Awards season is upon us

In an online analysis of postseason awards, ESPN's Ric Bucher named Erick Dampier as a candidate for Most Improved Player, writing "People are not voting for him because they suspect he's been motivated by the chance to become a free agent and land another long-term contract, but so what? Trust me, that's commendable compared to what motivates some players."

This begs the question, what exactly motivates some players that is worse than playing for money? Are they playing for drugs? Are they playing for sex? Are they throwing games so gamblers will murder the groupies trying to get child support from them?

Regardless of what Dampier is playing for, Bucher is right; the Golden State Warriors center is a qualified candidate for Most Improved Player. Dampier boosted his averages of 8.2 points per game (ppg) and 6.6 rebounds per game (rpg) a year ago to 12.3 ppg and 11.9 rpg this season. His field goal percentage is also up, but so are his minutes (meaning his scoring and rebounding averages should be up), and his blocks per minute are down.

People have been naming Carlos Boozer as a potential candidate, and he'll probably end up winning, but he really hasn't been that much better than last season, particularly the second half of last season.

If the award is really supposed to go to someone who has improved their game, not just someone who got more minutes, than the prize should go to the Philadelphia 76ers' Samuel Dalembert.

Yes, the Port-au-Prince native has been getting more minutes, but that's because of how hard he has worked to get better. He has developed a consistent short baseline jumper, and is finding a balance between playing with energy on defense and not committing stupid fouls.

Dalambert averaged 5.2 minutes in 34 games last year with 1.5 ppg, 2.0 rpg, and 0.4 blocks per game (bpg) while shooting 44 percent from the field and just under 39 percent from the line. This year, he has started 50 of 79 games (he's the only Sixer to play every game this season), averaging 7.8 ppg, 7.6 rpg, and 2.2 bpg while shooting 55 percent from the field and 64 percent from the charity stripe.

The Sixth Man of the Year award is really a four-horse race between Manu Ginobili, Atawn Jamison, Desmond Mason, and Al Harrington. Ginobili has started almost half of the games that he's played; I really think that ought to disqualify him.

All of the candidates have similar statistics, but in the end, it comes down to the fact that if Jamison had refused to come off the bench, the Dallas Mavericks might have imploded. Really, if he had whined and complained, this team could easily have ten fewer wins than it does right now. He didn't just accept coming off the bench, he volunteered to be a sixth man. Could you see Antoine Walker doing that?

Jamison has learned to take advantage of his limited opportunities, bolstering his field goal percentage and rebounds per minute while crafting himself into more of garbage points player rather than the one who was a featured star in Golden State. He deserves the award.

Coach of the Year seems to be a toss-up between Jerry Sloan of the Utah Jazz and Hubie Brown of the Memphis Grizzlies. Both deserve it, but come on: Brown has Mike Miller, Jason Williams, Shane Battier, James Posey, and Bonzi Wells, Sloan has Andre Kirilenko surrounded by Carlos Arroyo, Raja Bell, and Greg Ostertag.

Other worthy candidates are Mo Cheeks, just for having to interact with Zach Randolph, Ruben Patterson, and Damon Stoudamire on a daily basis; and Terry Porter, who has the Milwaukee Bucks in the playoffs when everyone thought they were going to be in the lottery. But if the Jazz make the playoffs, it will be one of the biggest surprises in the history of mankind. And even if they falter, Sloan is still the Coach of the Year.

For Rookie of the Year, the hands-down winner should be Darko Milicic. He's really shown it all this season: outside range, great ball handing, deft passing, soft hands, and deceptive strength.

Actually the April Fool's edition was two weeks ago. The real winner is obviously Lebron James, mostly because of that well-edited Nike commercial where it looks like he's making full court shot after full court shot. That's hot stuff.

The MVP decision is one of the toughest in recent years. Jermaine O'Neal is the best player for the best team (record-wise, at least), but Ron Artest is probably more valuable to the Indiana Pacers. Kobe Bryant has finally proved that he is more valuable to the Los Angeles Lakers than Shaquille O'Neal, but with all the off-court press he's gotten and distractions he's caused, there's no way he's winning.

As it did last year, the award will probably come down to Tim Duncan and Kevin Garnett. KG definitely deserves to win it; he trumps Duncan in points (24.3 ppg to 22.4 ppg), rebounds (13.9 rpg to 12.4 rpg), assists (5.1 apg to 3.1 apg) and steals (1.48 spg to 0.9 spg), and the Minnesota Timberwolves are just ahead of the San Antonio Spurs in the standings.

However, it seems weird giving the MVP to Garnett this year and not last year -- last year, he carried the T-Wolves to 51 wins with Troy Hudson and Kendall Gill as his sidekicks; this year they Wolves are going to win seven or eight more games than last year with Sam Cassell (19.8 ppg, 7.3 apg) helping KG out.

Still, KG's numbers are just too good, the spirit with which he plays the game is infectious, and the all-important media is behind him. And once the rock that is good press gets rolling, it's harder to stop than Shaq in the lane.