Tatum was 4th last season, quite a bit behind Embiid, Jokic, Giannis, and quite a bit ahead of Gilgeous-Alexander and Mitchell. Embiid is obviously not in the running this season due to games played. I see worst case, Tatum stays 4th (SGA moves up), but best case, arguments could be made for Jokic or Tatum with Giannis dropping down. I personally see Tatum as ahead of SGA and Mitchell, also probably ahead of Giannis this season.
But this is not what I am focusing on and I doubt Tatum is either. The real prize is finals MVP. That will do more for Tatum's legacy than the season MVP.
It is not a knock on a player to say he should be anywhere in the top 4 in the MVP voting. Tatum may not ever be the outright best player in the league in a season. But he is going to be in the top 3 or 4 or 5, at least every season for the next several. I'll take that.
I'm curious, why do you have him over SGA? I don't think it's debatable that SGA has been better. Is it simply the "best player on the best team" argument?
Yes, I believe some MVP "points" should be awarded for team success, not the end all, just a part of the equation, and Tatum is the best player on a better team. I think it is debatable as to whether SGA has been better, or more valuable based on individual production. Yes, he averages about 4 more points (about 15% more than Tatum), but Tatum get more rebounds (over 50% more), and plays better defense. SGA gets more assists but probably has higher usage (in my mind, assists can be a deceptive stat). I think it is a fair debate, I like Tatum a little better, others may see it differently, but to say it isn't even debatable, in my mind is going too far. I like Tatum better, but accept that it is close enough for legitimate debate.
As to Mitchell, I agree he is really good. He would likely be right there with in the debate with Tatum and SGA, if he had more games. But he doesn't this season so I have him behind both. He has 47 games, CLE has 20 remaining. If he does get to 65, it will be just barely. In any case, I think he has been less valuable because of games played. Maybe that isn't how you are supposed to score, but that is how it is in my mind.
SGA is on the team with the best record in the better conference with a significantly worse roster and outperformed Tatum in their head to head matchup…what are we talking about here
I don't know what anyone else is talking about, but I said that I thought Tatum was going to finish higher in the MVP voting that SGA. Then it became "it is not even debatable" that SGA is a better player than Tatum (which doesn't mean he will get more MVP votes).
It seems most have SGA as a "better player" than Tatum, from what I can see based mostly on the traditional offensive stats. SGA scores 31 while Tatum scores 27. All fair points but I will still take Tatum. I think Tatum could get 31 pts/gm if he wanted to or if the team was different, but SGA is never going to be able to rebound like Tatum or defend with the position versatility that Tatum can. I still think Tatum will end up with more MVP points/votes in the end (getting back to where this started). And I don't put much in assist stats. Good passing teams get buckets after a couple of passes. It may start with a good pass by Tatum, but the easy bucket may come a couple of passes later.
SGA has emerged as a legit star. He is the best player on a really good team. I don't think the best in the west (that would be DEN) but still in the top tier. (I know, OKC is 1 game ahead of DEN in the standings). SGA is exactly 4 months younger than Tatum but until this season, has not been a part of any real team success, while Tatum has been in the playoffs every season. I am nothing if not open minded so I reserve the right to change my mind but right now, I still take Tatum.