A Very Biased Look at Derrick's MVP Case

“The way I look at it within myself, why not? Why can’t I be the MVP of the league? Why can’t I be the best player in the league? I don’t see why [not]. Why can’t I do that?"- Derrick Rose, September 28, 2010

Despite the title of this post, I'd like to look at Derrick's case for MVP as objectively as I possibly can. And that's going to be extremely hard, because as the anti-Derrick-for-MVP backlash has been hitting the ol' blogosphere this week, I've taken almost every article personally. How dare these sportswriters point out my favorite player's flaws, or suggest that anyone else is more valuable to their team?

That isn't to say I don't understand the arguments. I like to think of myself as a statistically-inclined sports fan, and am probably more comfortable than most around win shares or Hollinger's player efficiency rating. And those don't point to Derrick being more valuable than Lebron or Dwight Howard, or hell, even Kevin Love. And in baseball, I get frustrated when people try to make the argument that, say, CC Sabathia deserves the Cy Young Award over Felix Hernandez just because no one on the Mariners can hit. However, there's a very important distinction I believe a lot of these articles are forgetting:

Basketball is not baseball.

Let me explain what I mean. Baseball exists very much in a bubble. It doesn't make a huge difference whether Albert Pujols likes whoever's standing on second, he's going to try to get him in regardless. Chemistry is a laughable idea in baseball, and a team that doesn't get along can absolutely win a world series (New York Yankees = exhibit A.)

Chemistry matters in basketball. And perhaps more importantly, a player can make his teammates better. Derrick does this. I mentioned it after the Pacers game, but it matters that the Bulls best player is also their hardest worker, their most competitive player, and someone their teammates genuinely enjoy playing with. Many of the other MVP candidates have 2 of those 3 qualities, but I don't know if any of them embody all 3 like Derrick.

I have about a dozen tabs open at the top of my browser window with links to various anti-Derrick articles. One of them from an Orlando Magic blog talks about Tracy McGrady's 2003 season, and how he could have won the MVP had his teammates been better. Now, I'm coming at this with no knowledge other than a fan's perspective, but from my observation, T-Mac never was (1) the most competitive player on his team, (2) the hardest worker, and (3) certainly was not someone his teammates ever enjoyed playing with. Maybe the reason T-Mac never made it past the first round had to do just a little bit with T-Mac's mental makeup (and I know I'm not the first person to suggest this.)

All of these Anti-Derrick articles have a few things in common. First they compare Derrick statistically to his competitors (usually Russell Westbrook is featured prominently) without providing any context for these stats. Much is made of Derrick's high usage rate (2nd in the league to Kobe) with not too many mentions of the lack of Boozer and Noah for much of the season. Westbrook is an awesome player, but when teams gameplan for the Thunder, they rarely start with "Don't let Russell Westbrook beat us", whereas Derrick is seeing more and more double teams run at him as soon as he gets over halfcourt, especially in crunch time.

Second, they all give credit to the Bulls defense and bench. I love the Bench Mob, truly. But they aren't the greatest group of athletes in the world. As I watched the 76ers run lob after lob to Thaddeus Young last night, it occurred to me that I don't think I've seen the Bulls run a play like that all year. They don't have the type of long freakish athletes you find on many a NBA team (I suppose James Johnson might have qualified.) The bench beats you by outworking you. And I think that at least part of the reason the bench outworks you is the example set by Derrick. You can't take effort and heart for granted in the NBA like you can in some leagues (ask the Detroit Pistons.) It's said that organizations take on the personality of their leader, and as even the other side points out, the Bulls have the best record in the East through hard work and toughness. Derrick deserves some credit for that.

If you want to reward the player with the best stats, go with Lebron. If you want to reward the player that if you took them off their team, they'd lose the most wins, I suppose you could make the case for Howard.

But if you think the MVP should go to the player that has done the most to make their team great...