NBA: Derrick Rose, LeBron James and Dwight Howard Step Aside, Omer Asik Is MVP

Omer Asik is the NBA MVP, at least that's what the numbers say.

When Derrick Rose is on the court, the Bulls outscore their opponents by an average of 8.50 points per 100 possessions. When Dwight Howard is on the court, it's 7.67. With LeBron James, it's 10.27.

When Asik is on the floor, it's 14.21. 

There you have it, article finished, case proven. Omer Asik is MVP. The only thing is I have to write a designated amount of words to actually be able to publish the article, and I have this nagging feeling you're not quite convinced, so I may as well continue typing. 

Maybe I should add that the reason you're not convinced is that I just made the dumbest argument throughout the whole World Wide Web (or one of them anyway, arguments can get pretty dumb). At least I have the decency to admit it's a dumb argument though. 

Without going into a lot of discussion, I could use similar logic to prove to you that Paul Pierce is the MVP because he has the best plus/minus net on a winning team, or that Chris Bosh is the most valuable player on the Heat. 

The argument is dumb because it's using a statistic that wasn't meant to be used that way. And don't take my word for it, take the word of the person who came up with the stat: 

"

"It is important to note that the adjusted +/- rating is not a 'holy grail' statistic that perfectly captures each player's overall value. The ratings reported here are limited by a number of factors. First, because they are estimates calculated using a complex statistical model, such ratings tend to be somewhat 'noisy' with substantial estimation error unless a very large sample of games is used. In practice, even a full NBA season does not provide an adequate sample size to fully eliminate this issue. The use of only half a season's worth of data exacerbates the problem, as indicated by the relatively high standard errors presented below. Additionally, the estimates suffer from the issue of skewed sampling—the fact that most players usually find themselves on the court in the company of certain teammates and not others. As a result, it can be difficult to accurately tease out the individual effects of two players who almost always appear on the court together..."

"

I point this out because a number of articles that seem to be carrying on the debate why Derrick Rose is not the MVP rather than focus on why their preferred player is, seem to have gotten some sort of spam email telling them to use this same distorted logic in denouncing Rose's MVP credentials. 

Their argument, as honestly as I can frame it, is this: Derrick Rose is valuable to the Bulls and unquestionably the most valuable player on the Bulls. However, the reason the Bulls are successful not because of the offense he provides, but rather the overall team defense.

Then they point to the on/off, +/- stats and show that the Bulls' defense is best when Rose is "off" the floor. While Rose is on the floor, the defense yields 101.89 points; when he's off it, they yield 92.86.

Therefore Rose is not a part of the reason the defense succeeds and is not the MVP. Some, but not all, have argued that Rose is, if anything, a detriment to the team on defense.

So if that's the line of reasoning, then why isn't Asik advocated as an MVP candidate? After all his "on" numbers are more compelling than Rose's "off" numbers, and the minutes that Omer is on are roughly the same as when Rose is off, so the relative impact on the game is comparable.

The answer is because it's an obviously bogus and loaded argument. However, it's no less loaded and bogus than the argument that Rose isn't contributing to the defense.

And let's be honest, the 101.89 per 100 possessions that Chicago gives up when Rose is on the court is very good. Compare that with Dwight Howard (102.55) or LeBron James (102.22). They don't take into account that Rose is a member of the best defensive starting five in the NBA or that he's a part of four of the 25 best units in the NBA. 

They skew the stats to make it look like Rose is worse defensively than he is. The overall numbers show not only that he's not a detriment, but he's a complement. Part of the reason this gets skewed is because C.J. Watson is actually playing very well defensively. It's not as much about Rose being off the court as it is about Watson being on it.

When Watson is on  the court, they give up 93.71, points, when Rose is off, they give up 92.86. Notice a similarity between those numbers?

The real thing is that the Bulls' bench even has a nickname now, the "Bench Mob." When your bench is playing well enough together to get a nickname, that's some good defense. 

Here's the thing, when you look at the top five man units that have played at least 100 minutes together (to at least minimize the skewing), the unit of Watson, Ronnie Brewer, Luol Deng, Taj Gibson and Asik is the best defensive unit in the NBA, yielding only 77.41 points per 100 possessions. 

To say that's "really good", would be like saying that Shaquille O'Neal is "kind of" big. I mean, that's a special kind of special.

Now here's where it gets interesting. The second best unit that has played 100 minutes or more is the exact same unit with Derrick Rose in place of Watson, and they give up 88.51 points. When Rose is in though, the offensive production goes from 96.14 to 114.52 points per 100 possessions.

So these two things are factual about that unit. When Rose is off it, it's the second best unit in the NBA, and when he's on it they outscore their opponents by twice as much than when he's on the bench. Pretty impressive right? You'd think so, but to read what some people are saying, it's an argument against Rose. 

The problem with on/off stats is that they don't measure how good a player is. They measure how well he plays against his counterpart to how well his backup plays against his counterpart. The reason Asik's numbers are utterly ridiculous has to do with the fact that he's an absolute stud on defense, and most backup centers aren't great offensive players. 

Plus/Minus stats and on/off stats are great for a lot of things, particularly in seeing how well players play together. But they aren't good for seeing which players are better individually, and they weren't intended to be used that way. 

Are there arguments to be made for Dwight Howard? You could certainly make an argument that when you're factoring in his contributions on offense and defense. You could make an argument that he has the weakest supporting cast of any team with more than 50 wins. 

Are there arguments to be made for LeBron James? You could easily make an argument that if MVP is about the best player in the league, then he deserves it. 

Truth be told, there are different understandings and interpretations of the award. However, to argue against Rose based on adjust plus/minus and on/off stats is not only reaching, it's desperate.

If you're going to use that though, why stop half way? Just go all in and declare Omer Asik the MVP.