Winning Needs to Matter in MVP Conversation Again

[Crives]

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.

[Smash3]

Indeed, we should draw the line at 51 wins.

[IAMZOOTED2]

Don't stress, meyn. Embiid got this locked up.

[Swish1906]

48 wins is a winning season. Specially if its includes an amazing carrying job

[Tempe]

Why is getting 6 seed in the worst western conference in a decade considered some great feat anyway? All the Nuggets did was beat up on bad teams. They had the worst record (20-26) against teams over 0.500 of any top 6 seed in either conference.

Didn’t the media learn their lesson with Westbrook MVP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bstein14]

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.

You can be the #1 seed and loose in the first round as well... If you care about playoff success for a regular season award you need to wait until after the first round to allow votes to be submitted.

[Jables]

Not happening anymore. You will see more and more Westbrook tier MVPs where fans and journalists are high on their own bull, there was so much gaslighting about how all three were deserving MVP choices but simultaneously Embiid was just a narrative pick despite scoring more than any big since the 80's, and Giannis team is apparently as good as the 90's Bulls and 80's Celtics/Lakers combined because he carried their asses to a ring. Now winning these stats that either haven't existed for more than a few years or think you're a great defender because you rebound, that's what basketball is about!

[HotRocks34]

Or, we could give the vote back to the players. And then they might vote for guys on losing teams as they did for Kareem 1976 or Pettit 1956.

Denver went into both the Suns series last year and the Warriors series this year without two of their three top players.

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.

To be the man you have to beat the man, and no one beat him.

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.

If someone wants to argue that, say, Booker deserved the award, ok.

[Crives]

48 wins is a winning season. Specially if its includes an amazing carrying job

48 wins and 11th place is a mediocre finish.
Trying to justify and award Jokic theoretical wins doesn’t change reality, this nuggets team is mediocre and the MVP should not be getting demolished like this.

[cpower]

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.

[MrBigShot]

Yeah they should've given it to Booker who isn't even the best player on his team instead. That's what you want to say, right?

Only 2 teams in the league had more than 5 more wins than the Nuggets. If not Jokic then it's going to Giannis or Embiid. If not them 3, then Luka or Tatum who are clearly better players than Booker and had their teams overachieve this year.

[Crives]

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.

You can be the #1 seed and loose in the first round as well... If you care about playoff success for a regular season award you need to wait until after the first round to allow votes to be submitted.

I’m not suggesting to wait until after the first round. Based on nuggets regular season performance this year, Jokic should not have been in mvp conversation.

[Patches Perry]

I think giving it to Devin Booker would make it less meaningful of an award. Nothing against Booker, he is a superstar in his own right, but basketball is a team game and the most valuable player isn't necessarily going to be on the best team.

[Roger Murdock]

What’s the solution? Give it to Devin Booker? He’s like the 14th best player in the NBA

Ja? He missed a third of the season and is nowhere near as good

Embiid, Giannis, and Jokic were the 3 best players and all their records were roughly even

The Suns and Grizzlies are better teams. MVP is a ‘best roster’ award it’s for the best player.

[skones]

I think there's something to be said about the context of the word "valuable" when it comes to the conversation. A 6 seed and a first round out isnt particularly "valuable" when you look at the scope of the league. That's the type of MVP vote you make and think, "ehhhh, that's not a good look" afterwards.

Don't get me wrong, Jokic has had a season for the ages, but 2nd straight MVP given the circumstances? Nah. It'll be interesting to see the voter fatigue after this MVP campaign given Giannis has been an undeserved afterthought for the last two.

[Duke4life831]

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.

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 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.

[Dominator83]

[vxmike]

Who does Jokic have on his team? Their second best player missed the entire season. Their 3rd best player missed most of it.

[Mogspan]

48 wins is a winning season. Specially if its includes an amazing carrying job

48 wins and 11th place is a mediocre finish.
Trying to justify and award Jokic theoretical wins doesn’t change reality, this nuggets team is mediocre and the MVP should not be getting demolished like this.

Basketball is 5 on 5, bro. We have tools that allow us to isolate value that individual players provide. You have to be smart enough to grasp that a guy whose best teammate is rookie drafted late in the first round and losing to a team with 3+ All-Star-caliber players can still be an incredibly valuable player. The Nuggets absolutely should be getting demolished like this.

[Crives]

Who does Jokic have on his team? Their second best player missed the entire season. Their 3rd best player missed most of it.

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.