Which individual offensive seasons in history have a case against 2023 Jokic?

[IdolW0rm]

Title.

I'm considering
2017 Curry (would easily be 2016 I think without the injury)
1989/1990/1991 Jordan
2009/2014/2018 Lebron

Maybe 2000/2001 Shaq.

But this version of Joker has a great argument of being above all of these guys.
What do you guys think?

[PistolPeteJR]

Definitely worth having the discussion. Without looking at the advanced numbers, the guy is absolutely unguardable. Give him space, he'll shoot the ball efficiently or back you down easily. Double, he'll find the open man every time. Stunt (best option), and he'll still get you a quality shot one way or another. Brings the ball up to initiate offense or simply works off the ball. Takes his time or makes a perfect touch pass. Initiates fast breaks super quickly off of rebounds. Dominating the offensive end like it's no one's business. It's really amazing to watch.

[OhayoKD]

Title.

I'm considering
2017 Curry (would easily be 2016 I think without the injury)
1989/1990/1991 Jordan
2009/2014/2018 Lebron

Maybe 2000/2001 Shaq.

But this version of Joker has a great argument of being above all of these guys.
What do you guys think?

Assuming there's no finals collapse, Magic, Nash, Oscar, and Lebron have years that can be argued. Other players will be mentioned, but that's probably a product of box-fixation(thereby only tracking what happens at or near the end of a possession), than them being similarly good on offense

[rk2023]

Title.

I'm considering
2017 Curry (would easily be 2016 I think without the injury)
1989/1990/1991 Jordan
2009/2014/2018 Lebron

Maybe 2000/2001 Shaq.

But this version of Joker has a great argument of being above all of these guys.
What do you guys think?

Assuming there's no finals collapse, Magic, Nash, Oscar, and Lebron have years that can be argued. Other players will be mentioned, but that's probably a product of box-fixation(thereby only tracking what happens at or near the end of a possession), than them being similarly good on offense

Who are the other players you’re alluding to?

[No-more-rings]

Offense only? Oh wow. These below have a case, none are definitely better.

Jordan: 88-91
Lebron: 09, 14, 17, 18
Magic: 87-90
Nash: 05-07
Bird: 86
Oscar: 62-66?(not knowledgeable enough on Oscar)
Curry: 16, 17

I think that’s pretty much it. I think Jokic has clearly surpassed a lot of great perimeter players offensively, such as Kobe, Wade, KD, Harden etc.

[OhayoKD]

Title.

I'm considering
2017 Curry (would easily be 2016 I think without the injury)
1989/1990/1991 Jordan
2009/2014/2018 Lebron

Maybe 2000/2001 Shaq.

But this version of Joker has a great argument of being above all of these guys.
What do you guys think?

Assuming there's no finals collapse, Magic, Nash, Oscar, and Lebron have years that can be argued. Other players will be mentioned, but that's probably a product of box-fixation(thereby only tracking what happens at or near the end of a possession), than them being similarly good on offense

Who are the other players you’re alluding to?

Jordan, Shaq, and Curry. None of them ran their offenses and all have a significant gap in "quality per creation" not captured by something like oc or apg(though it is reflected in stuff like passer-rating). They also happen to be the guys whose results trail behind "ppg + what ppg their teammates put up" type analysis but there's often a greater effort made to conjure up potential excuses than make positive arguments or adjust priors accordingly.

[IdolW0rm]

Assuming there's no finals collapse, Magic, Nash, Oscar, and Lebron have years that can be argued. Other players will be mentioned, but that's probably a product of box-fixation(thereby only tracking what happens at or near the end of a possession), than them being similarly good on offense

Who are the other players you’re alluding to?

Jordan, Shaq, and Curry. None of them ran their offenses and all have a significant gap in "quality per creation" not captured by something like oc or apg(though it is reflected in stuff like passer-rating). They also happen to be the guys whose results trail behind "ppg + what ppg their teammates put up" type analysis but there's often a greater effort made to conjure up potential excuses than make positive arguments or adjust priors accordingly.

I don't think that running an offense is a viable argument, at least as I understand it.
I'm obviously not the most knowledgeable person as basketball is only my 3rd sport, but the way I view it, there are some players that can provide colossal impact without touching the ball, with Shaq and Curry being the two most glaring examples.
I'd add that what Curry did at the peak of his powers was in fact running an offense. He just didn't need to touch the ball to do it. He could get you the same quality looks (though indirectly) as all-time playmakers by sheer gravity alone. Obviously that's not going to be captured by the box-score, but if I'm not mistaken analytics support that the impact a player like Curry or Shaq are very much in line with the impact someone like Nash provided. Scaled APM has Curry's 2017 ORAPM at +4.47, Nash's 2007 at +4.61 and Shaq's 01 at +4.84.
Quality per creation is also not going to really be accurate in representing the level of the faccilitation someone like Curry provided by just simply standing there. With Shaq that gets even fuzzier given that he played in an era with zero spacing.
But anyway that's just how I view it.

[70sFan]

Offense only? Oh wow. These below have a case, none are definitely better.

Jordan: 88-91
Lebron: 09, 14, 17, 18
Magic: 87-90
Nash: 05-07
Bird: 86
Oscar: 62-66?(not knowledgeable enough on Oscar)
Curry: 16, 17

I think that’s pretty much it. I think Jokic has clearly surpassed a lot of great perimeter players offensively, such as Kobe, Wade, KD, Harden etc.

That's my list as well, probably without Bird though (maybe sneaky mention of Jerry West?).

There is no way you can put Jokic outside of top 10 and he has a very strong case for top 5.

[No-more-rings]

Offense only? Oh wow. These below have a case, none are definitely better.

Jordan: 88-91
Lebron: 09, 14, 17, 18
Magic: 87-90
Nash: 05-07
Bird: 86
Oscar: 62-66?(not knowledgeable enough on Oscar)
Curry: 16, 17

I think that’s pretty much it. I think Jokic has clearly surpassed a lot of great perimeter players offensively, such as Kobe, Wade, KD, Harden etc.

That's my list as well, probably without Bird though (maybe sneaky mention of Jerry West?).

There is no way you can put Jokic outside of top 10 and he has a very strong case for top 5.

Yeah Bird is a “probably not”, but I think it’s at least reasonable. I’m not really sure what he does better on offense though, they’re passing is pretty similar and I can’t think of what he really does better scoring wise.

[70sFan]

Offense only? Oh wow. These below have a case, none are definitely better.

Jordan: 88-91
Lebron: 09, 14, 17, 18
Magic: 87-90
Nash: 05-07
Bird: 86
Oscar: 62-66?(not knowledgeable enough on Oscar)
Curry: 16, 17

I think that’s pretty much it. I think Jokic has clearly surpassed a lot of great perimeter players offensively, such as Kobe, Wade, KD, Harden etc.

That's my list as well, probably without Bird though (maybe sneaky mention of Jerry West?).

There is no way you can put Jokic outside of top 10 and he has a very strong case for top 5.

Yeah Bird is a “probably not”, but I think it’s at least reasonable. I’m not really sure what he does better on offense though, they’re passing is pretty similar and I can’t think of what he really does better scoring wise.

I still think he's a better shooter, especially on a move, and a better off-ball player. That's not enough to put him ahead though.

[OhayoKD]

That's my list as well, probably without Bird though (maybe sneaky mention of Jerry West?).

There is no way you can put Jokic outside of top 10 and he has a very strong case for top 5.

Yeah Bird is a “probably not”, but I think it’s at least reasonable. I’m not really sure what he does better on offense though, they’re passing is pretty similar and I can’t think of what he really does better scoring wise.

I still think he's a better shooter, especially on a move, and a better off-ball player. That's not enough to put him ahead though.

Bird is definitively not a better shooter. His efficiency did not even mantain when he faced tight(er) coverage on that much smaller volume of 3's and Jokic is an all-time mid-range guy.

[70sFan]

Yeah Bird is a “probably not”, but I think it’s at least reasonable. I’m not really sure what he does better on offense though, they’re passing is pretty similar and I can’t think of what he really does better scoring wise.

I still think he's a better shooter, especially on a move, and a better off-ball player. That's not enough to put him ahead though.

Bird is definitively not a better shooter. His efficiency did not even mantain when he faced tight(er) coverage on that much smaller volume of 3's and Jokic is an all-time mid-range guy.

I know, it comes from Ben's work that Bird didn't shoot as well in the playoffs or against good defenses as he did against weaker ones. The problem with that methodology is that Bird almost didn't take threes at all against the best opponents, because he saw this shot as a gimmick. I don't think it's a matter of him shooting poorly against quality defense, but more about him taking less threes (and more heaves as such). When you actually see Bird and Jokic on the tape, you clearly see who takes tougher midrange shots on average.

It's not a given without better data, but I don't think you can say anything like "Bird is definitely not a better shooter". I certainly wouldn't use such a strong statement with so little data available.

[LukaTheGOAT]

What do you guys think of this thought exercise in terms of where Jokic should rank?

"Is Jokic a better scorer than Magic? We know the answer to that. Is Magic a better playmaker than Joker? You hesitate and people might not be able to come to agreement on that. Jokic game has more off-ball value than Magic due to his time of possession being lower, his ability to come off screens, very likely better midrange shooting, his ability to be the pick and roll handler or screener, screen assists, and floor-spacing at the big position. Therefore, it is more likely Jokic>Magic on offense than vice-versa."

[OhayoKD]

I still think he's a better shooter, especially on a move, and a better off-ball player. That's not enough to put him ahead though.

Bird is definitively not a better shooter. His efficiency did not even mantain when he faced tight(er) coverage on that much smaller volume of 3's and Jokic is an all-time mid-range guy.

I know, it comes from Ben's work that Bird didn't shoot as well in the playoffs or against good defenses as he did against weaker ones. The problem with that methodology is that Bird almost didn't take threes at all against the best opponents, because he saw this shot as a gimmick. I don't think it's a matter of him shooting poorly against quality defense, but more about him taking less threes (and more heaves as such). When you actually see Bird and Jokic on the tape, you clearly see who takes tougher midrange shots on average.

It's not a given without better data, but I don't think you can say anything like "Bird is definitely not a better shooter". I certainly wouldn't use such a strong statement with so little data available.

You're framing this like its Bird and not Jokic who has a big volume advantage here. How are you even extrapping Bird is a better shooter if the defense is "well we dont know because he thought 3s were a gimmick". If nothing else that speaks poorly of Bird's decision-making. Magic didnt see 3's as a gimmick did he?

[70sFan]

You're framing this like its Bird and not Jokic who has a big volume advantage here.

How exactly am I framing this like that?

How are you even extrapping Bird is a better shooter if the defense is "well we dont know because he thought 3s were a gimmick".

By looking at other indicators than 3P%?

If nothing else that speaks poorly of Bird's decision-making.

No, it says more about the differences in eras.

Magic didnt see 3's as a gimmick did he?

Considering that he didn't start taking threes until the end of his career, he pretty much did...

[OhayoKD]

You're framing this like its Bird and not Jokic who has a big volume advantage here.

How exactly am I framing this like that?

"The evidence is not definitive in Bird's favor" is a weird way of phrasing things when its bird whose ability to scale up is hypothetical and Jokic's is not.

How are you even extrapping Bird is a better shooter if the defense is "well we dont know because he thought 3s were a gimmick".

By looking at other indicators than 3P%?

Such as? Jokic is an all-time effecient mid-range scorer, tough shot-maker, and has nigh unrivalled touch. Bird is a better ft shooter but jokic is very good there too

If nothing else that speaks poorly of Bird's decision-making.

No, it says more about the differences in eras.

Magic didnt see 3's as a gimmick did he?

Considering that he didn't start taking threes until the end of his career, he pretty much did...

[/quote]
I mean, it was "the end of his career" due to HIV but he was in his prime when he upped his volume(89 is the big jump). As it so happens he also put up his best three ft%'s those 3 seasons to go along with what was his best 3-year scoring stretch(volume and efficiency). Why is that not just Magic improving as opposed to "not taking it seriously"

[70sFan]

"The evidence is not definitive in Bird's favor" is a weird way of phrasing things when its bird whose ability to scale up is hypothetical and Jokic's is not.

But it's not true. Bird on average took significantly more and tougher midrange shots, it's clear when you watch both. You are fixated on 3 point shots, but the league didn't shoot threes back then.

Such as? Jokic is an all-time effecient mid-range scorer, tough shot-maker, and has nigh unrivalled touch. Bird is a better ft shooter but jokic is very good there too

Yes, FT% is a solid indicator and Bird crushes Jokic there. Jokic is an all-time efficient mid-range shooter, but he doesn't have the volume top midrange scorers ever have/had (Bird included).

I mean, it was "the end of his career" due to HIV but he was in his prime when he upped his volume(89 is the big jump). As it so happens he also put up his best three ft%'s those 3 seasons to go along with what was his best 3-year scoring stretch(volume and efficiency). Why is that not just Magic improving as opposed to "not taking it seriously"

[/quote][/quote]
I didn't say he didn't improve, stop putting your words into my mouth.

Of course Magic improved, but it doesn't change the fact that he didn't even try to develop a three point shot before 1989. Unless you think that he wasn't capable of developing a reliable outside shot before he was 30, I think we can assume that he didn't care about it.

[rk2023]

Excluding duplicates

17 James
91 Jordan
90 Magic
17 Steph

[ardee]

'09, '14, '17-'18 LeBron
'89-'92 Jordan
'90 Magic

Personally I don't think any Curry year has a case. His game simply is not Playoff resilient enough.

[70sFan]

What do you think about Jokic and Oscar comparison? At first doesn't look that close and it's far from perfect, but the more I think about it, the more I like it.