It's never exactly been clear on how the NBA delegates the MVP award, anyone who's been watching basketball since Steve Nash won back-to-back's would agree. Not saying that was the incorrect decision by any means, but fans value consistency.
Nikola Jokic averaged a triple-double this season (24 ppg, 11.8 rpg, 9.8 apg, 63% FG). We're rounding up the assists, deal with it. Not only did he have these insane averages, Denver is the number one seed in the West.
Is the West better than the East? The East has an 8 seed representing them in the NBA Finals right now, who were also in the play-in games. We will not take any arguments from fans of Eastern Conference teams. You all got dunked on by the power of Miami's friendship.
I understand that it's a ReGuLaR SeAsOn award, and I'm not going to discount Joel Embiid's dominance either. However, the optics on the MVP talk in the playoffs kind of just fell into Jokic's full glass of Pepsi. It became painfully obvious that no one was watching Denver play basketball this season, and some people get PAID to do that.
Imagine getting paid to talk about basketball, and you're not even talking about Jeff Green? What are we even doing here man? The ONLY threat to Lebron's greatness and you're going to treat him like this???
If I can be real for a second (Sorry uncle Jeff), there's a lot of questions that need to be answered surrounding the MVP selection process. This isn't even really a "new" thing, it's always been confusing.
People keep telling me voter fatigue isn't a real thing, but if that was true, Lebron would have 14 MVP's. I used Steve Nash as an example earlier because he was an uncommon MVP, but still a sensible one. Basketball mind's recognized the value he had on the run-and-gun Suns, in terms of creating opportunities and offense.
I'm not going to post Steve Nash's stats because they actually look disgraceful next to Jokic's, I'm sorry my fellow Canadians, but I'm trying to prove a fucking point here.
Jokic is the pinnacle of Denver's systematic perfection on the offensive end. Therefore, he's pretty valuable, arguably, the most valuable! So we're going to debunk some myths, and make some arguments for our humongous jar of graceful mayonnaise.
How good is Philadelphia without Embiid? How good is Denver without Jokic?
Most of these questions are going to be heavily debated, even though they maybe shouldn't be.
James Harden
Tyrese Maxey
Tobias Harris
Jalen McDaniels
Paul Reed (Yes we're starting Paul Reed, watch a single game of basketball I'm begging you).
Vs
Jamal Murray
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope
Micheal Porter Jr.
Aaron Gordon
Bruce Brown at the 5 (De'Andre Jordan and Thomas Bryant are suitable if you're a phony).
Now if I was stupid, I'd run these teams through a season simulation on 2K. However, I'm a smart man, and know that the team with James Harden and free will of the basketball is a good option for wins. Harden plays a role with Embiid on the floor, maybe he shouldn't, but he does. Denver without Jokic is lacking a real consistent playmaker, so I'd argue that Philadelphia fairs a bit better.
2. What about the fact both Denver and Philadelphia had the exact same record?
Did you even read the intro? The 8 seed is ruling the conference right now, there is absolutely no pull for the East in this moment. I do not give a shit about recency bias accusations, Denver made the West look silly on many occasions when it counted.
3. What about the per game averages?
Fair enough, here are Joel Embiid's stats:
33.1 ppg
10.2 rpg
4.2 apg
54% FG
If you look at these specific stats, you may be inclined to also give Joel Embiid the MVP. Do these stats display value to a team? Not totally, especially when it comes to overall offense created by the MVP Candidate.
Let's compare some more dynamic stats:
Nikola Jokic
Player Efficiency Rating - 31.5
Win Shares - 14.9
Effective Field Goal Percentage - 66.0%
True Shooting - 70.1% !!!!!!!
Real Plus-Minus - 13.0 (8.5 offensive, 4.5 defensive)
Joel Embiid
Player Efficiency Rating - 31.4
Win Shares - 12.3
Effective Field Goal Percentage - 57.3%
True Shooting - 65.5%
Real Plus-Minus - 9.2 (6.8 offensive, 2.4 defensive)
Wow would you look at that, Jokic is better in every single one! Who would've guessed!
4. Man, enough with the advanced stats, what about the eye test?
The "eye-test" means simply watching how someone moves and acts on the court. Which Jokic also wins. Get mad about it.
When people give me the "eye-test" bullshit, I know they haven't watched Denver play any basketball. Upon "eye-test", Joel Embiid draws fouls better than Jokic does. I'm not really comfortable saying he does anything else better? Jokic lives and breathes basketball, and Joel Embiid has definitely become and extremely skilled big man.
However, one of these guys look like they came out of the womb throwing no look passes, and the other does not. Take your "eye-test" and shove it up your ass. It's almost fatphobic using this as an argument. We all have round men in are life that are absolute hoopers, don't be like this.
5. Embiid led the league in points per game, shouldn't that count for something?
Bradley Beal led the league in points per game for a broke boy Wizards team in 2021. It definitely counts but what is the real merit? The advanced stats I listed above display the total offense created, Jokic being a playmaker makes him insanely valuable to Denver.
6. You're forgetting about defense!
Embiid averages more blocks (1.7 per game compared to 0.7). However, Jokic averages more steals and has a better defensive plus-minus. Their defensive win shares are the exact same (3.9).
I understand the optics on this one more, because Jokic is noticeably less athletic. He's not a liability at all though, and fans used to make him out to be one.
7. Why are you so set on using stats to prove your point?
This is where my core issues come from.
If you watch the games, and casually check some stats. You really don't need to do anything else, keep yourself updated on box scores.
My whole point is, what else could you possibly be formulating your opinions on? When it comes to basketball at least?
It really doesn't take much effort to watch basketball games if you like them?
I don't understand how you would watch both of these men play as your JOB, and not do your best to make sure you get it right.
8. Are you saying voter fatigue is real?
LEBRON IS THE PRIME EXAMPLE OF THIS!!!
It's absolutely real, some people are tired of seeing Jokic salsa-dance his way around their favourite players with maximum efficiency. Hell, I was tired of seeing Lebron win MVP's, but it's because I was a child.
Don't be childish. 3 straight MVP's is something that's allowed to happen. It's not even an optics issue, it's a "not paying attention" issue.
It's like if you watched Star Wars : Clone Wars, and none of the other movies, so you can happily declare Clone Wars as the best movie. In reality, it's the fucking worst out of the George Lucas films.
It goes:
Return of the Jedi
A New Hope
The Empire Strikes Back
The Phantom Menace
Revenge of the Sith
Clone Wars
You can interchange any of the first 3 and I'd be ok with it.
My subsequent point has to do with Russell Westbrook being awarded an MVP for doing what Jokic just did, and Russ did it way less efficiently. OKC was a 5 seed that year, Denver is a 1 seed this season. Sure Westbrook averaged more points per game, but we've been over that point before.
Joel Embiid had an all-time season, I don't want to discredit him in any way. I just do not understand what defines an MVP? What defines value in the NBA? It seems to change every 3 years.
Just because Jokic was scoring less this season, doesn't mean he's having a worse season? Denver is evidently better fully healthy with the big man facilitating and rebounding more. Does that even matter when it comes to an MVP vote? I have no idea. It's not very clear at all.
9. What about Giannis Antetokounmpo? Was he possibly over-looked?
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/antetgi01.html
If you scroll down to advanced stats, you'll see Giannis had his highest usage rating of his career this year (38.8). However, he declined in the major advanced stat categories. Joel Embiid and Nikola Jokic statistically did have better seasons. Giannis' MVP season displayed much more impact.
Jokic usage rating - 27.2
Embiid usage rating - 37.0
So yes, I'm telling you Jokic got more out of being used less. That's a huge disparity between usage ratings. It truly displays how effortless basketball has been for this man in 2023. I don't believe you should be punished for making it look easy, but again, Lebron has been punished for that.
10. If you were to give an MVP to each division, who would they be?
Weird question but ok.
Atlantic Division
Well this one is OBVIOUSLY Joel Embiid.
Central Division
Giannis Antetokoumnpo
31 ppg
12 rpg
5.7 apg
55.3 FG%
27.5 3P%
Player Efficiency Rating - 29.0
Win Shares - 8.6
Effective Field Goal Percentage - 57.2%
True Shooting - 60.5%
Real Plus-Minus - 8.5 (5.8 offensive, 2.7 defensive)
Southeast Division
Jimmy Butler
23 ppg
5.9 rpg
5.3 apg
53.9 FG%
35.0 3P%
Player Efficiency Rating - 27.6
Win Shares - 12.3
Effective Field Goal Percentage - 56.0
True Shooting - 64.7%
Real Plus-Minus - 8.7 (6.7 offensive, 2.0 defensive)
We're skipping the Northwest division for obvious reasons.
Pacific Division
De'Aaron Fox
25 ppg
4.2 rpg
6.1 apg
51.2 FG%
32.4 3P%
Player Efficiency Rating - 21.7
Win Shares - 7.4
Effective Field Goal Percentage - 55.7
True Shooting - 60.0%
Real Plus-Minus - 2.5 (3.4 offensive, -0.9 defensive)
(All of your favourite players in this division missed WAY too many games, cry about it).
Southwest
Luka Doncic
32.4 ppg
8.6 rpg
8.0 apg
49.6 FG%
34.2 3P%
Player Efficiency Rating - 28.7
Win Shares - 10.2
Effective Field Goal Percentage - 56.0%
True Shooting - 60.9%
Real Plus-Minus - 9.0 (7.6 offensive, 1.4 defensive)
Thank you for coming to my Ted Talk.
Comments