1994 Hakeem Olajuwon, 2003 Tim Duncan, 2011 Dirk Nowitzki or 2023 Nikola Jokic. Which player had the least amount of hel

[AMW27]

I think this is a good topic to debate.

I think either Duncan of Dirk had the least amount of help.

[scrabbarista]

To really get at the point of this, you'd need to include all of their opponents as context. I'm too lazy/apathetic, though, so I'll go with Duncan. Jokic would've been my second choice.

[Lou Fan]

All 4 of these are incredible carry jobs but Duncan stands alone here. How he dragged a team with a retiring David Robinson as the second best player to 60 wins and the title beating two teams with prime inner circle HOFers who won MVPs on them along the way is beyond crazy.

[Texas Chuck]

It's more contextual than this, but if we are just going simple like this, yeah its Timmy. And a perfect example of how when we look at peak(unless it is specifically Kevin Garnett for some reason) we don't put much stock into defense. I'm glad we do for KG, but wonder how we miss a guy like Tim Duncan who was an even better defensive player?

But we don't appreciate Duncan enough in general. Lack of self and league promotion, and so much of his value being defense, mixed with the current mix of this board having a strong modern bias, contributes to us missing a borderline GOAT candidate right in front of us.

[homecourtloss]

To really get at the point of this, you'd need to include all of their opponents as context. I'm too lazy/apathetic, though, so I'll go with Duncan. Jokic would've been my second choice.

Not sure what Jokic and the 2023 Nuggets are doing in this specific conversation.

Murray averaged 26 ppg on 59% TS primarily on shotmaking and a low FTr and only 37% of his FGs made were assisted. He has an ATG series vs. the Lakers.

He had the second best on-off and the nuggets with him on court with Jokic off was better than the other way around for the entire playoffs.

[f4p]

Playoffs:
2003 Robinson: 17.7 PER, 0.204 WS48, 3.6 BPM, -0.9 on/off (or Ginobili 15.0/0.152/3.7, +22.9 on/off)
2023 Murray: 21.6 PER, 0.181 WS48, 4.8 BPM, +9.9 on/off (or Gordon 14.1/0.141/-0.2, +20.6 on/off)
1994 Horry: 16.7 PER, 0.152 WS48, 5.0 BPM (or smith/thorpe 14.6/0.126/0.7, just averaged their stats)
2011 Terry: 20.3 PER, 0.179 WS48, 4.6 BPM, +12.7 on/off (or chandler 15.3 / 0.188 / 0.6, +3.2 on/off)

i would say terry's offense and chandler's defense and kidd's overall play make me think dirk had the MOST help. of the remaining 3, murray clearly is a level above anyone else offensively but robinson and bowen were great defensively. horry looks like the worst #2 but is kind of a swiss army knife so gives some offense and defense but neither at the level of the other guys but then smith and thorpe and cassell are all kind of statistically similar so it's a solid overall team, but then smith has a terrible finals and maxwell/horry have terrible TS% in the finals while being the 2nd and 3rd scorers. i would say it's close for duncan/hakeem because denver won pretty easily (but also against terrible competition).

[scrabbarista]

Playoffs:
2003 Robinson: 17.7 PER, 0.204 WS48, 3.6 BPM, -0.9 on/off (or Ginobili 15.0/0.152/3.7, +22.9 on/off)
2023 Murray: 21.6 PER, 0.181 WS48, 4.8 BPM, +9.9 on/off (or Gordon 14.1/0.141/-0.2, +20.6 on/off)
1994 Horry: 16.7 PER, 0.152 WS48, 5.0 BPM (or smith/thorpe 14.6/0.126/0.7, just averaged their stats)
2011 Terry: 20.3 PER, 0.179 WS48, 4.6 BPM, +12.7 on/off (or chandler 15.3 / 0.188 / 0.6, +3.2 on/off)

i would say terry's offense and chandler's defense and kidd's overall play make me think dirk had the MOST help. of the remaining 3, murray clearly is a level above anyone else offensively but robinson and bowen were great defensively. horry looks like the worst #2 but is kind of a swiss army knife so gives some offense and defense but neither at the level of the other guys but then smith and thorpe and cassell are all kind of statistically similar so it's a solid overall team, but then smith has a terrible finals and maxwell/horry have terrible TS% in the finals while being the 2nd and 3rd scorers. i would say it's close for duncan/hakeem because denver won pretty easily (but also against terrible competition).

Not to contradict your overall points, but as a Rockets fan I would say Thorpe was considered the Rockets' second best player at the time. (Just noticed his name after I commented.)

[scrabbarista]

To really get at the point of this, you'd need to include all of their opponents as context. I'm too lazy/apathetic, though, so I'll go with Duncan. Jokic would've been my second choice.

Not sure what Jokic and the 2023 Nuggets are doing in this specific conversation.

Murray averaged 26 ppg on 59% TS primarily on shotmaking and a low FTr and only 37% of his FGs made were assisted. He has an ATG series vs. the Lakers.

He had the second best on-off and the nuggets with him on court with Jokic off was better than the other way around for the entire playoffs.

1. He had a great offensive Playoffs in 2023.

2. He was the leader against bench units in every game, which Jokic did not play against.

[f4p]

Playoffs:
2003 Robinson: 17.7 PER, 0.204 WS48, 3.6 BPM, -0.9 on/off (or Ginobili 15.0/0.152/3.7, +22.9 on/off)
2023 Murray: 21.6 PER, 0.181 WS48, 4.8 BPM, +9.9 on/off (or Gordon 14.1/0.141/-0.2, +20.6 on/off)
1994 Horry: 16.7 PER, 0.152 WS48, 5.0 BPM (or smith/thorpe 14.6/0.126/0.7, just averaged their stats)
2011 Terry: 20.3 PER, 0.179 WS48, 4.6 BPM, +12.7 on/off (or chandler 15.3 / 0.188 / 0.6, +3.2 on/off)

i would say terry's offense and chandler's defense and kidd's overall play make me think dirk had the MOST help. of the remaining 3, murray clearly is a level above anyone else offensively but robinson and bowen were great defensively. horry looks like the worst #2 but is kind of a swiss army knife so gives some offense and defense but neither at the level of the other guys but then smith and thorpe and cassell are all kind of statistically similar so it's a solid overall team, but then smith has a terrible finals and maxwell/horry have terrible TS% in the finals while being the 2nd and 3rd scorers. i would say it's close for duncan/hakeem because denver won pretty easily (but also against terrible competition).

Not to contradict your overall points, but as a Rockets fan I would say Thorpe was considered the Rockets' second best player at the time. (Just noticed his name after I commented.)

i think he was considered 2nd best but the numbers have horry as 2nd behind hakeem in all 3 numbers i posted and i don't think it's wrong to think the numbers are right because horry just did so many different things, even if none were elite. but the rockets are a pretty evenly distributed supporting cast. no one stands out like murray or even terry and arguably no one is actually elite at anything while everyone has notable weaknesses and can fall apart in any given series, but the 5th best rocket might be better than the 5th best of the other teams or at least had a higher ceiling where someone like cassell could just randomly score 15 in a finals game and hit a huge 3 or maxwell could score 30 in the 2nd half of a playoff game against phoenix.

[Jaivl]

But we don't appreciate Duncan enough in general. Lack of self and league promotion, and so much of his value being defense, mixed with the current mix of this board having a strong modern bias, contributes to us missing a borderline GOAT candidate right in front of us.

I think Duncan not being considered a GOAT contender has more to do with him not being a GOAT contender.

[falcolombardi]

But we don't appreciate Duncan enough in general. Lack of self and league promotion, and so much of his value being defense, mixed with the current mix of this board having a strong modern bias, contributes to us missing a borderline GOAT candidate right in front of us.

I think Duncan not being considered a GOAT contender has more to do with him not being a GOAT contender.

The phrasing used was "borderline goat contender" and i think duncan prime + career longevity and achievements put him in a very good spot among those who dont quite have a legit goat case (the current consensus on who those are morphing around mj, lebron, kareem and russel)

Duncan is a bit of a gatekeeper of sorts

[Jaivl]

Of those runs, I'd say Duncan's is the only one that consistently had less help than his opposition (except vs the Suns). Probably one of the most impressive ever in that regard.

I don't even register 2023 Jokic or 2011 Dirk on that convo.

[FuShengTHEGreat]

The only player in NBA history to lead a team in all 5 categories throughout the playoffs to a title.....Hakeem.

In the 94 Finals 4 out of 5 the NY Knicks starters outplayed Houstons over the course of the series.....the only advantage Houston had was Olajuwon outscoring Ewing h2h by a wide margin.

[TheGOATRises007]

Dirk and Jokic shouldn't be in this conversation. They had a good supporting cast.

Splitting hairs between Duncan or Hakeem.

[lessthanjake]

I think it’s Hakeem. But I also think that team was lucky to come in a bit of a down year for top teams in the league. That’s in significant part because Jordan was out, but it’s not even just that. The Suns weren’t quite as strong as the prior year (though the downturn was in part due to Barkley and KJ missing some regular season games, and they were there for the playoffs). The Jazz weren’t as good as they’d be in the next few years. The Sonics were great in the regular season and then managed to lose in the first round. I do think the Knicks were actually at the peak of their powers that year, but they struggled a lot in the playoffs even against inferior teams, and, in any event, the representative from the East was definitely worse than normal for that era, given the lack of the Jordan Bulls. I don’t really think the 1994 Rockets would’ve won the title in any other year of the 1990s.

That said, the same kind of story could be told for all these teams. The 2023 Nuggets definitely benefited from a year without a standout team. The 2011 Mavs faced some very good teams, but all of them were at the end of the line (the Lakers) or not quite as good as they’d later be (Heat and Thunder), such that that year might well have been the only year in there that that Mavs team could’ve won. And, of course, the 2003 Spurs faced a Lakers team that wasn’t as strong as it had been. I think this sort of thing is always part of the story with “carry job” titles—no matter how good someone is, you can’t really win a title with a relatively untalented team in a year where there’s some hyper-talented juggernaut at the peak of its powers.

[One_and_Done]

It's clearly Duncan in a vacuum.

Now the context is that the league is stronger today, but I feel very confident 03 Duncan has a bigger impact than any of these other guys, then or now.

[parsnips33]

It's clearly Duncan in a vacuum.

Now the context is that the league is stronger today, but I feel very confident 03 Duncan has a bigger impact than any of these other guys, then or now.

I think it's interesting you should say this, because it's not really the question being asked, but it seems to be implied.

Like if the Spurs supporting cast was a lot better in 2003, would Duncan still have a bigger impact than the other guys? If so, what is really the point of this exercise?

[homecourtloss]

To really get at the point of this, you'd need to include all of their opponents as context. I'm too lazy/apathetic, though, so I'll go with Duncan. Jokic would've been my second choice.

Not sure what Jokic and the 2023 Nuggets are doing in this specific conversation.

Murray averaged 26 ppg on 59% TS primarily on shotmaking and a low FTr and only 37% of his FGs made were assisted. He has an ATG series vs. the Lakers.

He had the second best on-off and the nuggets with him on court with Jokic off was better than the other way around for the entire playoffs.

1. He had a great offensive Playoffs in 2023.

2. He was the leader against bench units in every game, which Jokic did not play against.

Not sure how this relates to anything – the question is about who has the least amount of help and in 2023 Murray had an incredible playoffs, a playoff run better than most “best player on the team“ playoff performances.

[scrabbarista]

Not sure what Jokic and the 2023 Nuggets are doing in this specific conversation.

Murray averaged 26 ppg on 59% TS primarily on shotmaking and a low FTr and only 37% of his FGs made were assisted. He has an ATG series vs. the Lakers.

He had the second best on-off and the nuggets with him on court with Jokic off was better than the other way around for the entire playoffs.

1. He had a great offensive Playoffs in 2023.

2. He was the leader against bench units in every game, which Jokic did not play against.

Not sure how this relates to anything – the question is about who has the least amount of help and in 2023 Murray had an incredible playoffs, a playoff run better than most “best player on the team“ playoff performances.

That's a big exaggeration when we consider:

A) the offensive environment in 2023 relative to history

and

B) he had a teammate who ---

*averaged 30.0 ppg 13.5 rpg 9.5 apg 1.1 spg 1 bpg
*shot 55/46/80 (.631 TS%),
*lead the Playoffs in points, rebounds, and assists (first in NBA history)
*had a USG% over 30
*had a PER of 31.2 (third all-time for an NBA champion, behind Mikan and Jordan)
*had a 12.8 BPM (second all-time for a champion, behind Jordan)
*was top five among all NBA champions in WS/48
*is arguably the greatest offensive player in NBA history

--- to relieve the pressure off of him.

Murray had a great 2023 Playoffs, but it wasn't done in a vacuum, and it certainly wasn't a 1a - or even a 1b.

[Lou Fan]

Weird to me that people are saying 11 Dirk and 23 Jokic aren't carry jobs. Dirk had a very nicely constructed ensemble around him but nothing resembling a second star which is rare as far as championship teams go. Jokic had a very weak second star by championship standards and a team without a lot of depth. I can see arguing the Hakeem and Duncan carries are another tier but to say Dirk and Jokic aren't carries at all is silly. There aren't many title teams that had less support for their top guys.