2024-25 NBA Season Discussion

[Special_Puppy]

[list=][/list]

I think Denver's supporting cast is underrated. Jamal Murray and Aaron Gordon aren't sexy names, but we can't deny the massive impact they've had in the playoffs and the roles they've played in Denver's successes. Do the Nuggets beat the Lakers in ANY of their matchups without Jamal Murray? Maybe the last time they played each other, because he was bad overall, but he also hit a game winner to win one of those games IIRC.

I think Denver doesn't necessarily dominate the RS because they don't have consistently good players other than Jokic, that's true. But come playoff time? IDK, the supporting cast is pretty proven and usually comes through in a big way.

I think if you are ranking every single supporting cast in the league, I think you could argue the Nuggets wouldn’t crack the top 10. Thunder+Celtics+Cavs+Clippers+Warriors+TWolves+
Knicks+Grizzlies+Rockets+Lakers all arguably have better supporting casts around their best player

[jalengreen]

Would it be crazy to say that Giannis has a worse supporting cast than Jokic? Dame > Murray for sure but I really do not like the rest of that roster

[Peregrine01]

Would it be crazy to say that Giannis has a worse supporting cast than Jokic? Dame > Murray for sure but I really do not like the rest of that roster

This year without Giannis, the Bucks are putting up a -3.5 net rating. This year without Jokic, the Nuggets are putting up a -9.5 net rating. A 6 pt difference in net rating is basically the difference between a team like Boston and a team like Detroit.

[Mos_Heat]

Would it be crazy to say that Giannis has a worse supporting cast than Jokic? Dame > Murray for sure but I really do not like the rest of that roster

This year without Giannis, the Bucks are putting up a -3.5 net rating. This year without Jokic, the Nuggets are putting up a -9.5 net rating. A 6 pt difference in net rating is basically the difference between a team like Boston and a team like Detroit.

Nuggets would not be the 2nd worst team in the NBA without Jokic

[RCM88x]

Would it be crazy to say that Giannis has a worse supporting cast than Jokic? Dame > Murray for sure but I really do not like the rest of that roster

This year without Giannis, the Bucks are putting up a -3.5 net rating. This year without Jokic, the Nuggets are putting up a -9.5 net rating. A 6 pt difference in net rating is basically the difference between a team like Boston and a team like Detroit.

Nuggets would not be the 2nd worst team in the NBA without Jokic

I don't know, with a frontcourt rotation of DeAndre Jordan, Aaron Gordon and Zeke Nnaji they might be pretty close to it.

[AEnigma]

Over the past three years the Nuggets are 11-16 (-3.4) without Jokic, which makes the idea that they are some horrific team without him pretty untenable. A roster is not bad just because it is starter heavy (see also the 1997 Hawks, the 1997 Jazz, the 2013 Pacers…).

[tsherkin]

Over the past three years the Nuggets are 11-16 (-3.4) without Jokic, which makes the idea that they are some horrific team without him pretty untenable. A roster is not bad just because it is starter heavy (see also the 1997 Hawks, the 1997 Jazz, the 2013 Pacers…).

Do you have any strength of schedule info on those 27 games? It's probably pretty balanced, but I'm just curious.

[therealbig3]

I mean sometimes yes, teammates play bad and you don't get the help you need. But in Denver's actual title run, Jamal Murray played like a superstar, better than anything guys like Dame Lillard, or Devin Booker, or Anthony Edwards, or even Kyrie Irving ever did. Or at least comparable to Kyrie vs GS.

It's kind of a weird narrative to point to Murray when he didn't play well and act like that's what he brought to the table every playoff run, and woe is Jokic for having to carry his loser ass, when Denver likely loses to LA that year if it wasn't for Murray going nuclear. In fact, Jokic was the one relatively contained in that series.

Come playoff time, Murray is a more proven player than a lot of bigger name players that have made All-Star teams. Sure he played bad recently, and a lot of that is injuries as well, but that doesn't erase what he did contribute when Denver was successful. I don't really jive with the idea that Jokic not having much help now means he never had much help.

[Peregrine01]

I mean sometimes yes, teammates play bad and you don't get the help you need. But in Denver's actual title run, Jamal Murray played like a superstar, better than anything guys like Dame Lillard, or Devin Booker, or Anthony Edwards, or even Kyrie Irving ever did. Or at least comparable to Kyrie vs GS.

It's kind of a weird narrative to point to Murray when he didn't play well and act like that's what he brought to the table every playoff run, and woe is Jokic for having to carry his loser ass, when Denver likely loses to LA that year if it wasn't for Murray going nuclear. In fact, Jokic was the one relatively contained in that series.

Come playoff time, Murray is a more proven player than a lot of bigger name players that have made All-Star teams. Sure he played bad recently, and a lot of that is injuries as well, but that doesn't erase what he did contribute when Denver was successful. I don't really jive with the idea that Jokic not having much help now means he never had much help.

No one's making that argument. The problem with Murray has always been inconsistency and it's why he's never been an all-star. The one time he played like an all-star since Jokic became an MVP-level player they cruised to a championship.

[therealbig3]

I mean sometimes yes, teammates play bad and you don't get the help you need. But in Denver's actual title run, Jamal Murray played like a superstar, better than anything guys like Dame Lillard, or Devin Booker, or Anthony Edwards, or even Kyrie Irving ever did. Or at least comparable to Kyrie vs GS.

It's kind of a weird narrative to point to Murray when he didn't play well and act like that's what he brought to the table every playoff run, and woe is Jokic for having to carry his loser ass, when Denver likely loses to LA that year if it wasn't for Murray going nuclear. In fact, Jokic was the one relatively contained in that series.

Come playoff time, Murray is a more proven player than a lot of bigger name players that have made All-Star teams. Sure he played bad recently, and a lot of that is injuries as well, but that doesn't erase what he did contribute when Denver was successful. I don't really jive with the idea that Jokic not having much help now means he never had much help.

No one's making that argument. The problem with Murray has always been inconsistency and it's why he's never been an all-star. The one time he played like an all-star since Jokic became an MVP-level player they cruised to a championship.

“Played like an all-star” is still underselling the fact that he played like an MVP, top 5 level player. As if Jokic didn’t need all that much support, or as if that’s the usual level of help other superstars get out of their 2nd option.

[Peregrine01]

I mean sometimes yes, teammates play bad and you don't get the help you need. But in Denver's actual title run, Jamal Murray played like a superstar, better than anything guys like Dame Lillard, or Devin Booker, or Anthony Edwards, or even Kyrie Irving ever did. Or at least comparable to Kyrie vs GS.

It's kind of a weird narrative to point to Murray when he didn't play well and act like that's what he brought to the table every playoff run, and woe is Jokic for having to carry his loser ass, when Denver likely loses to LA that year if it wasn't for Murray going nuclear. In fact, Jokic was the one relatively contained in that series.

Come playoff time, Murray is a more proven player than a lot of bigger name players that have made All-Star teams. Sure he played bad recently, and a lot of that is injuries as well, but that doesn't erase what he did contribute when Denver was successful. I don't really jive with the idea that Jokic not having much help now means he never had much help.

No one's making that argument. The problem with Murray has always been inconsistency and it's why he's never been an all-star. The one time he played like an all-star since Jokic became an MVP-level player they cruised to a championship.

“Played like an all-star” is still underselling the fact that he played like an MVP, top 5 level player. As if Jokic didn’t need all that much support, or as if that’s the usual level of help other superstars get out of their 2nd option.

In the 23 playoffs, he put up 26/6/7 on 59% TS with a BPM of 4.8 which would rank 16th that postseason. He was great in one series (Lakers), really good in another (Minny) and pretty meh in two others (Phoenix and Miami). It was all-star level play no doubt but far from MVP level. And again, no one's denying how important Murray was to the Nuggets' championship run in 2023.

[OhayoKD]

I mean sometimes yes, teammates play bad and you don't get the help you need. But in Denver's actual title run, Jamal Murray played like a superstar, better than anything guys like Dame Lillard, or Devin Booker, or Anthony Edwards, or even Kyrie Irving ever did. Or at least comparable to Kyrie vs GS.

It's kind of a weird narrative to point to Murray when he didn't play well and act like that's what he brought to the table every playoff run, and woe is Jokic for having to carry his loser ass, when Denver likely loses to LA that year if it wasn't for Murray going nuclear. In fact, Jokic was the one relatively contained in that series.

Come playoff time, Murray is a more proven player than a lot of bigger name players that have made All-Star teams. Sure he played bad recently, and a lot of that is injuries as well, but that doesn't erase what he did contribute when Denver was successful. I don't really jive with the idea that Jokic not having much help now means he never had much help.

No one's making that argument. The problem with Murray has always been inconsistency and it's why he's never been an all-star. The one time he played like an all-star since Jokic became an MVP-level player they cruised to a championship.

Conveniently ignoring 2020 I see

[therealbig3]

A healthy Murray usually stepped up in a big way (2020 and 2023). He was either out or playing through injury in 2021, 2022, and 2024.

I mean, I’m not sure how Jokic’s supporting cast has been worse than Giannis’s.

Have any of Giannis’s teammates since his first MVP season ever played as well as playoff Murray in 2020 or 2023? And Aaron Gordon continues to be one of the most underrated role players in the league.

[Peregrine01]

A healthy Murray usually stepped up in a big way (2020 and 2023). He was either out or playing through injury in 2021, 2022, and 2024.

I mean, I’m not sure how Jokic’s supporting cast has been worse than Giannis’s.

Have any of Giannis’s teammates since his first MVP season ever played as well as playoff Murray in 2020 or 2023? And Aaron Gordon continues to be one of the most underrated role players in the league.

I think you're selling Khris Middleton, Jrue Holiday and Brook Lopez pretty short here. Even a hobbled Middleton last year put up 25/9/5 on 58% TS against the Pacers without Giannis or Dame. Jrue while sucking on offense in the playoffs is elite defensively. And Brook was a DPOY candidate and the perfect big (sans Jokic) to play alongside Giannis.

Not saying that Jokic's supporting cast has completely sucked - they were pretty good in 2023 when they won it all - but between injuries, lack of depth and inconsistent play from the main guys, it's left much to be desired for a player of his caliber. Giannis has been in a much better situation IMO but he himself has underwhelmed largely because of his own injuries over the last few years.

[lessthanjake]

I mean sometimes yes, teammates play bad and you don't get the help you need. But in Denver's actual title run, Jamal Murray played like a superstar, better than anything guys like Dame Lillard, or Devin Booker, or Anthony Edwards, or even Kyrie Irving ever did. Or at least comparable to Kyrie vs GS.

It's kind of a weird narrative to point to Murray when he didn't play well and act like that's what he brought to the table every playoff run, and woe is Jokic for having to carry his loser ass, when Denver likely loses to LA that year if it wasn't for Murray going nuclear. In fact, Jokic was the one relatively contained in that series.

Come playoff time, Murray is a more proven player than a lot of bigger name players that have made All-Star teams. Sure he played bad recently, and a lot of that is injuries as well, but that doesn't erase what he did contribute when Denver was successful. I don't really jive with the idea that Jokic not having much help now means he never had much help.

No one's making that argument. The problem with Murray has always been inconsistency and it's why he's never been an all-star. The one time he played like an all-star since Jokic became an MVP-level player they cruised to a championship.

Conveniently ignoring 2020 I see

Failed to read the phrase “since Jokic became an MVP-level player” I see.

[OhayoKD]

No one's making that argument. The problem with Murray has always been inconsistency and it's why he's never been an all-star. The one time he played like an all-star since Jokic became an MVP-level player they cruised to a championship.

Conveniently ignoring 2020 I see

Failed to read the phrase “since Jokic became an MVP-level player” I see.

Jokic was an MVP level player by 2019. What are you yapping about?

[lessthanjake]

A healthy Murray usually stepped up in a big way (2020 and 2023). He was either out or playing through injury in 2021, 2022, and 2024.

I mean, I’m not sure how Jokic’s supporting cast has been worse than Giannis’s.

Have any of Giannis’s teammates since his first MVP season ever played as well as playoff Murray in 2020 or 2023? And Aaron Gordon continues to be one of the most underrated role players in the league.

Giannis has had a better supporting cast in general. He hasn’t had a better supporting cast every year, but on average it’s been better. Guys like Jrue Holiday, Khris Middleton, Brook Lopez, and Damian Lillard are all very impactful players, and Giannis has typically had multiple of those guys. And perhaps even more importantly, there’s generally been a big difference in terms of depth. Jokic’s teams have been quite thin. Meanwhile, Giannis’s teams have often had some genuinely solid role players. Guys like George Hill, DiVincenzo, Bledsoe, PJ Tucker, Wesley Matthews, etc. are all pretty positive-impact players. And even guys like Bobby Portis and Connaughton are role players that don’t hurt you, even if they’re not necessarily really positive impact. This is a pretty significant contrast with Jokic, who has had teams that had to give a lot of minutes to some genuinely negative-impact players. If you peruse the five-year RAPMs of Jokic’s and Giannis’s rotation guys in their various prime years, there’s really a stark difference in general. Giannis’s rotation guys nowadays actually do look similar to what Jokic’s rotation guys typically are like, but the Bucks are doing worse this year than the Nuggets did even in 2022 when Jokic had an absurdly awful team. In the years where Giannis’s team was doing great, his rotation players were far superior to what Jokic has had.

[lessthanjake]

Conveniently ignoring 2020 I see

Failed to read the phrase “since Jokic became an MVP-level player” I see.

Jokic was an MVP level player by 2019. What are you yapping about?

Lol, I guess that’s a compliment to him for you to say that (though obviously you’re only doing so in order to support a negative argument), but he didn’t get a single first-place or second-place MVP vote prior to 2021. He was definitely an all-NBA level player in those years, but he wasn’t really an MVP-level player. He quite clearly took a massive leap in the 2020-21 season and essentially anyone reading “since Jokic became an MVP-level player” would understand that to mean “from 2020-21 onwards.”

[OhayoKD]

Failed to read the phrase “since Jokic became an MVP-level player” I see.

Jokic was an MVP level player by 2019. What are you yapping about?

Lol, I mean I guess that’s a compliment to him for you to say that (though obviously you’re doing so in order to support a negative argument), but he didn’t get a single first-place or second-place MVP vote prior to 2021. He was definitely an all-NBA level player in those years, but he wasn’t really an MVP-level player. He took a massive leap in the 2020-21 season and essentially anyone reading “since Jokic became an MVP-level player” would understand that to mean “from 2020-21 onwards.”

He wasn't an MVP when he finished 4th in MVP and led the 2nd best west team before putting up maybe the best offensive performance in the playoffs?

I understand why you want to make 2021 the line of demarcation, but that doesn't change this is nonsense revisionism. The gap between 2020 Jamal Murray's playoff play and 2023 Murray's playoff play was bigger than the gap between 2020 Jokic's playoff play and 2023 Jokic's playoff play. And the Nuggets still got clapped. Jokic's teams have never approched contending without elite play from Murray

[lessthanjake]

Jokic was an MVP level player by 2019. What are you yapping about?

Lol, I mean I guess that’s a compliment to him for you to say that (though obviously you’re doing so in order to support a negative argument), but he didn’t get a single first-place or second-place MVP vote prior to 2021. He was definitely an all-NBA level player in those years, but he wasn’t really an MVP-level player. He took a massive leap in the 2020-21 season and essentially anyone reading “since Jokic became an MVP-level player” would understand that to mean “from 2020-21 onwards.”

He wasn't an MVP when he finished 4th in MVP and led the 2nd best west team before putting up maybe the best offensive performance in the playoffs?

I understand why you want to make 2021 the line of demarcation, but that doesn't change this is nonsense revisionism.

No, he wasn’t an MVP-level player in 2019. No one thought he was a threat to win MVP. And no one voted him higher than 3rd place. He really wasn’t considered to be that level of player at the time, and I know that you know that. I don’t “want to make 2021 the line of demarcation.” It just obviously *is* the line of demarcation, since Jokic demonstrably improved massively that year. Of course, if you want to say Jokic was already “MVP-level” in 2019 and 2020, then I shudder to think what level you’d put him at in the past five years, given that he’s been a hugely superior player than he was in 2019 and 2020. I guess perhaps GOAT-level would be the correct term?