Special_Puppy wrote:EmpireFalls wrote:Special_Puppy wrote:
What puts you firmly in the SGA MVP camp? Aren’t Jokic and SGA’s traditional and advanced stats very close?
The fact that every time I watch the Nuggets play someone good they seem to lose, whereas the Thunder have the best net rating in NBA history. I was looking at their respective performances against top 4 seeds in each conference and it was a very stark difference.
It’s unfair to Jokic, of course, but ultimately team success has always been the tiebreaker in these debates. I think it’s less about Jokic and more about the consistent greatness of SGA on an all time team.
Basically to overcome SGA’s team record edge, Jokic would need to significantly outdo SGA statistically or be much closer to OKC in the standings.
I might have asked you this before but what % of the Thunder being better than the Nuggets do you think is about SGA being more valuable than Jokic this season vs SGA's supporting cast being better than Jokic's?
Honestly? about 85% of it. Thunder are clearly better.
I won’t go 100%, though, because Chet has missed almost all of the season. I also think that SGA being a very good defender and being so durable helps OKC maintain their main strength, that elite switching defense and transition game. There’s arguments to be made that SGA might allow the Thunder to be better than Jokic would with that exact same supporting cast - although that’s mostly due to fit.
Obviously the two are playing at awesome levels and Jokic is having an all-time season. But when the team record is this outlier good, it takes a lot for someone else to win. that’s just the criterion for most valuable player historically. Jokic got an MVP last year because Tatum wasn’t having all that good of an individual season - but SGA now is.