Should Luka win MVP?

[Up-And-Coming]

I have him 2nd behind Jokic.

Jokic
Doncic
SGA

Swap SGA and Luka and that's my list. I think SGA is getting severely underrated at this point.

We just disagree then as I don't think swapping SGA just one spot behind Luka is severely underrating him. SGA had a great season but I simply think Luka edged him out as he himself had a historic season with a clearly worse supporting cast and coach imo.

[IlikeSHAIguys]

Jokic IS earning it. That doesn't mean that other guys don't have viable arguments, but you're also doing the very thing you're complaining about, you realize, yes? Jokic is a very viable MVP candidate this year.

Ironically his regular-season this year was probably alot stronger than what he did for his first MVP I think. But between the early frontrunner(Lebron) getting injured, Giannis coasting defensively, Embid missing a bunch of time and the top 2 regular-season teams being closer to ensemble casts, the best competitor was probably Steph who won a few games less(though can be justified argued to have been more valuable statistically).

Shai also seems to be forgetting that 21 was only a 72 game season so the "didn't win 50" isn't nearly as bad as it sounds.

All said, the second MVP does seem pretty odd juxtaposed with this year though.

And I do think anti-Luka cases get significantly weaker if you factor in roster-construction/situational factors. Statistically, Luka also posted a monster raw signal with a decent sample(27-pace without, 53-win with), posted by far the best on/off of any of the leading candidates without key teammates, and by sheer production was pretty clearly doing the most offensively of anyone in the league(again, counting offense beyond the start and end of possessions). Now add in that Luka/Kyrie was supposed to be questionable fit-wise, that Luka has had to deal with all sorts of injuries(similar to 22 Jokic) and roster upheavel, and that the healthy version of this team was playing 60-win basketball(not to mention the tear they went to the end the year), I don't know Jokic has that good of a case, setting aside the precedent 2022 established(and the broader nba precedent with giving mvp-less players the benefit of the doubt in an MVP race).

If anything I think seeding optics(Mavs have one of the best records in the league and deliberately missed on 2 likely wins because their seed was locked) and injuries have tricked people into thinking this was akin to a 2019 Harden type year where Luka just didn't play that good for an early stretch and turned it on late. Luka has been doing this all season.

You mean the advanced metrics you chose? Not sure why these matter, paticularly when one of the players Jokic is compared to is a much better defender.

That isn't the point. The point is Jokic crushes the box-score. MVP is typically "who crushes the box-score while being on a good team".

I was simply trying to illustrate this in combination of other "biases" Shaiguy420 brought up as not a clean or accurate parallel.

But, if that is all you got out of my post, not the fact that there are little--if any--parallels to 2021 and 2024, then you have missed the entire point I was conveying, and hopefully you now see the point I was conveying

I guess youre right on 2021. 2022 doesnt make sense to me still.

[Colbinii]

Ironically his regular-season this year was probably alot stronger than what he did for his first MVP I think. But between the early frontrunner(Lebron) getting injured, Giannis coasting defensively, Embid missing a bunch of time and the top 2 regular-season teams being closer to ensemble casts, the best competitor was probably Steph who won a few games less(though can be justified argued to have been more valuable statistically).

Shai also seems to be forgetting that 21 was only a 72 game season so the "didn't win 50" isn't nearly as bad as it sounds.

All said, the second MVP does seem pretty odd juxtaposed with this year though.

And I do think anti-Luka cases get significantly weaker if you factor in roster-construction/situational factors. Statistically, Luka also posted a monster raw signal with a decent sample(27-pace without, 53-win with), posted by far the best on/off of any of the leading candidates without key teammates, and by sheer production was pretty clearly doing the most offensively of anyone in the league(again, counting offense beyond the start and end of possessions). Now add in that Luka/Kyrie was supposed to be questionable fit-wise, that Luka has had to deal with all sorts of injuries(similar to 22 Jokic) and roster upheavel, and that the healthy version of this team was playing 60-win basketball(not to mention the tear they went to the end the year), I don't know Jokic has that good of a case, setting aside the precedent 2022 established(and the broader nba precedent with giving mvp-less players the benefit of the doubt in an MVP race).

If anything I think seeding optics(Mavs have one of the best records in the league and deliberately missed on 2 likely wins because their seed was locked) and injuries have tricked people into thinking this was akin to a 2019 Harden type year where Luka just didn't play that good for an early stretch and turned it on late. Luka has been doing this all season.


You mean the advanced metrics you chose? Not sure why these matter, paticularly when one of the players Jokic is compared to is a much better defender.

That isn't the point. The point is Jokic crushes the box-score. MVP is typically "who crushes the box-score while being on a good team".

I was simply trying to illustrate this in combination of other "biases" Shaiguy420 brought up as not a clean or accurate parallel.

But, if that is all you got out of my post, not the fact that there are little--if any--parallels to 2021 and 2024, then you have missed the entire point I was conveying, and hopefully you now see the point I was conveying

I guess youre right on 2021. 2022 doesnt make sense to me still.

How many players from the 2022 Denver Nuggets played over 500 minutes this season?

2 of the Top 6 Minutes and 4 of their Top 8 Minutes Played on the 2022 Denver Nuggets [i]didn't play an NBA game in the 2023-2024 NBA Season[/b].


Nobody on the Denver Nuggets had a positive BPM outside of Jokic

On top of this, Jokic was better statistically in 2022 compared to 2021

[lessthanjake]

Regarding 2022, Jokic had a genuinely awful team that year. Like, we often talk about star players not having help or having a weak supporting cast, but when we say that what we really mean is that the star player doesn’t have enough major difference makers alongside him. What Jokic had in 2022 was a different level of bad. It was a roster basically just filled up virtually entirely with deep bench or borderline NBA players. Winning 48 games with that team was akin to a miracle. And Jokic’s box and impact numbers that year were through the roof—backing up how much of a carry job it was. I don’t think there could be any reasonable comparison to Luka this season. Luka’s team has done similarly well but very slightly better (50 wins vs. 48 wins; 2.30 SRS vs. 2.15 SRS), but the Mavs supporting cast is quite a bit better than the 2022 Nuggets, even with the injuries (and this isn’t because Luka has a super great team around him, but rather is a reflection of just how bad the 2022 Nuggets were).

Perhaps more importantly, I’ll note that if Jokic 2022 and Jokic 2024 existed in the same season, Jokic 2024 would easily finish ahead ofJokic 2022 in MVP voting. As much of a carry job as it was in 2022, winning notably fewer games hurts an MVP case. To overcome that, you basically need to have been unassailably better in some other way (likely statistically) than major star players that won notably more games. In 2022, Jokic was fortunate that the two players who were even close to him statistically (Embiid and Giannis) were not actually on teams that won significantly more games (both won 51 games, compared to 48 for Jokic). Meanwhile, Booker’s team won way more games, but Jokic just blew him out of the water statistically, so it was enough to overcome winning a lot less. If Embiid or Giannis had won like 55+ games in 2022, I think they’d have nabbed MVP. Meanwhile, if you put 2022 Jokic and 2024 Luka in the same season, I think Jokic would probably still win it for similar reasons as he won it over Embiid and Giannis. But 2024 Jokic vs. 2024 Luka is not nearly as close as that would’ve been IMO, because Jokic’s team was notably better over the course of the season.

More generally, I think people like to sometimes talk as if MVP selections in some years make new precedent regarding how the MVP is selected. They almost never do. It’s basically just always a balancing test of factors, which include: (1) team success; (2) individual statistics; (3) player availability; (4) perception of teammate quality, including accounting for teammate injuries; (5) voter fatigue with regards to multi-time winners, especially in a row; and (6) voter reticence to give players the award without having seen them “prove” themselves in the playoffs. This is roughly in order of importance. Factors #1 and #2 matter the most, factors #3 and #4 mostly just come into play either as quasi-tiebreakers or where there’s a really noticeable difference between candidates in one of those factors, and factors #5 and #6 naturally only occasionally come up and largely act only as quasi-tiebreakers when they do. As with application of any balancing test of multiple factors, the factors that weigh most heavily in favor of one winner won’t necessarily be the factors that weigh most heavily in favor of another. This doesn’t really reflect a difference in voters’ approach each year, but rather the unremarkable fact that the context of each season will affect how important any specific factor in the balancing test ends up being as it relates to distinguishing between the top candidates. For instance, if the biggest candidates one year all had similar team success, then team success obviously won’t be the decisive factor in the choice. That doesn’t mean that team success didn’t matter that year, but rather just that it wasn’t the determining factor in the balancing test that time around. The main real change I’ve seen in how MVP selections are made has just been that voters have generally become more sophisticated in the types of data they look at these days when it comes to factors #1 and #2.

[Jaivl]

No, Jokic.

[hagredionis]

When talking about team success people seem to forget that as soon as the Mavs were healthy they went on a 14-2 run. And the last time the Mavs played against the Nuggets, which was a month ago, Luka outscored Jokic 37 points vs 16 points.

[Texas Chuck]

When talking about team success people seem to forget that as soon as the Mavs were healthy they went on a 14-2 run. And the last time the Mavs played against the Nuggets, which was a month ago, Luka outscored Jokic 37 points vs 16 points.

I think most people itt are well aware how good Dallas has played since the deadline. And who cares about points scored in a single matchup. Nobody should be considering that in MVP discussion.

Of course nobody should be hyper-focused on quality of teammates in an MVP discussion, yet we always do....

[Colbinii]

When talking about team success people seem to forget that as soon as the Mavs were healthy they went on a 14-2 run. And the last time the Mavs played against the Nuggets, which was a month ago, Luka outscored Jokic 37 points vs 16 points.

Typically post trade-deadline the good teams win a ton and the bad teams lose a ton. That happens every year.

For example, Denver went 15-2 following the all-star break, which is better than 14-2

[NBA4Lyfe]

wait people really believe luka doncic this year had the best offensive season ever lol

what is 2024 lukas case over 2019 harden or 2020 harden using advanced stats

[Snakebites]

The fact that we’re even having this discussion is a sign of how normalized Jokic’s greatness has become.

He’s clearly been better. If you wanna debate SGA vs Luka that’s fine, but it’s for second place.

[tsherkin]

wait people really believe luka doncic this year had the best offensive season ever lol

what is 2024 lukas case over 2019 harden or 2020 harden using advanced stats

For some uber-basic points of comparison, using a pile of box score-informed stuff and other easily accessible things:

4th in PER, 5th in WS/48, 2nd in OBPM, 2nd in VORP, 1st in O-EPM

In terms of Jokic vs. Luka...

Doncic is at 5.14 vs Jokic's 4.75 in O-DPM. 8.1 vs. Jokic's 8.8 in Passer Rating (from Crafted), 18.4 vs Jokic's 15.4 in estimated box creation, 5.1 vs Jokic's 4.8 in ODARKO, 5.5 to Jokic's 3.6 in ODRIP, 8.3 to Jokic's first-ranked 9.0 in OBPM.

So there is at least space to have the conversation based on some of the numbers. Too lazy to go hunting for more, but you get the picture. It isn't sufficiently distant as to merit the idea of just dismissing Doncic outright.

[lessthanjake]

The fact that we’re even having this discussion is a sign of how normalized Jokic’s greatness has become.

He’s clearly been better. If you wanna debate SGA vs Luka that’s fine, but it’s for second place.

Yeah, I think SGA vs. Luka is actually a genuinely good debate. Personally, I’d have SGA as my #2 pick for MVP.

SGA’s team won significantly more than Luka’s (57 wins vs. 50 wins), and have an even more significant gap in SRS (7.36 vs. 2.30). And that’s without some gaping talent difference between the teams (I do think the Thunder were a better supporting cast, particularly since they were healthier, but it’s not some massive difference IMO). So the team success factor definitely goes in SGA’s favor IMO. Meanwhile, in terms of stats, I think a cursory look at box stats would tell you that Luka is ahead here. But it’s a bit of a different story if looking closer. In terms of box-composites, Luka is ahead by a little bit in BBREF BPM and Thinking Basketball BPM, while SGA is ahead by a little bit in win shares and PER. The stats Luka is ahead in are better metrics IMO, but there’s not a big difference here either way, and box composites don’t do a good job accounting for defense (which is an area SGA has an advantage). Meanwhile, in impact stats, I think it’s similarly a bit of a wash. SGA is a bit ahead in EPM and LEBRON, while Luka is a bit ahead in DPM, and they have the same AuPM/g. SGA’s raw on-off is a bit higher than Luka’s and his “on” value is a good deal ahead. There’s unfortunately not a lot of other impact stats out there this year. So, on balance, I’d say the impact stats go slightly in SGA’s favor, but not a big difference here either way. In terms of their availability, I don’t think there’s really a meaningful difference. SGA played 5 more games, but Luka had more minutes. In theory that’s a wash, though it’s probably more like slight advantage to SGA, since the minutes difference is in significant part just sitting fourth quarters in games his team dominated early.

So I guess the way I see it is this: SGA has a meaningful advantage in team success. In terms of individual stats, I don’t really see a gap either way, with box and impact stats both being very close (with, I’d say, a slight box advantage to Luka and a slight impact advantage to SGA). Meanwhile, I don’t think availability or any other factor moves the scales here. Which leaves me favoring SGA as basically a player with very similarly good stats and more team success.

[Texas Chuck]

The fact that we’re even having this discussion is a sign of how normalized Jokic’s greatness has become.
.

Yep its just voter fatigue. People get tired of just the truth that Bird was the best, Mike was the best, Shaq was the best, Timmy was the best, Lebron was the best(forever), etc...

They know deep down Joker is the best player, but thats' boring. Plus they want to be "first" on that next guy so they jump. It's the same reason we are seeing all the Wemby is the future GOAT stuff right now. People want the next. It's boring to say Lebron should have been the MVP like 10x in 12 years or something, but he really should have been.

Sucks when you have great seasons when these all-time greats are in their prime, but it is what it is. Doesn't make SGA or Luka any less great. It's not zero sum. It's just only one guy can be the most valuable and that's still Jokic. And probably will be for several more years at least.

[ShaqAttac]

The fact that we’re even having this discussion is a sign of how normalized Jokic’s greatness has become.
.

Yep its just voter fatigue. People get tired of just the truth that Bird was the best, Mike was the best, Shaq was the best, Timmy was the best, Lebron was the best(forever), etc...

They know deep down Joker is the best player, but thats' boring. Plus they want to be "first" on that next guy so they jump. It's the same reason we are seeing all the Wemby is the future GOAT stuff right now. People want the next. It's boring to say Lebron should have been the MVP like 10x in 12 years or something, but he really should have been.

Sucks when you have great seasons when these all-time greats are in their prime, but it is what it is. Doesn't make SGA or Luka any less great. It's not zero sum. It's just only one guy can be the most valuable and that's still Jokic. And probably will be for several more years at least.

p sure ppl are saying luka should be mvp coz they think he played better. same with ppl who think bird or mj or shaq or timmy or whoever wasn't the best. Bron winning 10 mvps would also be pretty ridiculous. I dont get ppl who mindread instead of making args.

seems like u just want to overrate jokic and are mad not everyone is going to do it with you

[ShaqAttac]

When talking about team success people seem to forget that as soon as the Mavs were healthy they went on a 14-2 run. And the last time the Mavs played against the Nuggets, which was a month ago, Luka outscored Jokic 37 points vs 16 points.

Typically post trade-deadline the good teams win a ton and the bad teams lose a ton. That happens every year.

For example, Denver went 15-2 following the all-star break, which is better than 14-2

so luka made the same record with less help?

seems like luka impact is higher.

[Colbinii]

When talking about team success people seem to forget that as soon as the Mavs were healthy they went on a 14-2 run. And the last time the Mavs played against the Nuggets, which was a month ago, Luka outscored Jokic 37 points vs 16 points.

Typically post trade-deadline the good teams win a ton and the bad teams lose a ton. That happens every year.

For example, Denver went 15-2 following the all-star break, which is better than 14-2

so luka made the same record with less help?

seems like luka impact is higher.

Did Luka have less help?

Murray missed 3 of the wins and played 14 Minutes in another game.

[hagredionis]

Luka is ahead of Jokic on EPM, EW and DRIP. Considering that he also leads the league in PPG, is second in APG and that the Mavs had a much worse luck with the injuries he probably should be the MVP.

[Homer38]

Luka is second for me behind Jokic

[lessthanjake]

Luka is ahead of Jokic on EPM, EW and DRIP. Considering that he also leads the league in PPG, is second in APG and that the Mavs had a much worse luck with the injuries he probably should be the MVP.

Jokic is ahead in LEBRON, AuPM/g, DPM, and raw on-off. He’s ahead in BBREF BPM, Thinking Basketball BPM, win shares, and PER. On balance, impact data goes in Jokic’s favor (though, to Luka’s credit, he has made that discussion interesting). And Jokic is ahead in box metrics. Jokic’s team also did substantially better (both in wins and SRS), with Murray actually missing more games than Kyrie. Luka was great, but I think it’s pretty clear cut (as do most people, I think, since it seems Jokic is going to easily win).

[hagredionis]

Luka is ahead of Jokic on EPM, EW and DRIP. Considering that he also leads the league in PPG, is second in APG and that the Mavs had a much worse luck with the injuries he probably should be the MVP.

Jokic is ahead in LEBRON, AuPM/g, DPM, and raw on-off. He’s ahead in BBREF BPM, Thinking Basketball BPM, win shares, and PER. On balance, impact data goes in Jokic’s favor (though, to Luka’s credit, he has made that discussion interesting). And Jokic is ahead in box metrics. Jokic’s team also did substantially better (both in wins and SRS), with Murray actually missing more games than Kyrie. Luka was great, but I think it’s pretty clear cut (as do most people, I think, since it seems Jokic is going to easily win).

What are AuPM/g and DPM? Murray did not miss more games than Kyrie, he played 59 games and Kyrie played 58 games. But the Mavs also had Lively missed 27 games, J.Green 25 Kleber 39 and Exum 27 games. Dallas had by far the worse luck with the injuries this season.