PBA2012 MVP Jason Castro

[fernando_hierro]

If the stats where the basis, then it should be cumulative SPs and not average SPs. Seeded teams to the semis get bonus points for not playing quarterfinal games.

This current rule will reward the stats piler and not in relation to team performance. This means that David will be BPC for a long time especially when he averages 30ppg...

[Jay P. Mercado]

There's a way of avoiding issues like this in the future. The most logical approach is that a player can only qualify for the BPC award if his team cracks at least the semifinals. I have no problem with the stat averaging system - and while I agree with FH that "stats pilers" would obviously gain the edge, I also don't want to see players get rewarded unnecessarily because of bonus and additional stats generated because his team was extremely good.

A compromise scenario may be in order whereby the top stats average player from a team that entered the semifinals round would be included in the nomination. This rewards the most consistent player coming from a team that goes deep into the playoffs.

[darknight10]

Wow, David is already getting credits. Kung dati na kulelat din powerade ni allstar appearance wala. Good for him. But yes, He is clearly the best player in powerade. Best local scorer. But he can make himself as the best if he lead his team to be the best. or atleast one of the best. Pero ngayong conference, i dont think so. While Castro. I don't think he'll also win BPC. Gusto pa atang humabol.

[darkwind]

While Castro. I don't think he'll also win BPC. Gusto pa atang humabol.

The official candidates are already set. There will be no changes even if Yap or Castro scores 80 points.

[darkwind]

A compromise scenario may be in order whereby the top stats average player from a team that entered the semifinals round would be included in the nomination. This rewards the most consistent player coming from a team that goes deep into the playoffs.

Sir Jay, this was what was previously used (in determining BPC and MVP candidates), which allowed Caguioa (with BGK making it to the Commissioners' Cup Finals) to be an MVP cadidate even without a title, not being in the top 5 in SPs and not being a BPC last year which led to the controversy (at least to some), which , in turn, led to the rule change.

If this would be used for BPC only, then yeah, I agree with your assessment.

[Jay P. Mercado]

That's correct, Darkwind. My preference only sticks with the BPC award. And since there's a rule regarding BPC awardees becoming automatic nominees for the MVP race, then this may become an issue.

But then, this is where the voting counts. Of course, a lot of fans continue to question the validity of the points from the voters as they can easily be swayed by politics, favoritism or envelopmental approaches. But ultimately, this may actually serve as the balancing factor.

Unlike in the NBA when the MVP is judged based on the player's performance during the regular season, in the PBA, there are 3 conferences to consider. And no matter how one looks at it, the most favorable candidate to win the MVP award would normally come from the team that won the most titles that season - or in the AFC.

The Benjie Paras incident of 1989 was very telling really. I'm a huge Paras' fan but I feel for Ramon Fernandez, who placed 2nd overall in the statistical race (behind Alvin Patrimonio, with Paras placing 3rd overall), led his team SMB to a rare grandslam, and yet, wound up losing the MVP award to the rookie. I just can't understand the aberration really.

But then, there lies the rub. I will contradict myself here now, since the very reason why Paras won was because of the votes. Which ultimately goes back to the root cause of the problem - that voters, regardless of where they come from (media, broadcast panel, PBA office, etc), will always have their perceived "biases." And while statistics are equally important, it shouldn't be the sole weight as well because there are a lot of players who are considered as, in FH words, "stats-pilers." Atoy Co and Abet Guidaben may be regarded as the most notorious stats-padders in PBA history and I don't think they would deny that themselves.

Hence, a balance must be thought out. Statistics (with greater weight given to the AFC which the PBA is actually doing already), team standings, and votes should be merited into these. The voting process should already have considered the team standings (giving more weight to players coming from teams that won titles that season) but as proven in the past, this can easily be defied by the voting population.

[EL_Granada]

for me si Caguioa and David lang ang malakas na candidate. sa top 4 teams na naka pasok, wala kasing deserving manalo (except kang Caguioa) wala kasing consistent player na makikita mo na may malaking impact sa team

[darkwind]

That's correct, Darkwind. My preference only sticks with the BPC award. And since there's a rule regarding BPC awardees becoming automatic nominees for the MVP race, then this may become an issue.

But then, this is where the voting counts. Of course, a lot of fans continue to question the validity of the points from the voters as they can easily be swayed by politics, favoritism or envelopmental approaches. But ultimately, this may actually serve as the balancing factor.

Unlike in the NBA when the MVP is judged based on the player's performance during the regular season, in the PBA, there are 3 conferences to consider. And no matter how one looks at it, the most favorable candidate to win the MVP award would normally come from the team that won the most titles that season - or in the AFC.

The Benjie Paras incident of 1989 was very telling really. I'm a huge Paras' fan but I feel for Ramon Fernandez, who placed 2nd overall in the statistical race (behind Alvin Patrimonio, with Paras placing 3rd overall), led his team SMB to a rare grandslam, and yet, wound up losing the MVP award to the rookie. I just can't understand the aberration really.

But then, there lies the rub. I will contradict myself here now, since the very reason why Paras won was because of the votes. Which ultimately goes back to the root cause of the problem - that voters, regardless of where they come from (media, broadcast panel, PBA office, etc), will always have their perceived "biases." And while statistics are equally important, it shouldn't be the sole weight as well because there are a lot of players who are considered as, in FH words, "stats-pilers." Atoy Co and Abet Guidaben may be regarded as the most notorious stats-padders in PBA history and I don't think they would deny that themselves.

Hence, a balance must be thought out. Statistics (with greater weight given to the AFC which the PBA is actually doing already), team standings, and votes should be merited into these. The voting process should already have considered the team standings (giving more weight to players coming from teams that won titles that season) but as proven in the past, this can easily be defied by the voting population.

Sir Jay, the bold part I quoted is untrue. Statistics for each conference are of equal weight as far as I know. And based on what happened in recent past, the difference between the 1st and 5th statistical points leaders, when converted, is equal to only a few votes (since their SPs difference would be at most 10), which in turn, make the lead of the #1 in SPs insignificant. In my opinion, the SPs only determine the candidates. Media votes usually decide who wins an award. But this would not happen if (and this is a big IF), the PBA Press Corps doesn't block-vote. This practice of the PBAPC usually becomes the deciding factor of who wins an award. And really, I don't see a reason why they should continue this practice. It is unfair in my opinion.

[Harazkal]

David BPC? pede best scorer award...

all scoring, no other contributions...

Castro is the man....(monkey man)..

[Jay P. Mercado]

Sir Jay, the bold part I quoted is untrue. Statistics for each conference are of equal weight as far as I know. And based on what happened in recent past, the difference between the 1st and 5th statistical points leaders, when converted, is equal to only a few votes (since their SPs difference would be at most 10), which in turn, make the lead of the #1 in SPs insignificant. In my opinion, the SPs only determine the candidates. Media votes usually decide who wins an award. But this would not happen if (and this is a big IF), the PBA Press Corps doesn't block-vote. This practice of the PBAPC usually becomes the deciding factor of who wins an award. And really, I don't see a reason why they should continue this practice. It is unfair in my opinion.

My bad on this. I was actually referring to the draft lottery system where the records in the AFC is doubled while the records for the import-laced conferences are determined as it is. This was the procedure when the PBA only had two conferences, I'm not sure if this has been retained for the three-conference format. Thanks for correcting me.

Your observations are correct. The statistical points essentially only provide a very limited advantage for the stats leader against his closest competitors. Which means, as you accurately pointed out, only results in determining the candidates as this has no major bearing to the actual outcome of the award. Worse, the points system is also heavily tilted towards the votation process - a top voter would get XXX number of points and the second placer would also get XXX number but significantly lower. Hence, a first placer in the stats race may actually lose his lead already to a voting bloc if he places second behind another player. This doesn't include yet the so-called block voting done by the Press Corps which results to them determining the outcome. Since they vote as a bloc, there are no second place points given to the runner-up. The added points virtually dictates who the winner would be.

It would be interesting though if the PBA rules on MVP selection would not be done on point system but through block voting instead. The voting groups are the PBAPC, AKTV, the players and the Commissioner's Office. Each one, I believe have different weights at that. It would be best that each group would not only have equal weights, they're all entitled to one vote only. To avoid any ties though, a fifth group should be involved - probably the coaches. A tie would mean breaking it by having another voting process involving only the personalities in the tie.

[darkwind]

It would be interesting though if the PBA rules on MVP selection would not be done on point system but through block voting instead. The voting groups are the PBAPC, AKTV, the players and the Commissioner's Office. Each one, I believe have different weights at that. It would be best that each group would not only have equal weights, they're all entitled to one vote only. To avoid any ties though, a fifth group should be involved - probably the coaches. A tie would mean breaking it by having another voting process involving only the personalities in the tie.

Interesting, but I think it's a longshot for the above to happen.

What I would like to see though is:
1. for the Stats to have better distribution when converted to votes (1st to have more and 5th to have lesser)
2. for the PBAPC to not vote in block. (not all media that have a vote are member of the PBAPC)

Oh, also, to eliminate the Players' votes. We all know they won't vote objectively.

[Jay P. Mercado]

Excellent points actually.

Good mention of the players' votes. Believe it or not, this may actually turn out to be counter-productive for a particular leading MVP candidate. Let's say a Ramon Fernandez of SMB led everyone by a mile in the statistical race, with teammate Allan Caidic running a distant second, and an Alvin Patrimonio of Purefoods at a distant 3rd, SMB players would be in a fix as to who they'll vote for. Patrimonio stands to have the decisive advantage here.

Other points:

1. True, but I really don't know how this can be done. The only basis really is the actual stat points earned by a player. But I don't know how they can convert each stat point to ballot points without disrupting the distribution scheme. Similarly, we will find players trying to pad stats just to make sure they end up at #1, thereby earning for themselves a first place worth of votes.

2. This cannot be avoided - voting by block is normal. What can be done to prevent this is just to have one winner per voting group. Each group would have equal values, say 1.0 each. And since the players' votes won't matter, then we don't have to include the coaches anymore. Therefore, there would only be 3 voting groups - AKTV, PBAPC and the Commissioner's Office.

[darkwind]

Although voting in block is normal, I wish they just don't do that, because they become the ones who is almost singlehandedly responsible in determining the winner (think of politics, I think the last time a non-INC endorsed president who lost was Cojuangco in 1992).

I think a more ideal (at least for me) approach is for the stats to just be used to determine the candidates and have the voters (no block voting, please, hehe) list their top 3 choices and distribute the points 10-5-1, with 10 points going to their top choice. Each vote would be counted as such, and removing the percentages (30% media, 10% coveror, etc)

[Jay P. Mercado]

The simplistic way of doing things, to collate everything that we discussed, would be:

1. Statistical Points:

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2. Voting

2a. PBA Commissioner's Office

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2b. PBA Broadcaster

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2c. PBA Press Corps

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

This would mean that each would be worth 25% of the total MVP points.

Now, assuming they want a heavier weight imposed on statistical points (say 50% for stats, 50% for voting), they can just triple the point value for this, i.e.:

First Placer - earns 15 points
Second Placer - earns 12 points
Third Placer - earns 9 points
Fourth Placer - earns 6 points
Fifth Placer - earns 3 points

Whoever earns the most number of points would win the MVP award. And yes, every voting group should fill up the five places accordingly to ensure that every candidate would earn a vote.

From this computation, all the PBA needs to do is tweak the weights of the statistical points and the voting depending on the sign of the times. They can either increase or decrease the statistical points value, or give bigger weight to the PBA Commissioner's Office in the voting process (say 40% for Commissioner's Office, and 30% each for the PBA Broadcaster and the PBA Press Corps). Whatever they come up with, the only item needed for tweaking would be the weight in distribution of points for each category.

[darkwind]

The simplistic way of doing things, to collate everything that we discussed, would be:

1. Statistical Points:

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2. Voting

2a. PBA Commissioner's Office

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2b. PBA Broadcaster

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2c. PBA Press Corps

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

This would mean that each would be worth 25% of the total MVP points.

Now, assuming they want a heavier weight imposed on statistical points (say 50% for stats, 50% for voting), they can just triple the point value for this, i.e.:

First Placer - earns 15 points
Second Placer - earns 12 points
Third Placer - earns 9 points
Fourth Placer - earns 6 points
Fifth Placer - earns 3 points

Whoever earns the most number of points would win the MVP award. And yes, every voting group should fill up the five places accordingly to ensure that every candidate would earn a vote.

From this computation, all the PBA needs to do is tweak the weights of the statistical points and the voting depending on the sign of the times. They can either increase or decrease the statistical points value, or give bigger weight to the PBA Commissioner's Office in the voting process (say 40% for Commissioner's Office, and 30% each for the PBA Broadcaster and the PBA Press Corps). Whatever they come up with, the only item needed for tweaking would be the weight in distribution of points for each category.

^^Simple and easy. Hopefully, the PBA stumbles into this.

With not all media being Press Corps members, they can do the voting and after the final tally, have the top vote-getter get 5 points, 2nd place 4 points, and so on.

[Harazkal]

kung ganyan ang basehan ng BPC, si David na yan..

[schiller]

The simplistic way of doing things, to collate everything that we discussed, would be:

1. Statistical Points:

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2. Voting

2a. PBA Commissioner's Office

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2b. PBA Broadcaster

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

2c. PBA Press Corps

First Placer - earns 5 points
Second Placer - earns 4 points
Third Placer - earns 3 points
Fourth Placer - earns 2 points
Fifth Placer - earns 1 point

This would mean that each would be worth 25% of the total MVP points.

Now, assuming they want a heavier weight imposed on statistical points (say 50% for stats, 50% for voting), they can just triple the point value for this, i.e.:

First Placer - earns 15 points
Second Placer - earns 12 points
Third Placer - earns 9 points
Fourth Placer - earns 6 points
Fifth Placer - earns 3 points

Whoever earns the most number of points would win the MVP award. And yes, every voting group should fill up the five places accordingly to ensure that every candidate would earn a vote.

From this computation, all the PBA needs to do is tweak the weights of the statistical points and the voting depending on the sign of the times. They can either increase or decrease the statistical points value, or give bigger weight to the PBA Commissioner's Office in the voting process (say 40% for Commissioner's Office, and 30% each for the PBA Broadcaster and the PBA Press Corps). Whatever they come up with, the only item needed for tweaking would be the weight in distribution of points for each category.

oo nga sir jay, mas maganda kung ganito.

actually this is similar on how motorsports organizations determine the world driver championships. let's just assume that each category (Statistical Points, Media Votes etc.) is treated like a Grand Prix.

Further, a consistent second place finish will also have a very good chance in winning a specific award.

[fernando_hierro]

I remember the great Vitto Lazatin who represented the media partner didnt vote for a 2nd place in Best Import which allowed Gabe Freeman to beat Diamon Simpson when in truth was that Simpson outplayed Freeman. Good thing Alaska won the title...

[jacel27]

^Ikaw ba yung nakita ko sa tv nung Game 6 na may hawak ng banner na Castro for MVP/Castro future MVP?

[fernando_hierro]

Yes thats me...