2024-25 NBA MVP Discussion Thread (Pt. 2)

[canada_dry]

No he was insane two seasons ago but it was two seasons ago.

yeah, he had like 2/5 incredible playoff runs (champuionship season and bubble season) but he hasn't had a great rs yet, not even close.

This is true but he was borderline al-star level last year in the regular season (and then trash in the playoffs, the opposite of his usual M.O. lol). 21.2/6.5 in 31.5 MPG (24.2/7.4 per 36) on 58.6 TS% is good stuff. Definitely the best regular season he's had. I thought he was finally beginning to match his potential but injuries have put a stop to that sadly. He's been quite poor this year scoring the ball.

When he didn't make the all star team again, noone was saying oh man Murray was sbubbed. And we all know thats what everyone likes to cry about every year. Snubs. Its NEVER been tried to be argue he was a snub. That's saying something.

So not even all star level doesn't equal a great regular season. Not even close.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[RRR3]

yeah, he had like 2/5 incredible playoff runs (champuionship season and bubble season) but he hasn't had a great rs yet, not even close.

This is true but he was borderline al-star level last year in the regular season (and then trash in the playoffs, the opposite of his usual M.O. lol). 21.2/6.5 in 31.5 MPG (24.2/7.4 per 36) on 58.6 TS% is good stuff. Definitely the best regular season he's had. I thought he was finally beginning to match his potential but injuries have put a stop to that sadly. He's been quite poor this year scoring the ball.

When he didn't make the all star team again, noone was saying oh man Murray was sbubbed. And we all know thats what everyone likes to cry about every year. Snubs. Its NEVER been tried to be argue he was a snub. That's saying something.

So not even all star level doesn't equal a great regular season. Not even close.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

I said he was borderline, I didn't say he was a legend. Jokic stans sure are sensitive.

[srhcan]

New EPM=Expected (Takes into account information from prior seasons. Tries to be Predictive)
Old EPM=Actual (Only takes into account information from the current season)

so we should not be looking at New EPM at all when deciding MVP for the current season,

No? There’s a lot of noise in single season metrics that you can use information from prior seasons to help sift through

why I need to look at prior seasons to determine MVP of current season? does not make sense.

[Special_Puppy]

so we should not be looking at New EPM at all when deciding MVP for the current season,

No? There’s a lot of noise in single season metrics that you can use information from prior seasons to help sift through

why I need to look at prior seasons to determine MVP of current season? does not make sense.

For one reason, lineup based stuff doesn't really work using only a single season and using lineup information from surronding seasons can us find out a player's "true" value. For example, some box score based metrics like BPM think that in any particular season KD and Curry were basically the co-leaders of the "KD" Warriors. But we using lineup data we can clearly see that Curry was the better player in that timespan. Lineup data from any particular season isn't enough to know discover that, but using information from all 3 seasons we can see Curry's value.

[canada_dry]

This is true but he was borderline al-star level last year in the regular season (and then trash in the playoffs, the opposite of his usual M.O. lol). 21.2/6.5 in 31.5 MPG (24.2/7.4 per 36) on 58.6 TS% is good stuff. Definitely the best regular season he's had. I thought he was finally beginning to match his potential but injuries have put a stop to that sadly. He's been quite poor this year scoring the ball.

When he didn't make the all star team again, noone was saying oh man Murray was sbubbed. And we all know thats what everyone likes to cry about every year. Snubs. Its NEVER been tried to be argue he was a snub. That's saying something.

So not even all star level doesn't equal a great regular season. Not even close.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

I said he was borderline, I didn't say he was a legend. Jokic stans sure are sensitive.

And he said a "great" season. An ARGUABLY borderline all star season isn't that. You disagreeing with his " great" statement comes off as sensitive if anything.

Im Not a jokic stan. Very sensitive of you to assume.

Plus im Canadian. If anything I'd be biased towards Murray and sga. Bias aside i do I believe sga should be mvp as of now.

But disagreeing with the superstar that you are in these forums must make me a jokic stan. Got it.


Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[OkcSinceSGA]

Read on Twitter

Who is SGA going in on?

[AleksandarN]

Read on Twitter

[QPR]

Jokic has been an OT wizard this season but I'd be interested to see how many OKC games even get to that clutch point. Whereas it feels like every Denver game goes down to the wire.

[lethalizer]

Jokic has been an OT wizard this season but I'd be interested to see how many OKC games even get to that clutch point. Whereas it feels like every Denver game goes down to the wire.

According to NBA.com, OKC have been in 11 clutch games this season with a Net Rating of +34.7 and a win loss record of 8-3.

Nuggets have been in 18 such games with a Net Rating of +15.6 and a win loss record of 10-8.

Side note, Cavs have a 155.4(?!) offensive rating in the clutch which is simply incredible. They are truly having a remarkable season.

Source for the stats:

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/clutch-advanced?dir=A&sort=NET_RATING

[MoneyTalks41890]

Yeah SGA averages 4.3ppg in clutch situations against 4.8 for Jokic. SGA just gets into fewer close games.

SGA has a net rating of 35 in those games, and Jokic has a net rating of 19.

[AleksandarN]

This is true but he was borderline al-star level last year in the regular season (and then trash in the playoffs, the opposite of his usual M.O. lol). 21.2/6.5 in 31.5 MPG (24.2/7.4 per 36) on 58.6 TS% is good stuff. Definitely the best regular season he's had. I thought he was finally beginning to match his potential but injuries have put a stop to that sadly. He's been quite poor this year scoring the ball.

When he didn't make the all star team again, noone was saying oh man Murray was sbubbed. And we all know thats what everyone likes to cry about every year. Snubs. Its NEVER been tried to be argue he was a snub. That's saying something.

So not even all star level doesn't equal a great regular season. Not even close.

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

I said he was borderline, I didn't say he was a legend. Jokic stans sure are sensitive.

So you call people Stan’s when you get called out for saying something that wasn’t even true. Jamal wasn’t a borderline allstar. In fact no one even called him one except you. It seems like you are the one who sensitive when you get called out making up ****

[Jaqua92]

Read on Twitter

Who is SGA going in on?

What did Luka say?

"Everyone talking when they up!"

He should add "everyone talking when they up in a regular season game against a team that shot less 8/39 on open 3s."

Lol a lot of talk for a guy who hasn't won anything yet. This is peak petty.

The lack of maturity will once again be their undoing

[sikma42]

Yeah SGA averages 4.3ppg in clutch situations against 4.8 for Jokic. SGA just gets into fewer close games.

SGA has a net rating of 35 in those games, and Jokic has a net rating of 19.

Why are people so focused on SGA's net rating. Is it just some last-ditch effort to make an argument?

If we filter by players that average 25 or more mins per game SGA is 1st in net rating: But check this out:

- #2 in Chet Holmgren with an almost identical rating
- 6 of the top 15 individual net ratings belong to OKC players (Chet, Hartenstein, Dort, Cason Wallace and Jalen Williams).
- 5 of those OKC players have higher net ratings than Jokic

Let's break this down further net rating is offensive rating - defensive rating.

- SGA: 118.5 offensive rating - 101.96 defensive rating = 16.9 net rating
- Jokic: 124.2 offensive rating - 113.2 defensive rating = 11 net rating

so Jokic is performing much better offensively according to this metric (which should be obvious). The difference is the defensive rating. Lets look a bit deeper.

- OKC has a defesive rating of 102.7 (best in NBA)
- Denver has a defensive rating of 113.5 (19th in the NBA)

Based on looking through the lens of the only argument out there, Jokic is playing much better on a worst team. If you wanna say he needs to win 55 games thats fine. But there is no world were they are playing at the same level rn. Jokic is playing at top 5-10 of all time level.

[MoneyTalks41890]

Yeah SGA averages 4.3ppg in clutch situations against 4.8 for Jokic. SGA just gets into fewer close games.

SGA has a net rating of 35 in those games, and Jokic has a net rating of 19.

Why are people so focused on SGA's net rating. Is it just some last-ditch effort to make an argument?

If we filter by players that average 25 or more mins per game SGA is 1st in net rating: But check this out:

- #2 in Chet Holmgren with an almost identical rating
- 6 of the top 15 individual net ratings belong to OKC players (Chet, Hartenstein, Dort, Cason Wallace and Jalen Williams).
- 5 of those OKC players have higher net ratings than Jokic

Let's break this down further net rating is offensive rating - defensive rating.

- SGA: 118.5 offensive rating - 101.96 defensive rating = 16.9 net rating
- Jokic: 124.2 offensive rating - 113.2 defensive rating = 11 net rating

so Jokic is performing much better offensively according to this metric (which should be obvious). The difference is the defensive rating. Lets look a bit deeper.

- OKC has a defesive rating of 102.7 (best in NBA)
- Denver has a defensive rating of 113.5 (19th in the NBA)

Based on looking through the lens of the only argument out there, Jokic is playing much better on a worst team. If you wanna say he needs to win 55 games thats fine. But there is no world were they are playing at the same level rn. Jokic is playing at top 5-10 of all time level.

I mean EPM, BPM, LEBRON would beg to differ.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/bpm_season.html

[Jaqua92]

It's reasonable to say that SGA is leading the MVP race so far One factoring in the entire picture. Team record, level of play, impact metrics, box score.

It's not reasonable to say that he is playing better basketball than Jokic lol.


SGA can be the MVP and Joker can be the best player on the planet. Both things can be true

[sikma42]

Yeah SGA averages 4.3ppg in clutch situations against 4.8 for Jokic. SGA just gets into fewer close games.

SGA has a net rating of 35 in those games, and Jokic has a net rating of 19.

Why are people so focused on SGA's net rating. Is it just some last-ditch effort to make an argument?

If we filter by players that average 25 or more mins per game SGA is 1st in net rating: But check this out:

- #2 in Chet Holmgren with an almost identical rating
- 6 of the top 15 individual net ratings belong to OKC players (Chet, Hartenstein, Dort, Cason Wallace and Jalen Williams).
- 5 of those OKC players have higher net ratings than Jokic

Let's break this down further net rating is offensive rating - defensive rating.

- SGA: 118.5 offensive rating - 101.96 defensive rating = 16.9 net rating
- Jokic: 124.2 offensive rating - 113.2 defensive rating = 11 net rating

so Jokic is performing much better offensively according to this metric (which should be obvious). The difference is the defensive rating. Lets look a bit deeper.

- OKC has a defesive rating of 102.7 (best in NBA)
- Denver has a defensive rating of 113.5 (19th in the NBA)

Based on looking through the lens of the only argument out there, Jokic is playing much better on a worst team. If you wanna say he needs to win 55 games thats fine. But there is no world were they are playing at the same level rn. Jokic is playing at top 5-10 of all time level.

I mean EPM, BPM, LEBRON would beg to differ.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/bpm_season.html

assuming you agree the net rating argument doesn't hold any weight

[Jaqua92]

Yeah SGA averages 4.3ppg in clutch situations against 4.8 for Jokic. SGA just gets into fewer close games.

SGA has a net rating of 35 in those games, and Jokic has a net rating of 19.

Why are people so focused on SGA's net rating. Is it just some last-ditch effort to make an argument?

If we filter by players that average 25 or more mins per game SGA is 1st in net rating: But check this out:

- #2 in Chet Holmgren with an almost identical rating
- 6 of the top 15 individual net ratings belong to OKC players (Chet, Hartenstein, Dort, Cason Wallace and Jalen Williams).
- 5 of those OKC players have higher net ratings than Jokic

Let's break this down further net rating is offensive rating - defensive rating.

- SGA: 118.5 offensive rating - 101.96 defensive rating = 16.9 net rating
- Jokic: 124.2 offensive rating - 113.2 defensive rating = 11 net rating

so Jokic is performing much better offensively according to this metric (which should be obvious). The difference is the defensive rating. Lets look a bit deeper.

- OKC has a defesive rating of 102.7 (best in NBA)
- Denver has a defensive rating of 113.5 (19th in the NBA)

Based on looking through the lens of the only argument out there, Jokic is playing much better on a worst team. If you wanna say he needs to win 55 games thats fine. But there is no world were they are playing at the same level rn. Jokic is playing at top 5-10 of all time level.

I mean EPM, BPM, LEBRON would beg to differ.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/bpm_season.html

Joker is ahead of him in BPM. Also his level of play has generally been sustainable and consistently at this level for 4 years now.

SGA's metrics are benefiting from the season not even being half over yet and the team being on a 15 game winning streak.

[Exp0sed]

Yeah SGA averages 4.3ppg in clutch situations against 4.8 for Jokic. SGA just gets into fewer close games.

SGA has a net rating of 35 in those games, and Jokic has a net rating of 19.

I mean EPM, BPM, LEBRON would beg to differ.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/bpm_season.html

EPM has Chet at #13 overall, Ihart at #22 and J-Dub at #25. if EPM is king then SGA shouldn't be the MVP, cuz he's playing with three other top 25 players (that's completely unheard of and unprecedented level of stackedness )

[Wolfgang630]

Why doesn’t it get brought up how Aaron Gordon has missed significant time and Jamal Murray has been in out of the lineup

[canada_dry]

It's reasonable to say that SGA is leading the MVP race so far One factoring in the entire picture. Team record, level of play, impact metrics, box score.

It's not reasonable to say that he is playing better basketball than Jokic lol.


SGA can be the MVP and Joker can be the best player on the planet. Both things can be true

First reasonable post in about 24 hours.

Effects of last game must be wearing off

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app