The NBA MVP Debate: Beyond the Stats, a Story of Narratives and Snubs
The NBA’s MVP finalists for the 2025-26 season are out, and the basketball world is buzzing—not just about who made the cut, but about who didn’t. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, Nikola Jokic, and Victor Wembanyama are the final three, but the absence of Luka Doncic has sparked a fiery debate. Personally, I think this snub isn’t just about numbers; it’s about the narratives we’ve woven around these players and the criteria we use to crown a ‘valuable’ player.
The Frontrunner’s Case: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander’s Historic Season
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is the reigning MVP, and his case this year is undeniable. Leading the Oklahoma City Thunder to a league-best 64 wins, he’s averaging 31.1 points, 6.6 assists, and 4.3 rebounds. What makes this particularly fascinating is how he’s rewritten history. Breaking Wilt Chamberlain’s consecutive 20-point game record and surpassing Michael Jordan’s field goal percentage for a 30-point scorer? That’s not just impressive—it’s iconic.
But here’s the thing: Shai’s narrative is about more than stats. It’s about consistency, leadership, and carrying a team to the top. In my opinion, this is why he’s the frontrunner. The NBA loves a player who can dominate individually while elevating their team. Yet, it raises a deeper question: Are we overvaluing team success at the expense of individual brilliance?
Nikola Jokic: The Triple-Double Machine
Nikola Jokic, a three-time MVP, is once again in the conversation. Averaging a triple-double for the second straight year (27.7 points, 12.9 rebounds, 10.7 assists), he’s joined an elite club with Russell Westbrook. What many people don’t realize is how quietly dominant Jokic is. He doesn’t have the flashy dunks or viral moments, but his impact is undeniable.
From my perspective, Jokic’s case is about sustainability. He’s been at the top of his game for years, and his ability to maintain this level of play is remarkable. However, I wonder if his familiarity—his ‘expected greatness’—works against him. Are voters fatigued by his consistency, or do they see it as a testament to his value?
Victor Wembanyama: The Rising Star with a Defensive Edge
Victor Wembanyama’s inclusion is no surprise. The French phenom has led the San Antonio Spurs to 62 wins while averaging 25.0 points, 11.5 rebounds, 3.1 assists, and 3.1 blocks. What this really suggests is that Wembanyama isn’t just an offensive force—he’s a game-changer on both ends. His potential to win both MVP and Defensive Player of the Year is a narrative the NBA loves: the all-around superstar.
But here’s where it gets interesting: Wembanyama’s case is as much about the future as it is about the present. He’s only 22, and his ceiling is limitless. If you take a step back and think about it, voting for him is a bet on what he’ll become, not just what he is now. That’s a risky but exciting proposition.
The Snub Heard Around the League: Luka Doncic’s Case
Now, let’s talk about the elephant in the room: Luka Doncic. Averaging 33.5 points and leading the league in scoring for the second time in three years, Doncic’s exclusion feels like a snub. His hamstring injury late in the season certainly hurt his case, but is that enough to justify leaving him off the list?
In my opinion, Doncic’s snub highlights a flaw in the MVP criteria. The 65-game eligibility rule feels arbitrary, especially when a player like Doncic is clearly one of the league’s best. What this really suggests is that the MVP award isn’t just about who’s the best—it’s about who fits the narrative of the season. Doncic’s injury became a convenient excuse to exclude him, but it raises a deeper question: Should the MVP be about availability, or should it reward the most dominant player, regardless of games played?
Cade Cunningham: The Quiet Contender
Cade Cunningham’s snub is equally puzzling. Leading the Detroit Pistons to 60 wins and topping the Eastern Conference, he averaged 23.9 points, 9.9 assists, and 5.5 rebounds. A detail that I find especially interesting is how Cunningham’s all-around game mirrors that of a traditional MVP candidate. Yet, he didn’t make the cut.
This speaks to a broader trend in the NBA: the power of narrative. Cunningham doesn’t have the flashy stats or the viral moments, but his impact on the Pistons is undeniable. Personally, I think his exclusion is a missed opportunity to recognize a player who’s quietly transforming a franchise.
The Bigger Picture: What Does ‘Valuable’ Really Mean?
This year’s MVP race isn’t just about who wins—it’s about what we value in a player. Is it individual dominance? Team success? Consistency? Potential? The inclusion of Shai, Jokic, and Wembanyama, and the exclusion of Doncic and Cunningham, forces us to confront these questions.
From my perspective, the MVP award is as much about storytelling as it is about statistics. Each finalist represents a different narrative: the proven leader, the consistent great, and the rising star. But the snubs remind us that some stories—no matter how compelling—don’t fit the script.
Final Thoughts
As we debate the MVP finalists, I’m reminded that the NBA is as much about narratives as it is about basketball. Shai, Jokic, and Wembanyama are deserving candidates, but Doncic and Cunningham’s absences leave a lingering question: Are we rewarding the best player, or the best story?
Personally, I think the MVP award should be about both. But in a league where narratives drive everything, maybe that’s too much to ask. One thing is certain: this year’s race will be remembered not just for who wins, but for who was left out. And that, in itself, is a story worth telling.
