CREATED BY SPORTS BETTORS FOR SPORTS BETTORS
LET’S HEAR YOUR STORY
Since the 1980-81 season, an NBA MVP has been picked yearly by a panel of media representatives. The debate among voters, league officials, and fans appears to be more polarized than ever, but no race has been determined by less than 39 first-place votes since Steve Nash edged Shaquille O'Neal in 2004-05.
O'Neal will never forget that one, but talks over the award felt more nuanced and less harsh before sophisticated statistics led the media down a route that players and fans were unwilling to pursue. Perhaps this was always the product of the information era, but more and more individuals tend to assume there is a correct or wrong response, despite the fact that the NBA has never specified any exact criterion for the award.
Former players turned ESPN commentators Kendrick Perkins and J.J. Redick have spent the last 24 hours openly discussing whether reigning two-time MVP Nikola Jokic is "stat-padding" his season averages of 25 points, 12 rebounds, and 10 assists. The back-and-forth intensified as Jokic recorded another triple-double on 11 shots in 28 minutes of a rout. When Jokic achieves a triple-double, the Denver Nuggets are 24-0.
Perkins joined the MVP voting panel last season, voting for Philadelphia 76ers center Joel Embiid because he was "the first center to lead the league in scoring since Shaq... AND [kept] the 76ers afloat amid the Ben Simmons fiasco" – two reasons that cannot be questioned or generalized.
There were 12 media members that voted against Westbrook in 2017 and for Jokic on a 48-win, sixth-place team last year, when the difference between Westbrook and the next-highest PER was much bigger. Now, there's a potential that some of them may vote against Jokic this season, when he and his team are better, either out of exhaustion or because they believe that prior postseason performance should figure into a regular season award.
Giannis Antetokounmpo of the Milwaukee Bucks won back-to-back MVPs in 2019 and 2020 before garnering a single first-place vote at the end of his following season. Next year, Jokic and Embiid emerged as legitimate contenders, and two-time champion Stephen Curry re-entered the race, but the narrative changed away from Antetokounmpo partly because his Bucks underperformed in the playoffs following each MVP season.
How can Antetokounmpo be the best player in the world if he can't even leave his conference? A month later, when Jokic collected his first MVP award during a rout in the second round of the playoffs in 2021, Antetokounmpo won the title and Finals MVP, and we all agreed he was the best player alive once more. Then, he ended significantly behind Jokic and Embiid for MVP in 2021-22.
There is no clear definition of an MVP, and some voters use their criteria inconsistently. This is being over-analyzed. It's as though the more we learn about basketball, the dumber the conversation becomes.
Give it to the greatest player on the best team every time if you believe he deserves it. Continue to give it to the finest player alive if you believe he is more deserved, regardless of output. Stick with it if you believe the season's most dominant player is the most worthy, regardless of team performance. Go forward in perpetuity if your technique considers team performance, statistics, and film. But don't rule out a player for a third consecutive MVP simply because he's already won two, his team has fallen short in previous playoffs, or you don't want to put him in the company of Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, and Larry Bird.
And, please, don't let us live in a world where anyone is upset that Westbrook won with a sixth-place team in 2017 and Jokic wins with a first-place team in 2023. If we're being consistent, the man averaging a triple-double on the Western Conference's greatest team, who also has the highest true shooting % of anybody to ever score 20 points per game, is the league's MVP again. If you disagree, please explain why. The MVP discussion should be as entertaining as it is informative.
Daniel Weinman was crowned winner of the 2023 World Series of Poker (WSOP) Main Event on Monday, taking home a record breaking $12.1 million in winnings. Weinman had to outlast the other 10,043 entrants to take home the prize and get his hands on his share of live poker’s largest ever prize pool – a staggering $93,399,900. As well as taking home the prize money, 35-year-old Weinman also got his hands on the WSOP Main Event bracelet. The huge bracelet contains 500 grams of 10-karat yellow gold, as well as 2,352 various precious gemstones.
Daniel Weinman won the World Series of Poker's main event world championship on Monday in Las Vegas, earning $12.1 million along the way. Playing in the tournament for a 16th year, Weinman was tops in a deep pool of 10,043 players vying for $93.39 million. His victory came after just 164 hands at the final table. "I was honestly on the fence about even coming back and playing this tournament," the 35-year-old Atlanta native told reporters afterward. Weinman's final table featured Jan-Peter Jachtmann, who landed in fourth place and took home $3 million, as well as Toby Lewis, who finished seventh and secured $1.42 million. According to the Las Vegas Review-Journal, the main event's entry pool far outpaced the previous record of 8,773 set in 2006. "I've always kind of felt that poker was kind of going in a dying direction, but to see the numbers at the World Series this year has been incredible," Weinman said. "And to win this main event, it doesn't feel real. I mean, [there's] so much luck in a poker tournament. I thought I played very well." Steven Jones finished second, securing $6.5 million. And Adam Walton settled for third and a $4 million prize.
Your experience on this site will be improved by allowing cookies.
