2023-24 RealGM All-Season Awards Discussion Thread

[rk2023]

Tho I’d say he was a top 5 RS player until April, feel like Giannis might be unfortunately DQ from a POTY ballot at this point. KD is a foregone afterthought too, if not clear enough. Still feel Embiid deserves a vote. I don’t know what to do with Luka right now

Players whose stock is trending up for this award include Brunson and Ant. I doubt the Lakers comeback from 3-0/3-1, but if they play Denver to 6 or 7 with AD and LeBron playing well - would they be worthy a spot on the ballot?

Lots of thoughts rn, I’d appreciate some perspective / reinforcement here.

[AEnigma]

For me, Shai and Jokic are functional locks with a first round win. Giannis, Embiid, and Kawhi are out unless they make the conference finals (or farther) as the driver from here on out. Durant was never a serious consideration because I think Booker has been better for at least the past two seasons — and Booker is out with this loss. Waiting to see whether the Lakers advance to assess their cases; they would definitely be out with a first round loss (my ballot is about more than listing the five best players). Same for Tatum. The Wolves need at least a conference finals for me to consider placing them on the ballot, and honestly it is tough enough to distinguish the top player that I may need a Finals run to actually do it. Brunson has been interesting, and if he makes the conference finals, he will definitely be on one of my ballots (offensive or overall), although the same would probably extend to Haliburton in the possible event of a second-round matchup between them. Luka is an expected inclusion but still TBD; depending on the performances of the other teams, he could sneak into the top five with a first round loss, and he could also miss the top five with a second round loss.

Gobert will lock up DPoY so long as neither of Davis or Bam do not outlast him, and even then he would still have a strong edge.

Third spot for OPoY is between Haliburton and Brunson. A great case was made here for Brunson, but realistically I still assess Haliburton higher offensively, so he has a little more leeway.

[Doctor MJ]

Tho I’d say he was a top 5 RS player until April, feel like Giannis might be unfortunately DQ from a POTY ballot at this point. KD is a foregone afterthought too, if not clear enough. Still feel Embiid deserves a vote. I don’t know what to do with Luka right now

Players whose stock is trending up for this award include Brunson and Ant. I doubt the Lakers comeback from 3-0/3-1, but if they play Denver to 6 or 7 with AD and LeBron playing well - would they be worthy a spot on the ballot?

Lots of thoughts rn, I’d appreciate some perspective / reinforcement here.

Oh, if Philly loses in the 1st round, no way Embiid is on my ballot, and if the Bucks lose, Giannis probably won't make it either.

With Embiid, it's the missed regular season time that makes him start out of contention, and the only way for him to get back in is playoff success. With Giannis, the injury in the playoff is likely what will kill his candidacy.

In general nowadays I try not to commit myself too much to mid-season lists because I found they made my thinking overly rigid, but yeah, guys like Brunson & Ant are looking like Top 5 contenders certainly.

Re: Luka. Let's just see what happens.

Re: If Lakers play Denver to... No, for me. Now if they come back and upset the Nuggets, that will change things

[Colbinii]

For LeBron/AD to make the list, the Nuggets would essentially need to sweep the playoffs while the Lakers put up the best fight against the Nuggets out of all the Nuggets competitors.

[Doctor MJ]

For LeBron/AD to make the list, the Nuggets would essentially need to sweep the playoffs while the Lakers put up the best fight against the Nuggets out of all the Nuggets competitors.

Not even that for me. It would be one thing if LeBron/AD were already in my Top 5, but I generally don't elevate guys from nowhere to Top 5 because they lost in the 1st round. Yeah, in said scenario they'd have had to play the toughest opponent in the 1st...but that happened because they didn't do all that hot during the regular season.

[ardee]

For LeBron/AD to make the list, the Nuggets would essentially need to sweep the playoffs while the Lakers put up the best fight against the Nuggets out of all the Nuggets competitors.

Not even that for me. It would be one thing if LeBron/AD were already in my Top 5, but I generally don't elevate guys from nowhere to Top 5 because they lost in the 1st round. Yeah, in said scenario they'd have had to play the toughest opponent in the 1st...but that happened because they didn't do all that hot during the regular season.

What if Giannis was in your top 5 before and missing the Playoffs DQs him, then someone ascends to take that 5th spot based on an excellent first round (despite the team result)?

[AEnigma]

I think Lebron was securely one of the top eight regular season players in the league, and two of them disqualified themselves through injury (Giannis and Kawhi) even before considering how Lebron has been the second-best postseason performer of that group through the first round.

Ultimately my personal rule for balloting is not going to get there, because my first recollections of the season summary will not involve the Lakers potentially being up 3-2 if not for a pair of inevitable Jamal Murray game-winners, but for anyone balloting based on who they felt were the five best players that year, it is an easy enough case to make.

[Doctor MJ]

For LeBron/AD to make the list, the Nuggets would essentially need to sweep the playoffs while the Lakers put up the best fight against the Nuggets out of all the Nuggets competitors.

Not even that for me. It would be one thing if LeBron/AD were already in my Top 5, but I generally don't elevate guys from nowhere to Top 5 because they lost in the 1st round. Yeah, in said scenario they'd have had to play the toughest opponent in the 1st...but that happened because they didn't do all that hot during the regular season.

What if Giannis was in your top 5 before and missing the Playoffs DQs him, then someone ascends to take that 5th spot based on an excellent first round (despite the team result)?

Hmm. Well first I want to be clear I'm not telling others how to do their analysis.

For me, missing the playoffs with injury doesn't DQ you. It certainly makes it easier for others to surpass you, but I would typically not elevate someone over you for their play in a 1st round loss. I'm not going to say it's an absolute rule, but it's not how things would work for my generally.

[LA Bird]

Never voted in these end of season awards before (and don't intend to) but I don't see LeBron at 5 as being that crazy. He's not in tier 1 for regular season IMO (Jokic/SGA/Giannis/Luka/Embiid) but Embiid pretty much DQed himself from the ballot with only 39 games and nobody in tier 2 besides Ant has looked as good in the playoffs.

[AEnigma]

I might not automatically disqualify the league MVP or a close contender for MVP, but missing the playoffs, or effectively missing them via injury, has been functionally disqualifying on every one of my theoretical “Player of the Year” ballots since 2005 (Garnett), and with few exceptions before.

Now, last year Giannis did make the ballot (although I did not vote for him). He also played more in the postseason than he did this year, was the 1-seed in the conference, and was top three in MVP voting. Curry made the ballot in 2021 (I would not have voted for him). So recent forum history has certainly been sympathetic. However, going back to the merger, 2005 Garnett (agree), 1992 Robinson (understand), 1988 Barkley (disagree but understand), and 1978 Walton (agree) are the only other such instances I see at a glance (hm, I feel like I may have done this before…), and I do not think Giannis this year met those standards in any league-relative sense.

EDIT: Yes, last year I talked about missed postseasons outright when going over whether I felt Luka had a reasonable case, so a moderately different standard. Giannis did provide enough value to earn his team a conference 3-seed, but ultimately the principle is similar for me because whether a player makes the playoffs is still significantly tied to their degree of team support, and Giannis (and Kawhi) clearly have plenty.

[Texas Chuck]

Interesting problem right now for some with regards to Luka. The issue in the RS has been the +/- data hasn't been strong enough for them. Now in the playoffs his shooting numbers are terrible, but he's more than holding up defensively and the +/- data is stupid(yes I know there isn't enough off minutes to reach any conclusions, but I'm not one beholden to +/- data.)

Luka not being a lock on their top 5 ballots pending a series in which his team might lose, his efficiency may look poor, but his +/- data could be off the charts is going to be an interesting challenge for those who have held him down in the past for +/- overlooking all the other data that shows him positive. Consistency suggests this series should be a positive for them, but reading above, its certainly not reading that way.

Which is one of the reasons I have such strong opposition to just taking +/- data and working backwards from it to begin with. Take game 4. Luka sits just over 3 minutes and his team gets outscored 15-0. Skews everything like crazy. And that on top of the messiness of +/- anyway and how its much more a reflection of team construction than anything else.

[Dutchball97]

Interesting problem right now for some with regards to Luka. The issue in the RS has been the +/- data hasn't been strong enough for them. Now in the playoffs his shooting numbers are terrible, but he's more than holding up defensively and the +/- data is stupid(yes I know there isn't enough off minutes to reach any conclusions, but I'm not one beholden to +/- data.)

Luka not being a lock on their top 5 ballots pending a series in which his team might lose, his efficiency may look poor, but his +/- data could be off the charts is going to be an interesting challenge for those who have held him down in the past for +/- overlooking all the other data that shows him positive. Consistency suggests this series should be a positive for them, but reading above, its certainly not reading that way.

Which is one of the reasons I have such strong opposition to just taking +/- data and working backwards from it to begin with. Take game 4. Luka sits just over 3 minutes and his team gets outscored 15-0. Skews everything like crazy. And that on top of the messiness of +/- anyway and how its much more a reflection of team construction than anything else.

I think sample size plays a big role here. Lot easier for numbers to get skewed by fluky stretches in a 4 game sample size than it is over 82 games. This is already the case for boxscore stats but it's even more prominent for +- when there can be big swings one way or another in just a couple minutes like you said.

Overall Luka had significant upwards movement in +- in the latter half of the season but when looking how well players stack up to their teammates (which is how the stat should be used imo instead of just looking at how big the number is), then we get a very clear signal Jokic, Embiid and SGA are the 3 most impactful players this season. Now there's other stats where Giannis and Luka do just as well, if not better, than some of these 3 so it's no end all be all but I don't see why +- shouldn't at least be taken into serious consideration when evaluating players.

In any case these are easily the 5 best players this year and it's a shame Embiid and Giannis are likely to drop off my ballot due to injuries.

[Texas Chuck]

I don't see why +- shouldn't at least be taken into serious consideration when evaluating players.

No issues with using them at all. I do have an issue with starting with them and working to explain why the numbers look the way they do.

No issues with Luka being outside anyone's top 5 either, though I can't personally find 5 players who've been better this season. But if one's issue is I want the +/- stuff to impress and I don't care about the other data, to flip that in the playoffs....

And yes I know the sample size is too small--that was part of my point.

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Assuming Jokic/Luka/SGA are locks, looking at other guys in contention:

Embiid - I can see disqualification here because despite his huge numbers, he missed over half of the RS. That plus a first round elimination would not look good, though he's played extremely well so far in this Knicks series(35/9/5.5 assists[2.8 turnovers]/1.3 steals/1.0 blocks on 60.9% TS, .260 WS/48, 11.4 BPM, and a crazy +70.1 on/off that we probably shouldn't read too much into).

Giannis - I'd be hesitant to disqualify him just because he had the misfortune of getting hurt right before the playoffs. His numbers clearly put him in Top 5 territory, he didn't miss nearly as much time as Embiid(only 9 games), and if anything his absence from the playoffs only shows how very valuable he is to his team.

Tatum - Real solid numbers on the league's best team, but what jumps out is the negative on/off. It's not just him though, all of the Celtics' top 6 guys have lackluster-to-poor on/off despite the team's league-leading SRS/Net Rtg. It's weird.

LeBron - what he's doing is so impressive at his age, but the fact that he and AD(who might be Top 10 himself) can't do better than the play-in and a 7/8 seed when they've both had their healthiest seasons in a while raises questions.

Brunson - I'm feeling bullish on maybe giving this guy a Top 5 slot. Of the guys being considered, he's got the highest WS/48 of anyone other than Jokic/Luka/SGA/Giannis/Embiid, and the highest on/off of anyone other than Jokic. And his value to his own team is inordinately high right now, this Knicks team wouldn't be doing anything in these playoffs without him imo. If the Knicks go deeper into the playoffs, I think he'd have earned it.

Edwards - I'd give Brunson the nod over Edwards. Ant is really good, but Brunson's RS numbers are simply better.

Right now I'd lean towards Jokic/Luka/SGA/Giannis/one of Tatum/Brunson/Embiid depending on how the playoffs go, probably one of the former 2).

[OldSchoolNoBull]

Interesting problem right now for some with regards to Luka. The issue in the RS has been the +/- data hasn't been strong enough for them. Now in the playoffs his shooting numbers are terrible, but he's more than holding up defensively and the +/- data is stupid(yes I know there isn't enough off minutes to reach any conclusions, but I'm not one beholden to +/- data.)

Luka not being a lock on their top 5 ballots pending a series in which his team might lose, his efficiency may look poor, but his +/- data could be off the charts is going to be an interesting challenge for those who have held him down in the past for +/- overlooking all the other data that shows him positive. Consistency suggests this series should be a positive for them, but reading above, its certainly not reading that way.

Which is one of the reasons I have such strong opposition to just taking +/- data and working backwards from it to begin with. Take game 4. Luka sits just over 3 minutes and his team gets outscored 15-0. Skews everything like crazy. And that on top of the messiness of +/- anyway and how its much more a reflection of team construction than anything else.

I mean, Luka is +9.4 in this regular season, which is in the ballpark with all the other top candidates except for Jokic, who's way out in front of everybody.

[AEnigma]

Giannis - I'd be hesitant to disqualify him just because he had the misfortune of getting hurt right before the playoffs. His numbers clearly put him in Top 5 territory, he didn't miss nearly as much time as Embiid(only 9 games), and if anything his absence from the playoffs only shows how very valuable he is to his team.

The Bucks went from fringe top five with him to maybe like fifteen without him. I do not think that is a particularly crazy swing, and in any case, I would rather someone miss twenty regular season games than two playoff games, let alone an entire series.

Giannis also has missed multiple games in four of the past five postseasons, meaning at this point he is not far off Embiid or Kawhi for health reliability.

LeBron - what he's doing is so impressive at his age, but the fact that he and AD(who might be Top 10 himself) can't do better than the play-in and a 7/8 seed when they've both had their healthiest seasons in a while raises questions.

Yeah, questions like, “Why were last year’s successful lineups ignored for a third of season.”

Glib but not seeing the question. He was a top ten player in the regular season and has been better than that a round in. I think it is fair to penalise him for not being relevant, but to whatever extent we can say it does not make sense for the team to have gone 47(+2)-35, I would not be questioning Lebron’s (or Davis’s) role, no.

On that +2 note, the IST merits more consideration than it has received thus far in this thread. Past the Lakers, it is also a major reason why I still have Haliburton hovering in possible contention despite his hamstring-induced drop-off. Not for nothing that he went through both the Celtics and Bucks to reach the Finals, and similarly not for nothing that the Lakers were the ultimate victors.

[Doctor MJ]

Interesting problem right now for some with regards to Luka. The issue in the RS has been the +/- data hasn't been strong enough for them. Now in the playoffs his shooting numbers are terrible, but he's more than holding up defensively and the +/- data is stupid(yes I know there isn't enough off minutes to reach any conclusions, but I'm not one beholden to +/- data.)

Luka not being a lock on their top 5 ballots pending a series in which his team might lose, his efficiency may look poor, but his +/- data could be off the charts is going to be an interesting challenge for those who have held him down in the past for +/- overlooking all the other data that shows him positive. Consistency suggests this series should be a positive for them, but reading above, its certainly not reading that way.

Which is one of the reasons I have such strong opposition to just taking +/- data and working backwards from it to begin with. Take game 4. Luka sits just over 3 minutes and his team gets outscored 15-0. Skews everything like crazy. And that on top of the messiness of +/- anyway and how its much more a reflection of team construction than anything else.

I'm not sure what the "problem" you have in mind here is specifically, but this is absolutely an interesting year to look at Luka's +/- already just based on the mid-season acquisitions. I've honestly been trying to avoid drawing conclusions from it until I need to as part of this project after the playoffs, and I'm definitely hoping to see others put forward their interpretations of the data, though I'm not in a rush to see them as per above.

[Doctor MJ]

Interesting problem right now for some with regards to Luka. The issue in the RS has been the +/- data hasn't been strong enough for them. Now in the playoffs his shooting numbers are terrible, but he's more than holding up defensively and the +/- data is stupid(yes I know there isn't enough off minutes to reach any conclusions, but I'm not one beholden to +/- data.)

Luka not being a lock on their top 5 ballots pending a series in which his team might lose, his efficiency may look poor, but his +/- data could be off the charts is going to be an interesting challenge for those who have held him down in the past for +/- overlooking all the other data that shows him positive. Consistency suggests this series should be a positive for them, but reading above, its certainly not reading that way.

Which is one of the reasons I have such strong opposition to just taking +/- data and working backwards from it to begin with. Take game 4. Luka sits just over 3 minutes and his team gets outscored 15-0. Skews everything like crazy. And that on top of the messiness of +/- anyway and how its much more a reflection of team construction than anything else.

I mean, Luka is +9.4 in this regular season, which is in the ballpark with all the other top candidates except for Jokic, who's way out in front of everybody.

+9.4 is On-Off, which is one member of the family of stats, but it's far from the only one.

Raw +/- and RAPM for the regular season still aren't too flattering to Luka, though patterns shifted with the new additions which may indicate that such data can be viewed as essentially obsolete.

[Doctor MJ]

A couple fun rookie +/- stats that let Chet shine:

Top rookie seasons by raw +/-, RS only, going back to '96-97:

1. Duncan +429
2. Holmgren +422
3. Simmons +386
4. Mitchell +359
5. Tatum +348

RS + PS so far:

1. Holmgren +476
2. Duncan +445
3. Tatum +402
4. Simmons +365
5. Maloney +353

And by OnWin, no minutes minimum, RS only:

1. Simmons 54
2. Holmgren 53
3. Duncan 52
4. Tatum 51
5. Kirilenko 50
(tie) Mitchell 50

RS + PS so far:

1. Ginobili 60
2. Simmons 59
(tie) Tatum 59
4. Holmgren 57
(tie) Udrih 57

As always, Wemby certainly has counter-arguments and I'm leaning toward voting for him...but man, Chet is also having a special rookie season.

[Colbinii]

A couple fun rookie +/- stats that let Chet shine:

Top rookie seasons by raw +/-, RS only, going back to '96-97:

1. Duncan +429
2. Holmgren +422
3. Simmons +386
4. Mitchell +359
5. Tatum +348

RS + PS so far:

1. Holmgren +476
2. Duncan +445
3. Tatum +402
4. Simmons +365
5. Maloney +353

And by OnWin, no minutes minimum, RS only:

1. Simmons 54
2. Holmgren 53
3. Duncan 52
4. Tatum 51
5. Kirilenko 50
(tie) Mitchell 50

RS + PS so far:

1. Ginobili 60
2. Simmons 59
(tie) Tatum 59
4. Holmgren 57
(tie) Udrih 57

As always, Wemby certainly has counter-arguments and I'm leaning toward voting for him...but man, Chet is also having a special rookie season.

The benefit of playing with an MVP candidate as a rookie [See Duncan + Ginobili].

Chet + SGA: +11.40
SGA, No Chet: +10.80
Chet, No SGA: +2.48
No SGA, No Chet: -2.75