NBA MVP race: Joker leads but does Curry have a case?
MOST pundits have agreed that Nikola Jokic would win the NBA Most Valuable Player award. The Serbian center averages a near triple/double with 26/11/9 points, rebounds, and assists. His consistency has made close, wide/open MVP races turn into a breakaway, with about 75 percent of the season in the books.
With all the injuries and the fluctuating nature of a compressed season, the most consistent performer could win by default, although Jokic’s performance is far from pedestrian — the closest to a triple-double average since Russell Westbrook in 2017. In a league now dominated by point guards, having a center like the Joker is a real edge
The human factor
As with any MVP discussion, we would not be able to disregard the votes and there are some media and playing community members who have outlandish voting behaviors. In terms of statistics, Giannis Anteokoumpo’s spread of 28/11/6 is very close but due to “voter fatigue,” many will say that he is not as good a player like Larry Bird — the last player to win three straight MVPs.
There is also the argument on how Bird won two out of three titles in his MVP run in 1984 to 1986, Giannis has not reached the Conference Finals yet and this will definitely be a factor. Some would say voter fatigue robbed LeBron James in 2011 that would have given him a third straight nod.
It is hard to believe for all their hardware, both Michael Jordan and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar never got three consecutive MVPs, so it would be difficult to convince voters that Giannis should belong to a very exclusive circle that only has Bird, Wilt Chamberlain and Bill Russell.
Attendance
Another issue in the MVP debates this season is injuries. With the pandemic in play, players can contract the virus and immediately miss a significant number of games. Joel Embiid was a close rival of Jokic but he has missed 18 games, or 25 percent of the total season (granted he never misses a game the rest of the way).
While it may be argued that we are talking about “valuable” and not the best career season, how much value can you bring to your team when you can’t even be there? It’s easier to put up great stats in 10 games rather than 30 games, so Jokic’s consistent output without missing a single game is more than remarkable.
Team success
Since we are talking about how team performance factors in an individual award, the perplexing question is how much does team success matter. We disqualified Bradley Beal’s 31/5/5 due to the Wizards’ 22-33 record, but there are arguments for Steph Curry’s 28-28 Warriors.
Curry has a 31/5/6 spread, with not much difference in wins over Beal. Is this because Curry is a sentimental favorite? That he has performed well even after losing his super team and being left with a group that would probably not win 10 games without him?
Can your team survive without you? Isn’t that a fair question of value? The Lakers went 4-3 on a road trip without two superstars. The Warriors won’t fare as well without Curry. He has owned the team — and recently, the franchise as its all-time leading scorer. If you surpass Wilt Chamberlain in practically any stat, that is a lifetime achievement.
Reverse argument
The logic of player value’s relation to team success is reversible. The Suns had a late run in the bubble but fell short. Adding Chris Paul ensures them a playoff ticket and even home court advantage.
In a straw poll among NBA media members Paul had 2 first place votes but Curry had none. Positive impact counts more. The final results had Jokic getting 90 first place votes out of a possible 101. The math is way too simple.