Welcome back to the Deep Dive. Today we are clearing
off the table, putting away the minor stats,
and we are tackling the big one. The big one.
We have a stack of research here that feels a
little heavier than usual because we aren't just
looking at basketball statistics today. We're
looking at immortality. That is not an exaggeration
at all. I mean, when you look at the list of
names we are about to discuss, you are looking
at the pantheon. We are talking, of course, about
the... NBA Most Valuable Player Award, the MVP.
Yep. And right off the bat, I want to define
the scope here because I feel like casual fans
often get this mixed up with, you know, the finals
MVP or the all star MVP. Right. It's a totally
different beast. This isn't about who had a good
week in June. This isn't about who got hot in
an exhibition game. This is the marathon award.
It absolutely is. This is the award that says
for six months from October to April, night in
and night out through injuries, road trips and
back to backs. I was better than anyone else
on the planet. It measures sustained excellence.
over an 82 -game span, it is, I think, the ultimate
test of a basketball player's consistency and
dominance. And the timing for this deep dive
is actually perfect because the landscape of
the league has shifted right under our feet.
It really has. We are recording this in the wake
of the 2024 -25 season, and we have a new king
on the throne. The current holder of the award
is Shai Gilgis Alexander of the Oklahoma City
Thunder. Which is a massive moment. I mean, it
marks a changing of the guard, not just for the
Thunder franchise, but for the whole profile
of the player who wins this thing. How so? Well,
Shai is a guard. He's Canadian and he plays with
a pace and a style that is very, very different
from the big man dominance we saw in the few
years right before him with Jokic and Embiid.
That's a great point. So our mission today is
to unpack all of this. We aren't just going to
read a list of winners. No, that would be boring.
We're going to unpack the history, the weird
voting anomalies, the stuff that makes you go,
wait, what? And the evolution of the hardware
itself. And we have to talk about the new rules.
Oh, absolutely. We're going to look at how the
rules have changed, specifically the new 65 games.
threshold that is literally disqualifying legends
from contention and what this award tells us
about the changing face of the league. It really
is a fascinating lens to view the NBA through,
because when you track the history of the MVP,
you are really tracking the history of how we
as fans and media value basketball. That's it
right there. The definition of value. You see
the shift from raw stats to winning. You see
it go from centers to guards. And like we just
mentioned with Shy, from a purely American game
to a global phenomenon. OK, so let's start with
the physical object. The hardware. Because for
decades, if you were the absolute best player
in the world, the league handed you the Maurice
Putiloff trophy. That's right. The Putiloff.
A name that, let's be honest, doesn't exactly
scream, basketball superstar. Not at all. I mean,
be honest. If you walked into a sports bar in,
say, 2015 and asked 100 diehard fans who Maurice
Putiloff was, how many are getting that right?
Oh, maybe two. And they probably work for the
league office or are just extreme history buffs.
So who was he? Maurice Potiloff was the first
commissioner of the NBA, though back then his
title was actually president. He served from
1946 all the way to 1963. He was an administrator,
a lawyer, a bureaucrat. Which feels a little
dry, doesn't it? Congratulations on being the
most athletic, dominant, high -flying force in
the world. Here is a statue named after a lawyer
who probably couldn't dribble with his left hand.
Yeah. It feels like a disconnect. It was certainly
a product of its time. I mean, in the early days,
honoring the administrative founder made sense
to the people running the league. But as the
game grew into this massive global entertainment
product, that disconnect became glaring. The
trophy didn't match the energy of the achievement.
So the league finally made a move. In the 2022
-23 season, they announced a massive rebranding
of the major awards. They retired the Podolov
name from the MVP trophy and introduced the Michael
Jordan trophy. Which, let's be real, just makes
a lot more sense. It's a no -brainer. You win
the MVP, you get the trophy named after the guy
who is widely considered the gold standard of
basketball excellence. Michael Jordan won the
award five times, which we will definitely get
into. But his name is just synonymous with the
concept of value and winning. I've seen photos
of the new trophy, and it's pretty intricate.
It's not just a guy playing basketball. There's
symbolism there, right? There is, yeah. It's
a bronze figure breaking out of a rock, reaching
for a crystal basketball. It's meant to symbolize
the struggle to reach the pinnacle. I like that.
But what I love about this rebrand is that they
didn't just erase history. They didn't just,
you know, kick Maurice Podoloff out of the history
books entirely. They just reshuffled him. Exactly.
They moved him to where he belongs, the front
office. So his name is still on a trophy. Yep.
The Maurice Podoloff name was attached to a new
trophy that is awarded to the team with the best
regular season record. Ah, that is such a tidy
bit of housekeeping. That's perfect. The administrator
is attached to the organizational achievement,
the team record. And the player's name is attached
to the individual achievement. It is a very logical,
very clean alignment. It puts the player power
with the players. Speaking of player power, let's
talk about who actually decides this thing, because
I think a lot of listeners assume it's always
been sports writers in fedoras smoking cigars
in a press box. Right, the classic image. But
the voting process has gone through some wild
changes. It has basically had three distinct
eras. And the first era, phase one, might be
the most fascinating psychological experiment
in sports history. Okay, I'm intrigued. From
the inception of the award in 1955 -56 until
the 1979 -80 season, the MVP wasn't picked by
the media. Who picked it? It was picked by the
players. The players voted. Yes, the peers. The
guys you were battling against every single night
were the ones filling out the ballot. Now, on
the surface, that sounds like the ultimate sign
of respect. Game recognizes game. Who knows who
is harder to guard than the guy trying to guard
him? That is the romantic view of it, for sure.
And in some cases, it was true. But we have to
remember, these are human beings. They have rivalries.
They have beefs. They have jealousy. A lot of
jealousy. So you're saying it got petty. Oh,
it got incredibly petty. There is a famous example
involving Oscar Robertson. In the 1961 -62 season,
Oscar Robertson became the first player to average
a triple -double for an entire season. The first
ever. 30 points, 12 rebounds, 11 assists. Unheard
of. It was like a video game stat line in real
life. And he won MVP, surely. He finished third.
Third. You're kidding me. Who won? Bill Russell
won it, and Wilt Chamberlain was second. Now,
look, Russell and Wilt had amazing seasons, but
there is a very strong historical argument that
Oscar just rubbed people the wrong way. Ah. He
was tough. He was outspoken. He was the head
of the Players Association. He wasn't necessarily
the most popular guy in the locker room. So the
player vote could sometimes be a popularity contest.
Or an unpopularity contest. That's a better way
to put it. I'm not voting for that guy. He elbowed
me in the throat last Tuesday. That makes total
sense. So the league saw this happening, this
kind of bias. Precisely. So seeing these biases,
the league decided to make a change. Starting
in the 1981 season, we entered phase two. The
media era. And that's when the writers take over.
The power shifted to a panel of sports writers
and broadcasters across the United States and
Canada. Presumably to get a more objective, bird's
eye view of the league. That was the intent.
To remove the direct interpersonal conflict of
the locker room. Writers, in theory, are watching
all the games, analyzing the narratives, and
looking at the stats without the personal baggage
of having to guard the guy. But even that has
its flaws, right? We talk about East Coast bias
or writers favoring the guys who give good interviews.
It certainly isn't perfect. Narratives play a
huge role in the media vote. A huge role. If
a player has a great story, a comeback, a new
team, a redemption arc, writers eat that up.
But generally, it did stabilize the voting criteria.
And then they added another wrinkle recently.
The fans got a voice. Just a whisper of a voice,
but yes. Okay, what do you mean by that? Well,
starting in 2010, the league introduced Phase
3. the fan element. It allows for one single
ballot representing the collective online fan
vote to be cast. Wait, wait. One ballot. So millions
of people screaming on Twitter and Reddit, clicking
buttons on the NBA website. That all counts as
one guy. One guy. It's almost entirely symbolic.
It engages the fan base. It makes them feel involved.
But it doesn't really swing the election. Yeah.
You need a really, really close race for that
one vote to matter. Exactly. Okay. So we know
who votes, but we need to unpack how they vote.
Because this isn't a pick one winner system,
right? It's not like a presidential election
where you just tick a box. No. And this is crucial
for understanding the snubs and the close races
we'll talk about. It is a weighted point system.
Let's break down the math. How does it work?
So each voter. whether they're media or the fan
ballot, selects a top five. They rank them one
through five. Okay. A first place vote gets you
10 points. Second place gets you seven points.
Third place gets five points. Fourth place gets
three points. And fifth place gets one point.
So consistency matters a lot. You can't just
be the favorite of a few people. You need to
be on everyone's radar. Exactly. Let's say you
are a very polarizing player. Maybe you are a
defensive specialist who doesn't score much or
you have a style of play that some people just
hate. Like a James Harden type player for some
fans. A perfect example. You might get, say,
10 first place votes from the people who absolutely
love your game. That's 100 points. But if the
other 90 voters leave you off their ballot entirely.
you aren't going to win. Versus the guy who maybe
doesn't get as many first place votes, but everyone
agrees is, at worst, the second best player in
the league. Right. If you accumulate enough second
and third place votes, you can rack up a massive
point total. This system rewards consensus. It
forces the MVP to be someone that the vast majority
of observers agree is elite. That makes a lot
of sense. It prevents a regional favorite from
hijacking the award just because the local writers
in their city went rogue and put him number one.
Correct. It forces a broader perspective. All
right. Let's get into the legends, the titans,
the guys who didn't just win it once but turned
their homes into trophy cases. When we look at
the history books, who is sitting at the very
top of the mountain? The record holder. The undisputed
king of the MVP is Kareem Abdul -Jabbar. The
captain. Six times. He won the award six times.
Yeah. Just stop and think about the longevity
required for that. To be the best player in the
league over such a long span. It's incredible.
And he did it with different franchises, right?
This wasn't just one dynastic run. He did. He
won three with the Milwaukee Bucks in the early
70s and then three with the Los Angeles Lakers
in the late 70s and early 80s. But there is one
season in Kareem's resume that I think is the
single weirdest statistical anomaly in the history
of American sports awards. Okay, hit me. I love
these weird facts. In the 1975 -76 season, Kareem
Abdul -Jabbar won the MVP award. despite his
team not making the playoffs. Yeah, really? How
is that even possible? I feel like today, if
a guy's team is even the eighth seed, people
scream that he has empty stats or doesn't impact
winning. It is unthinkable in the modern era.
It would never happen. If Shy Gilgis Alexander
missed the playoffs this year, he wouldn't have
sniffed the trophy. He wouldn't even be in the
top ten. So what was the thinking back then?
You have to look at the context of 1976. This
was the first year after Kareem was traded to
the Lakers. And the Lakers roster was, let's
be charitable and say it was thin. It wasn't
the Showtime Lakers yet. Not even close. Not
even close. They were not good. But Kareem was
so individually dominant. He led the league in
rebounding. He led the league in blocks. And
he was second in scoring. The voters. Who were
the players back then? Who were the players back
then? Remember, they look at that Lakers team
and said, without this guy. They aren't even
a professional basketball team. They might win
10 games. So it was the ultimate definition of
value. He was literally the only valuable piece
on the roster. Exactly. He was single -handedly
dragging that team to respectability. So he remains
the only player in history to achieve that. It
is a record I feel very confident saying will
never, ever be broken. That is wild. Okay, so
Kareem is at six. Who is chasing him in the five
-timers club? We have two absolute legends in
that club. Bill Russell and Michael Jordan. Russell
and Jordan, the ultimate winner and the ultimate
icon. It feels right, doesn't it? The names just
fit. And Bill Russell's dominance was incredibly
concentrated. He won four of his five awards
in a single five -season span. Wow. He basically
owned the late 50s and early 60s. He just blocked
the lane for everyone else in the league, both
literally and figuratively for this award. And
Jordan. He's the namesake of the trophy now.
And Jordan is interesting because while he won
five, many people, and I think it's a very fair
argument, say he should have won seven or eight.
Right. This brings up the concept of voter fatigue.
The dreaded voter fatigue. We hear this term
a lot. Can you explain it? Humans get bored.
It's that simple. If Michael Jordan is the best
player every single year, the story gets stale
for the media. Writers want to write a new headline.
They want to champion a new hero. But the bar
moves for him. It gets raised impossibly high.
For Jordan to win his fourth or fifth MVP, he
had to be significantly better. than his previous,
already legendary self. Whereas a new guy, like
a Charles Barkley or Carl Malone, just had to
have a career year to get the narrative on their
side and steal one away. So Jordan's five is
actually a testament to him overcoming not just
the other players on the court, but the boredom
of the voters? Absolutely. He was so good that
he broke through the fatigue five times. Incredible.
And then we drop down to the four -time winners.
Who is on that tier? Two physical anomalies.
Wilt Chamberlain and LeBron James. Wilt and LeBron,
talk about two guys who were just built differently
than any other human on the court. There is a
strong parallel there, for sure. And just like
Bill Russell, LeBron James achieved that incredible
feat of winning four awards in a five season
span. So another period of just total dominance.
From 2009 to 2013, LeBron was the undeniable
center of the basketball universe. There was
no real debate about who the best player was.
And LeBron also did the two team thing. Right.
Two with the Cleveland Cavaliers and two with
the Miami Heat. Wilt also split his awards, winning
with the Warriors and the 76ers, which I think
speaks to their transquartable value. It wasn't
just the system. It was them. Okay. Moving down
the list. Who has three? The three -timers list
is fascinating because it includes some of the
best passing bigs and forwards in history. You
have Moses Malone, who is often the forgotten
giant of this list. He doesn't get talked about
enough. Not nearly enough. Yeah. He won with
the Rockets and Sixers. You have Laurie Bird
with the Celtics. You have Magic Johnson with
the Lakers. And the most recent addition to this
tier, Nikoli Jokic. The Joker. Yes. Jokic secured
his third MVP in 2024, joining that incredibly
elite company. But I want to flag Larry Bird
here for a second. Okay. He holds a very specific
distinction, along with Russell and Chamberlain.
Only those three. What's that? Bird is one of
only three players to win the award in three
consecutive years. 1984, 1985, 1986. A three
-peat MVP. Wow. And we haven't seen that since.
We have not. And think about the chances we've
had recently. Giannis went back -to -back. Steph
Curry went back -to -back. Jokic went back -to
-back. LeBron went back -to -back twice. But
that third straight one is the hardest hurdle
in sports. That voter fatigue again, it must
be at its absolute peak in that third year. It
is the Jordan rule applied to everyone. When
Jokic was going for his third straight in 2023,
the narrative shifted so heavily toward Joel
Embiid. And a big part of that was simply because
we hadn't given it to Embiid yet. It was his
turn. Exactly. It's his turn. He's a powerful,
powerful force in MVP voting. Now, speaking of
voting weirdness. Let's talk about the statistical
anomalies, because for a long, long time, there
was this weird fact that no one had ever been
a unanimous MVP. Right. Not Jordan, not Kareem,
not Wilt, not LeBron in his peak. It was one
of those unwritten rules of the sport. It felt
like it would never happen. Someone, somewhere,
always voted for someone else. Maybe a beat writer
in New York threw a pity vote to Patrick Ewing.
Or a Homer vote. A Homer vote. Maybe someone
in Houston voted for Hakeem. There was never
100 % consensus. Until the 2015 -16 season. Stephen
Curry. The season he broke basketball. He just
completely reshaped the game. The Golden State
Warriors won 73 games, breaking the Bulls' all
-time record. Which everyone thought was untouchable.
Untouchable. And Curry personally made 402 three
-pointers, which shattered his own record. It
was such an overwhelming display of dominance
that there was simply no logical argument for
anyone else. So he became the first and only
unanimous MVP. Every single first -place vote.
He stands alone in that category. But the tragedy,
and honestly the comedy... is looking at the
guys who missed it by one single vote. A one
-vote shy club. This has to be heartbreaking
for those guys. It is full of rage, and they're
not shy about it. Let's take Shaquille O 'Neal
in the 1999 -2000 season. Teak Shaq, just a force
of nature. He was Godzilla destroying Tokyo.
There was no answer for him. He led the league
in scoring with second in rebounds, third in
blocks. The Lakers won 67 games. It was a perfect
season. And he received how many votes? He received
120 of the 121 first place votes. So close. Who
got the one? Who's the person that Shaq still
has on a list somewhere? It was a reporter named
Fred Hickman who cast his first place vote for
Allen Iverson. Now look, Iverson had a great
year, but Shaq was historically dominant. And
Shaq is still bitter about that, by the way.
He brings it up on TV all the time. I don't blame
him. And LeBron had this happen too, right? Yes,
in the 2012 -13 season. This was Miami LeBron.
at the absolute peak of his physical efficiency.
He shot 56 % from the field as a wing player.
The Heat won 27 games in a row at one point.
Another season where there was just no question
who the best player was. Zero question. He got
120 of 121 votes. And the lone dissenter. A writer
named Gary Washburn from Boston voted for Carmelo
Anthony. His argument was that Melo meant more
to the Knicks than LeBron meant to the Heat,
because the Heat also had Dwyane Wade and Chris
Bosh. I mean, I guess that's a value argument,
but it feels like you're trying to be the contrarian.
It feels like overthinking it. It feels like
trying to be the smartest guy in the room. And
it cost LeBron. That unanimous distinction in
the history books. What about rookies? We see
guys like Wemby coming into the league now looking
like aliens. Has a rookie ever just walked in
and said, I'm the MVP of the whole league right
now? It has happened, but it is incredibly, incredibly
rare. It has only occurred twice in the entire
history of the league. Only twice? Twice. The
first was Wilt Chamberlain, of course, in the
1959 -60 season. He averaged 37 points and 27
rebounds as a rookie. I mean, what do you think
do with that? That's not a human stat line. You
just give him the... trophy and try not to make
eye contact. And the second one. And then Wes
Unsell did it in 1968 -69. He wasn't a scorer
like Wilt, but he was such a rock, such a force
of leadership and rebounding for the Baltimore
Bullets, that he won MVP on pure impact. So it
hasn't happened in over 50 years. Not since 1969,
no. The gap between college or even international
play. And the NBA is just too wide now. Even
a generational talent like Victor Wembanyama,
who had an incredible rookie year, wasn't leading
his team to 50 wins. And as we know, winning
is pretty much a prerequisite. Let's talk about
age. Who is the youngest gun to win it? That
would be Derrick Rose. In the 2010 -11 season,
he just captivated the league. He was so explosive,
so athletic, fearless. I remember that season.
He was must -see TV. Every single night, he led
the Bulls to the best record in the league over
LeBron's heat. And he was just 22 years old.
22? That is absurdly young to be the best player
in a league of men. And sadly, because of the
injuries that followed, he never reached those
heights again. He is, to this day, the only MVP
in history who is not considered a lock for the
Hall of Fame, which is a really tragic footnote.
That is tough. And on the other end of the spectrum,
who is the old man of the group? Karl Malone,
the mailman delivered in the 1998 -99 season.
Oh, the lockout year. The lockout shortened season,
yes. He won it at age 35. Old man strength. Indeed.
He kept his body in immaculate condition and
just outlasted all the younger stars that year.
Now, earlier you mentioned Kareem winning without
making the playoffs, which is the ultimate outlier.
But generally, you have to be on a top -tier
team, right? The golden rule of MVP voting. Generally,
MVPs come from teams with 50 -plus wins, or at
least a top -two seed. History shows that voters
value winning almost as much as individual stats.
If you score 35 points a game but your team is
under .500, you're empty calories. But there
are other exceptions besides Kareem. There are
a few, if we exclude the shortened seasons. Moses
Malone won twice, in 1979 and 1982, on teams
that were good but not necessarily juggernauts
in the 60 -win set. But the modern outliers,
the ones people really debate, are Russell Westbrook
in 2016 -17 and Nikola Jokic in 2021 -22. Westbrook
was the triple -double season, right? Right.
After Durant left. Exactly. He averaged a triple
-double for the first time since Oscar Robertson.
The narrative of that statistical achievement
was so powerful that it overwhelmed the fact
that his Oklahoma City Thunder were only the
sixth seed. So history mattered more than seeding
that year. Voters decided that a historic individual
feat mattered more than win percentage that year.
It was a total reversal of the usual criteria.
Jokic. Jokic in 2021 -22 carried a Denver team
that was just decimated by injuries. Jamal Murray
was out. Michael Porter Jr. was out. He was playing
with guys who were respectfully G leaguers. Right.
The voters recognized that without Jokic, that
team might have been in the lottery. So value
in that case meant carrying the heaviest load,
even if the final win total wasn't 60. That's
a great segue, actually, because the face of
who is carrying that load has changed dramatically.
We have seen a massive, massive international
shift. Well, this is one of the most profound
changes in the league's history. For the first
few decades, this was an American award for an
American league. The winners were born in Philly,
Louisiana, New York, Chicago. When did that start
to crack open? The door really opened with Hakeem
Olajuwon. In the 1993 -94 season, Hakeem became
the first international winner. The dream. Now,
context is important here. Hakeem was born in
Nigeria, but he played college ball at Houston,
and he became a naturalized U .S. citizen in
1993. But in terms of origin, in terms of where
he learned the game, He was the pioneer. Who
followed him? Then we have Tim Duncan. Now, Duncan
was born in the U .S. Virgin Islands and is a
U .S. citizen, so it's a bit of a gray area.
But for NBA categorization purposes regarding
the growth of the game, he is often discussed
in the context of international expansion. And
he won back -to -back. He won back -to -back
in 2002 and 2003. But then we started getting
players who were truly from outside the U .S.
system in a different way. Right. Not guys who
played in the NCAA. Exactly. Steve Nash, born
in South Africa, raised in Canada. He wasn't
a freak athlete. He was a soccer player turned
point guard. He won back to back in 2005 and
2006. Then Dirk Davidsky from Germany in 2007.
And then recently the floodgates just burst open.
Floodgates is the only word for it. If you look
at the 2020s, it has been total complete domination
by international players. It's actually shocking
when you write it all down. Okay, let's look
at the list for this past decade or so. All right.
Giannis Antetokounmpo from Greece, 1 -2. Nikola
Jokic from Serbia, 1 -3. Joel Embiid from Cameroon,
who, like Hakim, became a U .S. citizen later
in 2022, 1 -1. And now, Shai. And now, Shai Gilgis
-Alexander from Canada winning in 2025. So we
have had long stretches recently where an American
-born player hasn't even touched the trophy.
Correct. For a while, there was a seven -year
stretch where Jokic, Giannis, or Embiid won it.
It speaks to the globalization of the talent
pool. The best players in the world are no longer
exclusively coming from the NCAA pipeline or
American high schools. It's incredible. They're
coming from academies in Europe. clubs in Africa,
and gyms in Canada. There are 12 total MVP awards
now shared by eight international players. Why
do you think that is? Is the U .S. falling behind
in development? Well, there is a lot of hand
-wringing about that. Some experts argue that
the AAU system in America focuses too much on
individual scoring and athleticism, whereas the
European system focuses more on fundamentals,
passing, and team play. The cerebral side of
the game. Exactly. When you look at Jokic or
Luka Doncic, who is always in the conversation.
They play with a cerebral quality that is very
hard to teach. It's not just about jumping higher.
It's wild to think that the best player in the
world title has effectively left the United States
for a significant period. It has. And looking
at the young guys coming up, Wemba Nyama from
France, for example, it might not be coming back
anytime soon. The global talent is here to stay.
I want to pivot to something that affects the
modern game and the MVP specifically. The load
management era. The league actually changed the
rules recently to force guys to play. Yes. This
is the infamous 65 game threshold. And it has
been incredibly controversial. So how does it
work exactly? It became effective with the 2023
-24 season as part of the new collective bargaining
agreement. The rule is simple. Players must appear
in at least 65 games to be eligible for the MVP.
And not just MVP, right. It applies to most regular
season honors, all NBA teams, defensive player
of the year, all of it. Why did they do this?
Was it because guys were sitting out too much?
Exactly. The league was trying to combat load
management star players resting during games
when they were technically healthy enough to
play. It became a huge issue for fans and TV
partners. Right. The fans pay to see the stars.
The TV networks pay to show the stars. If the
stars are sitting out every back -to -back, the
product suffers. That's the league's position.
They wanted to ensure that the most valuable
player was actually on the court for the vast
majority of the season. Does just stepping on
the court count? Can I sub in for 10 seconds,
wave to the crowd, and leave? And that counts
as a game. No. They thought of that loophole.
To receive credit for a game, a player must play
at least 20 minutes. 20 minutes. OK, that's a
real shift. However, there's a little bit of
wiggle room. They allow two near misses where
a player appears for 15 to 19 minutes. Those
can count toward the 65. Why? What's the point
of that? This covers scenarios where a guy gets
into foul trouble early and has to sit or maybe
has a minor injury mid -game and has to leave.
Yeah. It gives a little flexibility. What if
you get hurt? Like a real season -ending injury?
There are protections for that. For season -ending
injuries, a player can be eligible with as few
as 62 games. And there is a vague clause for
bad faith circumstances, which is a bit of a
catch -all for weird situations where a team
might bench a player against their will, perhaps
to tank for a draft pick. But basically, if you
play 64 games and you're the best player on Earth,
you aren't winning MVP. Period. That is the rule.
It brings availability into the definition of
value. And we saw the impact immediately. Joel
Embiid. Joel Embiid in the 2023 -24 season. He
was having a historic scoring season, averaging
more points than minutes played, which is just
insane. But he got hurt. He tried to rush back
to hit the 65 game mark and ended up injuring
himself worse. He was disqualified from the award.
It's a harsh line, but I guess I get the league's
perspective. The fans want to see the stars.
And for historical comparison, it is really interesting.
Let's look at Bill Walton. He won MVP in 1978
playing only 58 games. Wait, really? 58? 58 games.
Walton was so dominant when he was on the court
that the voters just gave it to him anyway. They
decided those 58 games were more valuable than
anyone else's 80. So under these new rules...
Under these new rules, Bill Walton, one of the
greatest peaks we've ever seen, wouldn't have
even been eligible. He would be completely erased
from the history of that award. Wow. That puts
it in perspective. Okay, let's talk about the
teams. We talked about the players. But which
franchises have the most hardware in their lobby?
It's the usual suspects at the top. The Boston
Celtics lead the way with 10 awards. Ten? Who
are they? That is Russell with his five, Bob
Cousy, Dave Cowens, and, of course, Larry Bird
with his three -peat. The Green Legacy. Makes
sense. Then you've got the Los Angeles Lakers
with eight awards. That's Kareem with three for
them, Magic with three, and then Shaq and Kobe
Bryant with one each. Only one for Kobe. That
feels low. That is a whole other deep dive for
another day. Many people believe Kobe should
have won more, particularly in the mid -2000s,
but that was when Steve Nash and Dirk Nowitzki
took those trophies home. And the Sixers are
up there too, right? The Philadelphia 76ers are
right there with seven awards. A rich history.
Wilt. Julius Irving, Dr. J, Moses Malone, Allen
Iverson, and most recently, Joel Embiid. They
have a history of dominant individual scores.
And Chicago. The Bulls have six, five from Jordan
and one from Derrick Rose. The Jordan effect.
Now here's the sad part of the list, the droughts,
or rather the deserts. Which teams have never
had an MVP? It is a surprisingly long list, and
some of them might surprise you. The Brooklyn
Nets, Charlotte Hornets, Indiana Pacers, Memphis
Grizzlies, New Orleans Pelicans, Orlando Magic,
Toronto Raptors. Okay, a lot of the newer franchises.
A lot of expansion teams. But the one that always
surprises people? The Detroit Pistons. The Pistons?
No way! They won three championships. They did,
but think about how they won. The bad boys in
the late 80s were a defensive unit. Isaiah Thomas
was their leader, but he was playing in the era
of Magic and Bird and Jordan. Right, he was never
going to win over those guys. He never had the
statistical dominance to overtake them. And then
the 2004 go into work, Pistons were the ultimate
team. They didn't have a singular superstar.
Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton, Ben Wallace,
they were all great. But none of them were MVPs.
That really highlights the difference between
best team and most valuable player. Sometimes
those things align and sometimes they're complete
opposites. Exactly. It's a fascinating dynamic.
So we've covered the hardware, the voters, the
legends, the anomalies, the rules, the teams.
What does this all mean when we zoom out? What's
the biggest takeaway? I think the biggest takeaway
is. The standard of excellence this award represents.
We mentioned the Hall of Fame earlier. Yeah,
you said it's a guarantee. Virtually. Every single
eligible player who has won the MVP award has
been inducted into the Naismith Memorial Basketball
Hall of Fame. Every single one. Every one. If
you win this trophy, you are immortal. Period.
Derrick Rose is the only question mark because
he is not eligible yet and his career path was
so unusual. But history suggests that the trophy
is a golden ticket to Springfield. That really
puts it in perspective. It's not just a nice
plaque for the year. It's a validation of an
entire life's work. It is the ultimate individual
accolade in the sport. There's nothing higher
for the regular season. So here is a thought
to leave you with as we wrap up. We talked about
Shai Gilgis -Alexander winning in 2025. We talked
about Jokic, Giannis, Embiid, Nash, Dirk. Are
we permanently in an era where the best player
in the American League is no longer American?
It is a totally valid question. The infrastructure
for development globally has caught up. And in
some ways, you could argue it has surpassed the
domestic pipeline. The next face of the NBA might
be French or Canadian or Australian or Slovenian.
The world champion title that the NBA winners
get is finally starting to feel like it involves
the whole world. And what about that 65 game
rule? Are we going to see a future legendary
season? I'm talking 35 points, 15 rebounds, just
total undeniable dominance get disqualified from
the history books simply because a guy rolled
his ankle and played 64 games. It is bound to
happen eventually. It's inevitable. We almost
saw it with a bead. And when it does, the debate
about value versus availability is going to explode
all over again. What's more valuable? Is the
best player the one who plays the most or the
one who plays the best when he's out there? The
league has made its decision for now. I can't
wait for the Twitter threads on that one. It's
going to be absolute chaos. It will be. But that's
what makes the NBA so fun. The debates never
end. Thanks for diving deep with us on the MVP.
It's a history of giants, bureaucrats, and global
takeovers. We'll catch you on the next one. Keep
watching the games.