Stephen A. Smith Doesn't Understand How Shai-Gilgeous Alexander Didn't Win The NBA MVP Award

Smith begins by acknowledging Jokic's greatness, praising his personality and contribution to the game of basketball. However, he firmly believes that Gilgeous-Alexander has been overlooked and underappreciated despite finishing second in the MVP voting.

The crux of Smith's argument lies in Gilgeous-Alexander's exceptional performance throughout the season. Averaging 30.1 points, 5.5 rebounds, and 6.2 assists per game, Gilgeous-Alexander showcased his versatility and leadership on the court. 

His scoring prowess, coupled with his contributions in other statistical categories, played a pivotal role in leading the Oklahoma City Thunder to the number-one seed in the Western Conference.

Smith emphasizes Gilgeous-Alexander's impact on the Thunder's success, highlighting his role as the team's clear leader and galvanizing force. Despite their youth and inexperience, Gilgeous-Alexander inspired his teammates and propelled them to unprecedented heights. 

The fact that Gilgeous-Alexander achieved such remarkable success with a relatively inexperienced roster further underscores his value to the team.

Smith acknowledges the challenges faced by Jokic and the Denver Nuggets, including injuries and roster adjustments. However, he maintains that the MVP award should be based solely on regular-season performance, where Gilgeous-Alexander's contributions were undeniable.

Smith adamantly asserts that Gilgeous-Alexander deserved the MVP award for his exceptional performance and leadership throughout the season. While Jokic's accomplishments are acknowledged, Smith believes that Gilgeous-Alexander's impact on the Thunder's success was unparalleled, making him the rightful recipient of the prestigious award.

Shai-Gilgeous Alexander Deserved It More Than Nikola Jokic 

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander's case for the NBA MVP award over Nikola Jokic is rooted in the exceptional leadership and impact he brought to the Oklahoma City Thunder (OKC) during the season. Despite Jokic's impressive statistical performance, Gilgeous-Alexander's contributions to his team's success cannot be understated.

One of the most compelling arguments in favor of Gilgeous-Alexander is the age of the OKC team. With an average age of just 24.12 years old, the Thunder were the second youngest team in the NBA. Despite their youth and lack of experience, Gilgeous-Alexander guided them to the number one seed in the Western Conference, a feat that speaks volumes about his leadership and influence on the court.

In contrast, the Denver Nuggets had a more seasoned roster, with Jokic surrounded by established players. While Jokic's statistics were undoubtedly impressive, leading a team with experienced players is different from leading a young and inexperienced squad like the Thunder.

Gilgeous-Alexander's role as the clear leader of the Thunder cannot be overlooked. He had to lead from the front, inspiring and motivating his teammates to perform at their best. His ability to galvanize a young team and lead them to the top seed in the conference is a testament to his leadership qualities and impact on the court.

While Jokic's statistics may have been more eye-catching, sometimes the narrative and context of a player's performance carry more weight. Gilgeous-Alexander's ability to elevate his team despite their youth and inexperience demonstrates his value and importance to the Thunder's success.

While Jokic's statistical dominance is undeniable, Gilgeous-Alexander's leadership, impact, and the context of his performance make a compelling case for him to have been the deserving recipient of the MVP award over Jokic.