I find it hard to see Jokic being awarded a 4th MVP without another ring.

[dhsilv2]

In a vacuum, yes. But LBJ doesn't have... I dunno, 7? 8?

I can see Lebron from 2008-2013 winning all 6 of those. That said 2008 we had a few really good choices. 2014, KD's MVP feels fully justified. Same with Curry's two. After that not a good argument.

Now Rose winning in 2011 was just nonsense.

So 5-6 seems like a better choice, he got 4. I don't really see the issues or concerns here.

Rose won because people did not want to give LeBron on Heat an MVP at the moment when he just teamed up with 2 other top 5 or 10 players, and Bulls won a lot of games with him as the main guy. Rare moment in time.

Not saying it should have happened but I understand how it did

And despite that 3 top 10 guy move, Bulls had a better record which nobody expected.

[MarcusBrody]

In a vacuum, yes. But LBJ doesn't have... I dunno, 7? 8?

I can see Lebron from 2008-2013 winning all 6 of those. That said 2008 we had a few really good choices. 2014, KD's MVP feels fully justified. Same with Curry's two. After that not a good argument.

Now Rose winning in 2011 was just nonsense.

So 5-6 seems like a better choice, he got 4. I don't really see the issues or concerns here.

Rose won because people did not want to give LeBron on Heat an MVP at the moment when he just teamed up with 2 other top 5 or 10 players, and Bulls won a lot of games with him as the main guy. Rare moment in time.

Not saying it should have happened but I understand how it did

I think that was a big part of it, but I also think that his performance dropped a bit as he figured out how to play with Wade/Bosh/Miami. He dropped in basically ever stat, basic or advanced (save total rebounds, and steals were flat). He scored less points, had less assists, BPM, WS, WS/48, and VORP were all lower. So there was an impression that he had a down year.

But the counterargument would be that even though he was down in those measures, all the advanced measures still led the league as he was undeniably the best player at the time. But still, I think it's easier to deny the best player the MVP when he's dropped from his previous performance level a bit.

[Lockdown504090]

if joker put up the same stat as last year and win 64 games. he will be the mvp barring a wemby explosion.

[reload141]

His mvps should have an asterisk next to them.


And no SGA Luka or Wemby will win it this year.

Why are you even posting.

[maxpower8888]

Well the last time he didn't win a deserved MVP due to his ring count was in 2023 so....

[nate33]

Jokic was a little better than SGA last year, but SGA's team had 18 more wins which was enough to put him over the top. I don't love the decision because teammates shouldn't dictate MVP, but I can at least understand it.

If Jokic is again a slight bit better than SGA next year, I think Jokic will get it as long as Denver's win total is within 8-10 games of OKC. Last year, OKC had 68 wins and Denver had 50. If it's something like OKC 66 wins and Denver 58, I think Jokic will get MVP.

[Deivork]

And while the OP could be right, this is exactly that what is wrong with awards.

[Chuck Everett]

Denver supposedly has more help this year, so his stats probably shouldn't look as gaudy. And this seems to be the only reason to unequivocally state Jokic has a better chance than SGA to win the award. SGA has been playing at an MVP level the past two years. Sorry, I'm not seeing how it's a foregone conclusion that Jokic should win before the season begins.

[jokeboy86]

I've felt this way for a while. They had no problem giving him a 3rd MVP since usually they don't have a problem giving it to an elite player whose team just won their first title the year before(KD not withstanding). But I've said all along that until he gets a least one more ring(and maybe two more for him to get a 5th MVP) that there's a ton of hesitancy to put Jokic in that upper echelon of top 10 greatest players and that lends itself to whether or not they give him MVPs yearly. I knew that no matter what they were looking for a reason not to give him 3 MVPs in a row because of the list of players he would be amongst(only Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and Larry Bird have done it). The list of guys with at least 4 MVPs is even more highly regarded (KAJ, Russell, Wilt, MJ, Lebron) and it's even harder for some people to put him up there with those players. Not to mention Jokic's personality, style of play, and not being a face of the league makes it very hard for casual fans and casual media to put him over or next to other elite players who are/were much more popular like:

-Kobe
-Steph
-KD
-Shaq
-Magic

The one thing that may work in Jokic's favor though is the same thing that worked in Kareem's. Kareem won 5 MVPs before he won his 2nd NBA title and the reason why is probably because it was universally accepted that he was the best player in the league. But also during that time he won his MVPs the league had its most parity(no b2b champions and only 1 team won ring 2x in the decade). With Magic, Bird, Dr. J, and Moses it made it easy to start rotating the award amongst players on contenders/champions and then it basically became a requirement after that. Jordan made it really easy because of the dominance of the Bulls in the 90s. Lebron would probably have even more MVPs if he had more rings in his prime era.

Well fast forward to now, like KAJ Jokic is regarded universally as the best player in the game and we've had 5 different champions so far this decade. I still think Shai has the advantage because the MVP/NBA Champion always has the advantage going into the season afterwards. Only reason it hurt Lebron and MJ is because they had already won 2 in a row(old writers hesitant to make it 3)and other teams had better records than theirs.