2019-2020 Jokic Thread

[Jordan Syndrome]

Jokic is one of these extremely rare players who could see two or three moves ahead of opponnents. Very few players in NBA history had that gift - Magic, Bird, Nash, maybe Oscar (I haven't seen enough of him in his prime). I also see that in Duncan and Russell on the other side of the floor. Who would you also mention here?

Even all-time great passers like LeBron, Paul or Stockton didn't have that gift.

I see Russell, Oscar, and West all this way, albeit with different directions of focus.

I also think Connie Hawkins was like this too, though there's less evidence of this in the NBA, and we do know that Connie struggled with following his coaches instructions, so he was like a guy who only learned to play based on instinct from what I can see. But in terms of "the smartest guy on the blacktop", I think that was him.

I think Jason Kidd is like this too, though I always wonder if he could have found a way to be more effective in the half court despite his lack of scoring attack.

Stockton of course deserves a mention.

Going into the deep past, Bob Davies, Hank Luisetti, and Nat Holman and the best minds on the Rens and Globetrotters seem like the best candidates.

Until recently, I didn't know that you are that high on Connie Hawkins. To be honest, I don't know that much about him and although I've seen a few of his games - most of them were from his Lakers years (so way past prime). Could you tell me more about him and what makes him so special?

Do you like Julius Erving?

Hawkins was Julius Erving 10 years before Julius Erving.

My favorite part about Hawkins was his ability to direct and control tips, both on jump-balls and off rebounds.

[70sFan]

I see Russell, Oscar, and West all this way, albeit with different directions of focus.

I also think Connie Hawkins was like this too, though there's less evidence of this in the NBA, and we do know that Connie struggled with following his coaches instructions, so he was like a guy who only learned to play based on instinct from what I can see. But in terms of "the smartest guy on the blacktop", I think that was him.

I think Jason Kidd is like this too, though I always wonder if he could have found a way to be more effective in the half court despite his lack of scoring attack.

Stockton of course deserves a mention.

Going into the deep past, Bob Davies, Hank Luisetti, and Nat Holman and the best minds on the Rens and Globetrotters seem like the best candidates.

Until recently, I didn't know that you are that high on Connie Hawkins. To be honest, I don't know that much about him and although I've seen a few of his games - most of them were from his Lakers years (so way past prime). Could you tell me more about him and what makes him so special?

Do you like Julius Erving?

Hawkins was Julius Erving 10 years before Julius Erving.

My favorite part about Hawkins was his ability to direct and control tips, both on jump-balls and off rebounds.

Yeah, I know a bit about Hawkins. I'm just surprised by his mention among the smartest players ever. I know he's good and I know he played a bit like Julius (who was also quite smart player by the way), but was he that good?

[Doctor MJ]

Until recently, I didn't know that you are that high on Connie Hawkins. To be honest, I don't know that much about him and although I've seen a few of his games - most of them were from his Lakers years (so way past prime). Could you tell me more about him and what makes him so special?

Do you like Julius Erving?

Hawkins was Julius Erving 10 years before Julius Erving.

My favorite part about Hawkins was his ability to direct and control tips, both on jump-balls and off rebounds.

Yeah, I know a bit about Hawkins. I'm just surprised by his mention among the smartest players ever. I know he's good and I know he played a bit like Julius (who was also quite smart player by the way), but was he that good?

I just want to quick vouch for the fact that you've watched a ton of historical basketball and know a lot. To the extent I have true insight you don't (maybe I do, maybe I'm wrong) it's because I'm going to a place that's rarely discussed in part because of limited footage not because you don't know your stuff right up there with established knowledgeable opinions.

[Doctor MJ]

Until recently, I didn't know that you are that high on Connie Hawkins. To be honest, I don't know that much about him and although I've seen a few of his games - most of them were from his Lakers years (so way past prime). Could you tell me more about him and what makes him so special?

So, let me start by saying that I come by Hawkins via Julius Erving like most people do. I am a Dr. J fan - named myself after him on here - but I've increasingly come to the conclusion that they weren't as similar as the traditional narrative tells us, and where they diverge, I find Hawkins the more noteworthy player.

This does not mean that I'm arguing that Hawkins at his peak was better than Erving, though he might have been. The thing about Hawkins is that his career path is so broken up that there's no question it kept him from reaching his absolute best, and yet, when you look at what he did, it's staggering.

Now let me go next by looking at the history that preceded Hawkins:

Hawkins played what I'll call big-hand-streetball. He also happens to have been a Dr. J level athlete with incredible hops while also being taller than Dr. J, so that's not small thing, but it seems clear that there was a tradition of guys with big hands in the NYC scene doing stuff with the ball that we nowadays basically just don't see in the NBA, and the most interesting thing to me is that I don't think there was any good reason why basketball strategy went away from it.

Being able to grip the ball like that doesn't just allow you to do things in the air while you glide to the hoop, it also allows you to make types of passes (and fake passes) others can't. Consider the way that grip allows you throw the ball in a direction that's not in the same direction as your arm is moving. Consider how it allows you to twist your wrist at the last moment and change the direction of motion accurately in a way no full body motion can hope to match.

Part of my intrigue here comes from playing tennis. People who don't play tennis don't realize this, but true tennis power comes from the wrist, which is only possible because the grip of the racket is narrow enough that you can hold on. If you truly have an iron grip on the ball, there are all sorts of clever little things you can do to create openings not just for shooting, but for passing.

So among guys we know, your Goose Tatums, your Sweetwater Cliftons, your Meadowlark Lemons, you have super-clever guys doing things that aren't just "Wow how did he see that opening?" but are more like "Wait, what just happened?". And Hawkins learned from those guys while being far larger than Tatum or Lemon, and as far as I can tell, far more explosive than any of them.

Stories of Hawkins on the NYC street games tell of a guy who had the savviness of a veteran while he was still in high school. That sounds like hyperbole, but when you get your growth early, you start learning how to use it early. Anthony Davis has proven himself to be a capable quick learning, but he couldn't start learning to be a big man and make use of a truly freakish body until he got that body, which didn't happen until senior year of high school. Hawkins got a head start.

Now, despite me saying he was a savvy guy at a young age, it's important to note that when he joined the ABL as a 19 year old - earning MVP honors over various guys from the NBA - he seems to have been very much focused on just scoring. He scored over 2100 points that season while no one else in the league scored above 1800. The gap between Hawkins volume and the #2 guy was close to the gap between #2 and #10. But his team was more middle of the pack, so it's within the realm of possibility he wasn't necessarily the actual most valuable player in the league despite winning MVP. What's undeniable thought is that people watching at the time saw Hawkins' physical ability as being well beyond anyone else at the league.

The league folds, Hawkins goes to the Globetrotters and develops under a bizarre mentor-rival relationship with Meadowlark Lemon. Lemon praised his physical talent and passing ability but bemoaned Hawkins' work ethic (which Hawkins objects to).

Where things get really interesting for me though is Hawkins' arrival in the ABA. He was certainly hyped as a potential face of the league, but how he'd actually do had to be a major question even to himself. Dude was playing in exhibitions for 4 years years before that, how well would he do having to go up against actual cutthroat competition. Turns out, quite well.

One of the most amazing things to me is that Hawkins led the ABA in scoring while being 3rd on his own team in FGA. He did that by also leading the league in TS% - he was so damn effective in his scoring, which included drawing fouls like crazy, that he could lead the league without necessarily being a volume shooter.

Even more interesting, while playing center and leading the team in rebounding, he also led the team in assists. And if you look at the 3 other guys taking serious shot attempts on the team, all were 3-point shooters. (And note that 3-point shooting was in the ABL as well.) Basically, as a man in the interior, he was looking to draw defensive attention and kick out to the open 3-point shooters! Literally just about the most 21st century thing a guy could be doing!

To be frank, the 3-point shooters were awful by modern standards, and it's telling that as the first season went on, the team started just going to Hawkins to score more and more. The team got better and better, and despite an 11-12 start, they ended 54-24 and then Hawkins dominated in the playoffs to win the title, completing about as perfect of a season as you could ever see.

Teammates said that Hawkins just knew what plays to make. They talk about him as if he was an old veteran, despite the fact that he was the 2nd youngest of the 5 main regular season players and had only played a season and a half (the ABL folded midway through the 2nd season) of official competition basketball after high school.

I'll pause to note that the way Hawkins dominated all major statistical categories on his team very much reminds of Erving. Between this, the agility, hops, scoring, and the hands that allow a "swooping" style of play, it's no wonder that Hawkins is seen as Dr. J before Dr. J. I have to say though that the more I analyze Erving, the more I see a guy who wasn't an amazing passer. Erving's individual talent made it so that running a heliocentric offense around him made sense, and then once that occurred, his sheer primacy allowed him to lead the team in assists. I think the truth is that when he went to the 76ers, while some of the issues had to do knee injuries and a more congested interior in the NBA, fit was a bit issue, and the fit wouldn't have been as big of an issue if either he or George McGinnis were actually as savvy a passers as their box score seemed to indicate.

Hawkins would begin the next season racking up even bigger numbers until the big knee injury. He'd return later that season but as a shell of his former self and the team's record would never recover. (Hawkins would finish 2nd in MVP voting despite only playing 47 games, and playing some of those game after the injury.) After that year he'd leave the ABA for the NBA, and while he'd get back to "full health", those around him said that he was never the same after the injury.

But I tell you what, he was damn impressive in that first NBA season. All-NBA 1st team, Top 5 in MVP voting. The team offense went from bad to very good with a major leap, and while his efficiency wasn't what it had been in peak condition in the ABA, he still volume scored with a TS% of 56.3, which I'll note is well above anything Elgin Baylor ever did.

After that first year, things gradually go down hill for Hawkins of course, and his time on the Lakers doesn't go great. As I alluded to before, it really seems like he was better suited to read & react basketball than following plays the coach draws up. I'd imagine he'd be better at stuff like that though if he'd actually been able to play in college and then gone the traditional route to the NBA.

On that note, my best guess is that Hawkins would have had the best career of anyone to join the league from 1961 (after Oscar/West) to 1968 (before Kareem).

Hope that was worth the read. I'll reiterate that while I talk in a definitive tone often, you and I both know that there's a limit to how much you can really "know" about historical basketball, particularly with a career as off-the-grid as Hawkins was.

[Clyde Frazier]

As said in the broadcast, very special when a player can go 5-13 and feel like he completely dominated

Almost Magic Johnson-esque in how he completely controlled the game without making a ton of shots. Jokic had 22 boards and somehow it felt like he had even more. His defense didn't seem to bad either in that fourth quarter, aside from that late rotation that led to a Harrell layup and foul.

2 other games like that come to mind for me: Anthony Davis in the NCAA championship game with his defense and LeBron in game 4 of the 2012 finals with his passing. He still had 26 pts in the game, but his 12 assists were much more memorable, and many of them came from the post. It was a sharp contrast to his typical playmaking off the dribble and I was really impressed by his patience and decision making there.

[70sFan]

Until recently, I didn't know that you are that high on Connie Hawkins. To be honest, I don't know that much about him and although I've seen a few of his games - most of them were from his Lakers years (so way past prime). Could you tell me more about him and what makes him so special?

So, let me start by saying that I come by Hawkins via Julius Erving like most people do. I am a Dr. J fan - named myself after him on here - but I've increasingly come to the conclusion that they weren't as similar as the traditional narrative tells us, and where they diverge, I find Hawkins the more noteworthy player.

This does not mean that I'm arguing that Hawkins at his peak was better than Erving, though he might have been. The thing about Hawkins is that his career path is so broken up that there's no question it kept him from reaching his absolute best, and yet, when you look at what he did, it's staggering.

Now let me go next by looking at the history that preceded Hawkins:

Hawkins played what I'll call big-hand-streetball. He also happens to have been a Dr. J level athlete with incredible hops while also being taller than Dr. J, so that's not small thing, but it seems clear that there was a tradition of guys with big hands in the NYC scene doing stuff with the ball that we nowadays basically just don't see in the NBA, and the most interesting thing to me is that I don't think there was any good reason why basketball strategy went away from it.

Being able to grip the ball like that doesn't just allow you to do things in the air while you glide to the hoop, it also allows you to make types of passes (and fake passes) others can't. Consider the way that grip allows you throw the ball in a direction that's not in the same direction as your arm is moving. Consider how it allows you to twist your wrist at the last moment and change the direction of motion accurately in a way no full body motion can hope to match.

Part of my intrigue here comes from playing tennis. People who don't play tennis don't realize this, but true tennis power comes from the wrist, which is only possible because the grip of the racket is narrow enough that you can hold on. If you truly have an iron grip on the ball, there are all sorts of clever little things you can do to create openings not just for shooting, but for passing.

So among guys we know, your Goose Tatums, your Sweetwater Cliftons, your Meadowlark Lemons, you have super-clever guys doing things that aren't just "Wow how did he see that opening?" but are more like "Wait, what just happened?". And Hawkins learned from those guys while being far larger than Tatum or Lemon, and as far as I can tell, far more explosive than any of them.

Stories of Hawkins on the NYC street games tell of a guy who had the savviness of a veteran while he was still in high school. That sounds like hyperbole, but when you get your growth early, you start learning how to use it early. Anthony Davis has proven himself to be a capable quick learning, but he couldn't start learning to be a big man and make use of a truly freakish body until he got that body, which didn't happen until senior year of high school. Hawkins got a head start.

Now, despite me saying he was a savvy guy at a young age, it's important to note that when he joined the ABL as a 19 year old - earning MVP honors over various guys from the NBA - he seems to have been very much focused on just scoring. He scored over 2100 points that season while no one else in the league scored above 1800. The gap between Hawkins volume and the #2 guy was close to the gap between #2 and #10. But his team was more middle of the pack, so it's within the realm of possibility he wasn't necessarily the actual most valuable player in the league despite winning MVP. What's undeniable thought is that people watching at the time saw Hawkins' physical ability as being well beyond anyone else at the league.

The league folds, Hawkins goes to the Globetrotters and develops under a bizarre mentor-rival relationship with Meadowlark Lemon. Lemon praised his physical talent and passing ability but bemoaned Hawkins' work ethic (which Hawkins objects to).

Where things get really interesting for me though is Hawkins' arrival in the ABA. He was certainly hyped as a potential face of the league, but how he'd actually do had to be a major question even to himself. Dude was playing in exhibitions for 4 years years before that, how well would he do having to go up against actual cutthroat competition. Turns out, quite well.

One of the most amazing things to me is that Hawkins led the ABA in scoring while being 3rd on his own team in FGA. He did that by also leading the league in TS% - he was so damn effective in his scoring, which included drawing fouls like crazy, that he could lead the league without necessarily being a volume shooter.

Even more interesting, while playing center and leading the team in rebounding, he also led the team in assists. And if you look at the 3 other guys taking serious shot attempts on the team, all were 3-point shooters. (And note that 3-point shooting was in the ABL as well.) Basically, as a man in the interior, he was looking to draw defensive attention and kick out to the open 3-point shooters! Literally just about the most 21st century thing a guy could be doing!

To be frank, the 3-point shooters were awful by modern standards, and it's telling that as the first season went on, the team started just going to Hawkins to score more and more. The team got better and better, and despite an 11-12 start, they ended 54-24 and then Hawkins dominated in the playoffs to win the title, completing about as perfect of a season as you could ever see.

Teammates said that Hawkins just knew what plays to make. They talk about him as if he was an old veteran, despite the fact that he was the 2nd youngest of the 5 main regular season players and had only played a season and a half (the ABL folded midway through the 2nd season) of official competition basketball after high school.

I'll pause to note that the way Hawkins dominated all major statistical categories on his team very much reminds of Erving. Between this, the agility, hops, scoring, and the hands that allow a "swooping" style of play, it's no wonder that Hawkins is seen as Dr. J before Dr. J. I have to say though that the more I analyze Erving, the more I see a guy who wasn't an amazing passer. Erving's individual talent made it so that running a heliocentric offense around him made sense, and then once that occurred, his sheer primacy allowed him to lead the team in assists. I think the truth is that when he went to the 76ers, while some of the issues had to do knee injuries and a more congested interior in the NBA, fit was a bit issue, and the fit wouldn't have been as big of an issue if either he or George McGinnis were actually as savvy a passers as their box score seemed to indicate.

Hawkins would begin the next season racking up even bigger numbers until the big knee injury. He'd return later that season but as a shell of his former self and the team's record would never recover. (Hawkins would finish 2nd in MVP voting despite only playing 47 games, and playing some of those game after the injury.) After that year he'd leave the ABA for the NBA, and while he'd get back to "full health", those around him said that he was never the same after the injury.

But I tell you what, he was damn impressive in that first NBA season. All-NBA 1st team, Top 5 in MVP voting. The team offense went from bad to very good with a major leap, and while his efficiency wasn't what it had been in peak condition in the ABA, he still volume scored with a TS% of 56.3, which I'll note is well above anything Elgin Baylor ever did.

After that first year, things gradually go down hill for Hawkins of course, and his time on the Lakers doesn't go great. As I alluded to before, it really seems like he was better suited to read & react basketball than following plays the coach draws up. I'd imagine he'd be better at stuff like that though if he'd actually been able to play in college and then gone the traditional route to the NBA.

On that note, my best guess is that Hawkins would have had the best career of anyone to join the league from 1961 (after Oscar/West) to 1968 (before Kareem).

Hope that was worth the read. I'll reiterate that while I talk in a definitive tone often, you and I both know that there's a limit to how much you can really "know" about historical basketball, particularly with a career as off-the-grid as Hawkins was.

Thank you, it was very interesting reading! I think I'll have to re-evaluate my opinion about Connie. I always felt that he was amazing talent, but I also thought that him being "what-if" made him a bit overrated (like other guys - Len Bias for example). On the other hand, I was aware how well he played in the ABA and his first NBA season is spectacular for someone's 1st season.

I'd like to see more of his games and I hope I'll get some in future. Thank you again!

[Doctor MJ]

Thank you, it was very interesting reading! I think I'll have to re-evaluate my opinion about Connie. I always felt that he was amazing talent, but I also thought that him being "what-if" made him a bit overrated (like other guys - Len Bias for example). On the other hand, I was aware how well he played in the ABA and his first NBA season is spectacular for someone's 1st season.

I'd like to see more of his games and I hope I'll get some in future. Thank you again!

It's a pleasure to be able to share with those who want to learn, particularly when I know they know some things I don't. Cheers!

[Doctor MJ]

As said in the broadcast, very special when a player can go 5-13 and feel like he completely dominated

Almost Magic Johnson-esque in how he completely controlled the game without making a ton of shots. Jokic had 22 boards and somehow it felt like he had even more. His defense didn't seem to bad either in that fourth quarter, aside from that late rotation that led to a Harrell layup and foul.

2 other games like that come to mind for me: Anthony Davis in the NCAA championship game with his defense and LeBron in game 4 of the 2012 finals with his passing. He still had 26 pts in the game, but his 12 assists were much more memorable, and many of them came from the post. It was a sharp contrast to his typical playmaking off the dribble and I was really impressed by his patience and decision making there.

Jokic's game reminded me of AD in that championship game too!

[GSP]

I agree, Nuggets offense reminds me 1977 Blazers more than anything else we've seen in this decade and it's mostly because Jokic is one of very few players who approached Walton's creativity and ability to run offense.

Imagine Jokic with Walton's defense

Jokic is more creative than Walton was and his ability to run an offense is far better considering he can initiate plays and passes off the bounce and moving with the ball. Much better pick and roll play too not just on the roll but as the main ballhandler. Walton was more stationary and his passing while great for a big was more of a cog in Ramsay system.

Theres some similarities in how they screen and how active all the players are but there were many plays where Walton didnt even touch the ball and it was other willing passers giving it up and running plays. They had more connected ball movement through a diverse attack. Not that Denver has poor passers but almost everything runs through Jokic and his passing. He runs the entire offense and if not its the 2 man game with Jamal Murry. Players like Hollins, Gross, Davis, Lucas etc. all had big roles in the passing for the Blazers offense maybe not quite as bit as Walton but not far behind. Its not the same as with Denver

Absolutely agree on the Jokic comparison, but a note on Walton being a "cog":

Ramsay didn't coach this system before he came to Portland and he came to Portland specifically interested in what he could develop around Walton. So, full credit to Ramsay who after 1977 was considered the best working coach in basketball, but Walton was a unique piece that caused the system to be put in place, much like Jokic in Denver.

But also: This type of offense with the pivot playmaker and the cutting has a very deep history in the game (way older than the NBA). Quite honestly, in another universe, the entire NBA could be playing with some variation of it and the most sought after prospects would be playmaking bigs. We see them as super-rare, because on the whole teams don't groom their bigs to play like this, and thus when it happens, it's because the big in question is an off-the-charts prospect on this front. But I think it's clear that once guys get used to proactively making these cuts, you don't actually need a genius big man passer to make it work pretty well, you just need a pretty good big man passer. It's worth noting that Walton's Blazers didn't see their offense fall apart without Walton so much as their defense, and that's because the whole team learned to play in this way and they made sure to have other bigs who could at least make some passes. That kind of resilience tells you that this system could work lots of places, but there's a lot of inertia to get passed on the front end where having a genius passer makes it a lot easier for the other players to want to learn to play this way.

https://www.gq.com/story/bill-walton-tribute-to-nikola-jokic

thought you two would enjoy this

[Doctor MJ]

https://www.gq.com/story/bill-walton-tribute-to-nikola-jokic

thought you two would enjoy this

The feels. I has them.

Man I love Walton. "The flow and the glow" indeed.