LPD All District

**R0cketer** · March 4th, 2008, 11:39 PM

And the rest of the team added up barely beat his individual numbers most of the time. According to several posters on here, he carried his team as far as anybody else did...home early.

**raider75** · March 5th, 2008, 08:14 AM

I totally agree!!!

**sup-rbeast** · March 5th, 2008, 10:16 AM

Bottom line on Vanover....the coaches he played against thought he was the LPD's player of the year....so everyone just quit ur bitchin. He deserves it, and all the coaches combine for the selection...it isn't a popularity contest. Congratulate the kid and move on...basket ball is now over....THANK GOD.

**cvcgrad** · March 5th, 2008, 10:41 AM

No doubt EV played with more adversity than any other player in the LPD this year. And, he did it very well.

Being the most valuable player on a team is great, being able to play well under adverse conditions, leading your team in every stat, etc, are great attributes for a player. However, I don't think it necessarily equates to being the best player in a district.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: R0cketer</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The numbers he had, with all the chaos of a roster, that Clintwood had, impressed me. I don't think there was more than like 2 games in a row that Clintwood had the same roster. Nearly every game he lead them in scoring, steals, assists, and rebounds. You can take the scoring component out, you can say he shot a lot so he should get points, but the others are hustle and effort stats. As for the comment about defense, I seem to recall a few times when he was put into a lockdown type defense and did pretty well with it. Biggest issue he had was he had to cheat to cover players who were not only playing, but sometimes starting, that wouldn't have been in the game if the injury bug hadn't hit so much (I'm not even talking about ones who didn't come out).

Nothing wrong with different opinions. I guess I just see that he had more than double the ppg of anybody else on his team. Only one other player averaged double digits (and that was an even 10 ppg). Had over double rebounds of anybody else on his team. Had nearly double assists of anybody else on the team. Had over double steals of anybody else on the team. I mean take the points out of it, the rest of the stats show he did the gritty stuff as well.

Feel free to find me any other player who had to lead his team in every category, and not just lead but normally be 2x anybody else.

I'll agree that if you want to go by an MVP, probably not, since I think MVPs should be on winning teams, but I don't think there was any player that coaches had to prepare for more. </div></div>

**sup-rbeast** · March 5th, 2008, 10:45 AM

Look at it this way...take Vanover off of Clintwood's team and juxtapose any of the other "more qualified" players who "should have won the award" on the team in Vanover's place. Now ask yourself, would CW have done any better. Answer is no, and sometimes guys the best players don't play for the best team.

**cvcgrad** · March 5th, 2008, 10:48 AM

EV carried his team through the season. Obviously, it wasn't a good year for Clintwood. With the success of the football program, I don't expect the next couple of years to be any better.

But, it doesn't take anything away from Vanover's talent in my opinion. While I don't think he's the best player in the district, he's on a short list of the best.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: M&Ms</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Guys, he plays for clintwood that won two games. and cvcgrad, he didn't carry anybody obvioulsy anywhere did he? He's a good player and thats about all. Martin or Begley imo should have got it. Vanover could not step up and lead his team this year. I mean atleast more than two games. heck fire!! </div></div>

**R0cketer** · March 5th, 2008, 12:28 PM

Nothing wrong with different opinions either. You don't think he was the best, coaches did. I can't think of a player in particular, who I really felt was better. I seen games where a player was better on a particular night, but I've not seen anybody that really night-in/night out performed at a really high level. I felt like PV, Kelly, Norton and Appy were all blessed with multiple players who were capable of taking games over, and thus they were able to win more and got more players on the All-District team.

It's to a lot lesser extent of say a Kobe previous years. He could get his numbers, but the team couldn't win because there was no help. Or say a Paul Pierce with the Celtics, prior to other people coming to help.

**cvcgrad** · March 5th, 2008, 12:52 PM

Nothing wrong with differing opinions at all.

In the last couple of years, I wouldn't have given much consideration to Pat Begley as POY. I've watched him play since he started, and he's always been a good player. But, there were other players on the team, like Coleman, who had a greater impact on the game. But, I think 2007 was Begley's year. From beginning to end, he set the pace for his team.

**raider75** · March 5th, 2008, 12:59 PM

I totally agree. He stepped up to the plate and was a great player in each game, offensively and defense he was a great all-around player!!!!

**1inStripes** · March 5th, 2008, 01:05 PM

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: PVFAN</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I honestly believe if you put Jordan Martin on CW's team they win more than two games. I don't really see how you can give him POY in the LPD, the LPD is terrible we all agree on that. </div></div>

I don't think you can use anyone from PV in this argument. Remember one of CW's wins was against the Vikings, so more than likely, you swap Vanover with anyone else on PV, and the Vikings win that game, and the Wave only gets 1 win this year.