Tony Allen bluntly said Gasol could have won the 2010 FMVP! Kobe s shooting rate is not high

Former NBA player Tony Allen made controversial remarks on the podcast "Out The Mud Podcast", bluntly saying that the 2010 Finals MVP should have belonged to Paul Gasol, and Kobe's shooting percentage was only 36% that year. This view quickly sparked heated discussions in the fan circle.

Allen emphasized that the injury retreat of Celtic center Perkins was a turning point in the series. If Perkins was not injured, the Celtics could win; he also revealed that Kobe had publicly stated that Perkins was the best low-post defender.

Fans who have watched that round of the series must remember that it is almost the most defensive final in NBA history. The Celtics insisted on the strategy of "double-teaming Kobe and appropriately letting Gasol go"; so G7 Kobe made 6 of 24 shots, scoring 23 points, 15 rebounds and 2 assists; Gasol made 6 of 16 shots, scoring 19 points, 18 rebounds and 4 assists. In the end, the Lakers narrowly won the championship through a tiebreak, and Kobe won the FMVP.

throughout the series, Kobe averaged 28.6 points, 8 rebounds, 3.9 assists, with a shooting percentage of 40.5%, Gasol averaged 18.6 points, 11.6 rebounds, 3.7 assists, and a shooting percentage of 47.8%.

But Allen insisted that if Perkins was healthy, they would win the championship.

In my opinion, the Celtics' defensive strategy back then was indeed magical. The double-team Kobe, who had a 40.5% shooting percentage, made Gasol turn aside the basket.

What's more funny is the data comparison. Kobe made a 18-timer in the G7, and Gasol made a 10-timer in the iron. But Espanyol used 18 rebounds (of many frontcourt boards) to prove that he was the patron saint of the Lakers' penalty area. In contrast, in addition to 23 points and 15 rebounds, Kobe also contributed "iron strike highlights" and "one of the historical single-game blacksmith records in the finals."

FMVP selection has always been "result-only theory". The Lakers won the championship, and Kobe won the award naturally. But Allen's "hindsight" also reminds us that if Perkins was not injured, the Celtics might have laughed to the end, after all, it was only a few points difference. Is FMVP to Pierce or Ray Allen? This problem is indeed difficult to solve.

After all, a good data does not necessarily mean you win a prize, and you shouldn't think of losing a team. Gasol is like the "10,000-year-old second" in the class, while Kobe is a "genius who is biased towards science." FMVP may be renamed "Luckyest Player Award" - after all, winners take all, losers miss this award. What do you think?