Rather unfair, imo. You're correct in that it was a defence orientated team, which is what helps his case imo, as he was the only one scoring and setting up plays for that team.
That team could only go as far as Rose could and when Miami shut him down from game 2 onwards, there was no where for the Bulls to go. Fast forward a year on and he drags them to best record in the league and looking comfortable in the game vs Philly. He then goes down late in the 4th and is done for a year. All of a sudden Bulls go from a team who will give Miami a proper fight in the ECF (would still most likely lose), to a team that doesn't even look like they belong in the top 8 seeds.
That year LeBron and Wade had each other (and Bosh). Durant had Westbrook and Harden. Kobe had Pau. Rose was pretty much doing it all alone.
I seriously think you're playing down Rose's talents and performances in that year (+ the following). He was on his way to something special, imo.
Carlos Boozer was averaging 17 points a game that season. Loul Deng was averaging 17 points a game and was one of their main perimeter defenders. Joakim Noah averaged a double double and was their defensive anchor. He wasn't all alone by any means. He had a great team surrounding him.
Rose winning the MVP award was the product of him being the undisputed number one option in only his third year on a team that went from being in the eight seed to suddenly being the number one team record wise in the East. It was never about his talent, only about the story, and there's a reason why whether or not Rose deserved the MVP that year continues to be disputed to this day.
Now, with that said, if you were to say that Rose meant a lot more to his team than LeBron or any of those other four guys I mentioned, then yes, I could see an argument for that. And it's on that very merit that a lot of people believe was why Rose won the MVP award in the end. Either way, by no means was Rose a top five player that season. He was a terrific offensive PG capable of carrying his team in that regard, but he wasn't anything special defensively and he wasn't exactly a great playmaker either. He was fundamentally flawed. He could have put up the same stats with a less impressive supporting cast and he probably never wins the MVP award because of it.
Winning the MVP award is a flawed aspect and way of truly determining one's belonging in the NBA's list of best of the modern era. You see guys like Steve Nash who meant so much to his team but was a horrid defensive player win the award twice because guess what? His team was near or at the top of the league and he was their undisputed best player. There's a reason Kobe Bryant never won an MVP award until Pau Gasol got traded to LA and the Lakers were suddenly relevant again, despite LeBron James having arguably the better season but not having as much success.
Arguing with you is so pointless. You don't even know defense and defence are different spellings of the same word, and you tried to bash me for it. Congratulations, you played yourself.
Actually no. Defense is the American way of spelling it. Using it with a C is the British way of spelling it. In other words, you're wrong, and that was probably the easiest bait I've ever committed on this site.
You keep making stuff up, how I'm only talking about the future season.
Literally nothing I said was made up.
I've begun and ended talking about empty stats, the inability to win.
And yet you continue to give James Harden a pass despite his empty stats and his inability to win with an even greater supporting cast than Davis.
Listing an All-Star MVP is such a laughable thing to do. Imagine, listing a for-fun game MVP as a notable accomplishment.
And listing James Harden's MVP award wasn't any more laughable?
Harden won his MVP award because Leonard was gone for most of the season, Westbrook didn't average 30 points a game again along with a triple double because Paul George and Carmela Anthony were traded to the team, Kevin Durant went to Golden State so neither he or Curry were going to win it, and LeBron stopped giving a fuck about regular season. And most importantly, Harden got Chris Paul, Capela and a string of defensive players helped make the Rockets end the season with the best record in the league. And as we all know with the NBA, if you are the best player on an NBA team that finishes with the best record, unless another player in the league is having a historically great season, you are guaranteed the MVP award. And as we all know, as soon as Ariza left and Paul continued to age, the Rockets became worse (and this is despite Harden averaging 36 points a game this season. But sure, we're not going to blame him refusing to play defense or claim his stats were empty because why would we since we're clearly not factoring in logic, context or anything of the sort).
And the best part about all of this? People STILL dispute whether or not Harden should have won that year. People still claim that LeBron should have won it, the man who didn't give a shit about regular season. You know who else people claimed should have won that year? Anthony Davis, the man who was second in the league in scoring and was leading the league in blocks. He was without question the best two way player in the league at that point. But of course he wasn't going to win because unless he puts up Wilt Chamberlin numbers, no one's going to care that he's the clear cut best big man player in the league because his teams record isn't anything to go crazy over.
Tell me, how does Harden's MVP award prove he's a top five player in the league when the only reason he won it was because all the better players in the league were injured, in a position where they couldn't or just didn't care enough to do so?
If you are going to list meaningless accomplishments, so am I. You opened that door the moment you fell back on his MVP award like it was supposed to prove something. If you want to use things like that as a crutch in your argument, you better have a clear understanding of how that leg the crutch is being used for got broken in the first place. Because in this case, you clearly didn't.
Anyways, good luck in life with that 'tude, don't got time to argue with ignorant chumps.
Okay, I look forward to your reply after claiming you weren't going to do so like last time.