NBA MVP Discussion Thread 2023-24 (Part 3: Son of Daughter of MVP thread)

[NoStatsGuy]

with embiid about to miss the 65 games threshold put my boy jalen brunson right on top. i dont care what non of yall say. he is the MVP, lets crown him already!!

[dygaction]

Uh, that's not a loop.

Strong MVP candidates have strong +/- indicators.
Luka does not have strong +/- indicators.
Therefore Luka is not a strong MVP candidate.

You can disagree with the initial rule, but there's nothing circular about those statements.

RE: ignoring team situation. I guess I haven't been clear enough here:

Concerns about Doncic's teammates not playing are concerns that make sense from a raw +/- perspective, but regressed +/- stats like RAPM don't get thrown off by them. There's really no reason to think that these concerns are throwing Doncic's data over the last 6 seasons off to the point that they would explain what we're seeing.

I tend to use raw +/- data in my posts rather than fancier stuff because I think it's more clear to more people what the data means, but I wouldn't be using it if it told a drastically different story than the fancy stuff.

Re: "has Luka been a MVP level player? Some voters said yes so he must be." I mean, those are just people's opinions. If it makes it feel better they agree with you, cool, but I have no more qualms about saying they're off-base than I do of saying you are.

To be clear though: I'm not saying that you shouldn't be allowed to talk about Luka here in this thread. It's just that since y'all are bringing up Luka, I feel compelled to point out the reasons why I don't see him in the same breath as the people in serious contention.

I dont think he is the strong MVP candidate because of the team record as of now nor think he has a real chance this year, but to say he is not mvp level player is just hate... at the end of the day, +/- is one of the many, like ppg, TS%, bpm and should not be the island to hang on as the last line defense

Luka's been in the league 6 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league. He's played with vastly different teammates from year to year. And the common denominator is that every year the team's not much better with him on the floor than the bench. The best on/off he had was +4.9 last year.

By contrast, the worst on/off Giannis has had over the last 7 years was +6.7. Jokic's worst over the last 5 years was +6.2. Embiid's career worst is +5.0. LeBron has 2 seasons under +7.0 in the last 20.

This isn't some random fluke from a small sample. Practically the whole team has turned over in the course of the last 5 years and Luka still manages to put up worse on/off numbers than every other top superstar year in and year out. It's a huge sample at this point.

He's still a very good player that helps the team a lot, especially in the playoffs, but he has some serious deficiencies in his regular season game. He doesn't try very hard on defense and he holds the ball more than any other player in the league so it makes it hard for other guys to do stuff and get in a rhythm. He's much better at making stats than he is at helping his team win. He's just not quite in the same class as the true MVP candidates. He's closer to guys like Brunson and Mitchell than he is to SGA and Jokic. [url]No shame in that, it's still very good company, just not as good as his fanboys would like[/url].

Iconic and ironic the same poster that idolize KG and give him a pass double the amount 12 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league.

[Ruma85]

To win outright or to be around the top five?

He's a great story but I'm not sure how he elevates above Jokic, SGA and Giannis.

If they stay on this course he should have a chance to win it, for a guy who's 6ft, it's quite AMAZING, what he's doing.

The Knicks are certainly hot right now. They still have a worse record than OKC, Denver and Milwaukee though, and it's not like those teams are going to fall away.

What is Brunson's narrative other than being an underdog and likeable?

He's value to the team, if they have one of the top 4 records, in the league, should he not get considered?

[INKtastic]

There are 9 teams in the league who are .600 or better.

6 of the 9 teams have 2 all stars.

The exceptions are Thunder (33-15), Nuggets (33-16), Cavs (30-16).

In the poll Jokic is leading, SGA is second. Mitchell (eastern conference player of the month) isn't even one of the 16 players listed.

I'm not saying he's leading the MVP race, but he should be a heck of a lot higher than he is. Not only is he one of the few without an all star teammate, the cavs have had the most starter games missed with injuries.

Starter games missed by teams over .600 (Clippers and Knicks might not be completely accurate because of their trades, I used the teams current depth charts)
Cavs 56
Sixers 45
Knicks 35
Celtics 25
Nuggets 24
Timberwolves 15
Clippers 21
Bucks 11
Thunder 9

Mitchell is the primary reason they are right there with the top teams despite all of the starter games missed.

[dygaction]

with embiid about to miss the 65 games threshold put my boy jalen brunson right on top. i dont care what non of yall say. he is the MVP, lets crown him already!!

you know what, I dont have a problem him getting ahead of Luka for #4 if he keeps it another week or two. Hard to pass the other three yet with similar record but not as-stella individual stats. But he is in NYC and an american, so you know espn Steven A Smooth and Perk will prop him up 24/7 if things are close.

[dygaction]

There are 9 teams in the league who are .600 or better.

6 of the 9 teams have 2 all stars.

The exceptions are Thunder (33-15), Nuggets (33-16), Cavs (30-16).

In the poll Jokic is leading, SGA is second. Mitchell (eastern conference player of the month) isn't even one of the 16 players listed.

I'm not saying he's leading the MVP race, but he should be a heck of a lot higher than he is. Not only is he one of the few without an all star teammate, the cavs have had the most starter games missed with injuries.

Starter games missed by teams over .600 (Clippers and Knicks might not be completely accurate because of their trades, I used the teams current depth charts)
Cavs 56
Sixers 45
Knicks 35
Celtics 25
Nuggets 24
Timberwolves 15
Clippers 21
Bucks 11
Thunder 9

Mitchell is the primary reason they are right there with the top teams despite all of the starter games missed.

He has only played 3 more games this season than Embiid, so missed too many games to deserve a serious discussion yet. Also Mitchell missed 9 games and in the 37, Cavs were 24w-13l. In the 9 missed, they were 6w-3l. Similar to Ja's case a few years back.

[Woodsanity]

with embiid about to miss the 65 games threshold put my boy jalen brunson right on top. i dont care what non of yall say. he is the MVP, lets crown him already!!

you know what, I dont have a problem him getting ahead of Luka for #4 if he keeps it another week or two. Hard to pass the other three yet with similar record but not as-stella individual stats. But he is in NYC and an american, so you know espn Steven A Smooth and Perk will prop him up 24/7 if things are close.

I would be fine with him 7-10. Right now on the mvp ladder he isnt even in the top 10.

[Special_Puppy]

No longer a race. Congrats Jokic to his '4th' MVP.

Nah SGA and Giannis still have a shot.

[Special_Puppy]

What's the argument for Brunson being a more valuable player than Jokic?

[Wolfgang630]

Luka is an 8th seeded team. He really shouldn’t be part of any mvp conversation at the moment

[iggymcfrack]

I dont think he is the strong MVP candidate because of the team record as of now nor think he has a real chance this year, but to say he is not mvp level player is just hate... at the end of the day, +/- is one of the many, like ppg, TS%, bpm and should not be the island to hang on as the last line defense

Luka's been in the league 6 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league. He's played with vastly different teammates from year to year. And the common denominator is that every year the team's not much better with him on the floor than the bench. The best on/off he had was +4.9 last year.

By contrast, the worst on/off Giannis has had over the last 7 years was +6.7. Jokic's worst over the last 5 years was +6.2. Embiid's career worst is +5.0. LeBron has 2 seasons under +7.0 in the last 20.

This isn't some random fluke from a small sample. Practically the whole team has turned over in the course of the last 5 years and Luka still manages to put up worse on/off numbers than every other top superstar year in and year out. It's a huge sample at this point.

He's still a very good player that helps the team a lot, especially in the playoffs, but he has some serious deficiencies in his regular season game. He doesn't try very hard on defense and he holds the ball more than any other player in the league so it makes it hard for other guys to do stuff and get in a rhythm. He's much better at making stats than he is at helping his team win. He's just not quite in the same class as the true MVP candidates. He's closer to guys like Brunson and Mitchell than he is to SGA and Jokic. [url]No shame in that, it's still very good company, just not as good as his fanboys would like[/url].

Iconic and ironic the same poster that idolize KG and give him a pass double the amount 12 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league.

The Mavericks have a NetRtg of +0.4 with Luka on the floor this year. Over his 6 year career, their average NetRtg is +2.0.

When KG got drafted by the Wolves, the worst NetRtg they had in his first 7 seasons was +2.1. The average was +4.9.

The only reason the Wolves didn’t have more team success is that they were 9.3 points worse without KG than the Mavs were without Luka.

[INKtastic]

There are 9 teams in the league who are .600 or better.

6 of the 9 teams have 2 all stars.

The exceptions are Thunder (33-15), Nuggets (33-16), Cavs (30-16).

In the poll Jokic is leading, SGA is second. Mitchell (eastern conference player of the month) isn't even one of the 16 players listed.

I'm not saying he's leading the MVP race, but he should be a heck of a lot higher than he is. Not only is he one of the few without an all star teammate, the cavs have had the most starter games missed with injuries.

Starter games missed by teams over .600 (Clippers and Knicks might not be completely accurate because of their trades, I used the teams current depth charts)
Cavs 56
Sixers 45
Knicks 35
Celtics 25
Nuggets 24
Timberwolves 15
Clippers 21
Bucks 11
Thunder 9

Mitchell is the primary reason they are right there with the top teams despite all of the starter games missed.

He has only played 3 more games this season than Embiid, so missed too many games to deserve a serious discussion yet. Also Mitchell missed 9 games and in the 37, Cavs were 24w-13l. In the 9 missed, they were 6w-3l. Similar to Ja's case a few years back.

Are you really saying he shouldn't be in the top 16 players mentioned? Seriously? Embiid is near the top of the discussion (3rd in voting here), he'll be disqualified for games missed and the new rule. Cavs are ahead of the Sixers in the standings and just went through a stretch of over a month where their 2nd and 3rd best players were missing. They had the best record in the league during that time, primarily because of Mitchell.

Again, I didn't say he should be leading, I said he should be in the discussion. Cavs have a shot to make a run further up the standings. Especially if they can stay healthier the rest of the season than they've been thus far.

[NoStatsGuy]

with embiid about to miss the 65 games threshold put my boy jalen brunson right on top. i dont care what non of yall say. he is the MVP, lets crown him already!!

you know what, I dont have a problem him getting ahead of Luka for #4 if he keeps it another week or two. Hard to pass the other three yet with similar record but not as-stella individual stats. But he is in NYC and an american, so you know espn Steven A Smooth and Perk will prop him up 24/7 if things are close.

i know i know.. im only half serious, half joking. unless...

its just, you know.. we didnt have one to bring up in these threads like ever. i got a bit overzealous, i am sorry lol

[dygaction]

Luka's been in the league 6 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league. He's played with vastly different teammates from year to year. And the common denominator is that every year the team's not much better with him on the floor than the bench. The best on/off he had was +4.9 last year.

By contrast, the worst on/off Giannis has had over the last 7 years was +6.7. Jokic's worst over the last 5 years was +6.2. Embiid's career worst is +5.0. LeBron has 2 seasons under +7.0 in the last 20.

This isn't some random fluke from a small sample. Practically the whole team has turned over in the course of the last 5 years and Luka still manages to put up worse on/off numbers than every other top superstar year in and year out. It's a huge sample at this point.

He's still a very good player that helps the team a lot, especially in the playoffs, but he has some serious deficiencies in his regular season game. He doesn't try very hard on defense and he holds the ball more than any other player in the league so it makes it hard for other guys to do stuff and get in a rhythm. He's much better at making stats than he is at helping his team win. He's just not quite in the same class as the true MVP candidates. He's closer to guys like Brunson and Mitchell than he is to SGA and Jokic. [url]No shame in that, it's still very good company, just not as good as his fanboys would like[/url].

Iconic and ironic the same poster that idolize KG and give him a pass double the amount 12 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league.

The Mavericks have a NetRtg of +0.4 with Luka on the floor this year. Over his 6 year career, their average NetRtg is +2.0.

When KG got drafted by the Wolves, the worst NetRtg they had in his first 7 seasons was +2.1. The average was +4.9.

The only reason the Wolves didn’t have more team success is that they were 9.3 points worse without KG than the Mavs were without Luka.

It is a team sports. Like you use the same energy of defending KG to nickpick Luka. TWolves put all talent and salary on starters but nothing indicated it was a the best strategy. Mavs wasted the cap on expensive benches, two of them barely see the floor also as bad.
THJ - $18M; Holmes $12M; Kleber $11M;
Out of the 4 other starters, GWilliams offseason sign, Jones Jr. on league min, Lively II rookie, are all new, the most game Luka played with is Kyrie. It is almost a NEW team every year not like KG had lots of stability.

19-Rookie season
20-playoffs with Porzingis 57 and Powell 37 games played as starters.
21-playoffs with Porzingis 43 and Kleber 50 games played as starters, healthy Brunson and THJ off the bench.
22-9p/5r Powell as starter played 82 games, Porzingis in and out until traded. Four years in Luka won as many playoff series as KG in 12 years.
23-Luka injury combined with tanking to protect frp. Top 5 total minutes played are Luka, Bullock (check his stats in HOU this year), THJ (off bench), Dinwiddie (46/40/82 instead of 40/33/78 this season), Wood.

[dygaction]

There are 9 teams in the league who are .600 or better.

6 of the 9 teams have 2 all stars.

The exceptions are Thunder (33-15), Nuggets (33-16), Cavs (30-16).

In the poll Jokic is leading, SGA is second. Mitchell (eastern conference player of the month) isn't even one of the 16 players listed.

I'm not saying he's leading the MVP race, but he should be a heck of a lot higher than he is. Not only is he one of the few without an all star teammate, the cavs have had the most starter games missed with injuries.

Starter games missed by teams over .600 (Clippers and Knicks might not be completely accurate because of their trades, I used the teams current depth charts)
Cavs 56
Sixers 45
Knicks 35
Celtics 25
Nuggets 24
Timberwolves 15
Clippers 21
Bucks 11
Thunder 9

Mitchell is the primary reason they are right there with the top teams despite all of the starter games missed.

He has only played 3 more games this season than Embiid, so missed too many games to deserve a serious discussion yet. Also Mitchell missed 9 games and in the 37, Cavs were 24w-13l. In the 9 missed, they were 6w-3l. Similar to Ja's case a few years back.

Are you really saying he shouldn't be in the top 16 players mentioned? Seriously? Embiid is near the top of the discussion (3rd in voting here), he'll be disqualified for games missed and the new rule. Cavs are ahead of the Sixers in the standings and just went through a stretch of over a month where their 2nd and 3rd best players were missing. They had the best record in the league during that time, primarily because of Mitchell.

Again, I didn't say he should be leading, I said he should be in the discussion. Cavs have a shot to make a run further up the standings. Especially if they can stay healthier the rest of the season than they've been thus far.

oh, no, definitely should be a lot higher than 16. Somehow in my mind I was using Brunson as the ruler.

[dygaction]

with embiid about to miss the 65 games threshold put my boy jalen brunson right on top. i dont care what non of yall say. he is the MVP, lets crown him already!!

you know what, I dont have a problem him getting ahead of Luka for #4 if he keeps it another week or two. Hard to pass the other three yet with similar record but not as-stella individual stats. But he is in NYC and an american, so you know espn Steven A Smooth and Perk will prop him up 24/7 if things are close.

i know i know.. im only half serious, half joking. unless...

its just, you know.. we didnt have one to bring up in these threads like ever. i got a bit overzealous, i am sorry lol

SAS and TNT are here and now wait for Perk Actually deserved to see more exposure, even it were not in NYC

Watch on YouTube

Watch on YouTube

[Doctor MJ]

I dont think he is the strong MVP candidate because of the team record as of now nor think he has a real chance this year, but to say he is not mvp level player is just hate... at the end of the day, +/- is one of the many, like ppg, TS%, bpm and should not be the island to hang on as the last line defense

Luka's been in the league 6 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league. He's played with vastly different teammates from year to year. And the common denominator is that every year the team's not much better with him on the floor than the bench. The best on/off he had was +4.9 last year.

By contrast, the worst on/off Giannis has had over the last 7 years was +6.7. Jokic's worst over the last 5 years was +6.2. Embiid's career worst is +5.0. LeBron has 2 seasons under +7.0 in the last 20.

This isn't some random fluke from a small sample. Practically the whole team has turned over in the course of the last 5 years and Luka still manages to put up worse on/off numbers than every other top superstar year in and year out. It's a huge sample at this point.

He's still a very good player that helps the team a lot, especially in the playoffs, but he has some serious deficiencies in his regular season game. He doesn't try very hard on defense and he holds the ball more than any other player in the league so it makes it hard for other guys to do stuff and get in a rhythm. He's much better at making stats than he is at helping his team win. He's just not quite in the same class as the true MVP candidates. He's closer to guys like Brunson and Mitchell than he is to SGA and Jokic. [url]No shame in that, it's still very good company, just not as good as his fanboys would like[/url].

Iconic and ironic the same poster that idolize KG and give him a pass double the amount 12 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league.

But the point is that with Garnett demonstrated ample evidence of this sort of impact - and in fact the bad situation was used as a reason to downplay the impact based on the assumption that playing with worse players should make it easier to separate from them.

If you think folks are mindlessly holding it against Luka that there's been turnover and turmoil, you've got to understand that we have data to account for all of these things and we're bringing this up precisely because after we do this Luka still doesn't look anywhere near as good as his reputation.

I'm also going to quote myself from the PC board "New Engelmann" thread which has career rankings for every player in the +/- era over their entire career by RAPM. Not to take the explicit ranking that seriously but this is what I said in terms of Luka being ranked 95th:

-Doncic, honestly, this is going to sound damning with feint praise, but making the Top 100 on this list, and doing so having to rely on your own shoulders as the foundation for your team's context, is a pretty significant accomplishment by general standards. Doing so while still being under 25 in a sport where heady players can peak at 30+? All the more so.

So yeah, making that Top 100 is absolutely not nothing, but it's just not the same as what we see from certain other guys - most notably Jokic who takes the #1 spot on the list with LeBron at #2.

[dygaction]

Luka's been in the league 6 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league. He's played with vastly different teammates from year to year. And the common denominator is that every year the team's not much better with him on the floor than the bench. The best on/off he had was +4.9 last year.

By contrast, the worst on/off Giannis has had over the last 7 years was +6.7. Jokic's worst over the last 5 years was +6.2. Embiid's career worst is +5.0. LeBron has 2 seasons under +7.0 in the last 20.

This isn't some random fluke from a small sample. Practically the whole team has turned over in the course of the last 5 years and Luka still manages to put up worse on/off numbers than every other top superstar year in and year out. It's a huge sample at this point.

He's still a very good player that helps the team a lot, especially in the playoffs, but he has some serious deficiencies in his regular season game. He doesn't try very hard on defense and he holds the ball more than any other player in the league so it makes it hard for other guys to do stuff and get in a rhythm. He's much better at making stats than he is at helping his team win. He's just not quite in the same class as the true MVP candidates. He's closer to guys like Brunson and Mitchell than he is to SGA and Jokic. [url]No shame in that, it's still very good company, just not as good as his fanboys would like[/url].

Iconic and ironic the same poster that idolize KG and give him a pass double the amount 12 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league.

But the point is that with Garnett demonstrated ample evidence of this sort of impact - and in fact the bad situation was used as a reason to downplay the impact based on the assumption that playing with worse players should make it easier to separate from them.

If you think folks are mindlessly holding it against Luka that there's been turnover and turmoil, you've got to understand that we have data to account for all of these things and we're bringing this up precisely because after we do this Luka still doesn't look anywhere near as good as his reputation.

I'm also going to quote myself from the PC board "New Engelmann" thread which has career rankings for every player in the +/- era over their entire career by RAPM. Not to take the explicit ranking that seriously but this is what I said in terms of Luka being ranked 95th:

-Doncic, honestly, this is going to sound damning with feint praise, but making the Top 100 on this list, and doing so having to rely on your own shoulders as the foundation for your team's context, is a pretty significant accomplishment by general standards. Doing so while still being under 25 in a sport where heady players can peak at 30+? All the more so.

So yeah, making that Top 100 is absolutely not nothing, but it's just not the same as what we see from certain other guys - most notably Jokic who takes the #1 spot on the list with LeBron at #2.

The +/-, like any other stats, has its context and not a one for all solution. For example, Jokic has the best +/- by far as the Nuggets have the best starting lineup. If somehow they pull out a trade, Jamal Murray + KCP + Reggie Jackson for Embiid + filler. Now you play Embiid off the bench sub Jokic, both of them would have much worse +/-. This was the terrible roster construction of Mavs, logging more on backcourt and having terrible and injury prone front court.
Also I and my college 4 roommates can drag LeBron/MJ/Jokic to negative +/- on a 8-player rotation, all three of them regardless coaching or timing.

There is a reasons season after season Luka was predicted MVP favorite, because people know him as that level of a player. The companies set the lines with real $.

The PC board "New Engelmann" thread you cited is confusing, but when I see Jokic/James/CP3/KG at 1/2/3/4, I know it will be popular for that board, maybe rightfully so. 95 for Luka might be difficult to interpret as his 24. However, with Wade at 107, Kobe at 112, and Dwight 134, far behind Hornacek at 20, Caruso at 33, and Towns at 36, I can only envy the courage of the OP and posters for further discussions without worrying its validity or usefulness.

[Bob8]

Luka's been in the league 6 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league. He's played with vastly different teammates from year to year. And the common denominator is that every year the team's not much better with him on the floor than the bench. The best on/off he had was +4.9 last year.

By contrast, the worst on/off Giannis has had over the last 7 years was +6.7. Jokic's worst over the last 5 years was +6.2. Embiid's career worst is +5.0. LeBron has 2 seasons under +7.0 in the last 20.

This isn't some random fluke from a small sample. Practically the whole team has turned over in the course of the last 5 years and Luka still manages to put up worse on/off numbers than every other top superstar year in and year out. It's a huge sample at this point.

He's still a very good player that helps the team a lot, especially in the playoffs, but he has some serious deficiencies in his regular season game. He doesn't try very hard on defense and he holds the ball more than any other player in the league so it makes it hard for other guys to do stuff and get in a rhythm. He's much better at making stats than he is at helping his team win. He's just not quite in the same class as the true MVP candidates. He's closer to guys like Brunson and Mitchell than he is to SGA and Jokic. [url]No shame in that, it's still very good company, just not as good as his fanboys would like[/url].

Iconic and ironic the same poster that idolize KG and give him a pass double the amount 12 years on a team where the roster's been in as much turmoil as any team in the league.

But the point is that with Garnett demonstrated ample evidence of this sort of impact - and in fact the bad situation was used as a reason to downplay the impact based on the assumption that playing with worse players should make it easier to separate from them.

If you think folks are mindlessly holding it against Luka that there's been turnover and turmoil, you've got to understand that we have data to account for all of these things and we're bringing this up precisely because after we do this Luka still doesn't look anywhere near as good as his reputation.

I'm also going to quote myself from the PC board "New Engelmann" thread which has career rankings for every player in the +/- era over their entire career by RAPM. Not to take the explicit ranking that seriously but this is what I said in terms of Luka being ranked 95th:

-Doncic, honestly, this is going to sound damning with feint praise, but making the Top 100 on this list, and doing so having to rely on your own shoulders as the foundation for your team's context, is a pretty significant accomplishment by general standards. Doing so while still being under 25 in a sport where heady players can peak at 30+? All the more so.

So yeah, making that Top 100 is absolutely not nothing, but it's just not the same as what we see from certain other guys - most notably Jokic who takes the #1 spot on the list with LeBron at #2.

I just wonder why Nba champions is not crowned after RS? The best +/- should win it all. And it would be a lot more logical to crowned the team with +/- than using + /- for measuring impact of a single player.

But I have to admit it's absolutely stupid using time for talking about stat nobody cares about outside few nerds here. Luka is still making first All Nba team every year and if miracle happens and Kyrie starts playing, there is outside chance for Mavs to finish high enough for Luka having a chance for MVP. And you can be sure not a single voter will look at +/-.

[timO]

There are 9 teams in the league who are .600 or better.

6 of the 9 teams have 2 all stars.

The exceptions are Thunder (33-15), Nuggets (33-16), Cavs (30-16).

In the poll Jokic is leading, SGA is second. Mitchell (eastern conference player of the month) isn't even one of the 16 players listed.

I'm not saying he's leading the MVP race, but he should be a heck of a lot higher than he is. Not only is he one of the few without an all star teammate, the cavs have had the most starter games missed with injuries.

Starter games missed by teams over .600 (Clippers and Knicks might not be completely accurate because of their trades, I used the teams current depth charts)
Cavs 56
Sixers 45
Knicks 35
Celtics 25
Nuggets 24
Timberwolves 15
Clippers 21
Bucks 11
Thunder 9

Mitchell is the primary reason they are right there with the top teams despite all of the starter games missed.

jalen williams, murray and allen deserve to be all-star for team record

instead we have play-in teams or even lottery teams in all-star