Jokić vs Hakeem

[scrabbarista]

Probably both in my top ten at the end of the '25 season. [Jokic 11th and Dream 9th when the season started.]

Kind of kills me to say it, but I think Jokic is better.

(Kills me so much I didn't vote, in fact.)

[lessthanjake]

It’s definitely different than that. The number of possessions here isn’t enormous and it’s definitely noisy, but 1.5 seasons worth of RAPM isn’t so tiny as to be meaningless.

But it's not 1.5 seasons - it's only 109 Houston games, which more like 1.25 seasons and it contains random games across decade. We know he has tracked 19 games from 1995/96 season for example and that's the most of all seasons he specified in his single seasons samples (likely the most from all seasons). I don't think you understand how little it is for RAPM data. It's especially strange to me that you reject playoff RAPM for the same reason, even though Jokic already played 80 postseason games in his career, which is not really much different than Hakeem's sample.

Besides this, the rest of your post is mostly you agreeing with me or saying things you’ve basically already said and that I’ve already responded to, so I won’t try to make us keep going around and around about things.

I just want to address this idea that the playoff sample for Jokic “is not really much different than Hakeem’s sample.” A few things I would say about that:

1. Yes, in terms of sheer amount of time, Jokic’s full playoff sample and the Hakeem Squared sample are not *way* different. In fact, I specifically said that earlier in this discussion, when I said “I grant that the Squared sample isn’t exactly orders of magnitude bigger” than Jokic’s playoff sample. It is, however, still a bigger sample. We know the number of possessions for both, and Squared’s sample for Hakeem is over 30% bigger than the Jokic playoff sample.

2. As I’ve said before, I think playoff samples are even worse than regular season samples that are of the same size, because a higher percent of the minutes a superstar doesn’t play in the playoffs are just garbage time (since teams try to play their superstar in a higher percent of the meaningful minutes than they do in the regular season). That makes the off sample (which is the biggest issue when talking about small samples) even worse in the playoffs. So, if we wanted playoff data to be as reliable as regular season data, I’d want to see a playoff sample that was actually a bit larger. But, as noted above, Jokic’s playoff sample is actually notably smaller than the Hakeem Squared sample.

3. The issue here for Hakeem isn’t just Squared data. As I said in my last post, Squared data for Hakeem has a small enough sample size “that I wouldn’t rely on it much by itself.” As I said, “If that were the only data we have, I wouldn’t be making the point I’m making.” The issue for Hakeem is that the other data we have points in a similar direction. This is definitely a contrast with Jokic, for whom the rest of the impact data looks very good, so people just point to the small-sample playoff data that’s off on an island by itself. Squared’s data for Hakeem is not at all off on an island by itself (in fact, if anything, Squared is on the better end for Hakeem in terms of the data we have).

Basically, the Squared data for Hakeem is a noticeably larger sample than Jokic’s playoff data. It is still, however, small enough that I wouldn’t rely on it by itself, just like I wouldn’t rely on playoff RAPM. But it’s not by itself. We have multiple other pieces of data, and they are consistent with it. Which is a real contrast with Jokic, where the playoff impact data is off on its own and not consistent with the other data. I don’t think it’s at all difficult to come to different conclusions here.

[70sFan]

Teams generally played superstars in garbage time more in the earlier eras. I don't buy the idea that Hakeem's sample is more reliable because of the additional 30 games. I know you likely wouldn't use playoff RAPM for guys like Curry, who played 40 games more than Hakeem sample in his career.

Most of impact data we have for Hakeem isn't really reliable, as they come from his post-1996 career or are basically boxscore estimates.

Anyway, RAPM isn't for ranking best, most impactful players. I don't think you have to be the very best in RAPM studies to be GOAT candidate and we're talking about lower level here. Even if Jokic would end up as clearly better than Hakeem in full RS RAPM studies, that wouldn't disqualify Olajuwon from the comparison, at least not for me.

Lastly, I think saying that both are great in the playoffs, so Hakeem doesn't win the ground here is reductive. We can have two great postseason performers, with one being notably better than the other. I am not really sure if that's the case here, but I don't see any reason to believe Hakeem is weaker postseason player than Jokic. Up to this point, I think Hakeem's postseason career is a bit more impressive and I have less concerns with his play at the very top.

[Elpolo_14]

I will take : Hakeem

1. His defense in one of the best all time because of his IQ and physical traits that make him agile+strong enough and make read Quick enough to guard almost everywhere on the floor but his MOST Valuable aspect was his Interior/Rim defense he was a ATG shot-Blocker and an ATG shot contestants. He an ATG roaming bih who clean up for his teammates when they got beat on ball or when they didn't pay attention and got Cut backdoor by the offensive team ( Hakeem was there to clean up many mess his team make on Defense ). His ability to contain the Big of his era ( like Shaq D.rob Ewing Kemp Malone ) on the Post because he was either stronger or faster or making better decisions to control them enough to make it hard to score
2. His scoring was Elite in his peak ( 93-95 ) he was the GOAT the the post with his dream-shake footwork + Paint touch. He also able to make midrange shot when the paint was too full with defense( that make the floor open up more for his team ). Not to forget that he was a great shot selector and was able to pick/chose the best way for him to create point for himself or create Opportunities for his team. He was a good playmaker because the defense couldn't guard him to the post bringing Two man on him that generate Easy look for the prerimeter teammates or a Slasher teammates. He was an elite performer against Elite Defense in the playoff with his volume+ efficiency going up even when he was guard by all time great big of the 90s
3. Also Hakeem play longer so he get more sample size to provide

The Biggest factor that make me not chosing Jokic is DEFENSE - The primary Paint protector being Lazy and not great reading the floor on Defense is a HUGE Holes his team are needing to fill up ( he not a guard who's defense is Easy to cover with better scheme or coverage ). He not fast enough to guard the prerimeter and not good enough to guard interior. He not a good switch or help defender because his lack of athletic + attention on that end. He will always get hunt on Defense and the interior/Rim is the most Important aspect of defense.

I know Jokic is like top 1-5 offensive player ever but he's a Negative on defense
While Hakeem is like top 1-3 on Defense and still bring Great value at the offense end

[trex_8063]

To play devils advocate... Hakeem played in the golden age of centers (Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Mutombo, Mourning, young Ducan)

otoh.....


^^^Started 277 total games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 614 games (career 27.2 mpg) during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 299 games (29.8 mpg) during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 210 games in Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 538 games (28.7 mpg) during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 112 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 342 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 404 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 262 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 195 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started [post-injury] 467 games [25.4 mpg, collectively] during seasons that overlap with Hakeem's career.

Also Charles Shackleford (started 105 games during Hakeem's career).

This is just a partial list, but that's already thousands of starts from players who were at best league-average players.

Bear in mind the back-ups [for these guys] were often no better or worse, too.

Some great players at the top, but no depth at the position.
It's not like say.....Wilt's career: where he was facing a Russell or Thurmond or Bellamy or Lanier (or Lovellette?) practically every night.
For every night Hakeem was facing a DRob, Ewing, Shaq, Mutombo, or Mourning, there was another night where he was facing Benoit Benjamin or Mike Gminski or Danny Schayes or Joe Barely Cares or Randy Breuer or Bill Cartwright (or worse).

[FuShengTHEGreat]

To play devils advocate... Hakeem played in the golden age of centers (Shaq, Robinson, Ewing, Mutombo, Mourning, young Ducan)

otoh.....


^^^Started 277 total games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 614 games (career 27.2 mpg) during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 299 games (29.8 mpg) during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 210 games in Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 538 games (28.7 mpg) during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 112 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 342 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 404 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 262 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started 195 games during Hakeem's career.


^^^Started [post-injury] 467 games [25.4 mpg, collectively] during seasons that overlap with Hakeem's career.

Also Charles Shackleford (started 105 games during Hakeem's career).

This is just a partial list, but that's already thousands of starts from players who were at best league-average players.

Bear in mind the back-ups [for these guys] were often no better or worse, too.

Some great players at the top, but no depth at the position.
It's not like say.....Wilt's career: where he was facing a Russell or Thurmond or Bellamy or Lanier (or Lovellette?) practically every night.
For every night Hakeem was facing a DRob, Ewing, Shaq, Mutombo, or Mourning, there was another night where he was facing Benoit Benjamin or Mike Gminski or Danny Schayes or Joe Barely Cares or Randy Breuer or Bill Cartwright (or worse).

I really like Jokic and want Denver to win but this Clippers series is becoming increasingly painful for me to watch. As the series has progressed he's getting held to a virtual stalemate by Zubac at both ends of the floor.

Even if Hakeem wasnt facing the likes of Shaq, David, Ewing, Zo, Mutombo on a nightly basis in the 90s there was still the likes of 2nd tier Centers like Smits, Divac, Sabonis. Abnormally tall guys like Bol, Bradley & Muresan who were difficult to shoot over.

I didn't even mention Rony Seikaly who imho roughly was equal/superior of a talent to current Zubac.

Obviously not all these baskets are being scored 1 on 1 vs Jokic but i can't fathom Seikaly or Zubac averaging 20ppg and 65+ Fg% with Hakeem on the court.

Even prime HOF Centers Ewing and Robinson couldn't come anywhere near such numbers h2h vs Hakeem in the playoffs. Not even mentioning how he outplayed both offensively at the other end by a wide margin.

[One_and_Done]

This series is another reminder of why you're taking Hakeem over Jokic.

[TheGOATRises007]

This series is another reminder of why you're taking Hakeem over Jokic.

It isn't at all.

Put in Hakeem for Jokic, and I'm pretty sure the series is still 3-3.

The Nuggets' offense craters without Jokic. And Hakeem can't create as well for others.

His defense is obviously much better, but whatever they gain on defense, they likely lose on offense so it just offsets.

Hakeem is exceptional defensively, but if he's getting switched onto Harden, and Kawhi on the perimeter, he's not staying in front of them consistently either.

[One_and_Done]

Nah. Peak Hakeem would have won this series already.

[SlimShady83]

Nah. Peak Hakeem would have won this series already.

Haven't been following, but wow we agree on something

[TheGOATRises007]

Nah. Peak Hakeem would have won this series already.

Nah he wouldn't have.

This is how you converse. Zero rebuttals, and just statements in absolutes and bias against certain players.

And I disagree with you disagreeing.

[Jaivl]

This series is another reminder of why you're taking Hakeem over Jokic.

The 1990 and 1991 first rounds are reminders of why you're taking Jokic over Hakeem. Or something.

Imagine being completely nullified offensively by a team with zero bigs except for rookie Vlade Divac. Ivica Zubac would've locked that bum to 10 ppg.

[One_and_Done]

This series is another reminder of why you're taking Hakeem over Jokic.

The 1990 and 1991 first rounds are reminders of why you're taking Jokic over Hakeem. Or something.

Imagine being completely nullified offensively by a team with zero bigs except for rookie Vlade Divac. Ivica Zubac would've locked that bum to 10 ppg.

Hakeem's peak was 93-95. I agree that 90 or 91 Hakeem isn't moving the needle vs the Clippers.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

This series is another reminder of why you're taking Hakeem over Jokic.

The 1990 and 1991 first rounds are reminders of why you're taking Jokic over Hakeem. Or something.

Imagine being completely nullified offensively by a team with zero bigs except for rookie Vlade Divac. Ivica Zubac would've locked that bum to 10 ppg.

Puhleeze it's not like Houston was expected to beat the Lakers those years. Those weren't vintage series for Hakeem I agree, but it didn't help that Vernon Maxwell in both of those playoff losses had more total FG attempts than HOFers Olajuwon, Magic (who was MVP in 90) & Worthy on a combined 39% FG.

Jokic isn't sparkling offensively nor his team advancing in any series in his career if Vernon Maxwell is leading his team in FG attempts.

That was just bad coaching by Chaney imho.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

This series is another reminder of why you're taking Hakeem over Jokic.

It isn't at all.

Put in Hakeem for Jokic, and I'm pretty sure the series is still 3-3.

The Nuggets' offense craters without Jokic. And Hakeem can't create as well for others.

His defense is obviously much better, but whatever they gain on defense, they likely lose on offense so it just offsets.

Hakeem is exceptional defensively, but if he's getting switched onto Harden, and Kawhi on the perimeter, he's not staying in front of them consistently either.

At least on this Nuggets team in stretches Murray is talented enough in stretches to call his own number in 1 on 1 and make tough baskets. 24 of his 43 pts in game 5 were non Jokic created. Either him calling his own number or scoring in transition.

Obviously Hakeem would not be primary defender 1 on 1, but Kawhi and Harden are in their mid 30s and past their athletic prime. Not buying this notion at all that someone as agile as him wouldn't be able to keep either in front of him in stretches. I once saw him in a game in 92, get caught on a switch at the 3pt line with MJ and keep him in front of him and force a miss. Did not get blown by, by the most athletic SG in NBA history.

One things for sure Clippers players that are getting into the paint towards the rim definitely wouldn't be having the field day they are with Jokic often like a Matador.

[eminence]

If you're playing on the court with an offensive great like Jokic (Steph/LeBron/etc), your points are always a bit Jokic created.

Murray has pretty consistently led poor results with Jokic off the floor. 2019 to now:

Jokic+Murray: 11695 minutes, +9.0 Net, +9.1 Offense
Jokic Only: 8638 minutes, +6.0 Net, +5.0 Offense
Neither: 6612 minutes, -6.4 Net, -7.5 Offense
Murray Only: 3506 minutes, -4.0 Net, -2.9 Offense

[AEnigma]

If you're playing on the court with an offensive great like Jokic (Steph/LeBron/etc), your points are always a bit Jokic created.

Murray has pretty consistently led poor results with Jokic off the floor. 2019 to now:

Jokic+Murray: 11695 minutes, +9.0 Net, +9.1 Offense
Jokic Only: 8638 minutes, +6.0 Net, +5.0 Offense
Neither: 6612 minutes, -6.4 Net, -7.5 Offense
Murray Only: 3506 minutes, -4.0 Net, -2.9 Offense

Seems a little bench focused, no? I am not sure whether you are using pbpstats, because the numbers they give are slightly different (+5.47 Jokic only, -3.83 Jamal only), but going by their values, if you look at the 600 minutes that Murray has played over that stretch without Jokic in the game at all (so disproportionately playing without starters), he has a +4.2 on-court rating. I would not marry myself to that as an accurate representation of what Jamal would do in a larger Jokic-less sample, but it does feel worth noting given how Malone had handled team rotations throughout all those years.

And then in terms of production, while Jokic obviously helps Jamal’s scoring… I would not characterise it as a particularly dramatic scoring boost. Same timeframe, pbpstats has Jamal going from 29.76 points per 100 possessions (57.1% true shooting) with Jokic to 31.14 points per 100 possessions (54.4% true shooting) without Jokic. As a point of comparison, you can find a significantly more substantial effect from Draymond on Steph.

We should be able to acknowledge Jamal’s playoff scoring without trying to ascribe brilliant shotmaking as a case of passive gravity from Jokic — especially when the specific playoff sample across that stretch paints a different picture from what you see in the regular season.

[tsherkin]

If you're playing on the court with an offensive great like Jokic (Steph/LeBron/etc), your points are always a bit Jokic created.

Murray has pretty consistently led poor results with Jokic off the floor. 2019 to now:

Jokic+Murray: 11695 minutes, +9.0 Net, +9.1 Offense
Jokic Only: 8638 minutes, +6.0 Net, +5.0 Offense
Neither: 6612 minutes, -6.4 Net, -7.5 Offense
Murray Only: 3506 minutes, -4.0 Net, -2.9 Offense

Seems a little bench focused, no? I am not sure whether you are using pbpstats, because the numbers they give are slightly different (+5.47 Jokic only, -3.83 Jamal only), but going by their values, if you look at the 600 minutes that Murray has played over that stretch without Jokic in the game at all (so disproportionately playing without starters), he has a +4.2 on-court rating. I would not marry myself to that as an accurate representation of what Jamal would do in a larger Jokic-less sample, but it does feel worth noting given how Malone had handled team rotations throughout all those years.

And then in terms of production, while Jokic obviously helps Jamal’s scoring… I would not characterise it as a particularly dramatic scoring boost. Same timeframe, pbpstats has Jamal going from 29.76 points per 100 possessions (57.1% true shooting) with Jokic to 31.14 points per 100 possessions (54.4% true shooting) without Jokic. As a point of comparison, you can find a significantly more substantial effect from Draymond on Steph.

We should be able to acknowledge Jamal’s playoff scoring without trying ascribe brilliant shotmaking as a case of passive gravity from Jokic — especially when the specific playoff sample across that stretch paints a different picture from what you see in the regular season.

I think the shorter version of this is that Murray's assisted on a 40/65% 2P/3P split in the RS and 33/53 in the playoffs. He runs DHO and PnR with Jokic a lot, but his utility comes literally from whether or not those unassisted 3s are dropping, which has less to do with the other guys on the floor around him.

[trex_8063]

I really like Jokic and want Denver to win but this Clippers series is becoming increasingly painful for me to watch. As the series has progressed he's getting held to a virtual stalemate by Zubac at both ends of the floor.

I think this is an exaggeration.

It's like when people say Bill Walton played Kareem to a stalemate [or outplayed him] in the '77 series.
Kareem averaged 30.3 ppg @ 66.0% TS, 16.0 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.8 bpg. His teammates, meanwhile, only managed 47.6% TS even when often being fed open looks [by Kareem, out of his double/triple teams], and couldn't seem to contain anyone on the other end.
Walton's teammates outscored Kareem's by 13 ppg and at 51.9% TS [+4.3% relative to Kareem's teammates].

imo, the difference isn't that Zubac is playing Jokic to a stalemate. It's that his teammates are James Harden and a finally healthy Kawhi Leonard, plus Norman Powell, cagey veteran utility-man Batum, and various other spare parts.
It's simply better than Jamal Murray, Aaron Gordon, Christian Braun, MPJ [playing injured], this version of Russell Westbrook, and various other spare parts (who are ALL playing terrible).

And so the series is tied, despite Jokic outplaying Zubac.

Even if Hakeem wasnt facing the likes of Shaq, David, Ewing, Zo, Mutombo on a nightly basis in the 90s there was still the likes of 2nd tier Centers like Smits, Divac, Sabonis. Abnormally tall guys like Bol, Bradley & Muresan who were difficult to shoot over.

I didn't even mention Rony Seikaly who imho roughly was equal/superior of a talent to current Zubac.

Obviously not all these baskets are being scored 1 on 1 vs Jokic but i can't fathom Seikaly or Zubac averaging 20ppg and 65+ Fg% with Hakeem on the court.

Disagree again that Seikaly is as good as Zubac. He's closer to Jonas Valanciunas (and honestly very likely a lesser player than him, too, at least when Jonas was in his prime).

And while it's true Zubac is unlikely to score in the same manner against Hakeem, Hakeem is unlikely to be averaging a high efficiency 25-pt triple double while anchoring at 113.9 ORtg against the 3rd-rated defense in the league.

That's the trade-off you get in this comparison.
I mean, obviously the Nugget defense would look better with Hakeem in Jokic's place. But it's equally obvious that their offense would look substantially worse with him.
This is an offense that did -20.1 worse with Jokic off the court during the rs; an offense that is so far doing -26.9 worse per 100 possessions on offense in this series with him off the court. And this isn't some bizarre outlier occurrence: we have seen this same phenomenon EVERY_SINGLE_YEAR of Jokic's prime.

[70sFan]

This series is another reminder of why you're taking Hakeem over Jokic.

The 1990 and 1991 first rounds are reminders of why you're taking Jokic over Hakeem. Or something.

Imagine being completely nullified offensively by a team with zero bigs except for rookie Vlade Divac. Ivica Zubac would've locked that bum to 10 ppg.

Hakeem's peak was 93-95. I agree that 90 or 91 Hakeem isn't moving the needle vs the Clippers.

What exactly did Hakeem magically gain in 2 years that he'd suddenly start to move the needle?