2023-24 RealGM All-Season Awards Discussion Thread

[Peregrine01]

People need to learn what an all time bad series is lol

In the context of a second guy, Murray had 2 really bad games, 3 decent games, and 2 great ones

Murray put up a 47% TS this past playoffs...that's among the 10 worst in the 3-point era ever for volume shooters. Yeah, he had some decent games interspersed with horrible ones but that's been kinda his MO his entire career - sometimes he looks like an all-NBA guard, other times he looks like a poor man's Jason Terry.

His tough shot-making is useful sometimes though it's more of a weakness than an attribute IMO. He's forced into difficult shots for himself partly due to shot selection but also because he doesn't have great quickness to get himself into easier looks. How many times did we see Austin Reaves (not Jaden McDaniels) completely bottle him up on a drive? And I disagree that he's taking tough shots because he "has to". For one, he plays with Jokic, who's probably the best in the world at manufacturing a good possession at will. And second, that same running mate leads the league in grenade shots (less than 6 seconds on the clock) by a fairly wide margin.

[MyUniBroDavis]

People need to learn what an all time bad series is lol

In the context of a second guy, Murray had 2 really bad games, 3 decent games, and 2 great ones

Murray put up a 47% TS this past playoffs...that's among the 10 worst in the 3-point era ever for volume shooters. Yeah, he had some decent games interspersed with horrible ones but that's been kinda his MO his entire career - sometimes he looks like an all-NBA guard, other times he looks like a poor man's Jason Terry.

His tough shot-making is useful sometimes though it's more of a weakness than an attribute IMO. He's forced into difficult shots for himself partly due to shot selection but also because he doesn't have great quickness to get himself into easier looks. How many times did we see Austin Reaves (not Jaden McDaniels) completely bottle him up on a drive? And I disagree that he's taking tough shots because he "has to". For one, he plays with Jokic, who's probably the best in the world at manufacturing a good possession at will. And second, that same running mate leads the league in grenade shots (less than 6 seconds on the clock) by a fairly wide margin.

So:

1. After I cautioned against using averages vs individual games for evaluating a series as averages can paint a skewed picture, you added on another series he performed worse in to it, and calling some decent games (3 decent, 2 great) interspersed between horrible ones (2 games they lost in blowouts where no one on the team including Jokic played well)

2. After talking about how he led the league in very mays shot clock attempts in the playoffs this year and last year, defined as >4 seconds, you changed it to 6, so it would count Jokic posting up with like 10 seconds, and then counted the regular season instead of the playoffs, and used that as justification for he should have given it to Jokic, who had a 28.3% EFG in this situation compared to Jamal’s 41.1% vs minnesotta, with Jokic also taking more of them than his season average as well

And finally, despite him being the only on ball perimeter player that’s a scoring threat off P&R actions which is foundationally what opens up the short roll in the first place, he does not need to take tough shots which in context meant self created vs assisted off ball shot diets or leak outs that most of the league has

[eminence]

'Decent #2' Jamal Murray in games 1/4/5 was playing like DLO.

[Colbinii]

'Decent #2' Jamal Murray in games 1/4/5 was playing like DLO.

How dare you hate on the Lakers #2 Option in 2023 and 2024.

[Peregrine01]

People need to learn what an all time bad series is lol

In the context of a second guy, Murray had 2 really bad games, 3 decent games, and 2 great ones

Murray put up a 47% TS this past playoffs...that's among the 10 worst in the 3-point era ever for volume shooters. Yeah, he had some decent games interspersed with horrible ones but that's been kinda his MO his entire career - sometimes he looks like an all-NBA guard, other times he looks like a poor man's Jason Terry.

His tough shot-making is useful sometimes though it's more of a weakness than an attribute IMO. He's forced into difficult shots for himself partly due to shot selection but also because he doesn't have great quickness to get himself into easier looks. How many times did we see Austin Reaves (not Jaden McDaniels) completely bottle him up on a drive? And I disagree that he's taking tough shots because he "has to". For one, he plays with Jokic, who's probably the best in the world at manufacturing a good possession at will. And second, that same running mate leads the league in grenade shots (less than 6 seconds on the clock) by a fairly wide margin.

So:

1. After I cautioned against using averages vs individual games for evaluating a series as averages can paint a skewed picture, you added on another series he performed worse in to it, and calling some decent games (3 decent, 2 great) interspersed between horrible ones (2 games they lost in blowouts where no one on the team including Jokic played well)

2. After talking about how he led the league in very mays shot clock attempts in the playoffs this year and last year, defined as >4 seconds, you changed it to 6, so it would count Jokic posting up with like 10 seconds, and then counted the regular season instead of the playoffs, and used that as justification for he should have given it to Jokic, who had a 28.3% EFG in this situation compared to Jamal’s 41.1% vs minnesotta, with Jokic also taking more of them than his season average as well

And finally, despite him being the only on ball perimeter player that’s a scoring threat off P&R actions which is foundationally what opens up the short roll in the first place, he does not need to take tough shots which in context meant self created vs assisted off ball shot diets or leak outs that most of the league has

Looks like we're not really disagreeing much at all. If you just write off his really bad games (5 out of the 12 total playoff games he played), an argument can be made that he wasn't all that bad.

Wrt tough shot-taking: I didn't read your entire post so I didn't see the stat you cited. Nonetheless, it seems that both Murray and Jokic take a good share of grenade shots. I was just making the observation that a regular diet of tough shot-taking is usually due to two reasons:

1) plain obstinacy (ala Kobe): and Murray has some of that - which can often be good in clutch situations
2) inability to get to easier looks: which is a decisive weakness of Murray's in my view

[eminence]

'Decent #2' Jamal Murray in games 1/4/5 was playing like DLO.

How dare you hate on the Lakers #2 Option in 2023 and 2024.

I would never disrespect DLO, he helped the Jazz trade for an MVP winner.

[lessthanjake]

Quick reminder that particularly if we’re going to do this thing where we scrutinize exactly what the game state was when people got their stats, then Murray really was not “decent” in Game 5 against the Timberwolves. Until the end of the game at a point where the Nuggets’ chances of victory had to be well over 99%, Murray had 10 points on 46% TS%, with very little in the way of other contributions.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Murray put up a 47% TS this past playoffs...that's among the 10 worst in the 3-point era ever for volume shooters. Yeah, he had some decent games interspersed with horrible ones but that's been kinda his MO his entire career - sometimes he looks like an all-NBA guard, other times he looks like a poor man's Jason Terry.

His tough shot-making is useful sometimes though it's more of a weakness than an attribute IMO. He's forced into difficult shots for himself partly due to shot selection but also because he doesn't have great quickness to get himself into easier looks. How many times did we see Austin Reaves (not Jaden McDaniels) completely bottle him up on a drive? And I disagree that he's taking tough shots because he "has to". For one, he plays with Jokic, who's probably the best in the world at manufacturing a good possession at will. And second, that same running mate leads the league in grenade shots (less than 6 seconds on the clock) by a fairly wide margin.

So:

1. After I cautioned against using averages vs individual games for evaluating a series as averages can paint a skewed picture, you added on another series he performed worse in to it, and calling some decent games (3 decent, 2 great) interspersed between horrible ones (2 games they lost in blowouts where no one on the team including Jokic played well)

2. After talking about how he led the league in very mays shot clock attempts in the playoffs this year and last year, defined as >4 seconds, you changed it to 6, so it would count Jokic posting up with like 10 seconds, and then counted the regular season instead of the playoffs, and used that as justification for he should have given it to Jokic, who had a 28.3% EFG in this situation compared to Jamal’s 41.1% vs minnesotta, with Jokic also taking more of them than his season average as well

And finally, despite him being the only on ball perimeter player that’s a scoring threat off P&R actions which is foundationally what opens up the short roll in the first place, he does not need to take tough shots which in context meant self created vs assisted off ball shot diets or leak outs that most of the league has

Looks like we're not really disagreeing much at all. If you just write off his really bad games (5 out of the 12 total playoff games he played), an argument can be made that he wasn't all that bad.

Wrt tough shot-taking: I didn't read your entire post so I didn't see the stat you cited. Nonetheless, it seems that both Murray and Jokic take a good share of grenade shots. I was just making the observation that a regular diet of tough shot-taking is usually due to two reasons:

1) plain obstinacy (ala Kobe): and Murray has some of that - which can often be good in clutch situations
2) inability to get to easier looks: which is a decisive weakness of Murray's in my view

Can’t talk rn but did u say bad series or bad run? Might have misread

[LukaTheGOAT]

The funny thing is, I believe Jokic was clearly better this year versus the Wolves vomparef to 2023. The biggest difference is Murray actually played well and the Nuggets won the series handily, so there was little questioning of Jokic's performance.

[AEnigma]

^ Worth noting, but not especially unusual.

Series A (per 100):
35.5 on 53.7% true shooting

Series B (per 100):
31.5 on 50% true shooting

Series C (per 100):
35 on 53% true shooting

All same opponent. One series was a 4-0 win. The other two were 1-4 losses. Which was the win?

Sub-par production is easier to excuse when you win, and especially when you win convincingly.

For a more extreme version, look at Lebron versus the 2006 Pistons… and Lebron versus the 2016 Pistons.

[Colbinii]

The funny thing is, I believe Jokic was clearly better this year versus the Wolves vomparef to 2023. The biggest difference is Murray actually played well and the Nuggets won the series handily, so there was little questioning of Jokic's performance.

That isn't the biggest difference.

McDaniels played in the series.
Gobert was healthy.

I would put both of those [since the McDaniels portion is directly related to Murray] as bigger differences.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Quick reminder that particularly if we’re going to do this thing where we scrutinize exactly what the game state was when people got their stats, then Murray really was not “decent” in Game 5 against the Timberwolves. Until the end of the game at a point where the Nuggets’ chances of victory had to be well over 99%, Murray had 10 points on 46% TS%, with very little in the way of other contributions.

I really am not considering a 14 point lead with 3 minutes to go a 99% chance, but I can see where you’re coming from. At the same time, when you go through his misses again it’s like mostly late clock. Wolves doing a good job jamming up some ball screens so he has to set a high one with 4-5 seconds left, etc, so it’s different from if he’s getting good opportunities and bricking them. calling it decent is probably much, but I wouldn’t say it’s a horrible game in that context, but it’s basically a 4/10 night on tough shots and grenades considering he got his putback if you want to erase his last 3 buckets, so a quiet night as the rest of the team shot very well overall, but again you get this weird double criticism where it’s like, he’s chucking and taking too many tough shots but is supposed to take more?

In any case,

[lessthanjake]

Quick reminder that particularly if we’re going to do this thing where we scrutinize exactly what the game state was when people got their stats, then Murray really was not “decent” in Game 5 against the Timberwolves. Until the end of the game at a point where the Nuggets’ chances of victory had to be well over 99%, Murray had 10 points on 46% TS%, with very little in the way of other contributions.

I really am not considering a 14 point lead with 3 minutes to go a 99% chance, but I can see where you’re coming from. At the same time, when you go through his misses again it’s like mostly late clock. Wolves doing a good job jamming up some ball screens so he has to set a high one with 4-5 seconds left, etc, so it’s different from if he’s getting good opportunities and bricking them. calling it decent is probably much, but I wouldn’t say it’s a horrible game in that context, but it’s basically a 4/10 night on tough shots and grenades considering he got his putback if you want to erase his last 3 buckets, so a quiet night as the rest of the team shot very well overall, but again you get this weird double criticism where it’s like, he’s chucking and taking too many tough shots but is supposed to take more?

In any case,

FWIW, ESPN’s model had the Nuggets with a 99.6% chance of winning before Murray made the first shot he made at the end there. And for the two shots after that, it was 99.9%. Of course, that model may not be totally accurate, but I think 99%+ chance is a pretty good guess there.

[OhayoKD]

Quick reminder that particularly if we’re going to do this thing where we scrutinize exactly what the game state was when people got their stats, then Murray really was not “decent” in Game 5 against the Timberwolves. Until the end of the game at a point where the Nuggets’ chances of victory had to be well over 99%, Murray had 10 points on 46% TS%, with very little in the way of other contributions.

Sure. But then he also saved Jokic from a historic choke-job in game 3

[MyUniBroDavis]

Quick reminder that particularly if we’re going to do this thing where we scrutinize exactly what the game state was when people got their stats, then Murray really was not “decent” in Game 5 against the Timberwolves. Until the end of the game at a point where the Nuggets’ chances of victory had to be well over 99%, Murray had 10 points on 46% TS%, with very little in the way of other contributions.

I really am not considering a 14 point lead with 3 minutes to go a 99% chance, but I can see where you’re coming from. At the same time, when you go through his misses again it’s like mostly late clock. Wolves doing a good job jamming up some ball screens so he has to set a high one with 4-5 seconds left, etc, so it’s different from if he’s getting good opportunities and bricking them. calling it decent is probably much, but I wouldn’t say it’s a horrible game in that context, but it’s basically a 4/10 night on tough shots and grenades considering he got his putback if you want to erase his last 3 buckets, so a quiet night as the rest of the team shot very well overall, but again you get this weird double criticism where it’s like, he’s chucking and taking too many tough shots but is supposed to take more?

In any case,

FWIW, ESPN’s model had the Nuggets with a 99.6% chance of winning before Murray made the first shot he made at the end there. And for the two shots after that, it was 99.9%. Of course, that model may not be totally accurate, but I think 99%+ chance is a pretty good guess there.

My recollection is that they use data from 06-16 (adding in new years) rather than the last few where it’s become more common

I wouldn’t call the first shot garbage time but I’d call the latter two, but I don’t think it changes all that much, 4/10 (putback own shot) vs 5/11 isn’t swinging the needle that much for me

[trex_8063]

Quick reminder that particularly if we’re going to do this thing where we scrutinize exactly what the game state was when people got their stats, then Murray really was not “decent” in Game 5 against the Timberwolves. Until the end of the game at a point where the Nuggets’ chances of victory had to be well over 99%, Murray had 10 points on 46% TS%, with very little in the way of other contributions.

Sure. But then he also saved Jokic from a historic choke-job in game 3

What game are you talking about?

[MyUniBroDavis]

it feels some people think that Jokic criticisms necessarily come form a place of hate and trolling without being able to address the actual points because statements like "they were up 20 by someone else and then he started scoring" or "The offense fundamentally failed" or "looking at averages for a series isnt accurate at times if individual games have extreme values" are "cherry picked"

[MyUniBroDavis]

'Decent #2' Jamal Murray in games 1/4/5 was playing like DLO.

Love looking at box scores and ignoring context even when its literally right there

I think LessthanJake (or Peregrine? dont remember who) had a valid point about game 5 though.

[eminence]

'Decent #2' Jamal Murray in games 1/4/5 was playing like DLO.

Love looking at box scores and ignoring context even when its literally right there

I think LessthanJake (or Peregrine? dont remember who) had a valid point about game 5 though.

Ya got me, big box-score guy, love the slash line.

[Peregrine01]

it feels some people think that Jokic criticisms necessarily come form a place of hate and trolling without being able to address the actual points because statements like "they were up 20 by someone else and then he started scoring" or "The offense fundamentally failed" or "looking at averages for a series isnt accurate at times if individual games have extreme values" are "cherry picked"

It's not really hate. Anchoring is an innate human psychological defect. Some on here are so dug in to their positions about Jokic that they can't recognize (or admit) how the #2 in a duo playing as badly as he did - historically bad even - greatly derailed his team's finals chances. And instead of pointing to more obvious reasons like that or how MPJ lost his jumper or how AG's lack of shooting made Minny's defense particularly potent against Denver, they spotlight the blame on some contrived deficiency of Jokic.