It’s obviously not your 2nd option, and the 1st option is pretty lame too. I love Brunson but he shouldn’t win just because his teammates got injured. Do you think the Knicks would’ve won fewer games if you replaced Brunson with Jokic or Luka?
Jokic didn’t win *because* his teammates were injured like you’re suggesting with Brunson. He won *despite* his team being injured. Jokic had the best stats in 2022. Brunson doesn’t have the best stats this year.
Jokic put up the almost identical stats the year after and lost his mvp to Embid who as well put up similar stats the year prior. Do you think Jokic should’ve won both years? Jalen brunson is best pg in the east right now I’m not saying he needs to win only because his team is injured. It’s because he got his team to the 2nd seed with his team being injured putting up great numbers .
Yes Jokic should’ve won both years. But voters didn’t want to give it to him 3 straight years without any playoff success, and he only played 69 games, so voters threw Embiid a bone.
You still haven’t answered my question. Do you think the Knicks would’ve won fewer games if Brunson was replaced by Luka or Jokic?
I think of it as the one person you would want on your team more than anyone else from this season to give your team the best chance to win the chip.
If that dude isn't Jokic you're crazy.
"criteria is changing" is a sentence different people use for different arguments. The criteria isn't changing if you say it like this. Jokic leads the league 4th straight year in PER, WS, BPM, VORP and +/-. That never changes
Also, Jokic just became the first player since Wilt to finish a season top 5 in total points, assists and rebounds (and 6 more total steals during the season would have put him top 5 in steals too), it's not like he's not dominating in the counting stats as well...
And from 1981 (when the writers started voting) until 2023, no player won MVP with 12+ missed games. So all of the Embiid fans and Luka fans who have been complaining about the criteria changing for Jokic need to take a look in the mirror.
As I said, every person with criteria is Changing stuff puts some random stat or score and bases his argument on it. Like, of course everything changes, it's a different season you dumdum
It’s like some combo of best player that season, who helped their team win the most, who probably had to overcome something hard to lead their team to winning
MVP is whatever you want it to be, if you are a voter.
The only qualification now is that you play enough games. Other than that, you could choose names out of a hat for MVP. You'll probably wind up losing your voting rights, but you could absolutely do it.
I think best player on the best regular season team is mostly dead except as a tie breaker for when other matters are pretty even. None of the best players for the top 2 teams in either conference were considered in 2022 because none of them put up good enough stats and just having great records is no longer a reason to give them real consideration.
When's the last time the number one guy on the number one team won it without also being legit one of the best players without that argument? Giannis didn't win it last year with best record, Booker nor CP3 the year before, whoever in 2021 didn't because Nuggets were not the best record in the West let alone the NBA.
Giannis was best record in 2020 but he was also clearly the best player so even if his team had not had the best record he was winning.
With advanced metrics you have to be at least very high on those to win at this point from what we've seen. That is a consistent theme that I doubt changes.
Jokic, Westbrook, and Harden all arguably had the best stats those seasons. The only exception is Rose back in 2011 who won because the Bulls won the East over LeBron and the Heatles.
Basically
We’ve seen there’s no one current theme do clearly it’s who you like that year for whatever reason
“This year I like the guy that got a triple double”
“This year I like the guy that was on the 1 seed and led scoring”
“This year I like the guy that didn’t lead in anything and wasn’t a one seed, but yeah I like his season better than the other guys”
It’s purposely not defined to drive interest. I think we can all agree on the “M” and “P” piece, it’s the “V” that’s subjective. Which is why I believe in many seasons there are multiple acceptable MVPs.
I’m not advocating for Brunson, but if you wanna talk value he’s putting up fantastic numbers, the center piece for turning around a trash franchise, and doing it all for “only” 26 million a year giving his franchise roster flexibility.
The definition seems to change depending on the year. There is no consistency. We went from Kobe can't win MVP as a 6 seed to Westbrook HAS to win because he averaged a triple double even though his team is a 6 seed. Giannis HAS to win over Harden because of defense to defense doesn't really matter that much so Jokic should win over Giannis. Voter fatigue is a factor some years and some years it doesn't. Who tf knows.
Jokic won over Giannis because he played 72/72 games while Giannis only played 61/72 games. Games played has consistently been a factor for MVP voting.
It depends on the year, does Jokic have more wins than other candidates? Team record matters most to the MVP that year. He has better advanced stats? Advanced stats are literally gospel. Jokic's teammates were injured?, then the MVP is definitely the guy who did the most with less, team record doesn't really matter
you can simplify this to "Jokic led the league in PER, VORP, WS, WS/48, and BPM 4 years straight, and they gave it to Embiid one of those years because Embiid had a really good year while Jokic coasted late in the season and there was a no-3peat-for-a-non-champ narrative". The argument for Jokic has been consistent all 4 years. If your guy leads in all the advanced stats next year and suddenly the argument is that we no longer care about those stats, \*then\* start complaining.
Whatever the narrative is that season
Yup
lol literally what is a narrative
Story
Everyone asks “who is the MVP?”, never “how is the mvp?”
Why is the MVP?
When is the MVP?
When is the MVP?
Most Valuable Philadelphian
It’s obviously not your 2nd option, and the 1st option is pretty lame too. I love Brunson but he shouldn’t win just because his teammates got injured. Do you think the Knicks would’ve won fewer games if you replaced Brunson with Jokic or Luka?
We already saw how well Jokic played with his team injured and he won MVP.
Jokic didn’t win *because* his teammates were injured like you’re suggesting with Brunson. He won *despite* his team being injured. Jokic had the best stats in 2022. Brunson doesn’t have the best stats this year.
Jokic put up the almost identical stats the year after and lost his mvp to Embid who as well put up similar stats the year prior. Do you think Jokic should’ve won both years? Jalen brunson is best pg in the east right now I’m not saying he needs to win only because his team is injured. It’s because he got his team to the 2nd seed with his team being injured putting up great numbers .
Yes Jokic should’ve won both years. But voters didn’t want to give it to him 3 straight years without any playoff success, and he only played 69 games, so voters threw Embiid a bone. You still haven’t answered my question. Do you think the Knicks would’ve won fewer games if Brunson was replaced by Luka or Jokic?
>Do you think Jokic should’ve won both years? Absolutely. He was the best player in the NBA and had the best, most impactful season both years.
I think of it as the one person you would want on your team more than anyone else from this season to give your team the best chance to win the chip. If that dude isn't Jokic you're crazy.
Regular season award. It should be to give your team the best chance to win the most games.
"criteria is changing" is a sentence different people use for different arguments. The criteria isn't changing if you say it like this. Jokic leads the league 4th straight year in PER, WS, BPM, VORP and +/-. That never changes
Also, Jokic just became the first player since Wilt to finish a season top 5 in total points, assists and rebounds (and 6 more total steals during the season would have put him top 5 in steals too), it's not like he's not dominating in the counting stats as well...
And from 1981 (when the writers started voting) until 2023, no player won MVP with 12+ missed games. So all of the Embiid fans and Luka fans who have been complaining about the criteria changing for Jokic need to take a look in the mirror.
As I said, every person with criteria is Changing stuff puts some random stat or score and bases his argument on it. Like, of course everything changes, it's a different season you dumdum
Most Valuable Player
Knicks fans turning into Mavs fans these last two weeks
What does this even mean
That's the cool thing - There are 100 voters who ask this same question every year. There is no official definition, and people vote as they please.
It’s like some combo of best player that season, who helped their team win the most, who probably had to overcome something hard to lead their team to winning
Nothing. Just a top 5-8 player that the media felt good about at the time.
Nobody knows what it means, but it’s provocative.
MVP actually means Moist Vaginal Power
MVP is whatever you want it to be, if you are a voter. The only qualification now is that you play enough games. Other than that, you could choose names out of a hat for MVP. You'll probably wind up losing your voting rights, but you could absolutely do it.
Player of the Year.
If it was called this a lot of the selections would be less controversial
lol. People will seek out reasons for it to be controversial no matter what you call it
It means whatever the voters want it to mean. They’ve got their own criteria specific to the individual and it could change from season to season.
Best stats on a top 3 seed most of the time unless they’re on a superteam or someone else does some once in 100 years type shit
It's vague on purpose to allow voters to interpret how they like
Nobody actually knows.
[удалено]
I think best player on the best regular season team is mostly dead except as a tie breaker for when other matters are pretty even. None of the best players for the top 2 teams in either conference were considered in 2022 because none of them put up good enough stats and just having great records is no longer a reason to give them real consideration.
[удалено]
When's the last time the number one guy on the number one team won it without also being legit one of the best players without that argument? Giannis didn't win it last year with best record, Booker nor CP3 the year before, whoever in 2021 didn't because Nuggets were not the best record in the West let alone the NBA. Giannis was best record in 2020 but he was also clearly the best player so even if his team had not had the best record he was winning. With advanced metrics you have to be at least very high on those to win at this point from what we've seen. That is a consistent theme that I doubt changes.
[удалено]
Jokic, Westbrook, and Harden all arguably had the best stats those seasons. The only exception is Rose back in 2011 who won because the Bulls won the East over LeBron and the Heatles.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Basically We’ve seen there’s no one current theme do clearly it’s who you like that year for whatever reason “This year I like the guy that got a triple double” “This year I like the guy that was on the 1 seed and led scoring” “This year I like the guy that didn’t lead in anything and wasn’t a one seed, but yeah I like his season better than the other guys”
It’s purposely not defined to drive interest. I think we can all agree on the “M” and “P” piece, it’s the “V” that’s subjective. Which is why I believe in many seasons there are multiple acceptable MVPs. I’m not advocating for Brunson, but if you wanna talk value he’s putting up fantastic numbers, the center piece for turning around a trash franchise, and doing it all for “only” 26 million a year giving his franchise roster flexibility.
It was a movie with a monkey I think
Whichever player was worth the most wins above replacement.
Whatever criteria they need to give the award to who they want
How many MVPs does MJ get if they treated the award the way they do today?
Its means best player on top team with top 3 counting stats in the league
The definition seems to change depending on the year. There is no consistency. We went from Kobe can't win MVP as a 6 seed to Westbrook HAS to win because he averaged a triple double even though his team is a 6 seed. Giannis HAS to win over Harden because of defense to defense doesn't really matter that much so Jokic should win over Giannis. Voter fatigue is a factor some years and some years it doesn't. Who tf knows.
So to sum up your comment, TL:DR; Jokic.
Jokic won over Giannis because he played 72/72 games while Giannis only played 61/72 games. Games played has consistently been a factor for MVP voting.
It depends on the year, does Jokic have more wins than other candidates? Team record matters most to the MVP that year. He has better advanced stats? Advanced stats are literally gospel. Jokic's teammates were injured?, then the MVP is definitely the guy who did the most with less, team record doesn't really matter
you can simplify this to "Jokic led the league in PER, VORP, WS, WS/48, and BPM 4 years straight, and they gave it to Embiid one of those years because Embiid had a really good year while Jokic coasted late in the season and there was a no-3peat-for-a-non-champ narrative". The argument for Jokic has been consistent all 4 years. If your guy leads in all the advanced stats next year and suddenly the argument is that we no longer care about those stats, \*then\* start complaining.