Exactly. This is why it's more difficult to win X number of games in the East compared to the West. So he's significantly inferior at offense compared to Cousins. And the fact that Drummond's shots come from offensive rebounds and being set-up doesn't mean that his teammates are better at setting-up than Cousins' teammates. That's just bad logic. They already had Brook Lopez and Bobby Portis under contract. Plus, Giannis is more than capable of playing center. You do when the alternative is Jokic. You're aware that Jokic and Cousins play the same position, right? I think you got a bit mixed up at the end there.
that's completely irrelevant to me, i'm only interested in seeing the players who DESERVE the awards, actually get them. It's why the smart dpoy joke is such an embarrassment, and embiid or giannis winning mvp would be also a massive embarrassment to the nba. Based on talent, Philly over an 82 game season lead by Maxey and Harris (with 21 harden games) i would think would be around 28-30 wins. Denver over 82 lead by Gordon would win around 18
If this historical precedent is irrelevant to you, then the award itself should be irrelevant to you.
Voters today don’t use the same criteria as voters 10 years ago who used different criteria than voters 20 years before them. The analytics revolution is really widespread now and I believe a large portion of current voters lean heavily on them. Numbers voters didn’t even have access to not that long ago. I think basketball reference MVP tracker has only missed two MVPs since like 2007ish? If I’m not mistaken it’s just the two most narrative driven MVPs of recent time Rose and Westbrook and it hasn’t missed one since Westbrook. The reason that thing has gotten more and more accurate is because voters are leaning more and more on the numbers. Prior to that the accuracy of the tracker isn’t nearly as high because voters weren’t as aligned as they are now on what deserves MVP consideration. I think there are still going to be some holdouts who place a big importance on record, but I think it’s mattering less and less if the numbers are greatly slanted one way. The non traditional numbers are overwhelmingly in Jokics favor and I think those numbers are overwhelmingly what most voters lean on now. Sometimes a narrative can sway things, but I don’t think minor record differences are swaying votes and in my opinion probably shouldn’t in this case.
Na, i think over time people are getting smarter and better. I don’t think you’d ever see a derek jeter win a gold glove or a late careen kobe make all defense anymore
Eh, if this were the case, Harden should've won an MVP in 2015. Curry had marginally better numbers, but Harden led the Rockets to the #2 seed with a far inferior supporting cast. The only way it makes sense is if team performance (Warriors had 11 more wins than us) carries a great deal of weight.
True, you still see idiotic stuff like this unfortunately. That one is pretty egregious no doubt. My argument is only about who deserves mvp, not who people will vote for
If Philly had 11 more wins than Denver than I think there would need to be a serious debate. Pretty equal counting numbers, but then it’s Lopsided wins vs lopsided advanced numbers. But I don’t think a 3 game difference is swaying anyone in this case. I think 25 years ago Embiid wins this one but probably somewhat close. Just think the evidence people look for is different now.
