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

[TheFire]

I've been saying this since his first mvp. He's an incredible system player, but he lacks competitive fire and toughness to be an ATG player. His MVP as a 6 seed will be locked at as THE worst mvp season in history. It'll make the Rose and Nash wins seem unanimous.

Jokic is a guy that needs a superstar like Murray to make his game work. He can't take over without that second punch on the perimeter the way other ATGs could. Now that Murray has been exposed, so has Jokic. What's funny is that those really watching told you this year's ago when he only got the sixth seed without him.

To me he is the third best player in the NBA - Luka and Embiid are comfortably ahead of him. Last year he took advantage of an injured field, and a weakened conference in a transition year. He had Murray playing like a superstar and to his credit got it done. But his awards don't match his greatness and in a few years everyone will come around to what I'm saying here right now.

Has anyone heard from this guy?

[Kawaii Leonard]

Every player in sports history needs to be utilized to their strengths to maximize their strengths. Curry having a coach that lets him do what he’s good at doesn’t change the fact he was always this good just underutilized.

I don’t understand how this is some ‘got ya’. He was grossly misused by a stupid coach.

If you told Jordan to play offball all game, run off screens and shoot 14 three pointers every game he’d have been considerably worse and less impactful than he was running the triangle. Is Jordan a system player? Or would that be stupid coaching.

It’s almost like that is called coaching and having a game plan? Thanks for clearing that up.

There’s levels to this. And you’re reaching really far to make this compare to having MJ play Steph’s game. Jordan would thrive in any system, even in Kerr’s movement one. I’m not so sure you could say the same for Steph.

Playing in a system that grossly misused his skillset, he made all NBA second team and won a playoff series before he turned 26. Grossly misused and before his prime he was a top 10 player.

I mentioned you can still be a star outside of the system, you most benefitted from. As the 1st option, Curry is not winning a ring outside a system that reassembles Kerr’s. Take MJ out of the triangle and use him like Curry for the mid-range instead (a la Rip Hamilton), you’re still winning.

[tsherkin]

Take MJ out of the triangle and use him like Curry for the mid-range instead (a la Rip Hamilton), you’re still winning.

That doesn't make a lick of sense.

[Ambrose]

I'm OP and I can't deny Jokic looking like the best player right now. If he wins the ring this year I'll admit hes an ATG and the best player in the world. Still a series and a half left though

You said Luka and Embiid were better than him. Luka missed the play in tournament last year, Embiid still hasn’t made the conference finals, and Jokic won it all last year, becoming the first player to lead the playoffs in points, rebounds, and assists.

You were proven wrong before you ever created this thread.

Healthy Luka and Embiid are at least equal to Joker. If he wins this title then he will have earned an edge

It's the other way around. They have to win something to get on his level.

[Roger Murdock]

It’s almost like that is called coaching and having a game plan? Thanks for clearing that up.

There’s levels to this. And you’re reaching really far to make this compare to having MJ play Steph’s game. Jordan would thrive in any system, even in Kerr’s movement one. I’m not so sure you could say the same for Steph.

Playing in a system that grossly misused his skillset, he made all NBA second team and won a playoff series before he turned 26. Grossly misused and before his prime he was a top 10 player.

I mentioned you can still be a star outside of the system, you most benefitted from. As the 1st option, Curry is not winning a ring outside a system that reassembles Kerr’s. Take MJ out of the triangle and use him like Curry for the mid-range instead (a la Rip Hamilton), you’re still winning.

The issue is that what you are proposing isn’t useful, insightful, or interesting

Players are better when used properly and worse when used improperly. Woahhh you’re soooo smart for thinking that. So brave of you!

What’s your point? That if Curry was grossly misused throughout his career then he would have been less successful? No ****. Why should we discount his career when that applies to every player in sports history. Why not use, I dunno, what actually happened as the benchmark instead of stupid hypotheticals?

There’s literally no value to your line of thinking.

[Kawaii Leonard]

Take MJ out of the triangle and use him like Curry for the mid-range instead (a la Rip Hamilton), you’re still winning.

That doesn't make a lick of sense.

A hypothetical to prove my point that other all-time greats would win in other systems, while Curry wouldn’t because he has a very niche skillset of being the goat shooter but can’t create his best looks without Kerr’s system doesn’t make a lick of sense to you? Take another walk brother, we’ve been done here.

[Kawaii Leonard]

Playing in a system that grossly misused his skillset, he made all NBA second team and won a playoff series before he turned 26. Grossly misused and before his prime he was a top 10 player.

I mentioned you can still be a star outside of the system, you most benefitted from. As the 1st option, Curry is not winning a ring outside a system that reassembles Kerr’s. Take MJ out of the triangle and use him like Curry for the mid-range instead (a la Rip Hamilton), you’re still winning.

The issue is that what you are proposing isn’t useful, insightful, or interesting

Players are better when used properly and worse when used improperly. Woahhh you’re soooo smart for thinking that. So brave of you!

What’s your point? That if Curry was grossly misused throughout his career then he would have been less successful? No ****. Why should we discount his career when that applies to every player in sports history. Why not use, I dunno, what actually happened as the benchmark instead of stupid hypotheticals?

There’s literally no value to your line of thinking.

So he’s a system player. Great chat. Watch some TED talks next for your need of useful, insightful and interesting discourse instead of a sports forum board, while crying about terminology and their proper usage.

[KodiakBear]

You said Luka and Embiid were better than him. Luka missed the play in tournament last year, Embiid still hasn’t made the conference finals, and Jokic won it all last year, becoming the first player to lead the playoffs in points, rebounds, and assists.

You were proven wrong before you ever created this thread.

Healthy Luka and Embiid are at least equal to Joker. If he wins this title then he will have earned an edge

It's the other way around. They have to win something to get on his level.

100%. It is crazy the disrespect the Joker gets. Seriously, not only is he a champion and Finals MVP(and was the lead dog on a team who blitzed the playoffs 16-4), look at what he did just these past 3 games. His team was in a bad 0-2 hole; everyone counting them out. He goes and drops 24/14/9/3/3, 35/7/7 and 40/7/13 all on very efficient FG% to lead his team to 3 big wins. Imagine Joel "second round Mcgrady" Embiid doing that? You can't.

[tsherkin]

A hypothetical to prove my point that other all-time greats would win in other systems, while Curry wouldn’t because he has a very niche skillset of being the goat shooter but can’t create his best looks without Kerr’s system doesn’t make a lick of sense to you? Take another walk brother, we’ve been done here.

No, you keep peddling BS and then trying to slough it off as if this is my problem, but holy beans, man.

Jordan in a Rip Hamilton role does not create high-level offense, nor does it shift the D the same way he did with his dribble penetration. It's just... odd. Jordan specifically needed a given style of structure and spacing to enable him, just like any other star needs a given degree of structure. You exhibit this odd disrespect for Curry, and cleave to this strange notion that only Kerr's system would lead to a title while claiming that Jordan (who demonstrably won nothing without Phil or the structure of the triangle and the other talent around him) would magically win because... why, exactly? Reasons (TM)?

That's not an effective example at all.

[Roger Murdock]

I mentioned you can still be a star outside of the system, you most benefitted from. As the 1st option, Curry is not winning a ring outside a system that reassembles Kerr’s. Take MJ out of the triangle and use him like Curry for the mid-range instead (a la Rip Hamilton), you’re still winning.

The issue is that what you are proposing isn’t useful, insightful, or interesting

Players are better when used properly and worse when used improperly. Woahhh you’re soooo smart for thinking that. So brave of you!

What’s your point? That if Curry was grossly misused throughout his career then he would have been less successful? No ****. Why should we discount his career when that applies to every player in sports history. Why not use, I dunno, what actually happened as the benchmark instead of stupid hypotheticals?

There’s literally no value to your line of thinking.

So he’s a system player. Great chat. Watch some TED talks next for your need of useful, insightful and interesting discourse instead of a sports forum board, while crying about terminology and their proper usage.

Everyone is a system player

[Kawaii Leonard]

A hypothetical to prove my point that other all-time greats would win in other systems, while Curry wouldn’t because he has a very niche skillset of being the goat shooter but can’t create his best looks without Kerr’s system doesn’t make a lick of sense to you? Take another walk brother, we’ve been done here.

No, you keep peddling BS and then trying to slough it off as if this is my problem, but holy beans, man.

Jordan in a Rip Hamilton role does not create high-level offense, nor does it shift the D the same way he did with his dribble penetration. It's just... odd. Jordan specifically needed a given style of structure and spacing to enable him, just like any other star needs a given degree of structure. You exhibit this odd disrespect for Curry, and cleave to this strange notion that only Kerr's system would lead to a title while claiming that Jordan (who demonstrably won nothing without Phil or the structure of the triangle and the other talent around him) would magically win because... why, exactly? Reasons (TM)?

That's not an effective example at all.

Same sentiments right back to you for not seeing something so in your face that you can’t miss even if you’re Stevie Wonder. Imho Curry is blatantly a system player and you’ve yet to come up with anything meaningful to change my mind but say I’m spitting vapid non-sense or peddling bs. Throughout this all I’ve presented you clear examples of my take. You on other hand have been just criticizing my takes just for the sake of continuing this yappathon with no substance or meaning. Just like this very reply, take the hypothetical with a grain of salt instead of analyzing everything by face value. No shot that would be a very inefficient way to utilize Jordan’s strengths. That’s why it is a hypothetical, but it doesn’t make it any less true. Perhaps that’s why your opinion on what a system player is so skewed. Literalist. Continue in your lane, live on that hill, and please stop quoting me. It’s better for the both of us. Also, holy beans

[Kawaii Leonard]

The issue is that what you are proposing isn’t useful, insightful, or interesting

Players are better when used properly and worse when used improperly. Woahhh you’re soooo smart for thinking that. So brave of you!

What’s your point? That if Curry was grossly misused throughout his career then he would have been less successful? No ****. Why should we discount his career when that applies to every player in sports history. Why not use, I dunno, what actually happened as the benchmark instead of stupid hypotheticals?

There’s literally no value to your line of thinking.

So he’s a system player. Great chat. Watch some TED talks next for your need of useful, insightful and interesting discourse instead of a sports forum board, while crying about terminology and their proper usage.

Everyone is a system player

I’m okay with that statement. But with that, there are players who are literally the system. I recommend watching some Jokic. He is the very definition of that.

[sp6r=underrated]

My understanding is that the term “system player” dates to American football in the early 90s. It meant players who put up huge numbers but weren’t really moving the needle for their teams. That was a useful term as there are players who aren’t helping their team.

On realgm, system player now means a player who lacks flexibility in providing lift. This could mean a player who only helps his team that plays relatively slow or a player who must play on-ball. This meaning has way less utility as only a handful of players in NBA history provide high lift no matter the system. And realgm uses this lack of flexibility to indict the value they provide in a proper environment for their talents. That is nuts.

[tsherkin]

Everyone is a system player

I think clarity has been achieved on this one, hey?

[tsherkin]

Throughout this all I’ve presented you clear examples of my take.

No you haven't. Not one. Everything you've said has been right out there, and you haven't responded to any of the criticisms leveled against you by any of the posters in this discussion with any level of efficacy.

[Kawaii Leonard]

Throughout this all I’ve presented you clear examples of my take.

No you haven't. Not one. Everything you've said has been right out there, and you haven't responded to any of the criticisms leveled against you by any of the posters in this discussion with any level of efficacy.

There’s no way in hell you’re this dense irl.

[tsherkin]

Throughout this all I’ve presented you clear examples of my take.

No you haven't. Not one. Everything you've said has been right out there, and you haven't responded to any of the criticisms leveled against you by any of the posters in this discussion with any level of efficacy.

There’s no way in hell you’re this dense irl.

You have surely presented your take. You have clearly outlined what you think is relevant stuff, for sure. But none of it has been effective demonstration of the point you're trying to make, in case my remark was unclear.

[Kawaii Leonard]

My understanding is that the term “system player” dates to American football in the early 90s. It meant players who put up huge numbers but weren’t really moving the needle for their teams. That was a useful term as there are players who aren’t helping their team.

On realgm, system player now means a player who lacks flexibility in providing lift. This could mean a player who only helps his team that plays relatively slow or a player who must play on-ball. This meaning has way less utility as only a handful of players in NBA history provide high lift no matter the system. And realgm uses this lack of flexibility to indict the value they provide in a proper environment for their talents. That is nuts.

Finally something insightful. The bolded part was exactly my take from the beginning. Call it whatever you’d like, but Curry cannot do that and it’s limited to just one fashion.

[alevirfe]

the irony is that this post actually applies to Anthony Edwards (and not Jokic)

[WarriorGM]

My understanding is that the term “system player” dates to American football in the early 90s. It meant players who put up huge numbers but weren’t really moving the needle for their teams. That was a useful term as there are players who aren’t helping their team.

On realgm, system player now means a player who lacks flexibility in providing lift. This could mean a player who only helps his team that plays relatively slow or a player who must play on-ball. This meaning has way less utility as only a handful of players in NBA history provide high lift no matter the system. And realgm uses this lack of flexibility to indict the value they provide in a proper environment for their talents. That is nuts.

Finally something insightful. The bolded part was exactly my take from the beginning. Call it whatever you’d like, but Curry cannot do that imo and it’s limited to just one fashion.

Curry and I are still in your head?

The arguments against Curry have always been theoretical but the reality of Curry has shown those theoretical arguments didn't really matter next to what Curry brings. Curry's too small? Curry's not a good defender? Curry's just a jump shooter? Didn't stop him from winning—and not just winning—dominating.

System player? Curry in Davidson? Curry with Mark Jackson? Curry with Kerr before KD? Curry with KD? Curry after KD? Greatness all the way. Was the same "system" played throughout? Nope.

It's interesting Curry is being brought up after Jokic's performance in the last game. Did it show Jokic was clearly better? It seemed like a more complete performance but in perhaps the aspect that was most impressive about it, the efficiency, it's still not clearly better than a comparable great game from Curry.