So, since I'm seeing a lot of discussion between LaMelo and both Garland & VanVleet, let me put some specific thoughts down there.
First, I want to be clear that I thought LaMelo was a strong candidate. I don't consider myself to be a LaMelo skeptic, and there have been times during the season where LaMelo made my 12. He just didn't quite make it at this moment toward the end of January.
Now, let's begin with Garland & LaMelo, because that's the one that's more clear cut to me. I think people who haven't been looking closely at the stats would be surprised to learn that Garland scores more than LaMelo on better efficiency, and gets more assists than LaMelo does. That alone isn't any kind of proof by any means, but generally if Player A scores more, score better, and assist more while playing more games for a better team than Player B, it's not any kind of surprise when Player A gets ranked above Player B. That it is a surprise likely speaks to how much more established the hype surrounding LaMelo is compared to Garland.
And with that in mind, we consider that Garland's +/- numbers are spectacular. By raw +/- in the league, Garland is super-high, and here's a list of related players for perspective:
4. Garland (Cle) +325
35. Allen (Cle) +173
41. VanVleet (Tor) +153
48. Mobley (Cle) +140
58. Siakam (Tor) +124
81. Bridges (Cho) +96
120. Ball (Cho) +54
Clearly the level of success with Garland out there is far, far beyond what Charlotte has seen with Ball, and high enough that an MVP candidacy actually starts seeming plausible. It's not happening to this point - to this point now only is Cleveland under the radar, but Jarrett Allen seems to have been the assumed MVP of the Cavs - but this isn't what I'm seeing when I see Garland.
And if you want some actual analysis of his play, can't do better than Thinking Basketball's analysis:
Over to VanVleet, you can already see that while VanVleet's +/- doesn't end up an outlier the way Garland's does, it does tops Ball's despite Ball's team having the better record. That's not proof VanVleet should be ranked above Ball, but it does negate the argument that VanVleet's team isn't good enough to warrant an all-star at least in a debate with Ball.
And then you have VanVleet score more, score more efficiently, play better defense by a good margin, and play more.
Ball is a very promising player who I expect to be an all-star for many years...but he isn't quite making the cut for me this time around.
