BuzzerBeater Forums

how bout we just wait for the big cat to judge. good luck sir

I wish to appeal the following match.

http://www.buzzerbeater.com/match/36141628/boxscore.aspx

3 votes - Manogloids - Luke McCaskie - 28 points 7 rebounds 3 assists 3 steals

McCaskie has had some rough nights recently especially last week against the Gladiators when scoring came tough. Tonight was a bit of an exception shooting 12-30 for his game high 28 points. With 6 of his 7 rebounds being offensive he clearly wanted to prove his offensive value after recent performances and he deserves the 3

2 votes - Whompas Donkeys - Medartas Tvarijanavicius - 10 points 16 rebounds

The lithuanian didnt have the most impressive shooting night canning only 4 of 15, however he was big on the boards and managed double digit points.

1 vote - Mangoloids - Luca Batini - 10 points 19 rebounds

Luca shot only marginally better than Medartas and only grabbed a few more rebounds in 4 extra minutes. Not much between them but with the way the Donkeys marshalled the game they deserve to get the 2 votes imo.

Mertartas got a lesson from McCaskie who dropped 28 on him. Also Luca kept his man (Ignatio Santana, Whomp's best player) to just 6 points. Luca also had more boards. Medartas was lucky to get any token votes, let alone the two.

No idea if Rad Ranga is appealing or not, but more then happy for monkey to keep jumping in with common sense and deterring people from appealing

I think it was yoda that said the West teams are all 'business' that's why we don't appeal, either that or the complete opposite and we're the only ones who realise its just a bit of fun and only the opinion of the person putting the time in to write the report or maybe we're just not as big a sooks as the rest of u

Anyway yeah as i have no idea if crazy carrot is still appealing I'll just do Mango's for now...

This was an interesting one with the SG playing PF. But in my opinion it was pretty simple, as Mango said McCaskie gave Tvarijanavicius a bath while playing out of position. Realistically the situation should have been reversed, the big fella in an inside iso offense should have taken a SG playing at PF to town in a M2M defense but he didnt. So I agree with Mags, he was thoroughly disappointing and realistically i dont think he deserves any votes. But looking i dont think there was many other players who did. It was basically a horrible game all round so i cant find anyone else deserved of the 1 vote but I'm happy to approve the swap of Tvarijanavicius with Batini.

Tough gig doing votes for a match like that, I'd have found some lucky fans to give the 2 and 1 to as McCaskie was the only guy worthy of a vote!

So go nuts and swap it around to

3 - Luke McCaskie
2 - Luca Batini
1 - Medartas Tvarijanavicius

done.

i think ranga is serious but will have to wait and see if monkey has deterred him

I think it was yoda that said the West teams are all 'business' that's why we don't appeal, either that or the complete opposite and we're the only ones who realise its just a bit of fun and only the opinion of the person putting the time in to write the report or maybe we're just not as big a sooks as the rest of u :P

The North does not appeal either, it is just the sooky South and the exasperating East. We just take the pain. Except for Naker. But we still do not know why he is in the North. Was not he in the West last season? Is that the biggest drop ever?

Maybe the boys in the East can follow my lead - My opponent managed to get the 3 votes in a 40 point win to me and you didn't hear a complaint!

im just very passionate about my favourite player

but i fully accept the judges verdict

all good & now im moving on to my next spanking when haggards ream me tomorrow & i score another 0 votes :(



hey i just remembered

was it your game last season v koop when u spanked him but it was wazza v your team & wazza got 3?

i remember that 1 roflmao

Last edited by abigfishy at 8/18/2011 6:35:57 AM

haha well I don't know about why the rest of you appeal, but the reason that I personally like to appeal is because I like to see how different people think about the value of different players. I don't appeal just to get my guys more points as there is absolutely no chance of me ever winning an MVP title, because frankly, I am unlikely to ever keep a player on my team for long enough :P

correct and you will not that i did not appeal.

Oops I guess that was one of mine. However I think I am on the same side of the fence as Rad Ranga and opposite Monkeybiz and a lot of others. My opinion is the best player in the game should get the votes, not just the best player on a winning team, regardless of the margin. Even more if it is one star alone having to battle an entire team I am likely to give some credit.

Remember ages ago, maybe it was before your time, we had the discussion of LeBron and 4 girl scouts against a NBL team. The final score could easily be 100-50 but with LeBron scoring 50 and being clearly the best player on the court I would still give him the 3 points. Others like Monkey have said they would never give it to him for being on a team that lost so badly and so a random NBL guy that scored 20 would get the 3 points for dominating a girl scout.

The good news is C-Cat doesn't agree with me, he is on Monkeys side that the MVP is for the best player on the winning team. It's just a matter of opinion. No-one has had more of their MVP votes overruled than me and look through all the appeals threads and find a single time that I minded. It is all just subjective in my opinion anyway. Monkey and C-Cat have one opinion and Rad Ranga and I have another. The great news is if I do give votes to the loser in such a circumstance, because C-Cat has the opposite point of view you have an outstanding chance of a successful appeal.

If I get overruled, so what? It's happened so many times in the past and will happen so many more in the future. As long as the players involved in the match are happy it is all good.

As so many people have pointed out it is just a bit of fun and I actually am much more happy to have people reading, discussing and debating the MVPs than being indifferent. We have 48 people in here and it is amazing that almost everyone is so totally reasonable and cooperative.

I like having a good discussion and in Red Ranga's game , it is hard to argue Wall was the best player in the game so he was not "lebron with 4 girl scouts".

The stats are as follows:
G. Wall 48 13 - 28 0 - 1 8 - 8 -25 7 13 4 3 2 2 5 34 11.0

Wall grabs 7 of his 13 rebounds in the 4th Q during garbage time and shot horribly

Opposing C:
E. Volavc 23 8 - 11 0 - 0 1 - 2 +12 2 6 0 1 1 3 3 17 12.5

Shot a really high %

The point I want to make is that ANY team can pad their player's stats by playing him 48 minutes a game. That doesn't make that player the best player in the game. Like I've said earlier, its like Kendrik Perkins (Wall) playing the whole 48 minutes against Dwight Howard (Volavc) and Dwight got the job done in 24 minutes and with no need to come back out in the 4th, they used a lesser player to play. If you gross up Volavc's stats to 48 minutes, his stats are very similar to that of Wall but that is besides the point.

Why should players be rewarded for playing the whole game to have padded stats?? This isn't what MVP should be about. If this is the case, we might as well all run 5 man rosters and play them 48 minutes each to maximise the stats and increase their chances of MVP selection.