Not sure if you noticed the mini Twitter frenzy (Twenzy?) last week, but Nick Wright (FS1) claimed that if Jokic wins MVP, he'll go down as the worst MVP in the last 35 years. There's a bit more context there, but his point was that when Jokic's career is eventually completed, it will be the least accomplished compared to the careers of the previous 35 years' worth of MVPs. Though he's wrong, I'd like to expand the question to you on a more historical level. If you're a betting man, do you put your money on Jokic's career success (subjective, I know) ultimately surpassing which previous MVP winners? I mean, he's not touching guys like MJ, LeBron, Wilt, Kareem, Russell, Magic, Duncan, Kobe, Oscar, Bird, Moses, Hakeem, Shaq, Steph, and KD obviously. And he has next to zero chance of matching guys like the Admiral, Barkley, Malone, KG, Nash, Pettit, Giannis, Cousy, and Dirk. But do you think he might have an outside shot of reaching the levels of some of the remaining guys, like Rose, AI, Russ, Harden, Cowens, Walton, McAdoo, Cowens, Willis Reed and Unseld?
A twitter frenzy? I thought Trump was off that. I understand media today is often about someone saying (or writing) something zany and then having everyone debate and comment about it. Jokic will be a deserving MVP because he's been the combination of best/most impactful this season with good attendance. There's always this Hall of Fame debate about Derrick Rose. I believe he deserves to get in because it's a combination of all your accomplishments and not just the NBA (college title runner up, USA Basketball gold medals, prep titles in a major market) with multiple All-Star appearances and at least a conference finals. These rankings are, of course, arbitrary. I could contest Nash because his play was exaggerated because of D'Antoni's high scoring system. Dirk was a one-trick pony type whose defense was so poor his own coach called him Irk. You know, no D in him. If it were a two-way player award, no Nash also and likely no Curry. Probably no Barkley. McAdoo always is the low standard because Rick Barry should have gotten it then, but no one liked him. That's when players also voted. It's irrelevant to rank their careers because it's a one-year award. Walton may have become better than Kareem if he remained heathy. Jokic could have an amazing career because he's obviously not at risk of losing athleticism. By the way, what's FS1? Is that a streaming service?