RealGM

Can we please put it to rest. Jokic did so much more with less and even if you don’t want to argue Jokic, SGA was just as good and had OKC in the #1 seed.

No one believed Luka deserved MVP until Dallas made the finals.

2001 Vince Carter, 2003 TMac, 2024 Luka

nuff said

I genuinely do not think that I have seen a single person say this.

Domejandro wrote:I genuinely do not think that I have seen a single person say this.

But we can still put it to rest.

Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

Mavrelous wrote:Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

I think the main argument truly is that Jokic was just the best player that year. Exclude team success, whatever.

It was Jokic by a good distance.

There is no narrative. A few people think that way. Let them have their opinions. Most don’t agree anyway

Instead of arguing I just post 1 of the endless videos, articles, threads and posts that stated that Luka would be the deserving MVP and that the media has a bias against him. It's from March 2024, has 2.6 Million views, over 100.000 likes vs 1.000 dislikes and more than 10.000 comments.

DonaldSanders wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

I think the main argument truly is that Jokic was just the best player that year. Exclude team success, whatever.

It was Jokic by a good distance.

Jokic wasn't wasn't the best player that year, Luka was better, and it's an award with no set criteria, it's a media narrative, and the media narrative against him was he didn't win enough, this was the claim repeatedly thrown around in the Hoop Collective, which also do the straw poll and generally set the tone for the award.

I literally have never heard anyone say he deserved the MVP. I heard people say he was better then Shai. Which is perfectly reasonable in some people's mind if they want to include the finals and team success

Is this engagement farming?

There are quite a few arguments in Luka's favour.

First off, the Mavs have had an injury riddeled season. For example, by game 65 the most used Mavs lineup has played 90 minutes together(Denver and OKC's starting 5 have had around 600 min by that point of the season). That's quite a difference. Luka dragged that roster to a top5 finish. If it was Jokic, we would sing songs about that.

After everybody got back and the Gafford and PJW trade, the Mavs were the best(or 2nd best team in the NBA)

34/9/9 on elite efficiency, most points produced,..

The only false narrative was the "He's not a bad defender"

Mavrelous wrote:Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

Many players have won the MVP from lower standings then the Mavs. Jokic, Westbrook. "It's the narrative" of the voters " doesn't cut it when it's a small handful of voters. Selection criteria isn't distinguish so you literally can't pin it down to "it belongs to most stats/overall most important player on best team/bestest offensive player"

Come on bro

brutalitops wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

Many players have won the MVP from lower standings then the Mavs. Jokic, Westbrook. "It's the narrative" of the voters " doesn't cut it when it's a small handful of voters. Selection criteria isn't distinguish so you literally can't pin it down to "it belongs to most stats/overall most important player on best team/bestest offensive player"

Come on bro

I'm not saying players didn't win it from lower seeds, I'm arguing for a player to win it from lower seed.
I'm saying that the articles on ESPN and THC (which is an important podcast and sets the tone for the award), used this argument.

juanc wrote:There are quite a few arguments in Luka's favour.

First off, the Mavs have had an injury riddeled season. For example, by game 65 the most used Mavs lineup has played 90 minutes together(Denver and OKC's starting 5 have had around 600 min by that point of the season). That's quite a difference. Luka dragged that roster to a top5 finish. If it was Jokic, we would sing songs about that.

After everybody got back and the Gafford and PJW trade, the Mavs were the best(or 2nd best team in the NBA)

34/9/9 on elite efficiency, most points produced,..

Denver finished 6 with Murray out for the year and MPJ out with a destroyed back and won it.

Again. I will never put players down as Luka was fantastic that year and was clearly a top 3 player. Jokic was overall better that season.

Mavrelous wrote:

brutalitops wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

Many players have won the MVP from lower standings then the Mavs. Jokic, Westbrook. "It's the narrative" of the voters " doesn't cut it when it's a small handful of voters. Selection criteria isn't distinguish so you literally can't pin it down to "it belongs to most stats/overall most important player on best team/bestest offensive player"

Come on bro

I'm not saying players didn't win it from lower seeds, I'm arguing for a player to win it from lower seed.
I'm saying that the articles on ESPN and THC (which is an important podcast and sets the tone for the award), used this argument.

But lack of team success has never stopped a player from winning an MVP in years. Shai is the first MVP in 10 years to win an MVP in a championship year.

Hardly ever happens. It's usually players greatness and gets rewarded and takes the team a couple of years to get pieces or a luck break to win the title. Not a "hey his team hasn't made it to the conference finals yet I'm not voting for him on this particular year because of that!"

brutalitops wrote:But lack of team success has never stopped a player from winning an MVP in years. Shai is the first MVP in 10 years to win an MVP in a championship year.

Which is why it was false narrative to use...

Mavrelous wrote:

brutalitops wrote:But lack of team success has never stopped a player from winning an MVP in years. Shai is the first MVP in 10 years to win an MVP in a championship year.

Which is why it was false narrative to use...

It's false to use that argument as to why Doncic was a better player then Jokic.

Domejandro wrote:I genuinely do not think that I have seen a single person say this.

You’re blessed. Go somewhere less informed like Reddit and it’s a super common opinion even still. At the time it was obnoxious.

Mavrelous wrote:Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

No that’s the straw man that Luka fans constructed why he wasn’t the MVP. Really lack of team success was just the icing on the cake for his advanced stats not being close to SGA or Jokic and his defense being ****.

All the playoffs proved is that SGA was clearly better than Luka as he outplayed him badly head-to-head when they faced off.

iggymcfrack wrote:

Mavrelous wrote:Luka absolutely should have been the MVP, the narrative of the voters against him was his lack of team success, when it was a patently falst argumnet, the PO clearly showed it.

No that’s the straw man that Luka fans constructed why he wasn’t the MVP. Really lack of team success was just the icing on the cake for his advanced stats not being close to SGA or Jokic and his defense being ****.

All the playoffs proved is that SGA was clearly better than Luka as he outplayed him badly head-to-head when they faced off.

1st of all, Luka's advanced stats were better than SGA, and advanced stats are a tool to help evaluate players, not rank them, but you seem to feel very strongly about this, I don't think any discussion is going bear any fruit.