>1. I don’t know if he’s Top 5 just due to the MVP, >because, like Nash, of his defensive deficiencies and because >of how hard the league leans on guys who create from the >perimeter for both themselves and others. I think he’s >fairly indisputable Top 5 offensive players in the league, so >he’s almost certainly Top 10. But like I said elsewhere, if >he can be a Top 3 MVP candidate again next year— or if he >can somehow will this short handed Nuggets team to the WCF? >Then I think it’s gonna be increasingly hard to leave him >out— especially considering how a couple of the consensus >Top 5 guys are getting up there in age. > >2. Even if Embiid had played a full season, Jokic had a >historically good offensive season for a big man. I think >it’d have easily been Jokic regardless. That said, I agree >that Embiid’s two way impact means I’d theoretically start >a team with him over Jokic… that said again, it’s hard to >ignore Embiid’s health history compared to Jokic’s. While >Jokic’s lack of athleticism certainly caps his upside to >some extent (a funny thing to say, given that he just won NBA >MVP), it also means his game is less reliant on movement, so >he’s less likely to get hurt and he’s less likely to be >ineffective the older he gets. He could genuinely play like >this for damn near another decade. It’s hard to ignore the >impact on the floor an elite passing and elite shooting big >like Jokic has. So I don’t know. That’s a tough call, and >I think they’re way closer overall than people like to >admit.
Nobody ever said it wasn't close. It was close all year. Embiid missed too many games.