2020-21 NBA Season Discussion

[parsnips33]

I think Clippers can feel good about that game, almost won without good games from Kawhi and PG. Granted, Conley can come back any game now and make Utah even harder to defend.

What was Kennard doing out there in the 4th? Mitchell was just eating him alive, have a hard time believing Batum or Terrance Mann wouldn't have done a better job.

Also I've definitely been skeptical of Mitchell (mostly because of his size) and thought he was a bubble beneficiary last year, but taking control of that game in such a commanding manner was super impressive

I feel like I've watched variations of last night's game every time the Clippers have been in the second round, and they've never won any of these series, so I'm certainly not feeling good as a fan right now. Mike Conley has been one of the all-time Clipper killers since his Memphis days, so his imminent return to the lineup makes it even worse.

It's gonna be a very cold day in a very hot place when you feel good about the Clippers

[GSP]

drza was just on Espn radio with Max Kellerman thought that was cool for any of the long time posters here

[Doctor MJ]

Well I mean, if things hold, Jokic will have his 2nd season with a playoff PER better than anything Dirk did despite far higher box score standards, and in the other playoff season Jokic let an upset over the Clippers for the ages. It's hard then for me to look at Jokic as a guy who was clearly behind Dirk before this season. The box score data seems to put playoff Jokic right up there with the best of Dirk even before we talk about the evolution of the game, and then there's the matter that I just consider Jokic to be a lot smarter out there than Dirk (and I consider Dirk very smart, but Jokic is a genius).

Now on the other hand, I think it's clear from a pure impact perspective that Dirk once the fit got really built around him well had the edge there so I can still see the argument, but that's not a "show me again" type of argument.

I never look at PER so... And as you know from my little Giannis rant of yesterday that I don't look at playoff samples over regular season samples. I do understand the importance of being able to succeed in that environment of course, but the first 82 games are important to me as well when evaluating a player.

And I think you and I differ in that you are more concerned with "goodness" and skill and I'm much more concerned with results and "impact" regardless of form. So it makes sense you would focus more on the more important time and on Jokic' genius(and yes his understanding of basketball certainly seems to exceed Dirk's) and I'm looking at how Dirk carried his teams to success over and over and over regardless of who they were and boy he did he have a bunch of them--I believed he cited the figure of 203 or something at his retirement?

Is Jokic's vision and passing more impressive to watch than Dirk's gravity? Oh absolutely. When you get down to it, Dirk was almost boring in that he was going to PNR you do death leading to Nash carving you up or Terry burying wide open 18 footers or Barea getting into the paint to finish or hit the corner 3. Or he was going to go the high post with a live dribble and shoot over you, go around you if you got too close, and a lot of simply identifying the open guy on the double and then an extra pass or two shooting an open 3. Rinse/repeat.

But I'm not convinced Jokic' is that much more impactful. Dirk centric offenses were great and just as importantly allowed you to play limited offensive players around him while still having a terrific offense.

This year is different. Jokic impact is off the charts by any measure we want to pick. It's a significant jump from his previous seasons. I think its very real, but I just need him to do it again before I move him above a guy whose peak isn't much below Jokic' but whose prime was also 90%+ of his peak for a decade.

Completely understand being reluctant to rely on the small sample size of the playoffs, but I think given that Jokic just went through the regular season doing what he's done every minute he's ever played in the playoffs it's time to throw out any RS prior to '20-21 as if it represents what he's been capable of the entire time.

Re: Me being more focused on "goodness". I wouldn't necessarily say that. You asked whether Jokic had surpassed Dirk in his abilities which shifts the conversation in a more "goodness" oriented direction. I certainly don't have Jokic above Dirk in my GOAT list and I wouldn't feel comfortable unilateral saying any of his seasons surpassed Dirk's '10-11 when he had crazy impact on a title winner.

Re: Jokic's X more impressive than Dirk's gravity. "Gravity" is a term we use for the attractive impact that guys have who are much more dangerous at shooting than they are at passing. Jokic's shooting at this point is pretty comparable to peak Dirk so to the extent Jokic has less gravity than Dirk, it's because Jokic's passing is the most dangerous thing of all.

As we all keep saying it's hard to compare eras, but apples-to-apples, Jokic led an offense this year that makes anything Dirk ran look incompetent so any notion that Dirk made his team's offense unstoppable in an argument with a hyper-modern player like Jokic needs to stop in its tracks. On the other hand, Jokic's rate of TS Add this year is right up there with anything Dirk ever produced despite having apples-to-apples much, much, much tougher competition and having his scoring only be his second most valuable skill.

But look, my repetitive tone surely makes it sound like I think Dirk has no argument at all and I'm really not ready to make a statement like that. I can still see arguments for Dirk, particularly in terms of +/- stuff during the era surrounding the title run.

[Texas Chuck]

I think Dirk's gravity is more than just he's a good shooter.

And Dirk led so many high level offenses that I really hate you going to incompetent to describe them even if you only mean relatively. Is it Dirk's fault that offensive growth has continued league wide? Relative to league strength Dirk offenses don't take a backseat to the Nuggets this year much less be incompetent.

Jokic is great and does a number of things better than Dirk could ever dream of. To have the best vision arguably in the world, and the size and passing skills to take advantage of it is absurd alone. Then he's a terrific shooter from range and a load in the post. And he continually balances his scoring with his passing. The man is an offensive savant.

But Dallas got incredible offense when he was a broken down old man out of him, Dwight Powell, Devin Harris, JJ Barea and a 5th guy. To say nothing of those Nash teams or even the Jason Terry teams.

Ugh I hate this because I feel all defensive because I'm a Dirk guy and I really don't want to be. (defensive that is. I'm cool being a Dirk guy ) Jokic is incredible and I have zero issues with anyone who thinks he's better than Dirk. I'm not there yet, but conceded I might should be. But man calling Dirk offenses incompetent in comparison just feels way too far. Again unless this is just my attachment overreacting which admittedly it might be.

[Dr Positivity]

As we all keep saying it's hard to compare eras, but apples-to-apples, Jokic led an offense this year that makes anything Dirk ran look incompetent

The Nuggets ranked 7th with 117.1 ORTG while the 2006 Mavs ranked 1st with 111.8 (that's before considering 2003 and 2004 where they are nearly 2 points ahead of 2nd) so it's hard to for me to act like that means anything

[falcolombardi]

yeah, any 2019 and before offense is gonna look incompetent in the numbers in 2021, the average offensive rating in 2021 is almost 4 points better than anythingh between shot clock and 2019

comparing their offenses to the leagues they played in is a much better aproach

[Odinn21]

As we all keep saying it's hard to compare eras, but apples-to-apples, Jokic led an offense this year that makes anything Dirk ran look incompetent

Isn't this a bit too much?

2002 Mavs +7.7 rORtg in reg. season (1st) & +9.0 rORtg in playoffs
2003 Mavs +7.1 rORtg in reg. season (1st) & +11.9 rORtg in playoffs
2004 Mavs +9.0 rORtg in reg. season (1st) & -2.0 rORtg in playoffs (let's face it, this season should've never happened, )
2005 Mavs +4.2 rORtg in reg. season (4th) & +9.1 rORtg in playoffs
2006 Mavs +5.6 rORtg in reg. season (1st) & +7.9 rORtg in playoffs
2007 Mavs +4.8 rORtg in reg. season (2nd) & -0.8 rORtg in playoffs
2008 Mavs +3.6 rORtg in reg. season (8th) & +3.8 rORtg in playoffs
2009 Mavs +2.2 rORtg in reg. season (6th) & +7.4 rORtg in playoffs
2010 Mavs +1.6 rORtg in reg. season (10th) & +1.3 rORtg in playoffs
2011 Mavs +2.4 rORtg in reg. season (8th) & +7.3 rORtg in playoffs

On average, Dirk led +4.8 rORtg offense in regular seasons and +7.3 rORtg offense in playoffs over a decade.

[Texas Chuck]

Between my debates with 70s and Doc I now find myself asking myself a Kobe/Nash question that I am absolutely terrified to actually ask. But if some of their theory stuff is right I think I have to conclude I've had the wrong guy as the better offensive player and that's doubly confusing to me because I'm pretty sure Doc and I have long thought the same guy was the better offensive player and while I don't recall ever discussing it with 70s I think he does to.

But these Giannis/Kawhi arguments really has been thinking maybe I've had it all wrong.

[falcolombardi]

you guys see budenholzer finding some answer to nets or do bucks just hope nets start missing and bucks jumpers start falling?

cause even if we take nets as fully unguardable (which i dont feel they are tbh, not without harden at least) i dont see what is the excuse for bucks offense

[TheGOATRises007]

I'm not a big CP3 fan, but he has been sensational thus far this series.

[Dupp]

Goat ball handler at it again. 15 assists, 0 turnovers. Point god.

[mikejames23]

Nuggets not at the same level when Chris Paul is playing this way. Pretty disappointing series so far.

[Dupp]

Nuggets not at the same level when Chris Paul is playing this way. Pretty disappointing series so far.

Nuggets team has sucked all year outside joker tbh.

[Texas Chuck]

yeah in the debate over Paul vs Booker, Chris Paul with a masterclass in running a team and Booker a guy just taking bad shots right and left. Didn't matter tonight because Paul was so good, but those possessions with Paul on the bench, Booker has to make better decisions. This was not it.

And poor Jokic out there playing by himself basically.

[Doctor MJ]

As we all keep saying it's hard to compare eras, but apples-to-apples, Jokic led an offense this year that makes anything Dirk ran look incompetent

The Nuggets ranked 7th with 117.1 ORTG while the 2006 Mavs ranked 1st with 111.8 (that's before considering 2003 and 2004 where they are nearly 2 points ahead of 2nd) so it's hard to for me to act like that means anything

So, what we're all running smack into here is the shift in eras and what to do with it in comparisons.

I think what I'd say most basically is this:

While I do value relative values, it really bothers me when folks take the relative value as if they are the only thing that's real.

2006 was a really short time ago. Offensive effectiveness in 2006 was basically unchanged from 1986. The reason why things are different in the last 15 years is because the basketball world finally identified what worked and started optimizing along those lines.

You saying "Yeah but Jokic plays in an era with high ORtg" is really no different from you saying "Yeah but Jokic is only this effective because he's learned to shoot from all ranges, and since he's playing in an era where other people are also learning to be this good at basketball, we should act like he doesn't have those skills."

So while I'm really not trying to say that Jokic is definitively better because he's leading offenses that are much more effective than any Dirk led, I do take issue with the idea that we should blindly be more impressed with guys just because their competition was dumber.

Quite honestly, basketball fans are going to grapple with this from here on out. Until the last basketball fans dies, there's going to be debate about how to evaluate before our current time period and after our current time period. We're the ones who've lived through the sea change, and if we're fortunate enough to live long lives, we're going to be talking with generations of basketball fans who come later are literally find the eras before now to be pre-historic in a way you really have to go back to at least the '60s to have seen previously.

All this to say, there's something really BIG going on here, and I don't want this to get too focused on the specific Jokic vs Dirk comparison.

[Doctor MJ]

Nuggets not at the same level when Chris Paul is playing this way. Pretty disappointing series so far.

Nuggets team has sucked all year outside joker tbh.

Porter was really great to end the regular season.

[MartinToVaught]

Tough to really judge the Nuggets too harshly when they don't have Murray.

[Doctor MJ]

Between my debates with 70s and Doc I now find myself asking myself a Kobe/Nash question that I am absolutely terrified to actually ask. But if some of their theory stuff is right I think I have to conclude I've had the wrong guy as the better offensive player and that's doubly confusing to me because I'm pretty sure Doc and I have long thought the same guy was the better offensive player and while I don't recall ever discussing it with 70s I think he does to.

But these Giannis/Kawhi arguments really has been thinking maybe I've had it all wrong.

Sounds like you're concluding that Kobe was the better offensive player with some reluctance. If so that's an understandable position and I hope my recent bloviations haven't made you feel like you'd be better off just avoiding more conflict with me. My apologies if that's at all the case. I don't want to make people feel that way.

What theory stuff are you talking about?

[eminence]

Positives for Nuggets - Jokic still playing well, headed home, MPJ can’t play much worse, Barton looked alright in his return

Negatives - CP3 is eating them alive

[Dr Positivity]

As we all keep saying it's hard to compare eras, but apples-to-apples, Jokic led an offense this year that makes anything Dirk ran look incompetent

The Nuggets ranked 7th with 117.1 ORTG while the 2006 Mavs ranked 1st with 111.8 (that's before considering 2003 and 2004 where they are nearly 2 points ahead of 2nd) so it's hard to for me to act like that means anything

So, what we're all running smack into here is the shift in eras and what to do with it in comparisons.

I think what I'd say most basically is this:

While I do value relative values, it really bothers me when folks take the relative value as if they are the only thing that's real.

2006 was a really short time ago. Offensive effectiveness in 2006 was basically unchanged from 1986. The reason why things are different in the last 15 years is because the basketball world finally identified what worked and started optimizing along those lines.

You saying "Yeah but Jokic plays in an era with high ORtg" is really no different from you saying "Yeah but Jokic is only this effective because he's learned to shoot from all ranges, and since he's playing in an era where other people are also learning to be this good at basketball, we should act like he doesn't have those skills."

So while I'm really not trying to say that Jokic is definitively better because he's leading offenses that are much more effective than any Dirk led, I do take issue with the idea that we should blindly be more impressed with guys just because their competition was dumber.

Quite honestly, basketball fans are going to grapple with this from here on out. Until the last basketball fans dies, there's going to be debate about how to evaluate before our current time period and after our current time period. We're the ones who've lived through the sea change, and if we're fortunate enough to live long lives, we're going to be talking with generations of basketball fans who come later are literally find the eras before now to be pre-historic in a way you really have to go back to at least the '60s to have seen previously.

All this to say, there's something really BIG going on here, and I don't want this to get too focused on the specific Jokic vs Dirk comparison.

If you went by this logic you would also have to credit Dirk for playing on a much better defense than Jokic. The 2006 Mavs would rank 1st in the league by 2021 standards, or to put it another way the 2021 Nuggets would rank 29th by 2006 standards.

It's not really fair to act like Dirk is a much better defensive big just because he played in a league with midrange shooting teams, but neither is to claim Jokic offense in 2021 is more impressive just because he played on a team with more 3pt shooting. If you judge Nuggets by even 2011 standards in a vacuum they look like Bargnani Raptors on defense.