NBA MVP Discussion '20-'21, Part 2 (Poll created 21 March '21)

[QingJames]

It would nonsense if Jokic will become UMVP

Why?

its about expectations, if Jokic can win UMVP while leading a team to a 47 win season...whats stopping him to win another 3? i mean its not like 47 win is a high bar...Denver will easily win 50 win next year and 54 next Lebron has not won a MVP until his team wins 66 games. see my point?

I don’t really get your point. Not only did Jokic play every game of the season, he had was a historically great offensive player. He arguably just had the best season on offense that any player has had, ever.

I’m a big Jokic guy but I struggle to see how he can replicate those things. I don’t think he’ll play every game in a season again, and I think the inflated offense of this pandemic season will also make it nearly impossible for him to replicate the offensive greatness he showed this year. It’s not at all a stretch to say he deserves to be unanimous MVP this year, though.

[antonac]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

[xdrta+]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

Or, it may be, that some voters think someone else is more deserving. You may think no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic, others may disagree. It doesn't have to be that someone merely wants to deprive Jokic of the honor of being unanimous or is voting out of spite.

[Michael Jackson]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

Or, it may be, that some voters think someone else is more deserving. You may think no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic, others may disagree. It doesn't have to be that someone merely wants to deprive Jokic of the honor of being unanimous or is voting out of spite.

Agreed. I think Jolie deserves it but it’s not like an argument can’t be made for other guys too.

[Kurtz]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

Or, it may be, that some voters think someone else is more deserving. You may think no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic, others may disagree. It doesn't have to be that someone merely wants to deprive Jokic of the honor of being unanimous or is voting out of spite.

Well, if 2 guys vote one way and 98 vote the other way, it's a damn near certainty that the 2 got it wrong.

[cdubbz]

My goodness Steph Curry!!!!

[Hakeemthegoat]

It would nonsense if Jokic will become UMVP

Why?

its about expectations, if Jokic can win UMVP while leading a team to a 47 win season...whats stopping him to win another 3? i mean its not like 47 win is a high bar...Denver will easily win 50 win next year and 54 next Lebron has not won a MVP until his team wins 66 games. see my point?

47 games in a 72 games season. Not to mention top seeds lost more than they usually do this season.

[Ballerhogger]

If play on counted for mvp votes he wouldn’t be off of jokic . Curry was amazing

[durden_tyler]

In sportsbooks, Jokic is priced at 1.01 (Your $100 bet wins... $1) and Steph and Joel at 27.0 and 27.9 (your $100 wins $2700)

So this is a done deal, Jokic to win MVP, easily.

[Tomjas]

In sportsbooks, Jokic is priced at 1.01 (Your $100 bet wins... $1) and Steph and Joel at 27.0 and 27.9 (your $100 wins $2700)

So this is a done deal, Jokic to win MVP, easily.

And a loooooong way from being the best player

LeBron or Steph

Massive gap to the rest

[Johnny Firpo]

In sportsbooks, Jokic is priced at 1.01 (Your $100 bet wins... $1) and Steph and Joel at 27.0 and 27.9 (your $100 wins $2700)

So this is a done deal, Jokic to win MVP, easily.

And a loooooong way from being the best player

LeBron or Steph

Massive gap to the rest

Even if it's true, very few people care about this. Really only those who did not want Jokic to win it.

[Genjuro]

This will be the 3rd straight season in which a non american gets the MVP.
Luka and Embiid are next.
How much the game has changed.
Dream Team's legacy in '92 made this game the best sport ever. Thank you MJ.

The Dream Team legacy is pretty great, but I'm not sure it's such a factor for Balkan players like Jokic and Luka. The basketball tradition there is huge and the progression of Balkan basketball started way before. By 1992 the former Yugoslavia had an all-time great collection of stars, and to me Jokic is an super-evolution of guys like Cosic and Divac.

[kuclas]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

He won't get uMVP. Likely like KD 2013-2014 season where KD got 118/125 first place votes (or something like that) And KD team finished with 59 wins. 2nd best overall in NBA record wise.

Record does matter. KD averaged 32/7.5/5.5 that season.

Even Giannis with the best record in 2018-2019 season and 2019-2020 season was no where near uMVP (he was closer in 2019-2020 season).

The real issue is overall team record. If Nuggets had 1st or 2nd best overall record, a case can be made for Jokic to be uMVP. But nuggets aren't the top 2 team in the league.

[Texas Chuck]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

You will definitely get a guy from the Bay voting for Steph not just as a homer vote, but also to protect him as a unanimous MVP. It's petty but oh so predictable. Like the old baseball writer who wouldn't make Nolan Ryan unanimous thinking he was making a clever point but really just showing his ass.

[BoatsNZones]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

You will definitely get a guy from the Bay voting for Steph not just as a homer vote, but also to protect him as a unanimous MVP. It's petty but oh so predictable. Like the old baseball writer who wouldn't make Nolan Ryan unanimous thinking he was making a clever point but really just showing his ass.

Wrong (most likely).

Chris Haynes (used to cover the Warriors) is thus far the only voter who did not vote Curry for All NBA 1st Team (he went with an objectively terrible CP3/Lillard/Giannis/Embiid/Jokic). He also had Curry behind Lillard and CP in MVP voting. The two voters who have already come out and said they voted for Curry first are not from the Bay Area/have no connection to the Warriors. Nate Duncan is one of the few Bay Area/Warrior beat voters I know of off hand and he voted Jokic for MVP (giving the nod to Joker for games played in which the Warriors fell off a cliff... best ability being availability notion).

The top 3 finished (almost for sure) Jokic (by a mile), Embiid and Curry. Giannis 4th and CP 5th. So it played out as expected. Curry should have finished above Embiid (given better advanced stats virtually across the board, a different stratosphere of burden and not missing 30% of the season), but it is what it is.

[NY 567]

In sportsbooks, Jokic is priced at 1.01 (Your $100 bet wins... $1) and Steph and Joel at 27.0 and 27.9 (your $100 wins $2700)

So this is a done deal, Jokic to win MVP, easily.

And a loooooong way from being the best player

LeBron or Steph

Massive gap to the rest

Jokic is the much better playmaker, rebounder, and defender and gives you elite scoring and scoring efficiency. In no universe is Steph way better than Jokic. It's arguably that he's better at all. Volume stats, team record, and many advanced stats favor Jokic.

[eathb_au]

I mean even if we completely ignore team record, Jokic's regular season numbers are still better than Steph's

[maxwellcu]

I mean even if we completely ignore team record, Jokic's regular season numbers are still better than Steph's

Yep, that's what these insane curry stans conveniently forget. Who cares that jokic played more games or that his team was better? He was better in the games he played than curry. The season is longer than an 8 game hot streak. And jokic was better on a per game basis than curry, by a pretty comfortable margin.

These warriors trolls are completely off the rails mentally ill so they'll argue about it flamboyantly, but jokic has been considerably better (individually) on a PER GAME basis than curry. there isn't an argument to the contrary.

[Inspektor1312]

I mean even if we completely ignore team record, Jokic's regular season numbers are still better than Steph's

Yep, that's what these insane curry stans conveniently forget. Who cares that jokic played more games or that his team was better? He was better in the games he played than curry. The season is longer than an 8 game hot streak. And jokic was better on a per game basis than curry, by a pretty comfortable margin.

These warriors trolls are completely off the rails mentally ill so they'll argue about it flamboyantly, but jokic has been considerably better (individually) on a PER GAME basis than curry. there isn't an argument to the contrary.

They're just scared that Curry will lose the "only unanimous MVP in history" title. What they don't understand is that basically nobody cares about that except them.

[The411]

I would completely agree that Jokic's season was not on par with Curry's 2016, there's no question about it, and so I can see the argument. but really, the issue is this idea that being an unanimous MVP is like an MVP plus, no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic this year and I can't see any reason to pick anyone over him.

Still, I doubt he'll get a uMVP, given that one of the voters deliberately voted against Shaq just to deprive him of uMVP I think there's a precedent for doing the same to Jokic.

Or alternatively the other 98% don’t understand how flawed the equations are behind advanced statistics and people gobble it up because they assume that those flawed statistics are fact because it reinforces a believe system.

Normally, I wouldn’t care but as someone with a MS in sports analytics I started looking into the metrics that are used and they are very troublesome.

Which isn’t to say that Jokic shouldn’t be the MVP, but my initial impression is that he’s empirically not the most valuable.

For example PER doesn’t adequately address defensive metrics or gravity, which is quite troublesome.


I am contemplating doing a research paper on the issue because I think what is happening here is the media is putting arbitrary standards on the MVP award that reward a player for having better teammates than actually being a more valuable player.

Or, it may be, that some voters think someone else is more deserving. You may think no one has any sort of comparable case to Jokic, others may disagree. It doesn't have to be that someone merely wants to deprive Jokic of the honor of being unanimous or is voting out of spite.

Well, if 2 guys vote one way and 98 vote the other way, it's a damn near certainty that the 2 got it wrong.