RealGM

THE J0KER wrote:

LordCovington33 wrote:And now this, despite in meantime George badly dropped his level after All-Star game damaging OKC record.

mr570 wrote:

THE J0KER wrote:

LordCovington33 wrote:And now this, despite in meantime George badly dropped his level after All-Star game damaging OKC record.

This is just wrong. He hurt his shoulder, on February 26th, against the Nuggets. He tore his labrum. So he was playing basically half the season with a shoulder tear.

He didn't "drop his level" whatever that means. He got hurt.

BelgradeNugget wrote:

mr570 wrote:

THE J0KER wrote:

This is just wrong. He hurt his shoulder, on February 26th, against the Nuggets. He tore his labrum. So he was playing basically half the season with a shoulder tear.

He didn't "drop his level" whatever that means. He got hurt.

OK, then he "drop his level" because he was hurt.
Embiid is not in the conversation because he was hurt and played in 64 games. Same thing with Kawhi, 60 games out of conversation. Paul George shouldn't be in the conversation because he wasn't on the MVP level while playing hurt

TheBallsDeeper wrote:Jokic had to be benched at the end of game seven because he is a liability on defense, he shouldn't be in the MVP conversation. Can't even be a top 20 player if you are poor at 50% of the game.

Embiid is not in the conversation because he was hurt and played in 64 games. Same thing with Kawhi, 60 games out of conversation. Paul George shouldn't be in the conversation because he wasn't on the MVP level while playing hurt

Bergmaniac wrote:These retroactives hot takes about the MVP rankings based on playoff performance are so dumb. It's a regular season award.

Embiid is not in the conversation because he was hurt and played in 64 games. Same thing with Kawhi, 60 games out of conversation. Paul George shouldn't be in the conversation because he wasn't on the MVP level while playing hurt

He wasn't at the level he was earlier in the season, but he was still pretty damn good in most games after the injury too. In March he averaged 26.2 PPG and 8.6 RPG on a 55.4% TS% while still playing great defence. In April the numbers were very similar. His efficiency decreased from his peak months, but it's not like he became a scrub. He was still a major positive for his team.

jbk1234 wrote:Basketball professionals credit what happens October-february more than what happens in March and April when half the teams/players shut it down. They should.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app

BelgradeNugget wrote:

Bergmaniac wrote:These retroactives hot takes about the MVP rankings based on playoff performance are so dumb. It's a regular season award.

Embiid is not in the conversation because he was hurt and played in 64 games. Same thing with Kawhi, 60 games out of conversation. Paul George shouldn't be in the conversation because he wasn't on the MVP level while playing hurt

He wasn't at the level he was earlier in the season, but he was still pretty damn good in most games after the injury too. In March he averaged 26.2 PPG and 8.6 RPG on a 55.4% TS% while still playing great defence. In April the numbers were very similar. His efficiency decreased from his peak months, but it's not like he became a scrub. He was still a major positive for his team.

Nobody is saying he was a scrub. His efficiency decreased, his team fell from 3 to 6 in the west. He was still very good but not on MVP level.

Bergmaniac wrote:

BelgradeNugget wrote:

Bergmaniac wrote:These retroactives hot takes about the MVP rankings based on playoff performance are so dumb. It's a regular season award.


He wasn't at the level he was earlier in the season, but he was still pretty damn good in most games after the injury too. In March he averaged 26.2 PPG and 8.6 RPG on a 55.4% TS% while still playing great defence. In April the numbers were very similar. His efficiency decreased from his peak months, but it's not like he became a scrub. He was still a major positive for his team.

Nobody is saying he was a scrub. His efficiency decreased, his team fell from 3 to 6 in the west. He was still very good but not on MVP level.

And that's why he will end up way behind Giannis and Harden, but he did enough over the whole regular season to be third in the voting IMO. He played 335 minutes more than Jokic, which gives him the edge for me.

Soulyss wrote:

THE J0KER wrote:

Soulyss wrote:Neither team could beat the Blazers... yet no love for Lillard... WTH.

This is not about the playoff, but even if playoff counts, while Lillard arguably outplayed George and Russ both, Jokic clearly outplayed Lillard, but McCollum, bench, and coach make that slight difference in Portland favor over Denver. So once again - Nikola Jokic should join Giannis and Harden for this nomination!

I certainly agree that I would have Jokic over George, but Lillard took a team that "Wasn't even supposed to make the playoffs" to the three seed and 50+. Jokic had a nice regular season, but couldn't get the team over the hump when it mattered. Denver was clearly more talented and folded like a paper doll. These things do matter, which is why Lillard should be there, and not Jokic.

BelgradeNugget wrote:

Bergmaniac wrote:

BelgradeNugget wrote:Nobody is saying he was a scrub. His efficiency decreased, his team fell from 3 to 6 in the west. He was still very good but not on MVP level.

And that's why he will end up way behind Giannis and Harden, but he did enough over the whole regular season to be third in the voting IMO. He played 335 minutes more than Jokic, which gives him the edge for me.

A lot of players played more minutes than Jokic but didn't lead one of the youngest teams in the league, with most injuries to starters, to 2 place in the west. Thing is simple when you look at prediction before the season started one team overachieved the other underachieved. One player led his team to a better record than anybody thought they would have and that player is Jokic.

Bergmaniac wrote:

BelgradeNugget wrote:

Bergmaniac wrote:And that's why he will end up way behind Giannis and Harden, but he did enough over the whole regular season to be third in the voting IMO. He played 335 minutes more than Jokic, which gives him the edge for me.

A lot of players played more minutes than Jokic but didn't lead one of the youngest teams in the league, with most injuries to starters, to 2 place in the west. Thing is simple when you look at prediction before the season started one team overachieved the other underachieved. One player led his team to a better record than anybody thought they would have and that player is Jokic.

It's an individual award, Thunder underachieving has nothing to do with PG13, he was better than anyone expected, it' not his fault Westbrook forgot how to shoot and the Thunder bench and coach are hilariously bad.

ThumbsUpBaby wrote:It's unfortunate that those votes came in long before the playoffs. Jokic should've easily been in the top 3 candidates, especially after how he led a young Nuggets team to the 2nd seed. I don't understand how PG was voted over Jokic as well. Keep in mind, this Nuggets team wasn't even a playoff team last season and Jokic led them to the 2nd seed at the West. This year was even harder than last year.

jbk1234 wrote:Basketball professionals credit what happens October-february more than what happens in March and April when half the teams/players shut it down. They should.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J327A using RealGM mobile app