As I sat down to analyze the 2021 NBA MVP voting results, I couldn't help but reflect on that powerful Filipino phrase that's been circulating among basketball circles: "Ang dami namang beses na dinala na rin tayo niyan sa championship. Nabibitin lang pero may rason ang lahat." It perfectly captures the essence of what makes MVP debates so compelling - that tension between individual brilliance and team success, between coming close and breaking through. This year's race between Nikola Jokić and Joel Embiid felt particularly charged, with both players having legitimate claims to the trophy but only one ultimately reaching that championship-level recognition.
Looking at the final tally, Jokić secured 91 first-place votes compared to Embiid's solitary first-place vote from what I suspect was a particularly stubborn Philadelphia beat writer. The numbers tell a stark story - Jokić's 971 total points dwarfed Embiid's 586, making this one of the more lopsided MVP races in recent memory. What struck me most was how Jokić's season embodied that idea of "may rason ang lahat" - there were reasons everywhere you looked. His historic efficiency numbers, playing every single game for the Nuggets while averaging 26.4 points, 10.8 rebounds, and 8.3 assists on shooting splits that bordered on ridiculous. I've been covering the NBA for fifteen years now, and I've never seen a big man with his combination of playmaking vision and scoring efficiency.
The voting breakdown reveals interesting patterns about how different media markets perceived the race. Stephen Curry grabbed the remaining first-place votes, finishing third with 453 points, while Giannis Antetokounmpo and Chris Paul rounded out the top five. Personally, I thought Giannis might have been undervalued here - his 28.1 points and 11 rebounds per game while leading Milwaukee to the third seed deserved more consideration than the 348 points he received. But that's the beauty of MVP voting - it's never just about stats, but about narrative, timing, and that intangible quality of carrying a team when it matters most. Jokić's case was strengthened by Denver's resilience despite Jamal Murray's season-ending injury, something voters clearly weighed heavily.
What fascinates me about this particular MVP race is how it reflects the evolving nature of basketball excellence. Jokić represents this new archetype - the center who orchestrates offense like a point guard, who impacts the game through basketball IQ rather than athletic dominance. Watching him play feels like witnessing basketball chess, each possession carefully constructed and executed. Meanwhile, Emteed brought that traditional dominant big man energy we've come to expect from MVP candidates, averaging 28.5 points and 10.6 rebounds while anchoring Philadelphia's defense. Both approaches are valid, but this year, the voters clearly favored the innovator over the traditionalist.
As I look back on this voting outcome, I'm reminded why I love covering the NBA - these debates aren't just about who's better, but about how we define value in basketball. The 971-586 point gap might seem decisive, but the conversations it sparked about team success versus individual statistics, about durability versus peak performance, will continue long after the trophy's been handed over. Jokić's victory represents more than just personal achievement - it signals a shift in how we evaluate big men and their role in modern basketball. And really, that's what makes MVP seasons memorable - not just the numbers, but the way they make us reconsider what's possible in this game we all love.