Winning Needs to Matter in MVP Conversation Again

[Ambrose]

Is the Play In the post season? Then how am I moving the goalposts?

Jokic wouldn't have won MVP if he missed the playoffs so your point is moot.

They would’ve made the play in and votes were counted before that even started.

Jokic wouldn't have won MVP if he was an 8 seed so your point is still moot.

[NetsJets]

Moving the goal-posts implies making a target bigger, which is exactly what you're doing... by moving the goal-posts from "playoffs" to "play-in", to give Curry a larger target to aim at.

Is that like saying that we can’t criticize Jokic’s garbage play because the playoffs are separate from the regular season?

You are fully free to criticize Jokic in the playoffs or anything you want.

His performance in the playoffs is separate from his performance in the regular season for the MVP race though.

And Steph Curry should’ve been the 2021 MVP since the MVP is a regular season award.

[NetsJets]

Jokic wouldn't have won MVP if he missed the playoffs so your point is moot.

They would’ve made the play in and votes were counted before that even started.

Jokic wouldn't have won MVP if he was an 8 seed so your point is still moot.

Based on what? The only argument I’ve heard was how his stats are too good for him to not win MVP.

[LAL1947]

Is that like saying that we can’t criticize Jokic’s garbage play because the playoffs are separate from the regular season?

You are fully free to criticize Jokic in the playoffs or anything you want.

His performance in the playoffs is separate from his performance in the regular season for the MVP race though.

And Steph Curry should’ve been the 2021 MVP since the MVP is a regular season award.

Ahh, you've gone back to square 1... and here I was, thinking we had made progress.

No, Curry should not have been because his team didn't make the playoffs, i.e., the cut-off to be considered.

[Ambrose]

They would’ve made the play in and votes were counted before that even started.

Jokic wouldn't have won MVP if he was an 8 seed so your point is still moot.

Based on what? The only argument I’ve heard was how his stats are too good for him to not win MVP.

Because there is a baseline level of winning that matters. Once you're above it, you're good. Jokic was, Curry wasn't. This is easy stuff. You're either being deliberately obtuse or this is your second season watching basketball.

[Freighttrain]

I think being a top 4 seed should matter. It might be arbitrary but not even having home-court advantage in the first round just means you're team isn't in a winning position and winning matters when it comes to MVP for me. Jokic losing in the first round shouldn't even be that unexpected. Giving him an MVP and not even seeing him a week into the playoffs because he got swept is embarrassing.

[Knightfall]

48 wins is a winning season. Specially if its includes an amazing carrying job

48 wins and 11th place is a mediocre finish.
Trying to justify and award Jokic theoretical wins doesn’t change reality, this nuggets team is mediocre and the MVP should not be getting demolished like this.

Basketball is 5 on 5, bro. We have tools that allow us to isolate value that individual players provide. You have to be smart enough to grasp that a guy whose best teammate is rookie drafted late in the first round and losing to a team with 3+ All-Star-caliber players can still be an incredibly valuable player. The Nuggets absolutely should be getting demolished like this.

You realize you used the word smart and asked a realgm poster to use it right. In fact you may be asking someone who doesn't even watch basketball as their post would suggest to be smart.

[BrianFitz]

If anything, all I am asking is for voters to place stronger emphasis on individual performances that lead to wins. Make wins matter again please.

Some of you suns fans are super cringey. YOUR team has the best record so all of a sudden THATS what should matter. I GUARANTEE that you never made a similar post before this year when the suns ended with the best record.

Just like you guys got in an uproar yesterday because YOUR player didn't get DPOY. Jesus. You guys get a recent string of good games and act so entitled.

Just so you know - Booker isn't even close to MVP. Just relax.

[amcoolio]

I agree. Also, if a team has two players finish in the top 12 in MVP voting, both players should be disqualified for MVP, becuase they obviously had to rely on the other for wins. So that would eliminate Paul and Booker, for example

[bearadonisdna]

carry job in regular season isnt whats most valuable in the league.
said this months ago

[Crives]

If anything, all I am asking is for voters to place stronger emphasis on individual performances that lead to wins. Make wins matter again please.

Some of you suns fans are super cringey. YOUR team has the best record so all of a sudden THATS what should matter. I GUARANTEE that you never made a similar post before this year when the suns ended with the best record.

Just like you guys got in an uproar yesterday because YOUR player didn't get DPOY. Jesus. You guys get a recent string of good games and act so entitled.

Just so you know - Booker isn't even close to MVP. Just relax.

When have I brought Booker or Bridges into this thread? My topic is very much worth discussing and has nothing to do with phx. If you want to address my topic of I think many voters are trying to reward Jokic for a theoretical team that didn’t exist this year. Why not let the mvp be an actual award and reward someone who led their team to an elite season instead of a mediocre season? Do you really want to reward mvp each year to players putting up massive stats carrying heavy loads due to injuried rosters instead of rewarding elite players leading their teams to elite seasons? We are moving way to far in direction of Stats > results for this award

[LAL1947]

I agree. Also, if a team has two players finish in the top 12 in MVP voting, both players should be disqualified for MVP, becuase they obviously had to rely on the other for wins. So that would eliminate Paul and Booker, for example

Why Top 12 instead of Top 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 or even 13?

[Crives]

It should be humiliating to Jokic MVP voters that the soon to be back to back league MVP is about to get embarrassingly swept two years in a row.

Winning matters. 48 win season should be automatic disqualification from the discussion.

In a sense what you're saying is that if the best player in the league happens to be on a team where the second and third best player on the roster get hurt and miss the entire season and playoffs he should be automatically disqualified from MVP contention. Even if he is objectively the best player and has the best case under standard MVP criteria.

I can't get on board with that. Winning does matter. It is one of the factors that play into the MVP vote. But so does context.

No, I am not proposing that at all. I am saying that the MVP is an award, and a major factor in who wins should be how the mvp candidate leads their team to success. We are moving towards wins/results becoming meaningless, with individual stats becoming most important. Injuries are part of the game, we shouldn’t give Jokic MVP for a theoretical elite team that didn’t exist due to injuries.

Regarding MPJ, do you really consider him to be 3rd best player? I get he is a very talented and tall shooter, but seems like his defense offsets a lot of that offensive value.

[Jasen777]

Is that like saying that we can’t criticize Jokic’s garbage play because the playoffs are separate from the regular season?

You are fully free to criticize Jokic in the playoffs or anything you want.

His performance in the playoffs is separate from his performance in the regular season for the MVP race though.

And Steph Curry should’ve been the 2021 MVP since the MVP is a regular season award.

No, but because Jokic was better, not because Curry missed the playoffs.

[NetsJets]

You are fully free to criticize Jokic in the playoffs or anything you want.

His performance in the playoffs is separate from his performance in the regular season for the MVP race though.

And Steph Curry should’ve been the 2021 MVP since the MVP is a regular season award.

Ahh, you've gone back to square 1... and here I was, thinking we had made progress.

No, Curry should not have been because his team didn't make the playoffs, i.e., the cut-off to be considered.

Because we went back to square one.

[NetsJets]

You are fully free to criticize Jokic in the playoffs or anything you want.

His performance in the playoffs is separate from his performance in the regular season for the MVP race though.

And Steph Curry should’ve been the 2021 MVP since the MVP is a regular season award.

No, but because Jokic was better, not because Curry missed the playoffs.

I was told you can be an MVP if you are missing key players and lead your team to a lower seed. So what’s the difference.

[Crives]

By this insipid logic, a 10 dollar bill in a wallet with four 5 dollar bills would be "more valuable" than a 20 dollar bill in a wallet with four 1 dollar bills. Idiotic.

Yes but on the other hand you can say that your logic is that 10 dollar bill with four 1 dollar bills is more valuable than 12 dollar bill with 4 8 dollar bills (I know those bills do not exist , but just to make a point). As I previously sad, I think Jokic Is a 20 dollar bill, but if you are blind (and all of us are since you can not read attribute values of the player like in computer game), then it is hard to buy that he is 20 dollar bill cause whenever you open your wallet you can not buy anything with the content of it.

Don’t get me wrong, I actually mostly agree with you here. I think you could make a case for Jokic being the best if not one of the absolute best players in the league. And that’s even after watching the playoffs the last two year.

I just don’t believe MVP should be about rewarding the best player in the league. If that was the case, we honestly could award MVP before the season begins in most years. MVP should be rewarded to one of the elite players that led there team to great success. It’s not only about team success, but many voters are taking this way to far and rewarding a 48 win 11seed

[Crives]

It should be humiliating to Jokic MVP voters that the soon to be back to back league MVP is about to get embarrassingly swept two years in a row.

Winning matters. 48 win season should be automatic disqualification from the discussion.

Well for one, the award is called the Most Valuable Player, not the Most Valuable Roster.

Yes, most valuable player, not best player. And I believe you are not providing enough value at 48 wins and the 11 seed.

[Tempe]

They would’ve made the play in and votes were counted before that even started.

Jokic wouldn't have won MVP if he was an 8 seed so your point is still moot.

Based on what? The only argument I’ve heard was how his stats are too good for him to not win MVP.

Jokic would’ve won if his team went 40-42 because media nerds like Zach Lowe decided he won the award before the season even started


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crives]

It should be humiliating to Jokic MVP voters that the soon to be back to back league MVP is about to get embarrassingly swept two years in a row.

Winning matters. 48 win season should be automatic disqualification from the discussion.

Context should also matter in MVP conversations.

Dude is missing two 20ppg scorers, and 40%+ 3 point shooters. We saw what Murray is capable of in the playoffs.

He also won more games than the other top two MVP candidates. Unless we're going to credit Embiid/Giannis with games won when they were sitting on the bench/at home?

Context definitely matters, but it doesn’t excuse results. You cant use injuries to create a theoretically elite team led by Jokic that didn’t exist this season. We need to reward players for what they actually accomplished this year. How do you know that Jokics numbers don’t suffer if his role significantly changes by adding any two stars? How do you know top players on elite teams couldn’t put up better numbers with a depleted roster? The point is you can’t know, you can only project, and I believe we shouldn’t award mvp based on a projection.