NBA MVP Discussion Thread 2023-24

[MartyConlonOnTheRun]

Again, I'm basing my opinion on the history of voting for the award and the arguments made, outliers, narratives and others.
I'm voicing my opinion based on how I think voting will go down, not on how I MYSELF think is more deserving or not. Because that's a moot point honestly, only the result will stand out in time, not my opinion about the result.

You caring or not about a player or two having a considerable advantage in piling up "wins" due to a vastly better supporting cast(since you say record will determine it) doesn't faze me, since you don't have a single say in this in the end. I don't have a homer view or bone in this anyway, I don't support the Pacers(Lakers fan).

It's the most valuable player award. Not who is the better player. Not who wins the overall most games.

The fact that you say a measly 5 game difference in the standings will be enough, in an 82 game season....when the stats might even favor Haliburton in the end as well.

But the supporting cast:

Celtics are winning 45-50 without Tatum.
Bucks are winning 40-45 without Giannis.

Assuming good health for the rest of the roster of course.

Indiana are winning less than 20 without Hali.

If you don't think that matters, or you "don't care"....well the guys that actually vote, trust me, they do.
I don't have the problem for the cases of Jokic/Embiid. I still stand with what I said earlier BUT I can very much admit I could be wrong.

But for the others, no, sorry. If you think Celtics/Bucks winning 5 more games(or less, you said record will be the tiebreaker , might be even 1 game in your opinion), after being pegged as the greatest juggernauts to start the season...against a Pacers team most didn't even give a chance to make the playoffs in the first place, are enough to push Tatum/Giannis over Haliburton in the overall race, then I'm sorry for you, you'll be dissapointed.

I was looking it from a voters perspective. I'm saying voters won't end up voting for a guy on a 4 seed unless he blows away the competition. If Jokic has a top 3 PER and running away with the 1 seed after showing his worth in the finals, voters aren't going to go out of their way to vote for Hali. I totally agree 1-3 games isn't going to matter but if Celtics are 59-23 and the Pacers are 52-30, yes I think it will make a difference.


It is just rare that a MVP is not from a Top 3 seed. Only happened 2x this century:
1. RWB - Discussed how it was an anomaly and I think a lot of writers regret it
2. Jokic in 2022 when Giannis (3rd) and Embiid (4th) missed a ton of games with no other really viable candidates.

MVP Year Seed Wins
Embiid 2023 3rd 54
Jokic 2022 6th 48
Jokic 2021 3rd 47
Giannis 2020 1st 57
Giannis 2019 1st 60
James Harden 2018 1st 65
Russell Westbrook 2017 6th 47
Stephen Curry 2016 1st 73
Stephen Curry 2015 1st 67
Kevin Durant 2014 2nd 59
LeBron James 2013 1st 66
LeBron James 2012 2nd 46*
Derrick Rose 2011 1st 62
LeBron James 2010 1st 61
LeBron James 2009 1st 66
Kobe Bryant 2008 1st 57
Dirk Nowitzki 2007 1st 67
Steve Nash 2006 2nd 54
Steve Nash 2005 1st 62
Kevin Garnett 2004 1st 58
Tim Duncan 2003 1st 60
Tim Duncan 2002 2nd 58
Allen Iverson 2001 1st 56
Shaquille O'neal 2000 1st 67

[Exp0sed]

Is this thread about who we think should be MVP? Or who we think the actual voters will cast their vote towards?

Because if the Pacers somehow win 50-55 games and a top 4 seed and Haliburton keeps his current stats or even slightly less, you can bet your houses he's getting it regardless of what advanced stats or other whatnots are pulled out of arses in this thread.

Voters don't go for that. The best statistical line(both raw and advanced) has won it in the past, but it's hardly a rule.It actually isn't more often than not(see Steve Nash/Derrick Rose/Allen Iverson/Kobe winning it in the past).

They go by record, strength of team(who does more with less) and stats.

There's also voter fatigue involved(I'd imagine people don't want to give it to Jokic/Embiid every year regardless of how much they deserved it or not) and even nationality in this case. I would argue some are itching to give it to an american for a change if they have a solid case.

I mean Westbrook won it with just 47 wins for his team a few years ago..

The player with the highest PER has won the last 8 years, except last season that Embiid was second (Jokic was first). Haliburton is 14th right now. The last time someone won with such a low placement was Steve Nash, and there was nothing like prime Jokic around.

Advanced (or call them as you want) stats play a big role in the MVP race nowadays. There was never this much correlation.

14th? he's got like 30 (!) PER, ain't no way 13 players have better PER's

[HotelVitale]

With this level of efficiency and the elite assist numbers, he'll likely get Steve Nash-like MVP consideration -- if his team is winning at a high enough clip.

Steve Nash was the engine of a runaway #1 seed and legit contender. The Pacers will win games but they really aren't close to that level of team, even with good luck. That'll probably leave Haliburton out of serious contention even if he gets brought up in conversation a lot.

Nash also had much better teammates.
Haliburton thus far this season is better than Nash and that's without even talking about defense

you think Nash would be the runaway #1 seed with Mathurin, Turner, Obi Toppin and Bruce Brown?

Like I said before I think Haliburton has been top-2 in terms of impact on his team's individual success. No one's said a negative word about him and I'm not sure what the argument is here. This is the MVP thread and it feels like we're no longer talking about whether we think Haliburton will win the actual official MVP award. If any of you is actually predicting right now that the Pacers will be good enough, and Haliburton will be good enough stats-wise, to make him a for real MVP candidate, I'm up for that discussion.

[Kurtz]

Pacers have had a friendly, home-heavy schedule to start the season. They beat the Bucks without Dame and had an impressive win against Philly, and that's about it as far as impressive wins.

They have a +3.1 point differential, which is on par with the Hawks and below the Knicks. Small sample size here (heavily impacted by the blowout vs Boston), but point differential has been a pretty strong indicator of a team's future record.

They also had less team turnover than most other teams, which always helps to get off to a strong start. I can't see them reaching 50 wins, I think 40-45 is their realistic target this year. Haliburton is great but there just isn't enough talent on the roster to sustain a 60%+ winning percentage.

[Exp0sed]

Steve Nash was the engine of a runaway #1 seed and legit contender. The Pacers will win games but they really aren't close to that level of team, even with good luck. That'll probably leave Haliburton out of serious contention even if he gets brought up in conversation a lot.

Nash also had much better teammates.
Haliburton thus far this season is better than Nash and that's without even talking about defense

you think Nash would be the runaway #1 seed with Mathurin, Turner, Obi Toppin and Bruce Brown?

Like I said before I think Haliburton has been top-2 in terms of impact on his team's individual success. No one's said a negative word about him and I'm not sure what the argument is here. This is the MVP thread and it feels like we're no longer talking about whether we think Haliburton will win the actual official MVP award. If any of you is actually predicting right now that the Pacers will be good enough, and Haliburton will be good enough stats-wise, to make him a for real MVP candidate, I'm up for that discussion.

no argument.
he's 2nd atm in my book as well. I don't appreciate the "best player best team" approach, that's been dominant historically in MVP voting, in my book if Indy is 3rd or even 4th, nabbing HCA with this roster and Hali keeps doing what he's been doing - he should get serious consideration (and plenty of votes). this might be just a very hot start (for both Hali and Indy) so this is all very premature and hypotethical.

it'd be hard (barring injuries) for him to dethrone Jokic who got robbed last season and will likely best Hali both in raw stats and advanced and in team record and seeding.

it's worth noting that in the last few years we see both the discourse and the actual voting, moving away from "best player best team". we saw it in the WB MVP, 47 wins and a 6th seed and in the 2nd Jokic MVP (which imo was 100% deserved despite the seeding). back in the day, i'm not sure Jokic would have gotten that one, same goes for WB and as for Nash that was the beneficiary of a best player best team type MVP - I tend to think he wouldn't have won it if that season would have been the 2023 season.

[Exp0sed]

Pacers have had a friendly, home-heavy schedule to start the season. They beat the Bucks without Dame and had an impressive win against Philly, and that's about it as far as impressive wins.

They have a +3.1 point differential, which is on par with the Hawks and below the Knicks. Small sample size here (heavily impacted by the blowout vs Boston), but point differential has been a pretty strong indicator of a team's future record.

They also had less team turnover than most other teams, which always helps to get off to a strong start. I can't see them reaching 50 wins, I think 40-45 is their realistic target this year. Haliburton is great but there just isn't enough talent on the roster to sustain a 60%+ winning percentage.

all true. 40 is a bit low probably for a +3 differential team but all your premises are correct.
i'd have to think, after resigning Turner and signing Bruce Brown, both of whom are 27 years old that if Hali is really that good rn and will maintain it for a month or two more, Indy's FO should start making some win now moves. the most obvious one would be to trade Mathurin who isn't playing well (yet) but should have plenty of suitors from rebuilding teams and from teams hosting fires ales mid-season

Jalen Smith is shaping up to be a stud and Hield is an expiring they can use to match salaries - if I were them i'd start cooking a lil' something something

Hali is 23 and looks more than ready to lead this core for the forseeable future and he's also a pretty easy star to build around.

the'yre too good to tank, their pick isn't gonna be all that anyways so why wait for Mathurin to develop? no sense in that imo.

[HotelVitale]

Nash also had much better teammates.
Haliburton thus far this season is better than Nash and that's without even talking about defense

you think Nash would be the runaway #1 seed with Mathurin, Turner, Obi Toppin and Bruce Brown?

Like I said before I think Haliburton has been top-2 in terms of impact on his team's individual success. No one's said a negative word about him and I'm not sure what the argument is here. This is the MVP thread and it feels like we're no longer talking about whether we think Haliburton will win the actual official MVP award. If any of you is actually predicting right now that the Pacers will be good enough, and Haliburton will be good enough stats-wise, to make him a for real MVP candidate, I'm up for that discussion.

no argument.
he's 2nd atm in my book as well. I don't appreciate the "best player best team" approach, that's been dominant historically in MVP voting, in my book if Indy is 3rd or even 4th, nabbing HCA with this roster and Hali keeps doing what he's been doing - he should get serious consideration (and plenty of votes). this might be just a very hot start (for both Hali and Indy) so this is all very premature and hypotethical.

it'd be hard (barring injuries) for him to dethrone Jokic who got robbed last season and will likely best Hali both in raw stats and advanced and in team record and seeding.

it's worth noting that in the last few years we see both the discourse and the actual voting, moving away from "best player best team". we saw it in the WB MVP, 47 wins and a 6th seed and in the 2nd Jokic MVP (which imo was 100% deserved despite the seeding). back in the day, i'm not sure Jokic would have gotten that one, same goes for WB and as for Nash that was the beneficiary of a best player best team type MVP - I tend to think he wouldn't have won it if that season would have been the 2023 season.

Gotcha, I honestly wasn't sure if people were really predicting Indy would win 57 games and Haliburton would keep posting 28/15, or just kind of running with the hypothetical. I think the Pacers are really fun to watch but I would bet heavily against them doing that well or Haliburton keeping up this pace. I guess it's possible but I don't believe in it enough now to start talking like it's a thing.

I also don't think there's a 'best player best team' narrative these days, but it's very unlikely that a player who's leading a solid-not-great team and producing less than the big-time favorites could win. It would take a lot of other things for that to happen; e.g. Giannis missing 1/3 of the season and Jokic sleeping through the final 6 weeks, Luka getting pissy with teammates about losing and being seen as a bad leader, etc. Guy like Haliburton could sneak in if that was the case, but otherwise it will and should go to the big-time volume guys.

[CobraCommander]

You don't think prime Jokic, the past 4 seasons, has been more valuable than Prime Kobe? Prime Shaq?

Its extremely hard to grade Jokic until he actually exits his prime. If be the best player in the world for 5 years that's different than being statistically the best player in the world for 10 years

it's pretty easy tho, if u compare him to someone like Kobe who has never been "statistically the best player in the world", no?

No- Kobe was the actual best player for a period of time...so was Shaq....

[Wolfgang630]

Read on Twitter

This dude said the MVP race is between Tatum and KD lmaoooooo

[Mrakar]

Read on Twitter

[mkot]

Read on Twitter

This dude said the MVP race is between Tatum and KD lmaoooooo

Clown take. KD isn't even the best player on the Suns team right now.

[Exp0sed]

Its extremely hard to grade Jokic until he actually exits his prime. If be the best player in the world for 5 years that's different than being statistically the best player in the world for 10 years

it's pretty easy tho, if u compare him to someone like Kobe who has never been "statistically the best player in the world", no?

No- Kobe was the actual best player for a period of time...so was Shaq....

fair enough, i've heard it 20,000 times probably from those days onwards. Shaq? sure. as for Kobe, I personally disagree but like I said, most ppl seem to think so and that's fine by me

[AleksandarN]

This is why he is the MVP and best player on the planet. His BBIQ is at a higher level than anyone else in the game today. I laugh at people still thinking Jokic is terrible on defense or a minus.

Read on Twitter

[eyeatoma]

Read on Twitter

This dude said the MVP race is between Tatum and KD lmaoooooo

Hey guys rejoice! We finally agree on something... Jay Williams is a joke...

[Exp0sed]

Read on Twitter

This dude said the MVP race is between Tatum and KD lmaoooooo

Hey guys rejoice! We finally agree on something... Jay Williams is a joke...

Eyeatoma, I have a question. the season's still very young and both the 76ers and the Nuggets had a rather soft schedule with mostly homegames so far, but still let's talk about rn and not about projections:

Jokic is averaging a slight career high in mpg (34.7) and he's taking a career high 11.6 FGA, posting a career high in Rebs (13.9!) and PTS (30), he's even going to the stripe at a career high rate of 6.5 per game

he is playing without his #2 for the last several games which obviously puts more on the scoring onus on him

The Nuggets are atop the West with 9-2, with the 6th best offense and the 5th best defense.

sidenote: pretty weird, huh? KCP must be some defender if a team anchored by the subpar defender Jokic manages such a feat.no?

Jokic is leading the league (again) in most advanced stats as well and while his assists are down a little, he is still posting a modest 30/14/8.5 on 65% TS

meanwhile, the 76ers led by Embiid have the 4th best offense and the 12th ( ) best defense, good for 8-3 atm.
Embiid himself is posting a negative on\off numbers, while Maxey has been playing at an all-NBA level

my question is: since you have all this info at hand, would you agree that at the moment, Jokic is in the lead in the race for MVP?

Can we agree on that too?

[eyeatoma]

Read on Twitter

This dude said the MVP race is between Tatum and KD lmaoooooo

Hey guys rejoice! We finally agree on something... Jay Williams is a joke...

Eyeatoma, I have a question. the season's still very young and both the 76ers and the Nuggets had a rather soft schedule with mostly homegames so far, but still let's talk about rn and not about projections:

Jokic is averaging a slight career high in mpg (34.7) and he's taking a career high 11.6 FGA, posting a career high in Rebs (13.9!) and PTS (30), he's even going to the stripe at a career high rate of 6.5 per game

he is playing without his #2 for the last several games which obviously puts more on the scoring onus on him

The Nuggets are atop the West with 9-2, with the 6th best offense and the 5th best defense.

sidenote: pretty weird, huh? KCP must be some defender if a team anchored by the subpar defender Jokic manages such a feat.no?

Jokic is leading the league (again) in most advanced stats as well and while his assists are down a little, he is still posting a modest 30/14/8.5 on 65% TS

meanwhile, the 76ers led by Embiid have the 4th best offense and the 12th ( ) best defense, good for 8-3 atm.
Embiid himself is posting a negative on\off numbers, while Maxey has been playing at an all-NBA level

my question is: since you have all this info at hand, would you agree that at the moment, Jokic is in the lead in the race for MVP?

Can we agree on that too?

Embiid is posting a negative because of two bad games. He played bad, I have no question about that. I also blame the schedule makers for having the Sixers play a back to back against the fastest pace team, and then the Celtics for a Cup game. Let's remember these Sixers also just beat the Celtics, so we're 1-1, and they beat their full squad. Sixers were without Oubre and Batum who have been integral to the team. That impacts his numbers, and the fact that he has no ball handlers or passers playing with him. He has Patrick Beverly and a washed up Marcus Morris, while Maxey plays with Harris, Melton, etc.

Read on Twitter

?t=UovpAZm3RxvNKTB8KMWOeQ&s=19

That's not an excuse for Embiid though, he was straight ass against the Celtics. The Pacers not so much, just he had no gas in the 4th quarter. I'd say the one thing that Jokic has on him, is conditioning. Even I'm willing to admit that it's pretty unacceptable for an athlete of his stature to not be able to come into the season in good condition. It's kind of like Luka, although Luka has looked pretty good. Embiid seemed to turn the corner after the 1st game, and was putting up MVP numbers. Jokic also, doesn't need great players around him for him to elevate his game. Embiid is dependent on people to get him the ball, and his game suffers when he has to handle it too much. No shame in that, he's a center, and Jokic is 1 of 1. So is Embiid but in different ways.

Embiid was my MVP before those two clunkers, right now I'm not sure who it is. I would say Jokic is in the running, and Embiid is too. So sure you could say Jokic is above Embiid, but it's incredibly early and premature. It's been 10 games. All star break is a good time to get a clearer picture, right now there is too much noise.

[The-Power]

Haliburton thus far this season is better than Nash and that's without even talking about defense

The first part is debatable but if we disregard sample size and simply judge by the few games he has played this season (while comparing him to full seasons of Nash), I'm fine with the statement for the time being.

Regarding the defense, though: that's not really adding much if anything in Haliburton's favor. Both grade out as below average defenders. Haliburton's superior length helps him at times compared to someone like Nash but neither has ever had positive impact on that end and Nash probably wasn't a worst-in-the-league level defender either because he at least cared enough to put in some effort.

you think Nash would be the runaway #1 seed with Mathurin, Turner, Obi Toppin and Bruce Brown?

Not the ‘runaway #1 seed’ of course, but let's not pretend as if the Pacers don't have a good offensive supporting cast. Sure, there are no other stars on the roster but if you want to maximize offensive efficiency around a superstar playmaker, you can do a lot worse than the current Pacers. It's a collection of really solid supporting players on offense once you have the main driver in place.

Now, of course it's a very weak defensive supporting cast all things considered. They've fully leaned into offense and it's glorious to watch – but let's see what happens in the playoffs (provided they make it which seems more likely than not at this point).

I say all that as one of Hali's biggest fans – and I have been since his college days. I think he's a top 5 offensive player in the league at the moment and maybe even more (depending on how sustainable it is), at least in the RS, and currently he has a strong argument as the MVP of the first ~11 games of the season.

But while his supporting cast is relatively mediocre overall, he has a strong offensive supporting cast for the kind of game he plays and the skills he has. Lots of shooting, a pick-and-pop threat, and a bunch of players that can attack close-outs and run secondary actions on the ball – as well as a very good coach. It's still absolutely staggering to which heights he elevates the Pacers offense and most of the credit goes to him for where they currently are. But I hope we'll stay fair and not ridicule his offensive supporting cast to prop up his case just because the names he plays with aren't sexy. We can praise him without downplaying the value of his supporting cast when it comes to the Pacers offense.

[SpreeS]

Jokic/Embiid/Doncic

Tatum/Haliburton

Edwards/Shai/Giannis/Adebayo

[Genjuro]

Is this thread about who we think should be MVP? Or who we think the actual voters will cast their vote towards?

Because if the Pacers somehow win 50-55 games and a top 4 seed and Haliburton keeps his current stats or even slightly less, you can bet your houses he's getting it regardless of what advanced stats or other whatnots are pulled out of arses in this thread.

Voters don't go for that. The best statistical line(both raw and advanced) has won it in the past, but it's hardly a rule.It actually isn't more often than not(see Steve Nash/Derrick Rose/Allen Iverson/Kobe winning it in the past).

They go by record, strength of team(who does more with less) and stats.

There's also voter fatigue involved(I'd imagine people don't want to give it to Jokic/Embiid every year regardless of how much they deserved it or not) and even nationality in this case. I would argue some are itching to give it to an american for a change if they have a solid case.

I mean Westbrook won it with just 47 wins for his team a few years ago..

The player with the highest PER has won the last 8 years, except last season that Embiid was second (Jokic was first). Haliburton is 14th right now. The last time someone won with such a low placement was Steve Nash, and there was nothing like prime Jokic around.

Advanced (or call them as you want) stats play a big role in the MVP race nowadays. There was never this much correlation.

14th? he's got like 30 (!) PER, ain't no way 13 players have better PER's

I was wrong. It was discussed right after that message.

[Wolfgang630]

Read on Twitter

Joker still 1. Luka jumps to 2 and Embiid falls to 3.