2021-22 NBA MVP Discussion (Pt. 1)

[yoyoboy]

Booker does not deserve any kind of serious consideration. He’s simply not playing close to the level that guys like Jokic and Embiid are. Not sure how this is such a difficult concept for people. The best performing team doesn’t have to have the best performing individual player. Embiid, Jokic, Giannis, and Steph are far more important to their teams than Booker is.

[Crives]

Booker does not deserve any kind of serious consideration. He’s simply not playing close to the level that guys like Jokic and Embiid are. Not sure how this is such a difficult concept for people. The best performing team doesn’t have to have the best performing individual player. Embiid, Jokic, Giannis, and Steph are far more important to their teams than Booker is.

MVP is not best performing individual player. It’s most valuable to your team. And if you have a 20 game lead at the end of the season, that’s a lot of extra value you are providing.

And yes, Booker has been putting up mvp type performances.

Read on Twitter

?s=21

[Cubbies2120]

It’s a good point. But..

MVP is not best player award. It’s who is the most valuable to their team winning. If Philly or Denver were projected to end the season within a few games I would be fine with mvp to Embiid or Jokic. Just like last year, Jokic ended season only handful of games behind the #1 seed.

If we project forward based on current record… reasonable to do given how far into the season we are:

Phx: 66.3 wins
Denver: 45 wins
Philly: 48.8 wins

The best player on the 66 win team doesn’t get mentioned in the conversation? Has there ever been a team win this many games without having a top 3 MVP candidate?

MVP is not a best record award… but a 21 game to 18 game difference in wins is just massive and shouldn’t be ignored. Booker has been playing like an MVP, give him a 20 game lead in wins and I don’t see how you can make the case against him providing more winning value to his team.

It helps when Booker can sit out and his team can go 5-2 without him (and finish off the Warriors when Booker went out they were down 6, outscored the Warriors by 14 when he left the floor for the rest of the game.

Nuggets are 1-4 without Jokic, Sixers 3-8 without Embiid.

Does not change my point. We really awarding MVP to a team projected to finish with~20 less wins?even if you can’t get onboard with Booker being your favorite, how do you not elevate him to top3?

Because MVP is who is most valuable to their team. If your team wins at a 70% clip, are you really the most valuable player? You're able to take 7 games off and your team cruises along, but Jokic gets punished because his team struggles to win a game without him? There is no world that Booker is more valuable than Jokic or Embiid. It's arguable if he's even more valuable than CP3.

[Cubbies2120]

Booker does not deserve any kind of serious consideration. He’s simply not playing close to the level that guys like Jokic and Embiid are. Not sure how this is such a difficult concept for people. The best performing team doesn’t have to have the best performing individual player. Embiid, Jokic, Giannis, and Steph are far more important to their teams than Booker is.

MVP is not best performing individual player. It’s most valuable to your team. And if you have a 20 game lead at the end of the season, that’s a lot of extra value you are providing.

And yes, Booker has been putting up mvp type performances.

Read on Twitter

?s=21

The Suns win at a clip to be the #2 seed in the entire NBA when Booker sits. He elevates them to #1 seed.

The Suns would be a worse team without CP3 than they would be without Booker. How can you say he's the MVP lol.

[Dutchball97]

Booker does not deserve any kind of serious consideration. He’s simply not playing close to the level that guys like Jokic and Embiid are. Not sure how this is such a difficult concept for people. The best performing team doesn’t have to have the best performing individual player. Embiid, Jokic, Giannis, and Steph are far more important to their teams than Booker is.

MVP is not best performing individual player. It’s most valuable to your team. And if you have a 20 game lead at the end of the season, that’s a lot of extra value you are providing.

And yes, Booker has been putting up mvp type performances.

Read on Twitter

?s=21

Booker is not nearly the most valuable player in the league. Like others have said he does not elevate his team at the same level as the likes of Embiid, Giannis and Jokic are doing.

I don't even think Booker is the most valuable player on his own team, let alone the whole league. Can you honestly say Booker adds more wins to the Suns than anyone else adds to their teams?

[yoyoboy]

Booker does not deserve any kind of serious consideration. He’s simply not playing close to the level that guys like Jokic and Embiid are. Not sure how this is such a difficult concept for people. The best performing team doesn’t have to have the best performing individual player. Embiid, Jokic, Giannis, and Steph are far more important to their teams than Booker is.

MVP is not best performing individual player. It’s most valuable to your team. And if you have a 20 game lead at the end of the season, that’s a lot of extra value you are providing.

And yes, Booker has been putting up mvp type performances.

Read on Twitter

?s=21

You’re just getting into semantics now. To me best performing goes almost totally hand in hand with the value you provide to your team. And I clearly said guys like Embiid, Jokic, Steph, and Giannis are more important to their teams’ success. That’s what value is. The Suns without Booker would still be a top team in the West. They’ve done well in the games he’s missed and Booker’s plus-minus and impact stats are nothing special. You can argue that Booker isn’t even the most valuable player on his own team. That’s something that’s totally inarguable with all the other MVP candidates because they’re far and away the best and most important guys on their teams. Also by the end of the season, Phoenix isn’t going to have a 20 game lead lol.

All the other serious candidates I mentioned are quite literally doing everything at a higher level than Booker is. Scoring more, scoring more efficiently, defending better, playmaking at a higher level, drawing more defensive attention, and in all but Steph‘s case (who’s only a hair behind) rebounding far better as well. Yet somehow Booker ends up more valuable than those guys because...team has more wins? This logic where you work backwards from the team level to the individual in order to determine the MVP is so faulty and breaks down quickly. Phoenix has a very great well-rounded team, and Booker’s individual play/value just don’t compare to the other guys.

EPM:
Jokic: +9.3 (1st)
Curry: +7.6 (2nd)
Embiid: +7.2 (4th)
Giannis: +6.8 (5th)
Booker: +3.1 (35th)

RAPTOR:
Jokic: +15.7 (1st)
Giannis: +7.2 (5th)
Curry: +7.1 (6th)
Embiid: +6.8 (7th)
Booker: +2.9 (39th)

LEBRON:
Jokic: +7.00 (1st)
Embiid: +5.54 (2nd)
Giannis: +5.40 (4th)
Curry: +4.58 (5th)
Booker: +1.41 (59th)

BPM:
Jokic: 14.2 (1st)
Giannis: 10.3 (2nd)
Embiid: 9.3 (3rd)
Curry: 6.4 (7th)
Booker: 3.1 (28th)

RAPM:
Curry: +4.42 (2nd)
Jokic: +3.79 (3rd)
Embiid: +2.87 (11th)
Giannis: +2.78 (15th)
Booker: +1.30 (81st)

Looking at various impact metrics, Booker isn’t even in the same universe as the other guys right now. His individual box-score stats don’t compare. His team performed well in the stretch of games he missed. And he should be in the conversation (meaning it wouldn’t be a shame if he won the award) just because his team, a collection of 15 guys, has played better than the other guys’ teams? When that’s your only support, you have no argument. Atlanta won 60 games in 2015, yet I highly doubt anyone would’ve thought one of their guys deserved MVP if the Warriors weren’t in the picture just because they would have the best record at that point. So clearly it’s not enough on it’s own.

[schnakenpopanz]

to me this is the most Important value to the teams. In other words: the Team is the mvp. bit if I had to choose, cp3

Read on Twitter

?t=UxcMzC5KLRqyg_8A5QfWwg&s=19

[Ballerhogger]

Booker is far from top 3 it would take best record nba to even get on the ballot

[CBS7]

People took issue (and still do) with Rose's MVP because his individual stats weren't MVP level. Booker's stats are a good deal below even Rose's.
I would easily put CP3 above Booker on my MVP ballot. Booker does not deserve any serious consideration.

[Infinite Llamas]

Golden rule in life. If there’s a debate if you’re even the best player on your own team than no, you aren’t legitimately in the MVP discussion.

[Dutchball97]

Golden rule in life. If there’s a debate if you’re even the best player on your own team than no, you aren’t legitimately in the MVP discussion.

In the 01/02 and 02/03 seasons Kobe and Shaq were top 5 in MVP voting with both receiving first place votes each season. In the 82/83 season Moses won MVP, while Dr J. was fifth with 3 first place votes. In the 83/84 and 84/85 seasons Magic and Kareem were top 4. In 95/96 MJ won MVP with Pippen coming fifth. It isn't impossible for two teammates to both be in the MVP discussion.

I think we picture KD and Steph in 16/17 and 17/18 not getting serious MVP consideration but they were playing with two more All-Stars so that is a bit out an outlier. I think both CP3 and Booker could be in the conversation but neither is really playing at a MVP level.

[DutchManDanFan]

Golden rule in life. If there’s a debate if you’re even the best player on your own team than no, you aren’t legitimately in the MVP discussion.

Booker will not win it. CP3 has a chance, but only if Booker doesn't get too many votes. Suns should go all in on CP3 for MVP.

[Drakeem]

It’s a good point. But..

MVP is not best player award. It’s who is the most valuable to their team winning. If Philly or Denver were projected to end the season within a few games I would be fine with mvp to Embiid or Jokic. Just like last year, Jokic ended season only handful of games behind the #1 seed.

If we project forward based on current record… reasonable to do given how far into the season we are:

Phx: 66.3 wins
Denver: 45 wins
Philly: 48.8 wins

The best player on the 66 win team doesn’t get mentioned in the conversation? Has there ever been a team win this many games without having a top 3 MVP candidate?

MVP is not a best record award… but a 21 game to 18 game difference in wins is just massive and shouldn’t be ignored. Booker has been playing like an MVP, give him a 20 game lead in wins and I don’t see how you can make the case against him providing more winning value to his team.

It helps when Booker can sit out and his team can go 5-2 without him (and finish off the Warriors when Booker went out they were down 6, outscored the Warriors by 14 when he left the floor for the rest of the game.

Nuggets are 1-4 without Jokic, Sixers 3-8 without Embiid.

Does not change my point. We really awarding MVP to a team projected to finish with~20 less wins?even if you can’t get onboard with Booker being your favorite, how do you not elevate him to top3?

Yes, because most valuable player doesn't mean the player on the best team. You can make a legit argument that he might not be the most valuable player to his own team. They win games without him at a pretty solid rate. I'm not saying he's not a great player, but it's clear that he's not as valuable to PHX as some of the superstars are to their teams.

Simply put, Booker just isn't a good enough player to warrant being in any serious discussion (you can list him in the top 5 candidates or whatever but no one cares about people that aren't in the 1-3 favourite each year). Phoenix can win 70 games and it'll always come down to the fact that they have loads of talent at each position who play well together. Booker isn't outstanding enough to say that without him the team falls apart.

[PhilBlackson]

In this moment my vote is for Embiid, somehow has the Sixers just a half game behind MIL & BKN (and this is despite himself missing games), that's incredible and he's been absolutely dominant.

[Black star]

How valuable is it to lead a team that would be a surefire lottery team to the playoffs? If your team can't get a top 3 seed there is a slim chance that the team is going to be playing past the 2nd round.

In terms of championship odds being on a better team inherently makes a player's production more valuable. Another way to think of it is how much value can a player have who has virtually zero impact on which team is hoisting the trophy at the end of the year? His team wouldn't be impacting the race whether he was playing or not.

Not saying Devin Booker or CP3 should be leading the MVP race but it doesn't seem absurd to argue their contributions might have extra value on a league leading team.

[Cubbies2120]

In this moment my vote is for Embiid, somehow has the Sixers just a half game behind MIL & BKN (and this is despite himself missing games), that's incredible and he's been absolutely dominant.

Both of those teams also had MVP level players missing 10+ games, so if your argument is he's got them close in seeding, it's a bad one.

If your argument is that he's playing like a top 3 player right now (Jokic/Giannis/Embiid are IMO clearly the top 3 right now), then it's a good one.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[JDR720]

Watch on YouTube

[Ballerhogger]

Embiid should have monster night with Lebron out . See how it goes for him

[DCasey91]

Lol at the Booker talk. CP3 should be a shoe in for the All NBA 1st team and 1st All NBA defense as well. He’s been the ultimate team raiser wherever he goes to.

Without Jokic/Embiid your looking at the worst team in the comp injuries, guys missing etc, sub par lists anyway. Literally all of their teammates are replaceable. Not to mention Embiid has never played with a quality point guard ever lol same with Jokic.

Both are having outlier impact just to win and face facts to Curry supporters he’s having a woeful stretch for weeks basically a month now. It’s a two horse race with Giannis not far behind.

Even at the start of the season he did play bad games and they would demolish a lotto team by 10+.

Without Curry, Giannis and Booker all three teams would make the playoffs guaranteed.