Does CP3 get too much credit for what is happening in PHO? Does Booker get too little? Does Bridges (14ppg 63% TS% All-Defense) and Ayton (17ppg 10reb) get too little? Does their bench (Payne, C.Johnson, McGee) get too little?
I say yes to each one of those.
Agreed. CP3 makes a difference, but every one of those players is integral. If anything, they just showed that they're an elite team even without Paul.
There are parallels between the Suns/Booker and the Celtics/Tatum. I view Tatum as a better overall player than Booker and a more "valuable" player, but I am a Celtics fan. I suspect the rest of the world of fans sees them more on par and both behind the upper tier of stars that includes (in no particular order):
Durant
Harden
Embiid
Giannis
Jokic
James
I think a major changing of the guard is eminent though. Harden and James in particular may be starting to wear out. Durant has had persistent durability issues. Embiid could break at any point it seems. Giannis and Jokic are likely not going anywhere anytime soon but there is still room for the likes of Tatum, Doncic, and Booker (and a few others) to move up into some of those upper elite top spots. Just not right now or for this round of the MVP.
The numbers don't bear that out. Bridges has by FAR the best on/off differential per 100 on the Suns at +9.0. Booker is just +2.9 and Paul is only slightly better at +3.0. Tatum on the oth is an elite +13.6. He has only missed 4 games and Boston went 2-2 (which is actually better than Boston historically does when Tatum sits). Of the rest of the starters for the C's, Smart is +5.6, Rob is +5.5, Brown is +5.5, and Horford is +3.1. Tatum is not only unquestioned as Boston's best player, the team also plays its best when he is on the floor, and does poorly when he sits.
So the numbers absolutely support that Tatum is a more valuable to Boston than Booker is to the Suns, and Tatum has better numbers and has played more games. Tatum should clearly be ahead of Booker for post season awards and on the all nba team. It isn't really close.
I am not sure I understand what you are disagreeing with. I said I thought Tatum was the better player but that a casual fan in Nebraska may see Tatum as less of a star than I do.
Booker is the leading scorer on the winningest team in the league. I don't think he is better than Tatum, but I think he is good. I see all your on/off stats and I don't ignore those but they are only 1 indicator. Booker is a star player on a good team.
I actually wonder if PHO as a team is even as good as MIL, PHI, BKN, and BOS, but PHO is a good team, very balanced, very deep. And until Paul got hurt, they had their core team together a lot (PHO starters 638 min vs BOS starters 443 min), which helps the team record a lot.