Which center is Jokic going to knock off from Top 5?

[Johnny Tomala]

1. Russell
2. KAJ
3. Wilt
4. Hakeem
5. Shaq

If he knocks somebody it's gonna be Shaq. But he is way behind him so far.

[tsherkin]

Well, I have tracked around 40 Shaq games from 2000-01 and his foul rate in post up possessions is only 48%. It's better than Kareem for example (36%), but nothing ground-breaking.

Even if you look at absolute numbers, Shaq looks like one of the best ever at that, but not much better than Moses/Wilt/Embiid.

We can wipe Embiid away because he's a dirty flop artist. But Wilt and Moses were both legit, extremely adept at drawing fouls. At Wilt's shooting volume early on in his career, .400+ was amazing from 60-66. And 67-73, .695???!? Absurd. 01-11, Shaq was at .631. As their shooting volume came down and they used fewer hooks and what-not and more of their possessions were about quick moves in close, it was just absurd.

Moses was himself an excellent flop artist

Yeah, okay, that's fair. Maybe I should be kinder to Embiid, I just don't like him because he's such a flagrant douche about it. But the Moses point is fair xD

[Cavsfansince84]

I don't think its fair to compare the foul drawing rates of Wilt&Shaq to other atg centers without also adding the context of them being all time bad ft shooters.

[tsherkin]

I don't think its fair to compare the foul drawing rates of Wilt&Shaq to other atg centers without also adding the context of them being all time bad ft shooters.

This assumes that a huge portion of their draw rate stems from hack-a-Wilt/Shaq, when they actually just drew fouls quite well.

[Cavsfansince84]

This assumes that a huge portion of their draw rate stems from hack-a-Wilt/Shaq, when they actually just drew fouls quite well.

I wouldn't say it assumes a huge portion. Just that its part of why they had the foul rates they had. If they'd both been say 70-75% ft shooters I think those rates would be somewhat lower. How much idk but definitely lower.

[tsherkin]

This assumes that a huge portion of their draw rate stems from hack-a-Wilt/Shaq, when they actually just drew fouls quite well.

I wouldn't say it assumes a huge portion. Just that its part of why they had the foul rates they had. If they'd both been say 70-75% ft shooters I think those rates would be somewhat lower. How much idk but definitely lower.

I doubt that, to be honest.

[70sFan]

I feel you are forcing your points though, because nobody is arguing that alone make shaq a better player. Just like I don't agree sky hook alone makes Kareem a better player.
The other fouls are a big difference between Shaq and KAJ. Shaq routinely established himself in the paint and it would have been too late when he was in shooting motion. Lots of the fouls Shaq drew were to give him free throws and prevent him from shooting field goals. Again this is a double sword as it is connected to him being a bad free throw shooter.

I'm not forcing anything, the discussion started with your sentence:

"His great post up opportunities usually ended up with being fouls on the other teams due to hack a shaq"

I provided numbers showing that they didn't usually end up with being fouls, because teams can't just foul Shaq most of the time he catches the ball down low.

I'm not trying to argue that Kareem (or someone else) is superior, I'm just stating that people usually equate Shaq's dominance with him being unstoppable in the post, but it wasn't what made him unique and it's not something that went beyond what other great centers provided.

Exactly, you conveniently removed all the "post up opportunities ended up being fouls". Otherwise, KAJ's career average fta is 6.0, he only had several seasons averaged more than 6.2 as you accounted. For Shaq 01 season you counted 7.1FTA, his averaged 13.1 FTA. Where do you think that extra 6 FTAs coming from? I can guarantee they were not from 3pt line or all phantom calls. Not giving him a chance to post up by fouling sometimes may mean other teams are afraid of Shaq's dominance in the post. Those extra FTAs not only put other teams' frontline into foul trouble, but also gave Shaq's entire team advantage of going to the line earlier.

I didn't remove "conveniently" anything, I just said I tracked shooting fouls only. You can do your own tracking work if you don't like mine. Just please, do not accuse me of manipulation.

Do you know where Shaq's additional 6 FTA were coming from? Because I know and I can tell you, but only if you are willing to have a normal conversation without strange accusations.

[iggymcfrack]

I don't think its fair to compare the foul drawing rates of Wilt&Shaq to other atg centers without also adding the context of them being all time bad ft shooters.

This assumes that a huge portion of their draw rate stems from hack-a-Wilt/Shaq, when they actually just drew fouls quite well.

No, not at all. Intentionally fouling because they actually shoot so bad you WANT them at the line in some late game situations is one thing, but just in the regular course of play, there will be a lot of situations where it makes a lot of sense to wrap up a 51-53% shooter like Shaq or Wilt to keep them from getting a 60-65% look near the basket when that would be a clear mistake against better shooters like Duncan, Hakeem, and Kareem who shoot 70-72% from the line.

[tsherkin]

No, not at all. Intentionally fouling because they actually shoot so bad you WANT them at the line in some late game situations is one thing, but just in the regular course of play, there will be a lot of situations where it makes a lot of sense to wrap up a 51-53% shooter like Shaq or Wilt to keep them from getting a 60-65% look near the basket when that would be a clear mistake against better shooters like Duncan, Hakeem, and Kareem who shoot 70-72% from the line.

Yeah, but my response is mostly going to be "try again" when we're looking at wings who shoot 85% and still draw at .500+, or someone like Embiid who draws at .557 and is an 88% FT shooter so far this season, you know what I mean?

It feels like a major overestimation to suggest that their draw rate was heavily influenced by that.

[Owly]

I don't think its fair to compare the foul drawing rates of Wilt&Shaq to other atg centers without also adding the context of them being all time bad ft shooters.

This assumes that a huge portion of their draw rate stems from hack-a-Wilt/Shaq, when they actually just drew fouls quite well.

... well, it's literally called "Hack-a-Shaq" so it's probably not "just" that he drew fouls well. That could be the clear, vast majority but to say it's "just" his ability to put defenders in tough positions is implicitly denying Hack-a-Shaq exists.

[tsherkin]

I don't think its fair to compare the foul drawing rates of Wilt&Shaq to other atg centers without also adding the context of them being all time bad ft shooters.

This assumes that a huge portion of their draw rate stems from hack-a-Wilt/Shaq, when they actually just drew fouls quite well.

... well, it's literally called "Hack-a-Shaq" so it's probably not "just" that he drew fouls well. That could be the clear, vast majority but to say it's "just" his ability to put defenders in tough positions is implicitly denying Hack-a-Shaq exists.

Right, that was a specific strategy at times, for sure, but if you think that happened literally from the start of his career forward, then you're literally just looking for reasons to crap on Shaq. He had a .550+ FTr as a rookie, never dropped under .483, and only dropped under .500 in a single season of 55+ GP. That didn't happen just because he was getting wrapped up because he was bad at the line. That happened because of his proportion of buckets inside 3 feet and his frequency of dunks, etc.

[Cavsfansince84]

Yeah, but my response is mostly going to be "try again" when we're looking at wings who shoot 85% and still draw at .500+, or someone like Embiid who draws at .557 and is an 88% FT shooter so far this season, you know what I mean?

It feels like a major overestimation to suggest that their draw rate was heavily influenced by that.

There's a difference in saying context is useful to understanding a given data point and inferring that it heavily influenced something. If we are going to specifically look at foul drawing as a point of comparison I would say that any and all context should be looked into. That's the only point I was making re ft shooting. Just as with Embiid or Harden I would add the context of how fouls are called in recent years. Context to me isn't a bad thing when trying to compare players from different eras.

[tsherkin]

Yeah, but my response is mostly going to be "try again" when we're looking at wings who shoot 85% and still draw at .500+, or someone like Embiid who draws at .557 and is an 88% FT shooter so far this season, you know what I mean?

It feels like a major overestimation to suggest that their draw rate was heavily influenced by that.

There's a difference in saying context is useful to understanding a given data point and inferring that it heavily influenced something. If we are going to specifically look at foul drawing as a point of comparison I would say that any and all context should be looked into. That's the only point I was making re ft shooting. Just as with Embiid or Harden I would add the context of how fouls are called in recent years. Context to me isn't a bad thing when trying to compare players from different eras.

Phrasing and implication matter, too, though. Describing hack-a-shaq/wilt as you did implies that it was a driving force for their rate, when in truth the playstyle and type of shots generated were much more important.

[Cavsfansince84]

Phrasing and implication matter, too, though. Describing hack-a-shaq/wilt as you did implies that it was a driving force for their rate, when in truth the playstyle and type of shots generated were much more important.

I think you read way more into it than was implied tbh but people read things in their own way. All I said is that their ft shooting is context that should be considered when looking at their ftr. With Shaq probably more so than Wilt. I mean if a discussion is purely based on ftr then I think its relevant.

[tsherkin]

I think you read way more into it than was implied tbh but people read things in their own way. All I said is that their ft shooting is context that should be considered when looking at their ftr. With Shaq probably more so than Wilt. I mean if a discussion is purely based on ftr then I think its relevant.

No, I feel you. I don't mind that you raised the point, I think it's just inconsequential next to his play style and the nature of the shots which that playstyle generated. If he were a 75% FT shooter, it wouldn't have mattered on the season, it would have mattered in some playoff games and end-game scenarios, which wouldn't influence the overall volume of FTAs he generated. Possessions versus seasons.


D-Rob was a 74% FT shooter or so on his career and he drew at .577, for another example. Didn't inhibit him one bit, and that was during the same era.

[EmpireFalls]

Forget center, if he keeps this up I legitimately don’t see how you leave him out of the Jordan or LeBron conversation.

[zero rings]

He can potentially knock off all of them. I don’t think any of those guys had a better peak than Jokic, so it’s just a matter of staying healthy and motivated into his late 30’s.

[ty 4191]

He can potentially knock off all of them. I don’t think any of those guys had a better peak than Jokic, so it’s just a matter of staying healthy and motivated into his late 30’s.

Greatest offensive peak in NBA history.

Perhaps best offensive player, period, in NBA history.

Greatest passing center in NBA history. By a ridiculous margin!

Career Regular Season:



Career Playoffs:



Almost certainly the greatest shooter in NBA history from 5-15 feet and it's laughable how much better he is than everyone else since 1996-1997:



His 4 season run (2020-2021 through 2023-2024) here is one of the greatest ever. Certainly the greatest all around, offensively.

[ty 4191]

4 SDs above the mean for Jokic from 3-10 feet? And that doesn’t even give account to volume. I wonder how many SDs above the mean is Curry’s 3 pt shooting in comparison.

Jokic from 3-10 feet versus everyone else since 1996-1997?



Jokic's .555 FG% from 3-10 feet is actually 3.4 SD above the mean- I ballparked 4 SD..... which is laugh out loud funny and seems impossible (I ran Z scores for the 30 players with 3000+ attempts since 1996-1997). 3000+ FGA is not a small sample size, at all, for Jokic, or, for the other 29 players. That's a ton of attempts per player the last 27 seasons.

And since you asked, ye shall receive: Here's Steph Curry compared to everyone else since the three point line was instituted with 5000+ 3PA.



Steph Z Score: 2.08 (2.08 SD above the mean). Jokic at 3.4 SD above the mean for 3-10 feet.

Also, FWIW here's the all time leaders in FG% from 10-15 feet, min, 1000 FGA since 1996-1997 (123 qualifying players):



Jokic Z Score: 2.86 (.518 career FG%)

Notables, among big names since 1996-1997:

Durant: .473 (1267 attempts)
Olajuwon: .448 (1276 attempts)
Embiid: .438 (1436 attempts)
Kobe: .434 (4236 attempts)
Michael Jordan: .431 (1876 attempts)
Tim Duncan: .411 (4826 attempts)
Ewing: .397 (1273 attempts)
Westbook: .389 (2983 attempts)
Iverson: .372 (3100 attempts)
Karl Malone: .368 (1938 attempts)
Lebron James: .368 (3053 attempts)
Jason Kidd: .337 (last, with 1358 attempts)

And finally, to substantiate the claim that Jokic is one of THE best shooters of all time, and maybe THE best (from all distances, overall/combined) since 1996-1997..... here is Jokic's career 3P% in the playoffs among all players with high volume (4+ 3PA/G & Min. 50 games played in the playoffs):