Should Luka win MVP?

[The-Power]

ome people actually prefer to have voter fatigue (e.g. to save the 3+ MVP winners for the truly all-time players), which might favor Luka since he hasn't won yet.

Still, I tend to agree with you that the stats pretty clearly favor Jokic (or at least don't favor Luka), whether you're looking at pure impact, or box hybrid, or WOWY. s!

doesnt WOWY favor Luka?

What sample would you be looking at?

Jokic has no real without sample this season for single season (only missed 3 games). In more mid-term it looks pretty even. Career slightly favors Jokic.

On that topic, here's two posts from Feb 1., 2024 (so not taking into account the last couple months of this season):

Spoiler:

Mavs without Luka in last 3 years 39%. Denver without Jokic 35%. The difference between non impactful player and Jokic doesn't look that big, if we know that Jokic was far the best player in the league in that period.

Kind of pointless without also considering how well the team did when the respective player played. So I'll help out with that.

JOKIC

21-22 – 46W, 26L – 64%
22-23 – 48W, 21L – 70%
23-24 – 32W, 15L – 68%
TOTAL – 126W, 62L – 67%

DONCIC

21-22 – 44W, 21L – 68%
22-23 – 33W, 33L – 50%
23-24 – 23W, 17L – 58%
TOTAL – 100W, 71L – 58%

So there's an obvious gap when it comes to winning percentage when the two players actually play, and that has to be factored in when comparing how the teams fared without the star player. Jokic' team is considerably better when he plays compared to Luka's team, and worse when he doesn't play compared to Luka's team.

Now, there are a lot of other things to take into account such as:

a) who else was missing games;
b) what was strength of schedule;
c) what was the average margin of victory.

That's just for starters. Obviously that holds true for raw +/- numbers as well, just to be clear. But it's important to not erroneously break down any kind of complexity simply because it suits one's argument or belief. That's not going to result in an actually productive conversation.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=111110830#p111110830

I'd say Jokic looks comfortably better here than Luka even though Luka does admittedly look clearly better in terms of WOWY than raw on/off numbers. Obviously all of these numbers require additional context to get a fuller picture.

[eminence]

doesnt WOWY favor Luka?

What sample would you be looking at?

Jokic has no real without sample this season for single season (only missed 3 games). In more mid-term it looks pretty even. Career slightly favors Jokic.

well based on the kd post 24 vs 23 ig.

idk where u find wowy tho

I don't know of a site that does it directly, but NBA StatMuse works alright for individual queries.

Something like

"Denver Nuggets net rating in games with and without Nikola Jokic 2022-23"

[ShaqAttac]

What sample would you be looking at?

Jokic has no real without sample this season for single season (only missed 3 games). In more mid-term it looks pretty even. Career slightly favors Jokic.

well based on the kd post 24 vs 23 ig.

idk where u find wowy tho

I don't know of a site that does it directly, but NBA StatMuse works alright for individual queries.

Something like

"Denver Nuggets net rating in games with and without Nikola Jokic 2022-23"

statmuse says nuggs go from negative 4 to 5 which is 9

statmuse mavs go from negative 10 to 4 which is 14

[ShaqAttac]

doesnt WOWY favor Luka?

What sample would you be looking at?

Jokic has no real without sample this season for single season (only missed 3 games). In more mid-term it looks pretty even. Career slightly favors Jokic.

On that topic, here's two posts from Feb 1., 2024 (so not taking into account the last couple months of this season):

Spoiler:

Mavs without Luka in last 3 years 39%. Denver without Jokic 35%. The difference between non impactful player and Jokic doesn't look that big, if we know that Jokic was far the best player in the league in that period.

Kind of pointless without also considering how well the team did when the respective player played. So I'll help out with that.

JOKIC

21-22 – 46W, 26L – 64%
22-23 – 48W, 21L – 70%
23-24 – 32W, 15L – 68%
TOTAL – 126W, 62L – 67%

DONCIC

21-22 – 44W, 21L – 68%
22-23 – 33W, 33L – 50%
23-24 – 23W, 17L – 58%
TOTAL – 100W, 71L – 58%

So there's an obvious gap when it comes to winning percentage when the two players actually play, and that has to be factored in when comparing how the teams fared without the star player. Jokic' team is considerably better when he plays compared to Luka's team, and worse when he doesn't play compared to Luka's team.

Now, there are a lot of other things to take into account such as:

a) who else was missing games;
b) what was strength of schedule;
c) what was the average margin of victory.

That's just for starters. Obviously that holds true for raw +/- numbers as well, just to be clear. But it's important to not erroneously break down any kind of complexity simply because it suits one's argument or belief. That's not going to result in an actually productive conversation.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=111110830#p111110830

I'd say Jokic looks comfortably better here than Luka even though Luka does admittedly look clearly better in terms of WOWY than raw on/off numbers. Obviously all of these numbers require additional context to get a fuller picture.

how about if u include the last few months. Mavericks went crazy so

[The-Power]

What sample would you be looking at?

Jokic has no real without sample this season for single season (only missed 3 games). In more mid-term it looks pretty even. Career slightly favors Jokic.

On that topic, here's two posts from Feb 1., 2024 (so not taking into account the last couple months of this season):

Spoiler:

Kind of pointless without also considering how well the team did when the respective player played. So I'll help out with that.

JOKIC

21-22 – 46W, 26L – 64%
22-23 – 48W, 21L – 70%
23-24 – 32W, 15L – 68%
TOTAL – 126W, 62L – 67%

DONCIC

21-22 – 44W, 21L – 68%
22-23 – 33W, 33L – 50%
23-24 – 23W, 17L – 58%
TOTAL – 100W, 71L – 58%

So there's an obvious gap when it comes to winning percentage when the two players actually play, and that has to be factored in when comparing how the teams fared without the star player. Jokic' team is considerably better when he plays compared to Luka's team, and worse when he doesn't play compared to Luka's team.

Now, there are a lot of other things to take into account such as:

a) who else was missing games;
b) what was strength of schedule;
c) what was the average margin of victory.

That's just for starters. Obviously that holds true for raw +/- numbers as well, just to be clear. But it's important to not erroneously break down any kind of complexity simply because it suits one's argument or belief. That's not going to result in an actually productive conversation.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=111110830#p111110830

I'd say Jokic looks comfortably better here than Luka even though Luka does admittedly look clearly better in terms of WOWY than raw on/off numbers. Obviously all of these numbers require additional context to get a fuller picture.

how about if u include the last few months. Mavericks went crazy so

Feel free to do the math.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Ehh, Luka vs Shai is about as clear as Jokic vs Luka for me. Think Shai is overrated to the moon and is probably more like top 7 than top 3, but hey, it works for me

Nothing wrong with being objective, but you have to be the only OKC fan who I've seen say outright that Shai isn't on Luka's level
What about Shai's season do you find the numbers overrating? Is it the defense? I know his passing isn't stellar but in the context of just what we saw in the RS, it's the something that on average was not readily taken advantage of by opposing teams.

Defense is not a concern at all, much better than expected from a lead guard.

I don't think his driving game is versatile enough in terms of consistently creating high quality looks on a playoff setting, he's neither explosive enough nor a slick enough dribbler, and I see him settling for middies, which are probably more like 45% than 50% when contested. He's around Tatum level for me.

This is really interesting to me

I don't know if you watch the Duncan and Hollinger Podcast, but I think it was those 2 and Danny Leroux, and I believe 2 or all 3 of them voted Shai as the best ball-handler in the NBA. I kind of think of Shai as a bigger Jalen Brunson right now but he isn't quite the same 3pt shooter. Though at similar ages, I'm not sure Brunson was necessarily better in this regard.

I do think increased physicality can maybe bother Shai drives just a bit more because he is not quite as slippery when there is more force pressed against him and he can't just quite teleport around you.

[tsherkin]

I don't think his driving game is versatile enough in terms of consistently creating high quality looks on a playoff setting, he's neither explosive enough nor a slick enough dribbler, and I see him settling for middies, which are probably more like 45% than 50% when contested. He's around Tatum level for me.

Definitely above Tatum level. His past two regular seasons (this year's RS included) have both been notably superior to anything Tatum has ever managed. His playoffs, however, have been frustrating for sure. As far as settling for middies in the playoffs, he takes about 5% more of his total shooting volume from 3-16 feet during the playoffs, but gets into the RA at about the same rate (25.0% vs 25.2%). And he's shooting 47.4% on shots from 10-16 feet during the postseason since joining the Thunder. Caveat, of course, being usage rate, since that first postseason with OKC was in 2020 and he wasn't this level scorer then... and this postseason is 1 game long so far, heh.

His draw rate pits out in the playoffs, which is a little eyebrow-raising, but again, we need a meatier sample than one game to evaluate what THIS Shai looks like as a postseason performer. He put up a rough 28 points on very heavy usage over 39 minutes in a slog-fest of a game where both teams were hovering around 100 ORTG.

We'll see what game 2 brings.

[trex_8063]

I could see siding with Luka over SGA, maybe. Over Jokic is a hard sell for me, though.

Looking at crude box-based arguments......

Luka scored more (33.9 ppg to 26.4 ppg)
And edged him in apg (9.8 to 9.0 for Jokic)

otoh, Jokic beat him in boards (12.4 rpg to 9.2 rpg)
And turnovers (3.0 topg to Luka's 4.0 topg)
and shooting efficiency (65.0% TS to Luka's 61.7%)

In terms of the "all-in-ones", it all translated to:
Jokic: 31.0 PER, .299 WS/48, +13.2 BPM (in 34.6 mpg)
Luka: 28.1 PER, .220 WS/48, +9.9 BPM (in 37.5 mpg)

I would certainly deem Jokic the more impactful defensive player, too, even if he isn't exactly elite in that department.


In raw on/off it's a comfortable margin for Jokic:
+20.0 to +9.5 for Luka.

......despite that the missed time of Luka's cast should [in theory] render them less capable of existing on the court without him (thus inflating his raw on/off). Again: in theory.


And my own crude visual assessment "gut feel" also tells me Jokic is the better player. I don't feel like there's a team/season narrative the overtly favours Doncic, either (maybe slightly). Jokic's 2nd-best player missed the same amount of time as Kyrie did for Dallas. It's true Dallas saw more players miss time further down the roster........though they also finished 7 games back (and -2.93 SRS worse [putting them 8 games back in Expected W/L]). So I just don't see the team narrative as a clear nudge in Luka's favour.


edit: as an additional "tie-breaker" consideration--->Luka missed 9 more games than Jokic did.

[IlikeSHAIguys]

well based on the kd post 24 vs 23 ig.

idk where u find wowy tho

I don't know of a site that does it directly, but NBA StatMuse works alright for individual queries.

Something like

"Denver Nuggets net rating in games with and without Nikola Jokic 2022-23"

statmuse says nuggs go from negative 4 to 5 which is 9

statmuse mavs go from negative 10 to 4 which is 14

Does anyone know how SGA looks by this number?

[Texas Chuck]

I don't know if you watch the Duncan and Hollinger Podcast, but I think it was those 2 and Danny Leroux, and I believe 2 or all 3 of them voted Shai as the best ball-handler in the NBA. .

Nate Duncan knows numbers. Other two are slightly better, but are mostly numbers guys too. I wouldn't put that much stock into their "scouting". I mean is he really better than Kyrie Irving? No, of course not.

This is not to knock SGA, the player who is absurdly good and in full disclosure I would have him ahead of Luka in the MVP race, but he's not the best ballhandler in the Association. Probably not in the top 10 if we really broke it down. Smaller guys are just always going to have an advantage here.

[eminence]

I don't know of a site that does it directly, but NBA StatMuse works alright for individual queries.

Something like

"Denver Nuggets net rating in games with and without Nikola Jokic 2022-23"

statmuse says nuggs go from negative 4 to 5 which is 9

statmuse mavs go from negative 10 to 4 which is 14

Does anyone know how SGA looks by this number?

I don't have the numbers on hand, but similar to Luka this year, quite rough last year.

[OhayoKD]

Oh if its whose game I like watching the most, Maxi Kleber is the MVP.

But that's reductive and stupid and I forgot why I don't engage with you often. You never are willing to engage with the points I make in the posts you quote but rather invent windmills to tilt at.

Like this?

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.

Your first "point" this thread was you tilting at an imaginary windmill. You take people's points far less seriously than your own telepathy.

If you want to try and justify "lebron should have won 10 mvp's" with actual reasoning, go ahead.

statmuse says nuggs go from negative 4 to 5 which is 9

statmuse mavs go from negative 10 to 4 which is 14

Does anyone know how SGA looks by this number?

I don't have the numbers on hand, but similar to Luka this year, quite rough last year.

Over a 7 game sample...

With Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of +8.6, 53-win pace by record
Without Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of -4.7, 23-win pace by record

This is the best split we've seen for Shai over his career.

For comparison, over a 12 game sample

with Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of +4.3, 54-win pace by record
without Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of -10, 27-win pace by record

Also the best split we've seen for Luka over his career.

Moving to Jokic, 3 game sample

With Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 5.6, 58-win pace by record
Without Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 2.5, 55-win pace by record

Worst sample of his career(perhaps because it is the smallest) so if we instead use the best sample (8 games)

Without Jokic, Nuggets post a -7.4 net rating, 52-win pace by record
With Jokic, Nuggets post a +3.4 net rating, 27-win pace by record

[lessthanjake]

Over a 7 game sample...

With Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of +8.6, 53-win pace by record
Without Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of -4.7, 23-win pace by record

This is the best split we've seen for Shai over his career.

For comparison, over a 12 game sample

with Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of +4.3, 54-win pace by record
without Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of -10, 27-win pace by record

Also the best split we've seen for Luka over his career.

Moving to Jokic, 3 game sample

With Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 5.6, 58-win pace by record
Without Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 2.5, 55-win pace by record

Worst sample of his career(perhaps because it is the smallest) so if we instead use the best sample (8 games)

Without Jokic, Nuggets post a -7.4 net rating, 52-win pace by record
With Jokic, Nuggets post a +3.4 net rating, 27-win pace by record

Again, as I keep pointing out to you, the numbers you keep slinging out about Luka’s WOWY this year are *massively* affected by enormous blowouts that the Mavs had without Luka in games at the end of the season that they did not care about because their first-round matchup was already set. It’s just garbage data. If you take out those games—which are clearly meaningless—and also adjust for strength of schedule, I’ve already pointed out to you that the WOWY SRS impact of Luka this year is lower than Jokic’s WOWY SRS impact over the last four seasons.

[OhayoKD]

Over a 7 game sample...

With Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of +8.6, 53-win pace by record
Without Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of -4.7, 23-win pace by record

This is the best split we've seen for Shai over his career.

For comparison, over a 12 game sample

with Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of +4.3, 54-win pace by record
without Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of -10, 27-win pace by record

Also the best split we've seen for Luka over his career.

Moving to Jokic, 3 game sample

With Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 5.6, 58-win pace by record
Without Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 2.5, 55-win pace by record

Worst sample of his career(perhaps because it is the smallest) so if we instead use the best sample (8 games)

Without Jokic, Nuggets post a -7.4 net rating, 52-win pace by record
With Jokic, Nuggets post a +3.4 net rating, 27-win pace by record

I’ve already pointed out to you that the WOWY SRS impact of Luka this year is lower than Jokic’s WOWY SRS impact over the last four seasons.

The "4-year WOWY" which includes a much longer stretch of "garbage" games from last year when the Nuggets locked up the 1 seed?  

[lessthanjake]

Over a 7 game sample...

With Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of +8.6, 53-win pace by record
Without Shai, Thunder post a net-rating of -4.7, 23-win pace by record

This is the best split we've seen for Shai over his career.

For comparison, over a 12 game sample

with Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of +4.3, 54-win pace by record
without Luka, Mavs post a net-rating of -10, 27-win pace by record

Also the best split we've seen for Luka over his career.

Moving to Jokic, 3 game sample

With Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 5.6, 58-win pace by record
Without Jokic, Nuggets post a net-rating of 2.5, 55-win pace by record

Worst sample of his career(perhaps because it is the smallest) so if we instead use the best sample (8 games)

Without Jokic, Nuggets post a -7.4 net rating, 52-win pace by record
With Jokic, Nuggets post a +3.4 net rating, 27-win pace by record

I’ve already pointed out to you that the WOWY SRS impact of Luka this year is lower than Jokic’s WOWY SRS impact over the last four seasons.

The "4-year WOWY" which includes a much longer stretch of "garbage" games from last year when the Nuggets locked up the 1 seed?  

Those games actually increased the Nuggets’ SRS in the games Jokic missed, so if we took them out, it would only increase Jokic’s WOWY SRS impact in the last four years. So yeah…that’s really not a counterpoint at all.