Believe it or not, the Boston Celtics are in the middle of a rebuild. This remains true, despite earning the (fake) number one seed in the East and reaching their first Eastern Conference Final since 2012. Just three seasons ago, in Brad Stevens’ first year as head coach, the team finished 25-57 feeling the immediate repercussions of trading Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett and Jason Terry to the Brooklyn Nets for three first round draft picks. In this short period of time, the Celtics have solidified themselves as one of the top teams in the Eastern Conference, largely due to the 2015 deadline trade for point guard Isaiah Thomas from the Phoenix Suns. Over the next two and a half seasons, Isaiah would emerge as the center-piece of the franchise, leading Boston into the playoffs all three years. This 2017 season was different for Thomas, as the Celtics acquired big-man and facilitator Al Horford. The Horford signing enabled Boston to play an effective high pick-and-roll offense, capitalizing on a strong shooting season from Isaiah. This addition, coupled with Thomas’ development, helped the 5’9” powerhouse become the NBA’s third leading scorer in 2017, behind MVP favorites Russell Westbrook and James Harden.

Despite Isaiah’s impressive scoring season, the Eastern Conference Finals cast doubt on his future with the Celtics. Thomas was pulled out of game two with a hip injury, while the Cleveland Cavaliers were up by about 50 points. He was sidelined for the rest of the series, and is currently being evaluated to see if surgery is necessary. Down two games to none with their best player out, the Celtics stole game three in Cleveland, raising the idea of moving on from Thomas in the off-season. Not to say that the team is better without Isaiah at the helm, but deficiencies in his game, his expiring contract, and the need for the Celtics to develop young players makes a deal involving Thomas possible, if a team is willing to overpay based on his 2017 regular season performance.

The Case for Trading Isaiah Thomas

It is difficult to remember a time when the third leading scorer in the NBA was not on the trading block. This is because Isaiah Thomas is not the typical third leading scorer, and the Celtics are not the typical number one seed. At 5’9”, Thomas is tied with rookie Kay Felder as the shortest player in the NBA. In a tall man’s game, Isaiah’s height has held him back on the defensive end, making him a liability late in games. In an article written for Bleacher Report in April 2017, author Adam Fromal ranks Isaiah Thomas as the second worst defensive point guard in the league (out of players who play a minimum of 15 minutes per game) based on metrics. He stands dead last among those qualifying players in Defensive Real Plus/Minus and Defensive Points Saved. His defensive shortcomings are well displayed on the court. While Thomas has been embraced in Boston for his late-game offensive heroics, Brad Stevens is quick to take him off the floor in key defensive scenarios down the stretch, whenever he has the chance. During the regular season, Isaiah’s small stature did not impact his offensive game. Not only was he able to create separation and make jump shots, but Thomas was also successful in finishing around the basket. Despite being towered over in the paint, Thomas posted an NBA-best 12.7 drives to the basket per game, allowing him to get high-percentage shots.

Thomas’ scoring success came to an end during the Eastern Conference Finals. The increased defensive efforts of the Cavaliers, led by a dominant Tristan Thompson in the paint shut down the small-statured Isaiah. He shot 7-19 (.368) for 17 points in a 13-point loss in game one, and shot 0-6 before leaving with a hip injury in the second quarter of game 2, an eventual 44 point loss. If winning championships is the goal, Thomas’ performance against Cleveland in the Eastern Conference Finals should be weighed more heavily than that of the regular season in deciding his fate with the team. This season, Thomas proved that he is capable of being a prolific scorer in the NBA, but can he act as the centerpiece of championship winning team?

I do not believe that a player who is only capable of dominating one side of the court can be a championship winning franchise player, especially one who is 5’9”. While Isaiah may have the potential to be the number three player on a championship team, his ball-dependent style of play is best suited for an offense that runs through him. In a league where Mike Conley is the second highest paid player, Thomas is likely to receive max contract offers when his deal with the Celtics expires in 2018. Given the current landscape of the Eastern Conference, a Celtics team centered around Isaiah Thomas likely lacks the star power necessary to get past the dominant Cavaliers, even with the addition of a player like Jimmy Butler or Gordon Hayward. Locking Isaiah up for the future would only help the team compete in the short-run, and would not bring them any closer to winning their 18th title. Furthermore, it could possibly hurt the development of potential number one pick Markelle Fultz. Isaiah’s presence in the back-court is likely to take playing time away from the prospect, who has the potential to be a generational talent, and could even turn the team off from drafting him if the Boston thinks they have found their point guard of the future in Thomas. The Celtics should be more focused on winning a title after LeBron’s decline than on improving their current marginal success. In order to make way for Fultz’s development and to get some return on possibly losing Thomas to free agency if he demands a max contract (which the Celtics should not give him), they should explore the market for Thomas in a trade while his stock is the highest it has ever been.

Chris Paul was my favorite basketball player to watch growing up. He could get anywhere on the court whenever he wanted to, was unselfish enough to set up his teammates and didn’t force anything.  I tried to model my game after him, always working on my passing, dribbling and midrange shooting. I currently stand an unimposing five foot seven inches tall and still can’t shoot to save my life, so that didn’t necessarily go as planned.

Back to Chris Paul though, I had always felt that he was worthy of MVP honors, especially in the 08-09 season when he was the only good player on his Hornets team that he carried to a 49-win seven-seed in the playoffs.  Due to my belief that Chris Paul should have been an MVP, I have always felt that the MVP should go to the best player on the team that over-performed most drastically and would have been terrible without them.  For example, I thought that the NFL MVP during the 2016-2017 season should have been the Cowboys offensive line, because they were the reason that Dak and Zeke played the way they did.  In the 2014-2015 season, I thought that Anthony Davis deserved the MVP because that Hornets team would have ended up top five in the lottery had he not been on the team, and instead made the playoffs over a Thunder team that was then limited to Russell Westbrook just like this season.

This season’s MVP award is really down to two main candidates: Russell Westbrook and James Harden. My personal opinion is that Russell Westbrook should be the MVP, but my gut tells me that James Harden will win it because of his team’s success.  Westbrook plays on a team of significantly inferior talent than that of Houston and has still carried them to victory, averaging a triple double and leading the league in scoring in the process.  Harden’s team has the three seed in the West, he leads the league in assists and is second in scoring, only to Westbrook.  Statistically, Westbrook leads the league in points produced with 2931, but Harden leads in win shares with 15.

Here are the stat lines for each of our two major candidates:

From a basic perspective, both players have had incredible scoring and passing seasons and neither of those statistics can be utilized to differentiate the two of them.  Rebounding, though, has a wider margin.  Westbrook rebounded at an incredible rate for a point guard, despite the fact that Steven Adams and Enes Kanter are both good rebounders in their own right.  While Harden was a great rebounder, what Westbrook did was truly spectacular.

I decided to put this to the test by running the numbers, using every MVP’s stat line since 1980, when the 3-pt line was introduced.  Given that it starts in 1980, we miss out on all of Bill Russell’s, Wilt Chamberlin’s and all but one of Kareem Abdul-Jabaar’s MVP seasons.  Also, with two lockout shortened seasons in 1998-1999 and 2011-2012, the total win shares numbers were projected for those seasons based off of an eighty-two game season and the win totals for Karl Malone’s Jazz and LeBron James’ Heat were projected by their winning percentages.

Despite this differentiation, the trend in recent MVP years demonstrates a lowered value being placed on rebounding.  So, while what Westbrook did was special, the transition that the league is taking from a big man’s league to a small-ball centered league has resulted in a diminished impact on voters.

Being that wins set the MVP candidates apart more than many other statistics this season do, win totals have been a core point of discussion when thinking about the MVP race. In 2016-2017, Westbrook’s team only finished 5 games above .500.  Traditionally, players on teams with higher win totals do better as the only player since 1980 to win the MVP with a win total under 50 was Moses Malone in the 1981-1982 season when he won 46 games.  Russell Westbrook would be a huge exception to what has transpired in recent times, and it seems as though it would make more sense for voters to  choose Harden.  However, how does one account for a player who averaged a triple double the entire season? Could Westbrook be an exception to the trend, despite the fact that Oscar Robertson didn’t win the MVP when he averaged a triple double?

There is an argument to be made for each of these candidates within the two main differentiators, so with these arguments being presented, we may move to what it means to be the Most Valuable Player.  Everybody has their opinion of what being the MVP in basketball means, but to me, it is the person with the biggest impact on their team.  Harden led the Rockets to the biggest positive win differential against pre-season totals put out by the book makers in Vegas this season.  The Rockets were given 41.5 wins and the Thunder had 45.5. Harden’s team far exceeded their number by 13.5 wins, and Westbrook’s team only over-performed by 1.5.  This acts as a check for Harden. Once again, Westbrook is able to respond due to the poor shooting of his team. Both Westbrook and Harden positively impacted their team’s shooting performance from two point range as their teammates shot better off of assists from them (10.1% and 9.6% respectively).  However, Westbrook is the only one who positively impacted his teammates on a three-point shooting capacity in an increasingly three point shooting league. Despite this, Harden’s teammates shot 8.3% better than Westbrook’s teammates on wide open thees, leading to a record-setting three point shooting season for the Rockets. This can partially be credited to the fact that GM Daryl Morey has built a team completely designed to shoot the three and to make layups.

So, who is the MVP this year? According to my theory, while it is my strong opinion that Russell Westbrook had a greater positive impact on his team, based on the history of MVP voting and the impact that James Harden has made on his team this season, Harden is likely to receive this year’s trophy.