Ja Morant takes a shot at the media’s apparent MVP-bias for Jokic (“it’s obvious [who] they want”)

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

You know why Nash winning those two MVPs was bullshyt? CP3 went to the Suns and did exactly what Nash did all those years ago except he did it better, by turning them from a fringe playoff team to an actual Finals contender. Yet you don't hear a peep about CP3 getting the award.

Completely different times with completely different players and running narratives. You can't compare the two. And whatever the Suns accomplished in the playoffs last season is irrelevant; the MVP voting was decided long before they even got to the Finals. You know very damn well it's a regular season award.

It's hilarious how you're arguing CP3 should get the same MVP recognition that Nash did in a thread where a player is advocating for CP3's teammate to get MVP. You see the problem here?

 

[Ozymandeas]

Completely different times with completely different players and running narratives. You can't compare the two. And whatever the Suns accomplished in the playoffs last season is irrelevant; the MVP voting was decided long before they even got to the Finals. You know very damn well it's a regular season award.

This is bullsh*t logic. The logic to justify Nash winning MVP should apply today or else he shouldn't have won it.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

This is bullsh*t logic. The logic to justify Nash winning MVP should apply today or else he shouldn't have won it.

Except it doesn't work like that. As it's been repeated all throughout this thread - there's no set criteria for MVP. It changes depending on whatever the hell narrative is present at the time. The same logic can't apply because every season is different; no season is ever the same. That's why you can't compare what happened when Nash won to what happens in a season nearly 20 years later. Kareem won the MVP when his team missed the playoffs back in '76 (all with a losing record), so isn't that "bullshyt logic" too when nobody has won MVP since then when their team missed the playoffs? Why can't Bron win MVP if the Lakers miss the playoffs when there's a precedent of Cap winning it in the past?

You see the point I'm getting at here?

 

[DillaTUDE]

Except it doesn't work like that. As it's been repeated all throughout this thread - there's no set criteria for MVP. It changes depending on whatever the hell narrative is present at the time. The same logic can't apply because every season is different; no season is ever the same. That's why you can't compare what happened when Nash won to what happens in a season nearly 20 years later. Kareem won the MVP when his team missed the playoffs back in '76 (all with a losing record), so isn't that "bullshyt logic" too when nobody has won MVP since then when their team missed the playoffs? You see the point I'm getting at here?

The "best player on the best team" criteria was used to justify Steph's standing in the MVP ranking lists earlier on in the season (despite his long stretch of poor performances), therefore Book should be ahead of Jokic.

The voters don't just get to randomly flip the voting guidelines that they set earlier on in the season to place someone else in pole position. Book's MVP candidacy is just as valid as Steph's was earlier on in the season.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

The "best player on the best team" criteria was used to justify Steph's standing in the MVP ranking lists earlier on in the season (despite his long stretch of poor performances), therefore Book should be ahead of Jokic.

What MVP ranking lists are you talking about? There are none.

You cherry-picking what a few people said in the media wasn't the consensus of the voting panel. Narratives take a while to reflect what's happening at the time, so once it was clear that Steph was in a long drought and the Warriors lost the #1 seed, he was no longer the main name in the conversation. It started to switch to DeRozan, CP3, Bron, Giannis, Jokic, and the most prominent name of all - Embiid. Let's be honest here, this is all about you being mad because Steph was seen more as the MVP than KD was at the time. It's no coincidence you keep tracking back to referencing Steph. Narratives change all the time throughout a season. Just because you think it was "the best player on the best team" at one point, doesn't mean that's going to be the case later in the season, again, because there is no set criteria. Narratives change all the time, until they don't. The media might push a player at the start of the season because they're the best player on the best team, and then by the end of the season, the media is pushing a player because their team suffered multiple injuries and that player achieved some arbitrary box score stat mark.

Why isn't Booker ahead of Embiid and Giannis, who both have been mentioned in MVP conversations more than he has, despite being on inferior teams? Why make out like Jokic is the only one? Why do you believe Booker is the one deserving of being the MVP, when prior to CP3's injury, he was seen as the Suns' main guy? CP3 finished 5th in voting last season, so what has changed where Booker has now replaced him in that frame, where they aren't taking votes off one another?

The voters don't just get to randomly flip the voting guidelines that they set earlier on in the season to place someone else in pole position. Book's MVP candidacy is just as valid as Steph's was earlier on in the season.

There was no guidelines. And who are these voters you're talking about?

If Booker didn't have CP3 on his team where he was seen as the definitive #1 guy, then he probably would be getting more attention, but since CP3 was the face of the MVP narrative (on the Suns), Booker couldn't possibly be that guy that Steph is for the Warriors. How can you not see something so obvious? Its the reason why, again, all of Jokic, Embiid and Giannis are in the conversation more than Booker is, despite being on teams with weaker records.

 

[Long Live The Kane]

That cat who was sticking out his chest about how Giannis should be the frontrunner for MVP has disappeared from this thread. How convenient.

Homie I’ve been celebrating my brother’s wedding and haven’t watched or paid attention to a lick of basketball the past day or so…. You’re a weirdo and borderline psychotic with this begging to argue with nikkas on the internet shyt…my personal opinion is that Giannis is the MVP and the best player in the NBA, your choice is Jokic…I’m content to leave it there, I ain’t got the patience to respond to walls of strawmen arguments by you over the course of eternity over this

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Homie I’ve been celebrating my brother’s wedding and haven’t watched or paid attention to a lick of basketball the past day or so…. You’re a weirdo and borderline psychotic with this begging to argue nikkas on the internet shyt…my personal opinion is that Giannis is the MVP and the best player in the NBA, your choice is Jokic…I’m content to leave it there, I ain’t got the patience to respond to walls of strawmen arguments by you over the course of eternity over this

My choice isn't Jokic; I don't have one. I could care less about who wins it. I'm only arguing against the dumbass logic that's been applied in here. I don't think you've been paying much attention to hoops this season given the fact you've been trying to spam this Giannis-MVP narrative since the start of the season, and manipulating everything in your path with your confirmation bias. You won't find a strawman argument in any of my posts in here (I've noticed you resort to this escape route every time you get checked for posting silly shyt), but you will find me pointing out all your faulty logic and inconsistencies on the matter.

 

[Budda]

Homie I’ve been celebrating my brother’s wedding and haven’t watched or paid attention to a lick of basketball the past day or so…. You’re a weirdo and borderline psychotic with this begging to argue with nikkas on the internet shyt…my personal opinion is that Giannis is the MVP and the best player in the NBA, your choice is Jokic…I’m content to leave it there, I ain’t got the patience to respond to walls of strawmen arguments by you over the course of eternity over this

That guy should stop saying nikka all the time

 

[Budda]

My choice isn't Jokic; I don't have one. I could care less about who wins it. I'm only arguing against the dumbass logic that's been applied in here. I don't think you've been paying much attention to hoops this season given the fact you've been trying to spam this Giannis-MVP narrative since the start of the season, and manipulating everything in your path with your confirmation bias. You won't find a strawman argument in any of my posts in here (I've noticed you resort to this escape route every time you get checked for posting silly shyt), but you will find me pointing out all your faulty logic and inconsistencies on the matter.

Giannis is MVP he plays elite defense to go with his attacking capabilities.

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

@DillaTUDE

Westbrook wasn't in the frame of the MVP conversation during the first third of the 2017 season, as the narratives at the time were more about "the best players on the best teams", but slowly over the course of the season the narrative changed, and the best players on the best teams didn't hold that much weight anymore, and it became entirely about Westbrook averaging a triple-double. It begs the question, why are you trying to make out like the criteria has only been readjusted this season for Jokic, especially when Jokic isn't the only name that isn't on the team with the best record?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

Giannis is MVP he plays elite defense to go with his attacking capabilities.

That's cool and all that, but I never asked for your opinion. You can move along now.

 

[DillaTUDE]

@DillaTUDE

Westbrook wasn't in the frame of the MVP conversation during the first third of the 2017 season, as the narratives at the time were more about "the best players on the best teams", but slowly over the course of the season the narrative changed, and the best players on the best teams didn't hold that much weight anymore, and it became entirely about Westbrook averaging a triple-double.

There were no other standout MVP candidates that season aside from Harden and he had a far better narrative than Jokic does this season.

It begs the question, why are you trying to make out like the criteria has only been readjusted this season for Jokic, especially when Jokic isn't the only name that isn't on the team with the best record?

The other two candidates in Giannis and Embiid have better seeding than Jokic (in a tougher conference, mind you), and before the Harden trade Embiid was working with just as little help as Jokic has done.

 

[DillaTUDE]

My choice isn't Jokic; I don't have one.

This is a cop out. Who is your MVP for this season?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

There were no other standout MVP candidates that season aside from Harden and he had a far better narrative than Jokic does this season.

If Harden had a far better narrative than Jokic, then why did Westbrook end up winning on a 6th seed? You don't see how this goes against your argument? Why are you having trouble admitting that the best player on the best team narrative doesn't always carry throughout a season? It didn't just start this season with Jokic, and Jokic isn't the only one where the narrative has readjusted in favor for.

The other two candidates in Giannis and Embiid have better seeding than Jokic (in a tougher conference, mind you), and before the Harden trade Embiid was working with just as little help as Jokic has done.

EDIT:

Philly - 46 wins
Bucks - 46 wins
Nuggets - 44 wins.

You really out here trying to split hairs making it seem like they have significantly greater records than Jokic? Again, it begs the question, why are you centering this around Jokic being the only one who's ahead of Booker on a team with a worse record? Why are you ignoring CP3 was seen as the MVP of the Suns prior to his injury, which then would affect Booker's chances of being recognised in the same light?

 

[Gil Scott-Heroin]

This is a cop out. Who is your MVP for this season?

There are handful of names that are deserving. This is the problem I have with the MVP discussion: it gets us to unnecessarily argue who should win while undervaluing players that are also having great seasons. Look at this very thread. No matter who wins, it doesn't take anything away from the players that don't, as there can only be one winner. If Jokic wins, it doesn't mean the other candidates aren't deserving. If Embiid wins, it doesn't means the other candidates aren't deserving.

The fact remains, Ja is a lame for his MVP take, and so is everyone else he agrees with him. Ain't none of y'all nxggas were talking this Booker-MVP shyt a month ago when the Suns had the best record.