2024-25 NBA MVP Discussion Thread

[Mavrelous]

I know some people gonna push for KD

Tim Bontemps started on the Hoop collective...

[Wolfgang630]

NBA.com’s MVP Ladder:

1. Anthony Davis
2. Jayson Tatum
3. Nikola Jokic
4. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
5. Donovan Mitchell
6. Kevin Durant
7. Anthony Edwards
8. Luka Doncic
9. Giannis Antetokounmpo
10. Tyrese Maxey

There’s some serious LOL on this list

[scrabbarista]

I already have '23 Jokic as the second-greatest individual season in NBA history.

After watching the highlights to the OKC game this morning, it occurred to me for the first time that he really might be the best player ever - that this is actually on the table, that I might eventually come to feel that way.

That's a long way into the future, but just the fact that I acknowledged the possibility feels like a huge step.

Anyways, bbref has him over 60% for the MVP this morning, as does the realgm poll.

Clearly, given his stats and impact, he would deserve the award if it were handed out this morning.

[Wolfgang630]

Standings are gonna be a big deal this year I think. I could see KD winning it if he maintains his level and Suns are the #1 seed. I think there will definitely be a push from the American media to let one of the greats at this age win MVP. I’m not saying he won’t be deserving, but we have to think narratives being created.

[mrvioletowl]

The biggest obstacle for KD will be health. If he can make through the season and they are sitting at the top of West, I'd be OK with him winning it. But as always, it's a long race and consistency and availability play a huge part.

[Woodsanity]

Budenholzer is an underrated coach. Elite RS coach, decent PS coach. He has his flaws but he is much better than most coaches which is a big reason the Suns are doing well.

[WarriorGM]

I already have '23 Jokic as the second-greatest individual season in NBA history.

After watching the highlights to the OKC game this morning, it occurred to me for the first time that he really might be the best player ever - that this is actually on the table, that I might eventually come to feel that way.

That's a long way into the future, but just the fact that I acknowledged the possibility feels like a huge step.

Anyways, bbref has him over 60% for the MVP this morning, as does the realgm poll.

Clearly, given his stats and impact, he would deserve the award if it were handed out this morning.

Then it would be just another step towards confirming that the MVP is really just the triple double award. Ever since Curry won unanimously the award has fled from winning records except for a brief interlude with Giannis as it has tried to avoid Curry. Westbrook getting it the following year established the new trend towards the preeminence of box stat stuffing. Makes one wonder if the fact no player since Curry has won a championship in the same year as the MVP is coincidence or not.

Does Jokic deserve the MVP? I'm unconvinced. He keeps getting it the same way by putting up great stats but he's never done it by leading a team to the best record in the league. A couple of MVPs gotten one way is fine and winning that championship does show his numbers aren't just empty calories but more MVPs from him have diminishing value because they do not address any of the relevant criticism that can be leveled at him.

[bisme37]

NBA.com’s MVP Ladder:

1. Anthony Davis
2. Jayson Tatum
3. Nikola Jokic
4. Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
5. Donovan Mitchell
6. Kevin Durant
7. Anthony Edwards
8. Luka Doncic
9. Giannis Antetokounmpo
10. Tyrese Maxey

There’s some serious LOL on this list

AD sitting there in the poll with zero votes haha.

[bisme37]

I just added Steph to his own option, in place of Brunson (who had received no votes). Sorry Knicks pals, but again, he had no votes.

At first I figured the Dubs were doing well while Steph was out injured, but based on the Dubs record and his good play I feel he should be there.

It didn't really change the results at all but feel free to change your vote as often as you'd like.

[Wolfgang630]

I already have '23 Jokic as the second-greatest individual season in NBA history.

After watching the highlights to the OKC game this morning, it occurred to me for the first time that he really might be the best player ever - that this is actually on the table, that I might eventually come to feel that way.

That's a long way into the future, but just the fact that I acknowledged the possibility feels like a huge step.

Anyways, bbref has him over 60% for the MVP this morning, as does the realgm poll.

Clearly, given his stats and impact, he would deserve the award if it were handed out this morning.

Then it would be just another step towards confirming that the MVP is really just the triple double award. Ever since Curry won unanimously the award has fled from winning records except for a brief interlude with Giannis as it has tried to avoid Curry. Westbrook getting it the following year established the new trend towards the preeminence of box stat stuffing. Makes one wonder if the fact no player since Curry has won a championship in the same year as the MVP is coincidence or not.

Does Jokic deserve the MVP? I'm unconvinced. He keeps getting it the same way by putting up great stats but he's never done it by leading a team to the best record in the league. A couple of MVPs gotten one way is fine and winning that championship does show his numbers aren't just empty calories but more MVPs from him have diminishing value because they do not address any of the relevant criticism that can be leveled at him.

How can he do this though? He’s never played with an All Star in a stacked western conference. This isn’t some weak conference like other stars got to go through in the Eastern conference in the past. It’s a team game you need some All Star help to get to number 1 seed.

[WarriorGM]

I already have '23 Jokic as the second-greatest individual season in NBA history.

After watching the highlights to the OKC game this morning, it occurred to me for the first time that he really might be the best player ever - that this is actually on the table, that I might eventually come to feel that way.

That's a long way into the future, but just the fact that I acknowledged the possibility feels like a huge step.

Anyways, bbref has him over 60% for the MVP this morning, as does the realgm poll.

Clearly, given his stats and impact, he would deserve the award if it were handed out this morning.

Then it would be just another step towards confirming that the MVP is really just the triple double award. Ever since Curry won unanimously the award has fled from winning records except for a brief interlude with Giannis as it has tried to avoid Curry. Westbrook getting it the following year established the new trend towards the preeminence of box stat stuffing. Makes one wonder if the fact no player since Curry has won a championship in the same year as the MVP is coincidence or not.

Does Jokic deserve the MVP? I'm unconvinced. He keeps getting it the same way by putting up great stats but he's never done it by leading a team to the best record in the league. A couple of MVPs gotten one way is fine and winning that championship does show his numbers aren't just empty calories but more MVPs from him have diminishing value because they do not address any of the relevant criticism that can be leveled at him.

How can he do this though? He’s never played with an All Star in a stacked western conference. This isn’t some weak conference like other stars got to go through in the Eastern conference in the past. It’s a team game you need some All Star help to get to number 1 seed.

Jokic hasn't played with an all-star in a stacked Western Conference because he hasn't led his team to a good enough record that demanded his team get an additional all-star. It is true that being in a smaller market and not being American made the job even tougher to get that all-star but leading his team to a better record would have allowed criticism on those grounds to have heft which they don't right now.

[Exp0sed]

I already have '23 Jokic as the second-greatest individual season in NBA history.

Then it would be just another step towards confirming that the MVP is really just the triple double award. Ever since Curry won unanimously the award has fled from winning records except for a brief interlude with Giannis as it has tried to avoid Curry. Westbrook getting it the following year established the new trend towards the preeminence of box stat stuffing. Makes one wonder if the fact no player since Curry has won a championship in the same year as the MVP is coincidence or not.

Does Jokic deserve the MVP? I'm unconvinced. He keeps getting it the same way by putting up great stats but he's never done it by leading a team to the best record in the league. A couple of MVPs gotten one way is fine and winning that championship does show his numbers aren't just empty calories but more MVPs from him have diminishing because they do not address any of the relevant criticism that can be leveled at him.

that's because there aren't any legitimate criticisms. not really.

as stated again and again, he's the only MVP history that has never played alongside another all-star and that's not nothing..
one can argue about Murray's postseason prowess (and he did have two seperate, great playoff-runs) but there is no denying he's been pretty mediocre in the rs, not mention he isn't available half of the time

when ur 2nd option misses half of every season, plays limited mins in games and always needing to shake off rust in between and get his body right - it's hard to have the best team record in the league, ya know? it's basically impossible with how the the cap looks like now, to have the best record in the league with a max player on the bench in street clothes

MPJ has been healthy last couple of seasons but obviously you had him unavailable for a good number of seasons (and it's not like he's that good to begin with) so it is what it is and Denver's a small market, losing good role players every season and not many FA are interested in coming over

that means, that if your main criticism is him not leading his team to the top record in the league, that's a pretty weak argument, imo. show me a different atg player who carried a team without all-stars to the top record, with his #2 and #3 missing sigificant time to boot..

[WarriorGM]

I already have '23 Jokic as the second-greatest individual season in NBA history.

Then it would be just another step towards confirming that the MVP is really just the triple double award. Ever since Curry won unanimously the award has fled from winning records except for a brief interlude with Giannis as it has tried to avoid Curry. Westbrook getting it the following year established the new trend towards the preeminence of box stat stuffing. Makes one wonder if the fact no player since Curry has won a championship in the same year as the MVP is coincidence or not.

Does Jokic deserve the MVP? I'm unconvinced. He keeps getting it the same way by putting up great stats but he's never done it by leading a team to the best record in the league. A couple of MVPs gotten one way is fine and winning that championship does show his numbers aren't just empty calories but more MVPs from him have diminishing because they do not address any of the relevant criticism that can be leveled at him.

that's because there aren't any legitimate criticisms. not really.

as stated again and again, he's the only MVP history that has never played alongside another all-star and that's not nothing..
one can argue about Murray's postseason prowess (and he did have two seperate, great playoff-runs) but there is no denying he's been pretty mediocre in the rs, not mention he isn't available half of the time

when ur 2nd option misses half of every season, plays limited mins in games and always needing to shake off rust in between and get his body right - it's hard to have the best team record in the league when ur have a max player sitting on the bench

MPJ has been healthy last couple of seasons but obviously you had him unavailable for a good number of seasons (and it's not like he's that good to begin with) so it is what it is and Denver's a small market, losing good role players every season and not many FA are interested in coming over

that means, that if your main criticism is him not leading his team to the top record in the league, that's a pretty weak argument, imo. show me a different atg player who carried a team without all-stars to the top record, with his #2 and #3 missing sigificant time to boot..

No it is a fundamental argument. At the end of the day if you are as good as claimed it should translate to wins. It is wins that you should be after not stats. You can explain it this way and that way but it will always be a question mark if the wins aren't there to back it up. You cannot win with Jamal Murray and Michael Porter Jr.? Then win with someone else. If you need Murray and you need Porter Jr. maybe that is pointing to some underappreciated flaw.

[DCasey91]

Live and let live and all that but why does a certain poster get free reign of bs without recourse, is he a mod?

Jokic has been peerless in terms of winning impact since day dot. And no I'm not replying to the drivel that's spouted.

There is no fundamental arrguement when you look at what he has to work with.

MVP stands for most valuable player which Jokic has been for the past 4 seasons going on 5 now.

[Jeremy Lin 7]

Joker is legit CARRYING a washed westbrook, injuried murry and AG, and g league scrubs to a respectable record with unreal numbers.

28.8 PPG/ 13.4 REB / 11 AST per game on 53/54/80 efficeny is beyond MVP numbers

[DCasey91]

Jokic clocks in year in year out plays 80 or 80+ games including post season likes its nothing and gives the team 20+ wins easily.

Nobody has a claim to that consistency since 2021. He should be the outright leader for MVP until otherwise.

[Exp0sed]

No it is a fundamental argument. At the end of the day if you are as good as claimed it should translate to wins. It is wins that you should be after not stats. You can explain it this way and that way but it will always be a question mark if the wins aren't there to back it up. You cannot win with Jamal Murray and Michael Porter Jr.? Then win with someone else. If you need Murray and you need Porter Jr. maybe that is pointing to some underappreciated flaw.

but it's not "without Murray and MPJ", as their salaries are still on the books regardless if they are suited up or not
that's two max players sitting on the bench, which means the rest of the roster is very depleted

Nuggets have been very thin basically the entirety of Jokic's prime. it's fine in the playoffs when you can play a 7-8 man rotation but that doesn't work through the course of a grueling rs

and again, even assuming they were both completely healthy all the time, rs Murray is a pretty average player and MPJ isn't any better. again, Jokic is the only MVP whose never played with an all-star player. don't u think that matters?

do you think Larry Bird carries MPJ and rs Murray to the top of the standings? i'm really asking, it's not rhetorical

seems like ur ignoring that giant caveat. in reality, Jokic has been consistently carrying bad to mediocre rosters to excellent records.
how many wins do u think Jokic carries a team with Jrue Holiday, Jaylen Brown and the PF version of Porzingis?

how many wins do you think Tatum carries a team with Murray and MPJ?

Jokic's on\off numbers during these prime years have been extremely consistent and historically elite. it's hard to get to 60-65 wins when every time you sit on the bench - your team's getting smashed, which has been literally the case for Jokic for many consecutive seasons and still ongoing ofc in this current, young season

let's not act as if rs Murray is a good 2nd option (you could easily list 10 better ones, especially if u factor in availability) and MPJ isn't some elite 3rd option either..

yes, Jokic's career has been an outlier as the team decided to stick to it's core guys throughout his tenure and those guys are who they are. no other atg had to contend under similar circumstances for his entire career, that's a fact - wouldn't u agree?

[WarriorGM]

No it is a fundamental argument. At the end of the day if you are as good as claimed it should translate to wins. It is wins that you should be after not stats. You can explain it this way and that way but it will always be a question mark if the wins aren't there to back it up. You cannot win with Jamal Murray and Michael Porter Jr.? Then win with someone else. If you need Murray and you need Porter Jr. maybe that is pointing to some underappreciated flaw.

but it's not "without Murray and MPJ, as their salaries are still on the books regardless if they are suited up or not
that's two max players sitting on the bench, which means the rest of the roster is very depleted

Nuggets have been very thin basically the entirety of Jokic's prime. it's fine in the playoffs when you can play a 7-8 man rotation but that doesn't work through the course of a grueling rs

and again, even assuming they were both completely healthy all the time, rs Murray is a pretty average player and MPJ isn't any better. again, Jokic is the only MVP whose never played with an all-star player. don't u think that matters?

do you think Larry Bird carries MPJ and rs Murray to the top of the standings? i'm really asking, it's not rhetorical

seems like ur ignoring that giant caveat. in reality, Jokic has been consistently carrying bad to mediocre rosters to excellent records.
how many wins do u think Jokic carries a team with Jrue Holiday, Jaylen Brown and the PF version of Porzingis?

how many wins do you think Tatum carries a team with Murray and MPJ?

Jokic's on\off numbers during these prime years have been extremely consistent and historically elite. it's hard to get to 60-65 wins when every time you sit on the bench - your team's getting smashed, which has been literally the case for Jokic for many consecutive seasons and still ongoing ofc in this current, young season

let's not act as if rs Murray is a good 2nd option (you could easily list 10 better ones, especially if u factor in availability) and MPJ isn't some elite 3rd option either..

yes, Jokic's career has been an outlier as the team decided to stick to it's core guys throughout his tenure and those guys are who they are. no other atg had to contend under similar circumstances for his entire career, that's a fact - wouldn't u agree?

Complaining that Murray and Porter Jr. aren't all-stars to me is a non-argument. If either were selected as all-stars previously it wouldn't cause an uproar.

That Jokic is always being portrayed as having a weak team may be a symptom of a deeper structural issue and that issue may well be that Jokic plays the center position. You ask could Tatum carry a team with Murray and MPJ to a great record? I'm thinking why not? The advantage Tatum would have is that without Jokic the center position opens up to a more natural defensive fit. The problem with Jokic being capable of doing everything is that he ends up doing everything.

[Mavrelous]

Jokic most impressive season was when he won 46 games and made the PO with guard rotation of Monte Morris, Faccundo Campazzu, Austin Rivers, Bones Hyland and Will Barton, this is more valuable than having the most wins with a super team, former MVPs, even unanimous ones, missed the PO with better rosters.

[Wolfgang630]

Jokic most impressive season was when he won 46 games and made the PO with guard rotation of Monte Morris, Faccundo Campazzu, Austin Rivers, Bones Hyland and Will Barton, this is more valuable than having the most wins with a super team, former MVPs, even unanimous ones, missed the PO with better rosters.

And how many are in the NBA anymore? Lol and facu was like the worst player in all of the nba that year.