A mid-year(-ish) look at the NBA MVP Race

The NBA’s MVP award is probably the most fascinating individual accolade in professional team sports. The nature of a basketball game is such that having the MVP, or the best player on the floor, in a given game has an outsized impact compared to other sports. It’s this same reason why the NBA’s Greatest-of-All-Time debate generates so much fervor. Being the best individual player is the variable perhaps most directly linked to having the winningest team. The MVP discussion provides a chance to lift up the individual who gives his team the greatest chance to win, and the playing field is remarkably even despite the great variance in playing styles of individuals involved.

In the NFL, a quarterback has been awarded the title of MVP for the last 10 years, with the last non-QB to win being running back Adrian Peterson in 2012. But for all winners, their case was supplemented by the presence of other great players. Quarterbacks who lack offensive lines and wide receivers capable of delivering them time to throw and reliable targets to throw to will not win the award irrespective of their individual talent. In basketball, an MVP can win more easily despite his supporting cast, and regardless of his position. Take the five top candidates. You have two centers, a power forward who resembles a bulldozer, a small forward with the grace of a jellyfish, and a forward-sized point guard whose knack for the game borders on supernatural. Each of these players benefits from positional diversity in their skillsets: big men who pass and see the floor like point guards, point guards who have the bulk of forwards, a power forward with the strength of a center and speed of a quick guard, or a wing player whose size is just right for playing big or small depending on what the moment calls for. Compare this to the NFL, where the variance in passing success can often be attributed as much to surrounding personnel as individual prowess.

I’ve tracked the NBA MVP race for years because of this, what amounts to my personal fascination with the award, how it is chosen and how the various, vastly different cases are argued. The object of basketball is incredibly simple: ball go in hole. Yet, the methods of doing this at the highest level are as varied as the skillsets required to play quarterback versus defensive lineman.

To me, the justification for winning the award of NBA MVP comes down to this: Who is the preeminent factor in winning games the most amount of times during the regular season? The goal of the NBA regular season is to win games; thus the way a player provides value to his team is by ensuring they do so. The method of winning the game, even the precise share in which the player contributed is of secondary importance. Watching any given basketball game, one easily finds themselves sussing out who is the best individual player on the court. Which player is making the biggest impact on the outcome of this particular game, and doing so in a winning effort? That is the MVP of the game. In the course of a regular season, it should be the individual who is able to decide, in his team’s favor, the highest number of games.

The next question becomes, then, how do we determine who the best player in a given game is? That question is subjective, simple, and yet impossible. Most times, a routine box score can render an efficacious verdict without much need for study. To cite a random example, here:

Despite being his team’s leading scorer by just 1 point, this player turned in a massive rebounding game, including 9 offensive rebounds, netting nine extra possessions or shot attempts, that more than overcome the player’s relative lack of productivity in the way of assists. It would be unreasonable to disagree, even though it’s obvious that three other players put in pretty good statlines.

I did not watch this game on television, nor did I view any highlights, nor did I check play-by-play information to see which specific spurt of a player’s productivity led most directly to the deciding points or moments. Irrespective of other variables, the team would not have been in the competitive position it was if not for this player’s rebounding and scoring. I feel like I know enough about basketball to assert that. So, the decision is made, and that player is counted as that team’s MVP for that game, a win. Congrats, Jarrett Allen.

Sometimes, the results are a little more difficult to parse:

Here, the team’s best player isn’t so easily spotted. There are several factors to consider. The team’s leading scorer had a great night shooting the ball, going 8-of-10 from inside the 3-point arc, getting to the free-throw line a team-high five times to put up 21 points. The team’s leading rebounder was the only starter to collect an offensive rebound, getting four extra shots or possessions for his team, additionally that player tied for the team-high in assists, with four. Now, we also should consider that none of these numbers are great gross numbers in an NBA game. 21 points is below-average for a team-high, nine rebounds is fairly routine, and four assists is not evidence of a game-changing distributor. Furthermore, for both of these players’ efforts, neither was entrusted to take the most shots on that team. The player who took the most shots had a poor shooting night, going 6-of-18, including 3–of-10 from two-point range, and scored 15 points. Also, anyone who can do the math under the plus-minus category can determine this team lost (badly). So none of these performances would truly count toward an individual winning the NBA MVP award. (Nor should they.) However, it’s a relevant example of a box score presenting multiple competitive cases for who should be anointed as the team’s MVP for the game.

In a spot like this, you could do more research as to who deserves the honor more: You could look at highlights, you could rewatch the game, you could examine play-by-play descriptions to see who contributed more of his production during times when the game’s result was still undecided, and discount production that occurred in garbage time. Ultimately, I awarded the middle player, with their offensive rebounds and assists, over the leading scorer. I think it’s the right choice.

The point is, making this choice in every game, 82 times in a season, is a lot more thorough than making a choice once, viewing the season holistically. It alleviates the possibility of overreacting to narratives or games that maybe earn an outsized spotlight but contribute equally to the overall equation of which team has the best season. It allows for an objective approach to one’s own subjectivity. Because regardless of one’s context, the ultimate outcome of the regular season, as determined by wins and losses, and a player’s ability to frequently and reliably yield the former, is what matters.

As of the All-Star break, here are my NBA MVP rankings:

The decisive column is the one circled in black: The number of times a team has won games with the player listed as its best player. At this point, Jayson Tatum and Nikola Jokic have tied for the most of these (I call them Games Won, a crude term that doesn’t disguise its own subjectivity). The other two columns of significance are the column circled in blue (Games as Best, denoting the number of total times a player was his team’s best player) and the column circled in red (Games Played, denoting the number of games that player’s team — not the player themselves — has played). Combined, these numbers yield a percentage of the time that the player is their team’s best player when it plays. Of all the known and respected MVP candidates this season, the player who most frequently provides the most production for his team is Shai Gilgeous-Alexander. However, Gilgeous-Alexander’s team has struggled in those games, going 22–23. This rightly diminishes his MVP candidacy. But, it does reveal something about SGA’s incredible consistency this year, and explains his consideration for the league’s Most Improved Player award. Last year, SGA was the Thunder’s best player in 39 of 82 games (again, according to me!) and the team went 10–29 in those games.

So, my MVP rankings are as follows:
1. Nikola Jokic
2. Jayson Tatum
3. Giannis Antetokounmpo
4. Luka Doncic
5. Joel Embiid (barely)

Notably, this matches pretty tightly with the consensus top five, although the order is a bit scrambled. Right now, the order is considered to be:
1. Nikola Jokic
2. Giannis Antetokounmpo
3. Joel Embiid
4. Jayson Tatum
5. Luka Doncic

Embiid’s candidacy renders the largest discrepancy between the national perception (and most recent NBA MVP straw poll and NBA.com KIA MVP ladder) and my rankings. The reason is simple: He keeps getting outplayed by his teammates. Embiid’s percentage of games as his team’s best players is below 60%, lowest among any of the top 12 candidates outside of Kevin Durant, whose numbers stopped counting when he was traded out of Brooklyn after missing a month due to injury (Durant was top-4 alongside Jokic, Doncic, and Tatum at the time of his injury).

I’m probably biased against Embiid because as a fan I hated The Process and have always low-key rooted for his downfall. However, my bias doesn’t seem to have too much of an effect on Antetokounmpo, who is my favorite among the top candidates, or Tatum, another player my rooting interests directly oppose. However, let’s check my records to see if I’m being unfair to Embiid, or if he really isn’t the candidate he makes himself out to be.

For starters, here are Philadelphia’s MVP rankings as a team:

Here are the times each other player on this list has outplayed Joel Embiid, according to me. To shorten the list, I will only look at games Philadelphia has won with other players as their main contributors, because losses wouldn’t push Embiid’s candidacy over the top in my rankings regardless:

Feb. 13: 76ers 123, Rockets 104
Joel Embiid: 8-of-14 FGs, 6–6 FTs, 6 REB, 4 AST, 1 STL, 3 TO, 23 PTS
James Harden: 9-of-18 FGs, 6–7 FTs, 2 REB, 10 AST, 2 STL, 2 BLK, 3 TO, 28 PTS

Pretty open and shut. Harden took and made more shots, distributed more, nabbed an additional steal, and blocked two shots while turning it over the same amount. Minutes wise, it was Harden 32, Embiid 31, though I don’t factor minutes in to my decision-making, because availability is as valuable as efficiency in the long run.

Of note, however, is that this game was never closer than 10 points in the fourth quarter. It was essentially over after three. Despite that, Embiid sat the whole fourth quarter while Harden played six minutes, accumulating five points, a steal, and two assists in that time (based on a control-find scanning of the play-by-play data, which isn’t perfectly reliable). Removing their respective fourth quarters, which could be chalked up to garbage time, the comparison is as follows:
Joel Embiid: 8-of-14 FGs, 6–6 FTs, 6 REB, 4 AST, 1 STL, 3 TO, 23 PTS
James Harden: 7-of-13 FGs, 5–6 FTs, 1 REB, 8 AST, 1 STL, 2 BLK, 3 TO, 23 PTS

It’s closer, definitely more of a contest. Additionally Embiid had four points at the end of the third quarter that pushed the game out of single-digits for the final time. But by the time you’re looking at how the Sixers lead went from 5 after the first bucket of the third quarter to 17 and eventually 15 when Harden checked out, you’re so far deep in the weeds that the case for awarding the game MVP to Embiid doesn’t make as much sense as just acknowledging the fourth quarter productivity from Harden was important because it kept the lead strong and allowed Embiid to rest. So, in essence, Harden.

Feb. 1: 76ers 105, Magic 94
Joel Embiid: 9-of-17 FGs, 10–10 FTs, 11 REB, 3 AST, 1 BLK, 2 TO, 28 PTS
James Harden: 7-of-13 FGs, 6–7 FTs, 9 REB, 10 AST, 1 STL 7 TO, 26 PTS

Additional context: Harden had one offensive rebound to Embiid’s three, Harden shot 6-of-10 from three, and Embiid was +17 while Harden was just +7. So, in sum, Embiid shot more, got to the line more, his rebounding was more impactful, he scored more, and Harden had five more turnovers. Are seven assists worth all that? Seems doubtful. Maybe the raw numbers attracted me to Harden a little too much, and Embiid deserves the credit here.

Jan. 21, 76ers 129, Kings 127
Joel Embiid did not play. Embiid has played in 45 games this season, missing 12. Whether or not the absences are load management or injury-related, if you can’t play for your team, you can’t provide value. Also, a common theme here is most of these are wins against bad teams, currently outside the play-in in their respective conferences.

Jan. 14: 76ers 118, Jazz 117
Joel Embiid: 9-of-18 FGs, 10–13 FTs, 7 REB, 2 AST, 2 BLK, 2 TO, 30 PTS
James Harden: 11-of-19 FGs, 5–5 FTs, 6 REB, 11 AST, 2 TO, 31 PTS

Additional context: Embiid hit a game-winning stepback jumper. It was off a behind-the-back wraparound assist from Harden, who had just drawn Walker Kessler, Embiid’s defender, on a switch off a screen, and when Harden’s defender, Nickeil-Alexander Walker, came to double, Harden made the play. Jordan Clarkson missed a 3-pointer on the other end that would’ve stolen it back for Utah.

Embiid is both enhanced by Harden’s presence, and hindered by his productivity. What stat line looks better for you: 1 REB, 2 BLK, or 9 AST, 1 PTS. Those are the deltas in their performance in this game. They combined to make the game-winning play. I stand by Harden as the player of the game because of his role in the last shot and his raw distribution over the game which likely put them in that position to begin with.

Jan. 8, 76ers 123, Pistons 111
Jan. 4, 76ers 129, Pacers 126
Joel Embiid did not play in these games.

Dec. 31, 76ers 115, Thunder 96
Joel Embiid: 6-of-17 FGs, 4–6 FTs, 13 REB, 10 AST, 4 BLK, 4 TO, 16 PTS
Tobias Harris: 10-of-17 FGs, 2–2 FTs, 9 REB, 4 AST, 0 TO, 23 PTS

An odd game in many respects. The 76ers blew the game open immediately with a 38–20 first quarter. Embiid had 6 PTS, 5 REB, 2 AST in that quarter while Harris had 10 PTS, 4 REB, 3 AST in that span. Harris also had five offensive rebounds to Embiid’s two. Embiid had an uncharacteristically bad shooting night, and got the triple-double along with four blocks, possibly in response to his own poor shooting. You could argue for Embiid here, possibly, but my vote goes to Harris.

Dec. 25, 76ers 119, Knicks 112
Joel Embiid: 12-of-22 FGs, 10–15 FTs, 8 REB, 1 AST, 3 TO, 35 PTS
James Harden: 7-of-16 FGs, 10–11 FTs, 4 REB, 13 AST, 4 STL, 1 TO, 29 PTS

Embiid’s advantage numbers amount to 6 PTS, 4 REB; Harden’s are 12 AST 4 STL, and -2 TO. Additionally, Harden was a +10 while Embiid was a -6. Plus-minus can often be ignored, but a 16-point difference is significant. Advantage Harden.

Dec. 13, 76ers 123, Kings 103
Joel Embiid: 10-of-16 FGs, 11–13 FTs, 7 REB, 2 AST, 1 STL, 3 TO, 31 PTS
James Harden: 7-of-13 FGs, 3–6 FTs, 7 REB, 15 AST, 5 STL, 6 TO, 21 PTS

Harden’s advantage numbers are 13 AST, 4 STL; Embiid’s are 10 PTS, -3 TO. He also got to the line twice as much and took and made more shots. Harden keyed a run in the beginning of the second quarter that turned a 5-point lead into a 19-point advantage by the time Embiid checked in. The game was never close again. Advantage Harden.

Nov. 27, 76ers 133, Magic 103
Nov. 25, 76ers 107, Magic 99
Nov. 22, 76ers 115, Nets 106
Oct. 31, 76ers 118, Wizards 111
Oct. 28, 76ers 112, Raptors 90
Embiid did not play in any of the above games.

Oct. 24, 76ers 120, Pacers 106
Joel Embiid: 8-of-13 FGs, 9–9 FTs, 5 REB, 2 AST, 1 STL, 3 BLK, 3 TO, 26 PTS
James Harden: 10-of-18 FGs, 4–4 FTs, 9 REB, 11 AST, 2 STL, 1 TO, 29 PTS

More points, more rebounds, more assists, fewer turnovers. Vintage Harden.

That’s it. Those are all the games where Embiid has been outplayed by teammates in games the Sixers have won.

So, what did we learn? I’m not sure. Other than Christmas against New York and an early December game before we knew the Kings were for real, Embiid gets outplayed in games where the 76ers have a weak opponent, and even then his numbers are often competitive and worthy of praise.

Another factor: Isn’t Embiid still his team’s best player in those games? When Embiid and Harden share the floor, either Embiid is more productive, or Harden is more productive, but either way, Embiid is the face of the team and the primary concern of the defense. He’ll get most of their defensive attention, and success Harden has comes as a byproduct of Embiid’s presence. I guess, this is sort of the price you pay for having a really good team. It doesn’t compare to the impact, say, Jalen Hurts’ successful teammates had on his MVP candidacy in the NFL. But it means that sometimes guys have productive games because of you and take a bit of the limelight. The team functions well either way, but your MVP candidacy is a tad bit undermined. At least, that according to a schmuck who tracks it in a static fashion by box score trawling (for the record, I watch a lot of games and factor in the eye test for games I watch).

The player Embiid most casts himself in contrast to, Nikola Jokic, has been his team’s best player in 40 of 59 games. He’s played in 51 games, missing 8. Here are some examples of Jokic being outplayed by teammates.

Feb. 4, Nuggets 128, Hawks 108
Nikola Jokic: 5-of-8 FGs, 4–5 FTs, 18 REB, 10 AST, 1 STL, 2 BLK, 5 TO, 14 PTS
Jamal Murray: 15-of-24 FGs, 4–4 FTs, 5 REB, 7 AST, 1 STL, 1 TO, 41 PTS

Jan. 9, Nuggets 122, Lakers 109
Nikola Jokic: 5-of-5 FGs, 3–3 FTs, 11 REB, 16 AST, 1 STL, 1 BLK, 4 TO, 14 PTS
Jamal Murray: 13-of-29 FGs, 3–4 FTs, 7 REB, 4 AST, 2 STL, 3 TO, 34 PTS

Jan. 5, Nuggets 122, Clippers 91
Nikola Jokic: 4-of-8 FGs, 4–5 FTs, 6 REB, 9 AST, 1 STL, 2 TO, 12 PTS
Jamal Murray: 7-of-10 FGs, 0–0 FTs, 4 REB, 1 AST, 0 TO, 18 PTS
Vlatko Cancar: 6-of-12 FGs, 2–2 FTs, 12 REB, 1 AST, 1 STL, 1 BLK 2 TO, 15 PTS

Dec. 27, Nuggets 113, Kings 106
Nikola Jokic: 7-of-10 FGs, 6–6 FTs, 9 REB, 11 AST, 1 STL, 0 TO, 20 PTS
Jamal Murray: 7-of-15 FGs, 8–8 FTs, 5 REB, 7 AST, 2 STL, 1 TO, 25 PTS

Nov. 25, Nuggets 114, Clippers 104
Nikola Jokic: 7-of-13 FGs, 5–7 FTs, 13 REB, 6 AST, 2 STL, 1 BLK, 2 TO, 19 PTS
Jamal Murray: 9-of-21 FGs, 0–0 FTs, 6 REB, 9 AST, 1 STL, 1 TO, 21 PTS
Aaron Gordon: 12-of-16 FGs, 3–4 FTs, 7 REB, 3 AST, 2 STL, 2 BLK 1 TO, 29 PTS

Nov. 13, Nuggets 126, Bulls 103
Nikola Jokic: 4-of-4 FGs, 0–0 FTs, 6 REB, 14 AST, 3 STL, 2 TO, 8 PTS
Michael Porter Jr.: 11-of-16 FGs, 4–6 FTs, 1 REB, 2 AST, 2 STL, 0 TO, 31 PTS

Nov. 3, Nuggets 122, Thunder 110
Nikola Jokic: 6-of-9 FGs, 3–3 FTs, 13 REB, 14 AST, 1 STL, 10 TO, 15 PTS
Aaron Gordon: 10-of-13 FGs, 4–5 FTs, 5 REB, 3 AST, 1 STL, 0 TO, 27 PTS

Oct. 28, Nuggets 117, Jazz 101
Nikola Jokic: 3-of-10 FGs, 6–8 FTs, 10 REB, 6 AST, 1 STL, 1 BLK, 1 TO, 12 PTS
Michael Porter Jr.: 7-of-15 FGs, 4–5 FTs, 13 REB, 1 AST, 0 TO, 22 PTS

How different! I’ve decided to start calling these types of Jokic performances “crab mode,” where he decides to shoot less than 10 times a game but pile up rebounds and assists. Jokic still has plenty of games with high-volume shooting. In December he averaged 18.6 FGA per game. In the other months, however, his average is between 12.4 and 13.9. Last year, without Michael Porter Jr. and Jamal Murray for all but 9 MPJ games, Jokic averaged 17.7 FGAs per game.

It’s true that Jokic is an odd character, and he’s definitely not gunning for MVP like Embiid. He gets there because his team usually wins and he is usually the reason why. It’s simple, really. Over the years of tracking this (subjective) data, a gold standard has emerged. To win MVP in a given year, the benchmark is to be your team’s best player 70% of the time, and win 70% of the games as your team’s best player. This equates to about 40 games won as your team’s best player. Last season, no player hit both marks, but Jokic earned the title by being his team’s best player at an incredible rate, which isn’t surprising considering his best teammate was Aaron Gordon.

If you want to argue that the high number of team losses as his team’s best player counts against Jokic’s case (only Gilgeous-Alexander’s team lost more with him as its best player), then that’s fine, I guess? I would respect a player more if they were their team’s best player in all 82 games but went .500, then one who also was his team’s best player in 41 wins but missed 15 games and was outplayed in several others. Or maybe I wouldn’t.

The narrative and the data intersect here in many interesting ways, and ultimately, it’s impossible to determine whether data shapes narrative or narrative shapes interpretation of data, or to deny that both are true in cases.

I just know if somebody says Embiid outplayed Nikola Jokic in a noon game in January and should thus beat him out for MVP, I don’t respect that person’s opinion very much.

Who do I predict will come out on top in my rankings? It’s tough to say. Jokic seems a reasonable favorite, but I could see the Nuggets deliberately trying to prioritize Porter Jr. and Murray through the stretch run to gear them up for the playoffs, where presumably they’ll want to see both scoring at high clips, allowing for Jokic to damage teams as a facilitator. Tatum, who once led the race by 6 or so Games Won, has tapered off significantly from the pace he established in the season’s opening months, and figures to get overtaken. Antetokounmpo stands a chance as the Bucks get healthy and figure to get in the practice of featuring him and acclimating the pieces around him to playing with him. Then again, maybe Middleton ramps up and takes away some games. Doncic is always a threat, but the added presence of Kyrie Irving may take away some of his games as best also. All this keeps the door open for Embiid, just a crack. Finishing at the benchmark of 40, however, would require him to be his team’s best player in winning efforts in 17 of its final 25 games, meaning he’d have to be its best player in 24 of the 25 games, if they win under him at their current pace (69.7% of the time). That would land him 1 Game Won short of Jokic at his current pace (on pace for 41), but the narrative sensation of such a surge would undoubtedly be more than enough to win him the actual award.