definitely a case of voters trying to give someone other than MJ a little glory. Bulls had another 70 win season. No reason MJ shouldn't have won.

Nash's probably the sole exception to what's been taking place for decades. He put up 16/12(rounded) last season. Great but not earth shattering. Yet Phoenix was unrecognizeable when he wasn't on the court. He missed a few games due to injury and the Suns flat out stank it up. He came back and Phoenix was back to being the best regular season team in the league. If that ain't VALUE I don't know what is. Nobody made a bigger difference to his team's W/L record then him. And considering how superior individual players then Nash were all leading their teams to mediocrity, him winning became a no brainer. The point of the game is to WIN. Nothing else matters. It only makes sense to give MVP to the guy who clearly plays the biggest role in what matters most in sports - VICTORIES. Nash's once again the favorite this season because his team's great, he's having an even better statistical season and better individual players(LeBron, Kobe, Wade) aren't winning as much as him. Which makes 'em different to the likes of Barkley, MJ, Shaq, TD etc who were not only the best, but won the most.

[Kirk64]

Originally Posted by Hbwoy

If Steve Nash wins it this year, does it mean he is better than Wade, Kobe, Bron, Dirk?

Not necessarily. Many of the actual voters for the award do not agree with my definition.