I don't completely disagree with you. I'm just playing devil's advocate to the point of MVP. It's not solely an offensive award. You could argue either way with these offensive numbers. You could say Ruggles' numbers are better because he took more shots and maintained a high percentage, and you could argue that Garver would have had better numbers if he had attempted 70 more shots and maintained a high percentage, but we'll never know. Like I said in my original post, Garver didn't need to shoot any more due to the talent around him, and shouldn't be penalized for that. I'm not sure how I feel about having multiple MVP's. I would have been fine with either one of them winning the award outright too. I will say I am glad to see the overall amount of talent in the IIAC, and I am already looking forward to seeing the battles on the court next year.

Interesting that you say Ruggles' season was in a class of it's own. While he certainly had an outstanding season and deserved to be named MVP, a quick look at the numbers shows Garver's stats weren't too shabby either. Being surrounded by a deeper team probably kept his total numbers down. Percentage-wise, his stats were as good or better than Ruggles'. I don't think he should be downgraded for playing on a good team, and it's not as if Ruggles doesn't have talent around him as wel. Amsbaugh's numbers were also solid. All three are different types of players. Congrats to all 3 players on fantastic years. Here is a look at their numbers (Conference Only, for the purpose of this discussion).

Player      Pts   Reb      FG%         FT%    3Pt%   Ast/Gm Steals
Ruggles      23.3   4.8   49.8%   92.9%   49.1%   3.6      <6
                        
Garver      16.6   4.9   60.8%   82.2%   54.3%   4.0       43
                        
Amsbaugh      18.7   7.4   49.5%   78.8%   28.1%   3.9    13