Michaelperry's Blog

I Bet the Law and the Law Lost

By Michaelperry | View all Posts
Posted Tuesday, April 07, 2009 10:15 AM   5 comments
Monday morning, as I was glancing through the odds on "Most Outstanding Person" for the Final Four, I noticed that the odds for Ty Lawson were even money. I decided to put a couple on Lawson to win MOP. After Lawson's 22 point, 8 assist, 7 rebound effort against Villanova Saturday, it's looked as if he would be almost a shoe-in to win the "MOP" assuming North Carolina took care of business against Michigan State.

When Wayne Ellington was announced the "MOP",  I needed to to go the fridge to get some ice for my mouth after my jaw hit the table. Frustrated that I just missed out on what looked like an almost certainty, I decided to watch the game over again.

Right from the opening tap, Lawson got each of his teammates involved. When Carolina grabbed an early 10-5 lead, every starter had already scored. This did a world of good to confidence of the team, and a result UNC lead by double figures 5 minutes into the game, and coasted the rest of the game.

Yes, Ellington's shooting percentage was very impressive, especially from 3 point range, where he went 3/3 in the championship game and 5/7 on Saturday. Howevever, this is what he is supposed to do, this is his specialty. I could see Ellington winning the ward if he would have a high number of rebounds or assists against Michigan State, but he didnt. In fact, he didnt have a single assist against the Spartans.

Lawson was so spectactular, not only in the tournament, but for the entire season (winning ACC player of the year), that you kind of take what the guy does for granted. All the guy did in the Final 4 was score 43 points, dish out 14 assists, bring down 11 rebounds, and come up with 10 steals (including 8 in the championship game).

I dont know exactly who votes for the Final Four "MOP", but I do know that they need to re-evaluate the selection process of who votes.

5 comments
comment Post A Comment
LogansBlake says:
04/07/09 02:25PM
I'm not so sure Mike. I think there's a legitimate argument for Wellington. In 2 games, Lawson shot a god awful 27% from the perimeter and missed all 3 point attempts last night. In fact, he only made 10 shots in 2 games. Nothing MVP about that. As for Wellington, he was unbelievably efficient this weekend. He shot 53% from the perimeter in 2 games, going 7 of 12 last night and 3-3 from 3 point land. He made shots last night than Lawson had in 2 games. There is no question, Lawson is the straw that stirs this Carolina drink, but I think its difficult to give anyone an MVP trophy when they shoot well below 30%. With that said, I could have easily given him the 'MOP' because he is the teams catalyst and I seriously doubt Carolina would be NCAA Champions without him. Maybe "co MOPs"???
Michaelperry says:
04/07/09 06:44PM
Blake,

I think Lawson should have been Co-MOP at minimum.

Yes, Lawson's overall shooting in the final 4 was awful, but he got to the foul line and he was so dominant at just about every other positive statistical category. Plus he only turned the ball over once in the championship game.

Later buddy.

nc1capper says:
04/08/09 09:30AM
you got jobbed, just part of the biz tho
LogansMichael says:
04/08/09 01:46PM
NC1capper,

Yeah I thought I got jobbed. Just because Ellington was good at one facet of the game, he shouldnt be rewarded for most outstanding player, when lawson was clearly the most outstanding player on the court b/c not only how he got all his teammates involved early, but he was dominant in so many other statistical categories.

Josh_Nagel says:
04/08/09 06:35PM
Blake, Michael, you both make excellent points. While it's certainly difficult to dispute the Most Oustanding Player argument for Lawson, I think what put Wayne Ellington over the top was the timeliness of a couple of his shots.

Although both Final Four games were double-figure wins that were never really in doubt, Ellington snuffed out brief rallies by both Villanova and Michigan State with 3-pointers that really put a dagger in any hopes either had of coming back.

So I'm OK with Ellington though I won't deny being surprised that Lawson didn't get it. However, I am not in favor of a co-award in this situation.

Add your response:
Please note that the blogger has the option of reviewing all comments before they are displayed to the public. Your comment may not be published immediately.
 
Advertisement