2023-24 RealGM All-Season Awards Discussion Thread

[Colbinii]

Another couple, but one is much more interesting FOR Mitchell.
I like to call this one the Derrick Favors effect, where your back-up Center is still a Top 15-20 Center in the NBA.

Rudy + Mitchell: +11.07
Mitchell, No Rudy: +1.40
No Mitchell, No Rudy: +0.17
Rudy, No Mitchell: +0.51



Simmons, No Embiid: -0.95
Embiid + Simmons: +15.54
No Simmons, No Embiid: -3.19
Embiid, No Simmons: +2.54

[Texas Chuck]

yeah using raw plus minus of a rookie playing on a great team to show he's great is well something. Not to say Chet hasn't had a good year, he obviously has. But him being a positive in the starting lineup for the best team in the West should be expected.

[Ambrose]

Picking Chet over Wemby because he plays on a great team so his 'On' is good would be the definition of overthinking things. Especially when the On/Off heavily skews the other way. I'm assuming/hoping that's not what was happening there.

[OhayoKD]

Picking Chet over Wemby because he plays on a great team so his 'On' is good would be the definition of overthinking things. Especially when the On/Off heavily skews the other way. I'm assuming/hoping that's not what was happening there.

The Spurs also have a higher net-rating without Wemby over actual games. Wemby was definitely better by the end of the year and better over his best stretches, but Chet being better for the duration of the season is completely fair to argue

[Colbinii]

yeah using raw plus minus of a rookie playing on a great team to show he's great is well something. Not to say Chet hasn't had a good year, he obviously has. But him being a positive in the starting lineup for the best team in the West should be expected.

Eh, it is something. It is very impressive. What Chet/Mitchell/Simmons did as rookies is incredible. How Manu helped steer the ship [offensively] in the 2003 playoffs is impressive.

Context still remains king though.

[rk2023]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=_HOjrsiLtTYaVpOZxyl7Iw

Regarding the rookie ballots, this moves me a fair share.

[Colbinii]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=_HOjrsiLtTYaVpOZxyl7Iw

Regarding the rookie ballots, this moves me a fair share.

Him vs Chet could move you further

[rk2023]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=_HOjrsiLtTYaVpOZxyl7Iw

Regarding the rookie ballots, this moves me a fair share.

Him vs Chet could move you further

I’ve never been more excited for a stress free, fan of the game point of view, R2 in my life watching basketball - regarding both Wolves Nuggets and the possibility of Mavs Thunder

[Doctor MJ]

yeah using raw plus minus of a rookie playing on a great team to show he's great is well something. Not to say Chet hasn't had a good year, he obviously has. But him being a positive in the starting lineup for the best team in the West should be expected.

So I do want to make clear that I'm posting this stuff not with a "Chet for ROY" agenda. I think Wemby's going to be very hard to top for that award. I mention it because I think it's noteworthy for a rookie.

I feel like a lot of folks have things backwards when they say "Of course he has a good +/-, he's on a great team." given that we're talking about a ROY candidate. The reality is that most ROY candidates in most years would be glued to the bench if their team was actually any good. Mostly ROYs are guys who aren't actually good NBA players so much as they are guys who are given primacy by teams who hope the player will eventually deserve it, and that's fine...but when you have a guy who is actually part of a Big 3 of a #1 seed as a rookie, this is a pretty big deal, and I'd absolutely be voting for Chet for ROY in most seasons.

Perhaps people actually disagree with this, but I feel like most of the responses here are about people assuming that I'm making an argument against Wemby even though I'm not bringing up Wemby.

As you say, Chet's had a good year, and that's all I'm looking to celebrate when I point out the goodness of things.

Now, I do think we should have a conversation about whether OKC would be as good or better with Wemby in Chet's place, but I'm not looking to take a stand against Wemby on that question, nor am I looking to say Chet should necessarily be the ROY if I did think Wemby was a worse fit on the Thunder.

[Texas Chuck]

Doc, I have no fight over Wemby vs Chet. I think Chet's been really good for a rookie too.

I just don't find your new single game +/- stat compelling evidence to say that Chet is good. Literally every rotation player on OKC is a positive in plus/minus. They are a good team. Plus minus suggests SGA is the driving force which of course matches all other evidence.

[Doctor MJ]

Doc, I have no fight over Wemby vs Chet. I think Chet's been really good for a rookie too.

I just don't find your new single game +/- stat compelling evidence to say that Chet is good. Literally every rotation player on OKC is a positive in plus/minus. They are a good team. Plus minus suggests SGA is the driving force which of course matches all other evidence.

I'll reiterate and restate in terms of a different super-basic stat:

Do you actually think that most ROYs could be the #2 minutes guy on a #1 seed?

Paolo, Scottie, LaMelo...? I mean, forget about their ROY campaigns, I don't think any of these guys really could occupy such a prominent place on a top tier contender now.

And of course Shai is the MVP of the team, but Shai was a superstar last season and the team couldn't even get into the playoffs. When a team goes from not making the playoffs to being the #1 seed we typically ask "Who did they add?". For the Thunder the answer is a freaking rookie. That's super-unusual.

But look, it really is a question of what we're actually arguing about. I presented stats without making a specific argument and the response I've gotten from people is to pontification about how stupid it would be if I were stupid enough to only use one extremely simplistic stat to evaluate ROY candidates, when literally everyone here knows me - and I literally put the caveat in the post that this wasn't meant as an argument against Wemby.

Y'all, if I post a stat that doesn't resonate with you, you don't have to build a straw man argument in your head to turn your nose up at. You can just shrug and move on.

[Dutchball97]

I wonder how much Tatum's pretty meh showing so far is because it simply wasn't necessary for him to exert himself against a depleted Heat squad they blew out in all their wins and how much it is him once again not living up to the superstar moniker in the post-season. He'll be the player I'll be most interested in how he fares in round 2 when the competition heats up a bit because with the first round as good as wrapped up I feel like Tatum has dropped off my ballot for the moment with Brunson and Ant passing him by.

[Fundamentals21]

Jalen Brunson numbers through 6 games - 35/4/9, 37% USG Rate, 117 O rating.

The Knicks squad is solid with Hartenstein and OG, and he's utilizing it really well. Really need more Brunson action to see if he can make my Top 5.

[eminence]

No first round outs on my ballot this go around.

Probably the same contenders as most:
Jokic
SGA
Tatum
Luka
Ant/Rudy (Ant with the current lead imo, difficult to see both getting top 5 even if they win it)
Brunson

Theoretically open to a surprise run from Haliburton/Siakam or whomever wins the remaining series, but it probably takes at least a finals appearance.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Could this be Ant Edwards' 06 Wade run? I've been throwing around the idea, but he might be top...

[OhayoKD]

Could this be Ant Edwards' 06 Wade run? I've been throwing around the idea, but he might be top...

*Rudy Gobert's

[Doctor MJ]

I wonder how much Tatum's pretty meh showing so far is because it simply wasn't necessary for him to exert himself against a depleted Heat squad they blew out in all their wins and how much it is him once again not living up to the superstar moniker in the post-season. He'll be the player I'll be most interested in how he fares in round 2 when the competition heats up a bit because with the first round as good as wrapped up I feel like Tatum has dropped off my ballot for the moment with Brunson and Ant passing him by.

Well I think it's been a season-long thing really. This has been a situation this year where a team (Celtics) go from being a secondary contender with a guy looking like an MVP candidate (Tatum), to the clear cut best regular season team with what plays as more of an ensemble cast.

I think we should really think hard about how the contextual shift might have meant Tatum doing what was best for the team made him personally look less glorious, and I have reservations about knocking a guy for that.

Though to be clear: While Tatum has looked more like an MVP in the past, I think we all agree that Tatum's always had some offensive limitations that not only put him below the top tier of offensive players, but look egregious at times against tough defense. The question is always whether his combination of offense and defense is enough for him to top guys who are better on offense (or defense).

[Doctor MJ]

No first round outs on my ballot this go around.

Probably the same contenders as most:
Jokic
SGA
Tatum
Luka
Ant/Rudy (Ant with the current lead imo, difficult to see both getting top 5 even if they win it)
Brunson

Theoretically open to a surprise run from Haliburton/Siakam or whomever wins the remaining series, but it probably takes at least a finals appearance.

So those 7 guys are exactly the guys on my mind too - and yeah, since Indy is still in it, maybe something could turn my head there, but I think it's unlikely.

I do think it's important to have a process where a guy doesn't need to be in the 2nd round to be a Top 5 POY candidate, but I'd also say that a guy who doesn't seem like a Top 5 guy in the regular season probably isn't going to become one for me over the course of a 1st round loss.

I purposefully don't commit hard to RS award orderings any more, but I'll say that I think the only guy whose team lost in the 1st round who had a good chance to be in my RS 5 was Giannis, and him just plain missing the series makes him an easy one to cross off.

Embiid would have been in such a boat too had he played more, but he didn't, and so was totally dependent on an overwhelming playoff performance to get him into consideration. I don't want to hate on a man dropping 50 with Bell's Freaking Palsy, but to be blunt, what he did wasn't enough for him to leap frog any of the 7 you listed - who were all already ahead of Embiid based on the RS for me.

Last guy I feel like mentioning right now is LeBron, who remains just a monstrous player and it feels reasonable to still call him a Top 10 player at age 39, which I believe makes him unique in all of NBA history.

[Doctor MJ]

Speaking directly on the putative Magnificent 7 eminence put out there:

Jokic - remains at the top of my list through round 1
SGA - remains second on my list through round 1

Tatum - still very much in flux for me. He's felt less impressive to me than anyone else in this group this year to be honest, but if Boston ends up dominating the playoffs with him as the clear cut keystone, he's going to be compelling.

Luka - seems like a lock for Top 5 with the potential climb round by round.

Brunson - I have a reluctance to consider Brunson over some of these other guys (Luka for one), but I do think Brunson absolutely has the primacy and impact profile of an MVP candidate, and if the Knicks keep winning...

Ant & Rudy - they complicate the picture for each other. I could see a situation where one (probably Ant) takes the #1 spot and Rudy missed the top 5...but I could also see a situation where they win the chip with both in the Top 5 but neither in the top spot.

I do think it's important for us to consider the possibility that Rudy will be prove to be the more valuable on-court player. This is a team that wins with defense, and he's the foundation of all of that.

But aside from the fact that in the modern game it seems like there's just more potential for individual offensive impact than defensive, there's also a cultural impact factor for Ant I'll be reflecting on. Now, I'm personally not in love with Ant's personality - he's said some dumb s**t - but my feelings don't matter here, his teammates do. And the other two big names on this roster - Gobert & KAT - are awkward dudes who are prone to getting in their own heads, as well as those around them. Those two guys right now seem to be the most comfortable I think I've ever seen them, and they're doing this explicitly following the lead of the much younger Ant. It's really something.

[Colbinii]

Speaking directly on the putative Magnificent 7 eminence put out there:

Jokic - remains at the top of my list through round 1
SGA - remains second on my list through round 1

Tatum - still very much in flux for me. He's felt less impressive to me than anyone else in this group this year to be honest, but if Boston ends up dominating the playoffs with him as the clear cut keystone, he's going to be compelling.

Luka - seems like a lock for Top 5 with the potential climb round by round.

Brunson - I have a reluctance to consider Brunson over some of these other guys (Luka for one), but I do think Brunson absolutely has the primacy and impact profile of an MVP candidate, and if the Knicks keep winning...

Ant & Rudy - they complicate the picture for each other. I could see a situation where one (probably Ant) takes the #1 spot and Rudy missed the top 5...but I could also see a situation where they win the chip with both in the Top 5 but neither in the top spot.

I do think it's important for us to consider the possibility that Rudy will be prove to be the more valuable on-court player. This is a team that wins with defense, and he's the foundation of all of that.

But aside from the fact that in the modern game it seems like there's just more potential for individual offensive impact than defensive, there's also a cultural impact factor for Ant I'll be reflecting on. Now, I'm personally not in love with Ant's personality - he's said some dumb s**t - but my feelings don't matter here, his teammates do. And the other two big names on this roster - Gobert & KAT - are awkward dudes who are prone to getting in their own heads, as well as those around them. Those two guys right now seem to be the most comfortable I think I've ever seen them, and they're doing this explicitly following the lead of the much younger Ant. It's really something.

Some Wolves thoughts regarding Gobert vs ANT

-By far the best defensive wing group in the NBA with McDaniels/NAW/ANT which helps Gobert defensively
-Excellent floor spacing with Towns/Naz allowing 5-out offense when Gobert sits
-High IQ players like Conley/Morris who are able to calm the offense of Towns/ANT, which allows them to get to their spots

It seems like a flavor of the month type thing and however the Timberwolves last series ends [Whether its Denver, OKC/Dallas or Boston/New York] will likely leave the lasting imprint on who is more important.

If you watched the game, one play showed just how good Rudy Gobert is defensively. He switched onto Jokic around the free throw line and instantly took a step back and deflected a lob pass mid-air to Gordon. Gobert quite literally defender Jokic in the post AND Gordon in the dunker's spot within 1 second. I don't know if anyone in the NBA could have defended that play given the amount of anticipation and length it required.