All-Season Player of the Year Discussion thread

[Jaivl]

Regular season top 5:

#1 Curry (OPOY)
#2 Harden (Rockets had no business winning 56 games, period)
#3 Paul (Best offensive player and perimeter defender on a +7 team with no bench)
#4 James (MVP of the second half of the season)
#5 Davis

[lorak]

Anyone except me is seriously considering CP instead of Curry as no 1 player this season?

[Jaivl]

Anyone except me is seriously considering CP instead of Curry as no 1 player this season?

He certainly has a good argument.

[Keller61]

1. Steph Curry- I just think he has clearly been the best player in the league. There really isn't much else to say about him as everyone has really broken it down.

2. Chris Paul
3. James Harden

I feel like Chris Paul's +/- stats are really noisy this year. Last year by virtually every metric (RPM, xRAPM, vanilla, talkingpractice, mystic's formula) he rated top 3 in the league and higher than Kevin Durant. Yet this year he is having an objectively superior season and his numbers are down. RPM had his defense go from nearly +2 to +.5 and Curry has double that. It just screams noise.

I have just been more impressed by Chris Paul's two way play over what Harden has had to do. People claim that Harden has had to carry the Rockets and while that is true I think it is important to note that the Rockets are running with a far superior record than they should be given their point margin. The Clippers have played basketball at a significantly higher level. Combine that with the fact that Harden's team actually plays better with him off the court than Paul's does with him off the court and I feel like the Harden narrative should be the one used by Chris Paul.

I would say this is a point in Harden's favor. Winning games is more important than racking up margins. The Clippers have been beating up on bad teams all year; they have a 37-4 record (.902) vs. teams under .500, and only a 19-22 record (.463) vs. teams at or above .500. That is the biggest split in the league, although to be fair, the Rockets aren't far behind at 35-5 vs. losing teams and 21-21 vs. winning teams.

[Mutnt]

Anyone except me is seriously considering CP instead of Curry as no 1 player this season?

I mean, we're certain that Paul is the better individual defensive player, aren't we? I believe I've spotted some articles during the season arguing Paul's defensive impact and Dr.Spaceman has also dedicated several paragraphs in which he spoke quite highly of Paul on the defensive end. I'm not sure how Paul and Curry compare to each other in that regard, because in the grand scope of things, both really do not represent a major element in their team's respective defensive schemes, it's more what the other guys are doing individually, collectively and systematically.

On the other hand, we can agree upon the claim that both Paul and Curry are the centerpieces and the most important members of their team's offense. In that case, why do I get a feeling that there's a consensus that Curry is the best offensive player in the league? There's the argument that Curry has lead his team to more wins, more success and that the Warriors play incredible with Curry on the court, so much so that he doesn't even have to engage in 4th quarter action very often due to the Warriors cruising over almost every team pre-4th quarter.

From what I've gathered from Sideshow Bob's posts in this thread, where he analyzed how the best teams have performed with various lineups over the course of the year, the numbers have shown us that the Clippers with Paul on the court actually performed better than the Warriors with Curry offensively, both teams with their standard/best lineups. The Clippers were on average already the best offensive team in the league this year with the #1 ORtg (112.5) and it was 1 point higher when Paul, Griffin and Reddick were all playing together. Moreoever, when Blake returned from injuries at the end of the season the Clippers played even better and peaked at 115 ORtg.

The Warriors were never as good as the Clippers on offense, not on average and not peak-wise. So Paul carried a better offense than Curry and this can not even be disputed through contextualizing supporting casts because all indicators point to Curry also having more help on offense. Yes, (67 games of) Griffin is most likely the 3rd best offensive player on both teams (although Klay shouldn't be taken lightly here, 22 ppg on 59%TS with all-time great floor spacing is no joke) but after that it gets pretty gloom for CP3. Clippers simply don't have the depth, the shooting/spacing, the passing, the ball-handling the overall versatility on offense that Golden State have. Outside of their top two offensive threats, Bogut (solid low post threat/great big man passer), Barnes & Barbosa (great shooters), Iguodala (his versatility and ability to play the Point Forward is well documented), Green (another swiss knife type player, underrated passer), Speights/whatever minutes Lee played this year (stretch 4's) and Livingston (a big guard who can play in the post, an underreted passer as well). CP3 had Reddick and Crawford (who scored on below league average efficiency), outside of that there were guys like DeAndre Jordan, Matt Barnes, Austin Rivers, Spencer Hawes, Big Baby Davis etc. All horrible offensive players who do nothing without Paul's virtuoso play on offense.

Sum-up:

- Both Curry and CP3 don't really have monumental impact on defense from the guard position but most evidence point to CP3 being better individually. Dr. Spaceman would even argue Paul being one of the best defensive guards in the league, I honestly haven't done enough research to co-sing to that but alas, advantage Paul.

- Both Curry and CP3 are their team's best offensive players with monumental impact on that side of the court. CP3 led a better offense on average and peak-wise throughout the year with arguably a weaker supporting cast. Personally, I can see how Curry's superiority as a scoring threat (both on-ball and off-ball) and the pressure he creates with his GOAT shooting ability can trump the advantage Paul has in terms of playmaking but really the numbers don't support that, advantage Paul.

So if we concluded that Paul allegedly has an advantage over Curry on both sides of the court individually, the question to ask ourselves now is whether we've given too much credit to Curry for the amazing season the Warriors have put up this year and not enough credit to his team. Offensively there's the Kerr factor + the massive improvements of Klay and especially on defense (which is clearly anchored by Bogut + Dray & several good, athletic, versatile defenders) which was already outstanding last year.

[lorak]

^
Very good post. And yes, CP is one of the best perimeter defensive players. Goldsberry covered it some time ago: http://grantland.com/features/department-of-defense/



sportVU data confirms that too: http://stats.nba.com/featured/sportvu_c ... 04_19.html

and even in that game 1 Paul had at least three plays when he alone stopped Spurs fastbreaks, so basically "100% pts".

[HeartBreakKid]

Chris Paul is all nba defense this year for sure. I can't think of mote than 4 players better than him from the guard position. I have Tony Allen and Khris Middleton on my first team, CP3 is a lock for the second team (will likely be awarded first team though)

[Jaivl]

Chris Paul is all nba defense this year for sure. I can't think of mote than 4 players better than him from the guard position. I have Tony Allen and Khris Middleton on my first team, CP3 is a lock for the second team (will likely be awarded first team though)

He benefits of Rubio's injuries and Butler's role change, though.

[HeartBreakKid]

Chris Paul is all nba defense this year for sure. I can't think of mote than 4 players better than him from the guard position. I have Tony Allen and Khris Middleton on my first team, CP3 is a lock for the second team (will likely be awarded first team though)

He benefits of Rubio's injuries and Butler's role change, though.

You could say that every year about every player. They benefit from George and Iggudolla's role changes.

[Doctor MJ]

Anyone except me is seriously considering CP instead of Curry as no 1 player this season?

I've been pondering this a bit, and I realize my objection is pretty simple:

Curry beats Paul in literally any all-in-one stat I'm aware of, whether box score or +/-, and he's doing it while leading the vastly more successful team.

While in the abstract I don't think preferring Paul to Curry is crazy, to me it takes some really complicated dance moves to find a narrative where Paul has been the MVP this season. Maybe that will change after the playoffs, but for now, while I can see the case for Paul over Harden, Paul over Curry is tough.

[lorak]

Anyone except me is seriously considering CP instead of Curry as no 1 player this season?

I've been pondering this a bit, and I realize my objection is pretty simple:

Curry beats Paul in literally any all-in-one stat I'm aware of, whether box score or +/-, and he's doing it while leading the vastly more successful team.

Ok, but what do you think about argument Mutnt presented? I mean, I think we all agree CP is better defensively. So Curry has to be significantly better on offense to have overall edge here. But I think it's really unlikely as Paul is leading the best offense in the NBA (and Blake missed a lot of games).

[bondom34]

Anyone except me is seriously considering CP instead of Curry as no 1 player this season?

I've been pondering this a bit, and I realize my objection is pretty simple:

Curry beats Paul in literally any all-in-one stat I'm aware of, whether box score or +/-, and he's doing it while leading the vastly more successful team.

Ok, but what do you think about argument Mutnt presented? I mean, I think we all agree CP is better defensively. So Curry has to be significantly better on offense to have overall edge here. But I think it's really unlikely as Paul is leading the best offense in the NBA (and Blake missed a lot of games).

I'm w/ you and Mutnt on this, and find it a really interesting debate in the realm of team success and individual numbers. Curry's look a bit better on paper by himself, but something is certainly to be said for the team offense CP has led. I'm getting there with him, and he's neck and neck right now w/ Curry. I'm putting them 1/2, then Harden, then Lebron/Westbrook in some order.

[NinjaSheppard]

Here is a question I have for some of the guys that like +/-

Chris Paul last year objectively had a worse year than this year taking injuries into account and everything. His team also played just fine without him. Yet most advanced +/- stats had him above Durant and up there with LeBron and Iggy at the top. RPM, RAPM, Mystic's stat had him top 2 I believe, talkingpractice had him number 1.

Yet this year he objectively plays better and more importantly his team dies without him on the court and yet his +/- numbers are down across the board.

Is that just noise in your opinion or am I missing something in his game that is lacking this year compared to last year?

I don't want to use raw +/- over adjusted because his bench is horrible and all but it sure seems like the raw +/- does a better job of capturing how good he is than adjusted numbers have.

[HeartBreakKid]

Here is a question I have for some of the guys that like +/-

Chris Paul last year objectively had a worse year than this year taking injuries into account and everything. His team also played just fine without him. Yet most advanced +/- stats had him above Durant and up there with LeBron and Iggy at the top. RPM, RAPM, Mystic's stat had him top 2 I believe, talkingpractice had him number 1.

Yet this year he objectively plays better and more importantly his team dies without him on the court and yet his +/- numbers are down across the board.

Is that just noise in your opinion or am I missing something in his game that is lacking this year compared to last year?

I don't want to use raw +/- over adjusted because his bench is horrible and all but it sure seems like the raw +/- does a better job of capturing how good he is than adjusted numbers have.

When Chris Paul missed games, they Clippers had a very easy schedule.

[trex_8063]

I've been remiss in this discussion (though I have been thinking about it), so I think I'll drop in my 2 cents....

Here's how I'd rank it, based on the regular season (and fwiw, the top 3-4 are all very close to me):
1) Stephen Curry--->he's the clear leader and clear best player for that which has---consistently---been the best team in the land (generally by far). His box and advanced numbers are very much in contention with the other top candidates, his on/off numbers are very impressive.......not that I don't see cases for other guys, but he's probably who I'd go with for #1.
t2) Chris Paul--->Really impressive individual year, the Clipper's on-court ORtg is phenomenal, and the difference in the team's ORtg between Paul being on/off is also phenomenal (both are pretty near historic marks). And he's a well above average perimeter defender, and he played all 82 games. Until recently he was only around 5th for me. But the more I scrutinize him, his year just looks too damn impressive. I think at this point, the worst I can put him is maybe 2B or 3.
t2) James Harden--->His game isn't all that stylish of pleasing to watch. But when you can so consistently get to the FT-line as often as he does (where he hits nearly 87%)......man, that ends up being efficient offense. Look at the first two games in the playoffs: he's shooting 32% from the field, and yet his TS% is 58.3% (because he's getting 15 attempts per game and barely missing). He's a fine play-maker and rebounder for the SG, too, and is finally playing some reasonable defense as well. And he has his team in a position to contend. Seems a very solid/high ranking candidate overall.
4) Anthony Davis--->Absolutely one of the most statistically impressive this season. Excellent two-way player, very versatile (especially defensively). And frankly, looking at his supporting cast, that he managed to get that team into the playoffs at all while playing in THE toughest division in the league.......let's face it, replace him with a Ryan Anderson level player and that team doesn't win 30 games (maybe not even 25) in that division.
5) Lebron James--->his least impressive statistical year in some time (and actually a step down from ALL of the other top candidates), though his on/off numbers are stellar as always. And it was quite clear the Cavs simply withered and died without him, too. First year with a new team and he has them in decent position to make a run to the finals. Could see a case for him being higher, but this is where I'll put him for now (again: rs only).
6) Russell Westbrook--->AMAZING individual statistical year. Somewhat disappointed in that he couldn't get this team over the hump and at least into the playoffs. I suppose it's really just the 15 games missed that caused that, which is a relevant factor in rating him a little lower than the above characters.

These are the clear top 6. imo, it's a BIG step down to #7 (probably Blake Griffin, imo, though guys like Aldridge or Lillard, Jimmy Butler, Marc Gasol, maybe John Wall, also deserve a mention).

[trex_8063]

I was just looking at Anthony Davis' shooting stats........Can you imagine this guy with a 3pt shot?

He's already so solid from EVERYWHERE else on the court:

*Is 73.4% from <3ft this season (that's Blake Griffin territory), and on not insignificant volume (more than a third of his attempts come in that close).
*The 3-10 ft range is an area where most players shoot terribly; easy to understand: it's no longer close enough to be a "gimme", is almost invariably heavily contested, often in traffic, with a somewhat high frequency of it being a "high degree of difficulty" shot, too (like a runner in the lane or similar). Davis is shooting a totally solid (even elite???) 43.3% in this range where the majority of players fail to hit the 40% mark.
*He's completely solid (elite??) 45.1% from 10-16 ft.
*And then he's a totally respectable 41.9% from the deep mid-range. And hits his FT's at 80.5% (excellent for a big man).

The only area he's not "very good"-to-elite from is behind the arc. If he can add that aspect to his offensive game......lord have mercy!

[ardee]

Blake is 23/6/8 after 3. Headed for a trip-dub likely.

[MisterHibachi]

Blake is 23/6/8 after 3. Headed for a trip-dub likely.

He's been great today, that last turnover notwithstanding.

Edit: ignore overtime as well lol

[Doctor MJ]

Anyone except me is seriously considering CP instead of Curry as no 1 player this season?

I mean, we're certain that Paul is the better individual defensive player, aren't we? I believe I've spotted some articles during the season arguing Paul's defensive impact and Dr.Spaceman has also dedicated several paragraphs in which he spoke quite highly of Paul on the defensive end. I'm not sure how Paul and Curry compare to each other in that regard, because in the grand scope of things, both really do not represent a major element in their team's respective defensive schemes, it's more what the other guys are doing individually, collectively and systematically.

On the other hand, we can agree upon the claim that both Paul and Curry are the centerpieces and the most important members of their team's offense. In that case, why do I get a feeling that there's a consensus that Curry is the best offensive player in the league? There's the argument that Curry has lead his team to more wins, more success and that the Warriors play incredible with Curry on the court, so much so that he doesn't even have to engage in 4th quarter action very often due to the Warriors cruising over almost every team pre-4th quarter.

From what I've gathered from Sideshow Bob's posts in this thread, where he analyzed how the best teams have performed with various lineups over the course of the year, the numbers have shown us that the Clippers with Paul on the court actually performed better than the Warriors with Curry offensively, both teams with their standard/best lineups. The Clippers were on average already the best offensive team in the league this year with the #1 ORtg (112.5) and it was 1 point higher when Paul, Griffin and Reddick were all playing together. Moreoever, when Blake returned from injuries at the end of the season the Clippers played even better and peaked at 115 ORtg.

The Warriors were never as good as the Clippers on offense, not on average and not peak-wise. So Paul carried a better offense than Curry and this can not even be disputed through contextualizing supporting casts because all indicators point to Curry also having more help on offense. Yes, (67 games of) Griffin is most likely the 3rd best offensive player on both teams (although Klay shouldn't be taken lightly here, 22 ppg on 59%TS with all-time great floor spacing is no joke) but after that it gets pretty gloom for CP3. Clippers simply don't have the depth, the shooting/spacing, the passing, the ball-handling the overall versatility on offense that Golden State have. Outside of their top two offensive threats, Bogut (solid low post threat/great big man passer), Barnes & Barbosa (great shooters), Iguodala (his versatility and ability to play the Point Forward is well documented), Green (another swiss knife type player, underrated passer), Speights/whatever minutes Lee played this year (stretch 4's) and Livingston (a big guard who can play in the post, an underreted passer as well). CP3 had Reddick and Crawford (who scored on below league average efficiency), outside of that there were guys like DeAndre Jordan, Matt Barnes, Austin Rivers, Spencer Hawes, Big Baby Davis etc. All horrible offensive players who do nothing without Paul's virtuoso play on offense.

Sum-up:

- Both Curry and CP3 don't really have monumental impact on defense from the guard position but most evidence point to CP3 being better individually. Dr. Spaceman would even argue Paul being one of the best defensive guards in the league, I honestly haven't done enough research to co-sing to that but alas, advantage Paul.

- Both Curry and CP3 are their team's best offensive players with monumental impact on that side of the court. CP3 led a better offense on average and peak-wise throughout the year with arguably a weaker supporting cast. Personally, I can see how Curry's superiority as a scoring threat (both on-ball and off-ball) and the pressure he creates with his GOAT shooting ability can trump the advantage Paul has in terms of playmaking but really the numbers don't support that, advantage Paul.

So if we concluded that Paul allegedly has an advantage over Curry on both sides of the court individually, the question to ask ourselves now is whether we've given too much credit to Curry for the amazing season the Warriors have put up this year and not enough credit to his team. Offensively there's the Kerr factor + the massive improvements of Klay and especially on defense (which is clearly anchored by Bogut + Dray & several good, athletic, versatile defenders) which was already outstanding last year.

Responding directly to you Mutnt because Lorak referred me to your post. I'll say up front, I doubt I really sway either of you guys because I think my thinking here probably seems pretty lazy by comparison to your thorough post.

I'll put again to start the context what I've said before: There's literally no individual numbers I can find that don't rate Curry ahead of Paul overall, and Curry's leading a better team. This tends to be where I start when I compare players holistically, and this contrasts immediately with the focus on Paul leading a superior offense. That distinction is interesting because I'm known for championing Nash as a potential offensive GOAT, and when I do I focus on team offense. The difference is 2-fold: 1) We're talking about overall players now, and 2) by contrast to Nash on offense, it's not Paul whose numbers make it look like he's having the biggest lift for his team's offense, it's Curry.

From there my next step tends to be: So, what's the basis for being confident in Paul's superior impact? Paul is obviously the superior floor general - and that's my favorite type of player - but Curry's gravitational impact is quite possibly unprecedented in NBA history here. What exactly is causing doubt in his numbers? That might be moving the goal post a bit given that I didn't simply pick Curry but found it hard to even grasp an argument for Paul, and an argument should require confidence in Paul's superiority. It's just that what I sense from you and Lorak is a kind of disbelief that Curry could actually be more impactful than Paul given how much say Paul has over his team's play, and I don't see what justifies that disbelief. You say "the numbers don't support that" but I don't know what numbers you mean. The only data we have involving regression indeed gives Curry the edge over Paul. Skepticism about Curry and the potential of impact through shooting-based gravity used to make a lot of sense, but the Warriors were totally off the charts this year.

And on that note: Off the charts. The Warriors' "inferior" offense here was #2 in the league while having a core that was able to focus comparably on defense (#1 in the league). The Warriors' main rotation here is basically Curry, Thompson, and then a bunch of guys who for the most part have meh reputations on offense. Pretty damn easy to imagine they could have a better ORtg if they chose a more offense oriented core.

The Clippers on the other hand, have 6 guys averaging 20 MPG or more:

Paul - offensive star
Griffin - offensive star
Jordan - offensive star (more on that later)
Redick - offense only
Barnes - legit glue guy
Crawford - offense

It's not exactly a shock that their defense is so mediocre when only 1 of their 6 key guys can seriously claim to be more impactful on defense than offense, and yeah, that helps the Clipper offense.

Now, Jordan. You called him one of the "orrible offensive players who do nothing without Paul's virtuoso play on offense". Dude, you missed that really damn hard. I've said it before and I'll say it again: When you see a young giant racking up offense & defensive rebounds plus blocks, it's entirely possible that the latter 2 stats are doing more harm than good, and that even the benefits of the first come at the cost of hurting defense. Why?

Rebounds are supposed to be got by the defense. That means that young & dumb athletic studs have an ability to make immediate impact on offense by understanding nothing more than "go run after the orange thing". Their gifts are such that sometimes they'll win the ball even over a disciplined defense.

But on the other end, a similar mindless approach will lead not simply to stealing rebounds from teammates, it will lead to gaps in the defensive box out which increases the odds the other team can get the ball.

Similarly, we all know that being clueless didn't stop Javale McGee from blocking the ball.

Coming full circle: Obviously if you crash the boards on offense and fail...which you'll do most of the time, that's not as helpful to your defense as actually getting back. Not saying I wouldn't take that tradeoff with a guy like Deandre, but offense vs defense, it's without question helping offense by sacrificing defense.

So yeah, this is why with any +/- data, Jordan looks nothing like a DPOY, and so your list of bad offensive players on the Clippers is basically:

1 one defensive glue guy
1 offensive player
3 guys who combined have only played the equivalent of 1 starter

That is not anything worth complaining about.

I'll finish it up by saying again that I respect the hell out of Paul and see him as an MVP-worthy player, but I just find the arguments here to be a mixture of unwarranted skepticism about Curry and misguided martyrdom of Paul.

[Doctor MJ]

Here is a question I have for some of the guys that like +/-

Chris Paul last year objectively had a worse year than this year taking injuries into account and everything. His team also played just fine without him. Yet most advanced +/- stats had him above Durant and up there with LeBron and Iggy at the top. RPM, RAPM, Mystic's stat had him top 2 I believe, talkingpractice had him number 1.

Yet this year he objectively plays better and more importantly his team dies without him on the court and yet his +/- numbers are down across the board.

Is that just noise in your opinion or am I missing something in his game that is lacking this year compared to last year?

I don't want to use raw +/- over adjusted because his bench is horrible and all but it sure seems like the raw +/- does a better job of capturing how good he is than adjusted numbers have.

By "taking injuries into account" what do you mean exactly? His actual per game numbers are right where they were last year. Looking at stats that factor in minutes, he was clearly more accomplished this year.

RPM is tricky given that the algorithm changed a bit from last year, but his number is virtually the same as last year. He dropped from 2 to 6 because Curry, Harden, Davis, and Kawhi made huge leaps forward not because he went back.

RAPM is tough to talk about for me because studies haven't come out reliably, but sure noise can be a factor there. Paul's RAPM is still clearly excellent, and I wouldn't try to use it to say he's clearly unworthy of the MVP.

Re: Above Durant last year. OKC data with +/- has always been a little weird, and it's my feeling that it's based on Durant & Westbrook being so capable without each other and the scheme when used together being so primitive. I'm always a little torn on it. I don't think it's right to ignore it generally, but at the same time last year what Durant did without Westbrook made really clear that people aren't overrating his capabilities by any means.

Re: Clippers did fine without Paul last year. Don't overreact to that. The Clippers did miss him, and Griffin is a hell of a player. That said, I would imagine that Griffin's injury this year combined with Jordan's emergence may have tipped the algorithm to give a bit more credit to Paul and a bit less to Griffin.

Yeah so bottom line is that I don't really see anything that different about Paul this year compared to last year. He looks phenomenal both years, like he always does.