I find it hard to see Jokic being awarded a 4th MVP without another ring.

[Rubios]

ESPN’s annual survey (I know, I know) places Jokic as the most likely next MVP, with over 60% of the votes. However, it only gives Denver a 7% chance of winning the title.

Those "pundits" seem to suggest they’d have no problem giving a 4th MVP (which would put him only behind Jordan and Kareem, and tied with LeBron) to a player with just one ring who hasn’t even returned to a conference finals.

And it’s not that I’d find it unfair. If he once again proves to be the best and the team’s record is strong, fine.
But I find it very hard to believe they’ll let it happen.

[firedavidkahn]

MVP is a regular season award.

Your thought process would totally destroy what the award is even about and the absolute wrong way to think.

[Rubios]

MVP is a regular season award.

Your thought process would totally destroy what the award is even about and the absolute wrong way to think.

In a vacuum, yes. But LBJ doesn't have... I dunno, 7? 8?

[Calvin Klein]

MVP is a regular season award.

Your thought process would totally destroy what the award is even about and the absolute wrong way to think.

In a vacuum, yes. But LBJ doesn't have... I dunno, 7? 8?

what are those 7 seasons he deserved MVP?

[Cavsfansince84]

I think they will make it hard on him to get another. Not all voters necessarily but there's always a certain % who want to do things like gatekeep awards and all of that based on who had won that many in the past and stuff like that. So I think in order to get a 4th he'll prob at the very least need to lead Denver to the 1 seed in the west. If Okc wins more games then I think they will definitely give Shai another before they give Jokic his 4th.

[dhsilv2]

MVP is a regular season award.

Your thought process would totally destroy what the award is even about and the absolute wrong way to think.

In a vacuum, yes. But LBJ doesn't have... I dunno, 7? 8?

I can see Lebron from 2008-2013 winning all 6 of those. That said 2008 we had a few really good choices. 2014, KD's MVP feels fully justified. Same with Curry's two. After that not a good argument.

Now Rose winning in 2011 was just nonsense.

So 5-6 seems like a better choice, he got 4. I don't really see the issues or concerns here.

[Doctor MJ]

ESPN’s annual survey (I know, I know) places Jokic as the most likely next MVP, with over 60% of the votes. However, it only gives Denver a 7% chance of winning the title.

Those "pundits" seem to suggest they’d have no problem giving a 4th MVP (which would put him only behind Jordan and Kareem, and tied with LeBron) to a player with just one ring who hasn’t even returned to a conference finals.

And it’s not that I’d find it unfair. If he once again proves to be the best and the team’s record is strong, fine.
But I find it very hard to believe they’ll let it happen.

So, understandable thoughts, but I'll put it like this:

I would say "voter fatigue" is a thing that happens when a candidate is perceived as having more accolade love than their career warrants, and so if a guy won an MVP without really achieving all the team things we associate with an MVP, there's resistance to him winning against before he does those other things.

Jokic has absolutely been the victim of this fatigue in his career and so it's not remotely beyond consideration that it will keep happening.

But, there's also something we might call "voter fatigue fatigue". Basically, if you ended up choosing between players A & B by picking the A who hadn't won MVP before over B who had, you remember that you did that to player B, and you're more reluctant to do that again next time.

So, after Jokic not winning the award last year, there will be more reluctance to not give him the award again this time.

[HMFFL]

Last season: Jokic received 29 first place votes and SGA received 71. They're the only two candidates to receive first place votes.

23-24 season: Jokic received 79 first place votes, SGA 15, Luka 4, and Giannis 1.

Point is that the rest of the league better step their level of play up. SGA and Jokic are in a class of their own. If the media blackballs Jokic from winning another MVP when he's deserving I will just stop wasting my time supporting the league. We already experienced Embiid winning over Jokic when Jokic was a huge favorite to win.

[ropjhk]

He doesn't need another ring to win MVP but his team does need to be like top 3 in the league standings. I don't think voters will give him MVP if the Nuggets are a 4th seed playoff team no matter how his stats look (practically speaking).

[Calvin Klein]

Considering most people still think Jokic is the best player in the league, and many might regret their 2023 MVP vote, I say there's a bigger chance he gets it this year than last.

[CumberlandPosey]

objectively hes the mvp.depends what the great victor does.its rear view for everyone else if hes healthy.

[Stan]

LeBron literally won his 4th MVP when he had just 1 title, Kareem was a SIX time MVP with just 1 title. Historically, this precedent has never mattered.

[Effigy]

I think he's done getting MVPs regardless. It'll go to the younger guys. This year it's going to Luka, I'm certain. Place your bets now.

[Rubios]

LeBron literally won his 4th MVP when he had just 1 title, Kareem was a SIX time MVP with just 1 title. Historically, this precedent has never mattered.

Didn't remember it happened that way.

/Thread, I guess.

[Chokic]

His mvps should have an asterisk next to them.


And no SGA Luka or Wemby will win it this year.

[Black Jack]

All MVPs are political. So the only question is what the narrative is this year?

I suspect SGA will win if everyone's stats are close. SGA and OKC are king of the hill until further notice.

[og15]

So Jokic and Denver have a great season, top 2 seed, and then we say, "well I don't know if Denver will win it all this year, so I can't give it to Jokic"

I mean...but why?

His mvps should have an asterisk next to them.


And no SGA Luka or Wemby will win it this year.

it's actually comical how far some people go with this stuff

[nomansland]

So Jokic and Denver have a great season, top 2 seed, and then we say, "well I don't know if Denver will win it all this year, so I can't give it to Jokic"

I mean...but why?

His mvps should have an asterisk next to them.


And no SGA Luka or Wemby will win it this year.

it's actually comical how far some people go with this stuff

Yeah dude's obsessed enough to create an account name hating on a player, using a very dumb and obvious play on the name. A 3rd grader could do better.

[nomansland]

It'd be nice if he got it, and it's not impossible to imagine, especially if the Nuggets somehow win 60 games. But voter fatigue has already surfaced no matter how much better he gets every year. Whatever. I want to see a championship, and I'm pretty sure that's what matters to him most as well.

[chudak]

MVP is a regular season award.

Your thought process would totally destroy what the award is even about and the absolute wrong way to think.

In a vacuum, yes. But LBJ doesn't have... I dunno, 7? 8?

I can see Lebron from 2008-2013 winning all 6 of those. That said 2008 we had a few really good choices. 2014, KD's MVP feels fully justified. Same with Curry's two. After that not a good argument.

Now Rose winning in 2011 was just nonsense.

So 5-6 seems like a better choice, he got 4. I don't really see the issues or concerns here.

Rose won because people did not want to give LeBron on Heat an MVP at the moment when he just teamed up with 2 other top 5 or 10 players, and Bulls won a lot of games with him as the main guy. Rare moment in time.

Not saying it should have happened but I understand how it did