The Short Answer
OG Anunoby being mentioned in the Finals MVP discussion is not just cute role-player inflation. A role player can win NBA Finals MVP. The catch is that he has to stop looking like a role player in the series story.
That does not mean becoming the offense’s celebrity face for two weeks. It means his two-way value has to become central enough that voters cannot honestly tell the Finals without him near the top of it. That is the difference between real award traction and the lazy fan take: “He made big plays, so toss him into the MVP conversation.” No. Big plays are entry-level. Series-shaping value is the ticket.
Why The Bar Is Higher
The Finals MVP vote usually bends toward the player who owns the offense because that player is easiest to explain. The ball is in his hands. The defensive attention starts with him. The broadcast, the box score, and the late-clock possessions all keep pointing back to the same name.
So if a non-traditional star is going to win, he needs a louder kind of quiet impact. The defending has to matter. The spacing has to matter. The way he changes what the other team can comfortably run has to matter. His offense cannot just be decorative; it has to punish enough attention shifts that his minutes feel like part of the series engine, not a nice add-on.
That is the standard Anunoby’s current conversation helps clarify. He has been framed as central to the Knicks being on the verge of a title and as part of the Finals MVP discussion. Fine. Then the question is not whether fans like the story. The question is whether his work is so connected to winning that calling him “supporting cast” becomes a way to dodge what is happening on the floor.
The Award Case Has To Survive The Label
This is where people get sloppy. “Role player” is not an insult. It is a job description. But award voting does not reward job descriptions; it rewards series ownership.
A defender can absolutely matter enough. A wing who takes the hardest matchup, holds the lineup together, hits enough shots to keep the floor honest, and forces the opponent into worse choices is doing more than filling space. That player is changing the terms of the series.
But the case has to be that strong. Not “he is underrated.” Not “people finally noticed him.” Not “the stars already get enough credit.” Those are group-chat arguments. Finals MVP is not a lifetime achievement award for being useful.
For Anunoby, the useful version of the debate is sharper: if the Knicks’ title push is being told with him as a central piece, and his two-way value is part of why the series looks the way it does, then he belongs in the conversation. If the case depends on voters feeling clever for rewarding the less obvious name, it falls apart.
The Better Way To Ask It
Stop asking whether a role player is “allowed” to win Finals MVP. Of course he is. The award does not come with a usage-rate velvet rope.
Ask whether the series would still make sense if you pushed him to the side of the story. If the answer is yes, he is buzz. If the answer is no, he is a candidate.
That is why Anunoby’s current Finals MVP discussion is useful beyond the Knicks. It forces a cleaner award standard. Stars get the benefit of the default. Role players have to make the default look lazy.