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

[Rubios]

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.

I’m not editing your quote to take it out of context, I’m just highlighting the points I want to emphasize.

I’m the first to believe that, in certain games, Jokic should shoot more.
That said: (I’d have to check the stats against Shai, but I recall they were very, very close in points) Jokic has outscored the opposing team’s top scorer in EVERY playoff series since 2021.
I think the comparison with CP3 isn’t a proper analogy.

I’d like to remind that Jokic is the only MVP and champ who has never played with an All-Star, an All-NBA, or an All-Defensive.

Assists have always been inflated. But trust me: on very few teams is an assist closer to a real assist than in Denver lol.
And I don’t get why we’re removing rebounds from the equation.
That handler who can dribble from the perimeter should be Murray.

The reality is very simple: until 2023, and from then on, the Nuggets have been and still are a very bad team + Jokic.

[dhsilv2]

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.

You weren't doing that. If you were, you wouldn't qualify it with "young" Luka. And 5 years is more than most players. Guys who are serious contenders for MVP's generally are only there a very short time. Bird basically had the same short run as Jokic. Hakeem had a short window of like 3 years. You can argue about someone like Kobe with no second place finishes if his 3rd and 4th stuff counts. But over the history of the league there aren't 15 guys with 5 top 2 finishes in MVP. That is a SERIOUS accomplishment.

[CharityStripe34]

While I agree it's more fun to enjoy the present than try and contextualize guys like Jokic and Giannis all-time while they're still squarely in their prime, these last 5-6 years haven't been a "weak crop" of superstars. It's just that the "middle class" tier of players has improved dramatically and there's more parity in the NBA now. So, yes, Jokic, Giannis and Luka are certainly all-time talents and will go down as such. You don't go on 5-6 year stretches of All-NBA first-teams (including all-defensive for Giannis) and MVP-level seasons and simply get dismissed until some unknown Jordan/LeBron level guy randomly emerges.

Sure, if the Bucks and Nuggets faced off in the Finals 2-3 times and you had those two guys going at it, it would considerably help cement their Top 15 case, but for various reasons the talent around the league has been spread and with the advent of pace and threes there is a ton of variance even within the grind of the playoffs. Least of which is health, of course.

[hardenASG13]

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.

You weren't doing that. If you were, you wouldn't qualify it with "young" Luka. And 5 years is more than most players. Guys who are serious contenders for MVP's generally are only there a very short time. Bird basically had the same short run as Jokic. Hakeem had a short window of like 3 years. You can argue about someone like Kobe with no second place finishes if his 3rd and 4th stuff counts. But over the history of the league there aren't 15 guys with 5 top 2 finishes in MVP. That is a SERIOUS accomplishment.

I was doing that. If you don't want to say young Luka fine. But when Jokic won his first MVP at age 25 in 2020-2021, his sixth season, Luka was age 21 and in his third season. He was a young player in his career and relative to Jokic at the start of Jokics MVP run, and also just 22 and in year 4 during that second MVP. Not many guys take over the league by age 22 or year 4. Jokic certainly didn't. Giannis didn't. Embiid didnt. SGA didn’t. It's rare. Luka was an MVP contender during the period, but he was young those first two MVPs.

[Mephariel]

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.

Everything you said about MJ or Lebron is conjecture. You are just making up stuff at this point.

And Magic is held to that standard as well. You don't think if Magic averaged 4 blocks a game like Mutombo and anchored a defense, he wouldn't be ranked higher? Magic is an all-around talent boosted by winning 5 rings. If he was better on offensive or defense, he would be ranked 2nd or challenging MJ. But defense absolutely matters. There is no way around it.

[audiosway]

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.

When does 3 time All Defense (in the 80s) not mean elite defender? Larry Legend is top 2 all time.

[dhsilv2]

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.

You weren't doing that. If you were, you wouldn't qualify it with "young" Luka. And 5 years is more than most players. Guys who are serious contenders for MVP's generally are only there a very short time. Bird basically had the same short run as Jokic. Hakeem had a short window of like 3 years. You can argue about someone like Kobe with no second place finishes if his 3rd and 4th stuff counts. But over the history of the league there aren't 15 guys with 5 top 2 finishes in MVP. That is a SERIOUS accomplishment.

I was doing that. If you don't want to say young Luka fine. But when Jokic won his first MVP at age 25 in 2020-2021, his sixth season, Luka was age 21 and in his third season. He was a young player in his career and relative to Jokic at the start of Jokics MVP run, and also just 22 and in year 4 during that second MVP. Not many guys take over the league by age 22 or year 4. Jokic certainly didn't. Giannis didn't. Embiid didnt. SGA didn’t. It's rare. Luka was an MVP contender during the period, but he was young those first two MVPs.

It's not what I want. It's that if you call Luka "young", then you are not doing what you're claiming. You may have wanted to do that. But you factually didn't.

You can't go on to double down on this while saying Duncan was competing with Lebron and KD for MVP's dude. Do you not see how absolutely absurd this is? KD was 14 years old when Duncan won his last MVP. You said Duncan was competing with KD for MVP's and then listed a 14 year old who was in high school. Even Lebron wasn't in the NBA in 2003, he started in the 2003-04 season after Duncan won his last MVP. You can't argue Luka was too young at 21 (and first team all nba), but then justify KD and Lebron has competing with Duncan.

You're 100% trying to take the best players in the league over a 20 year period and applying them to past players while down playing the current era as they're still building their resumes.

[dhsilv2]

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.

When does 3 time All Defense (in the 80s) not mean elite defender? Larry Legend is top 2 all time.

I mean I think you kinda covered it for everyone. A weaker era for defenders combined with an even worse era in terms of defensive analysis by the voters.

[bonita_the_frog]

Claiming Bird was an "elite" defender is ludicrous.

When does 3 time All Defense (in the 80s) not mean elite defender? Larry Legend is top 2 all time.

I mean I think you kinda covered it for everyone. A weaker era for defenders combined with an even worse era in terms of defensive analysis by the voters.

I don't think it gets any weaker than the Westbrook MVP era-
"With Westbrook as their primary defender, players shot 48.6% from the field and 39.1% from three, both well above their collective average marks of 45.5% and 35.8%. Of 80 guards to allow at least 500 field goal attempts, Westbrook allowed the 8th highest field goal percentage and 8th worst differential between an opponent’s typical field goal percentage and their mark with him guarding them."
https://carsonbreber.wordpress.com/home/russell-westbrook-worst-mvp-ever/

Westbrook winning MVP set a horrible example for everyone else, allowing the worst defenders in the NBA to play starring roles, because the MVP doesn't need to play defense in this era

[hardenASG13]

You weren't doing that. If you were, you wouldn't qualify it with "young" Luka. And 5 years is more than most players. Guys who are serious contenders for MVP's generally are only there a very short time. Bird basically had the same short run as Jokic. Hakeem had a short window of like 3 years. You can argue about someone like Kobe with no second place finishes if his 3rd and 4th stuff counts. But over the history of the league there aren't 15 guys with 5 top 2 finishes in MVP. That is a SERIOUS accomplishment.

I was doing that. If you don't want to say young Luka fine. But when Jokic won his first MVP at age 25 in 2020-2021, his sixth season, Luka was age 21 and in his third season. He was a young player in his career and relative to Jokic at the start of Jokics MVP run, and also just 22 and in year 4 during that second MVP. Not many guys take over the league by age 22 or year 4. Jokic certainly didn't. Giannis didn't. Embiid didnt. SGA didn’t. It's rare. Luka was an MVP contender during the period, but he was young those first two MVPs.

It's not what I want. It's that if you call Luka "young", then you are not doing what you're claiming. You may have wanted to do that. But you factually didn't.

You can't go on to double down on this while saying Duncan was competing with Lebron and KD for MVP's dude. Do you not see how absolutely absurd this is? KD was 14 years old when Duncan won his last MVP. You said Duncan was competing with KD for MVP's and then listed a 14 year old who was in high school. Even Lebron wasn't in the NBA in 2003, he started in the 2003-04 season after Duncan won his last MVP. You can't argue Luka was too young at 21 (and first team all nba), but then justify KD and Lebron has competing with Duncan.

You're 100% trying to take the best players in the league over a 20 year period and applying them to past players while down playing the current era as they're still building their resumes.

I'm 100% not trying to do that. Duncan was first team all NBA in 2012-2013. He was one of the top players in the league from 2003-2013 when Lebron entered the league His teams often made deep playoff runs during that time. Lebron was one of the top players in that period from 07 on, KD was as well by 2010. If I didnt say young KD, on a comprehensive list covering 75 years i appologize. But guys I mentioned were really good, quickly (unlike Jokic, Embiid and Giannis). So yeah, their competition spans to more guys, because they maintained top player in the league status for a long time, achieving top player status earlier, and extending it longer than Jokic has to this point. They are special, all time type of players.

If we're making accusations and conspiracy theories, I'd say youre trying to derail points you don't like by nitpicking somantics, as you've done over and over in this thread. DimesandKnicks has made you look foolish, repeatedly. The list I posted and guys considered the best players during each one's time as one of or best players in the league is accurate. Again though, most of the guys I listed were really good almost immediately, so they were competing with a wider span of players for best in the league. Maybe Jokic does this another 4 or 5 years. I have my doubts, as he looks to be slowing down a lot defensively and i think Jokic led teams will continue to be early outs. Luka is still building his resume, sure. How much does Giannis have left? Embiid is shot. SGA still has time. These are/have been his main competition, no? If your arbitrary "top 2 over a 5 year span" measuring stick is infinitely more important, thats just your opinion. I don't think this last 5 years on NBA basketball has been strong from a superstar or team prospective. Nor do I think having a 5 year run in the conversation of best in the league, with 1 title in a historically weak championship run cements a guy in the top 15. I listed my top 15 when rubios asked for one, and Jokic isn't in it for me to this point, which is the basis of this entire thread. If he does what he's done the last 5 years, and wins a other title, I'd absolutely say he's top 15, which ive stated already in this thread when I made my list Rubios asked for.

[CharityStripe34]

I was doing that. If you don't want to say young Luka fine. But when Jokic won his first MVP at age 25 in 2020-2021, his sixth season, Luka was age 21 and in his third season. He was a young player in his career and relative to Jokic at the start of Jokics MVP run, and also just 22 and in year 4 during that second MVP. Not many guys take over the league by age 22 or year 4. Jokic certainly didn't. Giannis didn't. Embiid didnt. SGA didn’t. It's rare. Luka was an MVP contender during the period, but he was young those first two MVPs.

It's not what I want. It's that if you call Luka "young", then you are not doing what you're claiming. You may have wanted to do that. But you factually didn't.

You can't go on to double down on this while saying Duncan was competing with Lebron and KD for MVP's dude. Do you not see how absolutely absurd this is? KD was 14 years old when Duncan won his last MVP. You said Duncan was competing with KD for MVP's and then listed a 14 year old who was in high school. Even Lebron wasn't in the NBA in 2003, he started in the 2003-04 season after Duncan won his last MVP. You can't argue Luka was too young at 21 (and first team all nba), but then justify KD and Lebron has competing with Duncan.

You're 100% trying to take the best players in the league over a 20 year period and applying them to past players while down playing the current era as they're still building their resumes.

I'm 100% not trying to do that. Duncan was first team all NBA in 2012-2013. He was one of the top players in the league from 2003-2013 when Lebron entered the league His teams often made deep playoff runs during that time. Lebron was one of the top players in that period from 07 on, KD was as well by 2010. If I didnt say young KD, on a comprehensive list covering 75 years i appologize. But guys I mentioned were really good, quickly (unlike Jokic, Embiid and Giannis). So yeah, their competition spans to more guys, because they maintained top player in the league status for a long time, achieving top player status earlier, and extending it longer than Jokic has to this point. They are special, all time type of players.

If we're making accusations and conspiracy theories, I'd say youre trying to derail points you don't like by nitpicking somantics, as you've done over and over in this thread. DimesandKnicks has made you look foolish, repeatedly. The list I posted and guys considered the best players during each one's time as one of or best players in the league is accurate. Again though, most of the guys I listed were really good almost immediately, so they were competing with a wider span of players for best in the league. Maybe Jokic does this another 4 or 5 years. I have my doubts, as he looks to be slowing down a lot defensively and i think Jokic led teams will continue to be early outs. Luka is still building his resume, sure. How much does Giannis have left? Embiid is shot. SGA still has time. These are/have been his main competition, no? If your arbitrary "top 2 over a 5 year span" measuring stick is infinitely more important, thats just your opinion. I don't think this last 5 years on NBA basketball has been strong from a superstar or team prospective. Nor do I think having a 5 year run in the conversation of best in the league, with 1 title in a historically weak championship run cements a guy in the top 15. I listed my top 15 when rubios asked for one, and Jokic isn't in it for me to this point, which is the basis of this entire thread. If he does what he's done the last 5 years, and wins a other title, I'd absolutely say he's top 15, which ive stated already in this thread when I made my list Rubios asked for.

Of course we can never know what the future holds. But I'd say Giannis and Jokic have 3-4 prime years left of being elite. If we extrapolate that, both of those guys will likely be All-NBA 1st team for a decade with consistent Top 3 finishes. Same with Luka as he's younger than those guys, as with SGA.

And, to be sure, for any of these guys winning another (or in Luka's case one) championship will go a long way in overall legacy discussion. I'd simply rather enjoy the ride and see what happens. Perhaps Wemby bulldozes everyone out of the way and is the next Kareem/Jordan/LeBron type.

[dhsilv2]

When does 3 time All Defense (in the 80s) not mean elite defender? Larry Legend is top 2 all time.

I mean I think you kinda covered it for everyone. A weaker era for defenders combined with an even worse era in terms of defensive analysis by the voters.

I don't think it gets any weaker than the Westbrook MVP era-
"With Westbrook as their primary defender, players shot 48.6% from the field and 39.1% from three, both well above their collective average marks of 45.5% and 35.8%. Of 80 guards to allow at least 500 field goal attempts, Westbrook allowed the 8th highest field goal percentage and 8th worst differential between an opponent’s typical field goal percentage and their mark with him guarding them."
https://carsonbreber.wordpress.com/home/russell-westbrook-worst-mvp-ever/

Westbrook winning MVP set a horrible example for everyone else, allowing the worst defenders in the NBA to play starring roles, because the MVP doesn't need to play defense in this era

That's just silly on so many levels. If you want to address defensive selections of the actual value do so.

[hardenASG13]

It's not what I want. It's that if you call Luka "young", then you are not doing what you're claiming. You may have wanted to do that. But you factually didn't.

You can't go on to double down on this while saying Duncan was competing with Lebron and KD for MVP's dude. Do you not see how absolutely absurd this is? KD was 14 years old when Duncan won his last MVP. You said Duncan was competing with KD for MVP's and then listed a 14 year old who was in high school. Even Lebron wasn't in the NBA in 2003, he started in the 2003-04 season after Duncan won his last MVP. You can't argue Luka was too young at 21 (and first team all nba), but then justify KD and Lebron has competing with Duncan.

You're 100% trying to take the best players in the league over a 20 year period and applying them to past players while down playing the current era as they're still building their resumes.

I'm 100% not trying to do that. Duncan was first team all NBA in 2012-2013. He was one of the top players in the league from 2003-2013 when Lebron entered the league His teams often made deep playoff runs during that time. Lebron was one of the top players in that period from 07 on, KD was as well by 2010. If I didnt say young KD, on a comprehensive list covering 75 years i appologize. But guys I mentioned were really good, quickly (unlike Jokic, Embiid and Giannis). So yeah, their competition spans to more guys, because they maintained top player in the league status for a long time, achieving top player status earlier, and extending it longer than Jokic has to this point. They are special, all time type of players.

If we're making accusations and conspiracy theories, I'd say youre trying to derail points you don't like by nitpicking somantics, as you've done over and over in this thread. DimesandKnicks has made you look foolish, repeatedly. The list I posted and guys considered the best players during each one's time as one of or best players in the league is accurate. Again though, most of the guys I listed were really good almost immediately, so they were competing with a wider span of players for best in the league. Maybe Jokic does this another 4 or 5 years. I have my doubts, as he looks to be slowing down a lot defensively and i think Jokic led teams will continue to be early outs. Luka is still building his resume, sure. How much does Giannis have left? Embiid is shot. SGA still has time. These are/have been his main competition, no? If your arbitrary "top 2 over a 5 year span" measuring stick is infinitely more important, thats just your opinion. I don't think this last 5 years on NBA basketball has been strong from a superstar or team prospective. Nor do I think having a 5 year run in the conversation of best in the league, with 1 title in a historically weak championship run cements a guy in the top 15. I listed my top 15 when rubios asked for one, and Jokic isn't in it for me to this point, which is the basis of this entire thread. If he does what he's done the last 5 years, and wins a other title, I'd absolutely say he's top 15, which ive stated already in this thread when I made my list Rubios asked for.

Of course we can never know what the future holds. But I'd say Giannis and Jokic have 3-4 prime years left of being elite. If we extrapolate that, both of those guys will likely be All-NBA 1st team for a decade with consistent Top 3 finishes. Same with Luka as he's younger than those guys, as with SGA.

And, to be sure, for any of these guys winning another (or in Luka's case one) championship will go a long way in overall legacy discussion. I'd simply rather enjoy the ride and see what happens. Perhaps Wemby bulldozes everyone out of the way and is the next Kareem/Jordan/LeBron type.

As would I, and I think Wemby does that. I just don't think what Jokic has done in his last 5 years, with those guys as his contemporaries during that time, has solidified him in the top 15 to this point, which is what OP asked and is pushing for.

[dhsilv2]

I was doing that. If you don't want to say young Luka fine. But when Jokic won his first MVP at age 25 in 2020-2021, his sixth season, Luka was age 21 and in his third season. He was a young player in his career and relative to Jokic at the start of Jokics MVP run, and also just 22 and in year 4 during that second MVP. Not many guys take over the league by age 22 or year 4. Jokic certainly didn't. Giannis didn't. Embiid didnt. SGA didn’t. It's rare. Luka was an MVP contender during the period, but he was young those first two MVPs.

It's not what I want. It's that if you call Luka "young", then you are not doing what you're claiming. You may have wanted to do that. But you factually didn't.

You can't go on to double down on this while saying Duncan was competing with Lebron and KD for MVP's dude. Do you not see how absolutely absurd this is? KD was 14 years old when Duncan won his last MVP. You said Duncan was competing with KD for MVP's and then listed a 14 year old who was in high school. Even Lebron wasn't in the NBA in 2003, he started in the 2003-04 season after Duncan won his last MVP. You can't argue Luka was too young at 21 (and first team all nba), but then justify KD and Lebron has competing with Duncan.

You're 100% trying to take the best players in the league over a 20 year period and applying them to past players while down playing the current era as they're still building their resumes.

I'm 100% not trying to do that. Duncan was first team all NBA in 2012-2013. He was one of the top players in the league from 2003-2013 when Lebron entered the league His teams often made deep playoff runs during that time. Lebron was one of the top players in that period from 07 on, KD was as well by 2010. If I didnt say young KD, on a comprehensive list covering 75 years i appologize. But guys I mentioned were really good, quickly (unlike Jokic, Embiid and Giannis). So yeah, their competition spans to more guys, because they maintained top player in the league status for a long time, achieving top player status earlier, and extending it longer than Jokic has to this point. They are special, all time type of players.

If we're making accusations and conspiracy theories, I'd say youre trying to derail points you don't like by nitpicking somantics, as you've done over and over in this thread. DimesandKnicks has made you look foolish, repeatedly. The list I posted and guys considered the best players during each one's time as one of or best players in the league is accurate. Again though, most of the guys I listed were really good almost immediately, so they were competing with a wider span of players for best in the league. Maybe Jokic does this another 4 or 5 years. I have my doubts, as he looks to be slowing down a lot defensively and i think Jokic led teams will continue to be early outs. Luka is still building his resume, sure. How much does Giannis have left? Embiid is shot. SGA still has time. These are/have been his main competition, no? If your arbitrary "top 2 over a 5 year span" measuring stick is infinitely more important, thats just your opinion. I don't think this last 5 years on NBA basketball has been strong from a superstar or team prospective. Nor do I think having a 5 year run in the conversation of best in the league, with 1 title in a historically weak championship run cements a guy in the top 15. I listed my top 15 when rubios asked for one, and Jokic isn't in it for me to this point, which is the basis of this entire thread. If he does what he's done the last 5 years, and wins a other title, I'd absolutely say he's top 15, which ive stated already in this thread when I made my list Rubios asked for.

You're counter is that it's OK to use 14 year old KD but should have said he was young.

Just admit that your argument was trash man. It's not that deep.You derailed your own point by trying to group guys together in the MVP talks. By your own logic guys like Wemby need to be included with Jokic. Heck we might have some 12 year old who will come into the league eventually while Jokic gets his last 10th place MVP finish in a few years we should include by your standard. If guys NOT IN THE NBA when a guy wins an MVP, are the standards we need to hold someone to in real time...I can't even finish that.

By your standards Jokic has competed with KD, Harden, Lebron, Leonard, Luka, Giannis, Wemby, CP3, Curry, SGA and so on. Heck who knows what 14 year olds are coming on.

Hell, I didn't even mention that you left out actual MVP winners as guys people competed with on your list. But clearly did so because you didn't feel adding Rose or Nash types would help you as you attacked Embiid's MVP.

If you don't think having a run of being seen by the community as a top 2 player for 5 year is a big deal. That's fine. It was just presenting why one might rank Jokic extremely highly. If you think this era has been weak at the time. Make a case, I don't think there's a case there personally, but make it. You didn't do that at all. You argued 14 year old KD was fighting for MVP's against Duncan. And you can rank Jokic 15th or 450th. Just make a reasonable argument for it. Don't talk about how hard it was for Duncan to win his MVP's over 14 year olds.

[hardenASG13]

It's not what I want. It's that if you call Luka "young", then you are not doing what you're claiming. You may have wanted to do that. But you factually didn't.

You can't go on to double down on this while saying Duncan was competing with Lebron and KD for MVP's dude. Do you not see how absolutely absurd this is? KD was 14 years old when Duncan won his last MVP. You said Duncan was competing with KD for MVP's and then listed a 14 year old who was in high school. Even Lebron wasn't in the NBA in 2003, he started in the 2003-04 season after Duncan won his last MVP. You can't argue Luka was too young at 21 (and first team all nba), but then justify KD and Lebron has competing with Duncan.

You're 100% trying to take the best players in the league over a 20 year period and applying them to past players while down playing the current era as they're still building their resumes.

I'm 100% not trying to do that. Duncan was first team all NBA in 2012-2013. He was one of the top players in the league from 2003-2013 when Lebron entered the league His teams often made deep playoff runs during that time. Lebron was one of the top players in that period from 07 on, KD was as well by 2010. If I didnt say young KD, on a comprehensive list covering 75 years i appologize. But guys I mentioned were really good, quickly (unlike Jokic, Embiid and Giannis). So yeah, their competition spans to more guys, because they maintained top player in the league status for a long time, achieving top player status earlier, and extending it longer than Jokic has to this point. They are special, all time type of players.

If we're making accusations and conspiracy theories, I'd say youre trying to derail points you don't like by nitpicking somantics, as you've done over and over in this thread. DimesandKnicks has made you look foolish, repeatedly. The list I posted and guys considered the best players during each one's time as one of or best players in the league is accurate. Again though, most of the guys I listed were really good almost immediately, so they were competing with a wider span of players for best in the league. Maybe Jokic does this another 4 or 5 years. I have my doubts, as he looks to be slowing down a lot defensively and i think Jokic led teams will continue to be early outs. Luka is still building his resume, sure. How much does Giannis have left? Embiid is shot. SGA still has time. These are/have been his main competition, no? If your arbitrary "top 2 over a 5 year span" measuring stick is infinitely more important, thats just your opinion. I don't think this last 5 years on NBA basketball has been strong from a superstar or team prospective. Nor do I think having a 5 year run in the conversation of best in the league, with 1 title in a historically weak championship run cements a guy in the top 15. I listed my top 15 when rubios asked for one, and Jokic isn't in it for me to this point, which is the basis of this entire thread. If he does what he's done the last 5 years, and wins a other title, I'd absolutely say he's top 15, which ive stated already in this thread when I made my list Rubios asked for.

You're counter is that it's OK to use 14 year old KD but should have said he was young.

Just admit that your argument was trash man. It's not that deep.You derailed your own point by trying to group guys together in the MVP talks. By your own logic guys like Wemby need to be included with Jokic. Heck we might have some 12 year old who will come into the league eventually while Jokic gets his last 10th place MVP finish in a few years we should include by your standard. If guys NOT IN THE NBA when a guy wins an MVP, are the standards we need to hold someone to in real time...I can't even finish that.

By your standards Jokic has competed with KD, Harden, Lebron, Leonard, Luka, Giannis, Wemby, CP3, Curry, SGA and so on. Heck who knows what 14 year olds are coming on.

Hell, I didn't even mention that you left out actual MVP winners as guys people competed with on your list. But clearly did so because you didn't feel adding Rose or Nash types would help you as you attacked Embiid's MVP.

If you don't think having a run of being seen by the community as a top 2 player for 5 year is a big deal. That's fine. It was just presenting why one might rank Jokic extremely highly. If you think this era has been weak at the time. Make a case, I don't think there's a case there personally, but make it. You didn't do that at all. You argued 14 year old KD was fighting for MVP's against Duncan. And you can rank Jokic 15th or 450th. Just make a reasonable argument for it. Don't talk about how hard it was for Duncan to win his MVP's over 14 year olds.

This is nonsensical, and none of the words youre putting in my mouth are accurate. You seem to be having lots of difficulties comprehending points in this thread. I've explained that most of the guys I listed were in the MVP discussion rather quickly, and thus were competing with a wider range of players for best in the world during their careers. Jokic wasnt competing for MVPs as early in his career as them. Ive made the case your referencing regarding the past 5 years in this thread and others repeatedly. I left out multiple MVP winners as they were more flash in the pan type guys vs guys who were sustained stars during the periods, yes. I'm simply not impressed by the last 5 years and some MVP awards enough to say a Jokic is a top 15 all time player at this point, which again is what the basis of this thread is asking. It's largely because I don't view him as a winning player to the extent I do for many if not all the 15 I listed. I want to see him win playoff series against teams equal or better than Denver. I've made this very clear, and he hasn't done it to this point. I've detailed my critiques of his game repeatedly, and while I think it's very good, I don't see all time great. I think his stats, mainly his efficiency and assists, have led many here to over rate him in historical context as something he's not. Hes selective and limited in the shots he takes, and his playmaking role while great for his assist numbers comes at the detriment of dribble penetration for his team, making them easier to adjust to and beat when they face quality playoff competition. As the great AlexandarN said, he's not him.

[Anderson Hunt]

1. Magic
2. Jordan
3. Bird
4. James
5. Olajuwon
6. Shaq
7. Duncan
8. Curry
9. Kobe
10. Wade
11. Jokic
12. Thomas
13. Leonard
14. Giannis
15. Nowitzki

[dhsilv2]

I'm 100% not trying to do that. Duncan was first team all NBA in 2012-2013. He was one of the top players in the league from 2003-2013 when Lebron entered the league His teams often made deep playoff runs during that time. Lebron was one of the top players in that period from 07 on, KD was as well by 2010. If I didnt say young KD, on a comprehensive list covering 75 years i appologize. But guys I mentioned were really good, quickly (unlike Jokic, Embiid and Giannis). So yeah, their competition spans to more guys, because they maintained top player in the league status for a long time, achieving top player status earlier, and extending it longer than Jokic has to this point. They are special, all time type of players.

If we're making accusations and conspiracy theories, I'd say youre trying to derail points you don't like by nitpicking somantics, as you've done over and over in this thread. DimesandKnicks has made you look foolish, repeatedly. The list I posted and guys considered the best players during each one's time as one of or best players in the league is accurate. Again though, most of the guys I listed were really good almost immediately, so they were competing with a wider span of players for best in the league. Maybe Jokic does this another 4 or 5 years. I have my doubts, as he looks to be slowing down a lot defensively and i think Jokic led teams will continue to be early outs. Luka is still building his resume, sure. How much does Giannis have left? Embiid is shot. SGA still has time. These are/have been his main competition, no? If your arbitrary "top 2 over a 5 year span" measuring stick is infinitely more important, thats just your opinion. I don't think this last 5 years on NBA basketball has been strong from a superstar or team prospective. Nor do I think having a 5 year run in the conversation of best in the league, with 1 title in a historically weak championship run cements a guy in the top 15. I listed my top 15 when rubios asked for one, and Jokic isn't in it for me to this point, which is the basis of this entire thread. If he does what he's done the last 5 years, and wins a other title, I'd absolutely say he's top 15, which ive stated already in this thread when I made my list Rubios asked for.

You're counter is that it's OK to use 14 year old KD but should have said he was young.

Just admit that your argument was trash man. It's not that deep.You derailed your own point by trying to group guys together in the MVP talks. By your own logic guys like Wemby need to be included with Jokic. Heck we might have some 12 year old who will come into the league eventually while Jokic gets his last 10th place MVP finish in a few years we should include by your standard. If guys NOT IN THE NBA when a guy wins an MVP, are the standards we need to hold someone to in real time...I can't even finish that.

By your standards Jokic has competed with KD, Harden, Lebron, Leonard, Luka, Giannis, Wemby, CP3, Curry, SGA and so on. Heck who knows what 14 year olds are coming on.

Hell, I didn't even mention that you left out actual MVP winners as guys people competed with on your list. But clearly did so because you didn't feel adding Rose or Nash types would help you as you attacked Embiid's MVP.

If you don't think having a run of being seen by the community as a top 2 player for 5 year is a big deal. That's fine. It was just presenting why one might rank Jokic extremely highly. If you think this era has been weak at the time. Make a case, I don't think there's a case there personally, but make it. You didn't do that at all. You argued 14 year old KD was fighting for MVP's against Duncan. And you can rank Jokic 15th or 450th. Just make a reasonable argument for it. Don't talk about how hard it was for Duncan to win his MVP's over 14 year olds.

This is nonsensical, and none of the words youre putting in my mouth are accurate. You seem to be having lots of difficulties comprehending points in this thread. I've explained that most of the guys I listed were in the MVP discussion rather quickly, and thus were competing with a wider range of players for best in the world during their careers. Jokic wasnt competing for MVPs as early in his career as them. Ive made the case your referencing regarding the past 5 years in this thread and others repeatedly. I left out multiple MVP winners as they were more flash in the pan type guys vs guys who were sustained stars during the periods, yes. I'm simply not impressed by the last 5 years and some MVP awards enough to say a Jokic is a top 15 all time player at this point, which again is what the basis of this thread is asking. It's largely because I don't view him as a winning player to the extent I do for many if not all the 15 I listed. I want to see him win playoff series against teams equal or better than Denver. I've made this very clear, and he hasn't done it to this point. I've detailed my critiques of his game repeatedly, and while I think it's very good, I don't see all time great. I think his stats, mainly his efficiency and assists, have led many here to over rate him in historical context as something he's not. Hes selective and limited in the shots he takes, and his playmaking role while great for his assist numbers comes at the detriment of dribble penetration for his team, making them easier to adjust to and beat when they face quality playoff competition. As the great AlexandarN said, he's not him.

You just keep digging this deeper.

Jokic was 4th in MVP voting in his age 23 season. While I wouldn't call that a serious MVP contention, it certainly passes your absurd KD and Duncan were competing standard.

First season to be 4th or higher in MVP voting by age

Lebron - 21
Jordan - 23
Magic - 23
Kareem - 22
Shaq - 21
Duncan - 22 (but we can say 21 since he was 5th as a rookie)
Hakeem - 23
Bird - 23
Wilt - 23
Russell - 23
Robertson - 23 (but see Duncan was 5th at 22)
Curry - 26
Durant - 21
Kobe - 24 (but again was 5th at 23)

I can't even make this stuff up. Jokic's first top 5 MVP vote came at the same age as nearly everyone on the list. He was 2 years at the most behind any of these guys.

Again, you can have Jokic as the 150th best player ever for all I care. But don't make up these absolutely terrible arguments where Jokic took too long to be an MVP or that Duncan and KD competed for MVPs. If Jokic plays another 5 years, he most likely if he follows the path of the above guys will still be making all nba teams and will still be getting top 10 MVP votes, he likely had at best 1-2 years left as a legit top 2-3 MVP guy though. His years of being an MVP won't look short vs this list unless he gets hurt or retires young.

[hardenASG13]

You're counter is that it's OK to use 14 year old KD but should have said he was young.

Just admit that your argument was trash man. It's not that deep.You derailed your own point by trying to group guys together in the MVP talks. By your own logic guys like Wemby need to be included with Jokic. Heck we might have some 12 year old who will come into the league eventually while Jokic gets his last 10th place MVP finish in a few years we should include by your standard. If guys NOT IN THE NBA when a guy wins an MVP, are the standards we need to hold someone to in real time...I can't even finish that.

By your standards Jokic has competed with KD, Harden, Lebron, Leonard, Luka, Giannis, Wemby, CP3, Curry, SGA and so on. Heck who knows what 14 year olds are coming on.

Hell, I didn't even mention that you left out actual MVP winners as guys people competed with on your list. But clearly did so because you didn't feel adding Rose or Nash types would help you as you attacked Embiid's MVP.

If you don't think having a run of being seen by the community as a top 2 player for 5 year is a big deal. That's fine. It was just presenting why one might rank Jokic extremely highly. If you think this era has been weak at the time. Make a case, I don't think there's a case there personally, but make it. You didn't do that at all. You argued 14 year old KD was fighting for MVP's against Duncan. And you can rank Jokic 15th or 450th. Just make a reasonable argument for it. Don't talk about how hard it was for Duncan to win his MVP's over 14 year olds.

This is nonsensical, and none of the words youre putting in my mouth are accurate. You seem to be having lots of difficulties comprehending points in this thread. I've explained that most of the guys I listed were in the MVP discussion rather quickly, and thus were competing with a wider range of players for best in the world during their careers. Jokic wasnt competing for MVPs as early in his career as them. Ive made the case your referencing regarding the past 5 years in this thread and others repeatedly. I left out multiple MVP winners as they were more flash in the pan type guys vs guys who were sustained stars during the periods, yes. I'm simply not impressed by the last 5 years and some MVP awards enough to say a Jokic is a top 15 all time player at this point, which again is what the basis of this thread is asking. It's largely because I don't view him as a winning player to the extent I do for many if not all the 15 I listed. I want to see him win playoff series against teams equal or better than Denver. I've made this very clear, and he hasn't done it to this point. I've detailed my critiques of his game repeatedly, and while I think it's very good, I don't see all time great. I think his stats, mainly his efficiency and assists, have led many here to over rate him in historical context as something he's not. Hes selective and limited in the shots he takes, and his playmaking role while great for his assist numbers comes at the detriment of dribble penetration for his team, making them easier to adjust to and beat when they face quality playoff competition. As the great AlexandarN said, he's not him.

You just keep digging this deeper.

Jokic was 4th in MVP voting in his age 23 season. While I wouldn't call that a serious MVP contention, it certainly passes your absurd KD and Duncan were competing standard.

First season to be 4th or higher in MVP voting by age

Lebron - 21
Jordan - 23
Magic - 23
Kareem - 22
Shaq - 21
Duncan - 22 (but we can say 21 since he was 5th as a rookie)
Hakeem - 23
Bird - 23
Wilt - 23
Russell - 23
Robertson - 23 (but see Duncan was 5th at 22)
Curry - 26
Durant - 21
Kobe - 24 (but again was 5th at 23)

I can't even make this stuff up. Jokic's first top 5 MVP vote came at the same age as nearly everyone on the list. He was 2 years at the most behind any of these guys.

Again, you can have Jokic as the 150th best player ever for all I care. But don't make up these absolutely terrible arguments where Jokic took too long to be an MVP or that Duncan and KD competed for MVPs. If Jokic plays another 5 years, he most likely if he follows the path of the above guys will still be making all nba teams and will still be getting top 10 MVP votes, he likely had at best 1-2 years left as a legit top 2-3 MVP guy though. His years of being an MVP won't look short vs this list unless he gets hurt or retires young.

It's not my main argument. I threw together a list in 5 minutes. I didn't research it year by year as you apparently are. If there are errors in your view then disregard the list. My main argument is that this stretch he's "dominated" has been kinda week. I don't think this 5 year run, with 1 conference finals and easy title run (as far as title runs go) is as impressive as you do, especially since the top tier teams during this period lack continuity or sustained success. The door has been wide open for a player to take the league over since Lebrons decline became noticeable (after the bubble) and I don't think anyone's really done it, including Jokic. That's all I'm saying. There's been a couple 1 off titles and the Celtics are as close as there is for teams sustaining success. It's kind of a weak and wide open period. I don't think being top 2 among Luka, Giannis, embiid and SGA for a 5 year stretch is as serious of an accomplishment as you do.

[Mirotic12]

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?

Because 10 years is more than 5 years. Because 15 years is more than 10 years.

It's a lot harder to be top 15 in longer increments. That's a much higher standard, while the peak one, let's say 5 years, is a much lower standard.

Because it's much easier to be the best at something for half, or even a third of the amount of time, as compared to being the best over a much longer period of time.

[dhsilv2]

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?

Because 10 years is more than 5 years. Because 15 years is more than 10 years.

It's a lot harder to be top 15 in longer increments. That's a much higher standard, while the peak one, let's say 5 years, is a much lower standard.

Because it's much easier to be the best at something for half, or even a third of the amount of time, as compared to being the best over a much longer period of time.

I can see your point of view. I'm not sure it really passes muster. Is it HARDER to be the best player on the planet or among the best for 5 years? I'm not sure one is harder than the other off hand. 5 years is already roughly long enough to cover most of the top 15's best years (not your jordan's and Lebrons).

As I said you can value longevity more. I do myself so I tend to agree that I'd want more to solidify Jokic as top 15. But it's not easier or harder per say to have a top 15 5 year run than a 15 year run. They both mean you were something only 14 others could match in the history of the game.