"Job is done. We can go home now." Sounds like me after work, except work is usually not done.
That was never a defensive foul on Gordon and the NBA allowed it to stand because it wasn't clear enough to overturn and will stand by that. They tried to extend the series and keep Miami in this game, it's a bad call but right call to stretch the game and series.
Denver was the team to beat all year and even before Murray was injured, it was growing towards that and they earned it, well done to them.
Elite interior big, fantastic scoring point guard, and multiple defensive wings such as Gordon, KCP, etc. And a head coach to match in Malone, he gets it.
He got the MVP in the last two seasons, but I think that Giannis was the best player in the world. This season, when Jokic didn't win the MVP award (cause of stupidity of NBA pundits who vote), he is clearly the best player in the planet.Yeah that was headscratchingly bad. Gordon didn't seem to do anything there. Having a foul called on you and then having the officials double down on it after a replay was a little strange.
Great series by Jokic and the Nuggets. He's silenced all doubters now, surely. The best player on the planet the last 3 years and now he can begin building on his resume.
Poor Embiid. Apparently, you can cry your way to an MVP, but you have to win the ring to get the real MVP award.That might've been my favorite celebration ever after winning an NBA title. Looking completely unbothered, going over to every single one of the Heat players, and then "job's done now, we can go home" in your post-game interview. What a fecking legend
Seriously though, fully deserved for the Nuggets and congratulations to them. They made it look easy throughout the playoffs against tough opponents, really didn't expect that after they had their late-season "slump". They can also easily run it back next year if Jokic-Murray keep performing on the same level, although the Suns, hopefully Lakers, and a few other teams will definitely give them a run for their money. Tatum should be entering his real prime as well, although I don't wanna see the Celtics win it ever again. And hopefully Embiid can string together a few great playoff performances - both East and West should be really competitive next season.
I'd love to see Giannis battle it out with Jokic in the Finals.
The narrative that Embiid stole it from Jokic is heavily influenced by the way they both performed in the playoffs.Poor Embiid. Apparently, you can cry your way to an MVP, but you have to win the ring to get the real MVP award.
I agree that they both played in a very high level, although I think Jokic was better. However, Embiid was crying in media for over a year how he should have won last year and how he should win the award, while Jokic seemed to not give a feck, and was focused on how he will do in the playoffs. It was quite funny.The narrative that Embiid stole it from Jokic is heavily influenced by the way they both performed in the playoffs.
MVP is a regular season trophy and they were neck and neck, while Embiid finished the season a lot better which always influences voters. I think Jokic should've won it, but it wasn't a ludicrous decision to give it to Embiid like some are making out right now.
How exactly are you valuable to your team if you're not playing? We're not rewarding Embiid, we're merely factoring in the fact that Jokic didn't play. Which of course has to count for something.No it isn't. Jokic was known to have had the better season well before the playoffs even started. In the past 15 years, so since the Nash years, only Kobe and Rose have managed to win it while not being clearly ahead in almost every advanced metric like Jokic was this year. It started to swing in Embiid's favour when absurd shit was being shit by like Kendrick Perkins.
He also didn't finish the season a lot better either, it's questionable whether he actually finished it better at all. Except the fact the Embiid dressed more, are we rewarding Embiid just for being fit now?
Yeah agreed. Also think it played a part (understandably, whether people think it's correct or not) that Jokic won it back-to-back in the two seasons before that. List of winners 3 times in a row is quite something (I believe Bird, LeBron, and someone else, can't remember). Shouldn't influence people but unfortunately it does.I agree that they both played in a very high level, although I think Jokic was better. However, Embiid was crying in media for over a year how he should have won last year and how he should win the award, while Jokic seemed to not give a feck, and was focused on how he will do in the playoffs. It was quite funny.
No it isn't. Jokic was known to have had the better season well before the playoffs even started. In the past 15 years, so since the Nash years, only Kobe and Rose have managed to win it while not being clearly ahead in almost every advanced metric like Jokic was this year. It started to swing in Embiid's favour when absurd shit was being shit by like Kendrick Perkins.
He got the MVP in the last two seasons, but I think that Giannis was the best player in the world. This season, when Jokic didn't win the MVP award (cause of stupidity of NBA pundits who vote), he is clearly the best player in the planet.
Denver is a great team. Teams usually do not defend the title, but they have the best team in the league, and the best player in the league. Sweeping Lakers, and gentlemen sweeping Miami, and having a relatively easy time against Suns is not an easy feat. Kudos to them and Jokic.
How exactly are you valuable to your team if you're not playing? We're not rewarding Embiid, we're merely factoring in the fact that Jokic didn't play. Which of course has to count for something.
Like I said, I also agree that it should've been Jokic. But narratives exist (and are created) and will influence people, that's just how it is in the NBA and elsewhere. And it's not like Embiid wasn't great and dominant either.
Because I don't agree that it's that much of a travesty that Embiid won it instead of Jokic like some are making it out to be. It was a close call, could've/should've been Jokic, but I also have no problems with them giving it to Embiid. It's not like he was a nothing player during the regular season who only won it because of the narratives and the fact Jokic already had two.Well not really, given Jokic actually played more on the whole season. He just rested marginally a bit more when the job was done, this has almost never had an effect on voting, and didn't this year either. Like I said, Embiid won because of Kendrick Perkins and some others.... JJ Redick, who was wildly praised in here earlier this week, called him out for it, but couldn't save the inevitable, the damage had been done.
Up until then, Jokic was absolutely running away with it. And I don't know why you're arguing it if you actually agree...
He should've (or at least could've) gotten it in 2006 over Nash imo, and I think in that scenario he doesn't win it in 2008 when CP3 indeed had an equally as good or even better case. He was the best player in the league that year but wasn't even top 3 back then though, I think because we were only the #7 seed.Rose atleast lead a relatively mediocre Chicago team to 62 wins in 2011. The Kobe situation was just laughable. They were 28-16 prior to the Gasol trade and still "only" finished with 57 wins, well below the NBA's best. Chris Paul lead a Hornets team that had nowhere near the talent the Lakers did to 1 less win while leading Kobe in pretty much every advanced statistical metric and impact stat that season.
Kobe was only 8th in PER (Lebron 1st) and winshare average (Chris Paul first), 7th in BPM, and outside the top 20 in offensive and defensive ratings. It's hard to make the argument that he deserved it that year but I remember the media campaign even in the fall of 2007 about how "It's crazy that a dawg like Kobe hasn't won even 1 MVP" and that narrative seemed to help him in the spring just as the Embiid stuff helped him this year.
Can get on board with that, yeah. Not sure if you're US-based but the debate and Perkins' comments obviously didn't cause quite a stir back here, I mean I read about them but didn't really follow up on any shift in assessing Jokic vs Embiid that it may have caused.To be fair, those ARE the only reasons he won it. Just because he was either the 2nd or 3rd best player in the League, which the massive majority would acknowledge, doesn't change that. The patterns of MVP voting for the past 10, hell even longer, years - show that Jokic would of won it by a big margin, which he was until Perk started gobbing off, I'd genuinely not even count the three in a row as an issue.... since up until about March, it was a shoe-in he was winning it, and there's legit not a landslide in performance from then on to swing it.
I mean, no ones sitting at their keyboards claiming he didn't put up the numbers or performances to be in the debate, but the wrong reasons put him over the line.
Can get on board with that, yeah. Not sure if you're US-based but the debate and Perkins' comments obviously didn't cause quite a stir back here, I mean I read about them but didn't really follow up on any shift in assessing Jokic vs Embiid that it may have caused.
Jokic just won it all and you lot straight to argue about Jokic/ Embid MVP all over again? Jezz..
He should've (or at least could've) gotten it in 2006 over Nash imo, and I think in that scenario he doesn't win it in 2008 when CP3 indeed had an equally as good or even better case. He was the best player in the league that year but wasn't even top 3 back then though, I think because we were only the #7 seed.
In my opinion he was the best player in the league between ~2005-2008 but he didn't have enough good teammates to boost their record (or he didn't make his teammates good enough / better, whichever way you look at it - so that would be a fine argument against him). Couldn't give it to him in 2007 either because Dirk was the #1 seed and the Lakers once again #7 (and Dirk was great as well that season). When Kobe won titles 4 and 5 the Lakers were good but he was competing against prime LeBron for MVPs by then so no chance. Early succesful years he had Shaq's shadow hanging over him.
Context is needed but it's not a bold claim to say he didn't deserve an MVP in any particular year of his career, even though I do think he was the best player in the league for a stretch in the 00s. His best case for MVP was probably in 2006, then 2003, then 2008.
It's Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain and Larry Bird, they are the 3 guys who won 3 in a row. Lebron has 4 but he never won 3 in a row.Yeah agreed. Also think it played a part (understandably, whether people think it's correct or not) that Jokic won it back-to-back in the two seasons before that. List of winners 3 times in a row is quite something (I believe Bird, LeBron, and someone else, can't remember). Shouldn't influence people but unfortunately it does.
Jokic got the last laugh in the end though. Top-20 status all-time by now and has a few years in front of him to push for top-15 or even top-10 status.
I kept repeating that the conversation is so pointless but people love bringing it up. Irrelevant reward. This is what matters - championship.