There’s also Will Barton, whose numbers are similar: 14.4 ppg (43-35-81 percent shooting splits), 5.8 rpg, 2.5 apg. It’s amazing what narrative can do when it comes to voting for awards.

Kanter’s net rating is +18, Crawford’s is -4. If someone were to takeaway the names on those statistics, the choice of Kanter over Crawford would be unanimous. Twice in seven months he posted a negative net rating, and those months were October and April when much less games were played (seven games total).

His February (19.5 ppg on 41-31-88 percent shooting splits) and four games in April (18.8 ppg on 47-46-75 splits) were both sensational, but it is the whole season that is supposed to be rewarded, not just late season form. But the Clippers still posted a negative net rating of 6 with him on the floor, down from 8 before the break. His shooting was better (his three point percentage was at 38 percent) and his scoring was up at 15.5 ppg in 28.3 mpg. Now it has to be said, after the All Star break and during Blake Griffin’s absence Crawford stepped up when the Clippers needed him. Shouldn’t a sixth man’s contribution’s be positive? Although a floored statistic, it doesn’t speak well for the guard that it is negative as well as a VORP of -0.3.

An offensive box plus minus of -0.2, and defensively -2.4 (-2.6 overall). His PER of 14.0 is his lowest since his rookie year, and is also below the league average rating of 15.0. He only shoots a league average 34 percent from deep, which does not help him either. So essentially of any player playing heavy NBA minutes, Crawford is the second least efficient shooter. Crawford’s subpar shooting at 40 percent is the lowest of any player not named Kobe Bryant who averages more than 14 points per game.

Sixth man of the year 2016