2021-22 NBA Season Discussion

[Peregrine01]

Was listening to the Dunc'd On pod on top-10 players and was rather shocked to hear that they still have KD on the same tier as Giannis with Kawhi just behind them and Jokic and Embiid in the lower part of the top 10. Moreover, their reasoning seems convoluted.

They penalize Jokic and Embiid particularly badly for their defense while saying nothing of that sort about KD despite the Nets being in the bottom third on defense for two straight seasons now. With Jokic in particular they repeatedly point to the Suns series as the example for his shortcomings on defense without acknowledging that the Nuggets have plain poor point of attack defenders. Lastly, what's most indefensible is that they have Kawhi in the top 3 despite not having played a single minute this season. Completely head scratching.

it sounds like they think you cannot be a top 3 player unless you have rings and fmvp's

Yeah, it's befuddling. They call it forward looking but their entire rationale is based on what these players did in past seasons. And even then, a lot of their arguments are contradictory. Nate makes a big deal about Jokic's physique and how no center with his physical attributes has anchored a championship-level defense in recent memory...when the guy most similar in build (34 year old Marc Gasol) did just that in 2019.

At the same time, they don't apply the same "both sides of the ball" standard to KD, who has been on plain bad defensive teams (worse than the Nuggets) ever since he left the Warriors.

[Fadeaway_J]

Was listening to the Dunc'd On pod on top-10 players and was rather shocked to hear that they still have KD on the same tier as Giannis with Kawhi just behind them and Jokic and Embiid in the lower part of the top 10. Moreover, their reasoning seems convoluted.

They penalize Jokic and Embiid particularly badly for their defense while saying nothing of that sort about KD despite the Nets being in the bottom third on defense for two straight seasons now. With Jokic in particular they repeatedly point to the Suns series as the example for his shortcomings on defense without acknowledging that the Nuggets have plain poor point of attack defenders. Lastly, what's most indefensible is that they have Kawhi in the top 3 despite not having played a single minute this season. Completely head scratching.

it sounds like they think you cannot be a top 3 player unless you have rings and fmvp's

Yeah, it's befuddling. They call it forward looking but their entire rationale is based on what these players did in past seasons. And even then, a lot of their arguments are contradictory. Nate makes a big deal about Jokic's physique and how no center with his physical attributes has anchored a championship-level defense in recent memory...when the guy most similar in build (34 year old Marc Gasol) did just that in 2019.

At the same time, they don't apply the same "both sides of the ball" standard to KD, who has been on plain bad defensive teams (worse than the Nuggets) ever since he left the Warriors.

I like their work in general, but this is one aspect where I just can't get on board with their thinking. They tend to place a lot of value on what type of player you are, and whether that type meets their requirements for being a particular level of player, rather than what your actual impact is. Guys like KD, Kawhi, and Luka fit the archetype they value the most, while Embiid and Jokic don't, so they give the former group considerable benefit of the doubt while the latter would basically have to win a championship to move beyond a certain glass ceiling.

[Peregrine01]

it sounds like they think you cannot be a top 3 player unless you have rings and fmvp's

Yeah, it's befuddling. They call it forward looking but their entire rationale is based on what these players did in past seasons. And even then, a lot of their arguments are contradictory. Nate makes a big deal about Jokic's physique and how no center with his physical attributes has anchored a championship-level defense in recent memory...when the guy most similar in build (34 year old Marc Gasol) did just that in 2019.

At the same time, they don't apply the same "both sides of the ball" standard to KD, who has been on plain bad defensive teams (worse than the Nuggets) ever since he left the Warriors.

I like their work in general, but this is one aspect where I just can't get on board with their thinking. They tend to place a lot of value on what type of player you are, and whether that type meets their requirements for being a particular level of player, rather than what your actual impact is. Guys like KD, Kawhi, and Luka fit the archetype they value the most, while Embiid and Jokic don't, so they give the former group considerable benefit of the doubt while the latter would basically have to win a championship to move beyond a certain glass ceiling.

Agreed.

I also think that their view (which seems to be more or less a consensus among the analytical types) is that you absolutely need a dominant defensive big to have a bulletproof team defense. I don't see any reason why Jokic can't be as effective as Marc Gasol on defense if you transplanted him to that 2019 team. Conversely, I think Marc would look similarly poorly in pick and roll if he played with perimeter defenders like Monte Morris and Will Barton instead of Lowry, Danny Green and Pascal. Incidentally, I think Jokic on even the current Raptors roster would be title contenders.

[parsnips33]

I heard an interesting quote from Draymond's podcast the other day (talking about why Mikhal Bridges is his pick for DPOY)

"There's some defenders that compromise your defense in order to be a good defender"

I thought it was an interesting idea - I don't think versatility is something that is valued as much as the defensive end as it is on offense.

I know Gobert's defense is somewhat controversial, but I think this is a quote that kinda applies. Gobert is an elite defender in a drop scheme, but does having so much of his value tied to one particular style of defense limit his team's full defensive potential? Put another way, if Gobert was less elite in a drop scheme but more effective at switching/hedge & recover/etc. would that be preferable?

[The High Cyde]

That wouldn’t even be a discussion if Utah had any semblance of perimeter defenders. Gobert is the ultimate last line of defense, he’s there to deter slashers and penetrators and support the perimeter defenders. When there are none, you find out that it doesn’t matter how good you defend paint, there’s really nothing to stop the other team from launching at will en masse.

[Fadeaway_J]

I heard an interesting quote from Draymond's podcast the other day (talking about why Mikhal Bridges is his pick for DPOY)

"There's some defenders that compromise your defense in order to be a good defender"

I thought it was an interesting idea - I don't think versatility is something that is valued as much as the defensive end as it is on offense.

I know Gobert's defense is somewhat controversial, but I think this is a quote that kinda applies. Gobert is an elite defender in a drop scheme, but does having so much of his value tied to one particular style of defense limit his team's full defensive potential? Put another way, if Gobert was less elite in a drop scheme but more effective at switching/hedge & recover/etc. would that be preferable?

The problem with a lot of the Gobert discourse is that people keep ignoring the primary issue: the Jazz just don't have good defensive personnel outside of Gobert at all. He actually raises the expectations of how good they should be almost singlehandedly, and when their reliance on him comes back to bite them (because he can't guard three players at once), he also get the blame for that. Of course versatility becomes more valuable in the playoffs, but even a Draymond or AD at their peak would only be able to plug so many gaps.

[parsnips33]

I heard an interesting quote from Draymond's podcast the other day (talking about why Mikhal Bridges is his pick for DPOY)

"There's some defenders that compromise your defense in order to be a good defender"

I thought it was an interesting idea - I don't think versatility is something that is valued as much as the defensive end as it is on offense.

I know Gobert's defense is somewhat controversial, but I think this is a quote that kinda applies. Gobert is an elite defender in a drop scheme, but does having so much of his value tied to one particular style of defense limit his team's full defensive potential? Put another way, if Gobert was less elite in a drop scheme but more effective at switching/hedge & recover/etc. would that be preferable?

The problem with a lot of the Gobert discourse is that people keep ignoring the primary issue: the Jazz just don't have good defensive personnel outside of Gobert at all. He actually raises the expectations of how good they should be almost singlehandedly, and when their reliance on him comes back to bite them (because he can't guard three players at once), he also get the blame for that. Of course versatility becomes more valuable in the playoffs, but even a Draymond or AD at their peak would only be able to plug so many gaps.

I don't disagree with this at all, but there are players in today's game that you really can't rely on your guards to fight through screens to contest, even if you have great perimeter defenders. I think the question still stands - is a defender who's strong but not elite in all facets of defense more valuable than one who's extremely elite in a specific context

[Fadeaway_J]

I heard an interesting quote from Draymond's podcast the other day (talking about why Mikhal Bridges is his pick for DPOY)

"There's some defenders that compromise your defense in order to be a good defender"

I thought it was an interesting idea - I don't think versatility is something that is valued as much as the defensive end as it is on offense.

I know Gobert's defense is somewhat controversial, but I think this is a quote that kinda applies. Gobert is an elite defender in a drop scheme, but does having so much of his value tied to one particular style of defense limit his team's full defensive potential? Put another way, if Gobert was less elite in a drop scheme but more effective at switching/hedge & recover/etc. would that be preferable?

The problem with a lot of the Gobert discourse is that people keep ignoring the primary issue: the Jazz just don't have good defensive personnel outside of Gobert at all. He actually raises the expectations of how good they should be almost singlehandedly, and when their reliance on him comes back to bite them (because he can't guard three players at once), he also get the blame for that. Of course versatility becomes more valuable in the playoffs, but even a Draymond or AD at their peak would only be able to plug so many gaps.

I don't disagree with this at all, but there are players in today's game that you really can't rely on your guards to fight through screens to contest, even if you have great perimeter defenders. I think the question still stands - is a defender who's strong but not elite in all facets of defense more valuable than one who's extremely elite in a specific context

It depends on the players around him. I don't think the hypothetical player you describe would work as well with Utah's personnel as Gobert does.

[Peregrine01]

It's almost like people forgot that in a 5 on 5 game, one good defender isn't enough to make a team good at defense. KG is rightfully thought by many to be a GOAT defensive player but even he wasn't enough to prevent the Timberwolves from being a middling defensive team during his prime. And I'd argue that the impact of any individual defensive player is more limited now given how spread offenses are today.

[Statlanta]

I think Draymond's quote is for the Mo Bamba's and Mitchell Robinson's of the world than Rudy Gobert. Guys who are chasing defensive stats for their next contract who limit your defense.

[parsnips33]

I definitely don't want to single out Gobert, and I probably could've picked a better example since discussions about Rudy come with so much baggage.

Imagine I'm talking about Embiid instead, I think the same concepts apply

[falcolombardi]

I heard an interesting quote from Draymond's podcast the other day (talking about why Mikhal Bridges is his pick for DPOY)

"There's some defenders that compromise your defense in order to be a good defender"

I thought it was an interesting idea - I don't think versatility is something that is valued as much as the defensive end as it is on offense.

I know Gobert's defense is somewhat controversial, but I think this is a quote that kinda applies. Gobert is an elite defender in a drop scheme, but does having so much of his value tied to one particular style of defense limit his team's full defensive potential? Put another way, if Gobert was less elite in a drop scheme but more effective at switching/hedge & recover/etc. would that be preferable?

The problem with a lot of the Gobert discourse is that people keep ignoring the primary issue: the Jazz just don't have good defensive personnel outside of Gobert at all. He actually raises the expectations of how good they should be almost singlehandedly, and when their reliance on him comes back to bite them (because he can't guard three players at once), he also get the blame for that. Of course versatility becomes more valuable in the playoffs, but even a Draymond or AD at their peak would only be able to plug so many gaps.

I don't disagree with this at all, but there are players in today's game that you really can't rely on your guards to fight through screens to contest, even if you have great perimeter defenders. I think the question still stands - is a defender who's strong but not elite in all facets of defense more valuable than one who's extremely elite in a specific context

perimeter defenders cannot defend alone, put enes freedom in ayton place and you would watch suns defense evaporate regardless of mikal bridges play

blaming gobert for not defending the full team alone, in the paint ans the perimeter simultaneously would be like blaming curry for being double teamed full time and his teammates not taking advantage

offense or defense 1 player cannot play it alone

[parsnips33]

The problem with a lot of the Gobert discourse is that people keep ignoring the primary issue: the Jazz just don't have good defensive personnel outside of Gobert at all. He actually raises the expectations of how good they should be almost singlehandedly, and when their reliance on him comes back to bite them (because he can't guard three players at once), he also get the blame for that. Of course versatility becomes more valuable in the playoffs, but even a Draymond or AD at their peak would only be able to plug so many gaps.

I don't disagree with this at all, but there are players in today's game that you really can't rely on your guards to fight through screens to contest, even if you have great perimeter defenders. I think the question still stands - is a defender who's strong but not elite in all facets of defense more valuable than one who's extremely elite in a specific context

perimeter defenders cannot defend alone, put enes freedom in ayton place and you would watch suns defense evaporate regardless of mikal bridges play

Agreed. And I think Gobert is a better defensive player than Bridges.

I'm thinking less in terms of specific players and more in terms of archetypes - does the jack of all trades beat the master of one defensively?

[falcolombardi]

Yeah, it's befuddling. They call it forward looking but their entire rationale is based on what these players did in past seasons. And even then, a lot of their arguments are contradictory. Nate makes a big deal about Jokic's physique and how no center with his physical attributes has anchored a championship-level defense in recent memory...when the guy most similar in build (34 year old Marc Gasol) did just that in 2019.

At the same time, they don't apply the same "both sides of the ball" standard to KD, who has been on plain bad defensive teams (worse than the Nuggets) ever since he left the Warriors.

I like their work in general, but this is one aspect where I just can't get on board with their thinking. They tend to place a lot of value on what type of player you are, and whether that type meets their requirements for being a particular level of player, rather than what your actual impact is. Guys like KD, Kawhi, and Luka fit the archetype they value the most, while Embiid and Jokic don't, so they give the former group considerable benefit of the doubt while the latter would basically have to win a championship to move beyond a certain glass ceiling.

Agreed.

I also think that their view (which seems to be more or less a consensus among the analytical types) is that you absolutely need a dominant defensive big to have a bulletproof team defense. I don't see any reason why Jokic can't be as effective as Marc Gasol on defense if you transplanted him to that 2019 team. Conversely, I think Marc would look similarly poorly in pick and roll if he played with perimeter defenders like Monte Morris and Will Barton instead of Lowry, Danny Green and Pascal. Incidentally, I think Jokic on even the current Raptors roster would be title contenders.

ehh i wouldnt be so confortable saying this

marc gasol in Toronto had a much smaller offensive load than jokic so he could put more of his Energy and focus in defense than jokic can as a helio in denver

marc is taller which probably means he is longer somethingh fairly important for a defensive center

and even when marc shared a significant load as a co first option in Memphis he still played dpoy tier defense, jokic has bit played that level of defense even whe b sharing the offensove load with Murray (aka less Energy theorically spent in offense)

and most importantly, just because jokic is a brilliant player, one of the smartest ever, doesnt mean he is as proportionaly brilliant in defense as he is in offense

is sometimes taken for granted that a brilliant offensive mind must be every bit as much of a brilliant defensive mind which i am unsure how true it is
(to say nothingh that some players just are more cut for the defensive grind than others, not saying jokic is not, but in marc case is proven)

i thinl we as fans are guilty of assuming smart players like jokic or nash could just become all time great defenders if given the physical tools or focus on it

[70sFan]

I like their work in general, but this is one aspect where I just can't get on board with their thinking. They tend to place a lot of value on what type of player you are, and whether that type meets their requirements for being a particular level of player, rather than what your actual impact is. Guys like KD, Kawhi, and Luka fit the archetype they value the most, while Embiid and Jokic don't, so they give the former group considerable benefit of the doubt while the latter would basically have to win a championship to move beyond a certain glass ceiling.

Agreed.

I also think that their view (which seems to be more or less a consensus among the analytical types) is that you absolutely need a dominant defensive big to have a bulletproof team defense. I don't see any reason why Jokic can't be as effective as Marc Gasol on defense if you transplanted him to that 2019 team. Conversely, I think Marc would look similarly poorly in pick and roll if he played with perimeter defenders like Monte Morris and Will Barton instead of Lowry, Danny Green and Pascal. Incidentally, I think Jokic on even the current Raptors roster would be title contenders.

ehh i wouldnt be so confortable saying this

marc gasol in Toronto had a much smaller offensive load than jokic so he could put more of his Energy and focus in defense than jokic can as a helio in denver

marc is taller which probably means he is longer somethingh fairly important for a defensive center

and even when marc shared a significant load as a co first option in Memphis he still played dpoy tier defense, jokic has bit played that level of defense even whe b sharing the offensove load with Murray (aka less Energy theorically spent in offense)

and most importantly, just because jokic is a brilliant player, one of the smartest ever, doesnt mean he is as proportionaly brilliant in defense as he is in offense

is sometimes taken for granted that a brilliant offensive mind must be every bit as much of a brilliant defensive mind which i am unsure how true it is
(to say nothingh that some players just are more cut for the defensive grind than others, not saying jokic is not, but in marc case is proven)

I never got the idea that Jokic could reach Gasol level on defensive end. People don't realize how special Gasol was as a defender. Jokic doesn't have his physical tools, nor he has his defensive awareness,

[Peregrine01]

I like their work in general, but this is one aspect where I just can't get on board with their thinking. They tend to place a lot of value on what type of player you are, and whether that type meets their requirements for being a particular level of player, rather than what your actual impact is. Guys like KD, Kawhi, and Luka fit the archetype they value the most, while Embiid and Jokic don't, so they give the former group considerable benefit of the doubt while the latter would basically have to win a championship to move beyond a certain glass ceiling.

Agreed.

I also think that their view (which seems to be more or less a consensus among the analytical types) is that you absolutely need a dominant defensive big to have a bulletproof team defense. I don't see any reason why Jokic can't be as effective as Marc Gasol on defense if you transplanted him to that 2019 team. Conversely, I think Marc would look similarly poorly in pick and roll if he played with perimeter defenders like Monte Morris and Will Barton instead of Lowry, Danny Green and Pascal. Incidentally, I think Jokic on even the current Raptors roster would be title contenders.

ehh i wouldnt be so confortable saying this

marc gasol in Toronto had a much smaller offensive load than jokic so he could put more of his Energy and focus in defense than jokic can as a helio in denver

marc is taller which probably means he is longer somethingh fairly important for a defensive center

and even when marc shared a significant load as a co first option in Memphis he still played dpoy tier defense, jokic has bit played that level of defense even whe b sharing the offensove load with Murray (aka less Energy theorically spent in offense)

and most importantly, just because jokic is a brilliant player, one of the smartest ever, doesnt mean he is as proportionaly brilliant in defense as he is in offense

is sometimes taken for granted that a brilliant offensive mind must be every bit as much of a brilliant defensive mind which i am unsure how true it is
(to say nothingh that some players just are more cut for the defensive grind than others, not saying jokic is not, but in marc case is proven)

i thinl we as fans are guilty of assuming smart players like jokic or nash could just become all time great defenders if given the physical tools or focus on it

To me, the biggest impediment is circumstance.

The massive offensive load that Jokic has to carry and the need for him to stay on the floor are big reasons why he plays the kind of defense that he's playing right now, defensive improvements notwithstanding. He's kind of forced to play more passively on defense to avoid foul trouble and conserve energy on offense. Marc has never had such an enormous responsibility on offense.

Also, Marc has pretty much always played on highly defensively-minded teams so I question whether his rep has been enhanced because of that. On both the Grizz and the Raps, he's had probably the best ensemble of point-of-attack and wing defenders in the league to help him. Jokic plays with some of the worst point-of-attack defenders in the league.

[falcolombardi]

Agreed.

I also think that their view (which seems to be more or less a consensus among the analytical types) is that you absolutely need a dominant defensive big to have a bulletproof team defense. I don't see any reason why Jokic can't be as effective as Marc Gasol on defense if you transplanted him to that 2019 team. Conversely, I think Marc would look similarly poorly in pick and roll if he played with perimeter defenders like Monte Morris and Will Barton instead of Lowry, Danny Green and Pascal. Incidentally, I think Jokic on even the current Raptors roster would be title contenders.

ehh i wouldnt be so confortable saying this

marc gasol in Toronto had a much smaller offensive load than jokic so he could put more of his Energy and focus in defense than jokic can as a helio in denver

marc is taller which probably means he is longer somethingh fairly important for a defensive center

and even when marc shared a significant load as a co first option in Memphis he still played dpoy tier defense, jokic has bit played that level of defense even whe b sharing the offensove load with Murray (aka less Energy theorically spent in offense)

and most importantly, just because jokic is a brilliant player, one of the smartest ever, doesnt mean he is as proportionaly brilliant in defense as he is in offense

is sometimes taken for granted that a brilliant offensive mind must be every bit as much of a brilliant defensive mind which i am unsure how true it is
(to say nothingh that some players just are more cut for the defensive grind than others, not saying jokic is not, but in marc case is proven)

i thinl we as fans are guilty of assuming smart players like jokic or nash could just become all time great defenders if given the physical tools or focus on it

To me, the biggest impediment is circumstance.

The massive offensive load that Jokic has to carry and the need for him to stay on the floor are big reasons why he plays the kind of defense that he's playing right now, defensive improvements notwithstanding. He's kind of forced to play more passively on defense to avoid foul trouble and conserve energy on offense. Marc has never had such an enormous responsibility on offense.

Also, Marc has pretty much always played on highly defensively-minded teams so I question whether his rep has been enhanced because of that. On both the Grizz and the Raps, he's had probably the best ensemble of point-of-attack and wing defenders in the league to help him. Jokic plays with some of the worst point-of-attack defenders in the league.

is technically possible, but until i see jokic play
marc gasol level defense i wont believe he can play marc gasol level defense

[70sFan]

Agreed.

I also think that their view (which seems to be more or less a consensus among the analytical types) is that you absolutely need a dominant defensive big to have a bulletproof team defense. I don't see any reason why Jokic can't be as effective as Marc Gasol on defense if you transplanted him to that 2019 team. Conversely, I think Marc would look similarly poorly in pick and roll if he played with perimeter defenders like Monte Morris and Will Barton instead of Lowry, Danny Green and Pascal. Incidentally, I think Jokic on even the current Raptors roster would be title contenders.

ehh i wouldnt be so confortable saying this

marc gasol in Toronto had a much smaller offensive load than jokic so he could put more of his Energy and focus in defense than jokic can as a helio in denver

marc is taller which probably means he is longer somethingh fairly important for a defensive center

and even when marc shared a significant load as a co first option in Memphis he still played dpoy tier defense, jokic has bit played that level of defense even whe b sharing the offensove load with Murray (aka less Energy theorically spent in offense)

and most importantly, just because jokic is a brilliant player, one of the smartest ever, doesnt mean he is as proportionaly brilliant in defense as he is in offense

is sometimes taken for granted that a brilliant offensive mind must be every bit as much of a brilliant defensive mind which i am unsure how true it is
(to say nothingh that some players just are more cut for the defensive grind than others, not saying jokic is not, but in marc case is proven)

i thinl we as fans are guilty of assuming smart players like jokic or nash could just become all time great defenders if given the physical tools or focus on it

To me, the biggest impediment is circumstance.

The massive offensive load that Jokic has to carry and the need for him to stay on the floor are big reasons why he plays the kind of defense that he's playing right now, defensive improvements notwithstanding. He's kind of forced to play more passively on defense to avoid foul trouble and conserve energy on offense. Marc has never had such an enormous responsibility on offense.

Also, Marc has pretty much always played on highly defensively-minded teams so I question whether his rep has been enhanced because of that. On both the Grizz and the Raps, he's had probably the best ensemble of point-of-attack and wing defenders in the league to help him. Jokic plays with some of the worst point-of-attack defenders in the league.

Well, the problem is that you would never use the same logic in inverse situation. For example, I could say that someone like Gasol could play on offense more like Jokic but he was forced to spend more energy on defense. What would be your reaction? Probably that Gasol wasn't skilled enough to do what Jokic does. Which would be true, but then why don't we use the same argumentation for Jokic's defense?

Despite the narrative, defense isn't only about effort. There is a certain level which only the absolute elite defenders can reach as far as defensive IQ and anticipation goes. It doesn't always go with offensive IQ, so you can't simply say that Jokic is smart enough. Besides, Jokic simply doesn't have Gasol's physical tools. Marc was bigger, longer and quicker on his feet.

Some of the greatest defenders ever (Hakeem, Duncan, Robinson, Wilt, even Giannis) carried absurd offensive load and it didn't stop them from being ATG defenders. Until we see any evidence, I can't give Jokic the benefit of doubt and compare him to one of the best defenders of the last decade only because they look similar.

[Texas Chuck]

Despite the narrative, defense isn't only about effort. There is a certain level which only the absolute elite defenders can reach as far as defensive IQ and anticipation goes.

This this this this this.

We do not give defensive players nearly enough credit for things beyond physical tools and effort. Dwight Powell is a terrific athlete and plays as hard as he can every single second. He's also a marginal defensive player because his defensive IQ and anticipation and understanding just aren't very good.

Marc Gasol was a massive man, but not particularly fleet of foot. Yet his understanding of defensive principles and how teams were trying to attack his team were among the best of his generation and he had huge defensive impact as a result.

Draymond is special because of his mind, not his body. Gobert has that elite size and good mobility for a man of his size, but again its the mental side that makes him great and JaVale, not.

[Peregrine01]

Well, the problem is that you would never use the same logic in inverse situation. For example, I could say that someone like Gasol could play on offense more like Jokic but he was forced to spend more energy on defense. What would be your reaction? Probably that Gasol wasn't skilled enough to do what Jokic does. Which would be true, but then why don't we use the same argumentation for Jokic's defense?

Despite the narrative, defense isn't only about effort. There is a certain level which only the absolute elite defenders can reach as far as defensive IQ and anticipation goes. It doesn't always go with offensive IQ, so you can't simply say that Jokic is smart enough. Besides, Jokic simply doesn't have Gasol's physical tools. Marc was bigger, longer and quicker on his feet.

Some of the greatest defenders ever (Hakeem, Duncan, Robinson, Wilt, even Giannis) carried absurd offensive load and it didn't stop them from being ATG defenders. Until we see any evidence, I can't give Jokic the benefit of doubt and compare him to one of the best defenders of the last decade only because they look similar.

I think he and Denver are optimizing his effort for where it's most impactful, which in this case is quite clearly offense.

Agreed that it's not just about effort. I also think that it's hard to construct great defenses when you don't have good defensive teammates...even KG played on middling defenses throughout his prime. So I find it hard to fault Jokic for this team's defensive shortcomings when he isn't playing with any good defenders.

Mind you, I'm not comparing him to any of the ATG defenders you mentioned since they have plain physical qualities that Jokic lacks. I'm comparing him to Marc Gasol who has quite similar physical attributes and wondering to myself why can't he do something similar as well? Unfortunately I suspect Jokic will never have a defensive supporting cast like Marc had with the Grizz and Raps.