What does Jokic have to do to be considered GOAT of all time?

[TheGeneral99]

Of course there are. But no champion faced an easier overall path that I can remember. As in, not having to beat a single contender caliber team. No gymnastics, that's what happened.

"Single contender caliber team."

The Heat made the finals, they beat the Bucks and the Celtics fair and square, how is that not a title caliber team? They had prime Butler, they had prime Bam, they had a very effective Lowry, they had Herro, had an effective Love and some nice role players. That was still a dangerous team that had reached the ECF the year before and took the Celtics to 7. Again, the reason the Heat didn't have an incredible season record was because Lowry missed nearly 30 games due to personal issues, Jimmy missed 18 games due to injury, and Herro missed 15 games due to injury.

The Lakers had a healthy Lebron and AD who are always a contending threat if healthy.

The Suns had a healthy Durant, Booker, Ayton and CP3, who when healthy are contenders.

You can't just change the facts. Jokic, without another all-star next to him, beat Lebron, he beat Booker, he beat Durant and he beat Jimmy Butler.

Giannis was injured for the Bucks, and, no, the Heat didn't have Herro. Lowry wasnt highly effective. Their role players caught fire for a few series, came crashing down in the Boston series and were about to blow a 3-0 lead but Tatum got hurt in the first minute of that game 7. The suns didn't have a healthy CP3 or Ayton, and is I've mentioned, KD played 8 regular season games with them. If you don't understand the impact of that i cant help you. Their bench wasn't NBA worthy, let alone contender worthy. Healthy Lebron/AD weren't always a contending team, quite clearly. I'm not changing facts, that's you. None of those teams were any good that year, and there hasn't been a weaker overall path to a title. Many teams who didn't win a title since 2000 would've also rolled through that path. Those are facts.

Jesus Christ, you the excuses and cherry-picking you will make to your justify your position is mind boggling.

Jokic didn't have another all-star next to him unlike almost every FMVP in the last few decades.

I literally just went through with you how many teams benefitted from injuries to key players in the playoffs and I can give you dozens of more examples if you want.

This was not an easy road - you can make all the excuses you want but beating guys like Durant, Booker, AD, Lebron, Butler, Bam etc. is legit.

[70sFan]

Turn back the time and stop MJ from being born.


It's impossible, MJ is the GOAT of all sports all time and these discussions are pointless.

Jordan isn't close to clear basketball GOAT, let alone this bullsh*t you just made up.

Watch on YouTube

It's funny that people believe I am angry by reading these silly takes

[Ambrose]

I don't think anyone would consider him without at least 3 rings, right or not.

[bledredwine]

That still wouldn't put him above Russell.

I would be more on the Russell bandwagon but after seeing his awful offensive stats and how much his teammates carried on that end, I’m convinced that he can’t be the GOAT.

I had made a post on the PC forum a while back with those stats and it was intentionally ignored until it sank into oblivion. I’m also convinced that Wilt could have done the same thing with those teammates, given how dominant he was on both ends.

So you don't care how good someone is at basketball, but you care about scoring numbers? Feel free to do that, it doesn't make Jordan better than Russell though.

No.

I care about someone having the full package, and you trying to pigeon hole Jordan as a one-dimensional or one-side of the court player just because he's the GOAT scorer is comical.

If anything, Russell was a one-side of the court player between the two.

If looking at the finals, Jordan did what was needed to win, and he was damned effective at it. Russell very may well have, but there's no excuse for having FG%'s in the .300's on low buckets regularly if he's to be in the "greatest player of all time" debate.

Offense is half of the game.

And in terms of winning, you could certainly argue that winning 6 in the 90s without several hall of famers on your team carrying the offense and being by far the most dominant force every series is more impressive than winning 11 in an era with less than half the teams, shorter players, shorter playoff rounds and hall of famers carrying the offense.

Kareem is my 2nd GOAT by a decent margin (Wilt debatable). The reason being, I've never seen someone "have control" over the game like Jordan did, but Kareem has that quality as well.

The ability for Russell to have that without scoring prowess and that inefficiency, if given a squad, seems impossible. Luckily, he had very gifted scorers surrounding him. The 5 assists in 41 minutes wouldn't make up for that either. You need both sides of the court, preferably an unstoppable offensive move, and the high IQ that Russell supposedly had to be in that elite 2-3 player category of complete control over the game. If one of those is missing, you can't be in the Jordan/Kareem category.

Kudos for the 11 championships though, damned impressive, as is 6 for Jordan.

[HighFlyer23]

More championships and accolades


Stats are already there
"Eye test" already there

If he manages to become a good to great defender he cracks top 4 immediately

Already got him in top 10 all time

[70sFan]

No.

I care about someone having the full package, and you trying to pigeon hole Jordan as a one-dimensional or one-side of the court player just because he's the GOAT scorer is comical.

I never called Jordan one-dimensional, but he didn't have the full package. Jordan couldn't protect the rim, he couldn't rebound at elite level, he wasn't much of a screener, he was limited 3P shooter, he wasn't top tier playmaker.

If anything, Russell was a one-side of the court player between the two.

I don't know if Russell's offense was better than Jordan's defense or not (it's debatable), but I'm quite sure that Russell's defense was more impactful than Jordan's offense - that's what really matters.

If looking at the finals, Jordan did what was needed to win, and he was damned effective at it. Russell very may well have, but there's no excuse for having FG%'s in the .300's on low buckets regularly if he's to be in the "greatest player of all time" debate.

Russell averaged 16.4 ppg on 45.6 FG% in 12 finals series he played in and that includes his first and last season.
Russell won 11 out of 12 finals series and the only one he lost was when he was injured, but somehow it's Jordan who did what was needed to win, while Russell only "may well" did.

Also, the idea that Russell can't be GOAT because had a weak scoring series is ridiculous. I can make up completely arbitrary cutoff that would exclude Jordan as well - like him averaging less than 1 block per game in all but one finals series.

And in terms of winning, you could certainly argue that winning 6 in the 90s without several hall of famers on your team carrying the offense and being by far the most dominant force every series is more impressive than winning 11 in an era with less than half the teams, shorter players, shorter playoff rounds and hall of famers carrying the offense.

"Shorter players" is especially funny, I must admit.

Can you tell me why KC Jones is in the HoF? Why Satch Sanders and Tommy Heinsohn were introduced? Have you ever compared how many HoFers played in the 1960s teams on average?

The ability for Russell to have that without scoring prowess and that inefficiency, if given a squad, seems impossible.

Just a reminder that Russell had exactly average TS% for his RS and was consistent postseason raiser, so another failure.

Luckily, he had very gifted scorers surrounding him.

Who are these gifted scorers? Please give me the exact list.

The 5 assists in 41 minutes wouldn't make up for that either.

But Jordan's 5 assists in 38 imnutes would?

You need both sides of the court, preferably an unstoppable offensive move, and the high IQ that Russell supposedly had to be in that elite 2-3 player category of complete control over the game. If one of those is missing, you can't be in the Jordan/Kareem category.

Jordan didn't have defensive dominance either. He wouldn't be able to compete without elite inside defenders, elite rebounders etc. It sounds almost like you need a great team to compete for NBA titles, crazy right?

The funniest thing is that Russell played with various rosters, various teammates and even coached his own team for 2 titles - and yet you doubt his ability to thrive in various situations. In contrast, Jordan failed in significantly more seasons than Russell, never won without Phil, never won without Pippen but it's him who looks more bullet-proof than Russell.

It almost looks like you don't care about what actually happened.

[hardenASG13]

"Single contender caliber team."

The Heat made the finals, they beat the Bucks and the Celtics fair and square, how is that not a title caliber team? They had prime Butler, they had prime Bam, they had a very effective Lowry, they had Herro, had an effective Love and some nice role players. That was still a dangerous team that had reached the ECF the year before and took the Celtics to 7. Again, the reason the Heat didn't have an incredible season record was because Lowry missed nearly 30 games due to personal issues, Jimmy missed 18 games due to injury, and Herro missed 15 games due to injury.

The Lakers had a healthy Lebron and AD who are always a contending threat if healthy.

The Suns had a healthy Durant, Booker, Ayton and CP3, who when healthy are contenders.

You can't just change the facts. Jokic, without another all-star next to him, beat Lebron, he beat Booker, he beat Durant and he beat Jimmy Butler.

Giannis was injured for the Bucks, and, no, the Heat didn't have Herro. Lowry wasnt highly effective. Their role players caught fire for a few series, came crashing down in the Boston series and were about to blow a 3-0 lead but Tatum got hurt in the first minute of that game 7. The suns didn't have a healthy CP3 or Ayton, and is I've mentioned, KD played 8 regular season games with them. If you don't understand the impact of that i cant help you. Their bench wasn't NBA worthy, let alone contender worthy. Healthy Lebron/AD weren't always a contending team, quite clearly. I'm not changing facts, that's you. None of those teams were any good that year, and there hasn't been a weaker overall path to a title. Many teams who didn't win a title since 2000 would've also rolled through that path. Those are facts.

Jesus Christ, you the excuses and cherry-picking you will make to your justify your position is mind boggling.

Jokic didn't have another all-star next to him unlike almost every FMVP in the last few decades.

I literally just went through with you how many teams benefitted from injuries to key players in the playoffs and I can give you dozens of more examples if you want.

This was not an easy road - you can make all the excuses you want but beating guys like Durant, Booker, AD, Lebron, Butler, Bam etc. is legit.

Haha they aren't excuses, and if you want to stand by that not being an easy path (though Minnesota disproved that notion last year), live your dream.

[audiosway]

Turn back the time and stop MJ from being born.


It's impossible, MJ is the GOAT of all sports all time and these discussions are pointless.

Why would it be impossible?? Isn't there at least an argument that the Jokers' last 4 years is as dominate, even if it is a different way, comparable to Jordan's?? Nothing wrong with saying unlikely perhaps, but to say Impossible sounds a bit closed minded.

The guys in my GOAT category are studs on both ends of the court. MJ was a DPOY, 9 Time All Defense, 11 Time All NBA, 10 Time scoring champ, 5 Time MVP, 6 Time Champion, 3 Time Steals Champ.

That's why he is considered the GOAT.

Larry Bird, for that matter was a 10 Time All NBA player, 3 Time All Defense.

Jokic just has too thin of a profile so to speak. LeBron doesn't even match up to the level of MJ.

[playa-hater]

Turn back the time and stop MJ from being born.


It's impossible, MJ is the GOAT of all sports all time and these discussions are pointless.

Why would it be impossible?? Isn't there at least an argument that the Jokers' last 4 years is as dominate, even if it is a different way, comparable to Jordan's?? Nothing wrong with saying unlikely perhaps, but to say Impossible sounds a bit closed minded.

The guys in my GOAT category are studs on both ends of the court. MJ was a DPOY, 9 Time All Defense, 11 Time All NBA, 10 Time scoring champ, 5 Time MVP, 6 Time Champion, 3 Time Steals Champ.

That's why he is considered the GOAT.

Larry Bird, for that matter was a 10 Time All NBA player, 3 Time All Defense.

Jokic just has too thin of a profile so to speak. LeBron doesn't even match up to the level of MJ.

Everyone has a different criteria when selecting a goat. And there is certainly no problem with you using that as yours.

[uberhikari]

Sorry he will never surpass LeBron.

If Jokic wins 2 more MVPs, 2 more championships and 2 more FMVPs and finishes top 5 in points, assists and rebounds when it's all said and done, would he surpass Lebron?

I don't think people understand just how unlikely it is for Jokic to even be top 10 in points, rebounds, and assists. Jokic just turned 30 and he doesn't even have 16k points.

The most points Jokic has ever scored in a season is 2,085. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 8th all time.

The most rebounds Jokic has ever had in a season is 1,019. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

The most assists Jokic has ever had in season is 708. He would need need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

[TheGeneral99]

Sorry he will never surpass LeBron.

If Jokic wins 2 more MVPs, 2 more championships and 2 more FMVPs and finishes top 5 in points, assists and rebounds when it's all said and done, would he surpass Lebron?

I don't think people understand just how unlikely it is for Jokic to even be top 10 in points, rebounds, and assists. Jokic just turned 30 and he doesn't even have 16k points.

The most points Jokic has ever scored in a season is 2,085. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 8th all time.

The most rebounds Jokic has ever had in a season is 1,019. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

The most assists Jokic has ever had in season is 708. He would need need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

He just turned 30 and he's an incredibly high IQ player who doesn't rely on athleticism to be effective. With guys like Curry, Lebron, Durant, Harden, Derozan, Lillard etc. still posting elite stats in their mid-30s and late 30s, why do you think Jokic won't still be posting near similar numbers at age 36-37?

This year at age 30 he is having arguably his best statistical season ever - 29ppg, 13rpg and 10apg on 58%fg and 43%3fg, just incredible.

He also rarely misses games unlike guys like Steph and Durant who have had past injury issues.

The season isn't even over and he likely will be at closer to 16,500 in points by the end of this season.

If just averages 1800 points over the next 7 seasons that puts him just near 30,000.

I'm not saying it will happen, but I think it's far more likely than what you think.

[M2J]

The thing holding Denver back from being the favorites is that Jokic has never played with another superstar. Sure, Murray plays like an all-star at times but he's inconsistent, routinely injured and never even made an all-star team.

Is Murray at the level of any of the guys below?

Jordan had prime Pippen and also Rodman for a brief period.

Lebron played with prime Wade, prime Bosh, prime Kyrie and Love, and prime AD.

Magic played with Kareem.

Bird played with McHale and Parish.

What would happen if Jokic played with a prime Kobe or a prime Steph, or a prime Lillard, or a prime Kyrie or a prime Tatum or a prime Shai etc.?

Some of you people need to get off of Jokic's pants. Jokic plays with 3 other stars (not super) in Murray, Porter, Gordon.... Plus Westbrook and Braun are starring in their roles (as they've had in the past with KCP, etc.). Plus Murray for multiple postseasons, not just the title year was amongst the very best playoff performers in the league with superstar play.

Plus theit offense is actively elite in no small part due to Jokic, but I want to be very specific when I say this. Fans and media and even the league offices don't value defense and even if they had a defensive stud added on here, you wouldn't consider him a superstar...sooooo a superstar for superstar sake wouldn't make them the favorites. They're a strength in numbers team.

They are a strength in numbers team that collapses the second Jokic leaves the floor. Great analysis! I hope Jokic leaves the Nuggets so we can see this strength in numbers team truly shine.

Terrible analysis.

So they need a better backup center as they currently have terrible options that give you nothing on either side of the floor

[bledredwine]

No.

I care about someone having the full package, and you trying to pigeon hole Jordan as a one-dimensional or one-side of the court player just because he's the GOAT scorer is comical.

I never called Jordan one-dimensional, but he didn't have the full package. Jordan couldn't protect the rim, he couldn't rebound at elite level, he wasn't much of a screener, he was limited 3P shooter, he wasn't top tier playmaker.

If anything, Russell was a one-side of the court player between the two.

I don't know if Russell's offense was better than Jordan's defense or not (it's debatable), but I'm quite sure that Russell's defense was more impactful than Jordan's offense - that's what really matters.

If looking at the finals, Jordan did what was needed to win, and he was damned effective at it. Russell very may well have, but there's no excuse for having FG%'s in the .300's on low buckets regularly if he's to be in the "greatest player of all time" debate.

Russell averaged 16.4 ppg on 45.6 FG% in 12 finals series he played in and that includes his first and last season.
Russell won 11 out of 12 finals series and the only one he lost was when he was injured, but somehow it's Jordan who did what was needed to win, while Russell only "may well" did.

Also, the idea that Russell can't be GOAT because had a weak scoring series is ridiculous. I can make up completely arbitrary cutoff that would exclude Jordan as well - like him averaging less than 1 block per game in all but one finals series.

And in terms of winning, you could certainly argue that winning 6 in the 90s without several hall of famers on your team carrying the offense and being by far the most dominant force every series is more impressive than winning 11 in an era with less than half the teams, shorter players, shorter playoff rounds and hall of famers carrying the offense.

"Shorter players" is especially funny, I must admit.

Can you tell me why KC Jones is in the HoF? Why Satch Sanders and Tommy Heinsohn were introduced? Have you ever compared how many HoFers played in the 1960s teams on average?

The ability for Russell to have that without scoring prowess and that inefficiency, if given a squad, seems impossible.

Just a reminder that Russell had exactly average TS% for his RS and was consistent postseason raiser, so another failure.

Luckily, he had very gifted scorers surrounding him.

Who are these gifted scorers? Please give me the exact list.

The 5 assists in 41 minutes wouldn't make up for that either.

But Jordan's 5 assists in 38 imnutes would?

You need both sides of the court, preferably an unstoppable offensive move, and the high IQ that Russell supposedly had to be in that elite 2-3 player category of complete control over the game. If one of those is missing, you can't be in the Jordan/Kareem category.

Jordan didn't have defensive dominance either. He wouldn't be able to compete without elite inside defenders, elite rebounders etc. It sounds almost like you need a great team to compete for NBA titles, crazy right?

The funniest thing is that Russell played with various rosters, various teammates and even coached his own team for 2 titles - and yet you doubt his ability to thrive in various situations. In contrast, Jordan failed in significantly more seasons than Russell, never won without Phil, never won without Pippen but it's him who looks more bullet-proof than Russell.

It almost looks like you don't care about what actually happened.

First, calling Russell’s defense more impactful than Jordan’s offense is a bold claim when neither of us have any idea.

Second, yes, Jordan was a dominant defender and I can never agree with you on that. Whenever he set himself out to shut someone down, he actually did it and his 88 season was the most dominant perimeter defense I’ve seen, point blank. And he did it in a league stacked with defensively gifted guards and centers. If you disagree with that using popularity as an excuse, it is simply that- an excuse. Jordan hadn’t won a championship and though he excited fans, he was getting plenty of criticism. He won fair and square.

Third, when Russell is missing half the game, it’s going to be a tall order to state that his defense somehow beats Jordan’s offense, especially when you consider the scenario where Russell is surrounded by only one allstar like Jordan for the first three peat. Then put him up against Wilt, someone who could play both ends of the court with an allstar and let’s see how he fairs.

I’d be shocked if Russell could win a head to head against Hakeem with the same supporting cast. Jordan could score at will, lock players down and that translates to any era.

[TheGeneral99]

Some of you people need to get off of Jokic's pants. Jokic plays with 3 other stars (not super) in Murray, Porter, Gordon.... Plus Westbrook and Braun are starring in their roles (as they've had in the past with KCP, etc.). Plus Murray for multiple postseasons, not just the title year was amongst the very best playoff performers in the league with superstar play.

Plus theit offense is actively elite in no small part due to Jokic, but I want to be very specific when I say this. Fans and media and even the league offices don't value defense and even if they had a defensive stud added on here, you wouldn't consider him a superstar...sooooo a superstar for superstar sake wouldn't make them the favorites. They're a strength in numbers team.

They are a strength in numbers team that collapses the second Jokic leaves the floor. Great analysis! I hope Jokic leaves the Nuggets so we can see this strength in numbers team truly shine.

Terrible analysis.

So they need a better backup center as they currently have terrible options that give you nothing on either side of the floor

This Denver Nuggets team has net rating of -9.39 without Jokic on the floor ranking them second to last (Washington Wizards with -11.2) while when Jokic is on the floor the rating bumps all the way up to 11.94 a 21.33 net rating swing.



But according to you he is playing with 3 other stars and has a great supporting cast.

[bledredwine]

I don't know if Russell's offense was better than Jordan's defense or not (it's debatable), but I'm quite sure that Russell's defense was more impactful than Jordan's offense - that's what really matters.

If looking at the finals, Jordan did what was needed to win, and he was damned effective at it. Russell very may well have, but there's no excuse for having FG%'s in the .300's on low buckets regularly if he's to be in the "greatest player of all time" debate.

Russell averaged 16.4 ppg on 45.6 FG% in 12 finals series he played in and that includes his first and last season.
Russell won 11 out of 12 finals series and the only one he lost was when he was injured, but somehow it's Jordan who did what was needed to win, while Russell only "may well" did.

Also, the idea that Russell can't be GOAT because had a weak scoring series is ridiculous. I can make up completely arbitrary cutoff that would exclude Jordan as well - like him averaging less than 1 block per game in all but one finals series.

And in terms of winning, you could certainly argue that winning 6 in the 90s without several hall of famers on your team carrying the offense and being by far the most dominant force every series is more impressive than winning 11 in an era with less than half the teams, shorter players, shorter playoff rounds and hall of famers carrying the offense.

"Shorter players" is especially funny, I must admit.

Can you tell me why KC Jones is in the HoF? Why Satch Sanders and Tommy Heinsohn were introduced? Have you ever compared how many HoFers played in the 1960s teams on average?

The ability for Russell to have that without scoring prowess and that inefficiency, if given a squad, seems impossible.

Just a reminder that Russell had exactly average TS% for his RS and was consistent postseason raiser, so another failure.

Luckily, he had very gifted scorers surrounding him.

Who are these gifted scorers? Please give me the exact list.

The 5 assists in 41 minutes wouldn't make up for that either.

But Jordan's 5 assists in 38 imnutes would?

You need both sides of the court, preferably an unstoppable offensive move, and the high IQ that Russell supposedly had to be in that elite 2-3 player category of complete control over the game. If one of those is missing, you can't be in the Jordan/Kareem category.

Jordan didn't have defensive dominance either. He wouldn't be able to compete without elite inside defenders, elite rebounders etc. It sounds almost like you need a great team to compete for NBA titles, crazy right?

The funniest thing is that Russell played with various rosters, various teammates and even coached his own team for 2 titles - and yet you doubt his ability to thrive in various situations. In contrast, Jordan failed in significantly more seasons than Russell, never won without Phil, never won without Pippen but it's him who looks more bullet-proof than Russell.

It almost looks like you don't care about what actually happened.

First, calling Russell’s defense more impactful than Jordan’s offense is a bold claim when neither of us have any idea.

Second, yes, Jordan was a dominant defender and I can never agree with you on that. Whenever he set himself out to shut someone down, he actually did it and his 88 season was the most dominant perimeter defense I’ve seen, point blank. And he did it in a league stacked with defensively gifted guards and centers. If you disagree with that using popularity as an excuse, it is simply that- an excuse. Jordan hadn’t won a championship and though he excited fans, he was getting plenty of criticism. He won fair and square.

Third, when Russell is missing half the game, it’s going to be a tall order to state that his defense somehow beats Jordan’s offense, especially when you consider the scenario where Russell is surrounded by only one allstar like Jordan for the first three peat. Then put him up against Wilt, someone who could play both ends of the court with an allstar and let’s see how he fairs.

I’d be shocked if Russell could win a head to head against Hakeem with the same supporting cast. Jordan could score at will, lock players down and that translates to any era.

I also meant to say one more thing.

If you consider Russell having poor scoring outweighing Jordan’s offense merely with his defense,

How many top ten players can you name who were defensive savants and not offensive savants as well? How many were offensive savants and not defensive savants?

If you believe that Russell would outweigh Jordan’s offensive impact with his defense, that’s fine. But it’s not a sound argument, especially considering that one doesn’t even know Russell’s defense accurately.

[uberhikari]

If Jokic wins 2 more MVPs, 2 more championships and 2 more FMVPs and finishes top 5 in points, assists and rebounds when it's all said and done, would he surpass Lebron?

I don't think people understand just how unlikely it is for Jokic to even be top 10 in points, rebounds, and assists. Jokic just turned 30 and he doesn't even have 16k points.

The most points Jokic has ever scored in a season is 2,085. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 8th all time.

The most rebounds Jokic has ever had in a season is 1,019. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

The most assists Jokic has ever had in season is 708. He would need need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

He just turned 30 and he's an incredibly high IQ player who doesn't rely on athleticism to be effective. With guys like Curry, Lebron, Durant, Harden, Derozan, Lillard etc. still posting elite stats in their mid-30s and late 30s, why do you think Jokic won't still be posting near similar numbers at age 36-37?

This year at age 30 he is having arguably his best statistical season ever - 29ppg, 13rpg and 10apg on 58%fg and 43%3fg, just incredible.

He also rarely misses games unlike guys like Steph and Durant who have had past injury issues.

The season isn't even over and he likely will be at closer to 16,500 in points by the end of this season.

If just averages 1800 points over the next 7 seasons that puts him just near 30,000.

I'm not saying it will happen, but I think it's far more likely than what you think.

You're playing fast and loose with the math. Let's say Jokic finishes this season with 16,500 points. 7 x 1,800 = 12,600. 12,600 + 16,500 = 29,100. That number gets Jokic to 11th all-time. That's still not top 5. To reach top 5, Jokic would need to average 24 ppg over the next 9 years playing 75 games a season. And that's assuming KD retires or gets seriously injured in the next 2 years and stops climbing.

And this says nothing of rebounds and assists.

[TheGeneral99]

I don't think people understand just how unlikely it is for Jokic to even be top 10 in points, rebounds, and assists. Jokic just turned 30 and he doesn't even have 16k points.

The most points Jokic has ever scored in a season is 2,085. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 8th all time.

The most rebounds Jokic has ever had in a season is 1,019. He would need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

The most assists Jokic has ever had in season is 708. He would need need 7 more seasons of that just to reach 7th all time.

He just turned 30 and he's an incredibly high IQ player who doesn't rely on athleticism to be effective. With guys like Curry, Lebron, Durant, Harden, Derozan, Lillard etc. still posting elite stats in their mid-30s and late 30s, why do you think Jokic won't still be posting near similar numbers at age 36-37?

This year at age 30 he is having arguably his best statistical season ever - 29ppg, 13rpg and 10apg on 58%fg and 43%3fg, just incredible.

He also rarely misses games unlike guys like Steph and Durant who have had past injury issues.

The season isn't even over and he likely will be at closer to 16,500 in points by the end of this season.

If just averages 1800 points over the next 7 seasons that puts him just near 30,000.

I'm not saying it will happen, but I think it's far more likely than what you think.

You're playing fast and loose with the math. Let's say Jokic finishes this season with 16,500 points. 7 x 1,800 = 12,600. 12,600 + 16,500 = 29,100. That number gets Jokic to 11th all-time. That's still not top 5. To reach top 5, Jokic would need to average 24 ppg over the next 9 years playing 75 games a season. And that's assuming KD retires or gets seriously injured in the next 2 years and stops climbing.

And this says nothing of rebounds and assists.

Lol, and if he plays to age 38-39 and plays 2-3 seasons and still averages between 10-15ppg, he will get beyond 30,000.

We are only dealing with 7 additional seasons posting elite stats, but that's not to say he won't continue playing past that.

Sure, top 5 is difficult, but your initial post was about top 10, and I think him entering the top 10 is reasonable.

[70sFan]

First, calling Russell’s defense more impactful than Jordan’s offense is a bold claim when neither of us have any idea.

Why do you think so?

Second, yes, Jordan was a dominant defender and I can never agree with you on that. Whenever he set himself out to shut someone down, he actually did it and his 88 season was the most dominant perimeter defense I’ve seen, point blank.

I don't care that Jordan was the most dominant player among the position that is the least dominant on the court. It's like saying that a center with GOAT handles should be in GOAT ball-handlers conversation.
Jordan was a great guard defender and he doesn't touch Russell on defense.

Third, when Russell is missing half the game, it’s going to be a tall order to state that his defense somehow beats Jordan’s offense,

That's your assumption, you never actually backed this up with anything substantial. We've actually seen one-way players being more impactful than two-way players all the time. It's also not true that Russell "missed half the game", he wasn't a bad offensive player.

especially when you consider the scenario where Russell is surrounded by only one allstar like Jordan for the first three peat.

You mean like in 1969 when he destroyed Holzman Knicks and won against West/Baylor/Wilt trio in the finals with only one all-star?

Then put him up against Wilt, someone who could play both ends of the court with an allstar and let’s see how he fairs.

We don't need hypotheticals, Wilt literally lost against Russell with comparable supporting casts.

I’d be shocked if Russell could win a head to head against Hakeem with the same supporting cast.

Russell did that against Wilt, I see no reason to doubt that he'd do the same against Hakeem.

Jordan could score at will, lock players down and that translates to any era.

Never said he couldn't, but that doesn't make him undeniable GOAT.

I also meant to say one more thing.

If you consider Russell having poor scoring outweighing Jordan’s offense merely with his defense,

How many top ten players can you name who were defensive savants and not offensive savants as well? How many were offensive savants and not defensive savants?

I tell you for the 10th time that Russell wasn't a "poor scorer".

Tim Duncan wasn't an offensive savant. Kevin Garnett wasn't an offensive savant. I also wouldn't call Hakeem an offensive savant, though we probably disagree here.
Magic and Shaq are the only player I'd not call "defensive savants" that make my top 10.

If you believe that Russell would outweigh Jordan’s offensive impact with his defense, that’s fine. But it’s not a sound argument, especially considering that one doesn’t even know Russell’s defense accurately.

Maybe you don't, but that doesn't mean nobody does. Please, stop projecting.

[nate33]

3 more championships and 2 more MVP's would probably do it. It would certainly get him in the conversation among the top 3.

The 2 MVP's are certainly possible. The 3 championships are extremely doubtful unless Denver pulls off a miracle draft pick or trade and lands an All-Star caliber player (but not an All-NBA caliber player because that might taint Jokic's extra titles).

[Alatan]

Some of you people need to get off of Jokic's pants. Jokic plays with 3 other stars (not super) in Murray, Porter, Gordon.... Plus Westbrook and Braun are starring in their roles (as they've had in the past with KCP, etc.). Plus Murray for multiple postseasons, not just the title year was amongst the very best playoff performers in the league with superstar play.

Plus theit offense is actively elite in no small part due to Jokic, but I want to be very specific when I say this. Fans and media and even the league offices don't value defense and even if they had a defensive stud added on here, you wouldn't consider him a superstar...sooooo a superstar for superstar sake wouldn't make them the favorites. They're a strength in numbers team.

They are a strength in numbers team that collapses the second Jokic leaves the floor. Great analysis! I hope Jokic leaves the Nuggets so we can see this strength in numbers team truly shine.

Terrible analysis.

So they need a better backup center as they currently have terrible options that give you nothing on either side of the floor

They had a solid backup center in Plumlee for quite a while. They were still garbage. I dont know how you imagine the backup C would help replace what Jokic brings considering most backup Cs are mostly rim protecting lob threats, nothing of witch Jokic bring to the game.
And i bet you never saw Murray try to run an offense without Jokic or MPJ trying to create his shot without Jokic getting him an advantage. It aint pretty il tell you.