2024-25 NBA MVP Discussion Thread (Pt. 4: Who is the MVP?)

[BigGargamel]

Hahahahhaha you can see who didnt watch Nuggets vs Warrios in this thread...the hot takes man...

There is half a decade of data of the Nuggets being absolutely horrible when Jokic isn't on the court. But they win a trap game against a team that had an all time bonehead performance, and suddenly they're better without Jokic. This board, man. Never change.

[Johnston797]

Hahahahhaha you can see who didnt watch Nuggets vs Warrios in this thread...the hot takes man...

There is half a decade of data of the Nuggets being absolutely horrible when Jokic isn't on the court. But they win a trap game against a team that had an all time bonehead performance, and suddenly they're better without Jokic. This board, man. Never change.

MVP is this year’s performance. And no one said they are better without him. It’s the D that’s better without him.

[Mavrelous]

Hahahahhaha you can see who didnt watch Nuggets vs Warrios in this thread...the hot takes man...

There is half a decade of data of the Nuggets being absolutely horrible when Jokic isn't on the court. But they win a trap game against a team that had an all time bonehead performance, and suddenly they're better without Jokic. This board, man. Never change.

Nuggets are 13-20 w/o Jokic, this includes the truly horrible season on 2021-2022, where Jokic had only Gordon as starting material player next to him, after that they are close to .5 record.
This is not "absolutely horrible", that's 34 wins pace, this is a team built around a superstar w/o said superstar, not different than most others, Mavs w/o Luka are also 34, Warriors w/o Steph are 38 wins, Thunder w/o SGA are 35 wins team.

There is the on/off stat that is often extrapolated to claim Nuggets are absolutely horrible w/o Jokic, but that's because people are force reading into the stat something the stat isn't supposed to represent.

[Special_Puppy]

Hahahahhaha you can see who didnt watch Nuggets vs Warrios in this thread...the hot takes man...

There is half a decade of data of the Nuggets being absolutely horrible when Jokic isn't on the court. But they win a trap game against a team that had an all time bonehead performance, and suddenly they're better without Jokic. This board, man. Never change.

Nuggets are 13-20 w/o Jokic, this includes the truly horrible season on 2021-2022, where Jokic had only Gordon as starting material player next to him, after that they are close to .5 record.
This is not "absolutely horrible", that's 34 wins pace, this is a team built around a superstar w/o said superstar, not different than most others, Mavs w/o Luka are also 34, Warriors w/o Steph are 38 wins, Thunder w/o SGA are 35 wins team.

There is the on/off stat that is often extrapolated to claim Nuggets are absolutely horrible w/o Jokic, but that's because people are force reading into the stat something the stat isn't supposed to represent.

I mean the on/off stat explicitly includes games Jokic misses in the off sample. Jokic's supporting cast isn't bad, but its clearly orders of magnitude behind OKC+BOS+CLE's and might not even rank top 10 overall (if it was a very good supporting cast the Nuggets title odds wouldn't be +1400 unless you don't think Jokic is a MVP level player). Even during the title year they were as being fairly kinda mid in a composite of advanced stats (although Murray stepped up his game in the post-season)

[RRR3]

Well well well how did the worst supporting cast ever beat the hottest team in the league at home without the GOAT?

[Mavrelous]

There is half a decade of data of the Nuggets being absolutely horrible when Jokic isn't on the court. But they win a trap game against a team that had an all time bonehead performance, and suddenly they're better without Jokic. This board, man. Never change.

Nuggets are 13-20 w/o Jokic, this includes the truly horrible season on 2021-2022, where Jokic had only Gordon as starting material player next to him, after that they are close to .5 record.
This is not "absolutely horrible", that's 34 wins pace, this is a team built around a superstar w/o said superstar, not different than most others, Mavs w/o Luka are also 34, Warriors w/o Steph are 38 wins, Thunder w/o SGA are 35 wins team.

There is the on/off stat that is often extrapolated to claim Nuggets are absolutely horrible w/o Jokic, but that's because people are force reading into the stat something the stat isn't supposed to represent.

I mean the on/off stat explicitly includes games Jokic misses in the off sample. Jokic's supporting cast isn't bad, but its clearly orders of magnitude behind OKC+BOS+CLE's and might not even rank top 10 overall (if it was a very good supporting cast the Nuggets title odds wouldn't be +1400 unless you don't think Jokic is a MVP level player). Even during the title year they were as being fairly kinda mid in a composite of advanced stats (although Murray stepped up his game in the post-season)

Title odds are based on projected PO performance, MVP is RS award, current Nuggets aren't contenders because if Jokic defends like this, they aren't winning, but I wouldn't bet against him/Grodon, they have nothing to prove in RS, I'm sure they'll turn it up in the PO.
On/Off is lineups based metrics, Jokic on/off repeatedly drops in the PO, because the garbage lineups are filtered out.

We have 2 very strong indicators, record without Jokic, and PO record/ PO on/off, they both point out that:
1. Jokic supporting cast is very good with him on the floor, and on par with other heliocentric stars supporting cast.
2. Jokic impact, while great, isn't really as different as the specific on/off stat suggests.

This tells me all I need to know about which indicator is correct, and which is the noise, but feel free to disagree.

BOS/CLE are freak rebuilding stories, they aren't indicative of regular roster builds, OKC is the product of 2 full tank years + wildly imblanced trade, these are exceptions that happen to coincide the same year.

Recent champions/finalists don't fit that profile, Jokic supporting is on par or better/slightly worse than these supporting casts:
2024 Dallas
2023 Heat
2022 Warriors
2022 Celtics
2021 Bucks
2021 Suns
2020 Heat
2020 Lakers

[Special_Puppy]

A rare win against a good team for the nuggets.

No jokic.

Let this have been SGA and OKC and this thread would be going crazy right now...

But now its just "nothing" and "one game"

Which i agree with...its just i wish the energy was just kept consistent. That's all. Not long ago when okc won a game without SGA what did it look like in here from the same guys making excuses now?

We see you.



Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

Ok this is a terrible take. This wasn’t a good game by the Warriors. This was a historical bad game played by them. Not only that the Nuggets were missing their two best players(Murray and Jokic) and another starter in Braun. Also the Nuggets also had 22 turnovers this game. I like how people comment on the game without actually watching the game. It is pathetic the narratives people use.

Where you as a fanbase giving all this nuance and caveats when okc won a game without SGA a week or two ago? Or was all nuance like you're desperately trying to give now thrown out the window and rather the loss was basically used to push a narrative and stir up some last minute desperation support for jokic's mvp chances because the thunder are so good without SGA and jokics team wouldn't win 20 games without him etc etc?

Asking for a friend.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

Tbh I don't really remember people making much of a stink of the Trailblazers game besides pushing the undeniable idea that SGA has a very deep and talented supporting cast (and to be clear the Thunder are so good that SGA having a very deep and talented supporting cast and SGA being the MVP are compatible)

[Special_Puppy]

Nuggets are 13-20 w/o Jokic, this includes the truly horrible season on 2021-2022, where Jokic had only Gordon as starting material player next to him, after that they are close to .5 record.
This is not "absolutely horrible", that's 34 wins pace, this is a team built around a superstar w/o said superstar, not different than most others, Mavs w/o Luka are also 34, Warriors w/o Steph are 38 wins, Thunder w/o SGA are 35 wins team.

There is the on/off stat that is often extrapolated to claim Nuggets are absolutely horrible w/o Jokic, but that's because people are force reading into the stat something the stat isn't supposed to represent.

I mean the on/off stat explicitly includes games Jokic misses in the off sample. Jokic's supporting cast isn't bad, but its clearly orders of magnitude behind OKC+BOS+CLE's and might not even rank top 10 overall (if it was a very good supporting cast the Nuggets title odds wouldn't be +1400 unless you don't think Jokic is a MVP level player). Even during the title year they were as being fairly kinda mid in a composite of advanced stats (although Murray stepped up his game in the post-season)

Title odds are based on projected PO performance, MVP is RS award, current Nuggets aren't contenders because if Jokic defends like this, they aren't winning,

Top 2 most valuable player in the league+Very good supporting cast should produce higher title odds than +1400 and more wins than ~52, no?

[EmpireFalls]

Joker’s supporting cast is pretty good compared to historical teams but compared to 2025 teams it’s above average at best. With a healthy Gordon it becomes a good supporting cast though. If he plays like last night they are legit contenders.

However his impact numbers are slightly skewed by the complete lack of any backup big and Malone’s tendency to stack lineups with starters.

[Mavrelous]

Top 2 most valuable player in the league+Very good supporting cast should produce higher title odds than +1400 and more wins than ~52, no?

Nope, I see no correlation, Jokic has 3 MVPs, and people claim he should have had 4, yet he has a single title, and only 2 successful PO runs, one of them came before his MVP, he head very good supporting cast last year, and OK supporting cast in 21.
In general, the MVP of a given year hasn't reached the finals in 10 years, vast majority of them had a very good supporting cast.

[Special_Puppy]

Nuggets are 13-20 w/o Jokic, this includes the truly horrible season on 2021-2022, where Jokic had only Gordon as starting material player next to him, after that they are close to .5 record.
This is not "absolutely horrible", that's 34 wins pace, this is a team built around a superstar w/o said superstar, not different than most others, Mavs w/o Luka are also 34, Warriors w/o Steph are 38 wins, Thunder w/o SGA are 35 wins team.

There is the on/off stat that is often extrapolated to claim Nuggets are absolutely horrible w/o Jokic, but that's because people are force reading into the stat something the stat isn't supposed to represent.

I mean the on/off stat explicitly includes games Jokic misses in the off sample. Jokic's supporting cast isn't bad, but its clearly orders of magnitude behind OKC+BOS+CLE's and might not even rank top 10 overall (if it was a very good supporting cast the Nuggets title odds wouldn't be +1400 unless you don't think Jokic is a MVP level player). Even during the title year they were as being fairly kinda mid in a composite of advanced stats (although Murray stepped up his game in the post-season)

Title odds are based on projected PO performance, MVP is RS award, current Nuggets aren't contenders because if Jokic defends like this, they aren't winning, but I wouldn't bet against him/Grodon, they have nothing to prove in RS, I'm sure they'll turn it up in the PO.
On/Off is lineups based metrics, Jokic on/off repeatedly drops in the PO, because the garbage lineups are filtered out.

We have 2 very strong indicators, record without Jokic, and PO record/ PO on/off, they both point out that:
1. Jokic supporting cast is very good with him on the floor, and on par with other heliocentric stars supporting cast.
2. Jokic impact, while great, isn't really as different as the specific on/off stat suggests.

This tells me all I need to know about which indicator is correct, and which is the noise, but feel free to disagree.

BOS/CLE are freak rebuilding stories, they aren't indicative of regular roster builds, OKC is the product of 2 full tank years + wildly imblanced trade, these are exceptions that happen to coincide the same year.

Recent champions/finalists don't fit that profile, Jokic supporting is on par or better/slightly worse than these supporting casts:
2024 Dallas
2023 Heat
2022 Warriors
2022 Celtics
2021 Bucks
2021 Suns
2020 Heat
2020 Lakers

I do not think that the 2023 Nuggets supporting cast is on par with the 2022 Celtics to say the least. I would put Jokic's supporting cast as worse than basically all of these besides the 2023 Heat (don't have a strong opinion on the 2024 Mavs). This is based on grading every single player in the league in those seasons based on a composite of advanced stats.

[Mavrelous]

I do not think that the 2023 Nuggets supporting cast is on par with the 2022 Celtics to say the least...

Murray Vs Brown
Gordon Vs Marcus Smart
KCP Vs Derrick White
MPJ Vs Al Horford

Bruce Brown Vs Grant Williams

I'd say pretty comparable, I think Nuggets are better FWIW...

I would put Jokic's supporting cast as worse than basically all of these besides the 2023 Heat (don't have a strong opinion on the 2024 Mavs). This is based on grading every single player in the league in those seasons based on a composite of advanced stats.

That's your opinion, and it's in line with the belittling of the Nuggets player, I just disagree strongly with this sentiment.

[Special_Puppy]

Joker’s supporting cast is pretty good compared to historical teams but compared to 2025 teams it’s above average at best. With a healthy Gordon it becomes a good supporting cast though. If he plays like last night they are legit contenders.

However his impact numbers are slightly skewed by the complete lack of any backup big and Malone’s tendency to stack lineups with starters.

Yeah the raw on/off number is slightly skewed. Jokic is not literally worth +19 net points despite what on/off shows. He still looks obviously looks like an impact titan even when adjusting for the issues you mentioned though https://xrapm.com/table_pages/RAPM_29y.html. Also yeah as you hinted at, AG has been an underdiscussed issue for the Nuggets. He's been out half the season and mid in the games he's played (until last night lol). If you could guarantee 2023 AG that's obviously huge for the Nuggets

[Special_Puppy]

I do not think that the 2023 Nuggets supporting cast is on par with the 2022 Celtics to say the least...

Murray Vs Brown
Gordon Vs Marcus Smart
KCP Vs Derrick White
MPJ Vs Al Horford

Bruce Brown Vs Grant Williams

I'd say pretty comparable, I think Nuggets are better FWIW...

I would put Jokic's supporting cast as worse than basically all of these besides the 2023 Heat (don't have a strong opinion on the 2024 Mavs). This is based on grading every single player in the league in those seasons based on a composite of advanced stats.

That's your opinion, and it's in line with the belittling of the Nuggets player, I just disagree strongly with this sentiment.

If someone thinks Jokic has the worst supporting cast in the league that’s dumb. If someone thinks that the Nuggets supporting cast is orders of magnitude behind the top tier of contenders and that it probably doesn’t rank in the top 10 in the league. That’s a defensible opinion

[Woodsanity]

Top 2 most valuable player in the league+Very good supporting cast should produce higher title odds than +1400 and more wins than ~52, no?

Nope, I see no correlation, Jokic has 3 MVPs, and people claim he should have had 4, yet he has a single title, and only 2 successful PO runs, one of them came before his MVP, he head very good supporting cast last year, and OK supporting cast in 21.
In general, the MVP of a given year hasn't reached the finals in 10 years, vast majority of them had a very good supporting cast.

Where's the very good supporting case last year?

Only other decent player on the Nuggets last playoffs was Aaron Gordon.

Aaron Gordon PER: 18.2, BPM: 4.5

MPJ PER: 13.1, BPM .6

KCP PER: 8.4, BPM: -1.4

Kwamal Murray PER: 12.2, BPM -1.4

Don't even need to mention the others they were even worse. All horrible players outside of Aaron Gordon. MPJ I will be generous and say he is was average-slightly above average but still overpriced massively.

[Woodsanity]

I do not think that the 2023 Nuggets supporting cast is on par with the 2022 Celtics to say the least...

Murray Vs Brown
Gordon Vs Marcus Smart
KCP Vs Derrick White
MPJ Vs Al Horford

Bruce Brown Vs Grant Williams

I'd say pretty comparable, I think Nuggets are better FWIW...

I would put Jokic's supporting cast as worse than basically all of these besides the 2023 Heat (don't have a strong opinion on the 2024 Mavs). This is based on grading every single player in the league in those seasons based on a composite of advanced stats.

That's your opinion, and it's in line with the belittling of the Nuggets player, I just disagree strongly with this sentiment.

Problem with Jamal Murray is you will get 3 different versions of him. He is either out and injured completely. Plays 50% of his normal level and you get Kwamal Murray like he was in 2024 and is worthless on both ends. Plays 120% and you get championship Murray.
At 120% he can match Brown sure but the other times Brown is way better.

Aaron Gordon beats Smart I guess. KCP is nowhere remotely in the same dimension as Derrick White. MPJ is nowhere in the same dimension as Al Horford.

[Special_Puppy]

I do not think that the 2023 Nuggets supporting cast is on par with the 2022 Celtics to say the least...

Murray Vs Brown
Gordon Vs Marcus Smart
KCP Vs Derrick White
MPJ Vs Al Horford

Bruce Brown Vs Grant Williams

I'd say pretty comparable, I think Nuggets are better FWIW...

I would put Jokic's supporting cast as worse than basically all of these besides the 2023 Heat (don't have a strong opinion on the 2024 Mavs). This is based on grading every single player in the league in those seasons based on a composite of advanced stats.

That's your opinion, and it's in line with the belittling of the Nuggets player, I just disagree strongly with this sentiment.

Problem with Jamal Murray is you will get 3 different versions of him. He is either out and injured completely. Plays 50% of his normal level and you get Kwamal Murray like he was in 2024 and is worthless on both ends. Plays 120% and you get championship Murray.
At 120% he can match Brown sure but the other times Brown is way better.

Aaron Gordon beats Smart I guess. KCP is nowhere remotely in the same dimension as Derrick White. MPJ is nowhere in the same dimension as Al Horford.

FWIW OP also left off Time Lord. Who was the Celtics 3rd best player that year. Nuggets 7-9th men were also considerably worse too. In general, I'm confused how the 2022's Celtics net rating was like 4 point higher than the 2023 Nuggets if the Nuggets had a better supporting cast. Maybe 2022 Tatum was more valuable than 2023 Nikola Jokic?

[G R E Y]

Read on Twitter

[MoneyTalks41890]

So this was the final result last year.

Read on Twitter

My prediction for this year is roughly:

SGA - 950 total votes
Jokic - 900
Giannis - 300
Tatum - 200
Mitchell - 150

With 1st place votes

SGA - 65
Jokic - 33
Tatum - 1
Giannis - 1

[One Last Shot]

Hahahahhaha you can see who didnt watch Nuggets vs Warrios in this thread...the hot takes man...

Most of us watched 23 PO run and know full well Jokic supporting cast is very good, you don't need to belittle Jokic team mates to glorify him, when he really had bad supporting cast, he won MVP on 46 wins and 6th seed.

They think Jokic would approve of these dudes s****ing on his squad to make him look better. He would not.