2021-22 NBA MVP Discussion (Pt.2)

[bebopdeluxe]

Wait, you're serious? You don't even have an own opinion and you blindly follow what gamblers of all people do? That is even worse than what I was implying. Why are you even here on a discussion thread when you have nothing to contribute?

To be fair if you’re going to use any metric to predict mvp the odds in Vegas are literally your best bet. They follow the money and generally speaking the money is usually right. Now odds may change but I’ll take the current odds favorite as the best source of truth or anything else out there. And it’s sure as hell more predictive than a poll on a message board. Now you may disagree that he should be the favorite. And you have every right to do that since this is sports and subjective. But to dismiss real time Vegas odds is foolish

We're not here to play a guessing game though, are we? We're discussing who we think should be MVP, if someone thinks that should be Embiid I'm happy to hear their arguments but as you can see from bebop's response these guys are only interested in campaigning for their mancrush and aren't open for any form of meaningful discussion.

I wrote a VERY extensive post - including the example of Kirk Gibson as National League MVP in 1988 - to make the differentiation between "best statistical player " and MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.

Did you see it? It is midway down page 12 of this thread.

Go back a few pages in this thread and read it. It is actually pretty good, if I do say so myself!

[ty 4191]

I wrote a VERY extensive post - including the example of Kirk Gibson as National League MVP in 1988 - to make the differentiation between "best statistical player " and MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.

Kirk Gibson was third in the NL in Wins Above Replacement (WAR) among position players that year. He had an *outstanding* statistical season.

What the hell are you smoking/imbibing, anyway?

[bisme37]

I wrote a VERY extensive post - including the example of Kirk Gibson as National League MVP in 1988 - to make the differentiation between "best statistical player " and MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.

Kirk Gibson was third in the NL in Wins Above Replacement (WAR) among position players that year. He had an *outstanding* statistical season.

What the hell are you smoking/imbibing, anyway?

Let's dial back the hostility please. You can disagree with people without accusing them of inebriation. You already got Sixers fans riled up by calling out their entire fanbase and we don't need this thread to get more heated and go off the rails. Thanks.

[bradybunch]

Jokic was quite fortunate after missing two straight crucial free throws.

8-8 until those last two.

I don't get people that deny "clutch" play. It's real. Pressure is real.

[Dutchball97]

To be fair if you’re going to use any metric to predict mvp the odds in Vegas are literally your best bet. They follow the money and generally speaking the money is usually right. Now odds may change but I’ll take the current odds favorite as the best source of truth or anything else out there. And it’s sure as hell more predictive than a poll on a message board. Now you may disagree that he should be the favorite. And you have every right to do that since this is sports and subjective. But to dismiss real time Vegas odds is foolish

We're not here to play a guessing game though, are we? We're discussing who we think should be MVP, if someone thinks that should be Embiid I'm happy to hear their arguments but as you can see from bebop's response these guys are only interested in campaigning for their mancrush and aren't open for any form of meaningful discussion.

I wrote a VERY extensive post - including the example of Kirk Gibson as National League MVP in 1988 - to make the differentiation between "best statistical player " and MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.

Did you see it? It is midway down page 12 of this thread.

Go back a few pages in this thread and read it. It is actually pretty good, if I do say so myself!

I'm bored to death by baseball so I can't really speak about MVP examples from that sport but why are you so sure this applies to Embiid vs Jokic/Giannis/Curry? I don't really see a big difference between their intangibles as all these candidates are great leaders to their respective teams.

Lets just make it clear I'm very impressed by what Embiid is doing this season. He handled the absense of Simmons incredibly well and his mentorship of Maxey also definitely stands out, all while having a ridiculous individual season. It's just that arguments like this would make more sense to me if the other candidates were guys like Kawhi, KD or LeBron, who have all shown questionable leadership.

[Genjuro]

i would say no, he is the best player but having a worst record after coming off a MVP season.. I think Jokic is out of the race.

You don't think the voters realize/will realize that they played an entire season with bench players, instead of their 2nd and 3rd best players, who (likely) missed the entire season?

no, thats a part of the game. What if the players come back and Denver still not winning the west? Plus most MVP winners are coming from top 3 records in the league, i cant imagine Jokic winning 2 MVPs because his team let him down.. if that was the case MJ would have won another 2 MVPs at least.

Well, we can pretend 2006 Nash never happened.

Joel is the mvp! 40 15 and 10!! Wow he’s is the best player in the league currently no doubt about it.

No doubt about it? Delusional.

Check this most current poll. Then check all the polls we've had all season.

Has Embiid ever been remotely close to leading? Not once.

He is in Vegas. Nobody cares about a jabroni RealGM poll.

When it comes to MONEY, the leader in the clubhouse is Embiid. Sorry, bro,

Nobody but you, apparently.

[Johnny Firpo]

Jokic was quite fortunate after missing two straight crucial free throws.

8-8 until those last two.

I don't get people that deny "clutch" play. It's real. Pressure is real.

It is real, and Jokic is one of the most clutch players in the history of the game.

[csh 19792001]

Jokic was quite fortunate after missing two straight crucial free throws.

8-8 until those last two.

I don't get people that deny "clutch" play. It's real. Pressure is real.

It is real, and Jokic is one of the most clutch players in the history of the game.

Who has FOUR game winning blocks in 50 games? Seriously!?

Watch on YouTube

[youtube]

Read on Twitter

?s=20&t=i2bIIhdt_dqAxlu6jpCYiw[/youtube]

[bebopdeluxe]

We're not here to play a guessing game though, are we? We're discussing who we think should be MVP, if someone thinks that should be Embiid I'm happy to hear their arguments but as you can see from bebop's response these guys are only interested in campaigning for their mancrush and aren't open for any form of meaningful discussion.

I wrote a VERY extensive post - including the example of Kirk Gibson as National League MVP in 1988 - to make the differentiation between "best statistical player " and MOST VALUABLE PLAYER.

Did you see it? It is midway down page 12 of this thread.

Go back a few pages in this thread and read it. It is actually pretty good, if I do say so myself!

I'm bored to death by baseball so I can't really speak about MVP examples from that sport but why are you so sure this applies to Embiid vs Jokic/Giannis/Curry? I don't really see a big difference between their intangibles as all these candidates are great leaders to their respective teams.

Lets just make it clear I'm very impressed by what Embiid is doing this season. He handled the absense of Simmons incredibly well and his mentorship of Maxey also definitely stands out, all while having a ridiculous individual season. It's just that arguments like this would make more sense to me if the other candidates were guys like Kawhi, KD or LeBron, who have all shown questionable leadership.

Good post.

Frankly, I don't get all up in the advanced stats like RAPTOR and the like. And there are statistics that I view as very important - like Embiid leading the league in "clutch" scoring (by a pretty fair margin, IIRC) - that I believe are CRITICAL to the perception of those who are putting money down on Embiid's MVP candidacy. I would also acknowledge that voters are not taking into account the injury issues that the Nuggets have had to deal with - which have had a similar impact on their relative success this season, and reflects favorably on Jokic's season.

However, injury issues tend to galvanize and rally a team...whereas the holdout by Simmons potentially threatens to tear a team apart, and - aside from his great numbers on the floor - it is Embiid's leadership of the team to success substantially above expectations that is as important as any single factor in Embiid's MVP candidacy, IMO.

[Sgt Major]

Jokic was quite fortunate after missing two straight crucial free throws.

8-8 until those last two.

I don't get people that deny "clutch" play. It's real. Pressure is real.

Fortunate as in he blocked someone like that?

Pressure? He's been one of the clutchest players in the league for years ffs

[eyeatoma]

All three have been amazing. Jokic is still my pick as of now.

Your privilege of being a 76ers fan is in danger...

Nuggs are my favorite team. 76ers are my protest team. I grew up a Rockets' fan, but I watched Fertitta systematically annihilate a contending roster from the first day he took ownership of the team, and the day Morey left was the day I changed my RGM logo.

So, "It's complicated."

But, frankly, I had an MVP Formula on here for a while, and if I still had it, I'm pretty sure Jokic would be leading, because he leads the NBA in four of the five primary inputs by big margins, and the one he doesn't lead is the one that was weighted the least.

So you decide to put your protest team on here, instead of your favorite team? Okay...

[Black star]

So 2nd year of a back to back MVP stretch in the last 20 years

2020 Giannis 1 seed plus DPOY level defense
2016 Curry 1 seed 73 wins and insanely efficient offensive season
2013 Lebron 1 seed massive Miami win streak and DPOY level defense
2010 Lebron 1 seed and improved his production levels
2006 Nash 4 seed
2003 Duncan tied for 1 seed

Now the last two were before I started following the NBA so I'm not sure of the narratives surrounding their candidacies but it certainly seems to follow a trend of a lot of things needing to go right on an individual and team level to achieve that back to back status. Nash looks like a clear outlier and I know a lot of people like to argue he shouldn't have gotten that second MVP in retrospect.

I think Jokic has been arguably the best player in the league but unless he can get his team up to a top seed it seems unlikely that voters would award him with back to back MVPs. Especially with him not blowing Embiid completely out of the conversation of the MVP discussion. I think it is Embiids award to lose at this point as long as he can secure a high seed

[Hobo4President]

You can simulateneously think that Embiid is most likely to win MVP while arguing that Jokic should win it. These aren't mutually exclusive.

[Freighttrain]

So 2nd year of a back to back MVP stretch in the last 20 years

2020 Giannis 1 seed plus DPOY level defense
2016 Curry 1 seed 73 wins and insanely efficient offensive season
2013 Lebron 1 seed massive Miami win streak and DPOY level defense
2010 Lebron 1 seed and improved his production levels
2006 Nash 4 seed
2003 Duncan tied for 1 seed

Now the last two were before I started following the NBA so I'm not sure of the narratives surrounding their candidacies but it certainly seems to follow a trend of a lot of things needing to go right on an individual and team level to achieve that back to back status. Nash looks like a clear outlier and I know a lot of people like to argue he shouldn't have gotten that second MVP in retrospect.

I think Jokic has been arguably the best player in the league but unless he can get his team up to a top seed it seems unlikely that voters would award him with back to back MVPs. Especially with him not blowing Embiid completely out of the conversation of the MVP discussion. I think it is Embiids award to lose at this point as long as he can secure a high seed

Agreed. Winning back-to-back MVPs should always mean you have better individual & team stats than the previous year. That's why it's such an elusive club. Although someone can point to faulty logic and claim you have to analyze each season on their own merit, almost none do. What happens in a previous year matters. How bad one's performance is in the playoff will affect voting in the MVP the next season, although they should not correlate. It is what it is. If Jokic wins MVP, which individual stats would backup, his team record isn't up to par with previous back-to-back winners and worse than last year if I'm not mistaken. That's not going to cut it. Could he win in a vacuum compared to Embiid or Giannis? Sure, but that's not how it works.

[Genjuro]

So 2nd year of a back to back MVP stretch in the last 20 years

2020 Giannis 1 seed plus DPOY level defense
2016 Curry 1 seed 73 wins and insanely efficient offensive season
2013 Lebron 1 seed massive Miami win streak and DPOY level defense
2010 Lebron 1 seed and improved his production levels
2006 Nash 4 seed
2003 Duncan tied for 1 seed

Now the last two were before I started following the NBA so I'm not sure of the narratives surrounding their candidacies but it certainly seems to follow a trend of a lot of things needing to go right on an individual and team level to achieve that back to back status. Nash looks like a clear outlier and I know a lot of people like to argue he shouldn't have gotten that second MVP in retrospect.

I think Jokic has been arguably the best player in the league but unless he can get his team up to a top seed it seems unlikely that voters would award him with back to back MVPs. Especially with him not blowing Embiid completely out of the conversation of the MVP discussion. I think it is Embiids award to lose at this point as long as he can secure a high seed

The narrative around Nash was that he had improved his stats from his previous NBA season and had held the fort while Studamire was injured (they won 8 fewer games). The difference with Jokic is the seed and number of victories (and the fact that Nash had a better team around him).

Both Embiid and Anteto are in a better position right now to make a better case by the end of the season, but many things can happen in the meantime, from injuries to losses.

[Cubbies2120]

Jokic was quite fortunate after missing two straight crucial free throws.

8-8 until those last two.

I don't get people that deny "clutch" play. It's real. Pressure is real.

Fortunate as in he blocked someone like that?

Pressure? He's been one of the clutchest players in the league for years ffs

https://www.sportscasting.com/nikola-jokic-is-twice-as-clutch-as-lebron-james-and-the-numbers-prove-it/

Yep, he's literally been the most clutch player in the league since he entered the league, looking at "Shooting percentage in the final 10 seconds of the fourth quarter or overtime on attempts that could tie the game or give his team the lead."

He shoots 50%. That is better than some other elite players shoot in regular game situations

Y'all can miss me with the metric of "5 point game in last 5 minutes" as being "clutch", I'd say "2 point game with 10 seconds left" is a better indicator since it's the highest pressure situation (Down 2 with 5 seconds left, vs. Up 5 with 5 minutes left...what's more pressure?).

And this is literally missing all his clutch defensive stops, this is just the offensive end. There is not a single player in the game today that I would take over Jokic when there's 10 seconds left and I need a bucket. The numbers prove it.

[falcolombardi]

Jokic was quite fortunate after missing two straight crucial free throws.

8-8 until those last two.

I don't get people that deny "clutch" play. It's real. Pressure is real.

Fortunate as in he blocked someone like that?

Pressure? He's been one of the clutchest players in the league for years ffs

https://www.sportscasting.com/nikola-jokic-is-twice-as-clutch-as-lebron-james-and-the-numbers-prove-it/

Yep, he's literally been the most clutch player in the league since he entered the league, looking at "Shooting percentage in the final 10 seconds of the fourth quarter or overtime on attempts that could tie the game or give his team the lead."

He shoots 50%. That is better than some other elite players shoot in regular game situations

Y'all can miss me with the metric of "5 point game in last 5 minutes" as being "clutch", I'd say "2 point game with 10 seconds left" is a better indicator since it's the highest pressure situation (Down 2 with 5 seconds left, vs. Up 5 with 5 minutes left...what's more pressure?).

And this is literally missing all his clutch defensive stops, this is just the offensive end. There is not a single player in the game today that I would take over Jokic when there's 10 seconds left and I need a bucket. The numbers prove it.

the sample size of shots to tie or win in last 10 seconds is too small a sample size to take seriously

is impressive that jokic shot as high in those situations but they are so rare that the percentages are noisy

[Infinite Llamas]

Jokic was quite fortunate after missing two straight crucial free throws.

8-8 until those last two.

I don't get people that deny "clutch" play. It's real. Pressure is real.

Fortunate as in he blocked someone like that?

Pressure? He's been one of the clutchest players in the league for years ffs

https://www.sportscasting.com/nikola-jokic-is-twice-as-clutch-as-lebron-james-and-the-numbers-prove-it/

Yep, he's literally been the most clutch player in the league since he entered the league, looking at "Shooting percentage in the final 10 seconds of the fourth quarter or overtime on attempts that could tie the game or give his team the lead."

He shoots 50%. That is better than some other elite players shoot in regular game situations

Y'all can miss me with the metric of "5 point game in last 5 minutes" as being "clutch", I'd say "2 point game with 10 seconds left" is a better indicator since it's the highest pressure situation (Down 2 with 5 seconds left, vs. Up 5 with 5 minutes left...what's more pressure?).

And this is literally missing all his clutch defensive stops, this is just the offensive end. There is not a single player in the game today that I would take over Jokic when there's 10 seconds left and I need a bucket. The numbers prove it.

Not only scoring and the blocks but the passes. The pass to Gordon against the Clippers and the one to Gary Harris a couple years back for the winners. In a clutch situation, there is no one better with the game on the line.

[Cubbies2120]

Fortunate as in he blocked someone like that?

Pressure? He's been one of the clutchest players in the league for years ffs

https://www.sportscasting.com/nikola-jokic-is-twice-as-clutch-as-lebron-james-and-the-numbers-prove-it/

Yep, he's literally been the most clutch player in the league since he entered the league, looking at "Shooting percentage in the final 10 seconds of the fourth quarter or overtime on attempts that could tie the game or give his team the lead."

He shoots 50%. That is better than some other elite players shoot in regular game situations

Y'all can miss me with the metric of "5 point game in last 5 minutes" as being "clutch", I'd say "2 point game with 10 seconds left" is a better indicator since it's the highest pressure situation (Down 2 with 5 seconds left, vs. Up 5 with 5 minutes left...what's more pressure?).

And this is literally missing all his clutch defensive stops, this is just the offensive end. There is not a single player in the game today that I would take over Jokic when there's 10 seconds left and I need a bucket. The numbers prove it.

the sample size of shots to tie or win in last 10 seconds is too small a sample size to take seriously

is impressive that jokic shot as high in those situations but they are so rare that the percentages are noisy

Must just be pure luck, same with the blocks on the defensive end (after all, the other poster said "Jokic was fortunate" when HE was the one getting the block )

Most clutch player in the NBA by far right now when the game is on the line. Not opinion, statistics back it up.

[falcolombardi]

https://www.sportscasting.com/nikola-jokic-is-twice-as-clutch-as-lebron-james-and-the-numbers-prove-it/

Yep, he's literally been the most clutch player in the league since he entered the league, looking at "Shooting percentage in the final 10 seconds of the fourth quarter or overtime on attempts that could tie the game or give his team the lead."

He shoots 50%. That is better than some other elite players shoot in regular game situations

Y'all can miss me with the metric of "5 point game in last 5 minutes" as being "clutch", I'd say "2 point game with 10 seconds left" is a better indicator since it's the highest pressure situation (Down 2 with 5 seconds left, vs. Up 5 with 5 minutes left...what's more pressure?).

And this is literally missing all his clutch defensive stops, this is just the offensive end. There is not a single player in the game today that I would take over Jokic when there's 10 seconds left and I need a bucket. The numbers prove it.

the sample size of shots to tie or win in last 10 seconds is too small a sample size to take seriously

is impressive that jokic shot as high in those situations but they are so rare that the percentages are noisy

Must just be pure luck, same with the blocks on the defensive end (after all, the other poster said "Jokic was fortunate" when HE was the one getting the block )

Most clutch player in the NBA by far right now when the game is on the line. Not opinion, statistics back it up.

jokic being clutch and shots to win or tie with 10 seconds being too ti ny a sample size are not excluyent

do you know how few games actually end in that situation?