You're reflexively taking the position that these advanced metrics are always a better gauge of value than a little bit of stats and a little bit of the eye test. 1) Sometimes the model stinks (just because these stats are advanced compared to their precedecessors doesn't necessarily make them all that great; I think a lot of these numbers are getting the SABR treatment when they fall wayyyy short of them in actually quantifying value) 2) Even if the model doesn't stink it doesn't work the same way in all cases I mean if these metrics are enough to say Rose isn't a real MVP contender then why weren't the militant stat heads waving the Kevin Love for MVP banner earlier on? To me, that's just a tacit admission that their numbers can be misleading.