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

[cpower]

Enough said. Im not mad that SGA will win it, he has far better case then Embiid in 23, hut at this point we are just looking for reasons not to give it to Jok....

this is so ridiculous wrong on so many levels. Yes Denver would not be good but they would not be a 17 win team.. There are not the wizards and that is a huge disrespect to Gordon Murry MPJ and rest of the team

[hardenASG13]

Enough said. Im not mad that SGA will win it, he has far better case then Embiid in 23, hut at this point we are just looking for reasons not to give it to Jok....

this is so ridiculous wrong on so many levels. Yes Denver would not be good but they would not be a 17 win team.. There are not the wizards and that is a huge disrespect to Gordon Murry MPJ and rest of the team

Agreed, I'm not sure how anyone with sense of logic looks at that and goes along with it. OKC wouldn't win 55 games without SGA, and Denver wouldn't be a 17 win team. Nor are they, or have they ever, been close to a 64 win team with Jokic. Stats can be shaped to say crazy things.

[Special_Puppy]

Jokic
Net Rating: +10.63
On/off: +20.12
Blend: +15.375

SGA
Net Rating: +18.23
On/off: +11.11
Blend: +14.67

[slick_watts]

i think the endless hand wringing on teammate quality is the dumbest possible direction to take a mvp discussion. who cares. we have ways to estimate player impact without getting into pages long arguments about who has a better bench.

[Special_Puppy]

i think the endless hand wringing on teammate quality is the dumbest possible direction to take a mvp discussion. who cares. we have ways to estimate player impact without getting into pages long arguments about who has a better bench.

Teammate quality matters a lot if you bring up record difference as one of your main reasons for voting for a player.

[slick_watts]

i think the endless hand wringing on teammate quality is the dumbest possible direction to take a mvp discussion. who cares. we have ways to estimate player impact without getting into pages long arguments about who has a better bench.

Teammate quality matters a lot if you bring up record difference as one of your main reasons for voting for a player.

which is why record difference is also a dumb criteria.

[Special_Puppy]

i think the endless hand wringing on teammate quality is the dumbest possible direction to take a mvp discussion. who cares. we have ways to estimate player impact without getting into pages long arguments about who has a better bench.

Teammate quality matters a lot if you bring up record difference as one of your main reasons for voting for a player.

which is why record difference is also a dumb criteria.

Agreed

[MoneyTalks41890]

Record has long been a big part of MVP and it’s going to continue to be.

People may not like that, but it’s how it has been. If the Nuggets and the Thunder had the same record we would be having a totally different conversation.

[Special_Puppy]

Record has long been a big part of MVP and it’s going to continue to be.

People may not like that, but it’s how it has been. If the Nuggets and the Thunder had the same record we would be having a totally different conversation.

Right if the Nuggets and Thunder both were on track to win ~60 games because the quality of the supporting casts converted (and you don't change Jokic and SGA's individual performance at all), the betting odds would be near a tossup. The fact that your MVP pick can dramatically swing based on teammate quality is why its obviously a terrible criterion vs just looking at individual impact (which SGA might still edge out Jokic in)

[MoneyTalks41890]

Record has long been a big part of MVP and it’s going to continue to be.

People may not like that, but it’s how it has been. If the Nuggets and the Thunder had the same record we would be having a totally different conversation.

Right if the Nuggets and Thunder both were on track to win ~60 games because the quality of the supporting casts converted (and you don't change Jokic and SGA's individual performance at all), the betting odds would be near a tossup. The fact that your MVP pick can dramatically swing based on teammate quality is why its obviously a terrible criterion vs just looking at individual impact (which SGA might still edge out Jokic in)

I mean Jokic playing in more games would help as well.

But it’s certainly not as neat as Denver’s supporting cast is precisely 14 wins worse. So I think your argument here is also off.

[Special_Puppy]

Record has long been a big part of MVP and it’s going to continue to be.

People may not like that, but it’s how it has been. If the Nuggets and the Thunder had the same record we would be having a totally different conversation.

Right if the Nuggets and Thunder both were on track to win ~60 games because the quality of the supporting casts converted (and you don't change Jokic and SGA's individual performance at all), the betting odds would be near a tossup. The fact that your MVP pick can dramatically swing based on teammate quality is why its obviously a terrible criterion vs just looking at individual impact (which SGA might still edge out Jokic in)

I mean Jokic playing in more games would help as well.

But it’s certainly not as neat as Denver’s supporting cast is precisely 14 wins worse. So I think your argument here is also off.

I mean the advanced stats basically indicate that the gap is almost entirely about the difference in supporting casts. Could argue that there would still be a tiny gap in team record in favor of SGA even if you equalized supporting cast quality, but we are talking about like 1-2 games either way and not 16-17

[AmIWrongDude]

I feel like one of the problems is were always all on different pages about MVP criteria.

I think there’s 3 separate things:
1. Who the best player in the league is
2. Who is the most “valuable” to their team
3. NBA MVP and the common criteria for that

[Edrees]

Enough said. Im not mad that SGA will win it, he has far better case then Embiid in 23, hut at this point we are just looking for reasons not to give it to Jok....

this is so ridiculous wrong on so many levels. Yes Denver would not be good but they would not be a 17 win team.. There are not the wizards and that is a huge disrespect to Gordon Murry MPJ and rest of the team

Agreed, I'm not sure how anyone with sense of logic looks at that and goes along with it. OKC wouldn't win 55 games without SGA, and Denver wouldn't be a 17 win team. Nor are they, or have they ever, been close to a 64 win team with Jokic. Stats can be shaped to say crazy things.

The stat probably ignores the fact that Murray or Aaron Gordon also missed some of the games that Jokic missed. You probably shouldn't count games your 2nd or 3rd best player missed as a reasonable expectation of how good the team is without its star player.

[zimpy27]

SGA getting the MVP guys.

If the top team in the league has a player with a 30+ PER, then that player is winning MVP.

You may not like it but this is a slam dunk pick.

[Special_Puppy]

SGA getting the MVP guys.

If the top team in the league has a player with a 30+ PER, then that player is winning MVP.

You may not like it but this is a slam dunk pick.

Think most reasonable people acknowledge that SGA and Jokic are very close in terms of individual value, SGA and Jokic are both having ATG seasons, and that SGA is going to win a decisive victory because of record and to a lesser extent voter fatigue

[Special_Puppy]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=kXz47zZ_dZNjyZ0pjPEBWQ

[zimpy27]

SGA getting the MVP guys.

If the top team in the league has a player with a 30+ PER, then that player is winning MVP.

You may not like it but this is a slam dunk pick.

Think most reasonable people acknowledge that SGA and Jokic are very close in terms of individual value, SGA and Jokic are both having ATG seasons, and that SGA is going to win a decisive victory because of record and to a lesser extent voter fatigue

Yeah SGA is putting up 30+ PER, he will be on an all-defense team and his team is the top team in the league.

I don't even think voter fatigue is a factor, SGA winning this 100 times out of 100.

Jokic is still amazing, I don't think it takes away from him because SGA has been amazing too. One of the best seasons we've ever seen.

[Special_Puppy]

SGA getting the MVP guys.

If the top team in the league has a player with a 30+ PER, then that player is winning MVP.

You may not like it but this is a slam dunk pick.

Think most reasonable people acknowledge that SGA and Jokic are very close in terms of individual value, SGA and Jokic are both having ATG seasons, and that SGA is going to win a decisive victory because of record and to a lesser extent voter fatigue

I don't even think voter fatigue is a factor, SGA winning this 100 times out of 100.

When Hoop Collective Podcast covered did their straw poll, Tim MacMahon explicitly said he thought the two candidates were super close so he voted for the one with the better record and who hasn’t won before. Imagine that’s not too far off from the median voter.

[Infinite Llamas]

SGA getting the MVP guys.

If the top team in the league has a player with a 30+ PER, then that player is winning MVP.

You may not like it but this is a slam dunk pick.

Yeah I’m a Jokic guy but I’ve made my peace with this.

SGA is very worthy and it’s a lot easier losing to a stand up guy like him than Embiid.

Congrats SGA and Thunder fans. Great season.

[lethalizer]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=kXz47zZ_dZNjyZ0pjPEBWQ

We're posting Centel tweets in an actual MVP discussion thread on RealGM?

You're better than this, puppy.