Russell Westbrook is being robbed of back-to-back MVPs

Sorry mushi, but not true. And I did, but thanks for not noticing. I'm talking about advanced stats rating players, I said nothing about raw stats and percentages. Someone who shoots .500 from the field doesn't necessarily mean they're a better shooter than someone who shoots .450 from the field. However, individual advanced stats would claim whoever is higher is better, end of story, and that could be far from true. Advanced stats can be useful, but primarily only from a team aspect, or 5-man units. There's too many moving parts and variables in basketball, a constant-moving sport. And all these advanced stats are coming from raw stats, which seems pretty weird to think about it. And seemingly everyone's individual advanced stat is thought as more-or-less from the creator of it, and they're often much different from each other. I never said team advanced stats don't have flaws. They certainly do. But you can see the overall efficiency or lack thereof combined with that 5-man unit. When assigning value individually within the 5-man unit often makes no sense. For example, if Westbrook drives the lane drawing sometimes 3-4 defenders, but misses the layup. However, Adams is there on the weakside for an easy, uncontested layup. Westbrook gets penalized even though he's making up probably 90%+ of the play, while Adams reaps all the rewards advanced stats have to offer. AS selection isn't perfect like anything else, but we're seeing at least the top 20 players in the AS game more-or-less. There's always going to be some quibbling over the last 2-4 spots no matter what, and each conference isn't always equal in talent.

A trite and flawed straw man. For starters you clearly didn't read my comment to the end. But to respond "those advanced stats you cite are hard to decipher exactly. As much as many in the nba universe want us to believe, any stat that claims to be able to rate players to the hundredths doesn’t necessarily mean anything." Straw man. Actually the "many" that would suggest that typically have very little to do with stats and probably struggled with basic high school maths. To simply disregard anything that goes to 100ths doesn't seem a sound and rationale as by definition you have to disregard all NBA stats with any reference to FG, FT or 3P percentages. Generally no one would look at a minute difference in a single state and hold that out as immutable proof of difference. If someone is, then it is a user error that no system will overcome. The designers of the various systems go to pains to explain the short comings. Typically anyone with the most rudimentary knowledge of stats would need to see for a material reference before suggesting a " Team advanced stats are the competent advanced stats to look at." Um they have exact same flaws you highlighted above. Also several of the above are team performance based... But I'd suggest anyone using AS selection as a stone tablet of quality is lacking

Harden's defense or lack thereof has been a myth of years. He had a couple of seasons of bad defense, but has largely turned that around recently. Steals/blocks can be overrated, but Harden is elite in both for his position. He causes lots of deflections, and can actually defend post players very well for any size, but especially being just 6-5. His bad defense is usually really bad, and great for youtube, definitely exaggerates his overall defensive play lately. But, you're right, typically an MVP-caliber player should at least be competent on both sides of the ball, which Harden clearly is now. Dirk wasn't exactly a defensive juggernaut when he won MVP. Nash won 2 MVPs and the only defense he ever played was occasionally taking a charge. James hasn't played much defense in the regular season in years, but most still claim him as the best player in the game. Harden/James, and maybe Davis, have played the best ball of anyone this year. However, Harden's team is actually excelling more than anyone could've ever imagined, and James' team is once again underachieving in the regular season. It's a no-brainer if between those 2.

Mushi, those advanced stats you cite are hard to decipher exactly. As much as many in the nba universe want us to believe, any stat that claims to be able to rate players to the hundredths doesn't necessarily mean anything. Team advanced stats are the competent advanced stats to look at. RW has always been underrated/undervalued. Though your conclusion for Harden being MVP is correct and obvious. Swampy, OKC isn't worse than last year. They won 47 games in 2017. They're currently on pace for 48 wins in 2018. George gives OKC another big-time player, though he was only an injury replacement on the AS team this year. You're right about Oladipo/Sabonis. I don't see guys playing better with RW, in fact, I see the opposite often. RW is a great player, but he certainly doesn't play very smart at times.

I wish Harden would work on his defense , sure he scores , but a MVP should do it all and D is a big part of the overall makeup of a player.

I forgive you, next time make sure your family has a security detail :)

Regarding Oladipo & Sabonis, I don't think their improvement is on Westbrook. Oladipo lost a ton of weight and acknowledged he trained his arse off in the off season. And Sabonis is being used in a way that complements his skills much more - OKC tried to make him a stretch 4 and he's not really that player. Look at his 3 point attempts, 2 last season, 0.5 this season. Everyone points at how some players improve when they leave OKC (which isn't really true) and puts that on Westbrook when it's probably got more to do with Billy Donovan being a very average coach.

Yes Harden. And he should have been MVP last year as well. Lebron is making a case for MVP also however he oversaw too many losses mid-season. The MVP rewards regular season winners. It always has. OKC has gained a perennial all-star and is worse. And the two guys they jettisoned for him have turned out to be twice as good as we thought they were (once out of the gravitational pull of the supernova black hole). And that's without going to basketball reference and pulling out a pile of advance metrics that suggest Harden should be MVP and Westbrook shouldn't be in the conversation. But I'm pretty certain judging by the profile pic these comments will not penetrate the titanium Westbrook bubble you reside within. When I was a teenager my mates and I used to argue who was better, Nique or MJ? Some debates look a little silly 30 years later.

Oh yeah, that was more aimed at Liam rather than you.

I don't think he was robbed, like you I think either would have been fine. Just was clarifying that I think he meant the non-unanimous year

My thoughts exactly...where to begin?

Ok - but let's examine Curry's stats (ppg, apg, rpg, ts%, spg, per) 23.8 / 7.7 / 4.3 / 63.8% / 2.0/ 28.06 Harden's stats 27.4 / 7.0 / 5.7 / 60.5% / 1.9 /26.76 Harden scored more, but did it less efficiently and got more rebounds. Curry got more assists and did it with a better assist to turnover ratio The advanced stats like estimated wins added favoured Harden. Basically, if you look at their performances in a vacuum, Curry wins. If you look at the teams around them and how they improved their team Harden probably wins. If you are swayed by youtube highlights Curry wins. In neither case, however, would either of them actually be robbed.

Just looking at the numbers (and throwing out the negative narrative and the team wins arguments that go against him) I took a group of MVP candidates – Harden, LeBron, Giannis, Russ and Davis Looking at the per minute catch all stats of PER, Win Shares/48, Real Plus Minus and the total production stats of Value Over Replacement Player, Win Shares and Wins Added here is where russel ranks across the 6 stats in that group PER: 5th, distant 5th, the gap between him and fourth is larger than 4th and 1st WS/48: 5th (not as distant but only one sub 0.2) RPM: 4th VORP: 3rd WS: 5th Wins Added: 5th Harden? Hes,1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 1st and 1st. Whilst none of these are perfect it’s bloody hard to argue straight faced that Russel is a genuine candidate statistically, let alone the deserving winner.

I think he means the first Steph win

Two years ago was Steph's unanimous win wasn't it? He was unreal that season, no one else was even in the discussion (plus the 73 wins was the obvious narrative).

RW is hard to figure out. He puts up these crazy numbers, but his teams seem to underperform with him. Even as a #2 when KD was still with OKC, how'd they only make 1 Finals? As his team's #1 in 2015(missed playoffs) and then in 2017(lost 1-4 in 1st round) doesn't look good for him. And we're now seeing his team last year wasn't anywhere near as bad as believed. Oladipo/Sabonis are doing great this year compared to last year. As most years, there's almost always several guys that have MVP cases. James, Harden, Lillard, Davis, DeRozan, Westbrook can all make cases. But, Harden is clearly the frontrunner. He'll win as he should, and easily. He's elevating his team more than anyone else, too, plus HOU has the best record in the league. James is putting up big numbers again, which sometimes don't mean that much as he's a stat-padder, but his team is underachieving again in the regular season. Hard to make a strong case for him.

The fact is that, although I'm a thunder guy and Westbrook is a beast, Harden is going to win the award. The Houston Rockets have been consistent and deadly all season, and will likely make it very far this season, maybe even win it all. The Thunder have been wildly inconsistent, especially at the start of the season, and the Rockets have the best record in the NBA and the best record in the West, and that is mainly due to their star player James Harden. He was robbed two years ago when Steph won it, and you could make a strong debate that he should have won it last year.

Westbrook's playing worse slightly worse than last year but it's not just that. Narrative matters in MVP discussions (hence LeBron's relatively low odds despite a ridiculously strong season) and the Thunder's narrative is that they dreadfully inconsistent and underachieving. If the Thunder had 50 wins and were ranked 1st or 2nd, Westbrook would be a better chance even if his numbers were exactly the same.

For a player averaging close to a triple-double for the second straight season, Westbrook has undoubtedly flown under the radar in terms of the MVP race. Perhaps he outdid himself last season or maybe the fact that there are five or six players that you could make firm cases for as MVPs. As was the case last year, I think there’s a difference between being ‘valuable’ and ‘doing the most’- which is why Westbrook isn’t in the conversation.

Can someone please tell me what this is?