40+ accurate triple-double scores only 7.8 points! MVP Alexander was ridiculed by the crowd: Is he a technical master or a foul artist?

When the light of MVP and the controversy were intertwined: Alexander's stadium mystery

In the G4 match between the Thunder and the Timberwolves, Alexander used 40 minutes of playing time to hand in a quasi-triple double answer with 40 points, 9 rebounds and 10 assists, but the 7.8-point score after the game was shocking. Perhaps only this new NBA MVP can perform such a drama of "high data but subtle reputation". When the final whistle sounded, his sweat-soaked jersey seemed to be telling the smoke of public opinion outside the field.

As a star who just won the MVP trophy, Alexander's treatment among the fans is a bit special. The well-known basketball commentator Su Qun mentioned that many fans' controversy over him focused on "fraudulent fouls" and "too many free throws", and even their appearance became the focus of discussion. This complex emotion reminds me of Harden's "art of foul" during the Rockets era - he also relies on rhythm and confrontation to make a living. Why is the former often criticized for "speculation", while the latter is regarded as a "technical flow"?

Yang Yi specifically emphasized Alexander's physical talent during his post-match analysis: "You can put the ball into the basket without relying on a whistle, which is the real ability." This is particularly appropriate in the G4 game - 6 of the 14 free throws in the game came from tactical fouls before the end of the game. Apart from these "water", there were only 8 free throws created by breaking through. Those layups that twist and fold under the defender's armpits are not so much "finding a foul" as they are using non-human body coordination to challenge the physical limits.

I remember there was a round in the game that was particularly intriguing: when Alexander broke through with the ball, he took the initiative to lean on the defender, and the opponent subconsciously took a step away, but he actually twisted his body in the air and threw the ball in. This core technology of "you can get in even if you hide, I can get in" is indeed "choose one in a thousand" as Yang Yi said. But the fans' impression is very subtle - when he drills into the crowd like a flexible noodle, it always makes people feel that "the purpose is too strong." Compared with the stretching and elegant pulling of McDan (should be "Meddy") back then, this confrontation with a sense of "calculation" does indeed lack the freehand paintings in basketball aesthetics.

Su Qun said it thoroughly in the long article: Basketball is a sport where everyone loves carrots and cabbages. Every defender knows the skills of fouls, but it is rare to be able to perform to the extreme like Alexander. On the playoff stage, he used mid-range and breaking through the killing to tear open the opponent's defense line, which really brought the Thunder a 3-1 match point advantage. Perhaps the root of the controversy lies in people's different expectations for "star temperament" - some are fond of Curry's three-point freehand painting, some prefer Antetokounmpo's violent aesthetics, and Alexander's style of playing with "survival wisdom" is destined to move forward in applause and boo.

When the final score was frozen, watching the scene of him clapping with the coach when he left the court, he suddenly remembered that the NBA has never lacked topical characters. From Iverson's tattoo to Duncan's facial paralysis, from James' "decision" to Curry's braces, every star has built his own legend amid controversy. Alexander's "foul controversy" may be just a unique stroke in the long scroll of his career - as for whether this stroke is icing on the cake or a footnote of controversy, time will give the most objective answer.