2017-18 NBA MVP odds: Three-Man Weave wonders if Mr. Triple-Double repeats

When NBA MVP odds were released earlier this week, it got us talking about the award (because -- who isn't talking about the NBA MVP award in August, right?). Defending MVP Russell Westbrook was installed as the favorite, but does that seem right? Brad Botkin, James Herbert and Matt Moore debate the issue in another Three-Man Weave, also picking dark horse candidates and who they think will hoist the Maurice Podoloff Trophy next year.

Before we get started, here are the odds for the top seven favorites, per Bovada, and some pertinent SportsLine projections, including their Fantasy rankings, Fantasy PPG and their teams' projected wins for the upcoming season. Note there is only one player among the top seven odds-getters whose team is projected to win more games than last season: LeBron James.

Player	MVP odds	Fant. rank	Fant. PPG	Wins proj	16-17 wins	Win +/-
Russell Westbrook	7/2	1st	52.0	47	47	0
Kevin Durant	9/2	6th	44.6	66	67	-1
Kawhi Leonard	13/2	14th	39.5	53	61	-8
LeBron James	15/2	2nd	48.0	54	51	+3
James Harden	8/1	3rd	45.6	55	55	0
Giannis Antetokounmpo	17/2	7th	41.9	40	42	-2
Stephen Curry	11/1	6th	44.4	66	67	-1

Let's get after some Three-Man Weave:

1. Is Westbrook the rightful favorite, even with Paul George's presence presumably lowering his usage rate? (Note: SportsLine projects the Thunder to win 47 games again with Westbrook not averaging a triple-double, but he is projected to be the NBA's best fantasy player)

Brad Botkin: Sure, I can buy Westbrook having the best odds, if only because there isn't anyone else who jumps out as a clear-cut favorite, and also because the Thunder stand to make the biggest leap of any playoff team from a year ago. Last year, OKC won 47 games, and I can see them winning 55 this year (SportsLine is projecting 47 wins again this season). If they do get to 55, that kind of jump in wins, for a playoff team, in the West, would put not just Westbrook at the top of any MVP list, but George, too.

I really think people are underestimating how good the Thunder are going to be. I think they're in the running as the second-best team in the league, even if Kyrie Irving stays in Cleveland, and I expect Westbrook to play as brilliantly alongside George as he did alongside Kevin Durant for nine years. That's enough to call him the early favorite -- though, obviously, saying someone is a justifiable favorite and saying they'll actually win is two different things.

James Herbert: No. Westbrook's candidacy was directly tied to him averaging a triple-double, and it's unlikely that will happen next season. He should have another awesome year, but he raised the bar so high with last season's individual numbers that it will be difficult to reach it again. If the Thunder do win more games than most analysts expect, the story will be more about how Paul George changed the team than Westbrook's continued brilliance.

Matt Moore: Not seeing it. Last season was special, a unique set of circumstances that allowed Westbrook the opportunity to pile up the stats to gave him the award. What Westbrook did, handling that usage, and producing a triple-double average was insane, legendary, phenomenal. But it took that specific set of circumstances, and even then, most voters were very much on the fence until the last week of the season, when Westbrook's clutch performances carried it home. I know that from talking to other voters.

But he's not going to have those opportunities. He'll have a better team, which will help him, as wins did cost him a handful of votes last season. But the Thunder will be hard pressed to finish second in the West, and if they do, it will not be all on his shoulders. For Westbrook to win, he has to still put up incredible, if not historic, numbers, avoid injury after a taxing load last season, the Thunder will have to win 50-plus (doable) and no one else can produce a more impressive season or more compelling narrative.

Being installed as the favorite is understandable, but also folly. There are too many potential outcomes on a team or individual level challenging his candidacy. His story was compelling last season, but if those coin-flip games he turned last season don't go his way, or if the Thunder underperform in wins at all, if the story becomes how he and Paul George don't click, he's out. There are more scenarios where he doesn't win than ones where he does.

Is winning MVP beyond the grasp of the best player of his generation? USATSI

2. Has James likely won his last MVP award?

Botkin: I would lean toward yes, but storylines matter in these races. Westbrook's MVP candidacy benefitted greatly last season from Durant leaving for Golden State, for example, and if Kyrie does end up leaving Cleveland, LeBron could see a similar spike in support were he to lead the Cavs to 60-plus wins and put up his typical alien numbers.

Also, while this is down the road, don't rule out LeBron signing with the Lakers next summer and suddenly that team turns into a title contender. If LeBron were to return the Los Angeles Lakers, probably the glitziest franchise in all of sports, to prominence late in his career, another MVP would absolutely be within reach.

Herbert: Probably. Nobody feels comfortable counting James out, but it doesn't seem like winning Most Valuable Player is a high priority for him anymore. He is generally the best player in the league in the playoffs, but during the regular season he (wisely) paces himself, particularly on the defensive end. He could potentially win the award next season if the Cavs suddenly become a great, consistent defensive team, but I wouldn't bet on that.

Moore: He turns 33 this season. There were only three MVPs to win the award at 33 or older. Karl Malone (twice; 1996-97 and 1998-99) and Jordan (1997-98). On one hand, that looks like a pretty dire situation. On the other, James is on the level of Malone and Jordan, so it's not off the table. He likely has won his last because winning MVP is not likely for any player, evidenced by James last season. A four-time MVP, he had career highs in rebounds and assists per game and wound up fourth in the voting (behind Westbrook, James Harden and Kawhi Leonard).

James' defense last year was downright irksome. He played off-ball on spot-up shooters to roam, and too often simply dared those shooters to hit, and they did. The Cavs were woeful overall on defense last season, and was complicit. To win a fifth MVP, James would have to invest a level of effort which simply doesn't make sense at this point in his career, and for a regular season of more than 60 games.

But look, if the Cavaliers improve after trading Irving? If they secure the No. 1 seed in the East over the improved Celtics? If he registers a high mark for efficiency in any regard? Some will cape for him no matter what. Being a legend buys one a lot of cred.

3. Do Durant or Curry have a realistic chance of winning this award while they are teammates?

Botkin: They both should. In Curry's case, look at his on/off numbers last season. The Warriors were barely a positive team when he wasn't on the floor, compared to a wrecking ball when he was. It's funny how Curry has played the largest part in the Warriors becoming the juggernaut they are, and yet now his production is increasingly attached to Golden State's supposed "system" that wouldn't exist without him.

Look, Curry led the league in net rating and offensive efficiency last season. Durant was second in both. Had Durant not missed so much time at the end of last season, he probably would've been first-team all-defense, and his true shooting percentage was north of 65 percent. That's better than Curry's mark from his first MVP season and not too far off the head-scratching 67 percent Curry put up in his second MVP season, which was irrefutably the greatest shooting season in history.

And here we are wondering whether they have a realistic chance at MVP as teammates? Of course they do. Yeah, yeah, I know they're going to split the vote and all that, but come on. They're two of the top five players in the league playing on a team that could very well win 70-plus games again. If at least one of them isn't right there in the MVP conversation, it would be ridiculous.

Herbert: Yes, but the Warriors have to be downright dominant for it to happen. They are expected to be one of the best teams of all-time, so they might need to win 70-plus games in order to really impress MVP voters. If there is significant distance between them and the rest of the league, though, it would be difficult to not consider Durant and/or Curry for the league's most important individual accolade.

Moore: Durant has a better chance, even though Curry is more important to the Warriors' success. To explain: In the minds of voters, Curry's impact is reflected only in his shooting. Even though he's also a great finisher and is not bad defensively (though not a great passer). But the plus-minus, on-off impacts take a back seat to his shooting and spacing impact. Even though, Curry makes the Warriors go, applying that impact into an MVP context is difficult -- short of an injury to Durant.

Durant, on the other hand, is omnipresent. He's hyper-versatile, able to guard any position, a great passer, a finisher who dunks with the authority of a thunderbolt, and a 7-foot shooter with lethal efficiency. If the Warriors win 73 or more games? Durant's going to get the lion share's of the credit, even while those who cover the team scream to the heavens about Curry's role being more important (and they're right). To vote for Curry, one must reject a certain simple elements of value. If you're looking for proof that voters are looking at those simplistic elements, last year's winner took home the award almost entirely because he averaged a triple-double.

To win, each player must get past how dominant the team figures to be, but it will be easier next season than last. And if you want proof of that? LeBron James left the Cavaliers for the Heat's super team in 2010-11. He won MVP in 2012.

The Greek Freak also is a production anomaly. Getty Images

4. Who is a better dark-horse candidate: Giannis Antetokounmpo or John Wall? (Note: SportsLine projects Wall to be the fourth-best fantasy player in the league, and his odds of winning MVP are 33/1 according to Bovada.)

Botkin: Giannis. He's going to put up absurd numbers, and probably more importantly, he's going to do it absurd fashion. He's the kind of player who can hypnotize fans the way Curry did with his 400 3-pointer season or Westbrook and his triple-double average. Plus, the Bucks could shoot up in the East this season (though SportsLine projects them at 40 wins, two fewer than last season), whereas the Wizards feel pretty topped out, as great as Wall is.

Put it this way: If the Wizards win 50 games but still only get the No. 3 seed, nobody will care unless Wall goes full Westbrook. If the Bucks win 50 games, which should be a very reasonable goal in the East, Giannis will be at the top of a lot of people's boards. I don't think that's likely to happen, but that's why he's a dark horse.

Herbert: Antetokounmpo. I like Wall's supporting cast better, but Antetokounmpo's all-around stats are absolutely absurd. I'm not saying he is about to average a triple-double like Westbrook did, but if he sustains the gains he made last season and improves his shooting and playmaking, he could be the most productive player in the league from a statistical perspective. Milwaukee may need to have home-court advantage in the playoffs for him to be seriously considered, but in this conference, that is within the realm of possibility.

Moore: I will respectfully disagree with my associates. Giannis put up numbers last season per 100 possessions no one has. He's the youngest player to ever average 30-10-5 with two blocks per 100 possessions, and take a look at the list of the other guys who have done it. He's incredible.

The Bucks won 42 games last season. To hit 50, they'd have to make an eight-game jump. The East is weak, but the West is not and they have to play those teams 30 times. They rely on a risky defensive scheme and a cadre of young players. They made no major upgrades in the offseason and were wildly inconsistent last season. Don't believe it? They went 10-16 in January and February, before going 14-4 in March to secure their playoff spot. I'm buying the Bucks, but there's a decent chance they not only fail to gain by eight games, but actually slip (SportsLine is projecting a two-win dip from 2016-17).

Meanwhile, the Wizards really found something in their first season under Scott Brooks. They are going to benefit from internal development from Bradley Beal and Otto Porter, along with Kelly Oubre. They won 49 last season (SportsLine projects 44.3 wins and a fourth-place Eastern Conference finish for 2017-18), and Wall was seventh in MVP voting, his first year back after double knee surgery. This is a no-brainer. Not sure how to get this through people's brains, but John Wall is elite. He's much closer to MVP than Antetokounmpo.

5. Who is your way-too-early pick to win MVP?

Botkin: Man, this is tough. My top three would be Durant, James Harden and Kawhi Leonard. Durant is simply too great a player on too great a team to deny, Harden has been runner-up twice and consistent excellence has a way of being rewarded, and Leonard, in addition to being freaking awesome on both ends of the court, has the added advantage of being the guy who doesn't play on a super team.

If the Spurs win 60 plus (AGAIN!) with Kawhi as the only true star (SportsLine projects San Antonio to win 53 games), voters will want to highlight his two-way brilliance and under-appreciated stardom. But if the Warriors top last year's 67-win mark and Durant puts up similarly silly numbers, it will be too much. In a photo finish, Give me Durant.

Herbert: Durant. He was in the running last season before Zaza Pachulia crashed into his leg, and there's no reason he should regress now. I expect him to have the most efficient year of his life and make the All-Defensive team for the first time while Golden State wins around 70 games, starting yet another debate about whether he has surpassed James.

Moore: It's Kawhi. Leonard finished third in MVP last season, and a lot of smart people chose him for MVP. He's the only candidate who is considered at the top of his field offensively and defensively. The Warriors are looking for a fourth straight Finals run. That takes it out of a team, and there's a decent chance they opt for rest even more than the Spurs do. Leonard has less help than Westbrook, Harden, Durant or James and is better defensively than all of them. He also showed signs of improving as a playmaker. He gets better every season.

The Spurs win 60-plus games (though SportsLine projects 53.1 wins), the Warriors snooze the regular season and Curry and Durant split the votes, and Leonard takes it home.