Advanced Stats don’t mean much regarding NBA MVP.
This is not me taking on a war against advanced numbers. I have bigger things to do than just look at digits all day. Numbers do not lie, but people can slant them in many different ways. Think about it. Numbers are numbers. That’s all they are. Numbers. They do not say anything until people interpret them. That’s when we get into trouble. The ordeal is magnified when people hide certain numbers to support their agenda and disregard the others that do not support their position.
I’m going to catch a lot of crap from the stat community who rely solely on numbers to justify the most valuable player. I love numbers, too. But advanced statistics are not the end all be all for any situation. Common folks might not understand what I’m talking about. I’ll have to clarify what advanced numbers mean. This begs the question, “What are advanced statistics exactly?”
They typically consists of win shares, true shooting percentage, defensive rating, offensive rating, clutch stats, adjusted +/-, wins produced, and PER (Player Efficiency Rating) – stuff that most people do not see in a typical box score. And I’m not going to define each. Google that.
The common folk will say, “What the$%$k is this $h*%?”
I say, “Don’t worry about it.”
Listen. I’m a fan of advanced metrics. The problem I have with them is that people will use them to champion their stud and throw away things that do not pertain to their guy. I don’t get that. As soon as someone brings up something that does not agree with their data, they use their own numbers for persuasion or just to prove them wrong. How can that be when there is nothing to prove? Do not try to persuade those same guys either because they’re not going to budge. Period.
We’re basically having an intellectual spar, or better yet, a dick measuring contest. PAUSE.
This is the one I hear, “The MVP should go to the best player.” That is wrong. You failed, sir. The MVP is not the Best Player award. How does anyone determine the NBA’s best player in any given year? That’s subjective. That’s arbitrary. What do you mean exactly by “best?” Does said player has to be in the top 5? How does anyone determine a definitive top 5? I do not get it. Did advanced metrics get you there?
My response is this is all bullsh*%.
Look at that chart. Ignore PER, WS (Win Share), and PPG (Points Per Game). Focus on Wins. It never went below 4. There's consistency in winning. The rest does not have consistency.
What am I trying to say? Advanced metrics do not mean much in MVP voting when stacked up against the MVP Criteria. Those figures only matter to the new jacks in message boards. The big media types do not give a shit because they don’t have time to analyze the numbers. They have a life and got games to watch. The numbers have a place, but they’re not respected. The building block numbers (points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, minutes, games played, free throw percentage, 3 point percentage, and field goal percentage) and team wins are all that matters.
The argument for player X fails when someone is trying to push player X because of efficiency and true shooting percentage over player Y who has good building blocks and superior team record.
Those little numbers are cool, but do they add up to more wins? Be very careful. Those stat guys will release stats that do not favor player Y and omit other figures that clearly supports player Y. Always remember this. Call them out. That is where they are trying to slant the view. Keep in mind that this goes both ways.
My point stands - my NBA League MVP Criteria >>>>>>> Advanced numbers.
The number geeks should say, "The MVP should go to the best overall statistical player." Get it right. Now you can jack off to those numbers, sicko.