Winning Needs to Matter in MVP Conversation Again

[gottamakeit]

no one bother engaging with OP if he can't be bothered to answer reasonable questions related to topic

[Dupp]

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.

It’s a regular season award fyi



Bucks and phill won 51 games, only 3 more. So who gets mvp?

[Crives]

Lol. If you think any player in the NBA if he took Jokic's place on this Nuggets roster isn't getting shellacked by this version of the Warriors, then you're gravely mistaken. I doubt that any other player even gets this Nuggets squad a top 6 seed.

Your probably right. And most likely they have a mediocre season like the nuggets did after switching places. So maybe we don’t reward mediocre results (48 wins)

[ElectricMayhem]

The lesson here is not that Jokic isn't deserving of the MVP. It's the opposite, actually. The lesson is that Jokic dragged a scrub team to a playoff berth, and did it while having a historic season.

Finally, in individual wins Jokic had more (46) than both Embiid and Giannis (45). You can't reward guys for wins the team got without them.

You don't even need advanced stats to get an impression of his value.

Take on/off:

Bucks: +8 with Giannis on the floor; -3 with him off

76ers: +7.5 with Embiid on the floor; - 4 with him off

Nuggets: +8.4 with Jokić on the floor; -8 with him off

Suns: +9.7 with Booker on the floor; +4.9 with him off

In other words, the Nuggets with Jokić on the floor are about as good as any team with their best player on floor. When he's off the floor, his team is worse than the Pistons. This is noisy, but the more advanced stats make an attempt to account for the quality of one's teammates. When this is done, Jokić looks even better.

Jokic has a playoff career average of 26/11/6 on a 60 TS%, while having a WS/48 of .201 and a BPM of 9.1. He has been to a WCF already and he has yet to play with another all star yet in his career. Id say no matter if its a regular season game or a playoff game, Jokic is an elite top 5 player without a doubt.

This is all you really need to know. What's with all the hand-wringing in a season where Jokic was historically valuable to his team? Which MVP are you replacing Jokic with to have Denver perform better than they did this year?

[Peregrine01]

Lol. If you think any player in the NBA if he took Jokic's place on this Nuggets roster isn't getting shellacked by this version of the Warriors, then you're gravely mistaken. I doubt that any other player even gets this Nuggets squad a top 6 seed.

Your probably right. And most likely they have a mediocre season like the nuggets did after switching places. So maybe we don’t reward mediocre results (48 wins)

I get your point and actually thought that a guy like Book had a better case than Giannis and Embiid (who had similar records as Jokic while playing with much better teammates) given past precedents to award the perceived best guy on the most winning team. The problem was that Book didn't really separate himself as the clear cut best guy on his team when his teammate was getting MVP recognition for a good part of the season as well. There's a precedent for this as well: KD and Steph in 2017.

[Mick Dundee]

Kevin Booker should not even be in the Conversation for MVP.

He has a really nice and deep voice. Could have been a great Baritone at the Italian Opera.

I give him that. And hes a good Basketball Player.

But he aint MVP Material.


22/5/5 for the Season is a Joke.

Booker: 1822 Points
Joker: 2002 Points

Booker: 329 Assists
Joker: 584 Assists

Booker: Too Low a Number of Rebounds to write it down, because its embarassing
Joker: 1019

Booker: 662 Field Goals
Joker: 774 Field Goals

Booker: 46% FG%
Joker: 58% FG%

Booker: 53% eFG%
Joker: 62% eFG%

Why are Players, whose Success relies on Team Composition and Coaching, even in Conversation?

[Crives]

no one bother engaging with OP if he can't be bothered to answer reasonable questions related to topic

What reasonable question am I not answering related to this thread? If you want to read my MVP finalists this year go check my many posts all year long in the official MVP race threads.

This thread is about reconsidering how much we value performances that lead to wins vs big numbers in our mvp consideration. It’s getting to the point where winning doesn’t matter much for this reward. All about narrative + big numbers now which I believe is worth discussing. As I said earlier, I think we are headed down the path where every year MVP is going to someone putting up massive heliocentric numbers on a fringe team..

[Infinite Llamas]

no one bother engaging with OP if he can't be bothered to answer reasonable questions related to topic

What reasonable question am I not answering related to this thread? If you want to read my MVP finalists this year go check my many posts all year long in the official MVP race threads.

This thread is about reconsidering how much we value performances that lead to wins vs big numbers in our mvp consideration. It’s getting to the point where winning doesn’t matter much for this reward. All about narrative + big numbers now which I believe is worth discussing. As I said earlier, I think we are headed down the path where every year MVP is going to someone putting up massive heliocentric numbers on a fringe team..

Booker didn’t win a damn thing until CP3 arrived. Your case would have more merit if you were stumping for the rightful MVP of your own team.

[Crives]

Kevin Booker should not even be in the Conversation for MVP.

He has a really nice and deep voice. Could have been a great Baritone at the Italian Opera.

I give him that. And hes a good Basketball Player.

But he aint MVP Material.


22/5/5 for the Season is a Joke.

Booker: 1822 Points
Joker: 2002 Points

Booker: 329 Assists
Joker: 584 Assists

Booker: Too Low a Number of Rebounds to write it down, because its embarassing
Joker: 1019

Booker: 662 Field Goals
Joker: 774 Field Goals

Booker: 46% FG%
Joker: 58% FG%

Booker: 53% eFG%
Joker: 62% eFG%

Why are Players, whose Success relies on Team Composition and Coaching, even in Conversation?

Are you really trying to compare EFG% for a C vs SG, two players with very different roles/ shot profiles?

I am not trying to compare players in this topic. I am asking to reconsider awarding MVP to a player on such a mediocre team. Winning needs to matter a hell of a lot more

[Crives]

no one bother engaging with OP if he can't be bothered to answer reasonable questions related to topic

What reasonable question am I not answering related to this thread? If you want to read my MVP finalists this year go check my many posts all year long in the official MVP race threads.

This thread is about reconsidering how much we value performances that lead to wins vs big numbers in our mvp consideration. It’s getting to the point where winning doesn’t matter much for this reward. All about narrative + big numbers now which I believe is worth discussing. As I said earlier, I think we are headed down the path where every year MVP is going to someone putting up massive heliocentric numbers on a fringe team..

Booker didn’t win a damn thing until CP3 arrived. Your case would have more merit if you were stumping for the rightful MVP of your own team.

Did you see me argue for Booker when his team was mediocre, or any other candidate when their team was mediocre? If you did then you would have a point…

I’m not even saying Jokic is not a MVP level player. I am saying he needs to validate his individual performances with wins to be in the conversation for any season he wants to win. Something I am sure he will do in the future, likely with Denver. But this year, he absolutely didn’t provide enough value with only 48 wins to win the award

[picko]

Had their been an outstanding candidate among the top teams then Jokic probably doesn't win. But there wasn't.

Suns: CP3 missed 17 games and Booker finished third on the team in WS and second in VORP.
Grizzlies: Morant missed 25 games.
Heat: Butler missed 25 games and Adebayo missed 24 games.
Warriors: Curry missed 18 games and had a 'down' season.

Then there is four games separating the 4th through 11th best records. Only three games separating Jokic and the other two MVP candidates.

The gap between those records is so narrow - particularly in a year where teams have been impacted by COVID - that team record just isn't terribly important. When you factor in that there are no MVP candidates in the top four teams - highly unusual by historical standards - then I think it's a stretch to say that the Jokic pick is egregious or devalues 'winning'.

[Mick Dundee]

I am asking to reconsider awarding MVP to a player on such a mediocre team. Winning needs to matter a hell of a lot more

I don't understand.

Why do you believe that an Individual Award should be considered a Team Award?

That's contradictory and it doesn't make sense.

Jokic as an individual Player provided historically measurable Value to an otherwise abysmal Team and by doing that, managed to carry them into the Playoffs - Which as a Result, was accomplished by racking up enough Wins.

An herculean Effort was necessary to pull off something like that. Historic Totals and Efficiency Ratings.

And there simply is no other Player in the NBA, who could have accomplished that.

Not Durant, Not Curry, Not Embiid, Not even Giannis ... And certainly not Booker.


So, back to you. Because I don't even understand what we are talking about here.

[gottamakeit]

What reasonable question am I not answering related to this thread? If you want to read my MVP finalists this year go check my many posts all year long in the official MVP race threads.

This thread is about reconsidering how much we value performances that lead to wins vs big numbers in our mvp consideration. It’s getting to the point where winning doesn’t matter much for this reward. All about narrative + big numbers now which I believe is worth discussing. As I said earlier, I think we are headed down the path where every year MVP is going to someone putting up massive heliocentric numbers on a fringe team..

Booker didn’t win a damn thing until CP3 arrived. Your case would have more merit if you were stumping for the rightful MVP of your own team.

Did you see me argue for Booker when his team was mediocre, or any other candidate when their team was mediocre? If you did then you would have a point…

I’m not even saying Jokic is not a MVP level player. I am saying he needs to validate his individual performances with wins to be in the conversation for any season he wants to win. Something I am sure he will do in the future, likely with Denver. But this year, he absolutely didn’t provide enough value with only 48 wins to win the award

Book's stats were never close to what Jokic is putting up this year. You would have been insane to push the MVP argument in those dark years.

[ElectricMayhem]

I am not trying to compare players in this topic. I am asking to reconsider awarding MVP to a player on such a mediocre team. Winning needs to matter a hell of a lot more

Winning already matters a hell of a lot. The teams that win the most play the worst teams remaining in the playoffs. If they win the games in the playoffs, they get to advance to the next round. If they advance to the finals and win the most there, they become champions. How does winning need to matter more?

It doesn't make sense to me to make the Most Valuable Player award into the I'm The Star With The Best Teammates award. Due to the nature of the MVP award, the greatest players are likely to be on the most successful teams, but when that's not the case and they still have a year as amazing as Jokic has, why punish them? Yeah, you played the best basketball in the league. Yeah, you were the most valuable to your team. Yeah, your team made the playoffs and got to their position specifically because of you. But your teammates were too injured for us to recognize you?

[Mavrelous]

Joker is the best player when games dont matter. There is nothing wrong with the award and more with the regular season itself. it means lesser and lesser over the years and teams are saving the best of stars for PS.
maybe give MVP a min game requirement like 70 games and if you dont play enough games you dont get qualified for MVP.

Curry couldn't get out of playin last year and Warriors fans wanted to give him MVP, Jokic reached WCF with Murray.
I agree with the OP, league is too good, too deep, to give MVP to 6th seed, it should be Embiid or Giannis, regardless of how good a season Jokic is having, I know it's arguabely better than the other 2.

[Crives]

Booker didn’t win a damn thing until CP3 arrived. Your case would have more merit if you were stumping for the rightful MVP of your own team.

Did you see me argue for Booker when his team was mediocre, or any other candidate when their team was mediocre? If you did then you would have a point…

I’m not even saying Jokic is not a MVP level player. I am saying he needs to validate his individual performances with wins to be in the conversation for any season he wants to win. Something I am sure he will do in the future, likely with Denver. But this year, he absolutely didn’t provide enough value with only 48 wins to win the award

Book's stats were never close to what Jokic is putting up this year. You would have been insane to push the MVP argument in those dark years.

Yes that would have been absolutely insane. Hence why I didn’t do or believe that, nor anybody else

[gottamakeit]

Did you see me argue for Booker when his team was mediocre, or any other candidate when their team was mediocre? If you did then you would have a point…

I’m not even saying Jokic is not a MVP level player. I am saying he needs to validate his individual performances with wins to be in the conversation for any season he wants to win. Something I am sure he will do in the future, likely with Denver. But this year, he absolutely didn’t provide enough value with only 48 wins to win the award

Book's stats were never close to what Jokic is putting up this year. You would have been insane to push the MVP argument in those dark years.

Yes that would have been absolutely insane. Hence why I didn’t do or believe that, nor anybody else

Then why even mention Book? He is like 2 rungs below in impact.

The argument for Jokic is clear. Jokic has done in the regular season what no player before has done. He fills up all the good metrics and advanced stats. He has performed an insane carry job all season and has been the iron-man for his team.
If we don't award Jokic, then who the hell do we award? and how does that player compare to what Jokic has done all season?

[Egg Nog]

If Jokic dragged a roster consisting of the OP and several of his friends to 43 wins and a playoff berth he'd still get flak for not winning enough.

People just can't see an individual award for what it is.

[Crives]

I am not trying to compare players in this topic. I am asking to reconsider awarding MVP to a player on such a mediocre team. Winning needs to matter a hell of a lot more

Winning already matters a hell of a lot. The teams that win the most play the worst teams remaining in the playoffs. If they win the games in the playoffs, they get to advance to the next round. If they advance to the finals and win the most there, they become champions. How does winning need to matter more?

We have a misunderstanding. I meant winning needs to matter more for determining MVP. We are getting to the point where I truly believe we are headed further down direction of narrative + stats being most important factors for mvp, and actual results are being swept aside. Look at all of the replies and justifications in this thread alone arguing why wins were not that important because of factors like injuries.

It doesn't make sense to me to make the Most Valuable Player award into the I'm The Star With The Best Teammates award. Due to the nature of the MVP award, the greatest players are likely to be on the most successful teams, but when that's not the case and they still have a year as amazing as Jokic has, why punish them? Yeah, you played the best basketball in the league. Yeah, you were the most valuable to your team. Yeah, your team made the playoffs and got to their position specifically because of you. But your teammates were too injured for us to recognize you?

I completely agree. MVP should not go to simply best player on the best team. That would be silly. That’s not what I’m advocating. I am saying there is a big difference between best player on the best team vs best player on the 11th best team with only 48 wins. I believe we have gone way to far towards not valuing wins when we start considering teams this low in standings/success

At the end of the day, it’s really difficult to compare the most elite players in a given season. Instead of telling those players, hey, we want to reward you with most prestigious regular season award, that will be based on counting stats and media narrative, how about we tell those players that one of the most important considerations for winning said award will be the actual results? At the end of the day we know how valuable a win is, but we are so far off from assigning real value to counting stats impact on winning.

[vxmike]

Exactly. They have a mediocre team. Maybe Jokic could provide more value with a better surrounding cast, but the current reality is his team is mediocre, and achieved mediocre results, 11th best record and 48 wins. We shouldn’t be rewarding this type of value, we should be rewarding players who can lead their team to success. This isn’t to take anything away from Jokics individual performances this season, but don’t reward him with this prestigious an award two years in a row when it’s obvious his team is not very good.

They already have an award for best team, dawg. It's called the championship. MVP goes to the best performer of the regular season, which Jokić was by far.

How can you possibly argue Jokic was the best performer of the regular season when his team placed 11th with 48 wins?

His roster is extremely weak and wouldn’t sniff the play-in without him. Does Embiid or Giannis get more than 49 wins from this depleted roster?