Peregrine01 wrote:falcolombardi wrote:I am getting flashbacks to when people would blame the lebron system on why his team was bad when he was on the bench which is a logic that nobody ever has applied to other players with their own systems around them
(Forever bitterly pointing that out and the "limited ceiling in spite of better team offenses than the guys he is theorically less of a ceiling raiser thsn" bit)
Now back to jokic. Denver is an engine built to be optimized and brought together by Jokic, so if we apply the reasoning that a lot of this board has used to criticize other players portability or ceiling raising he would be responsible for his teammates being dependant on him when he sits. Of course that would be stupid but i wanted to point it out
The idea that Jokic as an engine cannot conceivably have ubderperformed because his team was bad without him doesnt hold to scrutiny because they were not exactly setting the world on fire with jokic there
Jokic for all of his genius and brilliant skillset struggled with bruteforcing shot creation (imo due to the inherent weak point of not being a ball handler) as he created minuscule advantages and the clock was constantly reset, while being doubled and passing back and forcing the D to scramble to recovet is -good- it is not -great- as creating a opem 3 off a drive is
denver team was built to optimize a post offense with their spscing and lob threat/cutter, unfortunately whether it’s the limits to Jokic’s post offense or post offense in general, it failed to produce trong offense results.
Jokic had a good offensive rating in 3 of 7 games, one of which he only performed at all in the second half after jamal brought denver up 23
This is not to say it was a bad series, but i think it showed that despite his skill/vision jokic offense is not some unstopabble or perfect dynamo
Because maybe, just maybe, teammates matter? Watching Kyrie and Luka beat Minny's ball pressure was night and day compared to the hell that they had Murray in. We also can't underestimate how taxing ball pressure is and the fact that Minny just emerged from a 7-game war that probably had their legs spent. Ant especially looked worn out.
Agree on post offense though which is why I don't think Malone coached that series well.
Yeah, and I think matchups have to be considered.
Like yes, the Mavs could perform better than the Wolves. Matchups matter, and the Timberwolves are specifically built to beat the Nuggets, in large part thanks to Tim Connelly probably understanding his old stomping grounds quite well.
I don't think GOAT offensive players will always have their teams put up the best offensive results. Sometimes it can be the most unlikely individuals, who just seem to know how to work their way around something.
Compare the Michael Jordan's "rough," performance against the Knicks in 1993 versus Reggie Miller's performance against the same team.
1993 Reggie Miller vs Knicks
31.5 ppg on 68.7 TS%
Rough estimate because they BR numbers but Miller had a 129 ORTG on the court
1993 Jordan vs Knicks
32.2 ppg on 52.2 TS%
Jordan had a 113 ORTG on the court.
Just off a quick look at this, you could argue that Miller was scraping or even exceeding MJ's impact against the Knicks. He didn't do as much on ball handling or playmaking as MJ, but I think what lead to the Pacers success on that end was that they were not ready for the incessant moving of Miller all over the court. I believe they were more prepared for a more direct attacking style of an on-ball star, because well that is more common for stars to do. This meant they couldn't stop themselves from fouling him off-ball or when he finally did put the ball on the floor, the idiosyncratic rhythm to his dribble, which got guys off-balance and when they made contact with him, meant he would hoist up a shot which often lead to a foul. They also weren't prepared for someone to be jacking from 3 so frequently (he was taking them at today's rates), and with FG% being so dominant, it didn't quite hit them just how efficient Miller's 3s were.
This isn't a a one-off thing. You can look at the surrounding stretches, and it definitely seems like the Knicks struggled to contain the Pacers offense more than Chicago's.
1992 Jordan vs Knicks
31.3 ppg on 53.9 TS%
Jordan-107 ORTG
1994 Miller vs Knicks
24.7 ppg on 57.6 TS%
Miller-123 ORTG
Miller go the worst of Knicks defenses, as the 93 and 94 Knicks put up a -8.3 and -8.1 rDRTG, respectively, which are the 3rd and 4th best defenses ever. No single core can lay claim to having 2 single-years in the top 5 of similar ever. So similiar to how people describe the Timberwolves now, this was an all-time defense that made things more difficult on acclaimed GOAT level offensive guys.
Now I don't think anyone would dare to say Miller was in the same tier as Jordan as an offensive player. As a matter of fact, people believe there are several tiers between them. I can rarely get people here to see Miller as a potential top 10 scorer ever case, and therefore that trickles down to him not being seen as that great of an offensive guy (merely a feeble all-star in many minds).
And this is my point, if the Mavs performed better than the Nuggets, I don't see that as automatically damning, because I think you could argue Minn. doesn't take away Dallas' strengths as much as they do, Denver's; Peregrine01 already mentioned the handling. It is naturally harder to double a smart ball-handler vs. a smart post guy, because a handler can navigate more around the court typically. I think Minn. doubles hurt Jokic more than most doubles.
Finally, as illustrated above, clearly lesser players have been able to lead better offenses than their superior counterparts depending on matchups, and I'd think it be shrewd to consider, who has really dampened Jokic's scoring since he started putting up what some people consider a ATG plus-minus numbers (which started in 22)...really it's been the Wolves last playoffs and this playoffs, and that's it.
Now you could compare Jokic and Luka against similar opponents against since they have debuted in the playoffs. I've done those comparisons, and Luka actually looks quite favorable there, but that was not the original assertion.
