NBA MVP Discussion '20-'21, Part 2 (Poll created 21 March '21)

[Infinite Llamas]

It's Jokic, Curry, Giannis, and Embiid for me in that order.

I think if everyone was healthy it would be Lebron, Harden, Jokic/Curry (Nuggets not being a top 4 seed would less attention on Jokic), Embiid, Giannis

Who is to say that if everybody was healthy the Nuggets are not a top 3 seed? Murray played half of his games injured and than got injured worse, MPJ missed time with covid and struggled for a few weeks when he came back, we have been missing our entire guard rotation for weeks. While Jokic has stayed healthy our team has had plenty of injuries.

Denver easily a top 2 seed with everyone healthy.

[FinnTheHuman]

Just to illustrate things to people who say Jokic is whining too much and that Jokic fans are lying when they say he's the least protected superstar in the league:

Read on Twitter

[WarriorGM]

Somewhere in the top 5, but not top 2. Giannis is 2nd behind Jokic. And many guys have a case for 3-5.

All I’m saying is if your team was playing to win last season and doing everything to win like they are now, they would be a 25-30 win team in an 82-game season. Which means Curry imo turned a .330 team into a .571 team. Which is impressive, but doesn’t sound surreal, while turning a .200 team into a .571 team does sound surreal and no, he didn’t do that, he’s not that good.

Even the current team wasn't doing everything to win as its priority all season. If it was it wouldn't have played a rookie so much trying to develop him resulting in awful WOWY numbers. Fact of the matter is the Warriors were a sub-20-win team last season. Your speculation on how they'd have finished if they'd done all they could to win is just that: speculation. It's not as if most teams in their situation last year would try to go all out to win either.

But for the sake of argument let's say they were actually a 25-30 win team. Who has brought such a team that wasn't tanking previously to a better record?

Curry is as good as anyone ever at carrying a team.

Active players, not more than 5. I think LeBron, Harden, and Westbrook have showed they can. Luka, Jokic, and Giannis maybe.

I don't think LeBron, Harden and Westbrook have done it. They've shown similar with teams that had slightly better records, but I don't recall them actually having had to work with a team that had a sub-30-wins record the previous season. Giannis might actually have done it before.

[dygaction]

Even the current team wasn't doing everything to win as its priority all season. If it was it wouldn't have played a rookie so much trying to develop him resulting in awful WOWY numbers. Fact of the matter is the Warriors were a sub-20-win team last season. Your speculation on how they'd have finished if they'd done all they could to win is just that: speculation. It's not as if most teams in their situation last year would try to go all out to win either.

But for the sake of argument let's say they were actually a 25-30 win team. Who has brought such a team that wasn't tanking previously to a better record?

Curry is as good as anyone ever at carrying a team.

Active players, not more than 5. I think LeBron, Harden, and Westbrook have showed they can. Luka, Jokic, and Giannis maybe.

I don't think LeBron, Harden and Westbrook have done it. They've shown similar with teams that had slightly better records, but I don't recall them actually having had to work with a team that had a sub-30-wins record the previous season. Giannis might actually have done it before.

Come on, this year Warriors also have healthy Draymond and Wiggins. It's just a different team. One may argue Curry should win most improved player himself if just for the sake of argument. Also not like he had played as good as April for the entire season. Over the year just from performance point of view, it is an MVP worthy year but not an outlier. The Warrior's supporting cast is not that bad, maybe they are as good or better than teams of 06 Kobe, 07 LeBron (Finals), 17 Harden, 17 Westbrook, or even 21 Mavs if you consider how Porzingis has been in and out and COVID interruptions.

[WarriorGM]

Active players, not more than 5. I think LeBron, Harden, and Westbrook have showed they can. Luka, Jokic, and Giannis maybe.

I don't think LeBron, Harden and Westbrook have done it. They've shown similar with teams that had slightly better records, but I don't recall them actually having had to work with a team that had a sub-30-wins record the previous season. Giannis might actually have done it before.

Come on, this year Warriors also have healthy Draymond and Wiggins. It's just a different team. One may argue Curry should win most improved player himself if just for the sake of argument. Also not like he had played as good as April for the entire season. Over the year just from performance point of view, it is an MVP worthy year but not an outlier. The Warrior's supporting cast is not that bad, maybe they are as good or better than teams of 06 Kobe, 07 LeBron (Finals), 17 Harden, 17 Westbrook, or even 21 Mavs if you consider how Porzingis has been in and out and COVID interruptions.

Draymond was on the team last year. D'Angelo Russell was who Wiggins replaced and the Timberwolves had to attach a pick to get him. Didn't prevent the team from only having 15 wins in the shortened season. You can claim those teams you mention had worse rosters. But it's pure conjecture. Fact of the matter is they didn't have a record the previous year as bad as this Warriors team Curry is currently leading. Show objective evidence not subjective opinion based on feelings.

[dygaction]

I don't think LeBron, Harden and Westbrook have done it. They've shown similar with teams that had slightly better records, but I don't recall them actually having had to work with a team that had a sub-30-wins record the previous season. Giannis might actually have done it before.

Come on, this year Warriors also have healthy Draymond and Wiggins. It's just a different team. One may argue Curry should win most improved player himself if just for the sake of argument. Also not like he had played as good as April for the entire season. Over the year just from performance point of view, it is an MVP worthy year but not an outlier. The Warrior's supporting cast is not that bad, maybe they are as good or better than teams of 06 Kobe, 07 LeBron (Finals), 17 Harden, 17 Westbrook, or even 21 Mavs if you consider how Porzingis has been in and out and COVID interruptions.

Draymond was on the team last year. D'Angelo Russell was who Wiggins replaced and the Timberwolves had to attach a pick to get him. Didn't prevent the team from only having 15 wins in the shortened season. You can claim those teams you mention had worse rosters. But it's pure conjecture. Fact of the matter is they didn't have a record the previous year as bad as this Warriors team Curry is currently leading. Show objective evidence not subjective opinion based on feelings.

You should be able to evaluate talent level to appreciate how much a player can elevate the team. If not,
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2010 had 61 wins and without him in 2011 had 19 wins?
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2018 had 50 wins and without him in 2019 had 19 wins again?
How about Rockets with Harden in 2020 had 44wins and without him this year has 16 wins?
Rockets also got someone in return for Harden, not like Warriors just add Curry.

[Ballerhogger]

Second spot for the mvp race is very up in the air .

[Doctor MJ]

Just to illustrate things to people who say Jokic is whining too much and that Jokic fans are lying when they say he's the least protected superstar in the league:

Read on Twitter

If I understand the chart, this seems to be saying that Jokic is just plain the hardest guy for the refs to officiate, and they're making errors in both directions. Not equally in both directions I realize, but lots of mistakes both ways.

[WarriorGM]

Come on, this year Warriors also have healthy Draymond and Wiggins. It's just a different team. One may argue Curry should win most improved player himself if just for the sake of argument. Also not like he had played as good as April for the entire season. Over the year just from performance point of view, it is an MVP worthy year but not an outlier. The Warrior's supporting cast is not that bad, maybe they are as good or better than teams of 06 Kobe, 07 LeBron (Finals), 17 Harden, 17 Westbrook, or even 21 Mavs if you consider how Porzingis has been in and out and COVID interruptions.

Draymond was on the team last year. D'Angelo Russell was who Wiggins replaced and the Timberwolves had to attach a pick to get him. Didn't prevent the team from only having 15 wins in the shortened season. You can claim those teams you mention had worse rosters. But it's pure conjecture. Fact of the matter is they didn't have a record the previous year as bad as this Warriors team Curry is currently leading. Show objective evidence not subjective opinion based on feelings.

You should be able to evaluate talent level to appreciate how much a player can elevate the team. If not,
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2010 had 61 wins and without him in 2011 had 19 wins?
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2018 had 50 wins and without him in 2019 had 19 wins again?
How about Rockets with Harden in 2020 had 44wins and without him this year has 16 wins?
Rockets also got someone in return for Harden, not like Warriors just add Curry.

All three situations you listed above came after the star had left and the team was tanking/rebuilding the following year. Very different expectations involved when one expects the star to be back. True it is similar but it's not quite the same.

Curry in 2013 led the Warriors to 47 wins when the previous year they only had 23 wins. For some reason though that's wasn't enough proof to show Curry is an exceptional floor raiser and was still being doubted at the beginning of this year and even now there are people chiming in saying what he has done isn't enough. I am simply showing that if one was to apply standards almost as rigid to LeBron's and Harden's, they wouldn't make the cut either and if anything should be subject to more doubt. All the discussion doubting Curry's ability to carry a team was groundless. Talk of him being a ceiling raiser but not a floor raiser was all narrative hokum. The question should now be what other false narratives are being perpetuated?

[dygaction]

Draymond was on the team last year. D'Angelo Russell was who Wiggins replaced and the Timberwolves had to attach a pick to get him. Didn't prevent the team from only having 15 wins in the shortened season. You can claim those teams you mention had worse rosters. But it's pure conjecture. Fact of the matter is they didn't have a record the previous year as bad as this Warriors team Curry is currently leading. Show objective evidence not subjective opinion based on feelings.

You should be able to evaluate talent level to appreciate how much a player can elevate the team. If not,
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2010 had 61 wins and without him in 2011 had 19 wins?
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2018 had 50 wins and without him in 2019 had 19 wins again?
How about Rockets with Harden in 2020 had 44wins and without him this year has 16 wins?
Rockets also got someone in return for Harden, not like Warriors just add Curry.

All three situations you listed above came after the star had left and the team was tanking/rebuilding the following year. Very different expectations involved when one expects the star to be back. True it is similar but it's not quite the same.

Curry in 2013 led the Warriors to 47 wins when the previous year they only had 23 wins. For some reason though that's wasn't enough proof to show Curry is an exceptional floor raiser and was still being doubted at the beginning of this year and even now there are people chiming in saying what he has done isn't enough. I am simply showing that if one was to apply standards almost as rigid to LeBron's and Harden's, they wouldn't make the cut either and if anything should be subject to more doubt. All the discussion doubting Curry's ability to carry a team was groundless. Talk of him being a ceiling raiser but not a floor raiser was all narrative hokum. The question should now be what other false narratives are being perpetuated?

2013 47 wins are a combined results of Curry's improvement, not having to share ball/time with Monta, and Klay's second year improvement. He was also there in 2012, so normally you cannot use that to justify the point of floor raiser.

Don't get me wrong. I consider Curry a great floor raiser. The comparison, LeBron, Kobe, Westbrook and Harden, are all GOAT level floor raisers. Curry is one of the greatest ceiling raiser. I will only take LeBron over him in the mentioned players.

[WarriorGM]

You should be able to evaluate talent level to appreciate how much a player can elevate the team. If not,
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2010 had 61 wins and without him in 2011 had 19 wins?
How about Cavs with LeBron in 2018 had 50 wins and without him in 2019 had 19 wins again?
How about Rockets with Harden in 2020 had 44wins and without him this year has 16 wins?
Rockets also got someone in return for Harden, not like Warriors just add Curry.

All three situations you listed above came after the star had left and the team was tanking/rebuilding the following year. Very different expectations involved when one expects the star to be back. True it is similar but it's not quite the same.

Curry in 2013 led the Warriors to 47 wins when the previous year they only had 23 wins. For some reason though that's wasn't enough proof to show Curry is an exceptional floor raiser and was still being doubted at the beginning of this year and even now there are people chiming in saying what he has done isn't enough. I am simply showing that if one was to apply standards almost as rigid to LeBron's and Harden's, they wouldn't make the cut either and if anything should be subject to more doubt. All the discussion doubting Curry's ability to carry a team was groundless. Talk of him being a ceiling raiser but not a floor raiser was all narrative hokum. The question should now be what other false narratives are being perpetuated?

2013 47 wins are a combined results of Curry's improvement, not having to share ball/time with Monta, and Klay's second year improvement. He was also there in 2012, so normally you cannot use that to justify the point of floor raiser.

Don't get me wrong. I consider Curry a great floor raiser. The comparison, LeBron, Kobe, Westbrook and Harden, are all GOAT level floor raisers. Curry is one of the greatest ceiling raiser. I will only take LeBron over him in the mentioned players.

Curry has numbers showing he is better than all of them. +/- On-Off shows higher career and peak values for Curry. On the other hand what do the other guys have to show? A lot of subjective narrative bluster.

[DCasey91]

WarriorsGM and Curry should get a room together.

Lebron is obv a higher ceiling raiser, Harden has done it for longer. And Kobe is Kobe

Curry’s longevity (and floor general skills) are his weak points that’s it.

Nuggets have the had the best record since March lol, and have you seen the lineups together with Jokic? Haha talk about a carry job. That guard rotation is putrid. Never actually know Nuggets record without him it’s all theory, Extraordinary season, beats out everybody else so easily. Already one of the best floor raisers in the league for a awhile.

I mean a 22 yr old by the name of Luka is having one heck of a season too.

I’m guessing Jokic will get 75-80% of the 1st place votes then the rest will be split.

[Nuthin But Net]

1. Embid
2. Curry
3. Jokic

[Sgt Major]

This is surely over

[dygaction]

All three situations you listed above came after the star had left and the team was tanking/rebuilding the following year. Very different expectations involved when one expects the star to be back. True it is similar but it's not quite the same.

Curry in 2013 led the Warriors to 47 wins when the previous year they only had 23 wins. For some reason though that's wasn't enough proof to show Curry is an exceptional floor raiser and was still being doubted at the beginning of this year and even now there are people chiming in saying what he has done isn't enough. I am simply showing that if one was to apply standards almost as rigid to LeBron's and Harden's, they wouldn't make the cut either and if anything should be subject to more doubt. All the discussion doubting Curry's ability to carry a team was groundless. Talk of him being a ceiling raiser but not a floor raiser was all narrative hokum. The question should now be what other false narratives are being perpetuated?

2013 47 wins are a combined results of Curry's improvement, not having to share ball/time with Monta, and Klay's second year improvement. He was also there in 2012, so normally you cannot use that to justify the point of floor raiser.

Don't get me wrong. I consider Curry a great floor raiser. The comparison, LeBron, Kobe, Westbrook and Harden, are all GOAT level floor raisers. Curry is one of the greatest ceiling raiser. I will only take LeBron over him in the mentioned players.

Curry has numbers showing he is better than all of them. +/- On-Off shows higher career and peak values for Curry. On the other hand what do the other guys have to show? A lot of subjective narrative bluster.

Even over LeBron? Higher career value? Let’s not fool ourselves. Over claim can alienate fan bases and to me, you are not doing Curry a favor on this board.

[WarriorGM]

2013 47 wins are a combined results of Curry's improvement, not having to share ball/time with Monta, and Klay's second year improvement. He was also there in 2012, so normally you cannot use that to justify the point of floor raiser.

Don't get me wrong. I consider Curry a great floor raiser. The comparison, LeBron, Kobe, Westbrook and Harden, are all GOAT level floor raisers. Curry is one of the greatest ceiling raiser. I will only take LeBron over him in the mentioned players.

Curry has numbers showing he is better than all of them. +/- On-Off shows higher career and peak values for Curry. On the other hand what do the other guys have to show? A lot of subjective narrative bluster.

Even over LeBron? Higher career value? Let’s not fool ourselves. Over claim can alienate fan bases and to me, you are not doing Curry a favor on this board.

Are people so ignorant and naive even now when it comes to Curry? Yes even over LeBron.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=90355640#p90355640

Whether I am doing Curry a favor or not is not a consideration. I'm simply talking about the results and interpreting them.

It is perfectly justifiable to believe that whereever LeBron places Curry should be put higher.

[dygaction]

Curry has numbers showing he is better than all of them. +/- On-Off shows higher career and peak values for Curry. On the other hand what do the other guys have to show? A lot of subjective narrative bluster.

Even over LeBron? Higher career value? Let’s not fool ourselves. Over claim can alienate fan bases and to me, you are not doing Curry a favor on this board.

Are people so ignorant and naive even now when it comes to Curry? Yes even over LeBron.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=90355640#p90355640

Whether I am doing Curry a favor or not is not a consideration. I'm simply talking about the results and interpreting them.

It is perfectly justifiable to believe that whereever LeBron places Curry should be put higher.

Wow what is your definition for career value?

[WarriorGM]

Even over LeBron? Higher career value? Let’s not fool ourselves. Over claim can alienate fan bases and to me, you are not doing Curry a favor on this board.

Are people so ignorant and naive even now when it comes to Curry? Yes even over LeBron.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=90355640#p90355640

Whether I am doing Curry a favor or not is not a consideration. I'm simply talking about the results and interpreting them.

It is perfectly justifiable to believe that whereever LeBron places Curry should be put higher.

Wow what is your definition for career value?

I'm citing average career value as how Basketball Reference defined it. You have a problem with it? Take it up with them.

[dygaction]

Are people so ignorant and naive even now when it comes to Curry? Yes even over LeBron.

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=90355640#p90355640

Whether I am doing Curry a favor or not is not a consideration. I'm simply talking about the results and interpreting them.

It is perfectly justifiable to believe that whereever LeBron places Curry should be put higher.

Wow what is your definition for career value?

I'm citing average career value as how Basketball Reference defined it. You have a problem with it? Take it up with them.

LOL @ average, nice switch.

[Impuniti]

1. Embid
2. Curry
3. Jokic

Embiid is not in first place stop it. It's Joker.