Embiid wins MVP

[tpols]

First two things i’ve seen said today is Booker = Kobe and that Anthony Davis = garnett/pippin…. I don’t even think they were trolling either





Speechless

AD also apparently isn't a playoff star while Joel "flop to the floor 30 times a game and sit out in the playoffs" Embiid is the MVP.

The whole NBA award system is a sham anyways.

[bdonovan]

Huh?

Bookers TS was 60%, not 66%. Brown's TS was 58%, not 64%.

Prior to the season OKC was predicted to win 23 games. They won 40, only 4 less than the defending champs.

The numbers were from playoff stats.
Here are regular season numbers:
https://www.nba.com/stats/players/ad...-1&sort=TS_PCT

TS%
Curry 65%
Lillard 64%
Gilgeous-Alexander 62%

I still don't know why the consensus on SGA for 46 points while Curry has 5.

MVP voters are often seduced by big stats on bad teams, judging by Jokic's wins the last two years on a slumping Nuggets (without Murray). Few would argue Jokic got worse as a player this year even if his stats are lower with Murray's return; but he didn't win MVP this year. Same situation with Westbrook's MVP in 2017. SGA got 30 pts a game because he's on a subpar OKC team, not because he's a higher caliber player than Curry or Lillard, certainly not in efficiency terms.

[tontoz]

The numbers were from playoff stats.
Here are regular season numbers:
https://www.nba.com/stats/players/ad...-1&sort=TS_PCT

TS%
Curry 65%
Lillard 64%
Gilgeous-Alexander 62%

I still don't know why the consensus on SGA for 46 points while Curry has 5.

MVP voters are often seduced by big stats on bad teams, judging by Jokic's wins the last two years on a slumping Nuggets (without Murray). Few would argue Jokic got worse as a player this year even if his stats are lower with Murray's return; but he didn't win MVP this year. Same situation with Westbrook's MVP in 2017. SGA got 30 pts a game because he's on a subpar OKC team, not because he's a higher caliber player than Curry or Lillard, certainly not in efficiency terms.

Why would you compare Shai's regular season TS to the playoff TS of other players, especially when the playoffs just started? That makes no sense.

Shai played 12 more games than Steph this year. OKC was predicted to win 23 games. They almost doubled that win total. GS had a disappointing regular season. GS as the defending champs won only 4 more games than OKC. It is obvious why Shai got more votes than Steph.

Denver won 48 games last year, same as Sacramento this year. That isn't a bad team first of all. Secondly Murray and MPJ missed the entire season. Jokic was the easy MVP last year it wasn't close.

[bdonovan]

Why would you compare Shai's regular season TS to the playoff TS of other players, especially when the playoffs just started? That makes no sense.

Shai played 12 more games than Steph this year. OKC was predicted to win 23 games. They almost doubled that win total. GS had a disappointing regular season. GS as the defending champs won only 4 more games than OKC. It is obvious why Shai got more votes than Steph.

Denver won 48 games last year, same as Sacramento this year. That isn't a bad team first of all. Secondly Murray and MPJ missed the entire season. Jokic was the easy MVP last year it wasn't close.

In the stats I posted, I compare his regular season numbers with those of others. You don't become MVP by doing anything that is related to under or over-performing odds-makers. His contribution can be evaluated on its own merits.

This is nothing to take away from Shai, but I find the MVP voters to be arbitrary; following their own narratives, disconnected with any objective measurement, much of the time. I can easily see them bantering about Shai and it being one of those choices that the journalists make that is contrarian and suggests they know the game better than others. Shai is not a household name so they seem knowing by choosing him, and with a 4th or 5th pick so it is not something they have to be held to.

Just something I noticed, you don't have to go to the mat defending the MVP voters unless you are some Gilgeous-Alexander fan.

[RRR3]

I'm saying his TS% is lower than people who got fewer votes than him. Curry's TS % is 65%. Booker, Butler at 66%. Jaylen Brown 64%. My question is why Shai? He was on a bad team and racked up the stats - that doesn't mean anything.

Jaylen Brown’s TS was 58.1% what on earth are you talking about?

[tontoz]

In the stats I posted, I compare his regular season numbers with those of others.

Here is what you actually posted.

I'm saying his TS% is lower than people who got fewer votes than him. Curry's TS % is 65%. Booker, Butler at 66%. Jaylen Brown 64%.(why are you using post season TS? ) My question is why Shai? He was on a bad team and racked up the stats - that doesn't mean anything.

The OP was about MVP voting. MVP is a regular season award so why are you comparing Shai's regular season TS to the postseason TS for Brown, Butler and Booker? That is nonsense

[SouBeachTalents]

Here is what you actually posted.



The OP was about MVP voting. MVP is a regular season award so why are you comparing Shai's regular season TS for the postseason TS for Brown, Butler and Booker? That is nonsense

Yeah, that shit makes absolutely no sense

[bdonovan]

Here is what you actually posted.



The OP was about MVP voting. MVP is a regular season award so why are you comparing Shai's regular season TS for the postseason TS for Brown, Butler and Booker? That is nonsense

I think you might be trolling me at this point. The data I just posted was:

TS%
Curry 65%
Lillard 64%
Gilgeous-Alexander 62%

It's an apples to apples comparison of regular season data. TS was just one metric I happened to use as I try to understand what they hype is about the guy.

The net takeaway is Good Stats on a Bad Team doesn't mean you're a Great Player; and this:

This is nothing to take away from Shai, but I find the MVP voters to be arbitrary; following their own narratives, disconnected with any objective measurement, much of the time. I can easily see them bantering about Shai and it being one of those choices that the journalists make that is contrarian and suggests they know the game better than others. Shai is not a household name so they seem knowing by choosing him, and with a 4th or 5th pick so it is not something they have to be held to.

Feel free to post away but think I've discussed this to my satisfaction.

[tontoz]

I think you might be trolling me at this point. The data I just posted was:



It's an apples to apples comparison of regular season data. TS was just one metric I happened to use as I try to understand what they hype is about the guy.

The net takeaway is Good Stats on a Bad Team doesn't mean you're a Great Player; and this:



Feel free to post away but think I've discussed this to my satisfaction.

LMAO are you really that dumb? I literally quoted your post from the 5th post in this thread on page 1? Did you forget to take your meds?

[RRR3]

Bdumbnovan getting embarrassed rn jesus.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

People justify...or argue against...an MVP based on playoff numbers....all the time. And EVERY TIME its equally as ridiculous.

Its OK to admit you're wrong "Bdonovan" lol. Your fragile message board ego will be fine

[NBAGOAT]

Most people can’t even name all of okcs starters yet shai got them to the playin. He should get consideration for all nba 1st team to be honest

[GOBB]

Well deserved. Even better seeing haters choke on their analytic data. Haha

[ShawkFactory]

First two things i’ve seen said today is Booker = Kobe and that Anthony Davis = garnett/pippin…. I don’t even think they were trolling either





Speechless

Not sure that AD being compared to Garnett is an insult. Quite the opposite actually.

The rest is dumb.