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

[5IVE5TAR5]

Jokic is clearly winning it by a wide margin. But it's safe to say that Luka has officially solidified himself in 2nd place race. Nobody is doing what he is.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Im a huge Luka stan but SGA is more efficient on offense and a better defender for the 1 seed in the West. He’s comfortably second, and closer to Jokic than the next is to him.

MVP cares about record much more than folks seem to think.

[cupcakesnake]

Shai vs. Luka:

Wins: Shai (big edge)
Counting stats: Luka
Advanced stats: Shai (it's close and there are some numbers that favor Luka)
Playmaking: Luka (considerable edge. Shai is good but Luka is ridiculous.)
Defense: Shai (huge edge)
Rebounding: Luka
Volume scoring: tie
Efficiency: Shai

Clearly both having MVP-level seasons and it's pretty difficult to say that one is definitely "better" than the other. I've been a Shai guy all season, and think the huge edge in wins (currently 9 games up on the Mavs and #1 in the conference) makes this obvious in my mind. There would be an argument if Shai was playing with another established star. I think J-Dub and Chet not being established will make a difference in voters minds in terms of who is getting credit for those wins. On paper, this season, the Thunder are not more talented than the Mavs. I'm confident that looking back 5 years from now, we'll be like: oh Shai was playing with 2x all-NBA level players, they just happened to be a rookie and a second-year player.

[Bob8]

Im a huge Luka stan but SGA is more efficient on offense and a better defender for the 1 seed in the West. He’s comfortably second, and closer to Jokic than the next is to him.

MVP cares about record much more than folks seem to think.

I agree that Luka has 0 chances because of the record, but he is scoring considerably more with better eFg%. Sga has better TS% because of FT.

Mavs in last 9 games are 3rd in offense and 30th in D. Kidd being the biggest problem.

[Bob8]

Shai vs. Luka:

Wins: Shai (big edge)
Counting stats: Luka
Advanced stats: Shai (it's close and there are some numbers that favor Luka)
Playmaking: Luka (considerable edge. Shai is good but Luka is ridiculous.)
Defense: Shai (huge edge)
Rebounding: Luka
Volume scoring: tie
Efficiency: Shai

Clearly both having MVP-level seasons and it's pretty difficult to say that one is definitely "better" than the other. I've been a Shai guy all season, and think the huge edge in wins (currently 9 games up on the Mavs and #1 in the conference) makes this obvious in my mind. There would be an argument if Shai was playing with another established star. I think J-Dub and Chet not being established will make a difference in voters minds in terms of who is getting credit for those wins. On paper, this season, the Thunder are not more talented than the Mavs. I'm confident that looking back 5 years from now, we'll be like: oh Shai was playing with 2x all-NBA level players, they just happened to be a rookie and a second-year player.

I agree mostly, but how is volume scoring tied? 3.5 points is very big difference between 1st and 2nd place. And Luka having better eFg%, which is ridiculous considering how much more difficult shots he's taking.

[HotRocks34]

Vegas movement over the last week.



to




RECORD > ALL STAR GAME
(time of last straw poll)

DEN.....8-1
OKC.....7-2

[Dirk]

Shai vs. Luka:

Wins: Shai (big edge)
Counting stats: Luka
Advanced stats: Shai (it's close and there are some numbers that favor Luka)
Playmaking: Luka (considerable edge. Shai is good but Luka is ridiculous.)
Defense: Shai (huge edge)
Rebounding: Luka
Volume scoring: tie
Efficiency: Shai

Clearly both having MVP-level seasons and it's pretty difficult to say that one is definitely "better" than the other. I've been a Shai guy all season, and think the huge edge in wins (currently 9 games up on the Mavs and #1 in the conference) makes this obvious in my mind. There would be an argument if Shai was playing with another established star. I think J-Dub and Chet not being established will make a difference in voters minds in terms of who is getting credit for those wins. On paper, this season, the Thunder are not more talented than the Mavs. I'm confident that looking back 5 years from now, we'll be like: oh Shai was playing with 2x all-NBA level players, they just happened to be a rookie and a second-year player.

I am surprised at the 9 game difference. Feels closer than I'd expect.

Mavs have lost 5 games with Luka not playing (Thunder 1 without SGA). And on top of that various miserable blown games against inferior teams. They also have had many injury issues throughout the year.

I guess the Thunder may have a few bad losses as well. But yeah, somehow reading "9 games up" just made me realise how the Mavs could easily be near that #1 seed with better health*.

*I read somewhere someone saying some teams have been lucky with (the lack of) injuries. Thunder being one of them and I think the other was the Wolves. The poster was claiming their records were inflated because they had better health than the other teams. His words. Not mine. I am half joking, but the Thunder record doesn't look that more impressive given the Mavs injuries and their good health.

[Bob8]

Shai vs. Luka:

Wins: Shai (big edge)
Counting stats: Luka
Advanced stats: Shai (it's close and there are some numbers that favor Luka)
Playmaking: Luka (considerable edge. Shai is good but Luka is ridiculous.)
Defense: Shai (huge edge)
Rebounding: Luka
Volume scoring: tie
Efficiency: Shai

Clearly both having MVP-level seasons and it's pretty difficult to say that one is definitely "better" than the other. I've been a Shai guy all season, and think the huge edge in wins (currently 9 games up on the Mavs and #1 in the conference) makes this obvious in my mind. There would be an argument if Shai was playing with another established star. I think J-Dub and Chet not being established will make a difference in voters minds in terms of who is getting credit for those wins. On paper, this season, the Thunder are not more talented than the Mavs. I'm confident that looking back 5 years from now, we'll be like: oh Shai was playing with 2x all-NBA level players, they just happened to be a rookie and a second-year player.

I am surprised at the 9 game difference. Feels closer than I'd expect.

Mavs have lost 5 games with Luka not playing (Thunder 1 without SGA). And on top of that various miserable blown games against inferior teams. They also have had many injury issues throughout the year.

I guess the Thunder may have a few bad losses as well. But yeah, somehow reading "9 games up" just made me realise how the Mavs could easily be near that #1 seed with better health*.

*I read somewhere someone saying some teams have been lucky with (the lack of) injuries. Thunder being one of them and I think the other was the Wolves. The poster was claiming their records were inflated because they had better health than the other teams. His words. Not mine. I am half joking, but the Thunder record doesn't look that more impressive given the Mavs injuries and their good health.

Mavs 32 staring lineups, Thunder 6 starting lineups.

The most used Mavs' lineup has 99 minutes together. Thunder's most used has 687 minutes.

It's difficult to understand Mavs' problems, if you don't watch them closely. I wonder what would have happened to Thunder, if their 3 best players besides SGA had missed 20+ games each?

[MoneyTalks41890]

Shai vs. Luka:

Wins: Shai (big edge)
Counting stats: Luka
Advanced stats: Shai (it's close and there are some numbers that favor Luka)
Playmaking: Luka (considerable edge. Shai is good but Luka is ridiculous.)
Defense: Shai (huge edge)
Rebounding: Luka
Volume scoring: tie
Efficiency: Shai

Clearly both having MVP-level seasons and it's pretty difficult to say that one is definitely "better" than the other. I've been a Shai guy all season, and think the huge edge in wins (currently 9 games up on the Mavs and #1 in the conference) makes this obvious in my mind. There would be an argument if Shai was playing with another established star. I think J-Dub and Chet not being established will make a difference in voters minds in terms of who is getting credit for those wins. On paper, this season, the Thunder are not more talented than the Mavs. I'm confident that looking back 5 years from now, we'll be like: oh Shai was playing with 2x all-NBA level players, they just happened to be a rookie and a second-year player.

This is a good objective analysis.

Most folks definitely have not caught up to how good Chet, Dub, and the role players like Wallace and Joe have been. And I think this is will benefit SGA in voting. But we will look back at how this second youngest in the league team was just humming across the board.

And when it comes to votes, OKC’s record is just a lot better and is guaranteed to finish a lot better. Most folks aren’t splitting hairs about injuries or coaching there, they want the MVP to carry the team to a top record.

[HotRocks34]

If you put Holmgren on Dallas, everything would become clear very fast.

Lively and Gafford are good, but they can't shoot threes. And Gafford just got to Dallas.

It's not an accident that the only main OKC roster difference between last year and this year is Holmgren and OKC is on pace to win 17 more games than a season ago.

That's how it goes (especially with Dallas's front office). Bird got to play with Parish and McHale, Magic got to play with Kareem but Hakeem was stuck with Sampson until Drexler came along later.

[Exp0sed]

its between SGA and and the Joker...

But i think SGA Should win... Not only is he having an incredible season but he is without a doubt the MVP to his team.... Denver would get by without jokic...But SGA is carrying this young squad and they would collapse without him...

SGA is having just such an insane season and has this super young squad sitting at the top of the west...

Incredible!

Watch on YouTube

;t

I view it as the nuggets are the veteran championship team with experience that would get by if Jokic was out for the season...

This thunder team is so young they would be lost without SGA if he was out for the season....

fair enough, that's def a valid take. personally I see something very special in this group, no denying they're very young (outside of SGA) but honestly when I hear them talk or see their body language on the court or the bench, I think they are a very mature bunch for their age. I think OKC might have drafted this way on purpose, as a strategy - picking these high I.Q, high charachter guys with solid fundamentales and prioritizing those over say..raw athlesticism or flash

maybe i'm just imagining it but I don't think it's a coincidence I think it's a policy

these guys are very young but they play or act, young (I say that as a good thing) but it's still entirely possible than without SGA or another vet on the court, they'd "collapse" due to their collective age, certainly possible.

[Exp0sed]

Shai vs. Luka:

This is a good objective analysis.

Most folks definitely have not caught up to how good Chet, Dub, and the role players like Wallace and Joe have been. And I think this is will benefit SGA in voting. But we will look back at how this second youngest in the league team was just humming across the board.

And when it comes to votes, OKC’s record is just a lot better and is guaranteed to finish a lot better. Most folks aren’t splitting hairs about injuries or coaching there, they want the MVP to carry the team to a top record.

good post, I'm very high on this OKC team and so many of their pieces. they have done a world class job in both drafting and developing. since OKC is a reay small market, even with SGA and the hype most folks don't watch them and don't really follow the team. I doubt many casual fans and even media talking heads would even be able to name their top 7-8 guys

thus indeed, most folks have not caught up with how good their supporting cast has been. that's not taking away from Shai's greatness, he's the real deal but the team record also has alot to do with this roster, young and all but still excellent players

I thought they should have moved on from Giddey but that's just a pet peeve

i 100% agree this is the main driver of SGA's case, the fact that he gets most of the credit for the Thunder seemingly conquering the leauge by storm out of nowhere, when only OKC fans and hardcorde NBA fans know it isn't really out of nowhere at all and SGA gets most of the credit for it

it's nice to hear an OKC fan admit that, it's healthy

[Exp0sed]

i've been going back and forth in regards to Luka this season
i'm not as high as most of the "best team" argument or seeding, it's def been true historically but since that WB MVP, we've seen another in Jokic (which unlike WB who didn't deserve it imo, Jokic did) when he carried the Nuggets to a decent seed with a G-league squad.

I think Luka is in the conversation despite the low seed
we can do a thought experiment, say a player averages 44-12-12 on decent efficiency for a team that finishes 7th - is that not enough individual seperation for MVP? I think 100% of voters would agree that would be enough

so from that experiment we can glean that a lower seed doesn't nessescary exclude said player from MVP contention, so the question becomes how much seperation is needed and what determines that seperation other than raw stats

i'm not sure if Luka has done enough, i've been going back on and forth in my mind all season long regarding this
as it stands for me atm, I think the games played tilt it not in his favor

I think he has done just about enough per game to warrant this MVP but he did only play 55 games so far, while Jokic and SGA have both played 62 and I consider that to be meaningful, 12% less games is significant imo

when I couple that with the lower seed I tend to still give the nod to Jokic or SGA but honestly Luka is right there too, not far behind.
we can argue that SGA and Jokic needed to do less, as their teams are simply better and better coached and that had they been forced to do more - they could have done more, indivdually and that would be correct, but in MVP considerations you ony count what's actually been done. that's a different discussion, "who is the MVP?" is a different question than whose the best player in the world.

[Wolfgang630]

i've been going back and forth in regards to Luka this season
i'm not as high as most of the "best team" argument or seeding, it's def been true historically but since that WB MVP, we've seen another in Jokic (which unlike WB who didn't deserve it imo, Jokic did) when he carried the Nuggets to a decent seed with a G-league squad.

I think Luka is in the conversation despite the low seed
we can do a thought experiment, say a player averages 44-12-12 on decent efficiency for a team that finishes 7th - is that not enough individual seperation for MVP? I think 100% of voters would agree that would be enough

so from that experiment we can glean that a lower seed doesn't nessescary exclude said player from MVP contention, so the question becomes how much seperation is needed and what determines that seperation other than raw stats

i'm not sure if Luka has done enough, i've been going back on and forth in my mind all season long regarding this
as it stands for me atm, I think the games played tilt it not in his favor

I think he has done just about enough per game to warrant this MVP but he did only play 55 games so far, while Jokic and SGA have both played 62 and I consider that to be meaningful, 12% less games is significant imo

when I couple that with the lower seed I tend to still give the nod to Jokic or SGA but honestly Luka is right there too, not far behind.
we can argue that SGA and Jokic needed to do less, as their teams are simply better and better coached and that had they been forced to do more - they could have done more, indivdually and that would be correct, but in MVP considerations you ony count what's actually been done. that's a different discussion, "who is the MVP?" is a different question than whose the best player in the world.

There’s no exact science to this on what numbers you need to have as a lower seed to win mvp. All voters have their opinions. Some may want 40 ppg as a 7th or 8th seed to win mvp. There’s no strict criteria on this.

[Exp0sed]

There’s no exact science to this on what numbers you need to have as a lower seed to win mvp. All voters have their opinions. Some may want 40 ppg as a 7th or 8th seed to win mvp. There’s no strict criteria on this.

well, obviously

the point I was trying to make is that it's not enough just to whine: "wah wah he's an 8th seed, haha, he can never win with an 8th seed". that's propestrous - ofc he "can" win it. only question is has he done enough in someone's opinion to have done it this year
whether the answer is yes or no, I just trying to argue that that's the right question to ask

it's perfectly valid if alot of ppl don't feel like he has, that's fine. like I said, i'm not even sure how I feel about it myself but it's def a conversation and I find it weird to deny that isn't one.

[Mavrelous]

I think Steph's 20/21 season is a good reference for Luka this season, it was somewhat comparable to what Luka is doing right now, and his team also finished 8th in the standings, he finished 3rd in MVP voting with similar voting% to Giannis at 4th.

[Exp0sed]

I think Steph's 20/21 season is a good reference for Luka this season, it was somewhat comparable to what Luka is doing right now, and his team also finished 8th in the standings, he finished 3rd in MVP voting with similar voting% to Giannis at 4th.

it's remotely comparable but there's a couple of key differences
firstly, 32\6\6 (with 3.5 To's) on 61 TS% is awesome but it's not quite 35\9\10 on 62.5 TS%

the first is awesome the second is basically unheard of in the modern age

as for wins, it's worth noting that Dallas actually has a better win % (and that's with most of the season without PJ/Gafford etc. and with Kyrie missing significant time) and more importantely: Dallas has a top 5-6 offense and only about the 20-21th best defense, now it's safe to say that Luka is the main driver of that offense and that most of Dallas wins come from the offensive side of the ball, so it makes sense for him to get a lot of credit for that

the Dubs however, had only about the 20th best offense (!) while having the 5th best defense. now, surely Curry wasn't responsible for their defense, right? but it's their defense that mostly got them to a 39-33 record so...yeah

close but no cigar

[cupcakesnake]

Shai vs. Luka:

Wins: Shai (big edge)
Counting stats: Luka
Advanced stats: Shai (it's close and there are some numbers that favor Luka)
Playmaking: Luka (considerable edge. Shai is good but Luka is ridiculous.)
Defense: Shai (huge edge)
Rebounding: Luka
Volume scoring: tie
Efficiency: Shai

Clearly both having MVP-level seasons and it's pretty difficult to say that one is definitely "better" than the other. I've been a Shai guy all season, and think the huge edge in wins (currently 9 games up on the Mavs and #1 in the conference) makes this obvious in my mind. There would be an argument if Shai was playing with another established star. I think J-Dub and Chet not being established will make a difference in voters minds in terms of who is getting credit for those wins. On paper, this season, the Thunder are not more talented than the Mavs. I'm confident that looking back 5 years from now, we'll be like: oh Shai was playing with 2x all-NBA level players, they just happened to be a rookie and a second-year player.

I am surprised at the 9 game difference. Feels closer than I'd expect.

Mavs have lost 5 games with Luka not playing (Thunder 1 without SGA). And on top of that various miserable blown games against inferior teams. They also have had many injury issues throughout the year.

I guess the Thunder may have a few bad losses as well. But yeah, somehow reading "9 games up" just made me realise how the Mavs could easily be near that #1 seed with better health*.

*I read somewhere someone saying some teams have been lucky with (the lack of) injuries. Thunder being one of them and I think the other was the Wolves. The poster was claiming their records were inflated because they had better health than the other teams. His words. Not mine. I am half joking, but the Thunder record doesn't look that more impressive given the Mavs injuries and their good health.

9 games is a pretty big gap though (or 8.5 as it currently stands). There are years with super teams with much much larger gaps, but in any of the years where the West is deep, it's usually the difference between a 1 seed and a 6th or 7th. I guess to think about it more simply: a 55-win team vs. a 46-win team. But if you factor in strength of schedule and probability, OKC is playing at a 59-win pace and Dallas is still only expected to win 44-48. It's just probability though and either team can exceed or disapoint.

I typically expect younger teams to get injured less and older teams to get injured more. I think the injury miracles this year are the LA teams and Golden State. OKC's top 7 guys are all 25 and under. Only Kenrich Williams and the recently acquired Gordon Hayward (and Micic before he was traded) are older, and all of those guys are/were back end of the rotation.

I hope this isn't insensitive to the fanbase: the Mavs have a bit of a chaotic year, but they also built a pretty chaotic roster and I don't think they're disappointing relative to realistic expectations. Kyrie can typically be pencilled in to miss 20-30 games. Lively has been injured but wasn't expected to be this big of a contributor. Dante Exum was not supposed to be relied on. Grant Williams had dramatic ups and downs in Boston. This was a team put together out of spare parts and new young guys, in the aftermath of the Kyrie trade. Expecting a solid and consistent rotation was never realistic?

I dunno, I think the main reason the OKC have a better record than the Mavericks is because they're better. Yes the health and youth give them a boost, but the Thunder actually play defense and have a lot more variability on offense around their high-volume star. Do you think a healthy Mavs are putting up a top 5 defense like the Thunder?

I'm not just going to sit here and let anyone call the Wolves "lucky" lol. Things were going smoothly before the Towns injury, but that was a MAJOR anomaly in the history of this franchise. The Wolves have never had a year where we've been both healthy and good at the same time and the timing of the injury streak keeps that going.

[zero rings]

I don't think Luka has much of a case outside of basic PTS/REB/AST counting stats. Shai is more efficient on offense, way better on defense, and clears him in on/off stats. He's also leading the #1 team in the conference.

Then there's Jokic who is just better than him.

[Special_Puppy]

Luka is 4th in EPM, 3rd in LEBRON, and 3rd BPM. That's a decent MVP case