NBA MVP Discussion 20/21 (Fresh poll ➥ Vote)

[stormi]

First 18-4 is irrelevant to MVP voters. They only look at overall record. Embiid's lack of availability actually hurts him twofold in the MVP race.

You're hopping into a discussion and regurgitating conversation points that have already been made. I'm not reading that almanac. Yes Embiid loses points for the 6 games he's missed and rightfully so. If he can clean up his missed time (big ask) and get into a consistent play rhythm, continue to boss the advanced analytics, continue to average 30 on 54/39/85 and lead his team to the best record in the conference he'll have an undeniable case to be the rightful MVP.

Leading his team to the best record in the conference is also a meaningless point though right? If anything, it highlights a negative for Embiid which is that he plays in a significantly worse conference.

I’m not one of those people who think MVP should be completely divorced from narratives, but leading his team to the number one seed in the East is as weak as it gets. Embiid’s production and stats speak for themselves...but he really doesn’t have the best player on the best or even elite team going for him.

I didn't use the 'winning the east' thing as a defining benchmark that should throne him MVP. It was in conjunction to display how poor that same team has been in his absence. The disparity of 1-5 without and 18-5 with, which tunnels us back into the durability conversation. But In terms of players that are by definition the most valuable to their squads, he should be a headlining name in that conversation and every impact metric supports that.

[Dupp]

I thought the nuggets record would even out and come good but it’s stating to look like it won’t and they just kinda suck. Joker will probably come third or something because of this.


Come around to havin Lilly first. Been insane. Steph level but with more wins.

[Homer38]

A player is not useful to his team when you miss too many games and that's the problem for Embiid, Durant right now

[KqWIN]

You're hopping into a discussion and regurgitating conversation points that have already been made. I'm not reading that almanac. Yes Embiid loses points for the 6 games he's missed and rightfully so. If he can clean up his missed time (big ask) and get into a consistent play rhythm, continue to boss the advanced analytics, continue to average 30 on 54/39/85 and lead his team to the best record in the conference he'll have an undeniable case to be the rightful MVP.

Leading his team to the best record in the conference is also a meaningless point though right? If anything, it highlights a negative for Embiid which is that he plays in a significantly worse conference.

I’m not one of those people who think MVP should be completely divorced from narratives, but leading his team to the number one seed in the East is as weak as it gets. Embiid’s production and stats speak for themselves...but he really doesn’t have the best player on the best or even elite team going for him.

I didn't use the 'winning the east' thing as a defining benchmark that should throne him MVP. It was in conjunction to display how poor that same team has been in his absence. The disparity of 1-5 without and 18-5 with, which tunnels us back into the durability conversation. But In terms of players that are by definition the most valuable to their squads, he should be a headlining name in that conversation and every impact metric supports that.

Well, you just used in your pitch so I commented on it. Leading his team to the best record means nothing, so I don't know why it was included.

I also don't see missing games as a positive. For me, the disparity between when he plays and when he sits out is also fairly meaningless in an MVP conversation. It does maybe mean something if you're deciding which player is better (which could factor into MVP tbf), but you don't have any value if you're not playing. Value is what you deliver to your team, and you can't do much if you're not playing.

If you look at cumulative measures of the impact stats, it's not close. Jokic is lapping the field. I'm not saying that means he should automatically win, but it's pretty clear what the numbers say.

This is definitely an interesting year for the MVP. It really comes down to what you weigh the most. The award is ambiguous by nature, I wouldn't say anyone is incorrect for valuing one thing or the other. Just as long as the things they are valuing are dumb things like leading his team to the best record in the east.

[stormi]

Leading his team to the best record means nothing

Silly statement from someone that brought up the connection between narrative and MVP case. Winning a conference and being a #1 seed will always be an influence and talking point. I'm not even all that confident the 76ers can do it, the Nets will win a lot of games and Milwaukee has been underperforming to this point. Finishing above those team isn't a given and the #1 seed in the East will have a very strong record.

If you look at cumulative measures of the impact stats, it's not close. Jokic is lapping the field. I'm not saying that means he should automatically win, but it's pretty clear what the numbers say.

This is definitely an interesting year for the MVP. It really comes down to what you weigh the most. The award is ambiguous by nature, I wouldn't say anyone is incorrect for valuing one thing or the other. Just as long as the things they are valuing are dumb things like leading his team to the best record in the east.

The impact stats say it's quite close actually. I don't care for PER (conflates the value of bigs and players that hound stats like Drummond), but Jokic and Embiid are at the top by less than a point of separation. Embiid's on/off is nearly 7 points per outing higher which is massive. Huge gap for Embiid in all RPM and RAPM metrics.

Again it's close and will come down to the best story. Lebron at his age and consistency is one I would understand completely. Same with Jokic's historic season if the Nuggets perform will down the stretch and get HCA. My reasoning for posting in here to begin with was to show Embiid that same amount of love, and i don't think he gets it.

[Dupp]

Kawhi, KD and Embiid lose major points because of games missed.

[BNM]

You're hopping into a discussion and regurgitating conversation points that have already been made. I'm not reading that almanac. Yes Embiid loses points for the 6 games he's missed and rightfully so. If he can clean up his missed time (big ask) and get into a consistent play rhythm, continue to boss the advanced analytics, continue to average 30 on 54/39/85 and lead his team to the best record in the conference he'll have an undeniable case to be the rightful MVP.

Leading his team to the best record in the conference is also a meaningless point though right? If anything, it highlights a negative for Embiid which is that he plays in a significantly worse conference.

I’m not one of those people who think MVP should be completely divorced from narratives, but leading his team to the number one seed in the East is as weak as it gets. Embiid’s production and stats speak for themselves...but he really doesn’t have the best player on the best or even elite team going for him.

I didn't use the 'winning the east' thing as a defining benchmark that should throne him MVP. It was in conjunction to display how poor that same team has been in his absence. The disparity of 1-5 without and 18-5 with, which tunnels us back into the durability conversation. But In terms of players that are by definition the most valuable to their squads, he should be a headlining name in that conversation and every impact metric supports that.

We're kind of on the same page, but also kind of not. We both agree that availability is very important for MVP consideration and that if Joel misses too many game, he seriously hurts his chances of winning the MVP award.

Here's where we differ:

You: "It was in conjunction to display how poor that same team has been in his absence. The disparity of 1-5 without and 18-5 with..."

Me: A guy who plays night in and night out, helping his team win, is much more valuable than a guy sitting behind the bench watching his team lose.

Saying PHI is 1-5 without Embiid is not helping his case, it's hurting it. Especially when there are guys out there helping their undermanned, less talented teams win every night, while fighting through injuries.

Another way to look at it: if PHI doesn't get the top seed in the East, the most likely reason is Embiid missed too many games. For me, the most valuable player is not the guy with the best metrics, it's the guy who helps his team win the most games they likely would not win without him. By definition, every game you miss is a game you didn't help your team win.

[stormi]

Leading his team to the best record in the conference is also a meaningless point though right? If anything, it highlights a negative for Embiid which is that he plays in a significantly worse conference.

I’m not one of those people who think MVP should be completely divorced from narratives, but leading his team to the number one seed in the East is as weak as it gets. Embiid’s production and stats speak for themselves...but he really doesn’t have the best player on the best or even elite team going for him.

I didn't use the 'winning the east' thing as a defining benchmark that should throne him MVP. It was in conjunction to display how poor that same team has been in his absence. The disparity of 1-5 without and 18-5 with, which tunnels us back into the durability conversation. But In terms of players that are by definition the most valuable to their squads, he should be a headlining name in that conversation and every impact metric supports that.

We're kind of on the same page, but also kind of not. We both agree that availability is very important for MVP consideration and that if Joel misses too many game, he seriously hurts his chances of winning the MVP award.

Here's where we differ:

You: "It was in conjunction to display how poor that same team has been in his absence. The disparity of 1-5 without and 18-5 with..."

Me: A guy who plays night in and night out, helping his team win, is much more valuable than a guy sitting behind the bench watching his team lose.

Saying PHI is 1-5 without Embiid is not helping his case, it's hurting it. Especially when there are guys out there helping their undermanned, less talented teams win every night, while fighting through injuries.

Another way to look at it: if PHI doesn't get the top seed in the East, the most likely reason is Embiid missed too many games. For me, the most valuable player is not the guy with the best metrics, it's the guy who helps his team win the most games they likely would not win without him. By definition, every game you miss is a game you didn't help your team win.

.....I . AGREE . WITH . YOU .

How can you write that first stanza, and continue on with the rest of the post. We're on the exact same page that his case can be docked because of the six games he's missed to this point (a couple of them due to Covid outbreaks where the team started Tyrese Maxey and Isaiah Joe and Danny Green played 40+ minutes because of tracing). The with/without thing must be where we're disconnecting. It was merely to point out how well he's been playing, and the fact that he's putting a subpar team on his spine. He's been fantastic this year and none of his criticisms have been performance related, it's pretty cool.

[KqWIN]

Leading his team to the best record means nothing

Silly statement from someone that brought up the connection between narrative and MVP case. Winning a conference and being a #1 seed will always be an influence and talking point. I'm not even all that confident the 76ers can do it, the Nets will win a lot of games and Milwaukee has been underperforming to this point. Finishing above those team isn't a given and the #1 seed in the East will have a very strong record.

Obviously I meant leading his team to the best record in the East means nothing. If the Sixers were in the West, they'd be 4th right now and not close to the top. The fact that they're in the East makes their record mean even less because it's significantly easier to fo 19-10 in the East than it is the west. I totally reject the notion that we give Embiid bonus points because he plays in a worse conference. In terms of "leading a good team", Lillard has more of case because his team is only a half game behind playing a tougher schedule. Winning the east isn't a significant accomplishment if it's equal to winning the 4th seed in the West...it's actually a lesser accomplishment due to the schedule.

The impact stats say it's quite close actually. I don't care for PER (conflates the value of bigs and players that hound stats like Drummond), but Jokic and Embiid are at the top by less than a point of separation. Embiid's on/off is nearly 7 points per outing higher which is massive. Huge gap for Embiid in all RPM and RAPM metrics.

Again it's close and will come down to the best story. Lebron at his age and consistency is one I would understand completely. Same with Jokic's historic season if the Nuggets perform will down the stretch and get HCA. My reasoning for posting in here to begin with was to show Embiid that same amount of love, and i don't think he gets it.

Not in cumulative measures. Jokic dwarfs Embiid in all cumulative measures of RPM, BPM, LEBRON, EPM, Raptor. It's not close. That's where the minutes factor in. If you're evaluating these two on a rate, it's close. But if you take a cumulative POV and give credit to Jokic for being available, it's not close.

[Ballerhogger]

A player is not useful to his team when you miss too many games and that's the problem for Embiid, Durant right now

By that methic is Lebron mvp to lose then

[Ballerhogger]

The nuggets are the 8th seed right now . Warriors have better record . No way is jokic going win the mvp as 6-8th seed .

[stormi]

Obviously I meant leading his team to the best record in the East means nothing.

Disagree mate, already gave you a full post on this topic.

Not in cumulative measures. Jokic dwarfs Embiid in all cumulative measures of RPM, BPM, LEBRON, EPM, Raptor

Selective stat mining. Embiid has a much more drastic on/off impact, Jokic isn't even top 50. Superior WOWY, RPM, Total RAPTOR. Averaging more points on greater TS%. Is a much better defensive anchor. But this is silly. I'm not sure why you're getting strain marks on your forehead trying to remove Embiid from the MVP conversation.

The media, aka the people that vote on this award currently have Embiid over Jokic. Team record and internal finish within the conference are variables that will be considered, and the Sixers being #1 in the East will sway more attention than their chi-squared parametric cross standard deviated sequential league wide position. It's an unfair advantage. Bonus narrative points.

Read on Twitter

[Ballerhogger]

Obviously I meant leading his team to the best record in the East means nothing.

Disagree mate, already gave you a full post on this topic.

Not in cumulative measures. Jokic dwarfs Embiid in all cumulative measures of RPM, BPM, LEBRON, EPM, Raptor

Selective stat mining. Embiid has a much more drastic on/off impact, Jokic isn't even top 50. Superior WOWY, RPM, Total RAPTOR. Averaging more points on greater TS%. Is a much better defensive anchor. But this is silly. I'm not sure why you're getting strain marks on your forehead trying to remove Embiid from the MVP conversation.

The media, aka the people that vote on this award currently have Embiid over Jokic. Team record and internal finish within the conference are variables that will be considered, but the Sixers being #1 in the East will sway more attention than their cross standard deviated conference position. It's an unfair advantage me-thinks. Bonus narrative points.

Read on Twitter

This tweet is general consensus right now see. See how leborn plays tonight

[Dupp]

Lillard getting spat on in that poll

[DCasey91]

James has a mountain to climb if Davis misses a significant period of time. He’s done it many times before but he’s 36 now lol. I Appreciate greatness

Curry/Lillard are massive darkhorses on the back end (Harden might sneak up there too in due time.)

Lillard is massively underrated what he did last in year in the rs season, was as elite as you can get offensively. He might get overlooked once again.

[zimpy27]

Lillard getting spat on in that poll

Honestly, Lillard has been spat on his whole career. I suspect some media people forget he exists.

[BNM]

Read on Twitter

Holy crap!!! Someone show that poll to Damian Lillard. I want to see him average 40/15 over the rest of the season and lead POR to the No. 1 seed in the West.

Damn! That is beyond disrespectful. Jason Tatum, leading his team to a .500 record in the East with worse numbers than Lillard, up 8 votes to 0. SMH!

[KqWIN]

Obviously I meant leading his team to the best record in the East means nothing.

Disagree mate, already gave you a full post on this topic.

Not in cumulative measures. Jokic dwarfs Embiid in all cumulative measures of RPM, BPM, LEBRON, EPM, Raptor

Selective stat mining. Embiid has a much more drastic on/off impact, Jokic isn't even top 50. Superior WOWY, RPM, Total RAPTOR. Averaging more points on greater TS%. Is a much better defensive anchor. But this is silly. I'm not sure why you're getting strain marks on your forehead trying to remove Embiid from the MVP conversation.

The media, aka the people that vote on this award currently have Embiid over Jokic. Team record and internal finish within the conference are variables that will be considered, and the Sixers being #1 in the East will sway more attention than their chi-squared parametric cross standard deviated sequential league wide position. It's an unfair advantage. Bonus narrative points.

Spoiler:

Read on Twitter

Selective stat mining? I literally used the cumulative measures Especially funny when you go on to choose your own statistics and leave out others. To make a claim about cumulative impact, it is not selective use the cumulative measures of ALL of the numbers. It is selective to pick and choose which ones you list and not acknowledge the numbers that Jokic is ahead in.

I also am not trying to remove Embiid from the conversation, where did I say that? I literally said that Embiid's production and numbers speaks for itself. I also said it's an eye of the beholder situation where different people will weigh things differently. Being the best player on the best team in the east is as weak as it gets for MVP narrative points. If people vote Embiid, I hope it's not for that lousy accomplishment.

Acting like #1 seed in the east is an accomplishment that could swing the MVP race comes off as reaching and does not make for a stronger argument. Embiid has a strong case on his own. No need to cheapen it by tossing in some garbage like that.

[NyKnicks1714]

Read on Twitter

Holy crap!!! Someone show that poll to Damian Lillard. I want to see him average 40/15 over the rest of the season and lead POR to the No. 1 seed in the West.

Damn! That is beyond disrespectful. Jason Tatum, leading his team to a .500 record in the East with worse numbers than Lillard, up 8 votes to 0. SMH!

In fairness, that was tweeted on the 10th and who knows then the poll was taken. Nobody was really talking about Dame as a candidate then.

[BNM]

Read on Twitter

Holy crap!!! Someone show that poll to Damian Lillard. I want to see him average 40/15 over the rest of the season and lead POR to the No. 1 seed in the West.

Damn! That is beyond disrespectful. Jason Tatum, leading his team to a .500 record in the East with worse numbers than Lillard, up 8 votes to 0. SMH!

In fairness, that was tweeted on the 10th and who knows then the poll was taken. Nobody was really talking about Dame as a candidate then.

But they were talking about Jason Tatum as an MVP candidate? On what planet?