The Russell Westbrook MVP Fallacy

Voters' misconception handed the MVP to the wrong guy.

NBA

Russell Westbrook should not have won the NBA’s Most Valuable Player award. I am Mugatu and “I feel like I’m taking crazy pills!” Why are so many so blind? Why are people watching bad basketball and thinking it is good basketball? What the hell is going on?

The MVP crowning that was inevitable since the end of the season was doomed from the beginning. At the outset of the season I predicted a Westbrook-Thunder implosion. While I watched an implosion of team basketball, the masses, paid professional pundits and writers instead watched a one-man explosion and awed at the theatrics while disregarding the rubble. I said the Thunder were at best-case scenario a first round playoff exit. Everyone was aware of this ceiling at the end of the season, but nonetheless nearly 70% of voters still anointed Westbrook MVP.

An already selfish player turned up his ball hogging tendencies more and he was rewarded with the highest trophy. Westbrook made himself more prominent and his team worse for it, but people did not care because he looked really good doing it. I felt like I was back in youth soccer watching the best player on our team dribble the ball to oblivion every possession. And at halftime when we had zero goals we did not tell the kid to move the ball but instead we all congratulated him for juking out five guys.

I think Westbrook honestly believes that his brand of basketball is the best way to win. He must truly believe it is all him or nothing. And now he is reaffirmed in that belief. Westbrook received the greatest individual award in a team sport by being the least team-oriented player. All because people got drunk on statistics and thought a bad idea was a good idea.

This triple-double garble was the problem. Westbrook did in fact reach an arbitrary measuring mark only seen once before. I get it, but I also see through it. His usage rate went sky high and he became the sole focal point of the Thunder offense. So he scored more points on more field goal attempts. Yet he had the same true shooting percentage as last year and had the same assists per game as last year. He did not play better. He played the same, more often and without Kevin Durant. No KD means all the looks and all the attention. That is what he wanted. But achieving the same heights while losing a top caliber teammate is a factor, not the factor.

The two main arguments for Westbrook to win MVP were that he averaged a triple double and he does it all for his team that is not very good. One is meaninglessly true and the other is a product of Westbrook’s gameplay.

If we look at the statistics there was a comparable player: James Harden. Here are the statistics for points per game (PPG), true shooting percentage (TS%) that takes into account efficiency of 2-pointers, 3-pointers and free throws, assists (AST) and rebounds (REB).

Russell Westbrook:             31.6 PPG, 55.4 TS%, 10.4 AST, 10.7 REB

James Harden:                    29.1 PPG, 61.3 TS%, 11.2 AST, 8.1 REB

So people want to choose the guy that scored 2.5 points more per game? But Harden had almost an assist more per game, which is worth two or three points. So combining points and assists it was basically a wash. “Don’t forget about rebounds.” That is correct. So the whole thing swings on 2.6 rebounds per game by the point guard? (We do count those extra rebounds where Westbrook crashes hard on defensive free throws, right?) While grabbing those boards were essential for all those patented one-man fast breaks, the overall efficiency was not drastically better. So Westbrook can have the 2.6 extra rebounds and Harden will take the true shooting percentage difference of nearly six percent. Harden was a more efficient scorer on 18.9 shots per game while Westbrook fired up 24.0 shots per game. The other guy actually has the better stats.

OK, maybe some really love rebounds? Like how they really love Andre Drummond? They are not impressed by the 2.6 rebound difference. What they really are impressed with is the “shiny round number” of 10+ total rebounds and the accompanying triple-double buzzword. That benchmark allows them to package all the statistics into a digestible happy meal where they are more impressed with the marketing than the actual taste. It is fool's gold. They are being seduced by cheap food. There are better options out there that are tastier and healthier.

In order to truly choose the Westbrook platter over the Harden dish one had to listen to the pro-Harden arguments and not care despite their truth. These were the intertwined arguments: 1) Harden actually made his teammates better and 2) Harden’s team won more games.

First, Harden elevated the play of his teammates. If you watched any part of a Rockets game this was readily apparent. As the Harden engine went the rest of the team fueled off of it. He broke down defenses, created space and found the open man for the open deep three or the easy look at the basket. His gameplay created all the action that allowed all the others to excel. Everyone played better and looked better because Harden facilitated this.

The Westbrook car drove at a different pace. Westbrook went full throttle and took over the entire game for the Thunder. He was really good at it and single handedly won games. Again, those Westbrook-only fast breaks were killer but the half court offense was stagnant. Westbrook is so good at being a one-man show that his team made the playoffs in the Western Conference playing this style. But this style did not maximize the team. The style amplified Westbrook while dampening the other players. There was no rhythm for the team. There was Westbrook hanging on to the ball while the other players could never get it going. People incorrectly harangued the other teammates when they should have pointed fingers at the lack of winning basketball that was played.

There was a reason why John Wooden never went all Kareem: 

“I believe, for example I could have made Kareem the greatest scorer in college history. I could have done that by developing the team around that ability of his. Would we have won three national championships while he was at UCLA? Never. Besides, he wouldn’t have wanted that. He was a very unselfish player, the best kind of player, one who put the welfare of the team ahead of his own personal glory.” (Wooden: A Lifetime of Observations and Reflections on and off the Court, pg. 78)

Second, Harden’s Rockets won eight more games this season than Westbrook’s Thunder. That should count in the MVP calculation. And people counter with the argument that Harden had better teammates. That is not entirely true. Bill Simmons framed the better teammates argument best: If you pooled the Thunder and Rockets players in a schoolyard pick’em whom would you choose? You would have taken Steven Adams and Victor Oladipo of the Thunder over Patrick Beverly/Eric Gordon and Clint Capela of the Rockets. Houston had better depth, but the perception of teammates’ abilities did not truly heavily favor Houston. Harden’s teammates played better because of Harden and Westbrook’s teammates played worse because of Westbrook. It is that simple. Yet people act mystified with how bad the other Thunder teammates play without focusing the lens on the glaring reason.

When did we lose sight of winning? We had it right even in the year Oscar Robertson averaged a triple-double when Bill Russell won the MVP. Winning matters. James Harden should have won MVP. And the cases for Kawhi Leonard and Steph Curry should have been listened to more.

Now both Harden and Westbrook will have help. We will see if Harden can keep the team chemistry when it mixes with another ball dominant player in Chris Paul. I believe it will work because despite being ball dominant they are each very unselfish. They prioritize setting up their teammates for good shots rather than taking bad shots (that they can make) themselves.

We will see if Westbrook can co-exist with another top-notch small forward. While the Thunder now have the talent, I believe Paul George will be headed to Hollywood faster than you can say “Lonzo loves to dish the rock.”