Will Jokic surpass Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan?

[kawhileonard2]

Will Jokic surpass Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan?

[L.Kizzle]

Once he wins some championships it can be a discussion.

[FultzNationRISE]

Well, splitting hairs to rank guys in a similar tier is a popular fan past time, but in reality its not a thing. There is no objective way to prove whether Duncan is better than Hakeem or vice versa. You can have an opinion but it’s realistically more about circumstance than about some measurable criteria.

Point is, there is no level of big man tier beyond Jokic’s belonging. Hes already as good as the guys you mentioned in my book.

[FultzNationRISE]

Once he wins some championships it can be a discussion.

So you dont have Malone or Barkley above McHale?

[L.Kizzle]

So you dont have Malone or Barkley above McHale?
McHale was the 4th best player in his team and only started 4 seasons in his career. Bad comparison.

[Im Still Ballin]

McHale wad the 4th best player in his team and only started 4 seasons in his career. Bad comparison.

Bro. Did you miss this thread? Check out how high McHale is.

A guy went back and tracked plus-minus and calculated RAPM for the 1987-88 season (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?511679-A-guy-went-back-and-tracked-plus-minus-and-calculated-RAPM-for-the-1987-88-season)

https://squared2020.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/screen-shot-2021-04-11-at-12.29.24-pm.png

[tpols]

Once he wins some championships it can be a discussion.

His help is alright but give him prime Kobe or clyde and he's winning.

[L.Kizzle]

Bro. Did you miss this thread? Check out how high McHale is.

A guy went back and tracked plus-minus and calculated RAPM for the 1987-88 season (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?511679-A-guy-went-back-and-tracked-plus-minus-and-calculated-RAPM-for-the-1987-88-season)

https://squared2020.files.wordpress.com/2021/04/screen-shot-2021-04-11-at-12.29.24-pm.png
I saw it.

[SaltyMeatballs]

He's gonna have to win at least 2 championships to be in the discussion

[ShawkFactory]

McHale wad the 4th best player in his team and only started 4 seasons in his career. Bad comparison.

That’s a new one.

[John8204]

Will Jokic surpass Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan?

Hakeem - not possible maybe if he gets a three-peat 2 MVP's in an era in which he wasn't winning and a ring this year puts him top 15.

Duncan - borderline top ten all-time for me Jokic is likely a top 30 guy

Shaq - this is actually doable for Jokic if he never leaves Denver and wins two titles that's better than what Shaq did...he's on pace to surpass Shaq in my eyes

[Phoenix]

Well, splitting hairs to rank guys in a similar tier is a popular fan past time, but in reality its not a thing. There is no objective way to prove whether Duncan is better than Hakeem or vice versa. You can have an opinion but it’s realistically more about circumstance than about some measurable criteria.

Point is, there is no level of big man tier beyond Jokic’s belonging. Hes already as good as the guys you mentioned in my book.

True, but at least Hakeem and Duncan's eras were close apart enough( there was even a cross-section between young Duncan and old Hakeem in the late 90s/early 2000s) that you could reasonably guesstimate how one does in the others spot and compare skills. For me Hakeem was clearly a more talented and prolific post scorer and overall defender, as great as Duncan was in both departments. Joker's era, though, is so far apart in terms of passage of time, how the game is played in general and what skills are even required from a big nowadays to be dominant that there really is no way to measure them beyond dominance relative to their contemporaries.

[FultzNationRISE]

True, but at least Hakeem and Duncan's eras were close apart enough( there was even a cross-section between young Duncan and old Hakeem in the late 90s/early 2000s) that you could reasonably guesstimate how one does in the others spot and compare skills. For me Hakeem was clearly a more talented and prolific post scorer and overall defender, as great as Duncan was in both departments. Joker's era, though, is so far apart in terms of passage of time, how the game is played in general and what skills are even required from a big nowadays to be dominant that there really is no way to measure them beyond dominance relative to their contemporaries.

True.

Altho for the people who see championships as some gatekeeper criterion, they must all surely consider Duncan twice as good as Hakeem, no? If championships are what we rank guys with, Duncan has to be above Lebron, Bird, and Hakeem for sure.

[Phoenix]

True.

Altho for the people who see championships as some gatekeeper criterion, they must all surely consider Duncan twice as good as Hakeem, no? If championships are what we rank guys with, Duncan has to be above Lebron, Bird, and Hakeem for sure.

I'm assuming that's why many (most?) have him ranked higher on GOAT lists. IMO Hakeem clearly peaked higher, not some massive gap but I think its fairly obvious. Duncan was able to age gracefully as guys like Ginobli, Parker and young Kawhi became more promiment in their success, where the Rockets were only as great as Hakeem was going to be until he fell out of his prime.

[ArbitraryWater]

He genuinely might surpass Duncan.

I see him surpassing him tbh.

Probably staying behind Shaq and Hakeem though.

[DMAVS41]

He genuinely might surpass Duncan.

I see him surpassing him tbh.

Probably staying behind Shaq and Hakeem though.

A lot of people, including me, have Duncan higher than Shaq and Hakeem.

Way too early to talk Jokic over those guys. He would have to lead his team to 3 titles while playing great...and have like another 8 to 10 mvp level or all-nba level seasons to start approaching a guy like Duncan.

Anything is possible, but that is a lot to ask.

[Phoenix]

If he can maintain health he should remain an MVP level talent well into his mid 30's. The things that make him great, IQ, instincts, hand-eye, and touch aren't going to drop off with age and he clearly doesn't rely on overwhelming speed, agility and explosiveness to dominate. He outskills and out-thinks you.

But yeah, the players he's being compared to here accomplished too much and have the entirety of their careers in stone makes it an unfair comparison for all concerned.

[Mask the Embiid]

I got him top 75 ish. Let’s see where his career goes. Those are some big fish to catch. Those are top 12 all-time names. He has a ways to go to get in that discussion

[Overdrive]

Well, splitting hairs to rank guys in a similar tier is a popular fan past time, but in reality its not a thing. There is no objective way to prove whether Duncan is better than Hakeem or vice versa. You can have an opinion but it’s realistically more about circumstance than about some measurable criteria.

Point is, there is no level of big man tier beyond Jokic’s belonging. Hes already as good as the guys you mentioned in my book.

That's why there is a distinction between greatest and best. As I said in the Jokic vs Embiid thread: For me he's the best basketballplayer that entered the NBA since Lebron, who had Duncan before him, then Shaq, MJ/Hakeem, etc. In terms of ability he is already in this tier. In terms of greatness not yet, that's where championships are needed.

[ArbitraryWater]

A lot of people, including me, have Duncan higher than Shaq and Hakeem.

Way too early to talk Jokic over those guys. He would have to lead his team to 3 titles while playing great...and have like another 8 to 10 mvp level or all-nba level seasons to start approaching a guy like Duncan.

Anything is possible, but that is a lot to ask.

Duncan was too casual/basic of a scorer for me after 2004. So he basically had 5 superstar seasons from 2000-2004. After that, he was no longer a takeover player. His loss of atheticism just limited his scoring abilities.

He aged gracefully, accepted his role gracefully, anchored the defense, but he was no onger a takeover payer. He relied on Parker and Ginobilis scoring and penetration and playmaking, which made up most of the offense. The teams as a whole were super well rounded and coached.

[ArbitraryWater]

That's why there is a distinction between greatest and best. As I said in the Jokic vs Embiid thread: For me he's the best basketballplayer that entered the NBA since Lebron, who had Duncan before him, then Shaq, MJ/Hakeem, etc. In terms of ability he is already in this tier. In terms of greatness not yet, that's where championships are needed.

Bingo. Thats why Im sure he should end up infront of Duncan and many others on the all time lists.

Hes just better.

[Overdrive]

I got him top 75 ish. Let’s see where his career goes. Those are some big fish to catch. Those are top 12 all-time names. He has a ways to go to get in that discussion

If he retires today he's at worst top 30. How many two time MVPs are outside the top 20, 30 or 40?

[DMAVS41]

If he can maintain health he should remain an MVP level talent well into his mid 30's. The things that make him great, IQ, instincts, hand-eye, and touch aren't going to drop off with age and he clearly doesn't rely on overwhelming speed, agility and explosiveness to dominate. He outskills and out-thinks you.

But yeah, the players he's being compared to here accomplished too much and have the entirety of their careers in stone makes it an unfair comparison for all concerned.

Yep.

I love Jokic...but Tim Duncan was winning multiple titles with rosters similar to the current Nuggets. Don't get me wrong...I think Jokic definitely can do that, but he has to actually do it...and do it at least multiple times in addition to having great longevity to enter into a discussion like that.

[ArbitraryWater]

Yep.

I love Jokic...but Tim Duncan was winning multiple titles with rosters similar to the current Nuggets. Don't get me wrong...I think Jokic definitely can do that, but he has to actually do it...and do it at least multiple times in addition to having great longevity to enter into a discussion like that.

2005 and 2007 Duncan was not at the level current Jokic is at.

Can we agree on that?

[tontoz]

They are a regular season team with Jokic and always will be. Outside of the bubble he will never go past the 2nd round unless he stacks the deck. That's just the nature of his limited impact.

The Nuggets are no better than the Jazz were a couple years ago. If the Nuggets faced the Clippers, healthy Lakers, healthy Suns, or the Warriors, you know that there's a high probably that they would lose. Mainly because Jokic would be the 2nd or 3rd best player in all of those series.

He's just not good enough yet.

:roll:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?510615-When-Steve-Nash-and-Nikola-Jokic-have-more-NBA-MVP-s-combined-than-Kobe-and-Shaq/page7

[Mask the Embiid]

If he retires today he's at worst top 30. How many two time MVPs are outside the top 20, 30 or 40?

Nash. Pettit.
A lot of mvps aren’t even top 75. Westbrook won mvp and no one here even believes he’s a championship player.

[DMAVS41]

Duncan was too casual/basic of a scorer for me after 2004. So he basically had 5 superstar seasons from 2000-2004. After that, he was no longer a takeover player. His loss of atheticism just limited his scoring abilities.

He aged gracefuy, accepted his roe gracefully, anchored the defense, but he was no onger a takeover payer. He relied on Parker and Ginobilis scoring and penetration and playmaking, which made up most of the offense. The teams as a whole were super well rounded and coached.

You are confusing how he played for the betterment of his team with what he was capable of. Just look at 2006...he was by far the best player on a 63 win team that was hardly historically stacked...was an elite defensive anchor...and then lost in the playoffs to another all-time great in his prime while averaging 32/12/4 (62% TS)....

And your conclusion is that he wasn't a superstar in 2006? That is just nonsense.

I also have to laugh...if Duncan "relied on Parker/Manu"...does Jokic not rely on Murray to score 25 a night? Does he not rely on his teammates to play defense?

This is actually a great comparison right now...Duncan already proved he was winning multiple titles with supporting casts like Jokic has this year. Again, I love Jokic and think he can do it, but it isn't a conversation until he does...and telling me that Duncan wasn't a superstar in 2006 is absurd. He just played the game differently...but his impact was all-time.

[theman93]

No. He has to do have multiple years of post season dominance. We'll see if he starts that this year.

[90sgoat]

He is not close to either of those yet.

He is in the Dirk/KG level now, indeniably a great player, but no impressive playoff runs yet.

I would say if he can get 2-3 rings, then he can challenge Hakeem. Duncan or Shaq are difficult to see how he would get there, unless he can improve defensively.

[tontoz]

For the record Joker's career averages in the playoffs are 27/12/7 with a TS of 62.6%. He has been elite in the playoffs for years some people just haven't noticed.

[ArbitraryWater]

You are confusing how he played for the betterment of his team with what he was capable of. Just look at 2006...he was by far the best player on a 63 win team that was hardly historically stacked...was an elite defensive anchor...and then lost in the playoffs to another all-time great in his prime while averaging 32/12/4 (62% TS)....

And your conclusion is that he wasn't a superstar in 2006? That is just nonsense.

I also have to laugh...if Duncan "relied on Parker/Manu"...does Jokic not rely on Murray to score 25 a night? Does he not rely on his teammates to play defense?

This is actually a great comparison right now...Duncan already proved he was winning multiple titles with supporting casts like Jokic has this year. Again, I love Jokic and think he can do it, but it isn't a conversation until he does...and telling me that Duncan wasn't a superstar in 2006 is absurd. He just played the game differently...but his impact was all-time.


Sure, hes had series coming up big. But on the big picture, his scoring and role drastically decreased after 2004. That makes things a lot easier. It also makes it easier to have enough energy for big series in the post-season.

Duncan relied on Parker and Manu to carry the offense, to at least the same degree he did (in reality more though). Jokic does not do that. He anchors the offense entirely. He does as much as he can on that end. He just needs others to chime in. But he is carrying the load.

Duncan dropped off to quickly.

After his first 6 postseasons, he averaged 21 ppg on 49% shooting, and I cut it off at 2013 to leave out the last 3 years/decline. Thats not enough for a top 10 player which you think he is.

[DMAVS41]

2005 and 2007 Duncan was not at the level current Jokic is at.

Can we agree on that?

No, we can't agree on that. Why do you think that?

Go actually look at the 05 Spurs roster, for example...you are confident that Jokic gets that team to 60 wins and wins the title?

You are acting like Duncan was some role player...he did 24/12/3 in the playoffs while anchoring the best defense in the league iirc.

[DMAVS41]

Sure, hes had series coming up big. But on the big picture, his scoring and role drastically decreased after 2004. That makes things a lot easier. It also makes it easier to have enough energy for big series in the post-season.

Duncan relied on Parker and Manu to carry the offense, to at least the same degree he did (in reality more though). Jokic does not do that. He anchors the offense entirely. He does as much as he can on that end. He just needs others to chime in. But he is carrying the load.

Duncan dropped off to quickly.

After his first 6 postseasons, he averaged 21 ppg on 49% shooting, and I cut it off at 2013 to leave out the last 3 years/decline. Thats not enough for a top 10 player which you think he is.

He did not drop off. He did a 12 year prime in the playoffs of 23/12/4 while playing some of the best defense in NBA history. During that time, he was the best player on 4 teams that won the title.

He could have, easily, averaged 4 to 5 more points if he was a more selfish player and cared about his stats. During that time...I think he took 16 or 17 shots a game...if he wanted to...he could have forced up 21 shots a game...and that sad thing is...people like you...would be saying he's way better if he did 27/12/4 and only won 3 titles instead of 4 during that run.

Not enough for a top 10 player? My god man...you are so obsessed with points per game is crazy. Duncan could have easily averaged more if he just shot a lot more. What would that prove?

Is winning 50 plus every year of your career nearly and being the clear cut best player on 4 title winning teams without elite historical level help while being on the short list of best defensive anchors ever not good enough for you?

[tpols]

No, we can't agree on that. Why do you think that?

Go actually look at the 05 Spurs roster, for example...you are confident that Jokic gets that team to 60 wins and wins the title?

You are acting like Duncan was some role player...he did 24/12/3 in the playoffs while anchoring the best defense in the league iirc.

05 playoff Manu was a better player than anybody Jokic has ever played with. You're underrating his help.

[Overdrive]

Nash. Pettit.
A lot of mvps aren’t even top 75. Westbrook won mvp and no one here even believes he’s a championship player.


Nash who's MVPs' legitimacy is questioned all the time? Pettit who played in ancient times? Westbrook who won his MVP based on novelty? Yet check their ranks here:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankalltime/greatest-players-ever
www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/33297498/the-nba-75th-anniversary-team-ranked-where-76-basketball-legends-check-our-list





Yep.

I love Jokic...but Tim Duncan was winning multiple titles with rosters similar to the current Nuggets. Don't get me wrong...I think Jokic definitely can do that, but he has to actually do it...and do it at least multiple times in addition to having great longevity to enter into a discussion like that.

You really think the Spurs and Nuggets as organizations are comparable?

[DMAVS41]

05 playoff Manu was a better player than anybody Jokic has ever played with. You're underrating his help.

I'm talking about the entire year. Not just the playoffs...and if we are going just off of playoffs. The supporting cast around Jokic has been fantastic so far in the playoffs.

I'm not under-rating anything...the types of teams that Duncan won titles with are very similar to this Nuggets team. If Jokic wants to enter into the discussion with Duncan...he'll need to win multiple titles with help like this.

You and others are under-rating the shit out of Duncan.

[DMAVS41]

Nash who's MVPs' legitimacy is questioned all the time? Pettit who played in ancient times? Westbrook who won his MVP based on novelty? Yet check their ranks here:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankalltime/greatest-players-ever
www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/33297498/the-nba-75th-anniversary-team-ranked-where-76-basketball-legends-check-our-list






You really think the Spurs and Nuggets as organizations are comparable?

I don't see the relevance. The supporting cast around Jokic right now is absolutely comparable to the types of teams Duncan won with in his prime. Hell, it's easily better than what Duncan had in 03 that is for damn sure.

It's quite simple...you don't get to be on the Duncan level in NBA history without winning multiple titles as the clear cut best player of a team as good as this Nuggets team is around him.

[tpols]

I'm talking about the entire year. Not just the playoffs...and if we are going just off of playoffs. The supporting cast around Jokic has been fantastic so far in the playoffs.

I'm not under-rating anything...the types of teams that Duncan won titles with are very similar to this Nuggets team. If Jokic wants to enter into the discussion with Duncan...he'll need to win multiple titles with help like this.

You and others are under-rating the shit out of Duncan.

Duncan was great but he wasn't as brilliant a player as Jokic. People saying he needs to win but he never played with prime Kobe or clyde or Manu etc.

The nuggets would legit be in the lottery without jokic... the spurs were still winning titles when Duncan was old and essentially a role player. That's beyond incredible help.

[Mask the Embiid]

Nash who's MVPs' legitimacy is questioned all the time? Pettit who played in ancient times? Westbrook who won his MVP based on novelty? Yet check their ranks here:

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/page/nbarankalltime/greatest-players-ever
www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/33297498/the-nba-75th-anniversary-team-ranked-where-76-basketball-legends-check-our-list






You really think the Spurs and Nuggets as organizations are comparable?

Right right because Pettit played in a era where players ran around shoeless with loin clothes and togas…. This is why I can’t take basketball discussions on this site serious.. back to ignoring jokic fluffers I go

[DMAVS41]

Duncan was great but he wasn't as brilliant a player as Jokic. People saying he needs to win but he never played with prime Kobe or clyde or Manu etc. The nuggets would legit be in the lottery with jokic... the spurs were still winning titles when Duncan was old and essentially a role player. That's beyond incredible help.

What the Spurs became in 2013 and 2014 has nothing to do with how good they were in 03.

I don't know what you mean by brilliant, but Jokic is, without a doubt, one of the best ever...I've been arguing as much, as you know, for a bit now...but to chalk up to Manu being this savior when Duncan won two titles before Manu even got good is showing how biased you are.

It was all Manu. His inefficient 9 points per game in the 03 playoffs is what Duncan relied on. Oh what incredible help!

[Overdrive]

I don't see the relevance. The supporting cast around Jokic right now is absolutely comparable to the types of teams Duncan won with in his prime. Hell, it's easily better than what Duncan had in 03 that is for damn sure.

It's quite simple...you don't get to be on the Duncan level in NBA history without winning multiple titles as the clear cut best player of a team as good as this Nuggets team is around him.

The relevance is while Duncan was great and his future great teammates weren't there yet he still had an at great coach on the sidelines, a solid running mate and some decent players. Yes, comparable to the recent Nuggets, but the NBA wasn't as wide open back then as now. If either of the Spurs/Lakers overcame each other chances were high they win a title during that window. After all they shared 9 titles between them in a 12 season span.


Right right because Pettit played in a era where players ran around shoeless with loin clothes and togas…. This is why I can’t take basketball discussions on this site serious.. back to ignoring jokic fluffers I go

It's not about being shoeless. Pettit played in an era that was massively dominated by one team and also one player in particilar. He will always be an afterthought.

It's quite ironic that a guy who bases his rankings on skin complexion can't take any discussion seriously.

[ArbitraryWater]

He did not drop off. He did a 12 year prime in the playoffs of 23/12/4 while playing some of the best defense in NBA history. During that time, he was the best player on 4 teams that won the title.

He could have, easily, averaged 4 to 5 more points if he was a more selfish player and cared about his stats. During that time...I think he took 16 or 17 shots a game...if he wanted to...he could have forced up 21 shots a game...and that sad thing is...people like you...would be saying he's way better if he did 27/12/4 and only won 3 titles instead of 4 during that run.

Not enough for a top 10 player? My god man...you are so obsessed with points per game is crazy. Duncan could have easily averaged more if he just shot a lot more. What would that prove?

Is winning 50 plus every year of your career nearly and being the clear cut best player on 4 title winning teams without elite historical level help while being on the short list of best defensive anchors ever not good enough for you?

What evidence is there for that?

When your efficiency hovers around 50% FG and its usually beneath that in the playoffs, it will further drop the more shots are taken. Good quality shots are a scarcity. Everyone takes the easy ones. The more you take, the harder they get (unless you take them in garbage time).

If the fact that his role dropped made the team better, that should tell you about his reduced scoring ability by then. I acknowledged his smooth role transitioning and allowing Parker/Ginobili to thrive, but better players carried a heavier scoring load for longer. Its not like Duncan averaged 55% FG on those 17 shots.

Duncans level of help was more than fine adjusted to the league. Have you looked at 1999, 2005 and 2007? What better help was out there? Thats a complete lie to say his help wasnt elite.

How it measures through history is irrelevant, only what it was relative to the league at the time.

[tpols]

What the Spurs became in 2013 and 2014 has nothing to do with how good they were in 03.

I don't know what you mean by brilliant, but Jokic is, without a doubt, one of the best ever...I've been arguing as much, as you know, for a bit now...but to chalk up to Manu being this savior when Duncan won two titles before Manu even got good is showing how biased you are.

It was all Manu. His inefficient 9 points per game in the 03 playoffs is what Duncan relied on. Oh what incredible help!

It wasn't just manu... Duncan played with a ton of star help and for arguably the best ran organization in the NBA. I only brought Manu up because you mentioned 2005 and nobody would say Duncan didn't have elite help that year.

But fine... move a away from Duncan and let's talk Shaq. You don't think jokic would be winning titles with prime Kobe or prime Wade or prime penny? And conversely you think Shaq could win with this nugget team? He had similar help in the late 90s and was getting swept.

Jokic isn't some unproven guy. His basketball ability is undeniably GOAT.

[ShawkFactory]

What evidence is there for that?

When your efficiency hovers around 50% FG and its usually beneath that in the playoffs, it will further drop the more shots are taken. Good quality shots are a scarcity. Everyone takes the easy ones. The more you take, the harder they get (unless you take them in garbage time).

If the fact that his role dropped made the team better, that should tell you about his reduced scoring ability by then. I acknowledged his smooth role transitioning and allowing Parker/Ginobili to thrive, but better players carried a heavier scoring load for longer. Its not like Duncan averaged 55% FG on those 17 shots.

Duncans level of help was more than fine adjusted to the league. Have you looked at 1999, 2005 and 2007? What better help was out there? Thats a complete lie to say his help wasnt elite.

How it measures through history is irrelevant, only what it was relative to the league at the time.

It isn't so much that Duncan's shot output was lower simply because he prevented himself from taking harder ones. It's that, given the particular matchup, he didn't demand to be the focal point of the offense like a more selfish "feed the big man" type guy would have been.

[ArbitraryWater]

It isn't so much that Duncan's shot output was lower simply because he prevented himself from taking harder ones. It's that, given the particular matchup, he didn't demand to be the focal point of the offense like a more selfish "feed the big man" type guy would have been.

I know, but I dont think you understand how the game works. Any additiona shots would have been self created ones not the spoonfed ones, cause he got all those anyway. So his FG% woud have dropped.

[BarberSchool]

No.

Unless either something drastic changes with Jokic’s fitness/athleticism, which will allow him to become great defensively.

…. or unless Jokic wins 4-5 chips & sustains his current level of insane efficiency & productivity, then it can be a conversation, but not “better/surpassed”.

The other 3 are intimidating defensive forces, Jokic is a very very poor rim defender, despite getting a good amount of steals for a center, due to quick hands and great predictive positioning.

[ArbitraryWater]

No.

Unless either something drastic changes with Jokic’s fitness/athleticism, which will allow him to become great defensively.

…. or unless Jokic wins 4-5 chips & sustains his current level of insane efficiency & productivity, then it can be a conversation, but not “better/surpassed”.

The other 3 are intimidating defensive forces, Jokic is a very very poor rim defender, despite getting a good amount of steals for a center, due to quick hands and great predictive positioning.

Jokic is also a FAR superior offensive player than all 3 bar maybe Shaq

[Overdrive]

I know, but I dont think you understand how the game works. Any additiona shots would have been self created ones not the spoonfed ones, cause he got all those anyway. So his FG% woud have dropped.

That's not exactly true. The early 2000 Spurs didn't play the equal opportunity offense the later employed, but Duncan surely gave up shots that were good enough for him to keep lesser players involved. That was always one thing that made the Spurs work.

You think Duncan on the mid/highpost can't hit 2 more bankshots a game? He wasn't Hakeem or Moses who basically hoisted up any ball they got.

Mentality is what kept Duncan from scoring more on similar efficiency, not skill.

I generally would agree with you statement though. Most guys' efficiency drops with more attempts.

[BarberSchool]

Jokic is also a FAR superior offensive player than all 3 bar maybe Shaq
Jokic defiiitley has a real chance to go down as the greatest offensive center of all time, but it will take some more work, and longevity.

He’s already the best passing center of all time.

[tpols]

No.

Unless either something drastic changes with Jokic’s fitness/athleticism, which will allow him to become great defensively.

…. or unless Jokic wins 4-5 chips & sustains his current level of insane efficiency & productivity, then it can be a conversation, but not “better/surpassed”.

The other 3 are intimidating defensive forces, Jokic is a very very poor rim defender, despite getting a good amount of steals for a center, due to quick hands and great predictive positioning.

Larry Bird wasn't a great athlete or really any better as a defender and a lot of people have him as the better player over all 3 of those guys.

Hakeem, and Shaq don't elevate teammates like jokic does with his GOAT big man passing an IQ. I remember early in his career some people even used to call hakeem a black hole on offense. He wasn't a great passer and Shaq really wasn't either compared to jokic.

There's something to be said for making others better at a GOAT level in addition to your own production.

[Overdrive]

No.

Unless either something drastic changes with Jokic’s fitness/athleticism, which will allow him to become great defensively.

…. or unless Jokic wins 4-5 chips & sustains his current level of insane efficiency & productivity, then it can be a conversation, but not “better/surpassed”.

The other 3 are intimidating defensive forces, Jokic is a very very poor rim defender, despite getting a good amount of steals for a center, due to quick hands and great predictive positioning.

If we took 2 random games from 90 to 95 for Hakeem, 99 to 2003 for Shaq and Duncan and 2020 till now for Jokic and let you watch I doubt you'd say it's clearly the first 3.

Most careers in hindsight are defined by a few memorable games and the amount of titles.

[ArbitraryWater]

That's not exactly true. The early 2000 Spurs didn't play the equal opportunity offense the later employed, but Duncan surely gave up shots that were good enough for him to keep lesser players involved. That was always one thing that made the Spurs work.

You think Duncan on the mid/highpost can't hit 2 more bankshots a game? He wasn't Hakeem or Moses who basically hoisted up any ball they got.

Mentality is what kept Duncan from scoring more on similar efficiency, not skill.

I generally would agree with you statement though. Most guys' efficiency drops with more attempts.

well, whats his success rate on them and how does it compare to his overall FG%? Thats the question you need to ask. And factor in that further post ups and backing down can lead to a slight increase in fatique also.

[SouBeachTalents]

I think Overdrive brought it up earlier, at this point, we're discussing the difference between the greatest vs. the best. It's safe to say at this point Jokic has reached the same level of play that these 3 did, now it's just a matter of can he match them resume/accolade wise all time.

[DMAVS41]

What evidence is there for that?

When your efficiency hovers around 50% FG and its usually beneath that in the playoffs, it will further drop the more shots are taken. Good quality shots are a scarcity. Everyone takes the easy ones. The more you take, the harder they get (unless you take them in garbage time).

If the fact that his role dropped made the team better, that should tell you about his reduced scoring ability by then. I acknowledged his smooth role transitioning and allowing Parker/Ginobili to thrive, but better players carried a heavier scoring load for longer. Its not like Duncan averaged 55% FG on those 17 shots.

Duncans level of help was more than fine adjusted to the league. Have you looked at 1999, 2005 and 2007? What better help was out there? Thats a complete lie to say his help wasnt elite.

How it measures through history is irrelevant, only what it was relative to the league at the time.

Because he did it in the playoffs when needed.

Just look at 06, for example, in the first round he scored like 18 a game. In your mind...oh my god....he's being carried...look how good his team is....and that isn't to say they weren't really good. They were...but you see that and undervalue how good Duncan actually was.

The very next series...when his team needed it...Duncan went for 32/12/4...and by your own claim...you say he had already declined by then. So by definition, he was capable of even more at other points of his career.

Duncan's help absolutely was fine when adjusted to the league...never did I claim otherwise. Elite is a bit strong for some years however, but I don't care to debate it. The point was and is...he won 4 ****ing titles as the clear cut best player and then another as a really important piece very late in his career.

Guess what? You know who else has absolutely fine adjusted to the league this year? Jokic. There is no dominant team waiting for him in either conference...and if it is the Lakers...last time he played AD in the playoffs...it was not great for him. Now, Jokic has of course improved since then, but I can assure you age 24 Tim Duncan was not going to get abused like Jokic did at age 24 by Anthony Davis.

You guys seem to forget that Jokic has been at this level for basically 3 years now. He was really good before, but not like this...Duncan came into the league and was already one of the best players and then in year 2 led a team to a title as the clear cut best player.

[DMAVS41]

I think Overdrive brought it up earlier, at this point, we're discussing the difference between the greatest vs. the best. It's safe to say at this point Jokic has reached the same level of play that these 3 did, now it's just a matter of can he match them resume/accolade wise all time.

I disagree with this. How you perform in the most important games / series reveals your true level of impact. We already know what Duncan did...we don't know what Jokic will do. Maybe he plays even better and he does it for even longer than Duncan. Maybe in 2 weeks he's at home after struggling against AD or the Warriors.

We need years more worth of evidence before we properly place Jokic as the evidence comes in.

[SouBeachTalents]

I disagree with this. How you perform in the most important games / series reveals your true level of impact. We already know what Duncan did...we don't know what Jokic will do. Maybe he plays even better and he does it for even longer than Duncan. Maybe in 2 weeks he's at home after struggling against AD or the Warriors.

We need years more worth of evidence before we properly place Jokic as the evidence comes in.
I agree with that, I'm basing that off the assumption Jokic will continue to play at this level, maybe not as good as this past series lol, but at an ATG level throughout the rest of his prime. If he does, he would unquestionably be in the convo with them based purely on an ability/impact level, even if he "only" wins 1-2 rings. It's all time where he'd really have to win at least 3 to get public support.

[DMAVS41]

It wasn't just manu... Duncan played with a ton of star help and for arguably the best ran organization in the NBA. I only brought Manu up because you mentioned 2005 and nobody would say Duncan didn't have elite help that year.

But fine... move a away from Duncan and let's talk Shaq. You don't think jokic would be winning titles with prime Kobe or prime Wade or prime penny? And conversely you think Shaq could win with this nugget team? He had similar help in the late 90s and was getting swept.

Jokic isn't some unproven guy. His basketball ability is undeniably GOAT.

Please stop with the strawman. If you are going to post, please don't go with the..."you are claiming Duncan had no help" shit. Never did I argue that.

I simply compared some of the teams Duncan won with to this Nuggets team. I responded to him saying Jokic is clearly better than 05 Duncan...and I said I'm not sure. I watched Duncan lead that team to 60 wins, the best defense, and the title. Yes, Manu was amazing that year...the best year of his career.

Do I think Jokic is just a lock for 60 wins and a title with a team similar to the 05 Spurs? No, I don't...before I say something like that...I'd like to see Jokic win a similar title...like winning this year. I think they might and I hope they do, but it needs to happen before we even start to have these conversations.

As for Shaq...his title in 00 was really impressive....as was his ability to make it work with those teams. You know I think Shaq, for his career, gets a tad over-rated...but his peak was undeniably one of the most dominant ever.

Can we at least see Jokic win a ring similar to 00 before we place him above Shaq and or Hakeem as well?

[theman93]

DMAVS41 spittin facts. Duncan is severely underrated.

[DMAVS41]

I agree with that, I'm basing that off the assumption Jokic will continue to play at this level, maybe not as good as this past series lol, but at an ATG level throughout the rest of his prime. If he does, he would unquestionably be in the convo with them based purely on an ability/impact level, even if he "only" wins 1-2 rings. It's all time where he'd really have to win at least 3 to get public support.

Yes, but it would depend on his circumstances. If he has similar teams to he currently has for the next 10 years, for example, and only wins one ring...there is no way he could ever be placed at the Duncan level in the all-time rankings.

Now, if he wins a couple rings and then really doesn't get much help this rest of his career and he doesn't have the circumstances Duncan did...but keeps playing at this level and has proven real shit...then I think that would be a conversation worth having.

[tpols]

Do people actually think jokic is gonna choke?

He's literally never had a bad playoff series in his entire career. As consistently dominant as they come.

Guy just put up 35/13/10 splits on sniper efficiency... averaged a triple double while totally dismantling a tile contended and forcing the opposing center to quit and you think he's gonna fall on his face?

:lol

That series he just played vs the sun's was a GOAT performance, even on a MJ level standard.

[ArbitraryWater]

Because he did it in the playoffs when needed.

Just look at 06, for example, in the first round he scored like 18 a game. In your mind...oh my god....he's being carried...look how good his team is....and that isn't to say they weren't really good. They were...but you see that and undervalue how good Duncan actually was.

The very next series...when his team needed it...Duncan went for 32/12/4...and by your own claim...you say he had already declined by then. So by definition, he was capable of even more at other points of his career.

Duncan's help absolutely was fine when adjusted to the league...never did I claim otherwise. Elite is a bit strong for some years however, but I don't care to debate it. The point was and is...he won 4 ****ing titles as the clear cut best player and then another as a really important piece very late in his career.

Guess what? You know who else has absolutely fine adjusted to the league this year? Jokic. There is no dominant team waiting for him in either conference...and if it is the Lakers...last time he played AD in the playoffs...it was not great for him. Now, Jokic has of course improved since then, but I can assure you age 24 Tim Duncan was not going to get abused like Jokic did at age 24 by Anthony Davis.

You guys seem to forget that Jokic has been at this level for basically 3 years now. He was really good before, but not like this...Duncan came into the league and was already one of the best players and then in year 2 led a team to a title as the clear cut best player.


We already looked at 2006, and I already told you he had big individual series and was able to step it up :lol

But youre ignoring the fact that he took a big step back on offense and was allowed to do so from year 7 on, and thats a huge luxury.

And by 2008, he could no longer even step up for individual series.

4 titles as clear cut best player sounds nice, but can you name any championship teams where the 1 was so close to the 2 like Duncan was in 2005 and 2007?

4 titles as clear cut best player also ignores that those years, Duncan had by far the best help any top 5 player had. Many players would have won in that situation. And 1999 was just the oddest year ever, with the Bulls and Jazz falling out and the lakers not being there yet, and of course the lockout contributing to it and to Shaq not being in proper shape. There is no way Duncan wins a title that year under normal circumstances.

Nobody is denying that 2003 was GOAT level.

Jokic is gonna have to fight more of an uphill battle in terms of help vs. opponent the next 2 rounds (perhaps even this one) than Duncan EVER DID in 1999, 2005 and 2007.

Thats undeniable.

[ShawkFactory]

I know, but I dont think you understand how the game works. Any additiona shots would have been self created ones not the spoonfed ones, cause he got all those anyway. So his FG% woud have dropped.

:biggums:

You're talking in generalities and ignoring what I actually said. This isn't a guard getting up extra shots by taking ill-advised 28 footers.

Duncan was an ultimate winner who would gladly give up a good shot for himself if it meant getting a better one for someone else. Most guys, particularly Hakeem and Shaq, weren't like that. Seriously...go back and watch Spurs games from that era. He was absolutely capable of taking over offensively if needed. He often didn't care to and it benefited guys like Manu and Parker, given the defensive attention he attracted.

[SouBeachTalents]

Yes, but it would depend on his circumstances. If he has similar teams to he currently has for the next 10 years, for example, and only wins one ring...there is no way he could ever be placed at the Duncan level in the all-time rankings.

Now, if he wins a couple rings and then really doesn't get much help this rest of his career and he doesn't have the circumstances Duncan did...but keeps playing at this level and has proven real shit...then I think that would be a conversation worth having.
I don't think you're understanding me bro. I fully agree with you Jokic needs multiple titles, at least 3, to get into the conversation with these guys all time. If Jokic plays at this level but only wins 1-2 rings, he wouldn't be ranked where they are. But if I'm judging them based solely on ability and impact, I would still put Jokic on their level. It's like how Wade & Kawhi are a good 15-20 spots behind Kobe all time, but peak for peak, I think they're just as good, if not arguably better than him.

[DMAVS41]

Do people actually think jokic is gonna choke?

He's literally never had a bad playoff series in his entire career. As consistently dominant as they come.

Guy just put up 35/13/10 splits on sniper efficiency... averaged a triple double while totally dismantling a tile contended and forcing the opposing center to quit and you think he's gonna fall on his face?

:lol

That series he just played vs the sun's was a GOAT performance, even on a MJ level standard.

Who thinks he's going to fall on his face? I haven't seen anyone argue that.

You, however, have said Anthony Davis is as good as prime Duncan. So if he has to face Anthony Davis, a guy he struggled against a few years ago, and they lose...what will you say then? He doesn't have to choke. His team is good, but it isn't some overwhelming force that can likely survive him not being great. Also, Jokic losing to the Lakers or Warriors wouldn't even be that bad or anything...I don't think he will, but he could.

You damn guys have been around over a decade and you still think the only two outcomes are "greatness" and "choke"

[DMAVS41]

I don't think you're understanding me bro. I fully agree with you Jokic needs multiple titles, at least 3, to get into the conversation with these guys all time. If Jokic plays at this level but only wins 1-2 rings, he wouldn't be ranked where they are. But if I'm judging them based solely on ability and impact, I would still put Jokic on their level. It's like how Wade & Kawhi are a good 15-20 spots behind Kobe all time, but peak for peak, I think they're just as good, if not arguably better than him.

I am understanding you.

I agree with your example...I was talking about from an overall perspective and not just peak.

[DMAVS41]

We already looked at 2006, and I already told you he had big individual series and was able to step it up :lol

But youre ignoring the fact that he took a big step back on offense and was allowed to do so from year 7 on, and thats a huge luxury.

And by 2008, he could no longer even step up for individual series.

4 titles as clear cut best player sounds nice, but can you name any championship teams where the 1 was so close to the 2 like Duncan was in 2005 and 2007?

4 titles as clear cut best player also ignores that those years, Duncan had by far the best help any top 5 player had. Many players would have won in that situation. And 1999 was just the oddest year ever, with the Bulls and Jazz falling out and the lakers not being there yet, and of course the lockout contributing to it and to Shaq not being in proper shape. There is no way Duncan wins a title that year under normal circumstances.

Nobody is denying that 2003 was GOAT level.

Jokic is gonna have to fight more of an uphill battle in terms of help vs. opponent the next 2 rounds (perhaps even this one) than Duncan EVER DID in 1999, 2005 and 2007.

Thats undeniable.

You could flip this and say Jokic gets to take a step back from defense and that is a huge luxury. Talking about defense with Duncan isn't like talking about Kobe's defense or some BS that didn't move the needle...this guy was anchoring some of the best defenses in the league for over a decade.

And, when Jokic strings together a decade plus of individual and team dominance in both the regular season and playoffs...winning multiple titles as the clear cut best player...we can have this conversation. Until then, it is all potential...

I don't know...that 05 Pistons team in the playoffs knew how to win. I don't think there is a team left in the current playoffs that is stronger than them.

[Overdrive]

well, whats his success rate on them and how does it compare to his overall FG%? Thats the question you need to ask. And factor in that further post ups and backing down can lead to a slight increase in fatique also.

I don't have stats for that but the quick turnaround for a bankshot was his money shot. Of course more touches would mean more fatigue, but the early 2000s Spurs game revolved around Duncan's touches. It's not like he didn't need to position in order to open up the game for the rest of the team.

[tpols]

Who thinks he's going to fall on his face? I haven't seen anyone argue that.

You, however, have said Anthony Davis is as good as prime Duncan. So if he has to face Anthony Davis, a guy he struggled against a few years ago, and they lose...what will you say then? He doesn't have to choke. His team is good, but it isn't some overwhelming force that can likely survive him not being great. Also, Jokic losing to the Lakers or Warriors wouldn't even be that bad or anything...I don't think he will, but he could.

You damn guys have been around over a decade and you still think the only two outcomes are "greatness" and "choke"

Well for one AD has the better team. The Lakers are stacked and his 2nd option is Lebron James whose a better player than Jamal Murray, even in old age.

But I don't think Jokic is going to put up only 21ppg this time around. The circumstances of that whole playoff format were extremely suspect. No crowds, no homecourt, tons of rest.... let's see what AD and the Lakers do having to play in the mile high city 4 times and against a unit that has been building chemistry for years since.

They needed AD to hit miracle clutch shots last time to win. I don't believe with all the aforementioned contextual changes it will be anywhere near as easy this time around.

[ArbitraryWater]

You could flip this and say Jokic gets to take a step back from defense and that is a huge luxury. Talking about defense with Duncan isn't like talking about Kobe's defense or some BS that didn't move the needle...this guy was anchoring some of the best defenses in the league for over a decade.

And, when Jokic strings together a decade plus of individual and team dominance in both the regular season and playoffs...winning multiple titles as the clear cut best player...we can have this conversation. Until then, it is all potential...

I don't know...that 05 Pistons team in the playoffs new how to win. I don't think there is a team left in the current playoffs that is stronger than them.


We can absoutely have this discussion now because we simply go off what Jokic is on pace to do. Jokic seems to be a shoe-in for the WCF at least with his team in tact, since 2020.

Since Jokic is not a liability on defense, he probably generates more points overall. And I will always find it easier to plug the defense than the offense.

Jokic needs to win 1 title on his own, all the other non-03 rings arent tier elevating. Duncan wasnt BITW. If you look at Duncans play and production those years, any reasonable person would deduct that others in his situation could replicate that success.

And Duncan completely disappointed against those Pistons, wet the bed in game 7 and got fortunate whistles to bail him out.

[tpols]

I'd also like to add it wasn't AD that was really giving Jokic problems in their 2020 series.

It was Dwight Howard who was getting really physical with him and bothering him.

The Lakers don't have Dwight anymore. Theyre ripe for physical punishment inside.

[DMAVS41]

Well for one AD has the better team. The Lakers are stacked and his 2nd option is Lebron James whose a better player than Jamal Murray, even in old age.

But I don't think Jokic is going to put up only 21ppg this time around. The circumstances of that whole playoff format were extremely suspect. No crowds, no homecourt, tons of rest.... let's see what AD and the Lakers do having to play in the mile high city 4 times and against a unit that has been building chemistry for years since.

They needed AD to hit miracle clutch shots last time to win. I don't believe with all the aforementioned contextual changes it will be anywhere near as easy this time around.

Right, that is what I just said. It wouldn't even be some horrible thing to lose to the Warriors or Lakers...but if he wants to be with Hakeem and Duncan and Shaq...he's got to win series like that...and even if he loses. They might win it next year and the year after...and then 2 years later.

We simply have to be patient and let things play out as how good a player actually is...will be revealed through their individual and team performance based on circumstances. It isn't perfect with guys like KG...etc...but when in prime all-time greats have a team that is capable of winning a title like the Nuggets are...it's a nice data point.

I hope the Nuggets win...I'd love nothing more than Nick Wright twist himself into a pretzel trying to make sense of his Jokic takes over the last few years if he just dominates his way to a title...beating the Lakers, if they make it to the WCF, in the process would be the icing on the cake.

[DMAVS41]

I'd also like to add it wasn't AD that was really giving Jokic problems in their 2020 series.

It was Dwight Howard who was getting really physical with him and bothering him.

The Lakers don't have Dwight anymore. Theyre ripe for physical punishment inside.

That is true, but AD is one of the few guys that can make life difficult on him. Can, doesn't mean he will...

[theman93]

It all comes down to championship. Duncan, Shaq, and Hakeem all have all-time resumes which Jokic is obviously trending towards, but if he can’t lead his team to multiple championships like they did he will not pass any of them. He’ll be placed in the Malone, Barkley, and Paul bin who all had great accolades and achievements but could never win.

[iamgine]

In terms of ability he's up there with peak Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan.

In terms of greatness, well that seems to require championships.

So maybe not, championships are not easy to get.

[tpols]

That is true, but AD is one of the few guys that can make life difficult on him. Can, doesn't mean he will...

Maybe...

I feel like jokic is gonna bully AD though. I'm rewatching the highlights and jokic couldn't move Dwight. He can easily move and punish AD. Most of Davis elite defensive impact comes from his length with help defense. If he has one weakness it's that he isn't nearly as sturdy in the low post as Dwight was.

[StrongLurk]

It's certainly possible. Being an elite defender is NOT a requirement for top 10-15 all time players if your offensive capabilities are GOAT tier.

[ArbitraryWater]

Maybe...

I feel like jokic is gonna bully AD though. I'm rewatching the highlights and jokic couldn't move Dwight. He can easily move and punish AD. Most of Davis elite defensive impact comes from his length with help defense. If he has one weakness it's that he isn't nearly as sturdy in the low post as Dwight was.


It seems like every elite defender gives up something. This is the same issue KG would have, even more so.

There is no player or body built for all situations.

[Phoenix]

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet but one thing Joker hadn't had yet is facing and overcoming a gauntlet of centers like Hakeem did in 94 and 95. It was a rare case of a player getting to face and overcome his positional rivals in head to head competition enroute to titles. That was some GOAT shit on Hakeem's part and vaulted him into most top 10s when his career outside of those years was alot of playoff futility. There's a thread here talking about what would make for the most compelling finals matchups( in terms of drawing ratings) and while I don't think a Nuggets-Sixers finals would be ideal for the NBA in terms of the 'numbers', it would make for a very interesting conversation seeing Joker and Embiid at that peaks head to head for the title. It's not often recently that we get to see two 5 players, playing the same position, in a 7 game series for the chip.

[FultzNationRISE]

I'd also like to add it wasn't AD that was really giving Jokic problems in their 2020 series.

It was Dwight Howard who was getting really physical with him and bothering him.

The Lakers don't have Dwight anymore. Theyre ripe for physical punishment inside.


Jokic is also a stronger, more refined player now than he was in 2020. The options around him are also better.

The 2020 series will have little to no bearing on how this series would go IMO. Of course the Lakers are favorites bc they have LeHung, but if LeTeammates dont show up at ALL we could see the Nugs in the finals…

[tpols]

Jokic is also a stronger, more refined player now than he was in 2020. The options around him are also better.

The 2020 series will have little to no bearing on how this series would go IMO. Of course the Lakers are favorites bc they have LeHung, but if LeTeammates dont show up at ALL we could see the Nugs in the finals…

Yea jokic does look skinnier in that series.

Dwight was the perfect goon to put on him. He had no other responsibility but to bang on him and talk shit, while joker was tasked with carrying the whole squad.

Todays Lakers don't have that presence. Vanderbilt will get schooled and AD will get knocked back and hit.

[FultzNationRISE]

Yea jokic does look skinnier in that series.

Dwight was the perfect goon to put on him. He had no other responsibility but to bang on him and talk shit, while joker was tasked with carrying the whole squad.

Todays Lakers don't have that presence. Vanderbilt will get schooled and AD will get knocked back and hit.

I mean they could put LeStud on him, but then if Jokic just becomes a passer youre basically wasting your best LeDefender.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

Keep one thing in mind as well. Shaq and Duncan both prevented each other from winning a title in several years.

Who is Jokic preventing from winning a title?

Take a title or two away from Shaq and give it to Duncan. Or take a title or two away from Duncan and give it to Shaq.

Then there is no way Jokic would compete with that.

[tpols]

Keep one thing in mind as well. Shaq and Duncan both prevented each other from winning a title in several years.

Who is Jokic preventing from winning a title?

Take a title or two away from Shaq and give it to Duncan. Or take a title or two away from Duncan and give it to Shaq.

Then there is no way Jokic would compete with that.

Lebron, AD, Durant, Booker, Curry, Klay, Butler, Embiid, Harden, Tatum, Brown...... ?

:hammerhead:

[tontoz]

I don't know if it's been mentioned yet but one thing Joker hadn't had yet is facing and overcoming a gauntlet of centers like Hakeem did in 94 and 95. It was a rare case of a player getting to face and overcome his positional rivals in head to head competition enroute to titles. That was some GOAT shit on Hakeem's part and vaulted him into most top 10s when his career outside of those years was alot of playoff futility. There's a thread here talking about what would make for the most compelling finals matchups( in terms of drawing ratings) and while I don't think a Nuggets-Sixers finals would be ideal for the NBA in terms of the 'numbers', it would make for a very interesting conversation seeing Joker and Embiid at that peaks head to head for the title. It's not often recently that we get to see two 5 players, playing the same position, in a 7 game series for the chip.


Hakeem's series against MVP DRob was one of the best i've ever seen. Hakeem did have a lot of first round flameouts though.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

Lebron, AD, Durant, Booker, Curry, Klay, Butler, Embiid, Harden, Tatum, Brown...... ?

:hammerhead:

You realize that he hasn't been to the Finals yet so he hasn't prevented a single East player you mentioned. He hasn't prevented LeBron/AD/Curry/Klay yet in the playoffs.

This year will be the first year where he may prevent those guys from winning one.

The Lakers is the team that beat Duncan the most in the playoffs for his career.

[tpols]

You realize that he hasn't been to the Finals yet so he hasn't prevented a single East player you mentioned. He hasn't prevented LeBron/AD/Curry/Klay yet in the playoffs.

This year will be the first year where he may prevent those guys from winning one.

The Lakers is the team that beat Duncan the most in the playoffs for his career.

Your point doesn't make any sense since Jokic will have had to go through a plethora of all time great players in order to win, while having no all time great players on his own team.

Easy to win when prime Kobe is your teammate instead of jamal murray.

[DMAVS41]

We can absoutely have this discussion now because we simply go off what Jokic is on pace to do. Jokic seems to be a shoe-in for the WCF at least with his team in tact, since 2020.

Since Jokic is not a liability on defense, he probably generates more points overall. And I will always find it easier to plug the defense than the offense.

Jokic needs to win 1 title on his own, all the other non-03 rings arent tier elevating. Duncan wasnt BITW. If you look at Duncans play and production those years, any reasonable person would deduct that others in his situation could replicate that success.

And Duncan completely disappointed against those Pistons, wet the bed in game 7 and got fortunate whistles to bail him out.

Do you actually expect to be taken seriously if your take is..."nothing Duncan did other than 03 matters" and that "others could replicate his success"?

No, there is no reasonable person that looks at Duncan doing roughly 24/13/4 for a decade in the playoffs while anchoring elite defenses while being the clear cut best player on 4 title winning teams....and says...yea, a bunch of other guys could replicate that success.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

Your point doesn't make any sense since Jokic will have had to go through a plethora of all time great players in order to win, while having no all time great players on his own team.

Easy to win when prime Kobe is your teammate.

And until he wins against those players, he hasn't "prevented" anyone. He has prevented Durant.

Shaq/Duncan literally prevented each other because they beat each other in various years. Hence prevented.

[FultzNationRISE]

You realize that he hasn't been to the Finals yet so he hasn't prevented a single East player you mentioned. He hasn't prevented LeBron/AD/Curry/Klay yet in the playoffs.

This year will be the first year where he may prevent those guys from winning one.

The Lakers is the team that beat Duncan the most in the playoffs for his career.


:biggums:

Just a TERRIBLE argument.

Classic example of agenda first, convoluted “logic” second.

[FultzNationRISE]

And until he wins against those players, he hasn't "prevented" anyone. He has prevented Durant.

Shaq/Duncan literally prevented each other because they beat each other in various years. Hence prevented.

:wtf:


Jokic’s team just beat Durant’s.

Are you drunk?

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

Do you actually expect to be taken seriously if your take is..."nothing Duncan did other than 03 matters" and that "others could replicate his success"?

No, there is no reasonable person that looks at Duncan doing roughly 24/13/4 for a decade in the playoffs while anchoring elite defenses while being the clear cut best player on 4 title winning teams....and says...yea, a bunch of other guys could replicate that success.

And let's not forget that Duncan was doing that with his team scoring 80/90 points a game in the playoffs. The 99 team finished games in the high 70s. Now teams get that many points by halftime.

[Locked_Up_Tonight]

:wtf:


Jokic’s team just beat Durant’s.

Are you drunk?

I believe I said he prevented Durant this year.

[tpols]

And until he wins against those players, he hasn't "prevented" anyone. He has prevented Durant.

Shaq/Duncan literally prevented each other because they beat each other in various years. Hence prevented.

So if he runs through Durant, Booker, either AD / Lebron or Curry, and some variation of the stacked Celtics or Heat that's not enough?

What do you want the man to do?

In Duncan's best playoff run Dirk got hurt in the WCFs (free pass) and he faced a weak Nets team in the Finals.

[FultzNationRISE]

I believe I said he prevented Durant this year.

Ah, yes.

I did misread that.


But this whole concept is still extremely selective, arbitrary, and convoluted.

[DMAVS41]

Your point doesn't make any sense since Jokic will have had to go through a plethora of all time great players in order to win, while having no all time great players on his own team.

Easy to win when prime Kobe is your teammate instead of jamal murray.

Can he just win multiple titles before we say he's as good as or better than these guys?

Also, we have to stop acting like Manu/Parker was this unreal good combo historically and Murray/Porter/Gordon/KCP is nothing of note. I don't love this Nuggets team in some ways, but my god...you guys act like the Spurs were stacked like the Durant Warriors or something.

The level of help Jokic is currently getting in these playoffs is absolutely comparable to the help Duncan got most years...and definitely better than the help he got in the 03 playoffs. Nobody else on the 03 Spurs even touches how good Murray is.

[basketballcat]

surpassing Duncan: extremely unlikely because of championships and All Defensive selections
surpassing Shaq: It's going to be tough. He'll need a ring this year or next year to get things going.
surpassing Olajuwon: He's already halfway there.

[bizil]

GOAT status wise, it's gonna be a TALL ORDER for him to eclipse those three. I got Shaq and Timmy in the top 10 GOAT. The Dream is in that top 11-13 GOAT area. We gotta see how his career plays out. On a peak-prime status, I would still take all three over Jokic. Usually for my 5 man, I value great two way ability OVER the great passing Jokic brings to the table. But Jokic's skillset frankly SUPERCEDES MANY CENTERS who have great two way ability!

However, Duncan and Dream were so great two way ability wise that I would take them over Joker. And when u think about it, those two COULD DEFEND Joker away from the basket better than most centers. And scoring wise, both would cook the Joker. I'm NOT SAYING Joker would go off too. He's that great. Just saying Dream and Timmy CHECK THE BOXES NEEDED to be the ideal matchup for Joker.

And peak wise, Shaq is arguably the best center ever. He's so physically dominant that it supercedes Joker's skill. With that said, I think Joker is a top 6-7 caliber center peak-prime wise. Embid has for that matter too. They have already passed up a lot of legendary centers in that regard. Kareem, Wilt, Shaq, and Dream are the only centers FOR SURE I have over them peak-prime wise. Duncan is the GOAT PF so I didn't include him.

[BarberSchool]

Larry Bird wasn't a great athlete or really any better as a defender and a lot of people have him as the better player over all 3 of those guys.

Hakeem, and Shaq don't elevate teammates like jokic does with his GOAT big man passing an IQ. I remember early in his career some people even used to call hakeem a black hole on offense. He wasn't a great passer and Shaq really wasn't either compared to jokic.

There's something to be said for making others better at a GOAT level in addition to your own production.
You’re wrong about Bird not being a great defender. He was, no question. And a great rebounder but didn’t have to do it as much since he had parish and mchale. Bird’s shoulders and biceps were unimpressive, but he almost always had stronger forearms/wrists and especially HANDS than his opponent, and ripped so many steals from huge 80’s forwards and 80’s centers. He led the entire damn league in steals more than once IIRC. Blocked some Dr. J dunks. Dude was slow and not known for dunking hardly ever after 86, but his defense on forwards and bigs, and his weakside passing lane steals as well, were all really great.

Jokic is a far worse athlete than Bird was. And he’s less mean/spiteful/angry/chip-on-his-shoulder. Nobody bested Bird in those departments. Maybe the entire Detroit Pistons or Knicks squads, but not an individual.

All that said, I’m not a Jokic hater. I don’t find his game aesthetically pleasing in the traditional sense, but he’s extremely fun to watch, and I respect how insanely efficient, intelligent, selfless he is. His predictive offensive intelligence is tops among all bigs in the league and it’s not close. Will probably be the best big ever in regards to predictive intelligence, predictive judgement, TOUCH, and the passing that comes from his predictive intelligence and predictive judgement. He has a very real chance to be the best offensive big ever. But the others mentioned were all time defensive game changers.


If we took 2 random games from 90 to 95 for Hakeem, 99 to 2003 for Shaq and Duncan and 2020 till now for Jokic and let you watch I doubt you'd say it's clearly the first 3.

Most careers in hindsight are defined by a few memorable games and the amount of titles.If you pick some out, don’t pick from shortly after Cartwright changed Akeem’s name with that elbow to Hakeem. Or fat toe problem Shaq. And a boring low scoring Duncan game.

What I’m saying is that, while Jokic has a real chance to be the goat offensive center and already is the goat passing center, he cannot, with any amount of hard work, come close to the physical domination of Shaq, or the defensive game changing abilities of any of the 3. The best he can do is be the most gifted offensive “team first” center ever, and be the goat efficiency/turnover-to-assist/consistent center ever and “dominant in results but but physically dominant in the traditional sense”. Not hating, just pointing out his limitations and how that limits his alltime ranking as a two way / overall / complete player/center.

[DCL]

at this point, he's still in steve nash's tier.

shaq, duncan's tier is a whole different universe.

bring some rings back first

[ArbitraryWater]

Can he just win multiple titles before we say he's as good as or better than these guys?

Also, we have to stop acting like Manu/Parker was this unreal good combo historically and Murray/Porter/Gordon/KCP is nothing of note. I don't love this Nuggets team in some ways, but my god...you guys act like the Spurs were stacked like the Durant Warriors or something.

The level of help Jokic is currently getting in these playoffs is absolutely comparable to the help Duncan got most years...and definitely better than the help he got in the 03 playoffs. Nobody else on the 03 Spurs even touches how good Murray is.


Again, you seem to ignore the state of the league at the time.

From 2005-2007, perhaps even 2004-2007, that was the best supporting cast in the NBA.

Murray/Porter is pretty standard top level support in todays league.

[DMAVS41]

Again, you seem to ignore the state of the league at the time.

From 2005-2007, perhaps even 2004-2007, that was the best supporting cast in the NBA.

Murray/Porter is pretty standard top level support in todays league.

I'm not sure what the state of the league, from 05-07, matters to my point. Even if I agreed with you...Duncan had already proved a shit ton before that three year run. I mentioned 03...and you focused on the other years. Not sure why.

Also, meh...the Suns, Pistons, and Heat were all really good in 05...and yes, Duncan got some luck to not face the Suns at full strength, but I don't think it would have mattered. He was just that good....as was Manu that year as well. The Pistons were definitely a top tier championship contending team and would give anyone in the league today real problems. If the East was 05 Pistons vs current Heat...the 05 Pistons would definitely be favored in that series.

Boiling down the Nuggets help to just Murray/Porter is not honest at all. Gordon and Pope are two legit players...and Brown has played well. Now, it is fair to say that this Nuggets team lacks depth, but so far...the next 5 guys have played very well in the playoffs so far.

I think the 05 Spurs supporting cast around Duncan was better, but probably worse in 07....but the competition was definitely weak in 07.

Again though...those are just two years of his career...he had already won 2 titles as the best player...with one of them being one of the most impressive title runs in NBA history.

In order for Jokic to enter into that discussion...he needs to win at least 2 with supporting casts of this caliber. Even if I thought Jokic was a much better player than Duncan just on my opinion, which I don't of course, but if I did...I'd still be saying he has to prove it.

You guys don't need to rush to rate or rank. If Jokic is as good as we all think...he's going to win this year and likely win at least 1 or 2 more given his current level of help relative to the league. And if he doesn't, but plays amazingly well...and just doesn't get the help...I'll be right there defending him like I have for multiple years now.

But to start getting to the Duncan level...he'll need to do something special at least once or twice in his career....and that is exactly how it should be....because it diminishes what other guys accomplished to just vault up a player that has only been all-time great for 4 years at this point of his career.

[ArbitraryWater]

I'm not sure what the state of the league, from 05-07, matters to my point. Even if I agreed with you...Duncan had already proved a shit ton before that three year run. I mentioned 03...and you focused on the other years. Not sure why.

Also, meh...the Suns, Pistons, and Heat were all really good in 05...and yes, Duncan got some luck to not face the Suns at full strength, but I don't think it would have mattered. He was just that good....as was Manu that year as well. The Pistons were definitely a top tier championship contending team and would give anyone in the league today real problems. If the East was 05 Pistons vs current Heat...the 05 Pistons would definitely be favored in that series.

Boiling down the Nuggets help to just Murray/Porter is not honest at all. Gordon and Pope are two legit players...and Brown has played well. Now, it is fair to say that this Nuggets team lacks depth, but so far...the next 5 guys have played very well in the playoffs so far.

I think the 05 Spurs supporting cast around Duncan was better, but probably worse in 07....but the competition was definitely weak in 07.

Again though...those are just two years of his career...he had already won 2 titles as the best player...with one of them being one of the most impressive title runs in NBA history.

In order for Jokic to enter into that discussion...he needs to win at least 2 with supporting casts of this caliber. Even if I thought Jokic was a much better player than Duncan just on my opinion, which I don't of course, but if I did...I'd still be saying he has to prove it.

You guys don't need to rush to rate or rank. If Jokic is as good as we all think...he's going to win this year and likely win at least 1 or 2 more given his current level of help relative to the league. And if he doesn't, but plays amazingly well...and just doesn't get the help...I'll be right there defending him like I have for multiple years now.

But to start getting to the Duncan level...he'll need to do something special at least once or twice in his career....and that is exactly how it should be....because it diminishes what other guys accomplished to just vault up a player that has only been all-time great for 4 years at this point of his career.


Duncan only did something truly special once in his life: 2003.

And if Dirk hadnt gotten injured, it would have gone down like many years from all time greats: not enough given the weakness of the own team. Jordan suffered that fate a couple times, lebron did a couple times, etc. Duncan performed there once.

So to say he "proved it before" is not on point because he was never close to being that same player again.

His 1999 ring isnt even worth mentioning. Amost every top 30 ATG woud have won under those circumstances. It was a compete no-show of a year as far as competition went.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Jokic is more impactful relative to his era than Duncan. I'd rather have Duncan in 03 because his game was better suited for that era... but Jokic is a more dominant force in his own era.

He's better than Hakeem and Duncan already, but needs to dominant for more years to eclipse Shaq. Shaq had the best peak of them all and that's valued heavily.

[DMAVS41]

Duncan only did something truly special once in his life: 2003.

And if Dirk hadnt gotten injured, it would have gone down like many years from all time greats: not enough given the weakness of the own team. Jordan suffered that fate a couple times, lebron did a couple times, etc. Duncan performed there once.

So to say he "proved it before" is not on point because he was never close to being that same player again.

His 1999 ring isnt even worth mentioning. Amost every top 30 ATG woud have won under those circumstances. It was a compete no-show of a year as far as competition went.

I'm one of the biggest..."titles need context" guys on here...but you can't just throw out rings as the clear cut best player on the team as if they are meaningless. If it was so easy...more guys would be able to do that.

You are not giving enough credit to him coming into the league from day 1 and being one of the best players in the league and a true championship first option. Even if I agreed that Jokic has proven enough and is as good or better than Duncan ever was...just on the longevity alone this is silly.

Jokic took into year 4, at the earliest, to get as good as Duncan was his rookie year. You can't just ignore that.

People forget...I'd invite you to go back and watch that Jazz series. It was only 3 years ago or whatever...Murray put the Nuggets on his ****ing back. That series could have easily been lost...Jokic was great as well and was awesome in game 7, but Murray's games 5 and 6 to save the season were incredible.

Point being...I don't even think 2020 Jokic was as good as Duncan was basically right away in his career.

Forget the titles...Duncan's level of play overall his first 8 years completely shits on Jokic's first 8 years of his....and this is coming from a huge Jokic fan that thinks he'll likely go down as a clear better player than Dirk. It's not comparable to date. The last 3 years?

Yes, you can start to compare, but Jokic needs to lead a team all the way given the circumstances of his help and the league. There is no dominant, truly scary opponent he will have to face.

[Micku]

Duncan only did something truly special once in his life: 2003.

And if Dirk hadnt gotten injured, it would have gone down like many years from all time greats: not enough given the weakness of the own team. Jordan suffered that fate a couple times, lebron did a couple times, etc. Duncan performed there once.

So to say he "proved it before" is not on point because he was never close to being that same player again.

His 1999 ring isnt even worth mentioning. Amost every top 30 ATG woud have won under those circumstances. It was a compete no-show of a year as far as competition went.

What? Hahahah! Man....if you were a Laker fan back then, that hurt. People were saying that even though the Lakers were more talented, they couldn't beat the Spurs. It sucked. They were getting in on Shaq as leader. Kobe might be overrated and drafted too early. The Lakers couldn't operate as a team even though they were the Lakers were constantly in the top 3 for the past 3 seasons.

And you talk about how top 30 ATG would've won in those circumstances? Shaq is a top 10. Got swept by Spurs. And it's not like he didn't have the squad. Dude had Kobe, Glen Rice, Fisher, Fox, and Horry. They just couldn't get it done. Karl Malone couldn't get it done. Ewing got hurt, but that was his shot. This was Duncan's second year in the league too. How is it possible for someone like Shaq with all that talent, Karl Malone with his MVP that year, can't get it done by Duncan could in his second year in the league?

You got to give respect where respect is due. Short season or not. He won in his second year and Karl Malone couldn't do it in his entire career, even though KM was mvp that year. Shaq couldn't do it despite having more talent. KG couldn't do it. Same age, but he was in the league longer. Grant Hill couldn't do it even though he had the talent. Chris Webber couldn't do it even though he was in the league longer. Etc, etc. Duncan passed his peers and ppl who were in the league longer. And did it again in 03.

[tpols]

Jokic is a far worse athlete than Bird was.


You're one of the most intuitive intelligent posters on this site... but man... what?

There's no way larry bird was a way better athlete than Jokic. Jokic is basically a taller heavier version of Larry Bird.

All of the stuff about Larry Birds farm boy strength and blue collar toughness also applies to Jokic with his Eastern European upbringing. Probably even moreso. He's a killer no doubt.

Athletically? They are one in the same.

[John8204]

So if he runs through Durant, Booker, either AD / Lebron or Curry, and some variation of the stacked Celtics or Heat that's not enough?

What do you want the man to do?

In Duncan's best playoff run Dirk got hurt in the WCFs (free pass) and he faced a weak Nets team in the Finals.


For his legacy....you can't really compare him to those players without 10 post seasons for a sample size. And lets be frank...he's 1-1 against Curry, Dame, Booker, he's 1-0 against Durant and Leonard and he's 0-1 against Lebron and AD.

If we cherry pick "best" seasons than Bill Walton should be in the discussion as he beat Kareem and Dr J to win a title when all the teams were fairly equal.

[rmt]

Funny how some so lightly dismiss winning championships. Until Jokic does, all it is is POTENTIAL (to be in the same conversation). There are so many things that can derail a team - injuries, bad calls, luck - Duncan could have 3 more rings (including a five-peat) but for Fisher's 0.4, Manu's foul, Ray Allen's three. If competition is so poor, why didn't someone else win? To surpass Hakeem, Shaq and Duncan, Jokic needs to have the accolades AND rings - skills or aesthetically great game is not enough (although fun/pleasing to watch) - he has to win because they DID (multiple times) - this is not even mentioning the defensive end of the floor - some of the greatest defensive players ever.

[DMAVS41]

Funny how some so lightly dismiss winning championships. Until Jokic does, all it is is POTENTIAL (to be in the same conversation). There are so many things that can derail a team - injuries, bad calls, luck - Duncan could have 3 more rings (including a five-peat) but for Fisher's 0.4, Manu's foul, Ray Allen's three. If competition is so poor, why didn't someone else win? To surpass Hakeem, Shaq and Duncan, Jokic needs to have the accolades AND rings - skills or aesthetically great game is not enough (although fun/pleasing to watch) - he has to win because they DID (multiple times) - this is not even mentioning the defensive end of the floor - some of the greatest defensive players ever.

Yep.

I was also trying to point out to them that even if you ignore the winning...which would be a mistake...if you just look at their first 8 years each...it is not close...Duncan was way better over that period.

Seriously, Duncan came into the league as a rookie and was already one of the very best players in the league...and by year 2...he was even better and capable of being the best player on a title winning team.

When did Jokic get good enough to be the clear cut best player on a title winning team? Even if we say he was good enough to do that in 2020, which honestly I'm not sure of...that was his 5th year in the league.

On just level of play alone...Duncan was better in year 1 or 2 than Jokic was until at least year 5, but likely year 6 of Jokic's career. Just on the tangible basketball stuff, Duncan's first 8 years...he was definitely a much better player than Jokic has been in his first 8 years.

[ArbitraryWater]

I'm one of the biggest..."titles need context" guys on here...but you can't just throw out rings as the clear cut best player on the team as if they are meaningless. If it was so easy...more guys would be able to do that.

You are not giving enough credit to him coming into the league from day 1 and being one of the best players in the league and a true championship first option. Even if I agreed that Jokic has proven enough and is as good or better than Duncan ever was...just on the longevity alone this is silly.

Jokic took into year 4, at the earliest, to get as good as Duncan was his rookie year. You can't just ignore that.

People forget...I'd invite you to go back and watch that Jazz series. It was only 3 years ago or whatever...Murray put the Nuggets on his ****ing back. That series could have easily been lost...Jokic was great as well and was awesome in game 7, but Murray's games 5 and 6 to save the season were incredible.

Point being...I don't even think 2020 Jokic was as good as Duncan was basically right away in his career.

Forget the titles...Duncan's level of play overall his first 8 years completely shits on Jokic's first 8 years of his....and this is coming from a huge Jokic fan that thinks he'll likely go down as a clear better player than Dirk. It's not comparable to date. The last 3 years?

Yes, you can start to compare, but Jokic needs to lead a team all the way given the circumstances of his help and the league. There is no dominant, truly scary opponent he will have to face.


No one else played in 1999 though.

literally.

1999 featured 2 ATGs in their prime: Shaq and Duncan. Shaq wasnt too special. And Duncan wasnt even really in his prime yet. He had a damn good sophomore season, but he woudnt have won that chip any other year.

You guys overrate titles without looking at level and context.

[Jasper]

Will Jokic surpass Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan?

no

[Carbine]

He needs to pass Dirk first.

[DMAVS41]

No one else played in 1999 though.

literally.

1999 featured 2 ATGs in their prime: Shaq and Duncan. Shaq wasnt too special. And Duncan wasnt even really in his prime yet. He had a damn good sophomore season, but he woudnt have won that chip any other year.

You guys overrate titles without looking at level and context.

You are the only one being unreasonable. Who here is saying means as much as his 03 ring or it would even mean as much as Jokic winning this year. You are arguing it means literally nothing that Duncan lead a team, in year 2, to what would have been like 60 wins and a title...dominating the competition while only losing 2 playoff games. He did that while dominating defensively and averaging 23/12/3.

Sorry, that does not mean "nothing"...it means something. It speaks to how good he was that early in his career. Again, check yourself...only one person being unreaonable.

Now, notice how you haven't even responded to the part of the post that talks about the simple fact that it took Jokic 4 or 5 years to get as good as rookie or 2nd year Duncan? You are ignoring that...and saying that Duncan leading a team to a title in dominant fashion means literally nothing.

You can't be taken seriously if that is your take.

Lastly, why again were the Lakers not tough competition? Shaq was 26 and a monster. Kobe had started to get really good...Rice/Fisher/Fox/Horry/Lue is absolutely legit role player help.

The problem with you is that if Jokic had to play that, you'd be lamenting how good the Lakers are. The only reason you think the Lakers weren't that good is because Duncan and the Spurs swept their asses out of the playoffs.

[theman93]

You are the only one being unreasonable. Who here is saying means as much as his 03 ring or it would even mean as much as Jokic winning this year. You are arguing it means literally nothing that Duncan lead a team, in year 2, to what would have been like 60 wins and a title...dominating the competition while only losing 2 playoff games. He did that while dominating defensively and averaging 23/12/3.

Sorry, that does not mean "nothing"...it means something. It speaks to how good he was that early in his career. Again, check yourself...only one person being unreaonable.

Now, notice how you haven't even responded to the part of the post that talks about the simple fact that it took Jokic 4 or 5 years to get as good as rookie or 2nd year Duncan? You are ignoring that...and saying that Duncan leading a team to a title in dominant fashion means literally nothing.

You can't be taken seriously if that is your take.

Well he literally called Hakeem's career "shitty". Now he's following it up by saying prime Shaq "wasn't too special". Of course we can't take him seriously lol.

[theman93]

Funny how some so lightly dismiss winning championships. Until Jokic does, all it is is POTENTIAL (to be in the same conversation). There are so many things that can derail a team - injuries, bad calls, luck - Duncan could have 3 more rings (including a five-peat) but for Fisher's 0.4, Manu's foul, Ray Allen's three. If competition is so poor, why didn't someone else win? To surpass Hakeem, Shaq and Duncan, Jokic needs to have the accolades AND rings - skills or aesthetically great game is not enough (although fun/pleasing to watch) - he has to win because they DID (multiple times) - this is not even mentioning the defensive end of the floor - some of the greatest defensive players ever.

Well that's the problem. In order to prop Jokic over these guys then you have to exclude the objective of the sport - winning (and multiple times at that). It's nonsense. What's the point of the game if all it is is filling a stat sheet? Hakeem, Shaq, and Duncan were stuffing the stat sheet AND winning. That's the difference.

[DMAVS41]

No one else played in 1999 though.

literally.

1999 featured 2 ATGs in their prime: Shaq and Duncan. Shaq wasnt too special. And Duncan wasnt even really in his prime yet. He had a damn good sophomore season, but he woudnt have won that chip any other year.

You guys overrate titles without looking at level and context.

So, I have a question for the people say that the 99 ring doesn't count for Duncan.

Do you now feel the same way about this year for Jokic?

Kind of similar in that both teams swept the Lakers and are facing a severely overmatched 8 seed in the finals.

Just curious.

[BarberSchool]

You're one of the most intuitive intelligent posters on this site... but man... what?

There's no way larry bird was a way better athlete than Jokic. Jokic is basically a taller heavier version of Larry Bird.

All of the stuff about Larry Birds farm boy strength and blue collar toughness also applies to Jokic with his Eastern European upbringing. Probably even moreso. He's a killer no doubt.

Athletically? They are one in the same.
If prime Bird and prime Jokic did every single track and field Olympic event, Bird would be victorious. Prime Bird was a significantly better athlete than Jokic.

But yes, Jokic predictive intelligence and predictive judgement are on par with Birds’

So is his touch on runners and off balance shots.

But Bird also is significantly more of a killer than Jokic. No single individual superstar ever matched Bird when it came to spite/meanness/chip-on-shoulder. Ever. Not even Kobe or the GOAT, Mike.

I have long said that Jokic is Bird’s brain and hands in a slightly smaller version of Marc Gasol’s body.

[tpols]

What's the point of the game if all it is is filling a stat sheet? Hakeem, Shaq, and Duncan were stuffing the stat sheet AND winning.



:biggums:

Is Jokic not winning?

The Nuggets were nowhere close to being title favorites on their talent when the season started and Yolk led a 1 seed that's now a -480 favorite in the Finals. This is a GOAT overachievement season right now.

https://i.postimg.cc/XYTZctND/Screenshot-20230530-100510-Chrome.jpg

[elementally morale]

Will Jokic surpass Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan?

Career:

1) Duncan
2) Shaq
3) Hakeem

Peak:

1) Shaq
2) Hakeem
3) Duncan


So who will Jokic overtake? Peakwise, I'd say he is on par with Duncan and very close to Hakeem. Jokic has a chance to become better than Hakeem but he needs to improve a bit more. Being somewhat more selfish could do the trick, especially if he can also improve just slightly on defense. Jokic is obviously the worst defender of the pack but his offense beats all three at this point, I think. Jokic really is the whole team on offense. I can't see him overtaking peak Shaq though.

As for their respective careers, Jokic is way too young to be able to tell. He can and I think will be considered better than Hakeem careerwise if he can win 2 rings. To pass Shaq he will need one more MVP and 3 rings. Duncan is a longshot. We shall see.

In terms of offense, Jokic is a top 5 all time player right now. I'd say if he can win it all this year he will be considered at least top 15 player overal. Definitely top 20-25. No chance putting him lower. In the end, like 10+ years from now (if he keeps playing that long)? Top 10 is not out of the question.

[kawhileonard2]

Career:

1) Duncan
2) Shaq
3) Hakeem

Peak:

1) Shaq
2) Hakeem
3) Duncan


So who will Jokic overtake? Peakwise, I'd say he is on par with Duncan and very close to Hakeem. Jokic has a chance to become better than Hakeem but he needs to improve a bit more. Being somewhat more selfish could do the trick, especially if he can also improve just slightly on defense. Jokic is obviously the worst defender of the pack but his offense beats all three at this point, I think. Jokic really is the whole team on offense. I can't see him overtaking peak Shaq though.

As for their respective careers, Jokic is way too young to be able to tell. He can and I think will be considered better than Hakeem careerwise if he can win 2 rings. To pass Shaq he will need one more MVP and 3 rings. Duncan is a longshot. We shall see.

In terms of offense, Jokic is a top 5 all time player right now. I'd say if he can win it all this year he will be considered at least top 15 player overal. Definitely top 20-25. No chance putting him lower. In the end, like 10+ years from now (if he keeps playing that long)? Top 10 is not out of the question.

Some are now saying Jokic may become the greatest big man ever.

[HighFlyer23]

If prime Bird and prime Jokic did every single track and field Olympic event, Bird would be victorious. Prime Bird was a significantly better athlete than Jokic.

But yes, Jokic predictive intelligence and predictive judgement are on par with Birds’

So is his touch on runners and off balance shots.

But Bird also is significantly more of a killer than Jokic. No single individual superstar ever matched Bird when it came to spite/meanness/chip-on-shoulder. Ever. Not even Kobe or the GOAT, Mike.

I have long said that Jokic is Bird’s brain and hands in a slightly smaller version of Marc Gasol’s body.

Jokic has a different mentality than Bird

Bird is top 10 but people are beginning to overrate him. Jokic is doing things that not even your Bird could do. He’s reached a level of understanding the game that few have reached.

Bird isn’t a better athlete. Jokic is much stronger and has a bigger physical presence. As far as running and jumping, it’s a wash.

[kawhileonard2]

Jokic has a different mentality than Bird

Bird is top 10 but people are beginning to overrate him. Jokic is doing things that not even your Bird could do. He’s reached a level of understanding the game that few have reached.

Bird isn’t a better athlete. Jokic is much stronger and has a bigger physical presence. As far as running and jumping, it’s a wash.

It would be interesting to see what Jokic would do against Brad Daugherty

[StrongLurk]

If Magic can be ranked in the top five all time even though he was an average at best defender, then Jokic can also make it to the top five if he wins enough rings/FMVPs/MVPs.

[John8204]

Some are now saying Jokic may become the greatest big man ever.

Jokic -
12,000 pts
6,273 rbs
3,959 assts

1 ring and 2 MVPs. It's a decent resume but he's going to have to basically double his numbers and at 27 he's just to old

[Micku]

Jokic -
12,000 pts
6,273 rbs
3,959 assts

1 ring and 2 MVPs. It's a decent resume but he's going to have to basically double his numbers and at 27 he's just to old

Do you value stat total more than stats per game, what can you do at your very best (prime/peak) or just accomplishments?

I think what matters more depends on the person.

[John8204]

Do you value stat total more than stats per game, what can you do at your very best (prime/peak) or just accomplishments?

I think what matters more depends on the person.

I think you judge players based upon their generation of players...and people who have played at that position.

[BigShotBob]

Jokic is more impactful relative to his era than Duncan. I'd rather have Duncan in 03 because his game was better suited for that era... but Jokic is a more dominant force in his own era.

He's better than Hakeem and Duncan already, but needs to dominant for more years to eclipse Shaq. Shaq had the best peak of them all and that's valued heavily.

In no world is Jokic better than Hakeem or Duncan

[1987_Lakers]

In no world is Jokic better than Hakeem or Duncan

You said Jokic would never get out of the 2nd round. You should never put his name in your mouth again.

[DMAVS41]

In no world is Jokic better than Hakeem or Duncan

In terms of his peak play...meaning the last 3 years...his level is absolutely comparable.

Where Jokic, obviously, falls short so far...is the totality of what he's done. If he wants to be on the Hakeem/Duncan level...he's going to need to win another title or two and maintain some version of this play for another 5 years...and then be quite good afterward for another 5 or so.

[kawhileonard2]

Jokic -
12,000 pts
6,273 rbs
3,959 assts

1 ring and 2 MVPs. It's a decent resume but he's going to have to basically double his numbers and at 27 he's just to old

No one cares about cumulative numbers. It's actual awards and titles for franchises that never won.

[kawhileonard2]

If he wins back to back he is probably top 20 all time

[j3lademaster]

I think it's just Shaq and Joker at this point. Those were the only two who were widely considered best in the world by the vast majority for their peaks. Hakeem always had the lingering 'but Shaq's not in his prime yet' or 'Jordan baseball' and Duncan was always an argument with Kobe.

[BarberSchool]

I think the main distinction, when we really boil it all down, is that Jokic, as an individual player, in a 1-on-1 situation, is barely even belonging in a convo like this. He lacks the ability to physically assert his own will against the oops best efforts for an extended duration. His solo iso bag (without passing or the threat of passing) isn’t really as great as his most supportive fans/fanboys think. Without his passing and mind, just strictly physically and skillwise, he isn’t special. Very good and skilled, but not truly special at all.

But that changes dramatically when we factor in his passing (better than any big in history) and his ability to read the game in real-time and essentially play thru all 4 of his teammates as an extension of his own limited abilities. He plays a different game, it’s more like he is playing against the opposing coaching staff, than the opposing players. Sure, he has opponents guarding him, but he isn’t thinking about them. He is seeing them as a positional defender who is merely an extension of the coach’s scheme.

It’s not like he is disrespecting his opponents, not at all, but it is at times, like he is looking past them. Past them, not like he is gonna blow by them or dunk on them, but looking past them because he is going to create a score that they cannot do anything about.

Many players think scoring first, and their awareness/concern about how their own defender or the nearby help can stop them, and many AVOID that line of action since they don’t want to be stopped on their attention score.

Jokic thinks differently, where the vast majority of possessions he is playing FOR/thru his teammates. He is actively trying to get two defenders to “stop him” since it will create a hugely efficient score for his teammates. He is something like if we mix an offensive lineman, or blocking tight end, and a dunk and dunk QB with league leading passer rating, yardage, and TD throws, who will only scramble for his own yards when necessary.

He’s a very unique player, in the Vlade/Webber mold, but with the ability to see the game differently and more fully.

I think the reason many can’t give him his full props, is because they cannot see the game anything like he can. A fan who was the type of player to only look for their own score, and never actively create for others, where passing was just a last second bail-out when their scoring got cutoff/stopped… these types of fans could never see why others hype him up as a potential top 10 player of all time.

Advanced stats show it, but to the layman, casual fan, or iso-selfish former player/fan, they just can’t see it and never will.

[elementally morale]

Career:

1) Duncan
2) Shaq
3) Hakeem

Peak:

1) Shaq
2) Hakeem
3) Duncan


So who will Jokic overtake? Peakwise, I'd say he is on par with Duncan and very close to Hakeem. Jokic has a chance to become better than Hakeem but he needs to improve a bit more. Being somewhat more selfish could do the trick, especially if he can also improve just slightly on defense. Jokic is obviously the worst defender of the pack but his offense beats all three at this point, I think. Jokic really is the whole team on offense. I can't see him overtaking peak Shaq though.

As for their respective careers, Jokic is way too young to be able to tell. He can and I think will be considered better than Hakeem careerwise if he can win 2 rings. To pass Shaq he will need one more MVP and 3 rings. Duncan is a longshot. We shall see.

In terms of offense, Jokic is a top 5 all time player right now. I'd say if he can win it all this year he will be considered at least top 15 player overal. Definitely top 20-25. No chance putting him lower. In the end, like 10+ years from now (if he keeps playing that long)? Top 10 is not out of the question.

What an intelligent post.

I wanted to see how my opinion changed over the years. There is no search function here and many older threads have already been deleted. I started following Jokic closely 5-6 years ago and became a real fan 3 years ago.

I was probably selling him short with top 10. On ability alone he is already there and many people will have him top 10 after this year IF the Nuggets win another ring. I personally would say top 15 or borderline top 10. That's for 'greatness'. As far as being 'good', I haven't seen a more impactful player. But I won't be comparing across eras other than saying he is playing no worse than anybody else that ever played. You can argue maybe 10 players in that group but that's stretching it. More like 6-8.

[tpols]

It's actually pretty crazy how guys like Shaq and Hakeem were doubled and even tripled so much and only averaged 3 dimes a game. Jokic averages 3-4x that while not being doubled quite as much (a good amount but not as much).

That's what really stands out. And it's not a physical thing it's a mental thing. The guy seems to see things in slow motion. Like how a fly would see a human swatting at it and easily dodge it. Because from their perspective were moving at a relative snail pace. That's Jokic basketball mind. He's physically slow but mentally warp speed.

[BarberSchool]

No.

Unless either something drastic changes with Jokic’s fitness/athleticism, which will allow him to become great defensively.

…. or unless Jokic wins 4-5 chips & sustains his current level of insane efficiency & productivity, then it can be a conversation, but not “better/surpassed”.

The other 3 are intimidating defensive forces, Jokic is a very very poor rim defender, despite getting a good amount of steals for a center, due to quick hands and great predictive positioning.


You’re wrong about Bird not being a great defender. He was, no question. And a great rebounder but didn’t have to do it as much since he had parish and mchale. Bird’s shoulders and biceps were unimpressive, but he almost always had stronger forearms/wrists and especially HANDS than his opponent, and ripped so many steals from huge 80’s forwards and 80’s centers. He led the entire damn league in steals more than once IIRC. Blocked some Dr. J dunks. Dude was slow and not known for dunking hardly ever after 86, but his defense on forwards and bigs, and his weakside passing lane steals as well, were all really great.

Jokic is a far worse athlete than Bird was. And he’s less mean/spiteful/angry/chip-on-his-shoulder. Nobody bested Bird in those departments. Maybe the entire Detroit Pistons or Knicks squads, but not an individual.

All that said, I’m not a Jokic hater. I don’t find his game aesthetically pleasing in the traditional sense, but he’s extremely fun to watch, and I respect how insanely efficient, intelligent, selfless he is. His predictive offensive intelligence is tops among all bigs in the league and it’s not close. Will probably be the best big ever in regards to predictive intelligence, predictive judgement, TOUCH, and the passing that comes from his predictive intelligence and predictive judgement. He has a very real chance to be the best offensive big ever. But the others mentioned were all time defensive game changers.

If you pick some out, don’t pick from shortly after Cartwright changed Akeem’s name with that elbow to Hakeem. Or fat toe problem Shaq. And a boring low scoring Duncan game.

What I’m saying is that, while Jokic has a real chance to be the goat offensive center and already is the goat passing center, he cannot, with any amount of hard work, come close to the physical domination of Shaq, or the defensive game changing abilities of any of the 3. The best he can do is be the most gifted offensive “team first” center ever, and be the goat efficiency/turnover-to-assist/consistent center ever and “dominant in results but but physically dominant in the traditional sense”. Not hating, just pointing out his limitations and how that limits his alltime ranking as a two way / overall / complete player/center.



If prime Bird and prime Jokic did every single track and field Olympic event, Bird would be victorious. Prime Bird was a significantly better athlete than Jokic.

But yes, Jokic predictive intelligence and predictive judgement are on par with Birds’

So is his touch on runners and off balance shots.

But Bird also is significantly more of a killer than Jokic. No single individual superstar ever matched Bird when it came to spite/meanness/chip-on-shoulder. Ever. Not even Kobe or the GOAT, Mike.

I have long said that Jokic is Bird’s brain and hands in a slightly smaller version of Marc Gasol’s body.
Also, in another thread, I repeatedly stated that Jokic lacks the physical nature, to simply “completely take over a game” in a solo/iso sense. His domination is not his own, but his ability to read and predict, and utilize all his teammates movement around him. By himself, in a strict iso post-up, against a defender longer than himself; he cannot simply take over and go on huge runs by himself.

And as I stated above in the quotes, he cannot physically dominate a game on the defensive side.

What Denver former head of basketball operation Tim Connelly built in Minnesnowta; is the blueprint on how to stop what Denver excels at.

[Carbine]

^ It's easy to say this NOW, after two poor games but doesn't Jokic have the best PPP on isolation post ups in the league?

He averaged 30 ppg on a championship run with the highest TS percentage ever for a 30ppg scorer.... His ability to take over games shouldn't be in question.

[SouBeachTalents]

The overreactions to these 2 games is ridiculous :lol The dude's been playing at a top 10 all time caliber for 4 years now, and just had one of the greatest title runs ever. Let's slow our roll on the overreactions, see how even this series plays out first, let alone the next 2-3 years.

[FultzNationRISE]

Also, in another thread, I repeatedly stated that Jokic lacks the physical nature, to simply “completely take over a game” in a solo/iso sense. His domination is not his own, but his ability to read and predict, and utilize all his teammates movement around him. By himself, in a strict iso post-up, against a defender longer than himself; he cannot simply take over and go on huge runs by himself.

And as I stated above in the quotes, he cannot physically dominate a game on the defensive side.

What Denver former head of basketball operation Tim Connelly built in Minnesnowta; is the blueprint on how to stop what Denver excels at.

This is empirically just wrong.

He’s schooled Davis 1 on 1 in the post two years in a row. Bam couldnt stop him. Dray did a decent job two years ago but he didnt stop him, Jokic was still dropping 40. He’s dropped 47 on DPOY Toody’s head before.

He’s clearly a dominant post scorer when he chooses to be, the stats and the eye test both support this abundantly. If anything he doesnt go to it enough. He doesnt wanna be a ballhog I guess. Right now tho they need him to settle down and just go to work in the post and use that to set up the open passes. Hes doing too many dribble handoffs at the top of the key. Too much trying to take guys off the dribble. Go into the post from the get go, over and over until it stops working. He’s backed guys down nicely a few times in this series already but other times hes been super casual with the ball and turned it over, or just stopped going to it entirely.

[j3lademaster]

The overreactions to these 2 games is ridiculous :lol The dude's been playing at a top 10 all time caliber for 4 years now, and just had one of the greatest title runs ever. Let's slow our roll on the overreactions, see how even this series plays out first, let alone the next 2-3 years.meh, the knee-jerk overreactions happen with all the greats. It’s just a rite of passage at this point.

[BarberSchool]

This is empirically just wrong.

He’s schooled Davis 1 on 1 in the post two years in a row. Bam couldnt stop him. Dray did a decent job two years ago but he didnt stop him, Jokic was still dropping 40. He’s dropped 47 on DPOY Toody’s head before.

He’s clearly a dominant post scorer when he chooses to be, the stats and the eye test both support this abundantly. If anything he doesnt go to it enough. He doesnt wanna be a ballhog I guess. Right now tho they need him to settle down and just go to work in the post and use that to set up the open passes. Hes doing too many dribble handoffs at the top of the key. Too much trying to take guys off the dribble. Go into the post from the get go, over and over until it stops working. He’s backed guys down nicely a few times in this series already but other times hes been super casual with the ball and turned it over, or just stopped going to it entirely.
Davis is a known obvious pu$$y, and Bam is like 6’7.75” and weighs 234lbs. Towns is a legit 7fter, and his rookie weight of 245 is NOT his current weight lol. Even Naz Reid (6’9.5” and 265lb) is significantly bigger and heavier than Bam, and Naz Reid is certainly mentally and physically tougher than Day-to-Davis.

Toody didn’t really guard Jokic 1-1 these recent games, he was free to roam, as we all said would be his best use case.

Jokic is certainly a highly efficient post up scorer against stretch bigs, and the type of slim mobile bigs that small ball brought into vogue. Against guys bigger and/or longer than him, that advantage evaporates, especially under the allowance of extremely physical play.

[rmt]

Davis is a known obvious pu$$y, and Bam is like 6’7.75” and weighs 234lbs. Towns is a legit 7fter, and his rookie weight of 245 is NOT his current weight lol. Even Naz Reid (6’9.5” and 265lb) is significantly bigger and heavier than Bam, and Naz Reid is certainly mentally and physically tougher than Day-to-Davis.

Toody didn’t really guard Jokic 1-1 these recent games, he was free to roam, as we all said would be his best use case.

Jokic is certainly a highly efficient post up scorer against stretch bigs, and the type of slim mobile bigs that small ball brought into vogue. Against guys bigger and/or longer than him, that advantage evaporates, especially under the allowance of extremely physical play.

I agree with your descriptions of today's big men (save Embiid) - that's why I would have loved to see this Nuggets team play against the 2005 Spurs or better yet - 2004 Pistons with Ben Wallace, Rasheed and McDyess. I think Jokic's individual stats and advanced stats (his game is SO pretty to watch) caused fans' over reaction - same as the over reaction to these 2 losses. If Denver wins next game, it's a whole 'nother series.

[BarberSchool]

If Denver wins next game, it's a whole 'nother series.if Malone/Denver staff can figure out a way for a smaller, older, hobbled team, to out-physical a younger, bigger, longer team allowed to get away with hella fouls …. That would be something to see!