Gong at least got into finals last year though, and Clarke was a constant high preformer, well above Conklin.

It definitely needs to be changed.

I'm happy with the voting system but I think allowing the coaches to distribute them as they please is what causes the players from lesser teams to benefit. They either need to borrow from the Brownlow and make it strictly 3-2-1, or they need to add weightings to the tally at the end of the season to take wins in to account.

Yes - don't believe in won't MVP based on numbers. Which is what the system does.

Childress should have been MVP - Injured or not.

I like the fact it's voted on week upon week so you get an accurate reflection of performances throughout the year.

Maybe we could tweak the voting regs a little, but both Clarke and Conklin* were amongst the standouts the past two years so I don't agree them getting MVP is reason to adjust it.

*after Childress, of course.

Rotnei was a more than deserving winner. As proven this season from how the hawks went without him.
He is a Genuine MVP

Yep! Hate the current system. Encourages good players in bad teams. Although last year Clarke almost single handedly took that Hawks team to the playoffs. So I had no problem with that.

I'd like the system tweaked too.
I still maintain that Ennis was last season's MVP, but Rotnei was a worthy winner. A legit game-winner, on a playoff team. A guy opponents struggled to contain.
Conklin ... I dunno. Yeah he was a tough matchup, but so were 20 other guys around the league. I just can't picture too many coaches shitting themselves in the leadup to a Crocs match over how they were going to contain him.
I don't mean to knock him btw. He's a more than solid import and I'd be happy to retain him in the league. And I guess his win is also a symptom of a lack of other obvious candidates. Whereas last year James & Rotnei were both standout players.

But bottom line, I would like to see some kind of guidelines about how votes can be distributed to a losing side. On a game-by-game basis, opponents will naturally be respectful with their voting and happily dish out sympathy votes to a guy that did ok in a losing side. But when that happens to that guy all the time because his teammates are so ordinary, it adds up just a bit too much for my liking.

When a power forward leads the league in FGM in the paint and from midrange, as well as FTA, while shooting at 51%, ranking in the league leaders in points and boards, and producing numbers consistently, he is definitely an awards candidate.

Had Childress not got injured Conklin wouldn't have been MVP, but he did get injured, and there was no one clearly above Conklin who was the best big in the league.

Wilson, Jackson and Wilbekin would have been worthy winners, but all three had periods where they didn't play well and probably hurt their team as much as helped them, and that put them back amongst the pack.

I would like to see the voting system tweaked a little though, Conklin wasn't 28 votes better than Wilson and Wilbekin.

He wasn't 1 point better than Wilbekin, let alone 28, IMO. But I'll also admit that the Crocs weren't on the top of my must-watch teams list this season.

I'd prefer to have the coaches voting, they know a lot more than the refs. I just think they should give the three best players on the other team a rating out of 10 and be done with it.

If Cedric Jackson has a triple double and Corey Webster hits 30, or Conklin and Blannchfield both have 20 and 10, they don't steal votes off each other, they can both get high votes.

@ DD, Wilbekin had a string of games in the middle of the season where he struggled. Of the guys listed I think he's the least deserving. Had he produced his early and late season form consistently he'd have won it.

Yeah, NBL refs voting is a bit of a dicey idea to me. Doesn't fill me with the type of confidence I have in AFL umpires to vote sensibly. And even they come up with some interesting ones (and yes I'm saying that as an Eagles fan too)

That's easily solved, make the coaches' votes available. Under no circumstances do I want the refs voting on MVP, their efforts with flop warnings this year confirmed they have little feel for the game.

It's the same problem with most of these type of awards. The two tops teams play an epic game, and the points are distributed. The two bottom teams play a crabfest and the same points are given out.
Worse, when top teams play the points are distributed amongst a number of quality players.

The votes used to be able to be distributed amongst many players. Not sure what it is now.
The voting system hasn't changed again AFAIK and the vote apportioning wont have changed either.
IE." The two tops teams play an epic game, and the points are distributed. The two bottom teams play a crabfest and the same points are given out."

Nothing has changed in an eternity so why change it now. Just because someone wins it who is 'less deserving' according to a few don't mean its a broken system.

Just get a group of 5 respected basketball minds together and let them decide. This system currently is weak at best.

This system reflects performances week after week from people who know the game and the league better than anyone, not consensus picks by people reflecting over five months and 96 games where much of the detail can be forgotten.

They have 8 respected minds already.

Conklin won by 10 votes. So why is the system flawed?

"Conklin was allocated 111 votes over 20 rounds to claim the 2015 MVP honour, edging out Cedric Jackson (New Zealand Breakers) with 101 votes, while Josh Childress (Sydney Kings) still managed to place third with 94 votes despite only playing 18 games. Jordan McRae (Melbourne United), Scottie Wilbekin (Cairns Taipans) and Jamar Wilson (Adelaide 36ers) completed the season with 83 votes apiece.

Maybe the minds need to be changed then lol

I have an idea. select a few stand out players e.g childress, jackson, conklin, mcrae, wilbekin. and a few more and then let the public vote off of that. what do you think of that?

So vote for a player that has a season ending injury? No thanks.

You know, I have no problem with Conklin winning the MVP award. He was a standout for the Crocs who did struggle somewhat this season so unlike Jackson, Martin, Wilson etc, he didn't have team mates taking votes from him.

In saying that though, if Childress didn't get injured twice during the season he probably would have won it rather easily.

What I do have a problem with is the way the awards have been announced. For a national competition like the NBL to hand out the awards without having an awards night like the Brownlow (AFL) or Dally M's (NRL) or the Border Medal (cricket) is a bit on the nose IMO.

Blanchfield would have taken a few votes from him...

Whenever you do round by round voting it takes the big picture / team record out of it, obviously, just like the Brownlow.

None of the guys on the elite teams had standout seasons, individual numbers wise.

A simpler answer would have been to schedule games in Melbourne, Adelaide, Sydney and Wollongong on the final day and then the awards ceremony is on the way home.

If you wanted to add to that, only play two SF games the first weekend, on Friday and Sunday for TV, so teams aren't preparing potentially for three games in four days.

They threatened to boycott the event.

Isaac Forman presents "A concise history of the NBL".

Anon, based on NBL.TV, I wouldn't be confident about the NBL running an event heavily reliant on a live video stream.

In fairness Isaac, that isn't the NBL, but I can see your point.

So Nick Marvin, who apparently runs the league single-handedly, plans to have an awards night on the day after the season finishes, then kicks up a stink about his own decision and threatens boycotts his own function.

Sure, makes perfect sense!!

The event isn't even televised (or streamed on the net anymore) so whether clubs and players attended in person, or did a set-up like #074 suggested, it wouldn't have made a difference. It gets no media coverage so having an event and forking out hundreds of thousands of dollars is a waste of money.

The Cats players attended last year, right in the middle of the semis and GF, and this year they would have only had to send one player who was any chance of winning any award.

There has been suggestions for a few months that no awards night was ever planned (assuming that decision was based on finances), which is a far more likely scenario than this rumoured boycotted event.