RealGM

Luka could become the youngest MVP in league history if he wins it next year.

Stats from Basketball-Reference

real question is what record/place in the league would the Mavs need to finish at for Luka to get MVP

I think they would need to be Top 5 in the west Top 7 in the league and these numbers should get him MVP

"Luka could become the youngest MVP in league history if he wins it next year"

Next year? The dude is making the run for it this year. 1/4 into the season and I think he is 50/50 with Giannis at the moment. If Luka keeps this level of play up and Dallas finishes with a top 3 seed (4th at the moment), I think he wins it.

And to answer the question on how it compares to Rose season. It blows it out of the water if he can keep this up.

Duke4life831 wrote:"Luka could become the youngest MVP in league history if he wins it next year"

Next year? The dude is making the run for it this year. 1/4 into the season and I think he is 50/50 with Giannis at the moment. If Luka keeps this level of play up and Dallas finishes with a top 3 seed (4th at the moment), I think he wins it.

And to answer the question on how it compares to Rose season. It blows it out of the water if he can keep this up.

Luka won't get an MVP-award this year. Giannis already won it.

I'm talking about MVP-award 2020 next year when it's given out after this regular season.

Rose wasn't the best player that season - many wouldn't even put him in the top-5. So being as good as that version of Rose doesn't mean that you're MVP quality. Especially as overall offensive efficiency has improved since then.

Rose is pretty widely looked upon as the worst MVP winner in the past 20 years. (With apologies to Steve Nash). If you want to make his case, compare him to Giannis last year, or even this year.

Rose was probably the biggest MVP sham of all-time. He was given the award because he was the best offensive player on the #1 seed, yet the Bulls were the #1 defensive team and only the 12th best offensive team.

The reason the Bulls were the best team was DEFENSE, not offense. If they wanted to compensate them, then COY or DPOY was the way to go. If you're going to give the MVP to a primarily offensive player, you better be sure that his team is great for that reason.

Same with Westbrook when he averaged a triple-double. His team was the 15th best offensive team in the league I think, and they were better defensively than offensively.

Nothing is black or white, which is why just looking at MVP is dumb. A guy can have a better season than another, and yet he doesn't get an MVP while the other does.

The stats being put up just can’t be compared across eras at this stage. This new era is **** in terms of stats, lack of defense, scoring, pace etc.

Compare him against Giannis last year + factor in defense or even just Harden last year so you can ignore the unquantifiable huge advantage Giannis would have in defense.

That’s the base for an MVP year in the stat era.

Effigy wrote:Rose is pretty widely looked upon as the worst MVP winner in the past 20 years. (With apologies to Steve Nash). If you want to make his case, compare him to Giannis last year, or even this year.

Why on Earth should we be comparing Luka's chances for winning an MVP to the guys he's up for the award against...

... when we can compare him to a guy from nearly a decade ago?

Silly you.

giberish wrote:Rose wasn't the best player that season - many wouldn't even put him in the top-5. So being as good as that version of Rose doesn't mean that you're MVP quality. Especially as overall offensive efficiency has improved since then.

MVP isn’t indicative of best player of the year. Else MJ would have more than 5 and LeBron would have more than 4.

Rose was the most valuable for the Bulls because the team was not very good on offense. The Bulls had the best record in the league and this is with Boozer missing the first 20 games and Noah missing 25 games in the middle of the season.

LeBron could have won it, but he was not given much credit for joining Wade and Bosh and ring chasers in Miami and finishing as the 2 seed behind Chicago (who started at 9-8 record before closing with 62-20 record).

Comparing raw stats like that is pointless when you consider how different their teams. Dallas plays at warp-speed compared to the Thib-era Bulls. Even if you use per-100 possession stats, that doesn't take into account how Rose was driving against set defenses in a much slower NBA.

I like Luka as much as the next guy, but I'd hate for this to be another thread where people take shots at D-Rose because his stats weren't the most eye-catching. Rose may not have been the best player in the league, but he absolutely made that Chicago team go on offense.

I don't think the Mavs have the pieces yet to win enough games for Luka to be in contention, but his numbers look good even compared to Giannis'.

I don't understand why people seem so butthurt about this kid tbh, any player doing 1/5 of what he is doing in his sophomore season would be getting praised to high heaven too. 30 ppg on 48FG%, 10 boards, 9.4 dimes, while carrying his team to the 4th seed in the West? That's an mvp season in my book.

PockyCandy wrote:Comparing raw stats like that is pointless when you consider how different their teams. Dallas plays at warp-speed compared to the Thib-era Bulls. Even if you use per-100 possession stats, that doesn't take into account how Rose was driving against set defenses in a much slower NBA.

I like Luka as much as the next guy, but I'd hate for this to be another thread where people take shots at D-Rose because his stats weren't the most eye-catching. Rose may not have been the best player in the league, but he absolutely made that Chicago team go on offense.

Logic isn't allowed in this thread.

It's all about dissing Rose.

giberish wrote:Rose wasn't the best player that season - many wouldn't even put him in the top-5. So being as good as that version of Rose doesn't mean that you're MVP quality. Especially as overall offensive efficiency has improved since then.

Chris Paul's average regular season for quite a while I'd put over derrick rose's mvp season. Like there's probably 8-10 season of CP3 you could average out and say its better than drose's best.

It would be hard to put up derrick rose type of numbers and win an MVP in the next 5 years. Only one who has a shot is Melo. obv. Let's just give melo the MVP now. He's playing so well and elevating his team. Da realest MVP evar.

PockyCandy wrote:Comparing raw stats like that is pointless when you consider how different their teams. Dallas plays at warp-speed compared to the Thib-era Bulls. Even if you use per-100 possession stats, that doesn't take into account how Rose was driving against set defenses in a much slower NBA.

I like Luka as much as the next guy, but I'd hate for this to be another thread where people take shots at D-Rose because his stats weren't the most eye-catching. Rose may not have been the best player in the league, but he absolutely made that Chicago team go on offense.

This.

The nba is quite different than it was even 5 years ago. Anyone who actually watched the bulls that year knows that Rose was absolutely the primary reason they won as many games they did with their rotation of injuries and general lack of scoring talent. The bulls were nowhere near an elite team without Rose. They were a great defensive team but never sniffed 50 wins in the thibs era without Rose on the floor; I believe the best they ever did without Rose was 44 wins, which is a far cry from a title contender historically. When he was there and healthy, they were a 60+ win team. I do apologize that this doesnt fit nicely into metrics the way people want but it's an obvious reality that he was the most valuable player that year. Just because others players led prettier offenses doesnt not at all mean that they shouldered heavier loads than Rose did, which is absolutely why he won.

And For the life of me I do not know why people even bother doing direct head to head comparisons of stats between two guys who played completely different styles of basketball in different eras. Makes zero sense to me, other than the sad reality that people are failing miserably at simplifying their understanding of the game. Luka is not Rose, Rose is not Luka. Luka plays in a very non physical pace oriented era, Rose played on a brutally slow grind it out team that defined NBA defense for the next several years.

I'll give you that he wasnt the best in 2011; I'd take LeBron, Dirk and Dwight over him solidly but he played about as well as anyone else and was only 22 and trending upwards.

Stop making these threads