NBA MVP Discussion Thread 2023-24 (Part 4: MVP Thread's Revenge)

[AleksandarN]

Read on Twitter

?t=LxzGBvZYl1IN0Q0aM3DKSg&s=19

Oh thanks for that tweet. Definitely going to use that on a certain poster who keeps on bringing up th are t Jokic would get exposed in pick and rolls.

[dygaction]

Jokic and Denver were better this year.

Jokic hasn't been better than Luka this year.

Nobody has.

He kinda was.

Bob you trolling here left and right

[Doctor MJ]

You're losing a lot of minutes on a player you seriously dislike.

Serious pre-season MVP candidate? Like all the obvious suspects. He will at least make 5th consecutive first All Nba team, kinda good for non impactful player, don't you think?

I think you're confused if you think hatred of Luka is what's driving me here.

I'm in the MVP thread because I'm in the MVP thread every year.
I'm discussing Luka in the MVP thread because other people think he's an MVP candidate.

Re: serious pre-season MVP candidate? To be clear what I mean: Luka was the #1 pre-season favorite for MVP in most places I saw for '20-21, '21-22 & '22-23. After '19-20, people kept expecting Luka to make the leap, and it was only after 3 seasons of failing to do as well as in the '19-20 voting that people soured on him.

This then to say that if what would down in the record books was the pre-season MVP favorites rather than the actual MVPs, Luka would be the clear cut Player of the 2020s so far.

You are kinda presenting being pre-season favourite as going against Luka.

To win MVP you first need to have a fantastic season and then have a team good enough. Both normally don't happen when you're around 20 years old.

He would have been on GOAT trajectory if he had won those MVPs. Maybe expectations were a bit too high? Being in 5 consecutive first Nba teams is still kinda good for 25 years old player, don't you think?

It's outstanding for any age, but I think expectations are still too high and this has everything to do with why Luka is so discussed in a thread for an award he really doesn't have a chance to win.

[Petergrifindor]

PPG really. Ok then Embiid is better than Luka if we are strictly going with ppg. What are we even doing here

Embiid had 1 point on Doncic, not 8.

And he is not eligible.

Apples to oranges.

[Exp0sed]

What ways has Luka been better. What makes Luka more valuable than Jokic

8 more points per game and a way more difficult carry job.

I noticed you compared their "efficiency" but neglected to point out usage

Jokic takes 17 fga per game and Luka takes almost 24 and that's just shots, not drives that result in FT etc
8 more points is alot but 8 more points on 7 more shots is meaningless

by ur logic, if a team gives a great scorer the green light to shoot 40 shots a night, that would make said player the MVP
no?

Luka has been phenomenal but Jokic is the MVP, come on now

I like how Jokic winning his MV3 is gonna drive the haters crazy, pure entertainment

[Yuri36]

But when you score and turnover the ball less with better efficiency that is more impactful in my books. We are not comparing Luka to an average player. We are comparing him to Jokic

Not true at all. A player can be more efficient by scoring/turnover less but less impactful. You can compare to anyone in a historical context:

34.0ppg/9.9a/4.0to @ .614TS%/12.5TOV%
26.1ppg/9.0a/2.9to @ .650TS%/12.7TOV%

7.9ppg is really a huge difference to justify the increase in turnover and decrease in efficiency, not to mention the difference between a center and a perimeter player.

I love how Yuri likes your posts when you use advanced stats. Lol. Yet he doesn’t want the numerous advanced stats that are in favour of Jokic over Luka.

Ok so ppg and apg are advanced stats now? You're learning us something.
And we're not talking about a 3/4 ppg difference but about an almost 8 ppg difference....and it's not like Doncic is doing that shooting 43% from the field, isn't he?

[AleksandarN]

PPG really. Ok then Embiid is better than Luka if we are strictly going with ppg. What are we even doing here

Embiid had 1 point on Doncic, not 8.

And he is not eligible.

Apples to oranges.

Yup totally different I guess having more ppg makes a person better player. I mean come on. That’s weak

[Bob8]

I think you're confused if you think hatred of Luka is what's driving me here.

I'm in the MVP thread because I'm in the MVP thread every year.
I'm discussing Luka in the MVP thread because other people think he's an MVP candidate.

Re: serious pre-season MVP candidate? To be clear what I mean: Luka was the #1 pre-season favorite for MVP in most places I saw for '20-21, '21-22 & '22-23. After '19-20, people kept expecting Luka to make the leap, and it was only after 3 seasons of failing to do as well as in the '19-20 voting that people soured on him.

This then to say that if what would down in the record books was the pre-season MVP favorites rather than the actual MVPs, Luka would be the clear cut Player of the 2020s so far.

You are kinda presenting being pre-season favourite as going against Luka.

To win MVP you first need to have a fantastic season and then have a team good enough. Both normally don't happen when you're around 20 years old.

He would have been on GOAT trajectory if he had won those MVPs. Maybe expectations were a bit too high? Being in 5 consecutive first Nba teams is still kinda good for 25 years old player, don't you think?

It's outstanding for any age, but I think expectations are still too high and this has everything to do with why Luka is so discussed in a thread for an award he really doesn't have a chance to win.

He might had a chance to win MVP, if Mavs were as lucky with injuries as OKC or if they got better defenders in preseason not only in February. That's why age matters a lot. More years in the league more chances that everything goes right. And you are forgetting his age deliberately.

[AleksandarN]

Not true at all. A player can be more efficient by scoring/turnover less but less impactful. You can compare to anyone in a historical context:

34.0ppg/9.9a/4.0to @ .614TS%/12.5TOV%
26.1ppg/9.0a/2.9to @ .650TS%/12.7TOV%

7.9ppg is really a huge difference to justify the increase in turnover and decrease in efficiency, not to mention the difference between a center and a perimeter player.

I love how Yuri likes your posts when you use advanced stats. Lol. Yet he doesn’t want the numerous advanced stats that are in favour of Jokic over Luka.

Ok so ppg and apg are advanced stats now? You're learning us something.
And we're not talking about a 3/4 ppg difference but about an almost 8 ppg difference....and it's not like Doncic is doing that shooting 43% from the field, isn't he?

True shooting and TOV was the main argument in his posts that you liked.

[dygaction]

But when you score and turnover the ball less with better efficiency that is more impactful in my books. We are not comparing Luka to an average player. We are comparing him to Jokic

Not true at all. A player can be more efficient by scoring/turnover less but less impactful. You can compare to anyone in a historical context:

34.0ppg/9.9a/4.0to @ .614TS%/12.5TOV%
26.1ppg/9.0a/2.9to @ .650TS%/12.7TOV%

7.9ppg is really a huge difference to justify the increase in turnover and decrease in efficiency, not to mention the difference between a center and a perimeter player.

Btw I could go full on advanced stats but then what is the fun in that to compare Luka and jokic. I haven’t

I vote for Jokic over Luka this season but less turnover cannot be an argument here. The scoring 7.9ppg difference between these two is bigger than that between Jokic and Devin Vassell, who only turns the ball over 1.5 per game.

[AleksandarN]

You are kinda presenting being pre-season favourite as going against Luka.

To win MVP you first need to have a fantastic season and then have a team good enough. Both normally don't happen when you're around 20 years old.

He would have been on GOAT trajectory if he had won those MVPs. Maybe expectations were a bit too high? Being in 5 consecutive first Nba teams is still kinda good for 25 years old player, don't you think?

It's outstanding for any age, but I think expectations are still too high and this has everything to do with why Luka is so discussed in a thread for an award he really doesn't have a chance to win.

He might had a chance to win MVP, if Mavs were as lucky with injuries as OKC or if they got better defenders in preseason not only in February.

And if Jokic didn’t have to play through injuries and having Murray miss a month of play. Jokic would be running away with the award with them probably having the same record as the Celtics.

[Yuri36]

You look to be extremely hyped up.

Jokic and Denver were better this year.

Sure, Jokic and Denver were better than a Mavs team with Dwight Powell at their main center and with Kyrie out for most of the first part of season.
After the Gafford-PJ trade though and with Kyrie now fully fit, things are surprisingly (lol) not quite the same as we saw in the last Mavs-Nuggets game....and even now, I'd argue Joker has still a better team around him than Luka.

You too hyped to be a guy that doesn’t play ball for the Mavs or have a vested interest in that man’s life.

In my OPINION Luka isn’t the best player on earth - not top 3 somewhere between 4 and 5…. Could be lower depending on the game.

I never thought Harden - who shot better when he was at his peak and a better passer at his peak as well, he was never the best player in the league ever either.

Luka is fun to watch and we all love Luka but to not bow to him isn’t blasphemy unless you actually think he is Luka god.

Oh great, another guy who thinks Luka is the new Harden.....
The only problem in your comparaison is that while their styles are effectively very similar, one has proven in only 5/6 years in the league that he is already (much) more clutch and a better PO performer than Harden in his whole career (and I obviously recognize Harden's talent).

And more significantly, he has already proven that he can inspire a team around him to give everything for him contrary to Harden (just look at his teammates reactions in the dressing room after the buzzer beater in PO against the Clippers or after the 73pts game....call me back if you've ever seen Harden's teammates showing so much appreciation to him as they had to Luka).

[AleksandarN]

Not true at all. A player can be more efficient by scoring/turnover less but less impactful. You can compare to anyone in a historical context:

34.0ppg/9.9a/4.0to @ .614TS%/12.5TOV%
26.1ppg/9.0a/2.9to @ .650TS%/12.7TOV%

7.9ppg is really a huge difference to justify the increase in turnover and decrease in efficiency, not to mention the difference between a center and a perimeter player.

Btw I could go full on advanced stats but then what is the fun in that to compare Luka and jokic. I haven’t

I vote for Jokic over Luka this season but less turnover cannot be an argument here. The scoring 7.9ppg difference between these two is bigger than that between Jokic and Devin Vassell, who only turns the ball over 1.5 per game.

I guess I could have used advanced stats to make a point.

Read on Twitter

[Yuri36]

I love how Yuri likes your posts when you use advanced stats. Lol. Yet he doesn’t want the numerous advanced stats that are in favour of Jokic over Luka.

Ok so ppg and apg are advanced stats now? You're learning us something.
And we're not talking about a 3/4 ppg difference but about an almost 8 ppg difference....and it's not like Doncic is doing that shooting 43% from the field, isn't he?

True shooting and TOV was the main argument in his posts that you liked.

Well, they weren't mine.

[Bob8]

It's outstanding for any age, but I think expectations are still too high and this has everything to do with why Luka is so discussed in a thread for an award he really doesn't have a chance to win.

He might had a chance to win MVP, if Mavs were as lucky with injuries as OKC or if they got better defenders in preseason not only in February.

And if Jokic didn’t have to play through injuries and having Murray miss a month of play. Jokic would be running away with the award with them probably having the same record as the Celtics.

Look, you can't compare Mavs' problems with Denver's.

Mavs 33 starting lineups, Denver 13.

Mavs' most used lineup 99 minutes, Denver's most used lineup 895 minutes.

I hope you understand now the level of injury problems by the Mavs. I would say that playing 800 minutes more with the best teammates is kinda crucial.

[dygaction]

Btw I could go full on advanced stats but then what is the fun in that to compare Luka and jokic. I haven’t

I vote for Jokic over Luka this season but less turnover cannot be an argument here. The scoring 7.9ppg difference between these two is bigger than that between Jokic and Devin Vassell, who only turns the ball over 1.5 per game.

I guess I could have used advanced stats to make a point.

Read on Twitter

That's the point. There are actual good arguments out there

[dygaction]

He might had a chance to win MVP, if Mavs were as lucky with injuries as OKC or if they got better defenders in preseason not only in February.

And if Jokic didn’t have to play through injuries and having Murray miss a month of play. Jokic would be running away with the award with them probably having the same record as the Celtics.

Look, you can't compare Mavs' problems with Denver's.

Mavs 33 starting lineups, Denver 13.

Mavs' most used lineup 99 minutes, Denver's most used lineup 895 minutes.

I hope you understand now the level of injury problems by the Mavs. I would say that playing 800 minutes more with the best teammates is kinda crucial.

Just curious, is the most used lineup still 99min?
I believe since Gafford got in the starting lineup, they are like 10w-1l, and the 1l is when Luka did not play.

[x]

Read on Twitter

?s=20[/x]

[Bob8]

And if Jokic didn’t have to play through injuries and having Murray miss a month of play. Jokic would be running away with the award with them probably having the same record as the Celtics.

Look, you can't compare Mavs' problems with Denver's.

Mavs 33 starting lineups, Denver 13.

Mavs' most used lineup 99 minutes, Denver's most used lineup 895 minutes.

I hope you understand now the level of injury problems by the Mavs. I would say that playing 800 minutes more with the best teammates is kinda crucial.

Just curious, is the most used lineup still 99min?
I believe since Gafford got in the starting lineup, they are like 10w-1l, and the 1l is when Luka did not play.

[x]

Read on Twitter

?s=20[/x]

Yes. Current best Mavs lineup with Gafford and Washington is second most used with 90 minutes and 21.4 net rtg. Just imagine what would Mavs record be, if they have played 800 minutes together like Nuggets did.

[AleksandarN]

He might had a chance to win MVP, if Mavs were as lucky with injuries as OKC or if they got better defenders in preseason not only in February.

And if Jokic didn’t have to play through injuries and having Murray miss a month of play. Jokic would be running away with the award with them probably having the same record as the Celtics.

Look, you can't compare Mavs' problems with Denver's.

Mavs 33 starting lineups, Denver 13.

Mavs' most used lineup 99 minutes, Denver's most used lineup 895 minutes.

I hope you understand now the level of injury problems by the Mavs. I would say that playing 800 minutes more with the best teammates is kinda crucial.

No I am saying if Jokic had OKC injury luck jokic would be running away with the MVP right now.

[Bob8]

And if Jokic didn’t have to play through injuries and having Murray miss a month of play. Jokic would be running away with the award with them probably having the same record as the Celtics.

Look, you can't compare Mavs' problems with Denver's.

Mavs 33 starting lineups, Denver 13.

Mavs' most used lineup 99 minutes, Denver's most used lineup 895 minutes.

I hope you understand now the level of injury problems by the Mavs. I would say that playing 800 minutes more with the best teammates is kinda crucial.

No I am saying if Jokic had OKC injury luck jokic would be running away with the MVP right now.

But do you agree that Mavs bad luck was absolutely insane in first half of the season? 33 different starting lineups in 70 games must be some kind of record, no lineup over 100 minutes is absurd.