I think one aspect of the MVP race that does not get enough attention is the relative performance of Harden and Curry against good teams. In particular, Harden's numbers are inflated by big performances against mostly bad teams (Harden's games of 40+ points were against Sacramento (x2), Denver (x2), Portland (x2), Indiana (x2), Phoenix, and OKC). I'm not saying beating under-500 teams is a bad thing, but it is certainly not as impressive as playing well against good teams. I think when you look at how they perform against over-500 teams, Curry looks like the clear MVP.

<table> <thead> <tr> <th></th> <th>PTS</th> <th>REB</th> <th>AST</th> <th>TOV</th> </tr> </thead> <tbody> <tr> <td>Harden vs over 0.500</td> <td>24.3</td> <td>5.2</td> <td>6.5</td> <td>3.8</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Harden vs under 0.500</td> <td>30.4</td> <td>6.1</td> <td>7.4</td> <td>4.1</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Curry vs over 0.500</td> <td>24.5</td> <td>4.4</td> <td>7.6</td> <td>3.0</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Curry vs under 0.500</td> <td>23.3</td> <td>4.1</td> <td>7.9</td> <td>3.3</td> </tr> </tbody> </table