2024-25 NBA MVP Discussion Thread (Pt. 3: Son of daughter of MVP thread)

[7seventynine9]

The Nuggets are only 1.5 games behind second in the west. If they can make up that ground, does the #1 Thunder have enough distance between the #2 Nuggets to claim "Shai's record is better"?

No, they'll need to get within 5 or so games for that argument to die.

Pretty sure that every 70+ win team has had the MVP so unless Oklahoma City falls off a cliff Shai is going to get it.

They aren't winning 70. They are 6-3 in their last 9. It's really hard to keep winning at a 70 win pace. They'll probably end up with 60-65 wins. It's possible Cleveland ends up with the best record, OKC wins 62 and Denver wins 54.

That would mean SGA isn't the best player on the best team. Doesn't mean he won't win MVP but I don't think it will help his cause.

[Exp0sed]

Can there be a tie for the MVP vote? Really they both deserve it so far.

Theoretically, if half the voters voted for Jokic 1 and SGA 2 and the other half the other way around, there would be a tie and the same number of first place votes and second place votes. So both would get the MVP unless i'm missing some rule.

It's ridiculous that one of the two will come away empty-handed. But than we had the season when Wilt averged 50/25 and Robertson averaged a triple-double, and neither won the MVP.

Thing is, the numbers of votes is uneven so in theory, an odd number of voters,for example - one voter, would need to leave those guys out of his ballot completey

Which makes it far less likely to occur (and it's unlikely even without that caveat so...)

[7seventynine9]

Can there be a tie for the MVP vote? Really they both deserve it so far.

Theoretically, if half the voters voted for Jokic 1 and SGA 2 and the other half the other way around, there would be a tie and the same number of first place votes and second place votes. So both would get the MVP unless i'm missing some rule.

It's ridiculous that one of the two will come away empty-handed. But than we had the season when Wilt averged 50/25 and Robertson averaged a triple-double, and neither won the MVP.

Thing is, the numbers of votes is uneven so in theory, an odd number of voters,for example - one voter, would need to leave those guys out of his ballot completey

Which makes it far more unlikely to occur (and it's unlikely even without that caveat so...)

Sent from my SM-A055F using RealGM mobile app

They wouldn't have to leave them off the ballot, they'd just have to put them 3rd, 4th or 5th. A tie is definitely possible, but not with SGA and Jokic splitting all the 1 and 2 votes.

[dautjazz]

Theoretically, if half the voters voted for Jokic 1 and SGA 2 and the other half the other way around, there would be a tie and the same number of first place votes and second place votes. So both would get the MVP unless i'm missing some rule.

It's ridiculous that one of the two will come away empty-handed. But than we had the season when Wilt averged 50/25 and Robertson averaged a triple-double, and neither won the MVP.

Thing is, the numbers of votes is uneven so in theory, an odd number of voters,for example - one voter, would need to leave those guys out of his ballot completey

Which makes it far more unlikely to occur (and it's unlikely even without that caveat so...)

Sent from my SM-A055F using RealGM mobile app

They wouldn't have to leave them off the ballot, they'd just have to put them 3rd, 4th or 5th. A tie is definitely possible, but not with SGA and Jokic splitting all the 1 and 2 votes.

Well some fool could vote Mitchell if they finish with the best record.

[lobosloboslobos]

Lotsa games left to play. Joker took some time to really get rolling, but he's playing at a true GOAT level now.

January comparison

Jokic - 10 games (9-1): 28/15/12/1/2 on 57/44/88 shooting

SGA - 11 games (9-2): 34/5/6/2/1 on 53/34/97 shooting

SGA's stat line is utterly fantastic but...
In January, compared to SGA, Jokic is putting up 3x the rebounds and 2x the assists

[ropjhk]

Here's an attempt at a simple MVP formula:

played wins X stats X dependance factor

Played wins is just simply the number of wins in games played. The value of an MVP is in the wins they deliver and they can only do that if they are playing. For stats I'll use PER. It's not perfect but it's a way to simplify the equation. Dependance factor is an imaginary rating for how much a team depends on that player. Although not perfect, I'll use VORP as it represents the added number of points per 100 possessions over a replacement player. Open to suggestions to improve the formula.

SGA: 35 wins X 30.9 PER X 5.2 VORP = 5623.8 PERVORPWINS

Jokic: 26 wins X 33.6 PER X 5.8 VORP = 5066.88 PERVORPWINS

So SGA is my MVP leader right now and that's mainly due to wins. Jokic may be the better player and his team may be more dependant on him but ultimately you need to deliver wins in order to be crowned MVP.

Why use a rate metric (PER) with an accumulation metric (VORP)?

PER is a measure of statistical production per minute. So it fits what I'm looking for as a basic stats measure.

Dependance is a tricky thing to quantify. It's a metric that needs to illustrate how poorly a team would perform without the player. It's hard to measure the missing impact of a player in games in which they do not play. Sample size can be a problem. I wasn't feeling too great about using VORP but I wasn't too sure what would be the better alternative and I was feeling too lazy to do further research.

[playa-hater]

Jokic is ridiculously good. Best player in the planet. But I think SGA is likely to win the MVP if he keeps playing at this level and OKC keeps winning at the same rate.

Probably true. But Joker is way ahead of whoever is 2nd best IMO.

clarification on my post. I do think SGA will squeak out the MVP.. Voter fatigue etc against Joker. But I meant to say Joker is way ahead of anyone as the best player in the world. Not sure who would be a "distant 2nd"

[-Luke-]

Can there be a tie for the MVP vote? Really they both deserve it so far.

Theoretically, if half the voters voted for Jokic 1 and SGA 2 and the other half the other way around, there would be a tie and the same number of first place votes and second place votes. So both would get the MVP unless i'm missing some rule.

It's ridiculous that one of the two will come away empty-handed. But than we had the season when Wilt averged 50/25 and Robertson averaged a triple-double, and neither won the MVP.

Thing is, the numbers of votes is uneven so in theory, an odd number of voters,for example - one voter, would need to leave those guys out of his ballot completey

Which makes it far less likely to occur (and it's unlikely even without that caveat so...)

Our hopes rest on Mark Jackson. But now that I think about it, he isn't a media member anymore and (luckily) doesn't have a vote. Still an all-time idiocy when he left Jokic off his ballot and said he forgot about him when he was criticized.

[Mrakar]

We all know its Jokic. We are just trying to put some diversity in the MVP award. Jokic is there and he is not going away. He will be favourite next 3 years probably, and we will try to find a reason not to give it to him.

[dhsilv2]

Here's an attempt at a simple MVP formula:

played wins X stats X dependance factor

Played wins is just simply the number of wins in games played. The value of an MVP is in the wins they deliver and they can only do that if they are playing. For stats I'll use PER. It's not perfect but it's a way to simplify the equation. Dependance factor is an imaginary rating for how much a team depends on that player. Although not perfect, I'll use VORP as it represents the added number of points per 100 possessions over a replacement player. Open to suggestions to improve the formula.

SGA: 35 wins X 30.9 PER X 5.2 VORP = 5623.8 PERVORPWINS

Jokic: 26 wins X 33.6 PER X 5.8 VORP = 5066.88 PERVORPWINS

So SGA is my MVP leader right now and that's mainly due to wins. Jokic may be the better player and his team may be more dependant on him but ultimately you need to deliver wins in order to be crowned MVP.

Why use a rate metric (PER) with an accumulation metric (VORP)?

PER is a measure of statistical production per minute. So it fits what I'm looking for as a basic stats measure.

Dependance is a tricky thing to quantify. It's a metric that needs to illustrate how poorly a team would perform without the player. It's hard to measure the missing impact of a player in games in which they do not play. Sample size can be a problem. I wasn't feeling too great about using VORP but I wasn't too sure what would be the better alternative and I was feeling too lazy to do further research.

Well then you'd use BPM not VORP if you want to avoid that. VORP is just BPM adjusted for minutes played.

[GeorgeSears]

I've been talking up Jokic for MVPs on here since at least 2020 but I just want to point out that part of Shai's argument over him is barely part of box score metrics which is defense. Jokic is probably an average defender at his position while Shai is a very good one and is also part of a historic defense this year. I think you can make good arguments for either guy but obviously box score type stuff is going to favor Jokic because that's his main thing(pts/efficiency/reb/ast).

I hear some version of this argument every year when it comes to Jokic: "Player A is putting up the same offensive numbers and their defense is significantly better than Jokic". Player A has usually been Giannis or Embiid.

The flaw in this argument is assuming that they're putting up similar offensive production. They're not. Jokic's offensive production is so generationally great that it more than dwarfs whatever defensive edge his counterparts have over him. The fact that he's doing it with a lower USG% but significantly more touches per game is something you'll probably never see again.

[Exp0sed]

We all know its Jokic. We are just trying to put some diversity in the MVP award. Jokic is there and he is not going away. He will be favourite next 3 years probably, and we will try to find a reason not to give it to him.

it would be the same reason..Nuggets are still gonna be a 55 wins team and there will be teams that are clearly better, some of whom are led by MVP contenders

that or Wemby

[Wolfgang630]

Don’t listen to Lou Williams questioning if Jokic’s stats are even needed for the Nuggets to be competitive

[Cavsfansince84]

I hear some version of this argument every year when it comes to Jokic: "Player A is putting up the same offensive numbers and their defense is significantly better than Jokic". Player A has usually been Giannis or Embiid.

The flaw in this argument is assuming that they're putting up similar offensive production. They're not. Jokic's offensive production is so generationally great that it more than dwarfs whatever defensive edge his counterparts have over him. The fact that he's doing it with a lower USG% but significantly more touches per game is something you'll probably never see again.

I don't wanna hear it tbh. I've been very pro Jokic for MVP the last 4-5 years. Bringing up defense is not some underhanded shot at Jokic. Its context that should be brought up if we are also bringing up stats or metrics mainly derived from box scores. There's 40 games left in the season so nothing is written in stone but as of right now but Shai deserves to be MVP based on criteria we've been mainly using for 30-50 years. Did Jokic deserve it over Embiid? I would say yes he should have but that's done and not relevant to this season imo. Obviously things like voter fatigue do happen but that's nothing new. The gap in the w/l records do matter. Same as Cowens getting it over Kareem in 73.

[Syd-TK3]

I feel bad for Shai he really do deserve it, it's not even like he just benefiting from the "best player best team" narrative his stats are genuinely mvp worthy.
But Jokic is insane

[Woodsanity]

SGA would be a runaway MVP in most years and a top tier MVP candidate in general. Right now though Jokic is clearly superior as a player but SGA can still win it due to voter fatigue/superior team record.

[MarcusBrody]

I feel bad for Shai he really do deserve it, it's not even like he just benefiting from the "best player best team" narrative his stats are genuinely mvp worthy.
But Jokic is insane

I'm about as big a Jokic fan as they come, but I think people are underestimating how much Shai is doing to elevate OKC's offense and how that is allowing them to be the super successful team that they are.

I'm on record saying that Shai isn't QUITE as important as people make him out to be defensively and some of his defensive counting stats are really him taking advantage of the amazing ball pressure that they other guards/wings, but he is the perfect person to take advantage of that with his long arms and good anticipation. That's valuable.

But while the rest of the roster can bring defense whether Shai's there or not, who is going to facilitate the offense without him? They look pretty stagnant/one dimensional when he isn't on. Part of that is Chet being out, but the fact that Chet is out and they've kept playing so well is also a credit to SGA's case.

I think that if you gave teams around the league the option to add Shai or Jokic to the roster for the second half of this season, you'd likely see the vast majority choose Jokic. But what Shai is doing for OKC has been amazingly valuable and he's leading a team to the tail end of the wins distribution. I think that is totally worth and MVP and wouldn't at all be sad to see him win it over Jokic, despite my love of the latter and preference for watching him play.

[dautjazz]

The Nuggets currently have the 7th best record in the league and climbing, 2.5 games behind the Celtics. So if the Nuggets climb as high as 2nd the West, it'll be HARD to deny Jokic who is having one of the GOAT invidual seasons. 3rd in scoring and rebounding, and 2nd in passing, is bonkers.

[MoneyTalks41890]

The Nuggets currently have the 7th best record in the league and climbing, 2.5 games behind the Celtics. So if the Nuggets climb as high as 2nd the West, it'll be HARD to deny Jokic who is having one of the GOAT invidual seasons. 3rd in scoring and rebounding, and 2nd in passing, is bonkers.

Current pace is OKC 67-15 and Denver 52-30

If that’s the case and the other stats generally hold, can’t give it to Jokic imo. He would be great for a best player award at that point, but not MVP.

If they get it within 10 games, then it’s a live discussion. Within 5 and record doesn’t really matter anymore.

But Jokic also can’t miss many more games either. Those two things alone are currently keeping SGA on top for this award.

[Bergmaniac]

I'm about as big a Jokic fan as they come, but I think people are underestimating how much Shai is doing to elevate OKC's offense and how that is allowing them to be the super successful team that they are.

I'm on record saying that Shai isn't QUITE as important as people make him out to be defensively and some of his defensive counting stats are really him taking advantage of the amazing ball pressure that they other guards/wings, but he is the perfect person to take advantage of that with his long arms and good anticipation. That's valuable.

But while the rest of the roster can bring defense whether Shai's there or not, who is going to facilitate the offense without him? They look pretty stagnant/one dimensional when he isn't on. Part of that is Chet being out, but the fact that Chet is out and they've kept playing so well is also a credit to SGA's case.

I think that if you gave teams around the league the option to add Shai or Jokic to the roster for the second half of this season, you'd likely see the vast majority choose Jokic. But what Shai is doing for OKC has been amazingly valuable and he's leading a team to the tail end of the wins distribution. I think that is totally worth and MVP and wouldn't at all be sad to see him win it over Jokic, despite my love of the latter and preference for watching him play.

Agreed. Shai's offensive brilliance is what allows OKC to play so many defence first players with very limited shot creation skills in their rotation and still have a very good offense even with Chet out.