Better Offensively: Nash or Jokic

[falcolombardi]

I'm not sure. Even in the 06 season without Amare, Nash had pretty good offensive players in Marion, Diaw and Barbosa. I don't think Jokic had a teammate on the level of those 3 last year. His best offensive teammate was probably Monte Morris.

But the 2006 suns also were a better offense than the 22 nuggets. In fact all of nash teams from 2005 to 2010 were better than any jokic offense

Hell, the freaking 2012 suns were close offensively to these nuggets and that team had 37 years old nash with jared dudley, shannon brown and 39 years old grant hill as teammates

Yeah, I'm not arguing one in favor of the other - just pointing out some differences in situations. IMO, Nash is one of a handful of offensive GOATs and to be compared to him says a lot about Jokic as an offensive player.

But nash has been in the sane situations as last year jokic when he was in his late 30's (36 and 37) and had similar results

In any result based comparision nash results are above or equal to jokic ones

[Pelly24]

I feel like maybe people are underrating Jokic's last two seasons. He's got a ws/48 of over .30 and a BPM of 13 and he's averaged 27/12/8 on +9 or so TS%. His team has had very good records regardless of who's on the court with him. His defense isn't really bad, and even if Jamal and MPJ were healthy, this still isn't even his optimized roster. Like...Jokic is putting up LeBron and MJ type of numbers, and he's been pretty elite in the playoffs under substandard conditions, too

[canada_dry]

Can Nash carry Denver’s level of offensive talent last year to 6th best in the league?

He probably could do it at age 35.

38*

Sent from my SM-G960W using RealGM mobile app

[OhayoKD]

Nash is a negative defender, but he’s going to hurt you less than a below average center right?

That is a relative argument to which not everyone subscribes. Not everyone is thinking in terms of team-building. It is easier to build a reasonable defence around Nash by virtue of more naturally pairing him with top rim protectors. However, if we had the exact same team regardless, the defensive results with Jokic could be better.

Of course, the funny thing is how that does not consistently cut both ways, with Jokic often credited as both a positional outlier on offence and as reasonably okay on defence because well big men just have that much innate defensive value!
.

I mean if we were to cut it both ways, arguably that would cancel out "relative to position" arguments and we'd get back to just comparing them in absolute terms

[OhayoKD]

I still would like to know in the case of Nash, how if he’s arguably the goat offensive player like many say, how he usually doesn’t even crack the top 25 in peak or career projects. Jokic just went I think 10 or 12 spots higher in peaks, so I don’t see how you consider Nash a better offensive player but not better overall. Nash is a negative defender, but he’s going to hurt you less than a below average center right? This is something the board needs to start being consistent and more transparent about. Also, are we going to continue to slide into this realm, where so many people think team ORTGs is like the be all end all when it comes to these debates? In regards to Jokic, it has to matter a lot that he’s a bigger and more difficult scoring force by a quite a lot. He can’t match Nash’s playmaking as a big man of course, but his passing is as good as it gets for a center and frankly outside of Shaq i’ve never seen a big make people look so silly trying to stop him. He embarrassed the Warriors in those last few games, and they’re really lucky he didn’t have a real supporting cast around him.

As someone who had nash a fair bit higher he ended up i am qualified to comment here

There is nothingh inherently better about scoring more if it doesnt translate to better offense. Jokic being a higher volume scorer doesnt mean anythingh by itself except if it translates to result advantages of some kind

Jokic being the best big man passer doesnt make him better than nash who is arguably the best passer ever. period

Nash scoring, efficiency, turnover and assists profile and even team offense results are very similar to magic johnson. And nobody would ever say magic cannot be better offensively than jokic cause he doesnt score enough

This sort of leads to my point about ORTGs though. We can’t just wave away Jokic’s massive scoring advantage just because he may not quite match Nash in certain metrics. For example I don’t think Nash being better in those will neccesarily lead to better results in a given playoff matchup.

the point of holistic metrics is that individual aspects are baked in.

If nash is sweeping jokic in an impact comparison, then he's doing so with jokic's scoring factored in. So "jokic scores more" ceases to function as a strong counterpoint

You need to rebut/counter the metrics or how the metrics are used itself for "jokic scores more" to work.

[Peregrine01]

So given the heights that Nash has taken his offenses given the talent he had, what's the argument for ANY player over him offensively?

[AEnigma]

So given the heights that Nash has taken his offenses given the talent he had, what's the argument for ANY player over him offensively?

Championship equity, and in Curry’s case also portability.

[falcolombardi]

So given the heights that Nash has taken his offenses given the talent he had, what's the argument for ANY player over him offensively?

Because his lead in team results over the field is much more marginal than someone like russel on defense. Lebron (playoffs) and magic reached similar heights.

Lebron actually has 2 of the 3 best playoffs offense runs ever (the other one is, you guessed it, nash)

Magic has historical results over his full career in both reg season and playoffs and could be given extra credit for doing it without the tactical advantage the suns held over the rest of the league

Curry doesnt have as impressive offense relative to era as nash/magic/playoffs bron (by a small amount only) but as docmj often said, has led the best "raw" offenses of his era and has goat tier impact metrics in offense too

[Peregrine01]

So given the heights that Nash has taken his offenses given the talent he had, what's the argument for ANY player over him offensively?

Because his lead in team results over the field is much more marginal than someone like russel on defense. Lebron (playoffs) and magic reached similar heights.

Lebron actually has 2 of the 3 best playoffs offense runs ever (the other one is, you guessed it, nash)

Magic has historical results over his full career in both reg season and playoffs and could be given extra credit for doing it without the tactical advantage the suns held over the rest of the league

Curry doesnt have as impressive offense relative to era as nash/magic/playoffs bron (by a small amount only) but as docmj often said, has led the best "raw" offenses of his era and has goat tier impact metrics in offense too

What were Lebron's 2 of the 3 best playoff runs ever? I think we have to consider teams that they played against because some of those East teams that the Cavs ran through in Lebron's second stint just weren't very good at all.

[falcolombardi]

So given the heights that Nash has taken his offenses given the talent he had, what's the argument for ANY player over him offensively?

Because his lead in team results over the field is much more marginal than someone like russel on defense. Lebron (playoffs) and magic reached similar heights.

Lebron actually has 2 of the 3 best playoffs offense runs ever (the other one is, you guessed it, nash)

Magic has historical results over his full career in both reg season and playoffs and could be given extra credit for doing it without the tactical advantage the suns held over the rest of the league

Curry doesnt have as impressive offense relative to era as nash/magic/playoffs bron (by a small amount only) but as docmj often said, has led the best "raw" offenses of his era and has goat tier impact metrics in offense too

What were Lebron's 2 of the 3 best playoff runs ever? I think we have to consider teams that they played against because some of those East teams that the Cavs ran through in Lebron's second stint just weren't very good at all.

Is by relative offense (aka how much you score compare to your rivals regular season average defense) and they are 2016 and 2017, the other one in the top 3 is 2005 suns

Is actually the opposite, for example the 17 warriors scored more points per 100 in the playoffs than the 17 cavs but cleveland did it against tougher average defense (in part because cleveland defense sucked which brings the warriors average defense faced down)

And the 2016 run while not an all time gauntlet of defensive juggernauts was actually an above average run of strong defenses faced as atlanta and warriors had both been elite on D that season and toronto/detroit were at least not bad in D for early round oppoments

There is a valid argument about "running the score" on weak defense (applies to a lot of magic playoffa career in the west)

But peak nash and lebron usually played in the tougher defensive conference or with tough defensive teams and thrived

Lebron from 2009-2016 played a insane slate of elite to all time defenses and did overall extremely well

So did nash when his suns faced the all time defense spurs

[Kingdibs19]

Nash only because he might be the greatest offensive player of all time and I'm not sure Jokic is quite there yet.

Oof Nash is probably the most overrated player on RealGM. Jokic is the better player and it’s not even close.

[falcolombardi]

Nash only because he might be the greatest offensive player of all time and I'm not sure Jokic is quite there yet.

Oof Nash is probably the most overrated player on RealGM. Jokic is the better player and it’s not even close.

Based on what is it "not even close"?

[Jaivl]

Nash only because he might be the greatest offensive player of all time and I'm not sure Jokic is quite there yet.

Oof Nash is probably the most overrated player on RealGM. Jokic is the better player and it’s not even close.

I do think Jokic is a better player, but that's not the question at hand.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Nash only because he might be the greatest offensive player of all time and I'm not sure Jokic is quite there yet.

Oof Nash is probably the most overrated player on RealGM. Jokic is the better player and it’s not even close.

I do think Jokic is a better player, but that's not the question at hand.

This is random but has your name always had an "l" on the end? I really thought it was "Jaivi," for the longest time.