RGM GOAT Debate Thread

[KGtabake]

So you think Jokic actually has an argument to be top 2 all time?

Players/coaches obviously know basketball but they’re even more biased than us and we’ve seen time and time again they can have some crazy takes. Even MJ has been a terrible owner.

I love Jokic but he’s not close to being top 10.

I don't have Jokic in my top15. That's my opinion.
If giannakopoulos has a different opinion he has the right to express it.
And bias has nothing to do here. Jokic is Serbian, he isn't Greek.

Of course everyone has a right to any opinion but we also have a right to question that opinion.

I can say Mario Chalmers is the GOAT but I’d have to be able to back it up. Obviously an extreme example but there isn’t much to back an argument of Jokic being #2 on the GOAT list. He might as well have just said he’s also better than MJ.

I’d love to hear his argument though. My guess is that he’s not talking about career and is taking more 1 year impact and that is more defensible. Jokic’s impact is insane and combination of power, skill, and passing is something we’ve never seen before but he needs to do it for longer and win more.

It's like having Ronaldinho as the greatest in football.
His longevity wasn't great but his 4-5 years prime was enough for many people to say that he's the best ever.

Guys like Jokic or Giannis have a great 5 year past.
They've accomplished everything. For some people that's enough. Not everyone is judging by longevity or number of rings.

[CzBoobie]

It's like having Ronaldinho as the greatest in football.
His longevity wasn't great but his 4-5 years prime was enough for many people to say that he's the best ever.

No one has ever said that.

[Message Boar]

It's like having Ronaldinho as the greatest in football.
His longevity wasn't great but his 4-5 years prime was enough for many people to say that he's the best ever.

No one has ever said that.

Maybe he meant the original Ronaldo? I've heard that said about him, but not Ronaldinho.

[AmIWrongDude]

I don't have Jokic in my top15. That's my opinion.
If giannakopoulos has a different opinion he has the right to express it.
And bias has nothing to do here. Jokic is Serbian, he isn't Greek.

Of course everyone has a right to any opinion but we also have a right to question that opinion.

I can say Mario Chalmers is the GOAT but I’d have to be able to back it up. Obviously an extreme example but there isn’t much to back an argument of Jokic being #2 on the GOAT list. He might as well have just said he’s also better than MJ.

I’d love to hear his argument though. My guess is that he’s not talking about career and is taking more 1 year impact and that is more defensible. Jokic’s impact is insane and combination of power, skill, and passing is something we’ve never seen before but he needs to do it for longer and win more.

It's like having Ronaldinho as the greatest in football.
His longevity wasn't great but his 4-5 years prime was enough for many people to say that he's the best ever.

Guys like Jokic or Giannis have a great 5 year past.
They've accomplished everything. For some people that's enough. Not everyone is judging by longevity or number of rings.

Yeah but that’s a different argument than best ever. That’s more who was the best at their best which then I could see an argument for Jokic.

Jokic and Giannis haven’t accomplished everything. Even Messi didn’t win the World Cup until a couple years ago.

It’s not all about longevity but both Giannis and Jokic looked like they were going to take over the league and haven’t been able to do it because it’s ridiculously tough to do so.

[KGtabake]

It's like having Ronaldinho as the greatest in football.
His longevity wasn't great but his 4-5 years prime was enough for many people to say that he's the best ever.

No one has ever said that.

?
A lot of people say that.
Others have Cruyff, maradona or pele.
Ronaldo fenomeno or Messi, Cristiano Ronaldo or Zidane.
It's a free world, everyone has an opinion.

[AmIWrongDude]

It’s impossible to choose a GOAT between different eras. There’s way too many variables.

If Pippen got hurt every year and MJ lost would he be a worse player? Of course not. Out of his control.

The weird cap hike allowed KD to go a 73 team and create the most absurdly stacked team of all time which kept LeBron from winning more rings. Out of his control.

Not saying we shouldn’t all have opinions but when you act like one is definitively right and everyone else is wrong, I dont get it.

[KGtabake]

Of course everyone has a right to any opinion but we also have a right to question that opinion.

I can say Mario Chalmers is the GOAT but I’d have to be able to back it up. Obviously an extreme example but there isn’t much to back an argument of Jokic being #2 on the GOAT list. He might as well have just said he’s also better than MJ.

I’d love to hear his argument though. My guess is that he’s not talking about career and is taking more 1 year impact and that is more defensible. Jokic’s impact is insane and combination of power, skill, and passing is something we’ve never seen before but he needs to do it for longer and win more.

It's like having Ronaldinho as the greatest in football.
His longevity wasn't great but his 4-5 years prime was enough for many people to say that he's the best ever.

Guys like Jokic or Giannis have a great 5 year past.
They've accomplished everything. For some people that's enough. Not everyone is judging by longevity or number of rings.

Yeah but that’s a different argument than best ever. That’s more who was the best at their best which then I could see an argument for Jokic.

Jokic and Giannis haven’t accomplished everything. Even Messi didn’t win the World Cup until a couple years ago.

It’s not all about longevity but both Giannis and Jokic looked like they were going to take over the league and haven’t been able to do it because it’s ridiculously tough to do so.

Giannis has won every single accolade in the NBA by the age of 26.
MVP? Finals MVP? All Star MVP? All Star Captain?
Champion? Defensive player of the year?
All NBA 1st? All defense 1st? All rookie?
All check. Even a minor like MIP.
Only him and Michael Jordan have every single individual accolade to his resume.
Giannis has done that in Milwaukee. Out of all teams...in Milwaukee.

Jokic is a 3xMVP and could have been 4x if not for the agendas. He's a second round pick who has brought his critics and haters into a world of humiliation.
He's the best big since Shaq and when all is said and done he can easily place his name beside him.
He has done that in Denver....in Denver.

Yes, these guys have accomplished everything in the NBA and judging on the fact they have done it with small teams like Milwaukee and Denver, their accomplishments become even greater.

[AmIWrongDude]

It's like having Ronaldinho as the greatest in football.
His longevity wasn't great but his 4-5 years prime was enough for many people to say that he's the best ever.

Guys like Jokic or Giannis have a great 5 year past.
They've accomplished everything. For some people that's enough. Not everyone is judging by longevity or number of rings.

Yeah but that’s a different argument than best ever. That’s more who was the best at their best which then I could see an argument for Jokic.

Jokic and Giannis haven’t accomplished everything. Even Messi didn’t win the World Cup until a couple years ago.

It’s not all about longevity but both Giannis and Jokic looked like they were going to take over the league and haven’t been able to do it because it’s ridiculously tough to do so.

Giannis has won every single accolade in the NBA by the age of 26.
MVP? Finals MVP? All Star MVP? All Star Captain?
Champion? Defensive player of the year?
All NBA 1st? All defense 1st? All rookie?
All check. Even a minor like MIP.
Only him and Michael Jordan has every single individual accolade to his resume.
Giannis has done that in Milwaukee. Out of all teams...in Milwaukee.

Jokic is a 3xMVP and could have been 4x if not for the agendas. He's a second round pick who has brought his critics and haters into a world of humiliation.
He's the best big since Shaq and when all is said and done he can easily place his name beside him.
He has done that in Denver....in Denver.

Yes, these guys have accomplished everything in the NBA and judging on the fact they have done it with small teams like Milwaukee and Denver, their accomplishments become even greater.

I think they’re both amazing. If they’ve already accomplished everything than why should they even play anymore?

As hard as it is to accomplish what they have, it’s even harder to build on it. When they both won I thought they were going to take over because they are that good but it’s hard to do. Everything has to go right.

Jokic is the best big since Shaq and it’s not close imo but he needs to have a period where he dominates and wins rings to get in conversations. No way they should’ve lost to the T-Wolves this year but u could tell he was gassed.

Shaq’ argument isn’t about longevity but about his dominance in that stretch of winning rings and FMVP’s at his peak. Giannis and Jokic are great but haven’t put together a stretch where they take over the league and that’s what needed to be in any kind of beat player argument.

[KGtabake]

Yeah but that’s a different argument than best ever. That’s more who was the best at their best which then I could see an argument for Jokic.

Jokic and Giannis haven’t accomplished everything. Even Messi didn’t win the World Cup until a couple years ago.

It’s not all about longevity but both Giannis and Jokic looked like they were going to take over the league and haven’t been able to do it because it’s ridiculously tough to do so.

Giannis has won every single accolade in the NBA by the age of 26.
MVP? Finals MVP? All Star MVP? All Star Captain?
Champion? Defensive player of the year?
All NBA 1st? All defense 1st? All rookie?
All check. Even a minor like MIP.
Only him and Michael Jordan has every single individual accolade to his resume.
Giannis has done that in Milwaukee. Out of all teams...in Milwaukee.

Jokic is a 3xMVP and could have been 4x if not for the agendas. He's a second round pick who has brought his critics and haters into a world of humiliation.
He's the best big since Shaq and when all is said and done he can easily place his name beside him.
He has done that in Denver....in Denver.

Yes, these guys have accomplished everything in the NBA and judging on the fact they have done it with small teams like Milwaukee and Denver, their accomplishments become even greater.

I think they’re both amazing. If they’ve already accomplished everything than why should they even play anymore?

As hard as it is to accomplish what they have, it’s even harder to build on it. When they both won I thought they were going to take over because they are that good but it’s hard to do. Everything has to go right.

Jokic is the best big since Shaq and it’s not close imo but he needs to have a period where he dominates and wins rings to get in conversations. No way they should’ve lost to the T-Wolves this year but u could tell he was gassed.

Shaq’ argument isn’t about longevity but about his dominance in that stretch of winning rings and FMVP’s at his peak. Giannis and Jokic are great but haven’t put together a stretch where they take over the league and that’s what needed to be in any kind of beat player argument.

Shaq did it with the Lakers. He didn't do it with the Magic.
Giannis and Jokic are playing for the Bucks and the Nuggets. I think that this counts a lot.

[AmIWrongDude]

Giannis has won every single accolade in the NBA by the age of 26.
MVP? Finals MVP? All Star MVP? All Star Captain?
Champion? Defensive player of the year?
All NBA 1st? All defense 1st? All rookie?
All check. Even a minor like MIP.
Only him and Michael Jordan has every single individual accolade to his resume.
Giannis has done that in Milwaukee. Out of all teams...in Milwaukee.

Jokic is a 3xMVP and could have been 4x if not for the agendas. He's a second round pick who has brought his critics and haters into a world of humiliation.
He's the best big since Shaq and when all is said and done he can easily place his name beside him.
He has done that in Denver....in Denver.

Yes, these guys have accomplished everything in the NBA and judging on the fact they have done it with small teams like Milwaukee and Denver, their accomplishments become even greater.

I think they’re both amazing. If they’ve already accomplished everything than why should they even play anymore?

As hard as it is to accomplish what they have, it’s even harder to build on it. When they both won I thought they were going to take over because they are that good but it’s hard to do. Everything has to go right.

Jokic is the best big since Shaq and it’s not close imo but he needs to have a period where he dominates and wins rings to get in conversations. No way they should’ve lost to the T-Wolves this year but u could tell he was gassed.

Shaq’ argument isn’t about longevity but about his dominance in that stretch of winning rings and FMVP’s at his peak. Giannis and Jokic are great but haven’t put together a stretch where they take over the league and that’s what needed to be in any kind of beat player argument.

Shaq did it with the Lakers. He didn't do it with the Magic.
Giannis and Jokic are playing for the Bucks and the Nuggets. I think that this counts a lot.

That’s definitely true. Giannis and Jokic’s teams were well rounded teams and had some luck along the way too though. Fair or not, they have to find a way to win again.

We’re talking about the GOAT list so it’s the absolute best of the best and the margin for error is small.

[UcanUwill]

Dude is obviously biased, but I don’t think it’s as ridiculous of a claim as others will say it is.

Not like Jokic is EL player or ever was one. I mean, its probably Serbian saying this, so he is maybe biased, but its just a take, most of the guys have questionable goat opinions, its rarely universal.

[Luke]

Yeah but that’s a different argument than best ever. That’s more who was the best at their best which then I could see an argument for Jokic.

Jokic and Giannis haven’t accomplished everything. Even Messi didn’t win the World Cup until a couple years ago.

It’s not all about longevity but both Giannis and Jokic looked like they were going to take over the league and haven’t been able to do it because it’s ridiculously tough to do so.

Giannis has won every single accolade in the NBA by the age of 26.
MVP? Finals MVP? All Star MVP? All Star Captain?
Champion? Defensive player of the year?
All NBA 1st? All defense 1st? All rookie?
All check. Even a minor like MIP.
Only him and Michael Jordan has every single individual accolade to his resume.
Giannis has done that in Milwaukee. Out of all teams...in Milwaukee.

Jokic is a 3xMVP and could have been 4x if not for the agendas. He's a second round pick who has brought his critics and haters into a world of humiliation.
He's the best big since Shaq and when all is said and done he can easily place his name beside him.
He has done that in Denver....in Denver.

Yes, these guys have accomplished everything in the NBA and judging on the fact they have done it with small teams like Milwaukee and Denver, their accomplishments become even greater.

I think they’re both amazing. If they’ve already accomplished everything than why should they even play anymore?

As hard as it is to accomplish what they have, it’s even harder to build on it. When they both won I thought they were going to take over because they are that good but it’s hard to do. Everything has to go right.

Jokic is the best big since Shaq and it’s not close imo but he needs to have a period where he dominates and wins rings to get in conversations. No way they should’ve lost to the T-Wolves this year but u could tell he was gassed.

Shaq’ argument isn’t about longevity but about his dominance in that stretch of winning rings and FMVP’s at his peak. Giannis and Jokic are great but haven’t put together a stretch where they take over the league and that’s what needed to be in any kind of beat player argument.

Give Kobe to Jokic and Murray to Shaq, and Shaq would have zero rings and Jokic would be on his 5th consecutive ring by now...

[DimesandKnicks]

1998 was not a superteam, it was a carry job. Pippen only played in 44 games and was injured in the Finals. Rodman was 36 and washed out of the league. Kukoc is in the HOF because of his international accomplishments like Big Z, who played with LeBron.

Game 6 of the 1998 NBA finals is the only game in NBA history where 1 player outscored all of his teammates.

So the LA ship wasn’t a superteam

The Cleveland ship wasn’t a super team because Kevin Love was Trash

And the second Heat championship wasn’t a superteam because Wade was hurt?

Right?

And Jordan beat Malone and friends.

Can I ask you a series question. How did the Bulls manage to win 55 games and take the conference champions to 7 games after losing their best player if the addition of MJ doesn’t put them over the edge and make them a superteam?

The Bulls added Longley, Kukoc, and Kerr to a deep team that won a championship. They won 55 games with defense, teamwork, and hitting some clutch shots. Their point differential was +3.3, for 11th in the league. The 2007 Bulls had a better point differential, +5.3, 4th in the league.

Would the 2007 Bulls + a star be a superteam?

The 96 Magic went 20-8 without Shaq. Were they a superteam? The 99 Knicks made the finals without Ewing. Were they a superteam? The 2006 Suns won 56 games and were 4th in Net Rtg with +5.7, and made the WCF without Amare. Were they a superteam? The 2005 Mavs won 58 games without Nash. Were the 2004 Mavs a superteam?

The Bulls added those role players to a player who was already getting MVP votes prior, already established himself as one of the best defenders in the league and was behind only The Dream and David Robinson in MVP votes. The 2007 Bulls would not be a superteam if they added a star, because again...they didn't have three HOFers.

The 96 Magic went 20-8 without Shaq, but they only played maybe four games against teams that won 50 games. Out of those few they split against the Lakers lost twice to the Bulls and lost to the Sonics.

The 99 Knicks beat the Heat, Hawks, and the Pacers in a lockout year and Patrick Ewing, while a shell of himself, played half of those games. They had depth. Despite this depth they were still an 8th seed. Super teams aren't eigth seeds.

The Suns could have been a super team, unfortunately the game of basketball has two sides to it and they were incmpetent at performing on the defensive end.

The 2004 Mavs weren't a super team, they were a deep team. Where are the three HOFers?

So lets be consisten, were the heat a Superteam, Yes
MVP level Wade (for the first leg), Franchise PF Bosh, and the best player in the league with eilte role players

Lakers? James and AD, then KCP?

The Cavs? Kyrie has never gotten an MVP vote and I doubt Kevin Love is a HOF and even if he is he was absolute garbage in the playoffs

So if a team with three HOFs, one of the best defenders and reboundsers of all-time, and bench player who competed for 6th man of the year and role players isn't a Superteam than neither are those other teams outside of the early Heat teams.

[AmIWrongDude]

Giannis has won every single accolade in the NBA by the age of 26.
MVP? Finals MVP? All Star MVP? All Star Captain?
Champion? Defensive player of the year?
All NBA 1st? All defense 1st? All rookie?
All check. Even a minor like MIP.
Only him and Michael Jordan has every single individual accolade to his resume.
Giannis has done that in Milwaukee. Out of all teams...in Milwaukee.

Jokic is a 3xMVP and could have been 4x if not for the agendas. He's a second round pick who has brought his critics and haters into a world of humiliation.
He's the best big since Shaq and when all is said and done he can easily place his name beside him.
He has done that in Denver....in Denver.

Yes, these guys have accomplished everything in the NBA and judging on the fact they have done it with small teams like Milwaukee and Denver, their accomplishments become even greater.

I think they’re both amazing. If they’ve already accomplished everything than why should they even play anymore?

As hard as it is to accomplish what they have, it’s even harder to build on it. When they both won I thought they were going to take over because they are that good but it’s hard to do. Everything has to go right.

Jokic is the best big since Shaq and it’s not close imo but he needs to have a period where he dominates and wins rings to get in conversations. No way they should’ve lost to the T-Wolves this year but u could tell he was gassed.

Shaq’ argument isn’t about longevity but about his dominance in that stretch of winning rings and FMVP’s at his peak. Giannis and Jokic are great but haven’t put together a stretch where they take over the league and that’s what needed to be in any kind of beat player argument.

Give Kobe to Jokic and Murray to Shaq, and Shaq would have zero rings and Jokic would be on his 5th consecutive ring by now...

Maybe, maybe not. It’s purely hypothetical. Jokic is going to need to win more to be in any GOAT conversations no matter what.

[nikster]

Sorry but if you want to be the best player ever you can't lose that series. Excuses aren't made when you're talking that high of a level

Yes, great players have never lost in the playoffs, especially to teams that are top 3 in point differential!

The 2024 Timberwolves had a better Net Rtg than the 2011 Mavs and 1990 Detroit Pistons.

He was up 3-2 against a team lead by 22 year old Anthony Edwards and couldn't get the job done, it's a blemish. Not like a 2nd best player of all time claim should be taken seriously in the 1st place. I don't think you realize how dominant a player like that is

I don't think you realize how common failures like that are even for the all time greats.

[Infinite Llamas]

Shaq never won without a HOF guard at his side. Jokic has never had that luxury.

[p0peye]

I think they’re both amazing. If they’ve already accomplished everything than why should they even play anymore?

As hard as it is to accomplish what they have, it’s even harder to build on it. When they both won I thought they were going to take over because they are that good but it’s hard to do. Everything has to go right.

Jokic is the best big since Shaq and it’s not close imo but he needs to have a period where he dominates and wins rings to get in conversations. No way they should’ve lost to the T-Wolves this year but u could tell he was gassed.

Shaq’ argument isn’t about longevity but about his dominance in that stretch of winning rings and FMVP’s at his peak. Giannis and Jokic are great but haven’t put together a stretch where they take over the league and that’s what needed to be in any kind of beat player argument.

Give Kobe to Jokic and Murray to Shaq, and Shaq would have zero rings and Jokic would be on his 5th consecutive ring by now...

Maybe, maybe not. It’s purely hypothetical. Jokic is going to need to win more to be in any GOAT conversations no matter what.

There is nothing hypothetical about two top 15 all-time players (or three top 30) winning multiple championships. Shaq and Kobe, Steph and KD are just some examples. If you have a pairing like that, everything but would be a massive failure.

To say that you expect same level of success when 1 top 20 player is paired with Chris Middleton or Jamal Murray is simply an agenda.

[AleksandarN]

Sorry but if you want to be the best player ever you can't lose that series. Excuses aren't made when you're talking that high of a level

Yeah totally agree. It’s not like what Lebron did in his prime losing to a Mavs team with the loaded Heat. Ask you this what team is better that Heat team or last year’s Nuggets team. Lol.

Timberwolves didn't beat the Back to Back Champion KB/Gasol/Phil Lakers, Big 3 Durant, Harden, Westbrook Thunder in the Western Conference lol

Mavs we're way better and I mean way better than the Gobert Timberwolves

Again the Heat was a super team. Last year Nuggets were not even close in comparison. The Heat were over whelming favourites to win. Prime Wade Prime Lebron prime Bosh

Not 1 not 2 not 3…

[Wingy]

Read on Twitter

Thoughts?

Bruh.

Take this trash to the stickied GOAT thread.

[Richardbroraps]

If he continues the same level of play for another 5-8 years and wins a few chips I can see an argument for him being in the MJ/Bron/KAJ tier. But not yet.