>the kyrie argument is basically the "best player on a #1
>seed" argument.

Right, which exposes the contradiction with Isaiah last
year. None of these bums were saying Isaiah was MVP.

And Russ wasn't anywhere near no damn 1 seed....which
brings me to:

>but the same people making that argument this year for kyrie
>were making the same argument in the past for lebron when his
>team was the #1 seed.

Nah, Lebron's cases have always COMBINED the "best player
on a 1-seed" with:

1) His stat lines being always very, very, very stupid
(ala Russy. UNLIKE Russy, he didn't put up those stupid
stat lines on mediocre teams. So Lebron's cases have
always been better than Russy's last year, if we're
being real)

2) He's been the best player in the world, by a lot,
for a decade+ (hasn't really been close since Kobe's prime,
though KD is shrinking the gap *slightly*).

So his cases have been shutdown for almost 10 years
straight, from multiple angles:

- Best player on top team
- Stupid ignorant funky ass statlines (ON good teams)
- Flat out best player

Hell, dude even defends (slightly less hawkishly than
he used to, but he does, and well)

The reason we don't award him is because we like finding
reasons not to. And that's all good. I just wish we'd admit it,
and stop shape-shifting and copping pleas.

Any nigga saying Kyrie is the MVP this year is dishonest,
dumb, mad, or probably all of the above.








>so again: it's not really an anti-lebron selective criteria
>thing. there actually are other quality candidates.