Jokic is not the best in the world, and has been heavily overrated (NOW YOU CAN CHANGE VOTES)

[Ssj16]

Yes because through the first two games of this series he wasn’t playing like him. I have no problems criticizing him when he is playing bad. I will praise when him when he plays great.

Hey HardenASG where you at bro?

Right here. Jokic was great last night, the first game this series I'd say that. I notice you didn't start any threads saying he's not him or anything either. Good for you! Or a thread saying Jokic needs more help, like you did when they lost 2 to the Suns last year. Because his supporting cast has been lights out the last two games. Because they probably have the best roster in the league outside of Boston. But no all star haha. Because we've seen that having a roster with a second all star at some point in their career makes a huge difference, rest of the starting 5 be damned!

I'm sure these two wins have been a huge sigh of relief for the Jokic GOAT people (not you, because you started a thread saying Jokic is not him a week ago, not me!) My whole argument is he's not the best player I've ever seen. Hes currently tied 2-2 vs a 3 seed, in a series where his team started with homecourt, and his opposition is in the second round for the first time as a group. He's played 1 extremely good game out of the 4. GOAT stuff!

Please remind Jordan, Duncan or Lebron swept their playoff competition? I'll wait.

[Bergmaniac]

You have to admire the perseverence of Jokic's most dedicated haters who showed up even after his last 2 games.

[hardenASG13]

Lol I call out Jokic when he doesn’t play up to his potential. Turning on him? Really bro. I don’t let any sense of loyalty to a player interfere with the reality of the situation. If I did I would be a fanboy. Maybe you have some weird sense of loyalty to players/team that prevents you from criticizing them that just shows the type of fan you are. But for me I keep it real

Keeping it real isn't starting a thread titled Jokic is not him. Keeping it real would be commenting in the series thread that Jokic needed to play better after the first 2 games, which was obvious, or something. Keeping it real would be what I'm doing, coming on here and acknowledging he was amazing last night.

Again, you've lost the ability to pile on after melting down following game 2, bro. You cant start a thread like that then a week later pretend like nothing happened and you always believed in him haha.

In that very thread I started I said Jokic was not playing like him the first two games. Not fulfilling his potential which I was right. Like I said I am no fanboy. I will criticize him when he plays poorly. I am sorry you can’t understand that. Maybe your loyalty to your favourite players and team prevents you from being real. But for me I keep it real bro. Maybe you should too and not be wanting players to fail because you can’t stand fans over praising certain players. That’s a sad life bro

Oh you were right that Jokic wasn't playing up to his potential after the first 2 games? What prodigious take! I don't have a favorite player or team, I simply haven't seen enough to annoint Jokic to the class many here do. And the way it's done prematurely annoys me. You know you started the thread, and you know it was an embarrassing over reaction. You then asked where I was at after a great game by Jokic, pretending like you didn't start a thread denouncing him as NOT him less than a week ago. No amount of saying bro will change that.

[AleksandarN]

Keeping it real isn't starting a thread titled Jokic is not him. Keeping it real would be commenting in the series thread that Jokic needed to play better after the first 2 games, which was obvious, or something. Keeping it real would be what I'm doing, coming on here and acknowledging he was amazing last night.

Again, you've lost the ability to pile on after melting down following game 2, bro. You cant start a thread like that then a week later pretend like nothing happened and you always believed in him haha.

In that very thread I started I said Jokic was not playing like him the first two games. Not fulfilling his potential which I was right. Like I said I am no fanboy. I will criticize him when he plays poorly. I am sorry you can’t understand that. Maybe your loyalty to your favourite players and team prevents you from being real. But for me I keep it real bro. Maybe you should too and not be wanting players to fail because you can’t stand fans over praising certain players. That’s a sad life bro

Oh you were right that Jokic wasn't playing up to his potential after the first 2 games? What prodigious take! I don't have a favorite player or team, I simply haven't seen enough to annoint Jokic to the class many here do. And the way it's done prematurely annoys me. You know you started the thread, and you know it was an embarrassing over reaction. You then asked where I was at after a great game by Jokic, pretending like you didn't start a thread denouncing him as NOT him less than a week ago. No amount of saying bro will change that.

He wasn’t playing like him the first two games I was right. But you wanting Jokic to fail because of fans is really sad bro. You are losing whatever credibility you had left. Enjoy the greatness and let go of the hatred you have of fans. You missing out on one of the greatest players to ever lace them up. Just let it go. You will enjoy life so much more

[nikster]

Right here. Jokic was great last night, the first game this series I'd say that. I notice you didn't start any threads saying he's not him or anything either. Good for you! Or a thread saying Jokic needs more help, like you did when they lost 2 to the Suns last year. Because his supporting cast has been lights out the last two games. Because they probably have the best roster in the league outside of Boston. But no all star haha. Because we've seen that having a roster with a second all star at some point in their career makes a huge difference, rest of the starting 5 be damned!

I'm sure these two wins have been a huge sigh of relief for the Jokic GOAT people (not you, because you started a thread saying Jokic is not him a week ago, not me!) My whole argument is he's not the best player I've ever seen. Hes currently tied 2-2 vs a 3 seed, in a series where his team started with homecourt, and his opposition is in the second round for the first time as a group. He's played 1 extremely good game out of the 4. GOAT stuff!

Yeah an efficient 24/14/9 with 3 steals, 3 blocks and +30 the previous game wasn't that good of a game

Much of that was accumulated after the game was out of hand, on the back of a big first half from Murray and the supporting cast. He had 8 points at halftime. It was a good game, not amazing by any means. Last night was.

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

[iLLmatic860]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=tVloFuZHnRcV_n-C8CiW9Q

[lessthanjake]

Post as many words and numbers as you want. The 2007 cavs beat the pistons because they had Lebron James and Detroit didnt. His offense and his defense. That was extremely clear to anyone who watched the series.

Only for people who see a star player’s team win through great team defense and want to simplistically give that star the credit for that. It’s unfortunately a simplistic form of analysis that is very common, both in terms of fans and sports media. Doesn’t make it accurate.

Anyways, beyond the fact that, given the overall numbers, it’s abundantly clear that the 2007 Cavs beat the Pistons due to incredible team defense and that essentially anyone would tell you that that great team defense was really not about LeBron in particular, it’s worth noting that the Cavs did great in that series in the few minutes LeBron sat (+16 in 21 minutes), and that that was, unsurprisingly, on the back of incredible defense—with the Cavs holding the Pistons to an absurd 73.3 points per 100 possession with LeBron off the floor (including just a 32% effective FG%). Of course, that’s a tiny sample size, but there’s really essentially no reason to think that LeBron was driving the greatness of the Cavs defense, and we know that the great defense is what drove the team’s success. One really just has to *want* to credit LeBron to somehow conclude he carried the team. He didn’t. The defense did, and you can talk all you want about what was “extremely clear to anyone who watched the series,” but I think anyone who watched the series and didn’t see the Cavs team defense carrying the team was blind or hopelessly biased.

Lebron was their best defender. Do you know the details of those 21(!) Total minutes? Was it garbage time? Long stretches (no)? With alot of bench players in for Detroit, a limited offense to begin with?

Jokic was a plus 3 last night. So Denver won by 5 in the 9 minutes he was off the floor. That must mean Jokic wasn't their best player by your logic then, right?

None of it was garbage time. There wasn’t even really any garbage time in the entire series, since all but one of the games was close and LeBron was in until the end of the game in the game that wasn’t very close.

And there’s really no basis for the claim that LeBron was the best defender on the 2007 Cavs. People did not believe that at the time, nor do impact stats say that that’s the case (there’s multiple Cavs ahead of him in DRAPM that season, and either way the team’s DRTG with him on and off the court was virtually identical).

And no, I’m not saying that plus-minus in small samples is super meaningful. But the problem is that the claim I was responding to included saying that LeBron’s defense carried the team, and there’s nothing that tells us that. That isn’t indicated by regular season impact data or plus-minus. It’s not indicated by any contemporaneous accolades regarding LeBron’s defense, or just how his defense was talked about at the time. Nor is it backed by how the defense did without him on the floor in that particular series. You might be able to draw a parallel with Jokic regarding the final point there (since plus-minus in small samples is super noisy), but you absolutely cannot draw a parallel with all those points, since Jokic was MVP this year and had enormous impact stats. The case that LeBron was the primary driver of the 2007 Cavs’ defense is extremely weak, and the case that Jokic is the primary driver of the 2024 Nuggets being a really good team is extremely strong. (Meanwhile, of course, the case that the 2007 Cavs were carried by their defense is really just inarguably correct, so LeBron not being the primary driver on that side of the ball leads to an obvious conclusion regarding whether LeBron carried the team).

[hardenASG13]

Yeah an efficient 24/14/9 with 3 steals, 3 blocks and +30 the previous game wasn't that good of a game

Much of that was accumulated after the game was out of hand, on the back of a big first half from Murray and the supporting cast. He had 8 points at halftime. It was a good game, not amazing by any means. Last night was.

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

Fair enough, I won't argue against that. It was a good game. It wasn't a standout, MVP game though like last night

[hardenASG13]

Only for people who see a star player’s team win through great team defense and want to simplistically give that star the credit for that. It’s unfortunately a simplistic form of analysis that is very common, both in terms of fans and sports media. Doesn’t make it accurate.

Anyways, beyond the fact that, given the overall numbers, it’s abundantly clear that the 2007 Cavs beat the Pistons due to incredible team defense and that essentially anyone would tell you that that great team defense was really not about LeBron in particular, it’s worth noting that the Cavs did great in that series in the few minutes LeBron sat (+16 in 21 minutes), and that that was, unsurprisingly, on the back of incredible defense—with the Cavs holding the Pistons to an absurd 73.3 points per 100 possession with LeBron off the floor (including just a 32% effective FG%). Of course, that’s a tiny sample size, but there’s really essentially no reason to think that LeBron was driving the greatness of the Cavs defense, and we know that the great defense is what drove the team’s success. One really just has to *want* to credit LeBron to somehow conclude he carried the team. He didn’t. The defense did, and you can talk all you want about what was “extremely clear to anyone who watched the series,” but I think anyone who watched the series and didn’t see the Cavs team defense carrying the team was blind or hopelessly biased.

Lebron was their best defender. Do you know the details of those 21(!) Total minutes? Was it garbage time? Long stretches (no)? With alot of bench players in for Detroit, a limited offense to begin with?

Jokic was a plus 3 last night. So Denver won by 5 in the 9 minutes he was off the floor. That must mean Jokic wasn't their best player by your logic then, right?

None of it was garbage time. There wasn’t even really any garbage time in the entire series, since all but one of the games was close and LeBron was in until the end of the game in the game that wasn’t very close.

And there’s really no basis for the claim that LeBron was the best defender on the 2007 Cavs. People did not believe that at the time, nor do impact stats say that that’s the case (there’s multiple Cavs ahead of him in DRAPM that season, and either way the team’s DRTG with him on and off the court was virtually identical).

And no, I’m not saying that plus-minus in small samples is super meaningful. But the problem is that the claim I was responding to included saying that LeBron’s defense carried the team, and there’s nothing that tells us that. That isn’t indicated by regular season impact data or plus-minus. It’s not indicated by any contemporaneous accolades regarding LeBron’s defense, or just how his defense was talked about at the time. Nor is it backed by how the defense did without him on the floor in that particular series. You might be able to draw a parallel with Jokic regarding the final point there (since plus-minus in small samples is super noisy), but you absolutely cannot draw a parallel with all those points, since Jokic was MVP this year and had enormous impact stats. The case that LeBron was the primary driver of the 2007 Cavs’ defense is extremely weak, and the case that Jokic is the primary driver of the 2024 Nuggets being a really good team is extremely strong. (Meanwhile, of course, the case that the 2007 Cavs were carried by their defense is really just inarguably correct, so LeBron not being the primary driver on that side of the ball leads to an obvious conclusion regarding whether LeBron carried the team).

Cleveland went from perennial finals contender to worst team in the conference immediately after Lebron left. He was the driving force.

[dhsilv2]

Yeah an efficient 24/14/9 with 3 steals, 3 blocks and +30 the previous game wasn't that good of a game

Much of that was accumulated after the game was out of hand, on the back of a big first half from Murray and the supporting cast. He had 8 points at halftime. It was a good game, not amazing by any means. Last night was.

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

This guy only values points per game. It's going to be impossible to explain to him that Jokic's game is built on his ability to create for others and through that his team wins games.

Just like Gobert is only playing good defense if he has a lot of blocks or steals, never mind he changes the geometry of the court and consistently makes the right reads and responses. Never mind his team is better with him on the court. And similarly, anytime someone scores in the paint on the Nuggets, it'll be Jokic's fault.

And remember, if you think Gobert or Jokic is great, you're a starts nerd. Also if Gobert doesn't get 5+ blocks or Jokic doesn't get 35+ points....they played bad because of you know...their stats.

[CobraCommander]

ANT doesn’t think Jokic is overrated

Read on Twitter

The next great one sees one of the all time greats and current best player on earth and doesn’t even hesitate to call him the best player on earth. Keep in mind Ant is playing with Towns and Rudy who both at some point thought they were better than jokic - and ant is straight up reminding everyone what every objectively already knows - Jokic is the best -

Funny how everyone except maybe Giannis calls jokic the best in the world - well Giannis, AD, Stephen A Smith, big Perk and RealGM posters.

Giannis can’t say it:.. he just can’t- jokic was behind him, ran him down and passed him… and that has to hurt. Probably good that that Giannis won’t say it so he can try to catch up.

AD can’t say it cause Lebron would slap him for being weak. Cause AD is young enough and talented enough to where he should be challenging Jokic but he isn’t and that’s odd.

SAS - I think espn and Disney told SAs who to vote for… his bosses

big Perk suffers from an ism that isn’t worth discussing.

But how can real gm people not named Eyetoma not see the reality ?

I don’t get it -

4 time mvp, champ, finals mvp, great teammate, confident leader, stays out of the off the basketball BS, legit tough guy that doesn’t start anything. Here to play basketball and go home - but if you a punk like the M-twins… well he can do that too.

What else yall want??

[dhsilv2]

Much of that was accumulated after the game was out of hand, on the back of a big first half from Murray and the supporting cast. He had 8 points at halftime. It was a good game, not amazing by any means. Last night was.

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

Fair enough, I won't argue against that. It was a good game. It wasn't a standout, MVP game though like last night

Jokic did his thing in game 3. The first half he setup his teammates, got them in rhythm, and as we've seen forever...when guys are getting touches on offense they play better defense.

Then in the 3rd he iced the game with his scoring 13 points on 5-6 shooting with 3 boards, 3 assists, 1 steal and 2 blocks. Pushing a 15 point lead to 27 and leaving virtually no room left for the Wolves. During the 3rd Murray was 1-4 with 2 points 2 assists.

That's EXACTLY what you'd want an MVP to due to close out a critical playoff game in the 3rd.

[dhsilv2]

ANT doesn’t think Jokic is overrated

The next great one sees one of the all time greats and current best player on earth and doesn’t even hesitate to call him the best player on earth. Keep in mind Ant is playing with Towns and Rudy who both at some point thought they were better than jokic - and ant is straight up reminding everyone what every objectively already knows - Jokic is the best -

Funny how everyone except maybe Giannis calls jokic the best in the world - well Giannis, AD, Stephen A Smith, big Perk and RealGM posters.

Giannis can’t say it:.. he just can’t- jokic was behind him, ran him down and passed him… and that has to hurt. Probably good that that Giannis won’t say it so he can try to catch up.

AD can’t say it cause Lebron would slap him for being weak. Cause AD is young enough and talented enough to where he should be challenging Jokic but he isn’t and that’s odd.

SAS - I think espn and Disney told SAs who to vote for… his bosses

big Perk suffers from an ism that isn’t worth discussing.

But how can real gm people not named Eyetoma not see the reality ?

I don’t get it -

4 time mvp, champ, finals mvp, great teammate, confident leader, stays out of the off the basketball BS, legit tough guy that doesn’t start anything. Here to play basketball and go home - but if you a punk like the M-twins… well he can do that too.

What else yall want??

360 backflip dunks...?

[hardenASG13]

Much of that was accumulated after the game was out of hand, on the back of a big first half from Murray and the supporting cast. He had 8 points at halftime. It was a good game, not amazing by any means. Last night was.

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

This guy only values points per game. It's going to be impossible to explain to him that Jokic's game is built on his ability to create for others and through that his team wins games.

Just like Gobert is only playing good defense if he has a lot of blocks or steals, never mind he changes the geometry of the court and consistently makes the right reads and responses. Never mind his team is better with him on the court. And similarly, anytime someone scores in the paint on the Nuggets, it'll be Jokic's fault.

And remember, if you think Gobert or Jokic is great, you're a starts nerd. Also if Gobert doesn't get 5+ blocks or Jokic doesn't get 35+ points....they played bad because of you know...their stats.

Gobert being a zero on offense and being as slow as he is on defense hasn't exactly helped the last few games.

Just because I don't make outrageous claims, like Gobert was the best player for Minnesota in game 1 (where Edwards had 43 points and Gobert had 6. If you've ever played in a basketball game, you'd know if a guy has 43, he had a better game than someone who scored 6) or that Mutumbo was more valuable to the 01 sixers than Allen Iverson, doesn't mean all I value is points. I understand Jokic creates for others. I also understand his team was unconscious shooting the ball from 3 last night, and always having 5 guys who can shoot it from outside on the court is an advantage for them this series, as opposed to Minnesota who often has two non shooters out there when Gobert and McDaniels are playing.

I've called for Jokic to look to score more, and he did last night. It was amazing.

[CobraCommander]

Much of that was accumulated after the game was out of hand, on the back of a big first half from Murray and the supporting cast. He had 8 points at halftime. It was a good game, not amazing by any means. Last night was.

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

This guy only values points per game. It's going to be impossible to explain to him that Jokic's game is built on his ability to create for others and through that his team wins games.

Just like Gobert is only playing good defense if he has a lot of blocks or steals, never mind he changes the geometry of the court and consistently makes the right reads and responses. Never mind his team is better with him on the court. And similarly, anytime someone scores in the paint on the Nuggets, it'll be Jokic's fault.

And remember, if you think Gobert or Jokic is great, you're a starts nerd. Also if Gobert doesn't get 5+ blocks or Jokic doesn't get 35+ points....they played bad because of you know...their stats.

Again I look to dhsilv2 to explain the importance of nuance and the true impact on winning. What makes Jokic better than anyone else isnt his scoring and what makes Rudy great isn’t just blocks…. It’s creating the offense and running or creating the defense by playing the way they do respectively.


It’s the hockey assist, the gravity, getting the ball to Murray and making the correct switch or pick at the end of the game so he has a chance to score, it’s the humility to not question the call in the huddle that gives the ball the Murray when Murray is struggling… it’s getting on his team mates when they miss plays but not making them look like idiots -

With Rudy it’s playing his part every time down the floor on defense and offense. Even if they lose to Denver, I think the wolves on the right path.

Keep teaching lol

[hardenASG13]

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

This guy only values points per game. It's going to be impossible to explain to him that Jokic's game is built on his ability to create for others and through that his team wins games.

Just like Gobert is only playing good defense if he has a lot of blocks or steals, never mind he changes the geometry of the court and consistently makes the right reads and responses. Never mind his team is better with him on the court. And similarly, anytime someone scores in the paint on the Nuggets, it'll be Jokic's fault.

And remember, if you think Gobert or Jokic is great, you're a starts nerd. Also if Gobert doesn't get 5+ blocks or Jokic doesn't get 35+ points....they played bad because of you know...their stats.

Again I look to dhsilv2 to explain the importance of nuance and the true impact on winning. What makes Jokic better than anyone else isnt his scoring and what makes Rudy great isn’t just blocks…. It’s creating the offense and running or creating the defense by playing the way they do respectively.


It’s the hockey assist, the gravity, getting the ball to Murray and making the correct switch or pick at the end of the game so he has a chance to score, it’s the humility to not question the call in the huddle that gives the ball the Murray when Murray is struggling… it’s getting on his team mates when they miss plays but not making them look like idiots -

With Rudy it’s playing his part every time down the floor on defense and offense. Even if they lose to Denver, I think the wolves on the right path.

Keep teaching lol

He's not teaching anything. All that stuff is obvious. He also said Gobert was the best player for Minnesota in game 1 where he had 6 points and Edward's had 43. No amount of being in the right position on defense can make up for that scoring difference to reasonably have that take.

[dhsilv2]

Nah man. Most of that was by the end of the 3rd quarter. 4 points in the 4th.

Unless you want to argue the whole 3rd quarter is garbage time despite it being only a 15 point game at half

This guy only values points per game. It's going to be impossible to explain to him that Jokic's game is built on his ability to create for others and through that his team wins games.

Just like Gobert is only playing good defense if he has a lot of blocks or steals, never mind he changes the geometry of the court and consistently makes the right reads and responses. Never mind his team is better with him on the court. And similarly, anytime someone scores in the paint on the Nuggets, it'll be Jokic's fault.

And remember, if you think Gobert or Jokic is great, you're a starts nerd. Also if Gobert doesn't get 5+ blocks or Jokic doesn't get 35+ points....they played bad because of you know...their stats.

Gobert being a zero on offense and being as slow as he is on defense hasn't exactly helped the last few games.

Just because I don't make outrageous claims, like Gobert was the best player for Minnesota in game 1 (where Edwards had 43 points and Gobert had 6. If you've ever played in a basketball game, you'd know if a guy has 43, he had a better game than someone who scored 6) or that Mutumbo was more valuable to the 01 sixers than Allen Iverson, doesn't mean all I value is points. I understand Jokic creates for others. I also understand his team was unconscious shooting the ball from 3 last night, and always having 5 guys who can shoot it from outside on the court is an advantage for them this series, as opposed to Minnesota who often has two non shooters out there when Gobert and McDaniels are playing.

I've called for Jokic to look to score more, and he did last night. It was amazing.

Gobert isn't slow at all...he's one of the most mobile big men at his size we've seen. I just don't even know how to respond to just obviously false statements.

And meanwhile the Nuggets don't have 5 guys who can shoot at all times. The biggest reason they lost game 1 was the inability to use Gordon which was heavily the work of Gobert. Gordon has responded by confidently taking 3's despite being a 30% shooter from out there and it's working.

Now all your "Bro" talk aside with the 40 points stuff. I do agree that Gobert has a small negative impact on offense. He however is far more than making up for it on the defensive end. The problem as ANT very clearly laid things out...it's just REALLY hard to beat a team when their offense has a guy like Jokic who just doesn't make mistakes in terms of decision making. As long as the Nuggets are able to avoid turnovers and protect the ball, the Wolves are going to either need cold shooting or absolutely perfect defensive execution to win this series. As I laid our before, ANT can drop 40 a game...that won't win them the series. They have to win on defense, that's what got them here, and that's where they have to win. And defense is always a team effort, and with the wolves it's a team effort built around Gobert.

[hardenASG13]

This guy only values points per game. It's going to be impossible to explain to him that Jokic's game is built on his ability to create for others and through that his team wins games.

Just like Gobert is only playing good defense if he has a lot of blocks or steals, never mind he changes the geometry of the court and consistently makes the right reads and responses. Never mind his team is better with him on the court. And similarly, anytime someone scores in the paint on the Nuggets, it'll be Jokic's fault.

And remember, if you think Gobert or Jokic is great, you're a starts nerd. Also if Gobert doesn't get 5+ blocks or Jokic doesn't get 35+ points....they played bad because of you know...their stats.

Gobert being a zero on offense and being as slow as he is on defense hasn't exactly helped the last few games.

Just because I don't make outrageous claims, like Gobert was the best player for Minnesota in game 1 (where Edwards had 43 points and Gobert had 6. If you've ever played in a basketball game, you'd know if a guy has 43, he had a better game than someone who scored 6) or that Mutumbo was more valuable to the 01 sixers than Allen Iverson, doesn't mean all I value is points. I understand Jokic creates for others. I also understand his team was unconscious shooting the ball from 3 last night, and always having 5 guys who can shoot it from outside on the court is an advantage for them this series, as opposed to Minnesota who often has two non shooters out there when Gobert and McDaniels are playing.

I've called for Jokic to look to score more, and he did last night. It was amazing.

Gobert isn't slow at all...he's one of the most mobile big men at his size we've seen. I just don't even know how to respond to just obviously false statements.

And meanwhile the Nuggets don't have 5 guys who can shoot at all times. The biggest reason they lost game 1 was the inability to use Gordon which was heavily the work of Gobert. Gordon has responded by confidently taking 3's despite being a 30% shooter from out there and it's working.

Now all your "Bro" talk aside with the 40 points stuff. I do agree that Gobert has a small negative impact on offense. He however is far more than making up for it on the defensive end. The problem as ANT very clearly laid things out...it's just REALLY hard to beat a team when their offense has a guy like Jokic who just doesn't make mistakes in terms of decision making. As long as the Nuggets are able to avoid turnovers and protect the ball, the Wolves are going to either need cold shooting or absolutely perfect defensive execution to win this series. As I laid our before, ANT can drop 40 a game...that won't win them the series. They have to win on defense, that's what got them here, and that's where they have to win. And defense is always a team effort, and with the wolves it's a team effort built around Gobert.

But if their defense can stop Denver either way (I don't expect Denver to continue shooting it like that), won't they need to play better offensively to win this series?

The Nuggets don't have 5 guys who can shoot at all times? Who do they play who isn't a threat to shoot. Why have they benched watson, who is a defender?

Do you think Gobert had a better game than Edwards in game 4 with his positioning and stuff? It's just as outrageous as saying he did in game 1.

[lessthanjake]

Lebron was their best defender. Do you know the details of those 21(!) Total minutes? Was it garbage time? Long stretches (no)? With alot of bench players in for Detroit, a limited offense to begin with?

Jokic was a plus 3 last night. So Denver won by 5 in the 9 minutes he was off the floor. That must mean Jokic wasn't their best player by your logic then, right?

None of it was garbage time. There wasn’t even really any garbage time in the entire series, since all but one of the games was close and LeBron was in until the end of the game in the game that wasn’t very close.

And there’s really no basis for the claim that LeBron was the best defender on the 2007 Cavs. People did not believe that at the time, nor do impact stats say that that’s the case (there’s multiple Cavs ahead of him in DRAPM that season, and either way the team’s DRTG with him on and off the court was virtually identical).

And no, I’m not saying that plus-minus in small samples is super meaningful. But the problem is that the claim I was responding to included saying that LeBron’s defense carried the team, and there’s nothing that tells us that. That isn’t indicated by regular season impact data or plus-minus. It’s not indicated by any contemporaneous accolades regarding LeBron’s defense, or just how his defense was talked about at the time. Nor is it backed by how the defense did without him on the floor in that particular series. You might be able to draw a parallel with Jokic regarding the final point there (since plus-minus in small samples is super noisy), but you absolutely cannot draw a parallel with all those points, since Jokic was MVP this year and had enormous impact stats. The case that LeBron was the primary driver of the 2007 Cavs’ defense is extremely weak, and the case that Jokic is the primary driver of the 2024 Nuggets being a really good team is extremely strong. (Meanwhile, of course, the case that the 2007 Cavs were carried by their defense is really just inarguably correct, so LeBron not being the primary driver on that side of the ball leads to an obvious conclusion regarding whether LeBron carried the team).

Cleveland went from perennial finals contender to worst team in the conference immediately after Lebron left. He was the driving force.

That was 4 years after the 2007 year that we are talking about. It was also with a completely different coach—not Mike Brown, who was an incredible defensive coach and was a huge reason for the team’s defensive greatness. They also had a substantially different roster (even as compared to what they had in LeBron’s final year there, let alone in 2007) and injuries to several of the team’s best players. There’s only two players who were on both the 2007 Cavs and 2011 Cavs, and one of them missed most of the 2011 season (and the other was Daniel Gibson). Furthermore, they were purposely tanking in 2011. I don’t see how this has any relevance to whether LeBron carried the team in 2007.

[flow]

What is this, are you seriously suggesting Murray isn't a top 30 player now? Come on man, be serious. He's top 20 at worst, with Jokic having multiple other top 40ish players. I'm not going to say the nuggets are the most stacked team in the NBA, but they for sure have one of the top 3 rosters in the NBA and Murray is the best closer in the game. Jokic is a great 40 minute player, but we've seen what he is without Murray for an entire season and now in these playoffs. He's good, but he's not ATG unless you're just Boxscore watching. Sometimes we say players are more than the sum of their parts, like a butler. But Jokic is less than the sum of his parts. The stats are deceiving.

OP, I can't believe ur actually doubling down on of the worst takes in RealGM history haha

fwiw, rs Murray is NOT a top 30 player, period but it'd be hard to argue he isn't a top 30 player in the playoffs, because he is. he's probably right around there tbh. the "closer" argument is absouletly ridicilous because a,) Jokic is a hell of a closer and he proved it over and over in both the rs and the playoffs and B.) Murray plays off Jokic and his immense gravity - put him on the Pistons and let him "close" see where that gets ya

Jokic is the defintion of being "more than the sum of his parts" (or stats), so much of what he does isn't captured in the boxscore, much more so than other superstars, even moreso than his gaudy all-around stats suggest, not to mention his numbers aren't capturing his leadership (on and off the court), his control of the game, directing traffic on both offense and defense. I mean some of it is captured by impact stats obviously but def not in raw stats

the "we've seen what he's like without Murray" is a ridicilous argument and disingenious at that - Jokic not only played that whole season without his #2, he also played without his #3 (MPJ). both happen to be max players, so there was a whole season of two max players sitting on the bench and Jokic carried Campazzo, Austin Rivers and Will Barton almost to 50 wins

the guys who were in the rotation that year (aside from AG) were basically out of the league the next season.
that's not the same as "playing without Murray" now, is it? lmfao

p.s, losing the first two games of this series with Murray going something like 3-18 from the field, isn't the same as "playing without Murray" either, it's playing with a huge net negative that is Murray (in those games), that's hardly the same thing

you doubling down on this stupidity is pure entertainment

He's a top 10 player in the playoffs.

.