2021-22 NBA MVP Discussion (Pt. 1)

[Hello Brooklyn]

I never thought KD had much of a case with the Nets always having Harden on there. Sorry if you have a former MVP candidate, even if he was playing below par, you really have to be having an incredible season. KD is doing amazing, but it's not like the best season he's had. Also, he's playing a ton of minutes, which can also be attribute to some of the extra production. I still think he's got a chance, just not the same chance as the other players.

Harden has been awful for much of the season.

Being a former MVP means nothing if youre not playing well right now.

Thats like saying LeBron cant win MVP cause he plays with Westbrook.

Harden has been great since he returned from COVID.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

Hes had a nice 5-7 game stretch.

Does that erase all the times he sucked?

His stats this season are not better than Jrue Holiday or Andrew Wiggins. And hes far worse than either defensively.

[HotRocks34]

Strong night for Giannis

[rate_]

I predict Giannis will end up winning this one even though everyone wants it to be Curry.

[slick_watts]

Sixers have a fake star in Tobias. This team is horrific without Embiid. It's a lot closer than you think with how bad there are compared to the Nuggets.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

we don't have to care about what you or i think.

the nuggets are -13.0pp100 without jokic in the game this season. the sixers are -2.0pp100 without embiid in the game this season.

the nuggets perform far worse without jokic than the sixers do without embiid.

this is objective fact.

Are you really an MVP if the best you can do is raise your team to .500?

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

yes, he's raising his team to .500 from worst in the league. they are +8.0pp100 or something when he's in the game. that's a 21pp100 swing, which is absurd.

think about it. why do you even care about team record when it comes to mvp? the reason is that the most valuable players make their teams better. jokic makes his team better, objectively, more than anyone else this season, by far. only giannis is even in the same universe as him.

jokic has no control over what happens when he is not in the game, when the nuggets play like the worst team in the nba. it's silly to ignore this and just point to the team's record.

[eyeatoma]

Harden has been awful for much of the season.

Being a former MVP means nothing if youre not playing well right now.

Thats like saying LeBron cant win MVP cause he plays with Westbrook.

Harden has been great since he returned from COVID.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

Hes had a nice 5-7 game stretch.

Does that erase all the times he sucked?

His stats this season are not better than Jrue Holiday or Andrew Wiggins. And hes far worse than either defensively.

If Harden continues to play this well it will. Not to mention Kyrie playing all the road games.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[eyeatoma]

we don't have to care about what you or i think.

the nuggets are -13.0pp100 without jokic in the game this season. the sixers are -2.0pp100 without embiid in the game this season.

the nuggets perform far worse without jokic than the sixers do without embiid.

this is objective fact.

Are you really an MVP if the best you can do is raise your team to .500?

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

yes, he's raising his team to .500 from worst in the league. they are +8.0pp100 or something when he's in the game. that's a 21pp100 swing, which is absurd.

think about it. why do you even care about team record when it comes to mvp? the reason is that the most valuable players make their teams better. jokic makes his team better, objectively, more than anyone else this season, by far. only giannis is even in the same universe as him.

jokic has no control over what happens when he is not in the game, when the nuggets play like the worst team in the nba. it's silly to ignore this and just point to the team's record.

There are plenty of MVP candidates that raise their team from .500 or just below to best in the league.

Giannis, Embiid, Durant, etc.

Let's also look historically, most MVPs are on a very good team. Westbrook and Jokic being the rare exception. I think for Jokic to win it two years in a row he'll need to make his team better not worse than last year. Yes they're missing MPJ and Murray, but I just don't see voters doing it twice in a row.

Nash and Curry did it back to back and those were very good teams.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[WhatTheBuck]

Giannis 30 / 12 / 11 and 3 Blocks
Curry 12 / 8 / 4 / 2 Steals and lots of gravity, presence and something you just can't put your finger on.

I predict Curry will add to his MVP votes in this thread after this match.

[eyeatoma]

we don't have to care about what you or i think.

the nuggets are -13.0pp100 without jokic in the game this season. the sixers are -2.0pp100 without embiid in the game this season.

the nuggets perform far worse without jokic than the sixers do without embiid.

this is objective fact.

Are you really an MVP if the best you can do is raise your team to .500?

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

yes, he's raising his team to .500 from worst in the league. they are +8.0pp100 or something when he's in the game. that's a 21pp100 swing, which is absurd.

think about it. why do you even care about team record when it comes to mvp? the reason is that the most valuable players make their teams better. jokic makes his team better, objectively, more than anyone else this season, by far. only giannis is even in the same universe as him.

jokic has no control over what happens when he is not in the game, when the nuggets play like the worst team in the nba. it's silly to ignore this and just point to the team's record.

You can say it's silly. Show me the number of MVPs from the last 20 years that were not a top team or a best team from the conference.

It's going to be very few.

From my recollection it was only Russ and Joker.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[eyeatoma]

Giannis 30 / 12 / 11 and 3 Blocks
Curry 12 / 8 / 4 / 2 Steals and lots of gravity, presence and something you just can't put your finger on.

I predict Curry will add to his MVP votes in this thread after this match.

Lol

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[slick_watts]

Are you really an MVP if the best you can do is raise your team to .500?

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

yes, he's raising his team to .500 from worst in the league. they are +8.0pp100 or something when he's in the game. that's a 21pp100 swing, which is absurd.

think about it. why do you even care about team record when it comes to mvp? the reason is that the most valuable players make their teams better. jokic makes his team better, objectively, more than anyone else this season, by far. only giannis is even in the same universe as him.

jokic has no control over what happens when he is not in the game, when the nuggets play like the worst team in the nba. it's silly to ignore this and just point to the team's record.

Let's also look historically, most MVPs are on are on a very good team. Westbrook and Jokic being the rare exception. I think for Jokic to win it two years in a row he'll need to make his team better not worse than last year. Yes they're missing MPJ and Murray, but I just don't see voters doing it twice in a row.

mvp voters are mostly stupid and adhere to this caveman ideology also. these are television talking head arguments. it's easy to predict what those guys will do, because they don't care at all about nuance.

we have objective evidence here that jokic makes his team better to an extent greater than any of the other candidates. who cares how the nuggets fared last year? what does that have to do with anything that is happening this season?

[slick_watts]

You can say it's silly. Show me the number of MVPs from the last 20 years that were not a top team or a best team from the conference.

It's going to be very few.

From my recollection it was only Russ and Joker.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

my original post in this thread mentioned that in a fair and just world, jokic would win mvp in a landslide.

we do not live in such a world, we live in one where team success outside of the control of the individual players considered for an individual award is an important criteria. obviously, jokic won't win mvp if the nuggets are at or around .500. and that is dumb.

[AussieBuck]

Needs a new poll.

[mediocrityrules]

I can't fathom the argument that says that a player is an MVP candidate if he raises a team that is potentially one of the bottom 4-5 in the league, to around .500. How is that a valid argument for MVP? Especially looking at the other candidates and what they are also able to do and how they bring their teams up.

Jokic needs to have his team doing more to be in the top 3-4 players right now. He can't have his team go backwards from last year and win again. Voters aren't that stupid.

[mediocrityrules]

You can say it's silly. Show me the number of MVPs from the last 20 years that were not a top team or a best team from the conference.

It's going to be very few.

From my recollection it was only Russ and Joker.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

my original post in this thread mentioned that in a fair and just world, jokic would win mvp in a landslide.

we do not live in such a world, we live in one where team success outside of the control of the individual players considered for an individual award is an important criteria. obviously, jokic won't win mvp if the nuggets are at or around .500. and that is dumb.

The fact that you can type that, and truly believe that he is head and shoulders above Giannis, KD etc? You said landslide. You think that Jokic is right now so far ahead of Giannis and KD?

[falcolombardi]

yes, he's raising his team to .500 from worst in the league. they are +8.0pp100 or something when he's in the game. that's a 21pp100 swing, which is absurd.

think about it. why do you even care about team record when it comes to mvp? the reason is that the most valuable players make their teams better. jokic makes his team better, objectively, more than anyone else this season, by far. only giannis is even in the same universe as him.

jokic has no control over what happens when he is not in the game, when the nuggets play like the worst team in the nba. it's silly to ignore this and just point to the team's record.

Let's also look historically, most MVPs are on are on a very good team. Westbrook and Jokic being the rare exception. I think for Jokic to win it two years in a row he'll need to make his team better not worse than last year. Yes they're missing MPJ and Murray, but I just don't see voters doing it twice in a row.

mvp voters are mostly stupid and adhere to this caveman ideology also. these are television talking head arguments. it's easy to predict what those guys will do, because they don't care at all about nuance.

we have objective evidence here that jokic makes his team better to an extent greater than any of the other candidates. who cares how the nuggets fared last year? what does that have to do with anything that is happening this season?

in fairness is arguable that is "easier" to have huge plus/minus métrics in bad teams that good ones

is commonly believe that lifting a good team 20 wins may be as hard as lifting a bad one 30

[slick_watts]

I can't fathom the argument that says that a player is an MVP candidate if he raises a team that is potentially one of the bottom 4-5 in the league, to around .500. How is that a valid argument for MVP?

it is a simple concept. the nuggets aren't much worse than the bucks w/ giannis when jokic is on the court. why would you penalize him for the team being putrid when he sits, if this is the case?

[slick_watts]

You can say it's silly. Show me the number of MVPs from the last 20 years that were not a top team or a best team from the conference.

It's going to be very few.

From my recollection it was only Russ and Joker.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

my original post in this thread mentioned that in a fair and just world, jokic would win mvp in a landslide.

we do not live in such a world, we live in one where team success outside of the control of the individual players considered for an individual award is an important criteria. obviously, jokic won't win mvp if the nuggets are at or around .500. and that is dumb.

The fact that you can type that, and truly believe that he is head and shoulders above Giannis, KD etc? You said landslide. You think that Jokic is right now so far ahead of Giannis and KD?

yes, jokic is having one of the best seasons ever.

[eyeatoma]

You can say it's silly. Show me the number of MVPs from the last 20 years that were not a top team or a best team from the conference.

It's going to be very few.

From my recollection it was only Russ and Joker.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

my original post in this thread mentioned that in a fair and just world, jokic would win mvp in a landslide.

we do not live in such a world, we live in one where team success outside of the control of the individual players considered for an individual award is an important criteria. obviously, jokic won't win mvp if the nuggets are at or around .500. and that is dumb.

Sounds more like it's your opinion. You're not the voter and the media is. Most of the time the media votes the best player in the best team. If we went with your theory LeBron would win MVP most of the time. Jokic might be the best player but he's not the MVP.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[eyeatoma]

yes, he's raising his team to .500 from worst in the league. they are +8.0pp100 or something when he's in the game. that's a 21pp100 swing, which is absurd.

think about it. why do you even care about team record when it comes to mvp? the reason is that the most valuable players make their teams better. jokic makes his team better, objectively, more than anyone else this season, by far. only giannis is even in the same universe as him.

jokic has no control over what happens when he is not in the game, when the nuggets play like the worst team in the nba. it's silly to ignore this and just point to the team's record.

Let's also look historically, most MVPs are on are on a very good team. Westbrook and Jokic being the rare exception. I think for Jokic to win it two years in a row he'll need to make his team better not worse than last year. Yes they're missing MPJ and Murray, but I just don't see voters doing it twice in a row.

mvp voters are mostly stupid and adhere to this caveman ideology also. these are television talking head arguments. it's easy to predict what those guys will do, because they don't care at all about nuance.

we have objective evidence here that jokic makes his team better to an extent greater than any of the other candidates. who cares how the nuggets fared last year? what does that have to do with anything that is happening this season?

Voter fatigue is a real thing and its rare when they reward someone twice for just making their team average.

Sent from my SM-G998B using Tapatalk

[Packbuckman]

my original post in this thread mentioned that in a fair and just world, jokic would win mvp in a landslide.

we do not live in such a world, we live in one where team success outside of the control of the individual players considered for an individual award is an important criteria. obviously, jokic won't win mvp if the nuggets are at or around .500. and that is dumb.

The fact that you can type that, and truly believe that he is head and shoulders above Giannis, KD etc? You said landslide. You think that Jokic is right now so far ahead of Giannis and KD?

yes, jokic is having one of the best seasons ever.

And so is Giannis plus elite defense I will take his season so far especially after tonite where he showed he’s the mvp and best player in one.