BasketballWho's the real MVP?

Beginning of Story Content

Derrick Rose, left, of the Chicago Bulls and Dwight Howard, right, of the Orlando Magic are leading the way in MVP talk late in the season. (Fernando Medina/NBAE via Getty Images)

A few months ago, before this Derrick Rose vs. Dwight Howard for MVP chatter really ramped up, my friend Knuckler sent me an email reminding me of what Charles Oakley had said about Howard last summer:

"Dwight Howard is embarrassing [Magic assistant coach] Patrick [Ewing] if you ask me. He doesn't have a ball player's mind. And they tell me he is one of the best centres in the game. He wouldn't have even made the league 10 years ago. He would be on the bench."

My friend went on to back Oakley's mini-rant, adding this:

"For the record, I completely agree with his assessment of Dwight Howard. Too much smiling; too many tight shirts; not enough work on his game. If he had two post moves, or even offensive moves [like a jump shot], he'd be absolutely unstoppable. Instead, he's content to slam everything, get in foul trouble against actual low-post threats."

Oak's take last summer --while there is a grain of truth in it -- can be attributed to a crotchety old guy. Sure, D12 would be outplayed by David Robinson or Hakeem Olajuwon in their primes, but that's all hypothetical. On an aside, I should mention I usually agree with Oakley on everything, and could listen to him talk for five hours about no-fault insurance if the situation arose.

Meanwhile, it's my friend's latter point that's hugely valid and the base of what is driving the anti-Howard-for-MVP sentiment. NBA fans are currently split into factions over this. There's a definite media bias toward Rose in a league currently driven by guard play, one Magic coach Stan Van Gundy noted when he said last week that "the media seems to have made their decision, and they're the ones that vote."

Where would we be without you?

So what's the best way to break this down fairly? Value to a team is the definition of MVP, and both the Magic and the Bulls would be best-case fighting for eighth in the East without Howard and Rose, respectively. In all likelihood, they'd be at the NCAA tournament scouting lottery picks like Derrick Williams.

Basketball isn't baseball -- so stats can be deceiving. Howard is hands-down the best defensive player in the NBA today. Looking at his rebounding numbers is a moot point. Orlando's system of putting Howard in position to clean everything up inside also allows for that. Rose on the other hand puts up the sort of big numbers you'd expect from a team leader who happens to be a point guard.

It's tempting to give the edge to Howard seeing as the NBA hasn't seen this dominant a centre since Shaquille O'Neal was among the league's elite. A closer look at the stats however indicates Rose is the player you'd rather want with the ball in his hands late. Stat geek dream site 82games.com's "Clutch Statistics" breakdown (fourth quarter or overtime, less than five minutes left, game within five points) through Tuesday shows Rose averaging 43.2 points (per 48 minutes of clutch time) and a Bulls' winning percentage of 69% versus Howard's 25 points and an Orlando 55.6% winning percentage.

You can poke holes in anything however. Rose's full-game assist-to-turnover ratio is tremendously average. Howard spends a fair amount of time at the end of close games at the charity stripe, where true to big man fashion, he shoots under 59%.

Because playoff performance is exempt from MVP voting, we won't be able to add that intriguing possibility to the Howard/Rose equation. My personal feeling is to take the easy way out and say it doesn't matter. NBA MVP awards have been notoriously meaningless in the past, so what difference does it make? It is just hardware for a mantle.

Shaq, the most dominant big man in basketball history, has as many NBA MVP awards as Bob McAdoo and Dave Cowens (one), while Steve Nash (all due respect) has double that. The Maurice Podoloff trophy doesn't always speak for how good a player is.

Madness living up to the moniker

To give you an idea about how insane this year's March Madness has been, consider this: Only two out of more than 5.9 million brackets submitted to ESPN's Tournament Challenge correctly predicted all Final Four teams. Of the two pools I was in, the smaller one is already finished because only one person out of 10 correctly predicted two of the Final Four.

A Butler-VCU National Semifinal? Try and tell me this isn't the best, most wide-open tournament in all of sports.

End of Story Content

Back to accessibility links