https://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/33726598/joel-embiid-nikola-jokic-giannis-antetokounmpo-mvp-best-rookie-zach-lowe-makes-2021-awards-selectionsMVP -JokerThere are three worthy winners. A case for one is not a slight against the others. In any normal season, Embiid and Antetokounmpo would run away with this.
Antetokounmpo may be the world's best player. If you asked 100 coaches and executives to pick one of these three for Game 7 of the Finals, Antetokounmpo wins -- maybe easily. He edged Embiid (ending behind only Jokic) in most advanced statistics. Milwaukee was plus-8 per 100 possessions with Antetokounmpo on the floor, and minus-3 when he sat; he too passes the "what happens when you take him away?" test. Milwaukee finished ahead of Philadelphia and Denver.
But with three otherworldly dossiers, I'm inclined to look again at that word "valuable" and place a smidgen extra weight on the rare level of chaos Embiid and Jokic navigated. Denver's second- and third-best players missed basically the entire season. Embiid's would-be co-star sat out the whole damned thing, turning a max salary slot into a zero until James Harden showed up in Philly's 59th game. These two giants carrying their teams to 51 and 48 wins is an incredible accomplishment.
This isn't "punishing" Antetokounmpo for Milwaukee's stability as much as it is rewarding Embiid and Jokic for stabilizing teams that might have otherwise teetered. Perhaps Philly endured the more unusual and potentially destabilizing turmoil. Injuries happen. Indefinite superstar boycotts don't. Jokic didn't face endless questions about Jamal Murray and Michael Porter Jr.
The difference between living those circumstances is hard for an outsider to parse. In strict production terms, I'm not sure Embiid faced a deeper talent void than Jokic. It's possible only one other Denver starter -- Aaron Gordon -- starts for your typical contender. If backups are starting, who are the actual backups?
Denver outscored opponents by 8.4 points per 100 possessions with Jokic on the floor, and went a hideous minus-7.9 when he rested. The first number is more important. You never want to over-reward someone because of a weakened surrounding roster -- and in the process unfairly knock an equivalent superstar for the sin of having good teammates.
But that plus-8.4 number shows Jokic didn't just lift an undermanned roster out of the muck. He made it great. That margin is one point higher than Phoenix's league-leading team mark.
The same holds for Embiid, on a slightly lesser scale: Philly was plus-7.9 with him, minus-3.6 without him.
Jokic logged almost 200 more minutes than Embiid. He has the overall statistical edge, which is astonishing given Embiid averaged 30.6 points and 11.7 rebounds; outshot Jokic from deep (37% to 33.7%); and became the first center since Shaquille O'Neal to win the scoring title. But Jokic posted an unprecedented line of 27.1 points, 13.7 rebounds, and 7.9 assists; invented the 2,000/1,000/500 club; and lapped the field in advanced metrics. He shot 65% on 2s, compared to 53% for Embiid.
I have seen claims Embiid faced more double- and triple-teams -- perhaps deflating his 2-point shooting. I'm not sure how one even measures triple-teams. Both faced the wrath of entire defenses. Jokic was doubled on 191 post-ups, per Second Spectrum. Embiid was doubled on 171. Equalizing for minutes and post-up frequency, they faced doubles at an identical rate -- on 3.7 post-ups per 100 possessions.
If Jokic is doubled less often, it is probably because defenses fear his passing as much as his scoring; Doc Rivers drew bile precisely for doubling Jokic in the Clippers' collapse against Denver in the 2020 conference semifinals. His very fair response might have been: Would you prefer we just let him score?
There is growing evidence that Jokic's passing is transformative in ways that are difficult to quantify and even digest with your eyes. We see the highlights, of course. Something more powerful is going on -- something about the ecosystem Jokic nurtures, and how he keeps defenses on the back foot.
That is part of what advanced numbers are getting at in trumpeting Jokic's case. Some people dismiss those numbers. That is their prerogative. Others cherry-pick a few, and toss the rest. Fine. They are not for everyone. They are not dispositive. But when they all scream the same thing, something is happening. It is hard to craft any statistical argument beyond raw individual scoring that ends anywhere but Jokic. It just is.
I've seen it floated that the league's generous accounting of handoffs and other rote passes is inflating Jokic's assist totals. That might be true! You know who else benefits from such accounting? Every other high-volume ball handler.
Even though the numbers don't really show it (and they don't), Embiid is the better defender. If I need three minutes of shut-down defense to win the title, I'm taking Embiid over Jokic. Offenses go at Jokic more than Embiid, though every paint-bound big becomes the target of pace-and-space offenses sometime. (The Sixers in past playoffs series shifted Embiid away from pick-and-pop centers -- Al Horford, Marc Gasol -- and onto lesser shooters.)
But available data suggests Jokic is a good defender, at least in the regular season. The gap on defense is not enough to tip the race here. Nor is team success. Philly won 51 games to Denver's 48. The Sixers finished fourth in the East; Denver is sixth in the West.
Denver went 46-28 with Jokic available -- a 51-win pace. Philly went 45-23 with Embiid -- a 54-win pace. Philly was plus-2.6 overall, Denver plus-2.3. There is almost no difference.
Embiid backers are right that MVPs typically come from teams way higher than sixth, but they should tread carefully. Those MVPs most often emerge from teams in first or second. The "what about wins?" line is actually an argument for Antetokounmpo, Tatum, or Devin Booker. (Yes, the Bucks and Celtics finished with the same record as Philly. They are above them in the standings. They were both clearly superior in qualitative terms.)
We should be more open to the notion that the most valuable player might sometimes be on a mid-rung playoff team. I had Kevin Love on my ballot (not at the top) once in his Minnesota Timberwolves prime, when Minnesota missed the playoffs. I didn't vote for Russell Westbrook in 2017 -- the Great Exception, lifting a No. 6 seed -- but I hoped his win would open the door to more candidates outside the very top teams.
I don't care who wins. All three are incredible. There is no wrong answer. But each voter must pick one, and Jokic -- to these eyes at least -- has the best case.
The last two spots came down to Doncic, Tatum, Booker, and Stephen Curry -- still a ubiquitous offensive force even in a "down" year by his generational standards.
Booker was the toughest cut. The best player on a 64-win juggernaut usually jostles for the top spot. Booker and Chris Paul share centerpiece status; Booker is the scoring engine, Paul the playmaking engine. Even in the best defensive season of his career, Booker ranks as the fifth-best defender in the Suns' vice-grip starting five.
Booker is probably less singularly responsible for Phoenix's greatness than Tatum and Doncic are in Boston and Dallas. Tatum logged about 400 minutes more than both. He's the best defender among them by a wide margin, and the common denominator in almost every productive Boston lineup. The Celtics were plus-12 per 100 possessions with Tatum on the floor -- the fattest margin among all these guys, including the top three -- and minus-2 when he rested.
The Mavs had a better overall scoring margin with Doncic on the bench, though that was largely a remnant of his slow start. Tatum and Doncic just do a little more than Booker.
ROTY - BarnesThis is one of the closest races in years, and Cunningham played well enough over the last 50 games to make it a three-man battle.
He may end up the best player among these three. He falls behind Mobley and Barnes in shooting efficiency -- Cunningham hit just 31% on 3s and 47% on 2s -- but that would happen to almost any lead ball handler on a rebuilding team. Barnes and Mobley have two current or recent All-Stars apiece around them; Cunningham had mostly young guys, minimum-level filler, and 47 games of Jerami Grant.
And yet: 17.5 points, 5.5 assists, 5.5 rebounds, and you-know-it-when-you-see-it alpha playmaking. Cunningham is big and patient, with the size to fling any pass and loft tricky fadeaways, pull-ups, and floaters. In the style of Doncic, Cunningham keeps plays alive in the paint, dribbling and pivoting and twisting until the defense reveals something. He's a solid defender, with All-Defensive potential -- and the toughness to realize it.
But Mobley and Barnes raced ahead early, and Cunningham didn't quite do enough to overtake them.
You can't go wrong between Mobley and Barnes. Mobley averaged 15.0 points, Barnes 15.3. Their shooting numbers are almost identical. Barnes has Mobley in assists; Mobley wins in rebounds. Barnes seems to have eked -- and I mean eked -- past Mobley in most advanced stats, but Mobley leads in a few big ones.
Mobley's defense sang the loudest of their respective skills. His combination of rim protection and switchability is unheard of for rookies. Only five players challenged more shots per game at the rim, and Mobley held opponents to 56% shooting on such attempts -- a solid number. Only 24 players defended more isolations; opponents managed only 0.82 points per chance going at Mobley one-on-one.
Mobley was the more dominant defender, but Barnes the more versatile. Only four players defended more isolations than Barnes, per Second Spectrum. He didn't defang those guys at Mobley's level, but he held up well considering how much time he spent guarding elite wings. He defended nearly as many post-ups as Mobley, and switched from screener to ball handler on about the same number of pick-and-rolls, per Second Spectrum. Barnes guarded the ball handler on those plays about four times as often as Mobley.
Raptors coach Nick Nurse threw Barnes on everyone. He often started on centers, but toggled assignments constantly -- often multiple times within possessions. He's dangerous as a roving helper, though sometimes too adventurous.
Barnes is a bit more comfortable than Mobley with the ball on offense, though the gap isn't as wide as you might think; Mobley is a cagey scorer on post-ups and isolations.
In a race this tight, Barnes' huge advantage in minutes -- about 300 -- looms as a tiebreaker, especially given how many were productive late-season minutes in high-leverage games. Over the final two months, the ultra-thin Raptors went 8-4 without Fred VanVleet -- remarkable considering VanVleet is Toronto's only consistent rotation point guard. The Raptors needed Barnes to be a chameleon -- to fill different holes in different sections of each game. He delivered, and (barely) gets the nod here.
Franz Wagner is the only other candidate -- closer to No. 1 than to No. 5. These first three are just really good -- two in major roles on play-in/playoff teams, and the third carrying a traditional star burden.
This post was edited by DeRozan on Apr 13 2022 10:56am