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

[Bob8]

In 2022 Jokic had a team full of guys who are now out of the league, and posted better on-court and on/off numbers than Luka ever has. By a lot.

If your argument is the Mavs’ backups are uniquely good, then they should be much better than a play-in team.

I'm claiming that not many players' backups are Brunson or Kyrie. What do you think would have happened with Luka's +/- on/of, if his backup was THJ and he was playing with Chet?

You can be pretty bad player and have fantastic on/off, if your replacement is even worse. And you can be very good player and your on/off will be average, if your replacement is good. Tell me is Tatum bad player, a lot worse than Luka this year?

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

[Young gun 6]

Race is looking done. With just 17 games left Jokic just keeps stretching his lead by the day.

Jokic deserves the MVP but if he wins another he would be the first one to win 3 MVPs without being 1st or 2nd seed in RS. I think the media gave him a pass when his team ranked 11th in the league and that‘s breaking the normal best player on best team narrative.

The irony is when he actually got the 1 seed in the West he didn't win MVP in arguably his most deserving season haha.

[Kurtz]

Race is looking done. With just 17 games left Jokic just keeps stretching his lead by the day.

Jokic deserves the MVP but if he wins another he would be the first one to win 3 MVPs without being 1st or 2nd seed in RS. I think the media gave him a pass when his team ranked 11th in the league and that‘s breaking the normal best player on best team narrative.

The irony is when he actually got the 1 seed in the West he didn't win MVP in arguably his most deserving season haha.

I don't think the best player on the best team is or has ever been a serious mainstream narrative outside of maybe that Rose year.

There's just a high degree of correlation between having an mvp-caliber player on your roster and having an excellent record.

[Young gun 6]

I'm claiming that not many players' backups are Brunson or Kyrie. What do you think would have happened with Luka's +/- on/of, if his backup was THJ and he was playing with Chet?

You can be pretty bad player and have fantastic on/off, if your replacement is even worse. And you can be very good player and your on/off will be average, if your replacement is good. Tell me is Tatum bad player, a lot worse than Luka this year?

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

Not the op but there are some question marks regarding whether Luka can impact winning anywhere near Jokic.

If you want to push that Kyrie and Brunson weren't great as teammates because they played a similar position, albeit both can play off ball and didn't command the usage they would get as a solo star guard on a team.

Looking at Jokic, I don't think it really would matter who his teammates are becuase he has improved basically every single teammate he has ever played with. He pushed Gordon, MPJ, KCP, Barton and many more players to well above their best play.

You can look at specific positions and argue that it's harder for Luka because the team isn't built perfectly around him. However, the thing is I feel like you can put almost any teammates next to Joker and he'll find a way for it to work.

The absolute opposite is true for Luka, we don't even know how to make a team around him successful because it's never happened with many different iterations. It's a lot harder to fit players around Luka from what we've seen.

He had arguably the best fit in the entire league on his team which was Porzingis, he burnt bridges there and wanted him gone from the team. He has had a tonne of 3pt shooting, defensive wings around him that get better but still don't result in a successful team, or really anything close to whilst also having an above average to star guard next to him (Brunson, Kyrie) on top of those perfectly suited role players.

He's now got even more suited rim running, defensive bigs that don't need the ball in their hands in Gafford & Lively.

If that doesn't work, what is actually the teammates Luka needs around him that will work? It's incredibly difficult with a guy having a usage of 40% if second stars (Kyrie/Brunson), perfect rim protection bigs (Gafford/Lively) and 3 & D wings haven't worked, like what is the actual makeup of a team that works? Just 2 other superstars who don't need the ball in their hands that much like PG & Kawhi?

It just seems difficult to build a team around him within the salary cap that perfectly fits if rim protection, secondary off ball guards, 3 & D wings all don't work.

I don't know that I could actually name 2 top 40 players in the league you could realistically pair with Luka and see them be a legitimate contender because it's never happened (KP, Kyrie, Brunson) whilst also being loaded with perfectly fitting role players that couldn't suit Luka any better (THJ, DFS, Kleber, Bullock, Gafford/Lively).

You give Joker THJ, DFS, Brunson & Kleber and he probably wins the chip considering he took a far far far worse supporting cast of Barton, Monte Morris, Jeff Green and Austin Rivers as his 30 minutes per night starters to nearly 50 wins...

Although the team suits Joker, he's taken a very similar supporting cast of Murray, KCP, MPJ, Gordon to a title where as Luka is struggling to even make the WCF with a similar supporting cast. You can argue that the supporting cast doesn't suit Luka as much as it would suit Joker but that's sort of the point, we can't find any supporting casts so far for Luka to even be a top 4 seed in a conference, let alone get anywhere near a title, whereas Joker can fit in with basically any players which he's shown throughout his career.

[Bob8]

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

Not the op but there are some question marks regarding whether Luka can impact winning anywhere near Jokic.

If you want to push that Kyrie and Brunson weren't great as teammates because they played a similar position, albeit both can play off ball and didn't command the usage they would get as a solo star guard on a team.

Looking at Jokic, I don't think it really would matter who his teammates are becuase he has improved basically every single teammate he has ever played with. He pushed Gordon, MPJ, KCP, Barton and many more players to well above their best play.

You can look at specific positions and argue that it's harder for Luka because the team isn't built perfectly around him. However, the thing is I feel like you can put almost any teammates next to Joker and he'll find a way for it to work.

The absolute opposite is true for Luka, we don't even know how to make a team around him successful because it's never happened with many different iterations. It's a lot harder to fit players around Luka from what we've seen.

He had arguably the best fit in the entire league on his team which was Porzingis, he burnt bridges there and wanted him gone from the team. He has had a tonne of 3pt shooting, defensive wings around him that get better but still don't result

I don't know that I could actually name 2 top 40 players in the league you could pair with Luka and see them be a legitimate contender because it's never happened (KP, Kyrie, Brunson) whilst also being loaded with perfectly fitting role players that couldn't suit Luka any better (THJ, DFS, Kleber, Bullock, Gafford/Lively).

You give Joker THJ, DFS, Brunson & Kleber and he probably wins the chip considering he took a far far far worse supporting cast of Barton, Monte Morris, Jeff Green and Austin Rivers as his 30 minutes per night starters to nearly 50 wins...

1. I was talking about on/off, if second best player is playing in your position.

2. The main problem with KP was his injuries. He was injured in first playoffs and many times in RS. I'm not convinced that things won't be the same with Celtics too. The only difference there is, that they have so good team, they don't need him as desperately Mavs did at least not in RS. And don't forget, they have the best season after they traded him.

3. Luka was in WCF with Brunson, so kinda difficult to say they didn't do anything.

3. Kyrie? They have played 13 games together last year.

4. THJ and Kleber perfect fit? You're joking aren't you? THJ can't defend a chair and is inefficient chucker. Kleber is averaging less than 7 points in his career and you have forgotten Powell on C, who was the main reason for no having chances against Warriors in WCF. Gafford has played 10 games with Mavs and Lively is a rookie.

5. Similar supporting cast? KCP, Gordon, Murray, Porter ws. Brunson, Dinwiddie, Kleber, Powell? Wtf?

6. What has Jokic won with 24 years? Some hear are acting like Luka is 30 years old and having competitive team for years. Maybe we can give him few years more, knowing that even MJ and LeBron didn't win anything until they were 27/28? You're forgetting that people doubted in Jokic too, when he was Luka's age.

I see standard for Luka is pretty high, Jokic is 4 years older and has 1 ring, Luka should probably have at least 2 already playing with stars like THJ, Kleber and Powell.

Next 2 years are crucial for Mavs, let's see what happens. Lively, Gafford and Washington look to be step in the right direction. Exum looks like perfect fit with Luka, better than Kyrie, but unfortunately he can't stay healthy.

[Archx]

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

Not the op but there are some question marks regarding whether Luka can impact winning anywhere near Jokic.

If you want to push that Kyrie and Brunson weren't great as teammates because they played a similar position, albeit both can play off ball and didn't command the usage they would get as a solo star guard on a team.

Looking at Jokic, I don't think it really would matter who his teammates are becuase he has improved basically every single teammate he has ever played with. He pushed Gordon, MPJ, KCP, Barton and many more players to well above their best play.

You can look at specific positions and argue that it's harder for Luka because the team isn't built perfectly around him. However, the thing is I feel like you can put almost any teammates next to Joker and he'll find a way for it to work.

The absolute opposite is true for Luka, we don't even know how to make a team around him successful because it's never happened with many different iterations. It's a lot harder to fit players around Luka from what we've seen.

He had arguably the best fit in the entire league on his team which was Porzingis, he burnt bridges there and wanted him gone from the team. He has had a tonne of 3pt shooting, defensive wings around him that get better but still don't result in a successful team, or really anything close to whilst also having an above average to star guard next to him (Brunson, Kyrie) on top of those perfectly suited role players.

He's now got even more suited rim running, defensive bigs that don't need the ball in their hands in Gafford & Lively.

If that doesn't work, what is actually the teammates Luka needs around him that will work? It's incredibly difficult with a guy having a usage of 40% if second stars (Kyrie/Brunson), perfect rim protection bigs (Gafford/Lively) and 3 & D wings haven't worked, like what is the actual makeup of a team that works? Just 2 other superstars who don't need the ball in their hands that much like PG & Kawhi?

It just seems difficult to build a team around him within the salary cap that perfectly fits if rim protection, secondary off ball guards, 3 & D wings all don't work.

I don't know that I could actually name 2 top 40 players in the league you could realistically pair with Luka and see them be a legitimate contender because it's never happened (KP, Kyrie, Brunson) whilst also being loaded with perfectly fitting role players that couldn't suit Luka any better (THJ, DFS, Kleber, Bullock, Gafford/Lively).

You give Joker THJ, DFS, Brunson & Kleber and he probably wins the chip considering he took a far far far worse supporting cast of Barton, Monte Morris, Jeff Green and Austin Rivers as his 30 minutes per night starters to nearly 50 wins...

Although the team suits Joker, he's taken a very similar supporting cast of Murray, KCP, MPJ, Gordon to a title where as Luka is struggling to even make the WCF with a similar supporting cast. You can argue that the supporting cast doesn't suit Luka as much as it would suit Joker but that's sort of the point, we can't find any supporting casts so far for Luka to even be a top 4 seed in a conference, let alone get anywhere near a title, whereas Joker can fit in with basically any players which he's shown throughout his career.

To be fair, Mavs were 1 game away from 4th spot last year before trade for Kyrie happened and Gleague guys were promoted to play big minutes due to injuries and lack of personal. Both stars got injured and FO wanted to tank so everything collapsed on them.

But what was actually the team which was sitting so high in the standings? Wood, Dinwiddie, DFS, Powell, Maxi, THj, Bullock..... Those were the main guys.

Where is Bullock today? How are Dinwiddie and Wood doing? DFS has been mediocre at best with Nets and has no result even close to what he had with Mavs. Powell is finally sitting at the end of the bench while Maxi and THJ have almost became unplayable this year. You're talking like as soon as players left Mavs, they became champs suddenly.

Put some things into context and you'll quickly learn it's not so black and white as you try to make it to be. And not to mention huge difference in coaching, Malone with great motion offense and Kidd who has no clue how to run either offense or make proper rotations on defense. Mavs at some point this season, had 30 different starting lineups (most out of any team). And just few games ago Kidd again shuffled them around.

And since you guys love +/- and ON/Off impact numbers so much, Luka went from -3.7 to 7.2 with a slightly better team in just a few months. Thats a +10.9 point swing lol. Mavs are winning Luka's minutes when he's on the floor. They are mostly losing when he sits. Even during the losing streak that they had, Mavs won 5 of those games when Luka was ON the floor and lost 3 of his minutes games. If his impact is so trash, why does he also have the highest +/- on the team aswell? How is that even possible with his horrible defense and low impact on offense?

[AleksandarN]

Like I brought up earlier. Jokic has the biggest impact on his teammates efficiency than any other player in the league. Not only that he also is the best player in league with the third best record in the nba. That is with Murray missing almost the whole month of December. He is the most valuable player to his team than any other player in the league to theirs.

[Doctor MJ]

This trend of Luka having ho-hum impact stats for an MVP candidate is consistent throughout his career. It can’t be explained away by his minutes being staggered with Kyrie this season.

And if you watch the games without an agenda, and really pay attention to what’s going on, it’s not hard to see why. He’s a lazy defender who spends too much time arguing with officials. And because he has the ball so much, his off nights are more damaging to his team than they are for most star players. It’s not that uncommon to see Luka with a -20 in a loss. You will almost never see this from someone like Jokic.

That's an interesting observation. If we go back to '19-20, which began Luka's prime and remains the Mavs' best season by SRS, here are the players who have been all-stars in that time who have the most -20 or worse games:

Nikola Vucevic 31
De'Aaron Fox 31
Julius Randle 28
Domantas Sabonis 27
Andrew Wiggins 26
Dejounte Murray 26
Zach LaVine 26
DeMar DeRozan 26
Luka Doncic 24
Russell Westbrook 23

And here are the other guys in the poll by this metric:

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander 18
Anthony Edwards 14 (began in '20-21)
Donovan Mitchell 13
Jayson Tatum 13
Jalen Brunson 12
Giannis Antetokounmpo 11
Nikola Jokic 7
Kawhi Leonard 6

I'm not going to ascribe specific meaning to this stat, but I'd never thought to query it before and it's interesting.

While I'm at it, here are the leaders in this all-star only stat for the entire history we have the stat (back to '96-97):

Antawn Jamison 73
Joe Johnson 67
Antoine Walker 66
Carmelo Anthony 64
Shareef Abdur-Rahim 63
Nikola Vucevic 63
Julius Randle 62
DeMar DeRozan 61
Vince Carter 60
Tyson Chandler 59

(One thing I can't help but marvel at is the current Chicago Big 3, on a list dominated by players who retired a good while ago, two (Vucevic, DeRozan) of the 3 modern all-stars in the Top 10 are theirs, and their 3rd (Lavine) is the next active player on the list at 58. This isn't a situation where these guys are there just because of they've done this a lot together, the Bulls' organization specifically assembled their team around a trio of guys who did the MAJORITY of this before they came to the Windy City, and did this in the era of analytics while it was clear that fit - which I would say eyes can predict better than numbers - was going to be a major concern. I have to say that with Karnisovas doubling down on Vucevic, I might consider the Bulls to be the worst run organization in the NBA at this time. The team itself isn't terrible so I don't want to act like it is, but the idea that they actually acquired these guys to lead their team in this day and age just feels so behind the times and damaging. )

Anyway, this is making think it would be interesting to look at player variance in game +/-, which I also don't think I've ever done. It's entirely possible that some players have their cume +/- significantly hurt because of a tendency to just not have it, for whatever reason, on any given night. The fact that legacy is determined by the playoffs where a) the player knows it's more important and b) you really only have "have it" >50% of the time means that cume +/- might in effect underrate some players.

Incidentally, this is part of what inspired me to make the stat I call OnWin - games where you have a positive +/- (typically with 24 MP threshold) - because I thought that a guy like Kobe might just be more focused on winning than on maxing out advantage every possession, and I think there's some truth to the theory.:

By career RS OnWin, Kobe ranks 5th. By career RS +/-, Kobe ranks 16th. Kobe looks better by OnWins.
(ftr Duncan, LeBron, Dirk & CP3 are the top 4 in some order both times.)

And because I have long had similar thoughts about Luka - and thus that +/- may be shown to underrate him - I have looked at him periodically too. If we focus on the '18-19 forward:

Luka ranks 14th by OnWins, but 48th by +/-. Luka looks better by OnWins.
(ftr Giannis, Tatum, Jokic & Gobert are the top 4 in some order both times.)

[iggymcfrack]

I'm claiming that not many players' backups are Brunson or Kyrie. What do you think would have happened with Luka's +/- on/of, if his backup was THJ and he was playing with Chet?

You can be pretty bad player and have fantastic on/off, if your replacement is even worse. And you can be very good player and your on/off will be average, if your replacement is good. Tell me is Tatum bad player, a lot worse than Luka this year?

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

You’re really good at completely ignoring what’s said to talk about something else. The post you quoted pointed out that when Jokic had the worst team around him ever in 21/22, he still had an on court rating of +8.5 while Luka hasn’t cracked +4 in the last 4 seasons with much better talent. That has nothing to do with the off numbers. Regardless of what happens with the bench units, Luka just fails to lead good teams when he’s on the floor.

[Archx]

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

You’re really good at completely ignoring what’s said to talk about something else. The post you quoted pointed out that when Jokic had the worst team around him ever in 21/22, he still had an on court rating of +8.5 while Luka hasn’t cracked +4 in the last 4 seasons with much better talent. That has nothing to do with the off numbers. Regardless of what happens with the bench units, Luka just fails to lead good teams when he’s on the floor.

Jokic playoffs On/Off for career +2.8..... But has a ring.

Luka playoffs On/Off for career +11.8... WCF appearance

According to Jokic's On/Off he's one of the worst playoff performers then, while Luka is a much better leader and performer when it matters?

Interesting to see how are you going wiggle yourself out of this one. Where is the logic in all of this if On/Off tells the entire story about a player and supposed leadership?

[Special_Puppy]

In 2022 Jokic had a team full of guys who are now out of the league, and posted better on-court and on/off numbers than Luka ever has. By a lot.

If your argument is the Mavs’ backups are uniquely good, then they should be much better than a play-in team.

I'm claiming that not many players' backups are Brunson or Kyrie. What do you think would have happened with Luka's +/- on/of, if his backup was THJ and he was playing with Chet?

You can be pretty bad player and have fantastic on/off, if your replacement is even worse. And you can be very good player and your on/off will be average, if your replacement is good. Tell me is Tatum bad player, a lot worse than Luka this year?

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Thought you were exaggerating, but
Jokic net rating in 2022 in non-garbage time minutes: +8.0
Luka net rating in the past two season *with Kyrie on the floor*: +5.9

https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612743&Season=2021-22&SeasonType=All&PlayerIds=203999&Leverage=Medium,High,VeryHigh

https://www.pbpstats.com/wowy-combos/nba?TeamId=1610612742&Season=2023-24,2022-23&SeasonType=All&PlayerIds=1629029,202681&Leverage=Medium,High,VeryHigh

[zero rings]

This trend of Luka having ho-hum impact stats for an MVP candidate is consistent throughout his career. It can’t be explained away by his minutes being staggered with Kyrie this season.

And if you watch the games without an agenda, and really pay attention to what’s going on, it’s not hard to see why. He’s a lazy defender who spends too much time arguing with officials. And because he has the ball so much, his off nights are more damaging to his team than they are for most star players. It’s not that uncommon to see Luka with a -20 in a loss. You will almost never see this from someone like Jokic.

That's an interesting observation. If we go back to '19-20, which began Luka's prime and remains the Mavs' best season by SRS, here are the players who have been all-stars in that time who have the most -20 or worse games:

Nikola Vucevic 31
De'Aaron Fox 31
Julius Randle 28
Domantas Sabonis 27
Andrew Wiggins 26
Dejounte Murray 26
Zach LaVine 26
DeMar DeRozan 26
Luka Doncic 24
Russell Westbrook 23

And here are the other guys in the poll by this metric:

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander 18
Anthony Edwards 14 (began in '20-21)
Donovan Mitchell 13
Jayson Tatum 13
Jalen Brunson 12
Giannis Antetokounmpo 11
Nikola Jokic 7
Kawhi Leonard 6

I'm not going to ascribe specific meaning to this stat, but I'd never thought to query it before and it's interesting.

While I'm at it, here are the leaders in this all-star only stat for the entire history we have the stat (back to '96-97):

Antawn Jamison 73
Joe Johnson 67
Antoine Walker 66
Carmelo Anthony 64
Shareef Abdur-Rahim 63
Nikola Vucevic 63
Julius Randle 62
DeMar DeRozan 61
Vince Carter 60
Tyson Chandler 59

(One thing I can't help but marvel at is the current Chicago Big 3, on a list dominated by players who retired a good while ago, two (Vucevic, DeRozan) of the 3 modern all-stars in the Top 10 are theirs, and their 3rd (Lavine) is the next active player on the list at 58. This isn't a situation where these guys are there just because of they've done this a lot together, the Bulls' organization specifically assembled their team around a trio of guys who did the MAJORITY of this before they came to the Windy City, and did this in the era of analytics while it was clear that fit - which I would say eyes can predict better than numbers - was going to be a major concern. I have to say that with Karnisovas doubling down on Vucevic, I might consider the Bulls to be the worst run organization in the NBA at this time. The team itself isn't terrible so I don't want to act like it is, but the idea that they actually acquired these guys to lead their team in this day and age just feels so behind the times and damaging. )

Anyway, this is making think it would be interesting to look at player variance in game +/-, which I also don't think I've ever done. It's entirely possible that some players have their cume +/- significantly hurt because of a tendency to just not have it, for whatever reason, on any given night. The fact that legacy is determined by the playoffs where a) the player knows it's more important and b) you really only have "have it" >50% of the time means that cume +/- might in effect underrate some players.

Incidentally, this is part of what inspired me to make the stat I call OnWin - games where you have a positive +/- (typically with 24 MP threshold) - because I thought that a guy like Kobe might just be more focused on winning than on maxing out advantage every possession, and I think there's some truth to the theory.:

By career RS OnWin, Kobe ranks 5th. By career RS +/-, Kobe ranks 16th. Kobe looks better by OnWins.
(ftr Duncan, LeBron, Dirk & CP3 are the top 4 in some order both times.)

And because I have long had similar thoughts about Luka - and thus that +/- may be shown to underrate him - I have looked at him periodically too. If we focus on the '18-19 forward:

Luka ranks 14th by OnWins, but 48th by +/-. Luka looks better by OnWins.
(ftr Giannis, Tatum, Jokic & Gobert are the top 4 in some order both times.)

Great post! I didn’t know these numbers off the top of my head, but it’s something I’ve noticed following Luka over the years. If he doesn’t have it going offensively the Mavs tend to get smoked with him on the court.

That list of players is exactly who you would expect lol. A bunch of high volume shooters who don’t play any defense. Luka is the best of this bunch because his “on” nights are so ridiculously good, but he needs to become a more well rounded player if he’s going to live up to expectations.

[HotRocks34]

Pacers beat OKC

1. OKC.......45-20 (tiebreaker)
2. DEN.......45-20


We'll see if the numbers move overnight like they did last night. Here's maybe an hour after the game ended.


jazzed

[Woodsanity]

Really sad stat padding by SGA for 30 points....

[Jaqua92]

Are people really trying to claim the only difference between Jokic and Doncic is teammates?

Offensively, the gap between the two, as pertains to winning basketball, is as big as it is between Doncic and Tatum on the offensive end.

Yeesh

[Infinite Llamas]

Jokic just gets wins. Period.

Yeah he won’t win a championship with Barton and Monte Morris as his backcourt but he will manage to squeeze out every last bit of value from his teammates.

It’s what separates him from the pack as he does it year in and year out.

[Bob8]

Kyrie is a starter and so was Brunson his last year in Dallas. Almost every team in the league staggers their best players, so I don’t see how this is unique to Luka.

Again, the problem with Luka’s on/off stats isn’t that his backups are too good. The problem is the Mavs haven’t been that good when he is on the court. He has not yet provided the lift one would expect from an MVP player.

I repeat: Jokic had a better on-court rating with Barton/Green/Rivers/Campazzo as his running mates than Luka ever has in his career.

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

You’re really good at completely ignoring what’s said to talk about something else. The post you quoted pointed out that when Jokic had the worst team around him ever in 21/22, he still had an on court rating of +8.5 while Luka hasn’t cracked +4 in the last 4 seasons with much better talent. That has nothing to do with the off numbers. Regardless of what happens with the bench units, Luka just fails to lead good teams when he’s on the floor.

And to which place has led that Goat +/- performance? 6th with 48 wins. More or less the same number of wins Mavs will have this year in much better West. And how old was Jokic then? Maybe 2 years older than Luka? 25 years old Jokic had 20/9/7 with 60% TS and was 9th in MVP race.

[Manimal]

Jokic just gets wins. Period.

Yeah he won’t win a championship with Barton and Monte Morris as his backcourt but he will manage to squeeze out every last bit of value from his teammates.

It’s what separates him from the pack as he does it year in and year out.

Exactly. Just two seasons ago Jokic carried a roster that featured Monte Morris, Will Barton, Jeff Green, Austin Rivers, Bones Hyland, Facundo Campazzo, JaMyhcal Green, and Davon Reed as part of the 10 man rotation. Only three of those eight guys are even still in the league today. Two of them were starting for Denver that year, and now they're fringe backups playing 15 mpg. Despite that, Jokic took them to 48 wins and the 6th seed, while averaging 27/14/8.

Doncic didn't have a very good roster around him last year, but it was definitely better than that Denver roster from 21/22. The difference is Luka only managed to get them to 38 wins and 11th place.

[Bob8]

This trend of Luka having ho-hum impact stats for an MVP candidate is consistent throughout his career. It can’t be explained away by his minutes being staggered with Kyrie this season.

And if you watch the games without an agenda, and really pay attention to what’s going on, it’s not hard to see why. He’s a lazy defender who spends too much time arguing with officials. And because he has the ball so much, his off nights are more damaging to his team than they are for most star players. It’s not that uncommon to see Luka with a -20 in a loss. You will almost never see this from someone like Jokic.

That's an interesting observation. If we go back to '19-20, which began Luka's prime and remains the Mavs' best season by SRS, here are the players who have been all-stars in that time who have the most -20 or worse games:

Nikola Vucevic 31
De'Aaron Fox 31
Julius Randle 28
Domantas Sabonis 27
Andrew Wiggins 26
Dejounte Murray 26
Zach LaVine 26
DeMar DeRozan 26
Luka Doncic 24
Russell Westbrook 23

And here are the other guys in the poll by this metric:

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander 18
Anthony Edwards 14 (began in '20-21)
Donovan Mitchell 13
Jayson Tatum 13
Jalen Brunson 12
Giannis Antetokounmpo 11
Nikola Jokic 7
Kawhi Leonard 6

I'm not going to ascribe specific meaning to this stat, but I'd never thought to query it before and it's interesting.

While I'm at it, here are the leaders in this all-star only stat for the entire history we have the stat (back to '96-97):

Antawn Jamison 73
Joe Johnson 67
Antoine Walker 66
Carmelo Anthony 64
Shareef Abdur-Rahim 63
Nikola Vucevic 63
Julius Randle 62
DeMar DeRozan 61
Vince Carter 60
Tyson Chandler 59

(One thing I can't help but marvel at is the current Chicago Big 3, on a list dominated by players who retired a good while ago, two (Vucevic, DeRozan) of the 3 modern all-stars in the Top 10 are theirs, and their 3rd (Lavine) is the next active player on the list at 58. This isn't a situation where these guys are there just because of they've done this a lot together, the Bulls' organization specifically assembled their team around a trio of guys who did the MAJORITY of this before they came to the Windy City, and did this in the era of analytics while it was clear that fit - which I would say eyes can predict better than numbers - was going to be a major concern. I have to say that with Karnisovas doubling down on Vucevic, I might consider the Bulls to be the worst run organization in the NBA at this time. The team itself isn't terrible so I don't want to act like it is, but the idea that they actually acquired these guys to lead their team in this day and age just feels so behind the times and damaging. )

Anyway, this is making think it would be interesting to look at player variance in game +/-, which I also don't think I've ever done. It's entirely possible that some players have their cume +/- significantly hurt because of a tendency to just not have it, for whatever reason, on any given night. The fact that legacy is determined by the playoffs where a) the player knows it's more important and b) you really only have "have it" >50% of the time means that cume +/- might in effect underrate some players.

Incidentally, this is part of what inspired me to make the stat I call OnWin - games where you have a positive +/- (typically with 24 MP threshold) - because I thought that a guy like Kobe might just be more focused on winning than on maxing out advantage every possession, and I think there's some truth to the theory.:

By career RS OnWin, Kobe ranks 5th. By career RS +/-, Kobe ranks 16th. Kobe looks better by OnWins.
(ftr Duncan, LeBron, Dirk & CP3 are the top 4 in some order both times.)

And because I have long had similar thoughts about Luka - and thus that +/- may be shown to underrate him - I have looked at him periodically too. If we focus on the '18-19 forward:

Luka ranks 14th by OnWins, but 48th by +/-. Luka looks better by OnWins.
(ftr Giannis, Tatum, Jokic & Gobert are the top 4 in some order both times.)

Great post! I didn’t know these numbers off the top of my head, but it’s something I’ve noticed following Luka over the years. If he doesn’t have it going offensively the Mavs tend to get smoked with him on the court.

That list of players is exactly who you would expect lol. A bunch of high volume shooters who don’t play any defense. Luka is the best of this bunch because his “on” nights are so ridiculously good, but he needs to become a more well rounded player if he’s going to live up to expectations.

Don't you think that players age should be in consideration too? "Prime" Luka was 20 years old, when 2019 season started. Jokic was 24, Giannis almost 26, Kawhi 28...It looks very fair comparison.

[iggymcfrack]

Normally best 2 players are not playing in the same position. What would Jokic's and Embiid's on/off be, if they were playing in the same team? Not impressive for sure. I don't even know, who's Jokic's replacement in Denver. I'm sure Mavs wanted some other star, who would complement Luka's game better, but Kyrie was the only cheap one available.

Mavs problem is not offense but D. If Warriors could play top D in more or less whole Steph's career, I'm pretty confident that Mavs will eventually build the right team around Luka. Probably not with Kidd.

You’re really good at completely ignoring what’s said to talk about something else. The post you quoted pointed out that when Jokic had the worst team around him ever in 21/22, he still had an on court rating of +8.5 while Luka hasn’t cracked +4 in the last 4 seasons with much better talent. That has nothing to do with the off numbers. Regardless of what happens with the bench units, Luka just fails to lead good teams when he’s on the floor.

Jokic playoffs On/Off for career +2.8..... But has a ring.

Luka playoffs On/Off for career +11.8... WCF appearance

According to Jokic's On/Off he's one of the worst playoff performers then, while Luka is a much better leader and performer when it matters?

Interesting to see how are you going wiggle yourself out of this one. Where is the logic in all of this if On/Off tells the entire story about a player and supposed leadership?

First off, I don’t know where you get that +2.8 would be “one of the worst” playoff performers. It’s still very solidly positive. Also, Jokic has a higher NetRtg than Luka in the playoffs. Luka’s on/off is driven entirely by a low “off” number over a very small sample. Luka’s played a total of 28 playoff games. Given superstars’ higher minute averages in the playoffs, you need a larger sample than you would for the regular season to get reliable “off” numbers, but even with a much larger sample than that in the regular season, no one would be discrediting Luka. It’s the 387 games worth of underperforming impact numbers that raises eyebrows.