NBA MVP Race 2017 and Value

The 2017 MVP race is an interesting one.

• Harden and Westbrook are putting up historic numbers and are carrying their teams.
• LeBron is LeBron — one of the greatest players ever, having a typical season.
• Durant, Curry and Leonard are all having fantastic and ultra-efficient seasons on 60+ win teams.

Not only is this particular race interesting, but I think it says a lot about MVP races more generally.

Valuable

If you interpret the term “valuable” literally, then you have to give the award to Harden or Westbrook. Think about the value that Durant adds to the Warriors. They already have three other superstars in Curry, Thompson and Green. That core broke the single season wins record last season. Durant is a great player and certainly adds value, but it’s just inherently difficult to add a lot of value to a team that’s already breaking records.

Contrast that with Westbrook. Westbrook’s supporting cast consists of Victor Oladipo, Steven Adams and Enes Kanter. All solid players, but they play a supporting role. Without Westbrook, they’d be lacking a central cog.

Is that a fun way to interpret the word though? Is it fair? The most valuable player is always going to be the guy who brings a 25 win team to 50 wins, not the guy who brings a 50 win team to 60 wins. Why should an individual award depend so much on something the individual can’t control — who his teammates are. If Curry was on the Thunder instead of Westbrook with the same orders to fire away, he too would be putting up record breaking stats.

Context Independent

The amount of value a player provides clearly depends on those who are around them:

• It’s hard for Kevin Durant to add a lot of extra value to a team that was already breaking records.
• DeAndre Jordan derives a lot of value from having Chris Paul throwing him lobs, and from having other role players who can space the court.
• James Harden derives a lot of value from playing in an up tempo system that always puts the ball in his hands, lets him be the playmaker, and surrounds him with three point specialists (and Clint Capella as the role man lob target specialist).
• Rajon Rondo suffers from playing with two other ball dominant alpha males. He thrived in Sacremento not too long ago when they gave him the ball and let him run the offense.

I like to evaluate players as individuals, independent of the context they’re in. As if I’m in a fantasy draft and have to pick a player without knowing who the rest of my team is yet. Some players fit well in many different contexts. Others can only flourish in a very specific context. I think that more value should be placed on players who are adaptable, and less value should be placed on players who only fit one context.

Anthony Davis is a guy who I think is very adaptable. If you need a scorer, you can give him the ball and let him put up 30 a night. If you need a complementary guy to play off the ball, he’s great in the pick and roll, great as a finisher, and great spotting up. If you have a lot of scoring, you can let him spend his energy crashing the boards and acting as a shut down defender + pain protector.

On the other hand, Harden is a guy who is not very adaptable. He needs the ball in his hands, and he needs spacing in order to go to work and really excel. He’s not particularly good playing off the ball. Which brings me to my next point…

Championships

One ball dominant volume scorer won’t win you a championship. Allen Iverson came close in 2001, but he couldn’t do it. Kobe was able to put up 35 a game in 2005, but couldn’t muster more than 45 wins. He never won much without good supporting casts. There are many other examples of this. Furthermore, it’s 2017 now and it’s even harder to win with one volume scorer than it used to be.

If the best volume scorers in history couldn’t win championships, you better be able to play well with others. I think that this is crucial. Championships are what matter, right? Isn’t that the ethos of professional sports?

There’s always diminishing returns to adding more superstars to a team. Adding Kevin Durant to the Nets would probably move them from a 20 to a 45 win team. But adding him to the Warriors doesn’t move the needle as much.

Championship teams are usually going to have three stars. Recent history:

• Cavs: LeBron, Kyrie, Love
• Warriors: Curry, Thompson, Green
• Heat: LeBron, Wade, Bosh
• Lakers: Kobe, Gasol, Bynum
• Celtics: Garnett, Pierce, Allen
• Spurs: Duncan, Ginobili, Parker

There are exceptions. Sometimes there are only two legit stars, and a bunch of very solid role players. The only exception without “stars” was the Pistons in 2004, and it’s very arguable that they had five stars rather than zero.

The point is — to win championships, you have to play well with others. If you’re the kind of player that introduces diminishing returns when other good players are added, then it’s going to be hard to win a championship with you. And if you’re the kind of player that is hard to win championships with… well then in what way are you valuable?

I believe that Harden and Westbrook are the kinds of players who make it hard to win a championship. Harden needs the ball in his hands, and needs space to operate. He’s been given the ultimate system this year, and I doubt he’ll win a championship with. He had Dwight Howard a few years back — the perfect co-superstar who doesn’t need to have the ball in his hands to influence the game. The rest of that roster also complemented Harden pretty well, and he never took them to the finals. He even had a roster of Durant, Westbrook and Ibaka — and wasn’t able to crack the code with lots of fire power along side him (You say he wasn’t in his prime? He averaged 26 a game the next year. Do you really think he improved that much over the summer?).

Similarly, Westbrook also needs the ball in his hands to be influential, and isn’t the kind of player you win championships with. His value comes from volume scoring. He isn’t a good defender. He isn’t a game manager. He isn’t a good teammate. He isn’t great off the ball. He doesn’t mesh well with others. When he had Kevin Durant, they just took turns going one-on-one. Now Kevin Durant is playing beautiful basketball in Golden State, and Westbrook continues to play one-on-one basketball in Oklahoma City. That’s not the kind of player that adds value to good basketball teams. Imagine him on the Spurs. Are they even any better?

On the other hand, guys like LeBron and Curry do mesh well with others, and it’s no surprise that they’re the ones winning championships. Same with Duncan and Shaq back in the day — each of them had the type of game that didn’t introduce diminishing returns as more talent was added to the roster.

I think that in evaluating players, priority needs to be given to Championship Skillsets above all else. Note that you don’t need to be a superstar to have the kind of skillset that doesn’t introduce diminishing returns when talent is added. Guys like Korver and Tristan Thompson won’t drop off when talent is added around them. Guys like Dion Waiters and Lance Stephenson will.

Vent

I hate Russell Westbrook. And I hate James Harden. If we’re going to talk about who added the most value to their team this year, yes, the MVP race is between them two. But I still hate them. And I don’t think they’re nearly as good as people think. Let me tell you why.

Harden

I can’t stand his flops. Can’t stand them. And he gets away with push-offs that either aren’t legal, or that shouldn’t be legal.

I know it cherry picking extreme examples… but this demonstrates a lack of integrity:

There’s also the fact that he’s ball dominant and doesn’t have a Championship Skillset… but let’s move on.

Westbrook

Everyone knows Westbrook can be a volume scorer. No one doubts that. But people are saying that Westbrook has added new dimensions to his game this year, with respect to passing and rebounding in particular.

Yes, he’s been putting up assists. But consider the context. Consider how ridiculously high his usage rate is. In that context, I’m not too impressed with the numbers. Even compared to other superstars, his usage rate is insane. Other guys are in the low 30s, while Westbrook is at 40+.

FiveThirtyEight had a good analysis where they looked at how much the MVP candidates improved their teammates true shooting percentage. Curry’s average teammate shot 7.3 percentage points better with him on the court, whereas Westbrook’s average teammate only shot 2.5 points better with him on the court. Yet Curry only averaged 6.6 assists per game this year, whereas Westbrook averaged 10.4.

Assists don’t tell the whole picture. If you watch the Warriors, you’ll see a lot of this:

The stats also don’t tell the story of how his teammates don’t get a chance to, you know, play basketball in the Give Westbrook The Ball And Let Him Go offense.

People like to praise Westbrook for his rebounding ability. They tell themselves the story of a big guard with long arms and insane explosiveness who can go up and fight for boards with the bigs. That story isn’t complete though. It misses the parts where Westbrook falls asleep and gives up offensive rebounds. And it misses the parts where his teammates step away and let him pad his stats. I’m not joking:

People also like to tell themselves the story of that same athletic freak being one of the best finishers in the league. Yes, he does have some nice highlight dunks. Yes, his physical gifts allow him to convert finishes that others aren’t able to convert. Those things are true, but they miss the poor shot selection and lack of touch around the rim.

The fact is that he’s not an efficient finisher around the rim.

This actually shouldn’t be too surprising. He isn’t an efficient player in general. While guys like Curry, Durant and Leonard are all approaching 50/40/90, Westbrook is 42/34/84 (Harden is at 44/35/85).

Take a look at this graphic again. You could see him as an obvious outlier. The bottom right is not The Cool Corner.

Perhaps the biggest reason why I hate Westbrook is because he could be so good. He should be so good. He should be a lock down defender. He should be able to play off the ball as a scoring guard who finishes well. He should be able to use that speed and be active off the ball, losing his man for easy alley oops. He should have a Championship Skillset.

In a way, he does have it. He just doesn’t use it. His issues are mental. I’ve seen him lock opposing scorers down when he wants to. I’ve seen him focus and not miss box outs. I’ve seen him make incredible passes. He knows how to take smart shots. Any guy in a YMCA pick up game knows — deep down — what is a good shot and what isn’t. It takes take 15 years of experience in the league to figure that out.

Westbrook may be the most athletic, explosive player who’s every played the game. It’s tantilizing. I want to see him utilize it and succeed for the same reason I wanted to see the Warriors go undefeated this year — I want to see greatness.

Conclusion

I haven’t answered the question of who I think the MVP should be. My answer is that I don’t care. I don’t like the way it’s defined (or it’s lack of a clear definition). And I hate Westbrook and Harden.