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

[dhsilv2]

OK, it's time for me to weigh in. I'm 72 years old (young?) and have been watching the NBA since the days of Russell vs. Wilt. I'm also a Day One Raptors season seat holder. In short, I've seen all the stars (MJ, Kobe, Shaq, King James, Steve Nash, Steph Curry), many in person multiple times.

Nikola Jokic is INDISPUTABLY a Top 15 player, and with three more years at his current pace, will break into my personal Top 10.

I suppose I can't get too upset about recency bias, but you guys really need to consider Jerry West and Oscar Robertson.

I think those two are locks for the discussion of top 15. Though the top 15 is getting rough! If Kobe and Jokic aren't in the top 10...and Giannis is around. It's tough!

[maxpower8888]

I'm a huge Jokic fan but how many players in the top 15 only have one ring? I can think of Oscar and Jerry West, but they both have more All-NBA First Team selections. He'll need to win more hardware first.

[dhsilv2]

I'm a huge Jokic fan but how many players in the top 15 only have one ring? I can think of Oscar and Jerry West, but they both have more All-NBA First Team selections. He'll need to win more hardware first.

How many players in the top 15 played in an era of 30 teams?

[DimesandKnicks]

So let’s ignore for a second, that u actually failed to mention any of this in the last thread, at least not in post I was quoted in, a few questions and comments:

You keep saying you’ve “quantified” Jokic’s defense, but what you’re actually doing is stringing together loosely related numbers under the banner of quantification.

Let’s be specific - 20 shots at 5% higher efficiency equals one extra make, not +0.1 points. So your base arithmetic already doesn’t check out.

Beyond that, every figure you’ve mentioned - the 1.1 per steal, 4.5 points per 100 from free throws, 1.5 from rebounding - are arbitrary, unweighted, and uncited. You’ve never defined a framework for how those interact or offset the defensive liabilities I listed.

So I’ll ask plainly: if you believe your method has merit, layer in the positives you listed with the negatives I provided above. Show your full equation. If it’s as simple as you claim, that should take you less than five minutes.

Hey, I got you to quantify!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes it's 2 points!

So let’s ignore for a second, that u actually failed to mention any of this in the last thread, at least not in post I was quoted in, a few questions and comments:

You keep saying you’ve “quantified” Jokic’s defense, but what you’re actually doing is stringing together loosely related numbers under the banner of quantification.

Let’s be specific - 20 shots at 5% higher efficiency equals one extra make, not +0.1 points. So your base arithmetic already doesn’t check out.

Beyond that, every figure you’ve mentioned - the 1.1 per steal, 4.5 points per 100 from free throws, 1.5 from rebounding - are arbitrary, unweighted, and uncited. You’ve never defined a framework for how those interact or offset the defensive liabilities I listed.

So I’ll ask plainly: if you believe your method has merit, layer in the positives you listed with the negatives I provided above. Show your full equation. If it’s as simple as you claim, that should take you less than five minutes.

I've never once claimed one can layer all this into a perfect metric. I've wanted you to put numbers behind the never ending mountain of stats you're posting because without that, it's as impossible discussion. I multiple times did this with you make no response related to those stats. I'm not asking you to be flaws. As you noted, I made a mistake in my math just there and you corrected me. No big deal.

The point I've tried to get to is to at least get you to see that you can offset rim protection with defensive rebounds, force turnovers, and reducing the other team's free throw rates. If you can at least see that and understand it. While showing a willingness to engage in a ball park quantification to what the rim shots mean. Then one can have an actual conversation.

Instead you just keep saying, look at the field goal percentages. And i keep loosely saying, cool...teams shoot better on Denver when Jokic is on the court and still score about 5 points per 100 less. And then you just repeat yourself.

I didn’t just keep saying look at the FG percentages…I literally asked you how?

Moreover, how do you actually get those numbers though? Like, where do the +1.1 per steal or +1.5 from rebounding figures come from? Because without a model or weighting behind them, they’re just arbitrary placeholders - they don’t really quantify anything.

And even if we entertain them, those values don’t mean what you think they do. They ignore the context of how those stats are generated - like how many points he gives up by gambling for steals, getting caught on kick balls, or avoiding fouls because he’s not actually contesting shots. Those defensive trade-offs don’t show up in your math, but they’re part of the equation you’re claiming to quantify.

So if you’re going to say these things “offset” his weaknesses, you have to also account for the possessions and points he concedes in the process. Otherwise, you’re not balancing a scale - you’re just putting weights on one side and calling it even. This is why the type of “quantifications” you’re looking for aren’t really productive. This isn’t baseball.

[maxpower8888]

I'm a huge Jokic fan but how many players in the top 15 only have one ring? I can think of Oscar and Jerry West, but they both have more All-NBA First Team selections. He'll need to win more hardware first.

How many players in the top 15 played in an era of 30 teams?

You can only beat who you face. If we're going down that road then Bill Russell should completely fall out of the top 20, let alone top 10, since he played in a very early era on the most stacked team, in a league with very few teams. If Bill can get a pass, so can Oscar and Jerry.

[dhsilv2]

So let’s ignore for a second, that u actually failed to mention any of this in the last thread, at least not in post I was quoted in, a few questions and comments:

You keep saying you’ve “quantified” Jokic’s defense, but what you’re actually doing is stringing together loosely related numbers under the banner of quantification.

Let’s be specific - 20 shots at 5% higher efficiency equals one extra make, not +0.1 points. So your base arithmetic already doesn’t check out.

Beyond that, every figure you’ve mentioned - the 1.1 per steal, 4.5 points per 100 from free throws, 1.5 from rebounding - are arbitrary, unweighted, and uncited. You’ve never defined a framework for how those interact or offset the defensive liabilities I listed.

So I’ll ask plainly: if you believe your method has merit, layer in the positives you listed with the negatives I provided above. Show your full equation. If it’s as simple as you claim, that should take you less than five minutes.

I've never once claimed one can layer all this into a perfect metric. I've wanted you to put numbers behind the never ending mountain of stats you're posting because without that, it's as impossible discussion. I multiple times did this with you make no response related to those stats. I'm not asking you to be flaws. As you noted, I made a mistake in my math just there and you corrected me. No big deal.

The point I've tried to get to is to at least get you to see that you can offset rim protection with defensive rebounds, force turnovers, and reducing the other team's free throw rates. If you can at least see that and understand it. While showing a willingness to engage in a ball park quantification to what the rim shots mean. Then one can have an actual conversation.

Instead you just keep saying, look at the field goal percentages. And i keep loosely saying, cool...teams shoot better on Denver when Jokic is on the court and still score about 5 points per 100 less. And then you just repeat yourself.

I didn’t just keep saying look at the FG percentages…I literally asked you how?

Moreover, how do you actually get those numbers though? Like, where do the +1.1 per steal or +1.5 from rebounding figures come from? Because without a model or weighting behind them, they’re just arbitrary placeholders - they don’t really quantify anything.

And even if we entertain them, those values don’t mean what you think they do. They ignore the context of how those stats are generated - like how many points he gives up by gambling for steals, getting caught on kick balls, or avoiding fouls because he’s not actually contesting shots. Those defensive trade-offs don’t show up in your math, but they’re part of the equation you’re claiming to quantify.

So if you’re going to say these things “offset” his weaknesses, you have to also account for the possessions and points he concedes in the process. Otherwise, you’re not balancing a scale - you’re just putting weights on one side and calling it even. This is why the type of “quantifications” you’re looking for aren’t really productive. This isn’t baseball.

You can look at his on off data if you need a ball park. And again, I'm just starting with ball parks.

Here's a very clean look from cleaning glass.

https://cleaningtheglass.com/stats/player/1883/onoff#tab-team_efficiency

And use a few years as on off is noisy, but we can start to build a trend.

I'll even walk you through it...not that we haven't been over this all before but maybe a nice chart makes it easier?

We have both been saying Jokic isn't much of a shot blocker or even deterrent to shooters. Well sure enough outside of 2022 when Jokic is on the Nuggets have one of the biggest drop offs you can imagine in eFG%. Ranking in the 33rd, 24th and 16th percentile the last 3 year. Outlier in 2022 at 91 and back to the same prior. So all our talk where we kept agreeing and you kept showing me MORE data, all shows up in the on off data. Jokic sucks at lowering eFG%. Now the point I kept making, and I guess crudely about how GREAT Jokic is with not fouling...about 2 defensive fouls per game and as you showed us, with nearly 20 shots against him (this is godly stuff here)...he ranks in FT Rate reduction in the 100th, 95th, 100th, and 90th percentile. We then go on and see the difference in ORB%, again Jokic in the 88th, 96th, 99th, and 90th. This is again something I've been hammering home.

Now I get that you'll want to say that these are team stats and you're right that there's a LOT of noise here. Look at turnovers where we both know Jokic generates a lot of them, but some years it doesn't seem to translate as different guys in different roles are on the court. So I'd certainly be open to guy some of these metrics aren't heavily Jokic driven, but they match up with what I have everyone else in this thread as been saying about Jokic from the start.

I am simply using these numbers and giving the credit roughly to Jokic to give us some reasonable number to talk about. As there has to be an explanation as to why the Nuggets are a better defense with him vs without him.

So for a second step back from being a skeptic and answer this really simple question. If these 3 key factors are mostly attributable to Jokic. Is it not reasonable to conclude that Jokic is an average to slightly plus defender?

[dhsilv2]

I'm a huge Jokic fan but how many players in the top 15 only have one ring? I can think of Oscar and Jerry West, but they both have more All-NBA First Team selections. He'll need to win more hardware first.

How many players in the top 15 played in an era of 30 teams?

You can only beat who you face. If we're going down that road then Bill Russell should completely fall out of the top 20, let alone top 10, since he played in a very early era on the most stacked team, in a league with very few teams. If Bill can get a pass, so can Oscar and Jerry.

No, Bill doesn't fall out because we can reasonably argue he is the most impactful player in NBA history. But I'm not going to argue that Bill's 11 all nba selections by default ranks him ahead of someone with a few less given the context of his era. And Oscar and West are really great players who need to be mentioned in this context, but their all nba selections and allstar appearances aren't the foundation of that argument.

[maxpower8888]

How many players in the top 15 played in an era of 30 teams?

You can only beat who you face. If we're going down that road then Bill Russell should completely fall out of the top 20, let alone top 10, since he played in a very early era on the most stacked team, in a league with very few teams. If Bill can get a pass, so can Oscar and Jerry.

No, Bill doesn't fall out because we can reasonably argue he is the most impactful player in NBA history. But I'm not going to argue that Bill's 11 all nba selections by default ranks him ahead of someone with a few less given the context of his era. And Oscar and West are really great players who need to be mentioned in this context, but their all nba selections and allstar appearances aren't the foundation of that argument.

Hardware matters, it's a direct measurement of where a player stood in relation to their contemporaries. And Jokic having some very efficient offensive seasons, with fairly good to subpar defending, has not done enough yet in his career that I can put him in a top 15 over guys who have proven their greatness over a longer span of time than him.

I also disagree with your premise that Bill is the most impactful player in NBA history.

[dhsilv2]

You can only beat who you face. If we're going down that road then Bill Russell should completely fall out of the top 20, let alone top 10, since he played in a very early era on the most stacked team, in a league with very few teams. If Bill can get a pass, so can Oscar and Jerry.

No, Bill doesn't fall out because we can reasonably argue he is the most impactful player in NBA history. But I'm not going to argue that Bill's 11 all nba selections by default ranks him ahead of someone with a few less given the context of his era. And Oscar and West are really great players who need to be mentioned in this context, but their all nba selections and allstar appearances aren't the foundation of that argument.

Hardware matters, it's a direct measurement of where a player stood in relation to their contemporaries. And Jokic having some very efficient offensive seasons, with fairly good to subpar defending, has not done enough yet in his career that I can put him in a top 15 over guys who have proven their greatness over a longer span of time than him.

If hardware matters there aren't 15 guys with more MVP's which is the pinnacle of hardware.

None the less we have nothing in 2025 that is comparable to being the last guy picked on the allstar team in an 8 team or even 12 team league. That would be like giving hardware to the 50th or 60th best player in the league. Perhaps we SHOULD do that, but none the less it's not an apples to apples comparison.

Now that said, it's perfectly fine to argue that Jokic hasn't played enough. Larry Bird played 152 more regular season games than Jokic. So there's at least a starting point to say when Jokic clearly will have enough games. But nobody in their right mind is putting Cousy over Jokic at this point either.

[TK Smart]

Jokic has never separated himself from Giannis IMO. Both were drafted like a year apart from each other. I think Giannis came on quicker but Jokic eventually caught up to him. Both are in my top 15, but I don't think you can have one in the top 15 without the other. That'd be the case to me. Like if you have Jokic in your top 15 and Giannis not there, it better be like Jokic at 15 or something.

[dhsilv2]

Jokic has never separated himself from Giannis IMO. Both were drafted like a year apart from each other. I think Giannis came on quicker but Jokic eventually caught up to him. Both are in my top 15, but I don't think you can have one in the top 15 without the other. That'd be the case to me. Like if you have Jokic in your top 15 and Giannis not there, it better be like Jokic at 15 or something.

I thought that at one point, but I'm not sure.

Lets start with the voter side since a lot of people value that. MVP share.

Jokic is 7th all time in MVP voting. Giannis is 13th. Both by this have a case for top 15, but that's a meaningful seperation. 4.460 vs 4.175. Between them are Wilt, Shaq, Malone, Duncan, and Kobe.

Career PER (I hate this metric but lets just use it). Jokic is 1st all time at 28.51 (obviously this will come down if/when he ages out). Giannis is 8th at 25.82. Guys between them. Jordan, Lebron, AD, Shaq, Robinson, and Wilt (fake PER but whatever).

WS - Jokic is 44th all time (argument strongly against top 15). Giannis despite that early lead, is 51st. Ewing, Carter, Pippen, Marion, Butler, Billups are between them.

VORP - Jokic is 22 (another strong argument against top 15) and Giannis 29th. Drexler, Miller, Pierce, Pippen, Wade, and Payton between them.

WS/48 Jokic first all time. Giannis 22nd...too many to list between them.

BPM - again Jokic first all time with Giannis 9th. MJ, Lebron, Doncic, Magic, Robinson, Bird and Stockton between them.

If your argument is that Jokic has dominated more and his extra MVP is a strong argument there. I think it's clear there is a very real separation statistically with these guys despite Giannis having 2 more allstar seasons.

[TK Smart]

Jokic has never separated himself from Giannis IMO. Both were drafted like a year apart from each other. I think Giannis came on quicker but Jokic eventually caught up to him. Both are in my top 15, but I don't think you can have one in the top 15 without the other. That'd be the case to me. Like if you have Jokic in your top 15 and Giannis not there, it better be like Jokic at 15 or something.

I thought that at one point, but I'm not sure.

Lets start with the voter side since a lot of people value that. MVP share.

Jokic is 7th all time in MVP voting. Giannis is 13th. Both by this have a case for top 15, but that's a meaningful seperation. 4.460 vs 4.175. Between them are Wilt, Shaq, Malone, Duncan, and Kobe.

Career PER (I hate this metric but lets just use it). Jokic is 1st all time at 28.51 (obviously this will come down if/when he ages out). Giannis is 8th at 25.82. Guys between them. Jordan, Lebron, AD, Shaq, Robinson, and Wilt (fake PER but whatever).

WS - Jokic is 44th all time (argument strongly against top 15). Giannis despite that early lead, is 51st. Ewing, Carter, Pippen, Marion, Butler, Billups are between them.

VORP - Jokic is 22 (another strong argument against top 15) and Giannis 29th. Drexler, Miller, Pierce, Pippen, Wade, and Payton between them.

WS/48 Jokic first all time. Giannis 22nd...too many to list between them.

BPM - again Jokic first all time with Giannis 9th. MJ, Lebron, Doncic, Magic, Robinson, Bird and Stockton between them.

If your argument is that Jokic has dominated more and his extra MVP is a strong argument there. I think it's clear there is a very real separation statistically with these guys despite Giannis having 2 more allstar seasons.

Giannis is like 2 months older than Jokic.


What year of their life would you say Jokic surpassed Giannis as a player? 2022?

[DimesandKnicks]

You can look at his on off data if you need a ball park. And again, I'm just starting with ball parks.

Look at his on/off data for what, exactly? I’ve asked multiple times how you’re arriving at figures like +1.1 per steal or +1.5 from rebounding — and more importantly, how you’re accounting for the points he gives up through the same defensive behaviors you’re crediting as positives.

You can’t just take “1.5 steals per game” and conclude he saves X number of points without also factoring in how many points he allows by gambling for those steals. Your “quantifications” ignore this trade-off entirely. Does on/off data fix that? No — as you’ve already acknowledged, it’s a team metric. And you and I both know his on/off looks better because he’s consistently had weak backups.

Jokic sucks at lowering eFG%. Now the point I kept making, and I guess crudely about how GREAT Jokic is with not fouling...about 2 defensive fouls per game and as you showed us, with nearly 20 shots against him (this is godly stuff here)...he ranks in FT Rate reduction in the 100th, 95th, 100th, and 90th percentile.

Jokic isn’t “great” at not fouling — he just doesn’t defend much. This is the same pattern: you praise a surface-level stat without considering the underlying behavior.

And just to reiterate, the data I shared is playoff data, where Jokic actually defends better by his standards. He averaged 3.4 fouls per game, which isn’t good. You’re also misinterpreting the “20 DFGA” figure. That doesn’t mean he’s actively defending 20 shots per game — it simply means he’s the nearest defender.

In the playoffs, he contested 5.5 shots per game. So by your framework, that’s 3.4 fouls per 5.5 contests — which isn’t “godly,” it’s god-awful.

I hope with that in mind we can finally put that argument to rest, or at least add some tension

Look at turnovers where we both know Jokic generates a lot of them

No we don't, as far as I know he forced 2 turnovers a game. That doesn't wave a wand against how many points he gives up.

I am simply using these numbers and giving the credit roughly to Jokic to give us some reasonable number to talk about. As there has to be an explanation as to why the Nuggets are a better defense with him vs without him.

And that’s the issue — you’re arbitrarily assigning credit to Jokic without demonstrating why he deserves it. The Nuggets could defend better with him on the floor for several reasons: he might be better than his backup, or he might just be surrounded by better defensive lineups. There are plausible explanations you could actually quantify, but instead, you’re skipping straight to “it must be Jokic.”

So for a second step back from being a skeptic and answer this really simple question. If these 3 key factors are mostly attributable to Jokic. Is it not reasonable to conclude that Jokic is an average to slightly plus defender?

Maybe — sure. But the problem is, you haven’t shown that these three factors are “mostly attributable” to him. That’s the step you keep skipping.

[dhsilv2]

Jokic has never separated himself from Giannis IMO. Both were drafted like a year apart from each other. I think Giannis came on quicker but Jokic eventually caught up to him. Both are in my top 15, but I don't think you can have one in the top 15 without the other. That'd be the case to me. Like if you have Jokic in your top 15 and Giannis not there, it better be like Jokic at 15 or something.

I thought that at one point, but I'm not sure.

Lets start with the voter side since a lot of people value that. MVP share.

Jokic is 7th all time in MVP voting. Giannis is 13th. Both by this have a case for top 15, but that's a meaningful seperation. 4.460 vs 4.175. Between them are Wilt, Shaq, Malone, Duncan, and Kobe.

Career PER (I hate this metric but lets just use it). Jokic is 1st all time at 28.51 (obviously this will come down if/when he ages out). Giannis is 8th at 25.82. Guys between them. Jordan, Lebron, AD, Shaq, Robinson, and Wilt (fake PER but whatever).

WS - Jokic is 44th all time (argument strongly against top 15). Giannis despite that early lead, is 51st. Ewing, Carter, Pippen, Marion, Butler, Billups are between them.

VORP - Jokic is 22 (another strong argument against top 15) and Giannis 29th. Drexler, Miller, Pierce, Pippen, Wade, and Payton between them.

WS/48 Jokic first all time. Giannis 22nd...too many to list between them.

BPM - again Jokic first all time with Giannis 9th. MJ, Lebron, Doncic, Magic, Robinson, Bird and Stockton between them.

If your argument is that Jokic has dominated more and his extra MVP is a strong argument there. I think it's clear there is a very real separation statistically with these guys despite Giannis having 2 more allstar seasons.

Giannis is like 2 months older than Jokic.


What year of their life would you say Jokic surpassed Giannis as a player? 2022?

I think 2024 is when I decided but 2023 likely was the point where Jokic had started to pass Giannis.

[dhsilv2]

So for a second step back from being a skeptic and answer this really simple question. If these 3 key factors are mostly attributable to Jokic. Is it not reasonable to conclude that Jokic is an average to slightly plus defender?

Maybe — sure. But the problem is, you haven’t shown that these three factors are “mostly attributable” to him. That’s the step you keep skipping.

I can't respond to all of those since you cut everything up in an impossible to respond to way.

It's a simple yes or no question you've been asked here. Can you offset poor defensive eFG% with low foul rates and preventing offensive rebounding. The data I just posted for you shows the Nuggets are doing just that. On average 5 points per 100 better defense over the past 4 seasons while teams shoot significantly better against the Nuggets with Jokic on the court.

So the question remains, can you grasp how that can be possible? The question isn't even about Jokic. It's if you can understand that it's possible.

[BelgradeNugget]

So for a second step back from being a skeptic and answer this really simple question. If these 3 key factors are mostly attributable to Jokic. Is it not reasonable to conclude that Jokic is an average to slightly plus defender?

Maybe — sure. But the problem is, you haven’t shown that these three factors are “mostly attributable” to him. That’s the step you keep skipping.

I can't respond to all of those since you cut everything up in an impossible to respond to way.

It's a simple yes or no question you've been asked here. Can you offset poor defensive eFG% with low foul rates and preventing offensive rebounding. The data I just posted for you shows the Nuggets are doing just that. On average 5 points per 100 better defense over the past 4 seasons while teams shoot significantly better against the Nuggets with Jokic on the court.

So the question remains, can you grasp how that can be possible? The question isn't even about Jokic. It's if you can understand that it's possible.

I see you guys had good conversation here, so I'll try to help back dhsilv2 arguments from stats with this really good video analysys. It includes arguments both of you used, but he still make argument in video that Jokic is a good defender.

Watch on YouTube

One underrated aspect of Jokic's defense not many people mantioned is his BB IQ. He knows a lot of plays of opposing teams and calls out their plays to prepare his teammates for what is comming. This aspect of his game can only be measured by the fact Nuggets defend better with him on the court.

Watch on YouTube

Braun's explanation on this and another play from the same game

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zDo1Dmlh_tw

3rd example from the same game when he is moving Watson in the right position and telling him what play is coming look at 6:07

Watch on YouTube

Here he is calling GSW play from the bench

Watch on YouTube

[DimesandKnicks]

So for a second step back from being a skeptic and answer this really simple question. If these 3 key factors are mostly attributable to Jokic. Is it not reasonable to conclude that Jokic is an average to slightly plus defender?

Maybe — sure. But the problem is, you haven’t shown that these three factors are “mostly attributable” to him. That’s the step you keep skipping.

I can't respond to all of those since you cut everything up in an impossible to respond to way.

It's a simple yes or no question you've been asked here. Can you offset poor defensive eFG% with low foul rates and preventing offensive rebounding. The data I just posted for you shows the Nuggets are doing just that. On average 5 points per 100 better defense over the past 4 seasons while teams shoot significantly better against the Nuggets with Jokic on the court.

So the question remains, can you grasp how that can be possible? The question isn't even about Jokic. It's if you can understand that it's possible.

Impossible!? Come on, man — you’re being evasive. Engage in good faith. I’ve been asking you the same exact thing for multiple posts now: how you arrived at your +1.1 per steal or +1.5 from rebounding figures. Show your framework so it can stand up to scrutiny and “quantify” the impact of his steals rebounds and “reduced fouls”.

Let me give u an example using Jokic’s poor pnr defense while defending the screener.

According to Second Spectrum tracking data from NBA.com, the Nuggets allowed 1.02 points per chance when Jokić defended the screener in pick-and-roll actions last season. He defended 45.8 ball screens per 100 possessions, one of the highest rates in the league. That means:

1.02 points × 45.8 chances = 46.7 points allowed per 100 possessions.

Now, Denver as a team allowed 116.9 points per game last season (roughly 100 possessions per game). So Jokić’s PnR defense — just this one area of defense alone — accounts for about:

(46.7 ÷ 116.9) × 100 = 40 percent of all points the Nuggets allow.

That’s massive. And it directly contradicts this idea that Denver’s slightly better on/off defensive numbers with him on the floor somehow prove his impact. When nearly 40 percent of your total points allowed come from one defensive action tied directly to your center, the “they’re 5 points better per 100 with him on the court” line doesn’t carry the weight you think it does.

I’m not saying on/off data is useless — I’m saying it’s incomplete without understanding how those numbers form. Jokic’s weaknesses in core defensive actions like pick-and-roll coverage far outweigh the narrative that he “offsets” them by not fouling or grabbing defensive boards. Those boards often come after poor initial defense, and his “low foul rate” comes from avoiding contesting shots in the first place.

So sure, in a vacuum, low fouls and strong defensive rebounding can offset poor eFG%, but Jokic has far more defensive liabilities than just eFG% — rim protection, pick-and-roll defense, contested shots, gambling for steals that lead to baskets, and leaving shooters uncontested. Those aren’t minor omissions; they’re major negative contributions that dwarf whatever small credit you try to assign.

[Rubios]

One can frame the question so Jokic gets in or outside that top 15.

But if OP is asking if Jokic is one of the 15 best players to ever do it (not greatest, not the best careers) I'd like to know the 15 guys you are putting above him.

[dhsilv2]

Maybe — sure. But the problem is, you haven’t shown that these three factors are “mostly attributable” to him. That’s the step you keep skipping.

I can't respond to all of those since you cut everything up in an impossible to respond to way.

It's a simple yes or no question you've been asked here. Can you offset poor defensive eFG% with low foul rates and preventing offensive rebounding. The data I just posted for you shows the Nuggets are doing just that. On average 5 points per 100 better defense over the past 4 seasons while teams shoot significantly better against the Nuggets with Jokic on the court.

So the question remains, can you grasp how that can be possible? The question isn't even about Jokic. It's if you can understand that it's possible.

Impossible!? Come on, man — you’re being evasive. Engage in good faith. I’ve been asking you the same exact thing for multiple posts now: how you arrived at your +1.1 per steal or +1.5 from rebounding figures. Show your framework so it can stand up to scrutiny and “quantify” the impact of his steals rebounds and “reduced fouls”.

Let me give u an example using Jokic’s poor pnr defense while defending the screener.

According to Second Spectrum tracking data from NBA.com, the Nuggets allowed 1.02 points per chance when Jokić defended the screener in pick-and-roll actions last season. He defended 45.8 ball screens per 100 possessions, one of the highest rates in the league. That means:

1.02 points × 45.8 chances = 46.7 points allowed per 100 possessions.

Now, Denver as a team allowed 116.9 points per game last season (roughly 100 possessions per game). So Jokić’s PnR defense — just this one area of defense alone — accounts for about:

(46.7 ÷ 116.9) × 100 = 40 percent of all points the Nuggets allow.

That’s massive. And it directly contradicts this idea that Denver’s slightly better on/off defensive numbers with him on the floor somehow prove his impact. When nearly 40 percent of your total points allowed come from one defensive action tied directly to your center, the “they’re 5 points better per 100 with him on the court” line doesn’t carry the weight you think it does.

I’m not saying on/off data is useless — I’m saying it’s incomplete without understanding how those numbers form. Jokic’s weaknesses in core defensive actions like pick-and-roll coverage far outweigh the narrative that he “offsets” them by not fouling or grabbing defensive boards. Those boards often come after poor initial defense, and his “low foul rate” comes from avoiding contesting shots in the first place.

So sure, in a vacuum, low fouls and strong defensive rebounding can offset poor eFG%, but Jokic has far more defensive liabilities than just eFG% — rim protection, pick-and-roll defense, contested shots, gambling for steals that lead to baskets, and leaving shooters uncontested. Those aren’t minor omissions; they’re major negative contributions that dwarf whatever small credit you try to assign.

I don't know how others respond. But what I do is I hit reply and go back and read over what you said again and try to answer it. It's really hard with the small text box to separate my comments from yours. I've done it with people I like and dislike equally. I just refuse to go into those types of replies. Truly nothing personal or me wanting to avoid stuff. I just find it really difficult and frustrating.

So just to be clear. You agree with the statement that poor eFG% defense can be offset by reduced free throw rates and strong defensive rebounding? There's nothing else to discuss until I fully understand if you agree or not on this.

[DimesandKnicks]

I can't respond to all of those since you cut everything up in an impossible to respond to way.

It's a simple yes or no question you've been asked here. Can you offset poor defensive eFG% with low foul rates and preventing offensive rebounding. The data I just posted for you shows the Nuggets are doing just that. On average 5 points per 100 better defense over the past 4 seasons while teams shoot significantly better against the Nuggets with Jokic on the court.

So the question remains, can you grasp how that can be possible? The question isn't even about Jokic. It's if you can understand that it's possible.

Impossible!? Come on, man — you’re being evasive. Engage in good faith. I’ve been asking you the same exact thing for multiple posts now: how you arrived at your +1.1 per steal or +1.5 from rebounding figures. Show your framework so it can stand up to scrutiny and “quantify” the impact of his steals rebounds and “reduced fouls”.

Let me give u an example using Jokic’s poor pnr defense while defending the screener.

According to Second Spectrum tracking data from NBA.com, the Nuggets allowed 1.02 points per chance when Jokić defended the screener in pick-and-roll actions last season. He defended 45.8 ball screens per 100 possessions, one of the highest rates in the league. That means:

1.02 points × 45.8 chances = 46.7 points allowed per 100 possessions.

Now, Denver as a team allowed 116.9 points per game last season (roughly 100 possessions per game). So Jokić’s PnR defense — just this one area of defense alone — accounts for about:

(46.7 ÷ 116.9) × 100 = 40 percent of all points the Nuggets allow.

That’s massive. And it directly contradicts this idea that Denver’s slightly better on/off defensive numbers with him on the floor somehow prove his impact. When nearly 40 percent of your total points allowed come from one defensive action tied directly to your center, the “they’re 5 points better per 100 with him on the court” line doesn’t carry the weight you think it does.

I’m not saying on/off data is useless — I’m saying it’s incomplete without understanding how those numbers form. Jokic’s weaknesses in core defensive actions like pick-and-roll coverage far outweigh the narrative that he “offsets” them by not fouling or grabbing defensive boards. Those boards often come after poor initial defense, and his “low foul rate” comes from avoiding contesting shots in the first place.

So sure, in a vacuum, low fouls and strong defensive rebounding can offset poor eFG%, but Jokic has far more defensive liabilities than just eFG% — rim protection, pick-and-roll defense, contested shots, gambling for steals that lead to baskets, and leaving shooters uncontested. Those aren’t minor omissions; they’re major negative contributions that dwarf whatever small credit you try to assign.

I don't know how others respond. But what I do is I hit reply and go back and read over what you said again and try to answer it. It's really hard with the small text box to separate my comments from yours. I've done it with people I like and dislike equally. I just refuse to go into those types of replies. Truly nothing personal or me wanting to avoid stuff. I just find it really difficult and frustrating.

So just to be clear. You agree with the statement that poor eFG% defense can be offset by reduced free throw rates and strong defensive rebounding? There's nothing else to discuss until I fully understand if you agree or not on this.

Is me saying sure not a clear affirmation?