What in all of this is a per 36 min rate?

16.1 ppg, 4.3 apg, .404 fg%, .366 3pt-fg% per 36 min in 2009
19.9 ppg, 5.4 apg, .432 fg%, .397 3pt-fg% per 36 min in 2010

The rise in scoring,assists, fg% and 3pt% are all significant; the only notable regression I see over the past year is in TO's ( from 2.3/36m to 2.9/36m)

My point with Q-Rich was that he's put up WS/48 numbers similar to this before.

Check out his player page: he's only had one season close to this one, and that came eight years ago with the Clippers. Once again, this is not an example of a player who is bouncing back to previous career norms. Coming into this season, Richardson's career WS/48 rate was 0.070, but he's almost doubling that this season. The vision you have of Richardson might not match what the numbers say, but statistically he's been a below average performer for a majority of his career.

And I did go there to read about SPS, that's where I got the idea from.

Given that age/performance curves aren't perfectly known, I think it's tough to really gauge what is typical, especially when you lump all the positions together.

The SPS age adjustment is very conservative, so I don't feel like it would bias the results.

You mean sort of like Quentin Richardson (0.104 WS/48 in 2007) or Jermaine O'Neal (0.177 WS/48 in 2003, 0.155 in 2004), both of whom are on your Top 10 list?

First, I said by using just one season we would "pick up many more cases where a player did not actually improve." Notice that I did not say that my approach eliminates these cases; I just think it produces fewer of them.

Second, no, not like Quentin Richardson or Jermaine O'Neal. Take Richardson, for example. Look at what he did from 2003-2009:

+-------+------+------+-------+
| MP    | ORtg | DRtg | WS/48 |
+-------+------+------+-------+
| 13343 |  103 |  110 | 0.057 | 
+-------+------+------+-------+

His WS/48 was less than the league average in six of those seven seasons, and overall his WS/48 was 43% below the league average. Compare that to what he has done this year:

+------+------+------+-------+
| MP   | ORtg | DRtg | WS/48 |
+------+------+------+-------+
| 1980 |  113 |  104 | 0.131 | 
+------+------+------+-------+

He's producing wins at a rate 31% above the league average. Is this a fluke or real improvement? We can't say for sure, but this is clearly not an example of a player who had one down season and then bounced back to his career norms.

Besides, doesn't SPS take into account the previous years' values?

You can read all about it here.

"when we're talking about the MIP, we should be talking about a player who has shown significant improvement. In my opinion, a player who has improved by an amount that would be typical for most players his age should not be considered for the MIP award."
Given that age/performance curves aren't perfectly known, I think it's tough to really gauge what is typical, especially when you lump all the positions together. I guess we just can agree to disagree here.

"Second, if we just compare players to their previous season then we are going to pick up many more cases where a player did not actually improve (e.g., a veteran who had a down year the previous season and then bounced back the following season)."
You mean sort of like Quentin Richardson (0.104 WS/48 in 2007) or Jermaine O'Neal (0.177 WS/48 in 2003, 0.155 in 2004), both of whom are on your Top 10 list? Besides, doesn't SPS take into account the previous years' values?