How are people not putting Jokic in their top 15 yet?

[dhsilv2]

Again, I don’t get this thread.
Raise your hand if you don’t have Jokic among the 15 best players of all time (not the greatest).
And if that’s the case, say who your #15 is.

He's not one of the top 15 NBA players ever.

The recency bias is very strong in these forums.

There's no "recency bias" need to argue for a guy who has had 5 straight seasons in the top 2 in MVP voting. There literally are not 15 guys who have done this and if someone's ranking is based on how good a player was at their peak, there's not much more to argue. He's clearly a top 15 guy by that fairly reasonable criteria. If you care more about longevity it's a bit more difficult to argue for him there yet, but he's awfully close by that standard too.

[threethehardway]

Jordan was never a lazy defender. Stop lying and writing fan faction please. I watched the games in the 90s with MJ. Offensive players didn't even want to test him. Jordan isn't a great defender is not a serious take. The guy tries on defense even in Washington. Just ask Ron Mercer. He didn't just win DPOY, he was all-defense first team 9 times.

Also, you are just being obtuse. I don't even need to use Jordan as an example. What about Lebron? What about Olajuwon? What about Duncan? What about Adul-Jabbar? Great players can play both ways and often do.

And also, what does team sport has to do with anything? You are responsible for your performance. It is like saying you can slack off on your job because your company is one team. Do that see what your boss say. Jokic isn't playing defense for his teammates, he is playing defense to win and to set an example for his team. That is what high performers do in every company.

Now, you are writing the classic "Jordan was the do it winner that nobody wanted to come across" and "It's like working at a company."

This is the prime of example of sports being middle class corporation loving middle class cope.


LeBron is a lazy defender too outside until his last two years with the Cavs and his stint in Miami where he was forced to play the elite defense due to how weak the Heat were at the 4 and 5. He was the biggest, most athletic player on the team, he didn't have a choice.

Most of the All-Time GOAT perimeter players were lazy defenders because they carry a heavy offensive load.

They tried in spurts or used their energy to make splash plays. They weren't defensive stoppers.

Magic Johnson was lazy
LeBron is lazy
Kobe was lazy
Jordan was lazy

These guys are not defensive players with good technique or motor. They were try-hard defenders at best during certain times in their careers and for their career, they grade out at average or neutral defenses.

LeBron proved he could anchor an entire defense by himself and when he didn't have to do it anymore, he stopped doing it because he was worth more on offense.

Every star perimeter offensive player does it.

To think they don't is being naive.

"Jordan tries his best on defense."

Yeah, when he was young and wanted to prove a point.

When he got Pippen, you think he was flying around like in his DPOY year?

Fans kill me when they call star GOAT offensive players great defenders off of reputation.

Most All-star GOAT perimeter player are lazy on defense is not a serious argument. Jordan was a 9 time all-defense. So he only tried for 9 years? Is that really your argument? Anybody can make up stuff using unprovable words like "lazy." I can make up stuff too. Kobe was crazy, and he was imaging an alien invasion while playing ball. Besides, why are you limiting this argument to GOATs? By your logic, anyone who averaged 25+ points must be lazy on defense right? Since they need to reserve energy for scoring.

Also, if Jordan was lazy on defense, what does that make Jokic? A corpse? Does that really help your argument? So Giannis is lazy on defense? What does that make Jokic? A lamppost?

Jordan was all defensive team off of reputation and his splash plays

Kobe Bryant was on all defensive teams well into his 30s and he didn't play solid defense since 2003.

Fans don't like to account for the marketing aspect of the NBA.

Jordan was anointed as a GOAT before he even won a championship, you really think they weren't gonna give him All Def-Teams while on the best team that he was the face of?

Plus the competition at SG wasn't that deep. They gonna give 1st Team All Defense to Alvin Robertson over MJ?

LeBron almost got DPOY with his final years with the Cavs simply because his chase down blocks was making Sportscenter Top 10.

And Jokic is lazy on defense and he isn't vertically athletic.

I never said Jokic was good on defense. He's bad. I just don't care that he is that good on offense. He isn't a Tim Duncan level of offensive player. He's LeBron/Shaq/Magic/MJ level.

Only GOAT offensive juggernaut that was legitimately a defensive anchor for a championship team was LeBron with the Heat.

The rest had help and was hidden.

LeBron was the best rim protector and perimeter defender and he stepped up and carried those teams both ways at an ATG level that we will never see again. It won't be appreciated until he retires and weirdos get over the fact he's probably the best player ever.

When he had to, he stepped up.

But yeah, GOAT offensive players aren't great defenders for their entire career, it doesn't happen. The offensive load is too much and on championship squads they get help.

Holding Jokic to the standard of being a great defensive player when Magic wasn't is silly. They are basically the same type of player.

[JN61]

I only respect elite 2-way players, so Jokic will never make it onto my list.
Jokic will never reach Giannis level.
For the last 6 years, Giannis has averaged 29.9 points, 11.9 rebounds, 6.0 assists, .575 field, and been one of the very best defenders in the NBA.

And even while lazing around defensively, Jokic never even scored 30ppg.
GIannis 2024-25 = 30.4 points, 11.9 rebounds, 6.5 assists, .601 fielding
Giannis 2023-24 = 30.4 points, 11.5 rebounds, 6.5 assists, .611 fielding

And Jokic's lack of athleticism is no excuse.
Larry Bird was not athletic, and he was still an elite 2-way player.

Claiming Bird was an "elite" defender is ludicrous.

Not as ludicrous as having Jokic or Curry in top 15.

[bonita_the_frog]

I only respect elite 2-way players, so Jokic will never make it onto my list.
Jokic will never reach Giannis level.
For the last 6 years, Giannis has averaged 29.9 points, 11.9 rebounds, 6.0 assists, .575 field, and been one of the very best defenders in the NBA.

And even while lazing around defensively, Jokic never even scored 30ppg.
GIannis 2024-25 = 30.4 points, 11.9 rebounds, 6.5 assists, .601 fielding
Giannis 2023-24 = 30.4 points, 11.5 rebounds, 6.5 assists, .611 fielding

And Jokic's lack of athleticism is no excuse.
Larry Bird was not athletic, and he was still an elite 2-way player.

Claiming Bird was an "elite" defender is ludicrous.

Not as ludicrous as having Jokic or Curry in top 15.

Plus i never said Bird was an elite defender, i said Bird was an "elite 2-way player", because he's an elite player (3-time MVP) and he's a 3-time All-Defensive member.

He's an elite player who is also a 2-way player = 2-way player is when you are an All-Defensive teamer or at least WORTHY of All-Defensive which Jokic clearly is NOT

If you are a big man you are supposed to protect your team from forces at the rim more than anything, and Jokic is one of the very worst at that, among the highest opponent fg% at the rim.

[Joao Saraiva]

A pure one way heliocentric player who has only beat one 50 win team in his career. Two conferences finals in his decade long career. Is that the same many as Damian Lillard? Lol how can a player be top 10 all time when we simply haven't seen him on the biggest most pressure packed rounds enough? Doesn't play defense at all in the regular season and is declining rapidly on defense if Eurobasket was any indication. One of the only MVPs to win the award with a losing record vs winning teams on the year and many wanted him to win it again last year when he was only on the court for 14 wins vs winning teams.

Lol top ten all time. Silly rabbits. Tricks are for kids.

Declining rapidly.... dude literally dominated the league in advanced metrics for as much time as only Bron and MJ did. LOL

It's hard to beat a lot of teams when the reinforcement is washed Westbrook. When LBJ and Davis got that support they missed the playoffs... let that sink in.

I don't think Westbrook was the issue, nonetheless the hate is so weird.

He wasn't, not with the value of his contract. But we're expecting Jokic with those casts to beat OKC that is possibly the best defense of the modern era. I mean... It's just wierd that people don't understand it's a team game.

[DimesandKnicks]

You keep posting stats saying Jokic is at xyz based on his difference. Take the average, which the metrics you already pulled does. And just do the math. 2 points per shot, this reduces shots by this and jokic does this. The difference is the impact. This isn't complex math. I've done just that a few times for you to simply dismiss it and thus I'm not going to keep doing it when you don't engage.

Meanwhile you keep changing the metrics. One thing it per game, one is per 100 another is percentages. Jokic lead all centers in minutes, he's going to be high on a lot of good and bad per game metrics because he played more minutes than other centers. The guy was 4th in minutes per game after all. The next center was KAT at 20th and then Sabonis at 23rd. Also showing the "see bad defenders do this" doesn't really work if all the guys you call bad are also the leaders in minutes.

The problem remains you keep posting stats that show Jokic is bad at what we're generally in agreement with. Our difference in agreement is on the impact of those weaknesses and the offsets in his defensive play making. But forget all the offsets. I'm asking you to breakdown what what those field goal percentage difference would mean vs just the average. It's the (average FG%-Jokic Defensive FG%)*2*volume...that's the math. You keep posting the stats. You don't respond when I do it. Unless you think rim shots are 3's...then this is a very easy starting point.

I’m saying Jokic is bad at defense based off the many things he’s bad at defense at

Maybe I’m just dumb but the bold isn’t a formula that I can input numbers in. U keep saying calibrating this is so easy. I keep telling you idk how to and u keep giving a vague directive as to how to do so instead of just doing what u call simple than giving an abstract process of out to derive at an impact that I don’t agree has any value.

Your a bad faith argued. And I’m good on you.

Meanwhile you keep changing the metrics. One thing it per game, one is per 100 another is percentages.

This is just an out right lie. I gave u per game data, how is percentages compare vs the average. I dont believe I offered one per 100 metric

You keep posting field goal differentials to show Jokic is a bad rim protector. What's complicated about calculating that? It's like you found a post on reddit with stats against Jokic and just re-posted it here without knowing what any of it means.

I don't understand the hesitancy of you calculating something that your saying would take 5 to 10 minutes to calculate when I'm admitting idk how to calculate it.

[dhsilv2]

I’m saying Jokic is bad at defense based off the many things he’s bad at defense at

Maybe I’m just dumb but the bold isn’t a formula that I can input numbers in. U keep saying calibrating this is so easy. I keep telling you idk how to and u keep giving a vague directive as to how to do so instead of just doing what u call simple than giving an abstract process of out to derive at an impact that I don’t agree has any value.

Your a bad faith argued. And I’m good on you.



This is just an out right lie. I gave u per game data, how is percentages compare vs the average. I dont believe I offered one per 100 metric

You keep posting field goal differentials to show Jokic is a bad rim protector. What's complicated about calculating that? It's like you found a post on reddit with stats against Jokic and just re-posted it here without knowing what any of it means.

I don't understand the hesitancy of you calculating something that your saying would take 5 to 10 minutes to calculate when I'm admitting idk how to calculate it.

I went down this path in the last thread and was ignored. The point is for YOU to do it so you can better understand the topic. If you don't understand what the stats you're posting mean in terms of how they impact the final score of a game, then trying to explain why any player is or isn't a good defender is impossible.

[Blame Rasho]

Wow… I made a post in the first page and damn… even by realgm standards, there have been dozens of complete trash posts since then.

[Rubios]

There's no "recency bias" need to argue for a guy who has had 5 straight seasons in the top 2 in MVP voting. There literally are not 15 guys who have done this and if someone's ranking is based on how good a player was at their peak, there's not much more to argue. He's clearly a top 15 guy by that fairly reasonable criteria. If you care more about longevity it's a bit more difficult to argue for him there yet, but he's awfully close by that standard too.

Eeeeeeeexactly.
The title doesn’t specify it, and in the debate BEST is being confused with GREATEST.
It’s hardly debatable that he belongs to the former, and it’s likely that a broad majority still wouldn’t place him among the latter.

[Mirotic12]

Again, I don’t get this thread.
Raise your hand if you don’t have Jokic among the 15 best players of all time (not the greatest).
And if that’s the case, say who your #15 is.

He's not one of the top 15 NBA players ever.

The recency bias is very strong in these forums.

There's no "recency bias" need to argue for a guy who has had 5 straight seasons in the top 2 in MVP voting. There literally are not 15 guys who have done this and if someone's ranking is based on how good a player was at their peak, there's not much more to argue. He's clearly a top 15 guy by that fairly reasonable criteria. If you care more about longevity it's a bit more difficult to argue for him there yet, but he's awfully close by that standard too.

Getting into top 15 all time is about much more than a player's peak.

It would be extremely weak to let players into an all time top 15 just because of peak play of 5 years.

To get into top 15 of all time level, a lot more is needed than that.

No player should be considered for top 15 all time, if their main case is just a 5 year peak. That would be a low standard and the bar needs to be, and in fact is, much higher than that.

[hardenASG13]

He's not one of the top 15 NBA players ever.

The recency bias is very strong in these forums.

There's no "recency bias" need to argue for a guy who has had 5 straight seasons in the top 2 in MVP voting. There literally are not 15 guys who have done this and if someone's ranking is based on how good a player was at their peak, there's not much more to argue. He's clearly a top 15 guy by that fairly reasonable criteria. If you care more about longevity it's a bit more difficult to argue for him there yet, but he's awfully close by that standard too.

Getting into top 15 all time is about much more than a player's peak.

It would be extremely weak to let players into an all time top 15 just because of peak play of 5 years.

To get into top 15 of all time level, a lot more is needed than that.

No player should be considered for top 15 all time, if their main case is just a 5 year peak. That would be a low standard and the bar needs to be, and in fact is, much higher than that.

Much like his 2023 title, you have to consider context with being in the top 2 for MVP in terms of who'd he beat? The other Candidates for MVP in those years (Giannis, Luka, Embiid, SGA) aren't considered top 15 players ever. Whereas if you look at the list of all time players and their competition for MVP, it's much more accomplished.

Jordan (competition: Magic, Bird, Hakeem, barkley)
Lebron (Kobe, Wade, Durant, Curry, peak Kawhi)
Magic (Bird, KAJ, Moses Malone, Jordan)
Kareem
Dr J
Shaq (MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Malone)
Duncan (Shaq, KG, LeBron, KD, Dirk)
Olajuwon (see Jordan, swap the 2)
Bird (see magic, swap the 2)
Chamberlain
Russell
Robertson
Curry (LeBron, Kawhi, KD)
Durant (Duncan, LeBron, Curry, Kawhi
Kobe (Duncan, Shaq, LeBron, Wade, Dirk)

I'm not listing the competition for the older players, as I didn't witness the eras. You get the point though. Being in the top 2 with contemporaries such as Giannis, young Luka, and Embiid isn't the same as being in the top 2 for really any of these guys. You need to look at context. Since Lebron/KD/Curry fell off their primes around 22-23', coinciding with Jokics rise/peak, the landscape of superstars, relative to other eras is pretty weak. Him being top 2 in MVP these last 5 years isn't saying as much as you think it is. Since the bubble, this era has been a weak lull in consistent superstars and strong, consistently good teams. OKC and Wemby are about to drag us out of it though.

[Rubios]

Winning the MVP depends on many factors and doesn’t tell the whole story.
(At the end of the day, Jordan "only" has 5 and LeBron "just" 4).

But Jokic is generally recognized as the best player in the league over the last five years.
Not for me: IMHO it’s ‘only’ been four lol.

Are there 15 players in history who’ve ever been the best for five years, even if not consecutive?

[dhsilv2]

He's not one of the top 15 NBA players ever.

The recency bias is very strong in these forums.

There's no "recency bias" need to argue for a guy who has had 5 straight seasons in the top 2 in MVP voting. There literally are not 15 guys who have done this and if someone's ranking is based on how good a player was at their peak, there's not much more to argue. He's clearly a top 15 guy by that fairly reasonable criteria. If you care more about longevity it's a bit more difficult to argue for him there yet, but he's awfully close by that standard too.

Getting into top 15 all time is about much more than a player's peak.

It would be extremely weak to let players into an all time top 15 just because of peak play of 5 years.

To get into top 15 of all time level, a lot more is needed than that.

No player should be considered for top 15 all time, if their main case is just a 5 year peak. That would be a low standard and the bar needs to be, and in fact is, much higher than that.

It's fine to have a different standard as I clearly stated. It isn't a "lower" standard to hold people to their peak.

[dhsilv2]

There's no "recency bias" need to argue for a guy who has had 5 straight seasons in the top 2 in MVP voting. There literally are not 15 guys who have done this and if someone's ranking is based on how good a player was at their peak, there's not much more to argue. He's clearly a top 15 guy by that fairly reasonable criteria. If you care more about longevity it's a bit more difficult to argue for him there yet, but he's awfully close by that standard too.

Getting into top 15 all time is about much more than a player's peak.

It would be extremely weak to let players into an all time top 15 just because of peak play of 5 years.

To get into top 15 of all time level, a lot more is needed than that.

No player should be considered for top 15 all time, if their main case is just a 5 year peak. That would be a low standard and the bar needs to be, and in fact is, much higher than that.

Much like his 2023 title, you have to consider context with being in the top 2 for MVP in terms of who'd he beat? The other Candidates for MVP in those years (Giannis, Luka, Embiid, SGA) aren't considered top 15 players ever. Whereas if you look at the list of all time players and their competition for MVP, it's much more accomplished.

Jordan (competition: Magic, Bird, Hakeem, barkley)
Lebron (Kobe, Wade, Durant, Curry, peak Kawhi)
Magic (Bird, KAJ, Moses Malone, Jordan)
Kareem
Dr J
Shaq (MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Malone)
Duncan (Shaq, KG, LeBron, KD, Dirk)
Olajuwon (see Jordan, swap the 2)
Bird (see magic, swap the 2)
Chamberlain
Russell
Robertson
Curry (LeBron, Kawhi, KD)
Durant (Duncan, LeBron, Curry, Kawhi
Kobe (Duncan, Shaq, LeBron, Wade, Dirk)

I'm not listing the competition for the older players, as I didn't witness the eras. You get the point though. Being in the top 2 with contemporaries such as Giannis, young Luka, and Embiid isn't the same as being in the top 2 for really any of these guys. You need to look at context. Since Lebron/KD/Curry fell off their primes around 22-23', coinciding with Jokics rise/peak, the landscape of superstars, relative to other eras is pretty weak. Him being top 2 in MVP these last 5 years isn't saying as much as you think it is. Since the bubble, this era has been a weak lull in consistent superstars and strong, consistently good teams. OKC and Wemby are about to drag us out of it though.

Dismissing "young luka" and Giannis (a 2x MVP). But then with Kobe you list Shaq, Duncan, Wade and Dirk?

Kobe's competition in 2008 was a youngER CP3, older KG, and a very young Lebron...I can go on with others, but Giannis alone defeats your argument.

[hardenASG13]

Getting into top 15 all time is about much more than a player's peak.

It would be extremely weak to let players into an all time top 15 just because of peak play of 5 years.

To get into top 15 of all time level, a lot more is needed than that.

No player should be considered for top 15 all time, if their main case is just a 5 year peak. That would be a low standard and the bar needs to be, and in fact is, much higher than that.

Much like his 2023 title, you have to consider context with being in the top 2 for MVP in terms of who'd he beat? The other Candidates for MVP in those years (Giannis, Luka, Embiid, SGA) aren't considered top 15 players ever. Whereas if you look at the list of all time players and their competition for MVP, it's much more accomplished.

Jordan (competition: Magic, Bird, Hakeem, barkley)
Lebron (Kobe, Wade, Durant, Curry, peak Kawhi)
Magic (Bird, KAJ, Moses Malone, Jordan)
Kareem
Dr J
Shaq (MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Malone)
Duncan (Shaq, KG, LeBron, KD, Dirk)
Olajuwon (see Jordan, swap the 2)
Bird (see magic, swap the 2)
Chamberlain
Russell
Robertson
Curry (LeBron, Kawhi, KD)
Durant (Duncan, LeBron, Curry, Kawhi
Kobe (Duncan, Shaq, LeBron, Wade, Dirk)

I'm not listing the competition for the older players, as I didn't witness the eras. You get the point though. Being in the top 2 with contemporaries such as Giannis, young Luka, and Embiid isn't the same as being in the top 2 for really any of these guys. You need to look at context. Since Lebron/KD/Curry fell off their primes around 22-23', coinciding with Jokics rise/peak, the landscape of superstars, relative to other eras is pretty weak. Him being top 2 in MVP these last 5 years isn't saying as much as you think it is. Since the bubble, this era has been a weak lull in consistent superstars and strong, consistently good teams. OKC and Wemby are about to drag us out of it though.

Dismissing "young luka" and Giannis (a 2x MVP). But then with Kobe you list Shaq, Duncan, Wade and Dirk?

Kobe's competition in 2008 was a youngER CP3, older KG, and a very young Lebron...I can go on with others, but Giannis alone defeats your argument.

Giannis alone doesn't defeat my argument. I listed the contemporaries of the guys in my top 15. I think their competition year after year had more accomplished players than what Jokic has experienced in his prime. Giannis has his flaws. He did win 2 MVPs, and his team flamed out in the playoffs both of those years, as favorites in the series they lost. He's really never had a serious chance to win an MVP since. He, like Jokic, has a lone title against an uncharacteristically weak field, where outside of that they've lost to every good team they've faced. At no point in their primes have these two consistently given "you have to get through Jokic or Giannis" vibes to win a title....because they arent good enough where their teams automatically contend or consistently make deep playoff runs. You cant pencil them into the conference finals year after year, both have only made that round twice. The last 5 years has been a weak crop of superstars, historically speaking, and ive spelled it out here for you in terms of contemporaries other all time greats were competing against through their primes. Choose to ignore it if you'd like.

What group that I listed, as far as other top players and who they were up against for their primes, is weaker than Giannis, Luka and Embiid. Those 3 obviously are very good players, but they don't stack up imo.

[Tnasty4l]

Because people have free will too choose whoever they want in their top 15, lol.

[dhsilv2]

Much like his 2023 title, you have to consider context with being in the top 2 for MVP in terms of who'd he beat? The other Candidates for MVP in those years (Giannis, Luka, Embiid, SGA) aren't considered top 15 players ever. Whereas if you look at the list of all time players and their competition for MVP, it's much more accomplished.

Jordan (competition: Magic, Bird, Hakeem, barkley)
Lebron (Kobe, Wade, Durant, Curry, peak Kawhi)
Magic (Bird, KAJ, Moses Malone, Jordan)
Kareem
Dr J
Shaq (MJ, Hakeem, Duncan, Malone)
Duncan (Shaq, KG, LeBron, KD, Dirk)
Olajuwon (see Jordan, swap the 2)
Bird (see magic, swap the 2)
Chamberlain
Russell
Robertson
Curry (LeBron, Kawhi, KD)
Durant (Duncan, LeBron, Curry, Kawhi
Kobe (Duncan, Shaq, LeBron, Wade, Dirk)

I'm not listing the competition for the older players, as I didn't witness the eras. You get the point though. Being in the top 2 with contemporaries such as Giannis, young Luka, and Embiid isn't the same as being in the top 2 for really any of these guys. You need to look at context. Since Lebron/KD/Curry fell off their primes around 22-23', coinciding with Jokics rise/peak, the landscape of superstars, relative to other eras is pretty weak. Him being top 2 in MVP these last 5 years isn't saying as much as you think it is. Since the bubble, this era has been a weak lull in consistent superstars and strong, consistently good teams. OKC and Wemby are about to drag us out of it though.

Dismissing "young luka" and Giannis (a 2x MVP). But then with Kobe you list Shaq, Duncan, Wade and Dirk?

Kobe's competition in 2008 was a youngER CP3, older KG, and a very young Lebron...I can go on with others, but Giannis alone defeats your argument.

Giannis alone doesn't defeat my argument. I listed the contemporaries of the guys in my top 15. I think their competition year after year had more accomplished players than what Jokic has experienced in his prime. Giannis has his flaws. He did win 2 MVPs, and his team flamed out in the playoffs both of those years, as favorites in the series they lost. He's really never had a serious chance to win an MVP since. He, like Jokic, has a lone title against an uncharacteristically weak field, where outside of that they've lost to every good team they've faced. At no point in their primes have these two consistently given "you have to get through Jokic or Giannis" vibes to win a title....because they arent good enough where their teams automatically contend or consistently make deep playoff runs. You cant pencil them into the conference finals year after year, both have only made that round twice. The last 5 years has been a weak crop of superstars, historically speaking, and ive spelled it out here for you in terms of contemporaries other all time greats were competing against through their primes. Choose to ignore it if you'd like.

What group that I listed, as far as other top players and who they were up against for their primes, is weaker than Giannis, Luka and Embiid. Those 3 obviously are very good players, but they don't stack up imo.

You listed guys who's actual "MVP" seasons were against lower competition. Saying "lebron" sounds good. But in 2009 Lebron had just be swept in the finals and otherwise had no playoff accomplishment. He wasn't a 2x MVP and former NBA champ. "Young Luka" as you dismiss him, is a 5 first team all nba guy now, who took a team to the finals. That's more than CP3 had remotely done in 2008. And I can do this with multipe players here, when we actually breakdown the years they won a title.

You can't just list off names of guys who became or were all time greats to dismiss guys who's careers are still developing but in real time are clearly a step above those.

Meanwhile you listed Lebron and KD with Tim Duncan? Duncan's last MVP was 2003. KD wasn't fighting for MVP's with Tim Duncan. And really Lebron wasn't either.

[Mirotic12]

There's no "recency bias" need to argue for a guy who has had 5 straight seasons in the top 2 in MVP voting. There literally are not 15 guys who have done this and if someone's ranking is based on how good a player was at their peak, there's not much more to argue. He's clearly a top 15 guy by that fairly reasonable criteria. If you care more about longevity it's a bit more difficult to argue for him there yet, but he's awfully close by that standard too.

Getting into top 15 all time is about much more than a player's peak.

It would be extremely weak to let players into an all time top 15 just because of peak play of 5 years.

To get into top 15 of all time level, a lot more is needed than that.

No player should be considered for top 15 all time, if their main case is just a 5 year peak. That would be a low standard and the bar needs to be, and in fact is, much higher than that.

It's fine to have a different standard as I clearly stated. It isn't a "lower" standard to hold people to their peak.

It is though.

[dhsilv2]

Getting into top 15 all time is about much more than a player's peak.

It would be extremely weak to let players into an all time top 15 just because of peak play of 5 years.

To get into top 15 of all time level, a lot more is needed than that.

No player should be considered for top 15 all time, if their main case is just a 5 year peak. That would be a low standard and the bar needs to be, and in fact is, much higher than that.

It's fine to have a different standard as I clearly stated. It isn't a "lower" standard to hold people to their peak.

It is though.

How is it a lower bar? If we go on best 5 years, someone like Kobe might for example not make the bar. Jokic will. How is it a lower bar?

[hardenASG13]

Dismissing "young luka" and Giannis (a 2x MVP). But then with Kobe you list Shaq, Duncan, Wade and Dirk?

Kobe's competition in 2008 was a youngER CP3, older KG, and a very young Lebron...I can go on with others, but Giannis alone defeats your argument.

Giannis alone doesn't defeat my argument. I listed the contemporaries of the guys in my top 15. I think their competition year after year had more accomplished players than what Jokic has experienced in his prime. Giannis has his flaws. He did win 2 MVPs, and his team flamed out in the playoffs both of those years, as favorites in the series they lost. He's really never had a serious chance to win an MVP since. He, like Jokic, has a lone title against an uncharacteristically weak field, where outside of that they've lost to every good team they've faced. At no point in their primes have these two consistently given "you have to get through Jokic or Giannis" vibes to win a title....because they arent good enough where their teams automatically contend or consistently make deep playoff runs. You cant pencil them into the conference finals year after year, both have only made that round twice. The last 5 years has been a weak crop of superstars, historically speaking, and ive spelled it out here for you in terms of contemporaries other all time greats were competing against through their primes. Choose to ignore it if you'd like.

What group that I listed, as far as other top players and who they were up against for their primes, is weaker than Giannis, Luka and Embiid. Those 3 obviously are very good players, but they don't stack up imo.

You listed guys who actual "MVP" seasons were against lower competition. Saying "lebron" sounds good. But in 2009 Lebron had just be swept in the finals and otherwise had no playoff accomplishment. He wasn't a 2x MVP and former NBA champ. "Young Luka" as you dismiss him, is a 5 first team all nba guy now, who took a team to the finals. That's more than CP3 had remotely done in 2008. And I can do this with multipe players here, when we actually breakdown the years they won a title.

You can't just list off names of guys who became or were all time greats to dismiss guys who's careers are still developing but in real time are clearly a step above those.

Meanwhile you listed Lebron and KD with Tim Duncan? Duncan's last MVP was 2003. KD wasn't fighting for MVP's with Tim Duncan. And really Lebron wasn't either.

I'm not referring to individual years they won MVPs. I'm referring to the caliber of players they were up against who were in discussion year after year during their careers. I don't think Giannis, Luka and Embiid stack up, and thus don't put as much value into him being in the top 2 in MVP voting for the last 5 years as you do. Being in the MVP discussion for only 5 years is short as well relative to the careers of all time greats listed above. Jokic will probably add a few more years onto that, but it's not guaranteed, and I don't think an accomplishment of being top 2 in MVP discussion for 5 straight years makes him top 15, in light his lack of team success or any memorable moments/wins/games against good teams in the playoffs. I don't care what his ORTG or TS% is either. I've elaborated on those points in this thread and many others. I don't think having your teams playmaker be a guy who can't dribble on the perimeter is the best way to play, though it's great for Jokics assist numbers. I don't put a ton into TS% when it ignores the very valid criticism of him only shooting selective shots (CP3 syndrome) to achieve that, when improvising and creating out of nothing is more essential for a superstar in a long playoff series (ie one against another good team).

Jokic to this point puts up great regular season offensive stats (though I question the impact of his assists which imo are inflated with all the handoffs and cuts around him, detrimental to the teams dribble penetration), and struggles defensively. In a playoff series against a good team, to this point, he puts up a good TS% and his team goes out as an also ran. Sorry but the assists dont wow me, nor does the highTS% on selective attempts. Ive tried to see it, watched him repeatedly, and just see very good, not great. I enjoy watching greatness, ill defend Lebron without being a fan of his, simply because its undeniable. But with Jokic, he's yet to take over and assert his will on any team better or equal to Denver. That's not a top 15 guy. If you want to say he's been the top player since the bubble there's a very good argument there. I just think this is a weak lull in NBA history in terms of top tier talent and teams.