NBA MVP Discussion Thread 2023-24 (Part 3: Son of Daughter of MVP thread)

[MyTake_1]

[quote="eyeatoma" [/quote]



Looks he was hurt for that one game. Come on.

[SlovenianDragon]

This is an MVP thread why are people still talking about Embiid?

[Mavrelous]

Jokic is backed up by DeAndre Jordan in his run
Steph Curry was backed up by Jordan Poole in 22

When Steph received adequate backup in CP3 and his starters started under performing (Wiggins and Klay, and his 2-man game buddy went full on crazy) he dipped into -9 on/off, after Dray came back and CP3 went down, his on/off readjusted -5, is Steph Curry negative impact player this year? Did Curry massively transfirmed to go from -9 to -5? Maybe, maybe circumstances dictated this on/off.

Luka was backed up Jalen Brunson and then Kyrie Irving, the 2nd best player on the team.
Luka had to play entire 20-21 season with hobbled KP who could barely move.

Stats are a guide, not a judge, if we see a stat that doesn't adjust with the expectation, it may be our expectation is wrong, it also may be that it is an anomaly due circumstances.
We can simply rewatch snippets of Luka's best stretches (Clippers 7 game series +33 on/ff while playing 1.5 games injured, because Brunson, his backup, who is a very good player was totally ineffective during this series), the 2nd half of 21/22 season (Best player in the league during that period in my biased opinion) and draw conclusions.

Jokic has a great starting lineup next to him, Aaron Gordon had +18 on/off last year, is Aaron Gordon more impactful player than Luka? Michael Malone runs his rotation in this manner, the bench unit drops off, significantly.
Mavs always had Luka, another great guard (Brunson/Kyrie), and a bunch of 3&D player who are very similar in level, all are borderline starters probably bench players.

I don't think Luka is a better player than Jokic, Jokic is significantly better during this historic run, he's in peak GOAT territory.
I also don't think Luka is better than prime Steph, his prime is a competitor for the aforementioned.
But he is a damn good good player, an MVP calibre player and generational talent, his on/off are an anomaly due to circumstances and bizarre roster setup, not lack of impact.

[The-Power]

Only TWO players shot over 50 percent and those two were bench players. The team as a whole shot 39.8 percent. If that doesn’t tell you Jokic’s impact I don’t know what does.

Does the game also prove that Jokic is bad on defense as the team performed well without him? Or does the reasoning only work in one (the desired) direction?

They held the bucks(top 5 rated offense in the league) to 107 points the game before while Jokic being playing the best defense in that game. They played great defense in both games. So I don’t get your point.

And they have had poor offensive games with Jokic as well. The point is that you cannot look at one game and write (paraphrased) ‘see, that's clear evidence that the team sucks on offense without Jokic’ without also having the same energy when it comes to the defensive performance. Well, of course you can but it'll naturally look biased and inconsistent to drive a narrative.

Look, I'm all for making an argument that demonstrates Jokic' value by pointing out what the team looks like without him. I believe Jokic is the MVP. But you cannot use one game as conclusive evidence when it comes to offensive performance, and then simply brush off the defensive performance as irrelevant by pointing to other games. That's just not a credible stance to take.

[losmi]

This is an MVP thread why are people still talking about Embiid?

Yeah, his attempt to steal another award has obviously failed. Lessons learned, he should rest for the next regular season and find a better balance between stat padding and games played.

[BaDaBo]

My 50c.

Embiid - Likely to miss too many games. Probably #1 or #2 if he makes the treshold.
Jokic - Doesn't care about the MVP and plays like it. Media is not going to like that -> less votes. Make no mistake, still MVP worthy.
Tatum - Doesn't really stand out among other MVP candidates & has a better (the best team?) around him than other candidates.
Kawai - Simmilar argument as Tatum. He is on pace to play the most games since 16/17, which is nice to see.
Haliburton - Likely to miss too many games. But even if he didn't some players on this list are just better & Indiana is too low in the standings.
Giannis - I don't have a good argument against him, I just don't feel it. He's right there with his stats and team success, and I'm sure he'll get a couple of votes, but not enought to win it imo. The media has been pretty quiet here, maybe even a bit negative. And it's a media vote.
Luka - His stats are probably the best on the list, and he's done the most with the worst team (mainly due to injuries, arguably overall) among other candidates . Unfortunatly the Mavs just haven't won enough. Not to mention media is a bit against him currently (based on the reactions to his 73pt game). If mavs somehow get into top 4 in the west and he continues his great season...who knows, but right now he probably doesn't get many first place votes.
Edwards - His stats don't POP compared to other MVP candidates. The suprprising team success is the biggest reason he is considered imo.

So that leaves SGA. Stellar personal & team season. It's his award to lose right now. Jokic and Giannis are right there behind him. With Luka as a dark horse. Emiid playing enough games complicates things at 1 & 2 but we probably agree that is unlikely to happen.


p.s.: Durant, Booker, Curry, Brunson, Sabonis, Fox, LeBron, etc. are somewhere in the 5-15 (like some players already mentioned) range with the exact order down to personal preferance of the voter.

[Bob8]

Mavs without Luka in last 3 years 39%. Denver without Jokic 35%. The difference between non impactful player and Jokic doesn't look that big, if we know that Jokic was far the best player in the league in that period.

Kind of pointless without also considering how well the team did when the respective player played. So I'll help out with that.

JOKIC

21-22 – 46W, 26L – 64%
22-23 – 48W, 21L – 70%
23-24 – 32W, 15L – 68%
TOTAL – 126W, 62L – 67%

DONCIC

21-22 – 44W, 21L – 68%
22-23 – 33W, 33L – 50%
23-24 – 23W, 17L – 58%
TOTAL – 100W, 71L – 58%

So there's an obvious gap when it comes to winning percentage when the two players actually play, and that has to be factored in when comparing how the teams fared without the star player. Jokic' team is considerably better when he plays compared to Luka's team, and worse when he doesn't play compared to Luka's team.

Now, there are a lot of other things to take into account such as:

a) who else was missing games;
b) what was strength of schedule;
c) what was the average margin of victory.

That's just for starters. Obviously that holds true for raw +/- numbers as well, just to be clear. But it's important to not erroneously break down any kind of complexity simply because it suits one's argument or belief. That's not going to result in an actually productive conversation.

I'm not arguing that Luka was as good as far the best player in the league in that period, he of course wasn't.I was just answering the poster, who's implying that Luka's impact on Mavs winning is small. Whoever watches Mavs games doesn't need +/- numbers to know how crucial is Luka for the Mavs and seeing how Mavs is doing without Luka confirms that.

When we look at those numbers you posted, we can clearly see the difference in Denver and Mavs rosters. Denver had huge problems with injuries in 21/22 so Luka had better record, Jokic saving Denver. In 22/23 Denver were champions, obviously having very good team, and Dallas imploded after all star break, Jokic with much better record. And this year Mavs with huge injury problems, I would say that Luka has pretty good record considering everything.

I have a feeling that we're complicating things anyway. Saying that someone, who is averaging near 35 triple double with 61.6 TS%, and being far the most doubled player in the league, is not impactful player looks just stupid. I can agree that there can be few better players in the league, but there is a long way from that to say that he doesn't have enough impact on winning. I believe people should firstly watch player play and only after that look at various advanced stats with a grain of salt.

[Lakers In 5]

Why are we discussing an ineligible player for MVP in the MVP thread?

[AleksandarN]

Does the game also prove that Jokic is bad on defense as the team performed well without him? Or does the reasoning only work in one (the desired) direction?

They held the bucks(top 5 rated offense in the league) to 107 points the game before while Jokic being playing the best defense in that game. They played great defense in both games. So I don’t get your point.

And they have had poor offensive games with Jokic as well. The point is that you cannot look at one game and write (paraphrased) ‘see, that's clear evidence that the team sucks on offense without Jokic’ without also having the same energy when it comes to the defensive performance. Well, of course you can but it'll naturally look biased and inconsistent to drive a narrative.

Look, I'm all for making an argument that demonstrates Jokic' value by pointing out what the team looks like without him. I believe Jokic is the MVP. But you cannot use one game as conclusive evidence when it comes to offensive performance, and then simply brush off the defensive performance as irrelevant by pointing to other games. That's just not a credible stance to take.

Don’t need to look at one game we can go back three years same thing.

Read on Twitter

[Wolfgang630]

At least Embiid got an mvp last year.

[eyeatoma]

At least Embiid got an mvp last year.

If his career ends today, it's a miracle he got one after all the **** he's been through and how his body reacts to the rigors of an NBA season. He's not built for the grind unfortunately.

[The-Power]

Don’t need to look at one game we can go back three years same thing.

I am aware. It's a better argument to make than the one you did, which was based on cherry-picking one side of the ball of one game to prove a point. That's what I called out.

[AleksandarN]

Don’t need to look at one game we can go back three years same thing.

I am aware. It's a better argument to make than the one you did, which was based on cherry-picking one side of the ball of one game to prove a point. That's what I called out.

We can also look at defensive rating for the last three years with and without Jokic

With Jokic 113.8
Without Jokic 116.1.

I listed last game as an example of his impact offensively. It also bares out defensively as well when he is not on court. Keep in mind defensive rating is not the be all end all.


https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/nuggets-defensive-rating-with-and-without-nikola-jokic-last-3-years

[AleksandarN]

At least Embiid got an mvp last year.

If his career ends today, it's a miracle he got one after all the **** he's been through and how his body reacts to the rigors of an NBA season. He's not built for the grind unfortunately.

MPJ same. Not MVP caliber because of his back. He had the potential to be special. Now he is a shell of what he could be. Sad. I wish Embiid has a better outcome than MPJ(a miracle he is still able to play)

[eyeatoma]

At least Embiid got an mvp last year.

If his career ends today, it's a miracle he got one after all the **** he's been through and how his body reacts to the rigors of an NBA season. He's not built for the grind unfortunately.

MPJ same. Not MVP caliber because of his back. He had the potential to be special. Now he is a shell of what he could be. Sad. I wish Embiid has a better outcome than MPJ(a miracle he is still able to play)

Miracle that Jokic won the chip last year with Murray and MPJ having their issues. You have to be so damn lucky to win a chip. Obviously skill, and team building/performance is the biggest components, but luck plays a huge part.

[Chokic]

My 50c.

Embiid - Likely to miss too many games. Probably #1 or #2 if he makes the treshold.
Jokic - Doesn't care about the MVP and plays like it. Media is not going to like that -> less votes. Make no mistake, still MVP worthy.
Tatum - Doesn't really stand out among other MVP candidates & has a better (the best team?) around him than other candidates.
Kawai - Simmilar argument as Tatum. He is on pace to play the most games since 16/17, which is nice to see.
Haliburton - Likely to miss too many games. But even if he didn't some players on this list are just better & Indiana is too low in the standings.
Giannis - I don't have a good argument against him, I just don't feel it. He's right there with his stats and team success, and I'm sure he'll get a couple of votes, but not enought to win it imo. The media has been pretty quiet here, maybe even a bit negative. And it's a media vote.
Luka - His stats are probably the best on the list, and he's done the most with the worst team (mainly due to injuries, arguably overall) among other candidates . Unfortunatly the Mavs just haven't won enough. Not to mention media is a bit against him currently (based on the reactions to his 73pt game). If mavs somehow get into top 4 in the west and he continues his great season...who knows, but right now he probably doesn't get many first place votes.
Edwards - His stats don't POP compared to other MVP candidates. The suprprising team success is the biggest reason he is considered imo.

So that leaves SGA. Stellar personal & team season. It's his award to lose right now. Jokic and Giannis are right there behind him. With Luka as a dark horse. Emiid playing enough games complicates things at 1 & 2 but we probably agree that is unlikely to happen.


p.s.: Durant, Booker, Curry, Brunson, Sabonis, Fox, LeBron, etc. are somewhere in the 5-15 (like some players already mentioned) range with the exact order down to personal preferance of the voter.

No donovan mitchell shoutout? Dudes been carrying that cavs team w/o garland and mobley.

[CobraCommander]

My 50c.

Embiid - Likely to miss too many games. Probably #1 or #2 if he makes the treshold.
Jokic - Doesn't care about the MVP and plays like it. Media is not going to like that -> less votes. Make no mistake, still MVP worthy.
Tatum - Doesn't really stand out among other MVP candidates & has a better (the best team?) around him than other candidates.
Kawai - Simmilar argument as Tatum. He is on pace to play the most games since 16/17, which is nice to see.
Haliburton - Likely to miss too many games. But even if he didn't some players on this list are just better & Indiana is too low in the standings.
Giannis - I don't have a good argument against him, I just don't feel it. He's right there with his stats and team success, and I'm sure he'll get a couple of votes, but not enought to win it imo. The media has been pretty quiet here, maybe even a bit negative. And it's a media vote.
Luka - His stats are probably the best on the list, and he's done the most with the worst team (mainly due to injuries, arguably overall) among other candidates . Unfortunatly the Mavs just haven't won enough. Not to mention media is a bit against him currently (based on the reactions to his 73pt game). If mavs somehow get into top 4 in the west and he continues his great season...who knows, but right now he probably doesn't get many first place votes.
Edwards - His stats don't POP compared to other MVP candidates. The suprprising team success is the biggest reason he is considered imo.

So that leaves SGA. Stellar personal & team season. It's his award to lose right now. Jokic and Giannis are right there behind him. With Luka as a dark horse. Emiid playing enough games complicates things at 1 & 2 but we probably agree that is unlikely to happen.


p.s.: Durant, Booker, Curry, Brunson, Sabonis, Fox, LeBron, etc. are somewhere in the 5-15 (like some players already mentioned) range with the exact order down to personal preferance of the voter.

No donovan mitchell shoutout? Dudes been carrying that cavs team w/o garland and mobley.

Not enough buzz-

It’s jokic again then SGA and Giannis - followed by Luka

[Doctor MJ]

We could see today how looks when non impactful player is missing. Those others are missing more or less very often.

We wouldn't be having this conversation if the team got blown out at this rate without him typically.

And how has this game help his +/-?

You might check how many games have Mavs won without him in last 3 years in RS?

I will help you . Luka,

23/24 3/5
22/23 5/11
21/22 8/9 ( 52 wins season)

Jokic,

23/24 1/1
22/23 5/8
21/22 2/6

Mavs without Luka in last 3 years 39%. Denver without Jokic 35%. The difference between non impactful player and Jokic doesn't look that big, if we know that Jokic was far the best player in the league in that period.

It’s weird that I have to point out that it hardly makes sense to talk about the games without these without talking about the games with them in.

One of these teams with their respective star was just a top seed and champion, and one is not. Anything indicating their teams are comparable without their star only highlights the gap with said star.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mavrelous]

It's contagious!!

Read on Twitter

?s=20

[BaDaBo]

Spoiler:

My 50c.

Embiid - Likely to miss too many games. Probably #1 or #2 if he makes the treshold.
Jokic - Doesn't care about the MVP and plays like it. Media is not going to like that -> less votes. Make no mistake, still MVP worthy.
Tatum - Doesn't really stand out among other MVP candidates & has a better (the best team?) around him than other candidates.
Kawai - Simmilar argument as Tatum. He is on pace to play the most games since 16/17, which is nice to see.
Haliburton - Likely to miss too many games. But even if he didn't some players on this list are just better & Indiana is too low in the standings.
Giannis - I don't have a good argument against him, I just don't feel it. He's right there with his stats and team success, and I'm sure he'll get a couple of votes, but not enought to win it imo. The media has been pretty quiet here, maybe even a bit negative. And it's a media vote.
Luka - His stats are probably the best on the list, and he's done the most with the worst team (mainly due to injuries, arguably overall) among other candidates . Unfortunatly the Mavs just haven't won enough. Not to mention media is a bit against him currently (based on the reactions to his 73pt game). If mavs somehow get into top 4 in the west and he continues his great season...who knows, but right now he probably doesn't get many first place votes.
Edwards - His stats don't POP compared to other MVP candidates. The suprprising team success is the biggest reason he is considered imo.

So that leaves SGA. Stellar personal & team season. It's his award to lose right now. Jokic and Giannis are right there behind him. With Luka as a dark horse. Emiid playing enough games complicates things at 1 & 2 but we probably agree that is unlikely to happen.


p.s.: Durant, Booker, Curry, Brunson, Sabonis, Fox, LeBron, etc. are somewhere in the 5-15 (like some players already mentioned) range with the exact order down to personal preferance of the voter.

No donovan mitchell shoutout? Dudes been carrying that cavs team w/o garland and mobley.

I've only covered the ones mentioned in the poll. I haven't heard much about Mitchell this season tbh, so he's a bit off my radar. The only thing I've heard is that he might get traded since it doesn't look like he wants to sign an extension (Source:Bill Simmons podcast I think so take it with a grain of salt).

After looking him up, he's having a terrific season and the team score is good. You can switch him with almost anyone in the 5-15 range. Top 5 he is not.