NBA MVP Discussion Thread 2023-24 (Part 4: MVP Thread's Revenge)

[zero rings]

Luka is 4th in EPM, 3rd in LEBRON, and 3rd BPM. That's a decent MVP case

That’s a good case for him finishing 3rd, but not 1st.

[Bob8]

I don't think Luka has much of a case outside of basic PTS/REB/AST counting stats. Shai is more efficient on offense, way better on defense, and clears him in on/off stats. He's also leading the #1 team in the conference.

Then there's Jokic who is just better than him.

Yes, Shai has better case for MVP, but can we don't pretend that efficiency makes a case for Shai? Luka has better eFg% while scoring a lot more, and Shai is shooting better FTs. My guess is that those FTs will be the biggest problem for Shai in playoffs. No way he will made 8 per game.

[Special_Puppy]

MVP Odds according to betting markets with Vig removed
Jokic 57%
SGA 24%
Luka 11%
Giannis 5%
Tatum 3%
Ant 0.6%

[itsxtray]

I don't think Luka has much of a case outside of basic PTS/REB/AST counting stats. Shai is more efficient on offense, way better on defense, and clears him in on/off stats. He's also leading the #1 team in the conference.

Then there's Jokic who is just better than him.

Yes, Shai has better case for MVP, but can we don't pretend that efficiency makes a case for Shai? Luka has better eFg% while scoring a lot more, and Shai is shooting better FTs. My guess is that those FTs will be the biggest problem for Shai in playoffs. No way he will made 8 per game.

Making your freethrows is important, Luka has a playoff run shooting .656% and another shooting .529% which is inexcusable. Also, the difference in their efg% is negligible. Shai's at .577% with Luka at .580% there's a basically no difference. So bringing that up as something that separates them is inaccurate.

[Bob8]

I don't think Luka has much of a case outside of basic PTS/REB/AST counting stats. Shai is more efficient on offense, way better on defense, and clears him in on/off stats. He's also leading the #1 team in the conference.

Then there's Jokic who is just better than him.

Yes, Shai has better case for MVP, but can we don't pretend that efficiency makes a case for Shai? Luka has better eFg% while scoring a lot more, and Shai is shooting better FTs. My guess is that those FTs will be the biggest problem for Shai in playoffs. No way he will made 8 per game.

Making your freethrows is important, Luka has a playoff run shooting .656% and another shooting .529% which is inexcusable. Also, the difference in their efg% is negligible. Shai's at .577% with Luka at .580% there's a basically no difference. So bringing that up as something that separates them is inaccurate.

To sum it up, Luka is much better scorer, rebounder and passer, has marginally better eFG% and is much worse FT shooter.

[Exp0sed]

Yes, Shai has better case for MVP, but can we don't pretend that efficiency makes a case for Shai? Luka has better eFg% while scoring a lot more, and Shai is shooting better FTs. My guess is that those FTs will be the biggest problem for Shai in playoffs. No way he will made 8 per game.

Making your freethrows is important, Luka has a playoff run shooting .656% and another shooting .529% which is inexcusable. Also, the difference in their efg% is negligible. Shai's at .577% with Luka at .580% there's a basically no difference. So bringing that up as something that separates them is inaccurate.

To sum it up, Luka is much better scorer, rebounder and passer, has marginally better eFG% and is much worse FT shooter.

everything u said is true, Luka is a much better rebounder and passer, they are pretty comparable as scorers but you omitted the fact that Shai is a much better defender.

i agree historically defense has been less important than offense in MVP considerations but that's SGA's main advantage over Luka

[Bob8]

Making your freethrows is important, Luka has a playoff run shooting .656% and another shooting .529% which is inexcusable. Also, the difference in their efg% is negligible. Shai's at .577% with Luka at .580% there's a basically no difference. So bringing that up as something that separates them is inaccurate.

To sum it up, Luka is much better scorer, rebounder and passer, has marginally better eFG% and is much worse FT shooter.

everything u said is true, Luka is a much better rebounder and passer, they are pretty comparable as scorers but you omitted the fact that Shai is a much better defender.

i agree historically defense has been less important than offense in MVP considerations but that's SGA's main advantage over Luka

I know that Luka is not winning MVP this year.

I don't know, 3.5 points more looks pretty big difference to me.

Tell me who was the last player that has won MVP award because of his D?

Btw. Luka is averaging 36.1/10/10.5 with 63.6 TS% in last 24 games.

[iggymcfrack]

To sum it up, Luka is much better scorer, rebounder and passer, has marginally better eFG% and is much worse FT shooter.

everything u said is true, Luka is a much better rebounder and passer, they are pretty comparable as scorers but you omitted the fact that Shai is a much better defender.

i agree historically defense has been less important than offense in MVP considerations but that's SGA's main advantage over Luka

I know that Luka is not winning MVP this year.

I don't know, 3.5 points more looks pretty big difference to me.

Tell me who was the last player that has won MVP award because of his D?

Giannis over Harden in 2019.

[zero rings]

To sum it up, Luka is much better scorer, rebounder and passer, has marginally better eFG% and is much worse FT shooter.

everything u said is true, Luka is a much better rebounder and passer, they are pretty comparable as scorers but you omitted the fact that Shai is a much better defender.

i agree historically defense has been less important than offense in MVP considerations but that's SGA's main advantage over Luka

I know that Luka is not winning MVP this year.

I don't know, 3.5 points more looks pretty big difference to me.

Tell me who was the last player that has won MVP award because of his D?

Btw. Luka is averaging 36.1/10/10.5 with 63.6 TS% in last 24 games.

Embiid, Giannis, Garnett and Duncan all won MVPs when there were better offensive players in the league. Defense was absolutely a consideration.

And of course, defense shows up in the impact stats, where Shai has a pretty clear edge over Luka (+12.2 to +6.6 on/off). Combine that with his team being #1 in the conference and I don't see the case for Luka.

Then there is Jokic, who is clearly better on both sides of the court and leads the league in +/-. Maybe Luka could win in a weaker year, like Westbrook in 2017, but not in a year where there are two candidates with impeccable resumes.

[Bob8]

everything u said is true, Luka is a much better rebounder and passer, they are pretty comparable as scorers but you omitted the fact that Shai is a much better defender.

i agree historically defense has been less important than offense in MVP considerations but that's SGA's main advantage over Luka

I know that Luka is not winning MVP this year.

I don't know, 3.5 points more looks pretty big difference to me.

Tell me who was the last player that has won MVP award because of his D?

Btw. Luka is averaging 36.1/10/10.5 with 63.6 TS% in last 24 games.

Embiid, Giannis, Garnett and Duncan all won MVPs when there were better offensive players in the league. Defense was absolutely a consideration.

And of course, defense shows up in the impact stats, where Shai has a pretty clear edge over Luka (+12.2 to +6.6 on/off). Combine that with his team being #1 in the conference and I don't see the case for Luka.

Then there is Jokic, who is clearly better on both sides of the court and leads the league in +/-. Maybe Luka could win in a weaker year, like Westbrook in 2017, but not in a year where there are two candidates with impeccable resumes.

Embiid? We have clearly seen in playoffs the difference between Embiid and Jokic. They just didn't want to give to white, unathletic, international player another MVP. Campaign for Embiid was embarrassing.

There's no case for Luka because Mavs aren't winning enough. Difficult to blame the team, who played with 32 different starting lineups, with 0 lineups over 100 minutes and best players missing 20+ games, for that. But I agree, it's what it is, Luka is not winning it.

Nobody will convince me that Shai is better player though.

[zero rings]

I know that Luka is not winning MVP this year.

I don't know, 3.5 points more looks pretty big difference to me.

Tell me who was the last player that has won MVP award because of his D?

Btw. Luka is averaging 36.1/10/10.5 with 63.6 TS% in last 24 games.

Embiid, Giannis, Garnett and Duncan all won MVPs when there were better offensive players in the league. Defense was absolutely a consideration.

And of course, defense shows up in the impact stats, where Shai has a pretty clear edge over Luka (+12.2 to +6.6 on/off). Combine that with his team being #1 in the conference and I don't see the case for Luka.

Then there is Jokic, who is clearly better on both sides of the court and leads the league in +/-. Maybe Luka could win in a weaker year, like Westbrook in 2017, but not in a year where there are two candidates with impeccable resumes.

Embiid? We have clearly seen in playoffs the difference between Embiid and Jokic. They just didn't want to give to white, unathletic, international player another MVP. Campaign for Embiid was embarrassing.

There's no case for Luka because Mavs aren't winning enough. Difficult to blame the team, who played with 32 different starting lineups, with 0 lineups over 100 minutes and best players missing 20+ games, for that. But I agree, it's what it is, Luka is not winning it.

Nobody will convince me that Shai is better player though.

I don't think Embiid deserved it either, but defense was an argument in his favor. It will be an argument in SGA's favor as well.

[Bob8]

Embiid, Giannis, Garnett and Duncan all won MVPs when there were better offensive players in the league. Defense was absolutely a consideration.

And of course, defense shows up in the impact stats, where Shai has a pretty clear edge over Luka (+12.2 to +6.6 on/off). Combine that with his team being #1 in the conference and I don't see the case for Luka.

Then there is Jokic, who is clearly better on both sides of the court and leads the league in +/-. Maybe Luka could win in a weaker year, like Westbrook in 2017, but not in a year where there are two candidates with impeccable resumes.

Embiid? We have clearly seen in playoffs the difference between Embiid and Jokic. They just didn't want to give to white, unathletic, international player another MVP. Campaign for Embiid was embarrassing.

There's no case for Luka because Mavs aren't winning enough. Difficult to blame the team, who played with 32 different starting lineups, with 0 lineups over 100 minutes and best players missing 20+ games, for that. But I agree, it's what it is, Luka is not winning it.

Nobody will convince me that Shai is better player though.

I don't think Embiid deserved it either, but defense was an argument in his favor. It will be an argument in SGA's favor as well.

It wasn't, they just had to fabricate something to stole it from Jokic. And it would be the same this year, Jokic is just superior player to Shai. Jokic is basically the whole Nuggets system.

[Doctor MJ]

i've been going back and forth in regards to Luka this season
i'm not as high as most of the "best team" argument or seeding, it's def been true historically but since that WB MVP, we've seen another in Jokic (which unlike WB who didn't deserve it imo, Jokic did) when he carried the Nuggets to a decent seed with a G-league squad.

I think Luka is in the conversation despite the low seed
we can do a thought experiment, say a player averages 44-12-12 on decent efficiency for a team that finishes 7th - is that not enough individual seperation for MVP? I think 100% of voters would agree that would be enough

so from that experiment we can glean that a lower seed doesn't nessescary exclude said player from MVP contention, so the question becomes how much seperation is needed and what determines that seperation other than raw stats

i'm not sure if Luka has done enough, i've been going back on and forth in my mind all season long regarding this
as it stands for me atm, I think the games played tilt it not in his favor

I think he has done just about enough per game to warrant this MVP but he did only play 55 games so far, while Jokic and SGA have both played 62 and I consider that to be meaningful, 12% less games is significant imo

when I couple that with the lower seed I tend to still give the nod to Jokic or SGA but honestly Luka is right there too, not far behind.
we can argue that SGA and Jokic needed to do less, as their teams are simply better and better coached and that had they been forced to do more - they could have done more, indivdually and that would be correct, but in MVP considerations you ony count what's actually been done. that's a different discussion, "who is the MVP?" is a different question than whose the best player in the world.

I like that you're doing a thought experiment, but have to note that you're talking as if nothing like this has ever been seen before in NBA history, when it's actually the classic discussion about MVP.

When Wilt scored 50 PPG, he didn't win the MVP despite leading the 3rd best team in the league.

How could that be so when he put up such huge individual numbers? Because someone else was thought to be more valuable, because voters understood there were things the box score was not capturing. I happen to think the voters were right, but the more objectively important point here is just that there's historical precedent for not giving the MVP to the guy with the biggest numbers.

And in the case of Luka, if we literally had this situation right now, it only hammer home the point harder that it doesn't seem to matter how much bigger and better Luka's numbers get, the team remains pretty mediocre.

None of this means that voters can't be bowled over by huge individual numbers and a mediocre record, but if you already have the "But when will they start winning big?" question looming over your head for years, bigger individual numbers don't rebut that.

So I'd say this is the thing Luka's really going to need to rebut to win the MVP, and I think a number of folks here want to act like that's not a real thing. Right or wrong, it's a thing.

[Doctor MJ]

I don't think Luka has much of a case outside of basic PTS/REB/AST counting stats. Shai is more efficient on offense, way better on defense, and clears him in on/off stats. He's also leading the #1 team in the conference.

Then there's Jokic who is just better than him.

Yes, Shai has better case for MVP, but can we don't pretend that efficiency makes a case for Shai? Luka has better eFg% while scoring a lot more, and Shai is shooting better FTs. My guess is that those FTs will be the biggest problem for Shai in playoffs. No way he will made 8 per game.

I don't necessarily mind someone factoring in translation to playoffs in their regular season MVP thinking, but let's just note that you're really not supposed to do that.

If there's something about the way that Shai & Luka approach things that makes Shai the better RS player and Luka the better PS player, then Luka will go down as the greater player...but he kinda shouldn't be getting more love for the RS award based on what the award is officially for.

[Packbuckman]

Embiid? We have clearly seen in playoffs the difference between Embiid and Jokic. They just didn't want to give to white, unathletic, international player another MVP. Campaign for Embiid was embarrassing.

There's no case for Luka because Mavs aren't winning enough. Difficult to blame the team, who played with 32 different starting lineups, with 0 lineups over 100 minutes and best players missing 20+ games, for that. But I agree, it's what it is, Luka is not winning it.

Nobody will convince me that Shai is better player though.

I don't think Embiid deserved it either, but defense was an argument in his favor. It will be an argument in SGA's favor as well.

It wasn't, they just had to fabricate something to stole it from Jokic. And it would be the same this year, Jokic is just superior player to Shai. Jokic is basically the whole Nuggets system.

MVP isn’t a best player award if it was Jordan would have won every year. SGA is leading a young team to top seed in the west which is just more impressive than defending champs as a 3 seed even if they are close in record.

[Exp0sed]

I like that you're doing a thought experiment, but have to note that you're talking as if nothing like this has ever been seen before in NBA history, when it's actually the classic discussion about MVP.

When Wilt scored 50 PPG, he didn't win the MVP despite leading the 3rd best team in the league.

How could that be so when he put up such huge individual numbers? Because someone else was thought to be more valuable, because voters understood there were things the box score was not capturing. I happen to think the voters were right, but the more objectively important point here is just that there's historical precedent for not giving the MVP to the guy with the biggest numbers.

And in the case of Luka, if we literally had this situation right now, it only hammer home the point harder that it doesn't seem to matter how much bigger and better Luka's numbers get, the team remains pretty mediocre.

None of this means that voters can't be bowled over by huge individual numbers and a mediocre record, but if you already have the "But when will they start winning big?" question looming over your head for years, bigger individual numbers don't rebut that.

So I'd say this is the thing Luka's really going to need to rebut to win the MVP, and I think a number of folks here want to act like that's not a real thing. Right or wrong, it's a thing.

Wilt? really?

well, it hasn't happend in a while
as for Luka you've stated your case plenty, it's fine..

How has Luka's +- looked since the deadline? do u have an explanation for him being so much better than in the first half of the season?

his +- in say January was awful, how's he doing now?

surprisingly I agree with what Barkley said the other day - as ur teammates get better, ur numbers should go down.
I don't think it's good that his numbers have actually gone up since Kyrie came back and the deadline additions but that's mostly on Kidd imo, he's the one whose tasked with driving this point home with Luka

but that's to say - it might not be optimal for winning but it def matters as far as MVP goes

[Exp0sed]

I don't think Embiid deserved it either, but defense was an argument in his favor. It will be an argument in SGA's favor as well.

It wasn't, they just had to fabricate something to stole it from Jokic. And it would be the same this year, Jokic is just superior player to Shai. Jokic is basically the whole Nuggets system.

MVP isn’t a best player award if it was Jordan would have won every year. SGA is leading a young team to top seed in the west which is just more impressive than defending champs as a 3 seed even if they are close in record.

Murray missed many games, OKC has been as close as you can to 100% healthy
also as you know, teams "get up" when they matchup with the champions while OKC was overlooked earlier in the season by some opponents, being so young and all

both have been almost equally impressive individually imo, team record isn't everything and both teams are basically identical anyway

[Special_Puppy]

It wasn't, they just had to fabricate something to stole it from Jokic. And it would be the same this year, Jokic is just superior player to Shai. Jokic is basically the whole Nuggets system.

MVP isn’t a best player award if it was Jordan would have won every year. SGA is leading a young team to top seed in the west which is just more impressive than defending champs as a 3 seed even if they are close in record.

Murray missed many games, OKC has been as close as you can to 100% healthy
also as you know, teams "get up" when they matchup with the champions while OKC was overlooked earlier in the season by some opponents, being so young and all

both have been almost equally impressive individually imo, team record isn't everything and both teams are basically identical anyway

OKC's net rating in non-garbage time minutes is +1.7 better than Denver's. That's a fairly material difference.

https://www.pbpstats.com/team-leverage-summary/nba?Season=2023-24&Leverage=Medium,High,VeryHigh

[AleksandarN]

Jokic impacts his players more than any other in the NBA. That is the true definition of most valuable player to his team and winning. He makes the game literally easier for every player he plays with. There is no one else currently who impacts his team more than Jokic. Some players might score more points etc but Jokic’s control of his team and the game itself is unmatched.

Read on Twitter

[Doctor MJ]

I like that you're doing a thought experiment, but have to note that you're talking as if nothing like this has ever been seen before in NBA history, when it's actually the classic discussion about MVP.

When Wilt scored 50 PPG, he didn't win the MVP despite leading the 3rd best team in the league.

How could that be so when he put up such huge individual numbers? Because someone else was thought to be more valuable, because voters understood there were things the box score was not capturing. I happen to think the voters were right, but the more objectively important point here is just that there's historical precedent for not giving the MVP to the guy with the biggest numbers.

And in the case of Luka, if we literally had this situation right now, it only hammer home the point harder that it doesn't seem to matter how much bigger and better Luka's numbers get, the team remains pretty mediocre.

None of this means that voters can't be bowled over by huge individual numbers and a mediocre record, but if you already have the "But when will they start winning big?" question looming over your head for years, bigger individual numbers don't rebut that.

So I'd say this is the thing Luka's really going to need to rebut to win the MVP, and I think a number of folks here want to act like that's not a real thing. Right or wrong, it's a thing.

Wilt? really?

well, it hasn't happend in a while
as for Luka you've stated your case plenty, it's fine..

How has Luka's +- looked since the deadline? do u have an explanation for him being so much better than in the first half of the season?

his +- in say January was awful, how's he doing now?

surprisingly I agree with what Barkley said the other day - as ur teammates get better, ur numbers should go down.
I don't think it's good that his numbers have actually gone up since Kyrie came back and the deadline additions but that's mostly on Kidd imo, he's the one whose tasked with driving this point home with Luka

but that's to say - it might not be optimal for winning but it def matters as far as MVP goes

Oh I think the connection between Luka & Wilt is pretty striking. I understand how it could seem out of the blue and bizarre, but if you're looking to see where history repeats itself, it sticks out. Doesn't mean things will end up all that similar, but those points of divergence will be of interest.

In terms of "it" not happening recently, that's only the case because of the scale you imagined. In terms of a question of whether
a celebrated statistical footprint and lower seed would end up winning the MVP, we've seen things go both ways. Westbrook's triple double was huge in getting him that MVP, while Kobe's big scoring year didn't quite get him there. Kobe's PPG that year may not seem like a big deal now, but at the time it was. People weren't going around saying "But he didn't score THAT much", they were either raving about the PPG, or talking about the fact that there's more to basketball than scoring volume.

Re: Luka, stated your case plenty. Sounds to me like you're just seeing anything I say here is part of "my anti-Luka case", but I actually made a real point to emphasize in my most recent posts that this was a point different from my personal assessment of Luka. You may see me talking about the pragmatic weaknesses in Luka's MVP chances as something that goes along with me personally not thinking of him as delivering MVP levels of value, but they are two different things. A year ago at this it was starting to become clear that Embiid would likely win the MVP and I recognized that even as I personally didn't think he was that much of a challenger for the #1 spot.

Re: rhetorical questions about Luka's +/- getting better. As I've said, time will tell. That's not me being cynical about the possibility that things could change, it's just a recognition that the data is noisy.

I will say though as I alluded to in a recent discussion in this thread: If a change in teammates helps Luka be more impactful, then he'll be more impactful, and thus a stronger MVP candidate.

Re: scoring volume maybe not optimal for winning, but matters for MVP. It matters to the extent it lifts the team, and how impressive that lift is.

In terms of Luka just doing this because he has to, here's the thing:

Luka is the highest career Usage% player in the history of the NBA (min. 10K minutes). If Luka were only doing this because he had to, we'd expect that that meant he'd been playing with teammates less offensively capable than any supporting cast in history. But we have plenty of evidence to indicate this isn't the case.

So what we're talking about is a choice on Luka's part to become arguably the highest primacy player in the history of the NBA because he feels most comfortable playing playing this way. He may feel like he has to - that any other way would be worse - but if this is true it's really not about the teammates he's had, who really haven't been that abnormal over the course of his career to this point, but about his specific needs.

And again, none of this means Luka's wrong, and none of this means Luka can't emerge as the more playoff resilient star in the world and lead his team to a run of chips. But it does mean he plays in a way where he racks up his box score production for reasons other than his teammates being uniquely unable to get box score stats.