Jokic or Hakeem?

[90sgoat]

Is Jokic already better than Hakeem ever was?

In that case, is he top 10 GOAT?

[Neal Romer]

Anyone who's be OBJECTIVE and not shamelessly bias or agenda drive would have to admit the answer is Lebron.

[Meticode]

Jokic will go down as the most complete offensive center in the NBA when he retires in terms of efficiency and passing and rebounding.

I feel defense gets undervalued in today's game and I feel Hakeem overall is one of if not the most offensively and defensively complete center ever.

One of the few players to win MVP+DPOY and dude averaged over 4 blocks a game three different times. He almost had a 5 block a game season.

[StrongLurk]

We can pretty much replace Hakeem with Giannis and say who do you want, Jokic or Giannis?

The answer is Jokic.

[warriorfan]

Is Jokic already better than Hakeem ever was?

In that case, is he top 10 GOAT?

Which era are we playing in?

[Meticode]

We can pretty much replace Hakeem with Giannis and say who do you want, Jokic or Giannis?

The answer is Jokic.

In terms of accomplishments minus the two rings? Sure. In terms of offensive game and defensive game? No.

[Meticode]

We can pretty much replace Hakeem with Giannis and say who do you want, Jokic or Giannis?

The answer is Jokic.

In terms of accomplishments minus the two rings? Sure. In terms of offensive game and defensive game? No. Their games don't mirror each other at all.

[Mask the Embiid]

After he got his ass kicked by a 22-year-old in his prime. I cant reasonable put him above hakeem. That would mean he's a top 10 player. Which he is not. Im sorry OP. I know this is not the answer you wanted

[SouBeachTalents]

After he got his ass kicked by a 22-year-old in his prime. I cant reasonable put him above hakeem. That would mean he's a top 10 player. Which he is not. Im sorry OP. I know this is not the answer you wanted
Embiid got his ass kicked by a far inferior 22 year old in his prime.

[90sgoat]

I'm taking Jokic now, but only because this year he is been at the highest level.

[White Hammer]

Give me the guy that plays against real ball players everyday instead of tow truck drivers and VCR repairmen.

[Meticode]

Give me the guy that plays against real ball players everyday instead of tow truck drivers and VCR repairmen.

You're about 2 decades off.

[k0kakw0rld]

Hakeem >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Not even close.

[Meticode]

Hakeem >>>>>>>>>>>>>

Not even close.

Hakeem gets so underappreciated.

[FKAri]

Hakeem. He had some rough years but at his peak he was incredible. And his game translates to today.

[Meticode]

Hakeem. He had some rough years but at his peak he was incredible. And his game translates to today.

No doubt. If Hakeem needed to be a 3 point shooter he had the ability to do it if he put the time in, but it wasn't called for him to do it in the 80s and 90s. His middy was wet.

[Full Court]

Hakeem had one of the biggest carry jobs ever.

Jokic beat the second worst finals team of the modern era (the Heat).

Jokic is top five of current players, but he gets a slightly overrated. His teammates bail him out a LOT. When the game's on the line, it's usually someone else putting the nail in the coffin.

[Baller234]

To me it's Hakeem and it's not close. Hakeem is hands down the most skilled big man to ever play and I don't care which all time legend you stack him up against. Sure you can argue that Wilt was more ahead of his time and Kareem was better at an earlier age, but Dream at his peak was the final evolution. His ability down low was unrivaled.

Jokic is a better passer and 3pt shooter, that's really about it. He's nowhere close to being as good of a scorer and it goes without saying he's not in the same league defensively. Hakeem wouldn't have to change a single thing about his game and he would still dominate today just fine. He would be destroying teams down low and drawing doubles on the regular. In fact the Rockets were the prototype when it came to surrounding a dominant big man with shooters, leading the league in 3 pointers both years they won the championship.

Hakeem went toe to toe with multiple all time HOF'ers at his position in the playoffs and in the finals... and he beat them all.

Sorry but Hakeem > Jokic and it's not much of a debate.

[imdaman99]

Hakeem shattered my dreams of the Knicks winning a chip. He was the best player by far that year and before anyone says they would have lost to the Bulls... shut the hell up, nobody cares. He was as good a big man I have ever seen :(

[ArbitraryWater]

To me it's Hakeem and it's not close. Hakeem is hands down the most skilled big man to ever play and I don't care which all time legend you stack him up against. Sure you can argue that Wilt was more ahead of his time and Kareem was better at an earlier age, but Dream at his peak was the final evolution. His ability down low was unrivaled.

Jokic is a better passer and 3pt shooter, that's really about it. He's nowhere close to being as good of a scorer and it goes without saying he's not in the same league defensively. Hakeem wouldn't have to change a single thing about his game and he would still dominate today just fine. He would be destroying teams down low and drawing doubles on the regular. In fact the Rockets were the prototype when it came to surrounding a dominant big man with shooters, leading the league in 3 pointers both years they won the championship.

Hakeem went toe to toe with multiple all time HOF'ers at his position in the playoffs and in the finals... and he beat them all.

Sorry but Hakeem > Jokic and it's not much of a debate.


really? Hes not a better mid range shooter, facilitator, PnR passer, can orchestrate the offense like a QB? Boiling all that down to "better passer" is false. Hes very close in post-up efficiency also if not matching Hakeem.

Hes just a much bigger offensive force.

[Reggie43]

Hakeem was better not even an argument

[ArbitraryWater]

Hakeem was better not even an argument

Boomers be like

[rmt]

We can pretty much replace Hakeem with Giannis and say who do you want, Jokic or Giannis?

The answer is Jokic.

That is an unlikely comparison - Hakeem is one of the most skilled basketball players (who was it Kobe sought out?) vs Giannis ...

I would pick Hakeem - who actually played against other ATG centers - not what passes for centers these days.

[HoopsNY]

Hakeem PS '86-'95: 29/12/3/2/4 on .533 FG%
Jokic PS '19-'25: 27/12/8/1/1 on .528 FG%

Jokic has him on the TS% (.614% to .575%), cause he shoots threes. But Hakeem's ability to be a two player I think moves the needle that much more. This is one of those arguments where you have to decide if you prefer having peak Magic or peak Hakeem? I'd rather have Hakeem, but I wouldn't fault anyone for choosing Jokic for this era, especially if he wins a chip this season.

[rawimpact]

Hakeem PS '86-'95: 29/12/3/2/4 on .533 FG%
Jokic PS '19-'25: 27/12/8/1/1 on .528 FG%

Jokic has him on the TS% (.614% to .575%), cause he shoots threes. But Hakeem's ability to be a two player I think moves the needle that much more. This is one of those arguments where you have to decide if you prefer having peak Magic or peak Hakeem? I'd rather have Hakeem, but I wouldn't fault anyone for choosing Jokic for this era, especially if he wins a chip this season.

These numbers dont really compare when there's 30 year difference between careers... avg number of points per game in 1990 was 101 and 2022 was 115. Lets not even talk about the diff. between bigs and gameplay differences between the eras.

[ILLsmak]

We can pretty much replace Hakeem with Giannis and say who do you want, Jokic or Giannis?

The answer is Jokic.

Elaborate haha

-Smak

[ImKobe]

Hakeem is a better player at his peak due to his 2-way play.

[HoopsNY]

These numbers dont really compare when there's 30 year difference between careers... avg number of points per game in 1990 was 101 and 2022 was 115. Lets not even talk about the diff. between bigs and gameplay differences between the eras.

Yea for sure. I think that weighs into it, which is why I said it's kinda like the debate between peak Magic and peak Hakeem.

[90sgoat]

In the end, it isn't your stats or your individual skills, but how you win.

Jokic lifts up his teammates like no other player ever.

[Baller234]

really? Hes not a better mid range shooter, facilitator, PnR passer, can orchestrate the offense like a QB? Boiling all that down to "better passer" is false. Hes very close in post-up efficiency also if not matching Hakeem.

Hes just a much bigger offensive force.

I don't really care about stats or "efficiency" when comparing two guys that played 30 years apart. That's a worthless exercise if you ask me. It's a totally different game now.

I wasn't trying to downplay Jokic simply by saying he was a better passer. Obviously passing is a huge part of the game and Jokic can run point on offense which is something Hakeem can't do, but at the end of the day scoring is the most valuable skill in basketball.

There's no way I can give the nod to Jokic when it comes to scoring. Great player obviously but he's just no Hakeem. He's awkward, he's lumbering and too often when it's late in the game he costs his team with his sloppy play. He looks very limited at times which is why the Nuggets so often have to lean on Murray and the other guys to bail them out.

Olajuwon just had the god tier skill set. The footwork, the full range of moves he had, the post up moves, the face up moves, etc. He could beat you in so many different ways and he never looked like he was struggling. If it's a tight game and I need a bucket there's no question I would rather feed Hakeem in the post than Jokic. Like that's not even a debate. So Hakeem might not be able to "run" an offense like Jokic but he can definitely anchor the offense in a much more meaningful way.

Plus you can't ignore the fact that Jokic is a ghost on defense. That's another way he hurts his team in a huge way. He gets KILLED out there. Meanwhile Hakeem is in the discussion for being the best defensive big of all time.

[90sgoat]

In the end, it isn't your stats or your individual skills, but how you win.

Jokic lifts up his teammates like no other player ever.

[Baller234]

In the end, it isn't your stats or your individual skills, but how you win.

Jokic lifts up his teammates like no other player ever.

Hakeem wasn't a winner? Lol he led his team to back to back championships. His teammates from those years speak about him as if he were a god.

Jokic is great and will also go down in history but come on let's not get crazy here. What you said about Jokic also applies to Hakeem.

[ImKobe]

In the end, it isn't your stats or your individual skills, but how you win.

Jokic lifts up his teammates like no other player ever.

Hakeem lifted his team on both ends. That '94 title run is as big of a carry job as any title ever.

[StrongLurk]

Jokic is the most skilled offensive player ever by the way. There is literally nothing he can't do at a high level on offense. His factual stats show he's basically Shaq in the post, Dirk on the perimeter, with Nash level passing.

[SouBeachTalents]

Boomers be like
He's the same guy who argued the 90's Knicks would be better with Starks than Brunson, just comically biased :lol

[tpols]

To me it's Hakeem and it's not close. Hakeem is hands down the most skilled big man to ever play and I don't care which all time legend you stack him up against. Sure you can argue that Wilt was more ahead of his time and Kareem was better at an earlier age, but Dream at his peak was the final evolution. His ability down low was unrivaled.

Jokic is a better passer and 3pt shooter, that's really about it. He's nowhere close to being as good of a scorer and it goes without saying he's not in the same league defensively. Hakeem wouldn't have to change a single thing about his game and he would still dominate today just fine. He would be destroying teams down low and drawing doubles on the regular. In fact the Rockets were the prototype when it came to surrounding a dominant big man with shooters, leading the league in 3 pointers both years they won the championship.

Hakeem went toe to toe with multiple all time HOF'ers at his position in the playoffs and in the finals... and he beat them all.

Sorry but Hakeem > Jokic and it's not much of a debate.

Jokic is a much better offensive player period. Not only his individual production, but the offenses he's led were consistently much better than Hakeem.

On offense Hakeem was just a scorer. He didn't elevate teammates or run any complicated offensive team sets. His passing and playmaking werent dynamic or special. Just a basic iso scorer on offense. A great one but Jokic scoring has been even better. He puts the ball in the hoop far more efficiently.

It's like the reason a lot of people have magic > Hakeem. How can that be since Hakeem smokes Magic on defense? Because Magics offense was far more dynamic than hakeems, elevated teammates more, and produced way better all time great offenses. Same ting with Yolk.

[tpols]

There's no way I can give the nod to Jokic when it comes to scoring. Great player obviously but he's just no Hakeem. He's awkward, he's lumbering and too often when it's late in the game he costs his team with his sloppy play.


I can't believe he said that about Jokic.

:biggums:

We done with the 90s for real. This is just next level.

[ImKobe]

Jokic is a much better offensive player period. Not only his individual production, but the offenses he's led were consistently much better than Hakeem.

On offense Hakeem was just a scorer. He didn't elevate teammates or run any complicated offensive team sets. His passing and playmaking werent dynamic or special. Just a basic iso scorer on offense. A great one but Jokic scoring has been even better. He puts the ball in the hoop far more efficiently.

It's like the reason a lot of people have magic > Hakeem. How can that be since Hakeem smokes Magic on defense? Because Magics offense was far more dynamic than hakeems, elevated teammates more, and produced way better all time great offenses. Same ting with Yolk.

Let's ignore the fact that the league is a lot smaller and Jokic just struggled quite a bit vs Zubac who would be an average big man by 90s standards. Now make Jokic defend the bigs of the 90s while also trying to score against them in the post all game. lol.

"basic iso scorer" yeah ok

[tpols]

Let's ignore the fact that the league is a lot smaller and Jokic just struggled quite a bit vs Zubac who would be an average big man by 90s standards. Now make Jokic defend the bigs of the 90s while also trying to score against them in the post all game. lol.

"basic iso scorer" yeah ok

24/12/10 on 50% FG and 45% 3pt is struggling?

He averaged a triple double on good shooting and led his team to the win. This what were talking about. If this is a down series for Jokic... :oldlol:

Oh man...

[Baller234]

Jokic is a much better offensive player period. Not only his individual production, but the offenses he's led were consistently much better than Hakeem.

On offense Hakeem was just a scorer. He didn't elevate teammates or run any complicated offensive team sets. His passing and playmaking werent dynamic or special. Just a basic iso scorer on offense. A great one but Jokic scoring has been even better. He puts the ball in the hoop far more efficiently.

It's like the reason a lot of people have magic > Hakeem. How can that be since Hakeem smokes Magic on defense? Because Magics offense was far more dynamic than hakeems, elevated teammates more, and produced way better all time great offenses. Same ting with Yolk.

Magic is ahead of Hakeem on most lists because of his overall career accomplishments and his 5 championships. In terms of peak value as a player I think there's a real debate to be had between the two. In an all time draft you can't go wrong choosing either guy.

As for your Hakeem/Jokic comparison... I'm sorry you can't just arrive at a forgone conclusion looking at numbers and comparing them across decades. That is really low IQ analysis. The league is totally different now and defense is far more lax so the numbers are totally arbitrary and you can spin them any way you want. There's really no telling what Hakeem would be able to do in this era. Mind you there's far less rim protection now, the spacing is better so he would have way more room to operate... and he would be surrounded by elite shooting in every direction.

I blame ESPN for all of this. They bear significant responsibility for the shift in how basketball is analyzed today, often prioritizing surface level stats over nuanced and contextual understanding. Because anyone that thinks Jokic was better at "putting the ball in the hoop" than Hakeem just doesn't have eyes.

[tpols]

It's not even looking at just numbers. It looking at their games and analyzing it from a qualitative perspective.

Jokic is an elite 3 level scorer and passer. Post, midrange, and deep he's all elite scoring and passing the ball. Hakeem is only elite in the midrange and post not deep, so he's a 2 level scorer. And when comes to passing out of each level he's just mid at best. In fact early in his career / prime he had a rep as being tunnel visioned and black hole.

Look up the offenses they led relative to their leagues. I'm not comparing directly across eras. Look at the relative ranks. Jokic can lead #1 offense. Most of Hakeems offenses were average at best ranked against their own era.

[rawimpact]

It's not even looking at just numbers. It looking at their games and analyzing it from a qualitative perspective.

Jokic is an elite 3 level scorer and passer. Post, midrange, and deep he's all elite scoring and passing the ball. Hakeem is only elite in the midrange and post not deep, so he's a 2 level scorer. And when comes to passing out of each level he's just mid at best. In fact early in his career / prime he had a rep as being tunnel visioned and black hole.

Look up the offenses they led relative to their leagues. I'm not comparing directly across eras. Look at the relative ranks. Jokic can lead #1 offense. Most of Hakeems offenses were average at best ranked against their own era.

Yeah but Hakeem isn't just elite, he is arguably GOAT in the paint.

[Baller234]

It's not even looking at just numbers. It looking at their games and analyzing it from a qualitative perspective.

Jokic is an elite 3 level scorer and passer. Post, midrange, and deep he's all elite scoring and passing the ball. Hakeem is only elite in the midrange and post not deep, so he's a 2 level scorer. And when comes to passing out of each level he's just mid at best. In fact early in his career / prime he had a rep as being tunnel visioned and black hole.

Look up the offenses they led relative to their leagues. I'm not comparing directly across eras. Look at the relative ranks. Jokic can lead #1 offense. Most of Hakeems offenses were average at best ranked against their own era.

Jokic is not elite in the post when compared to a guy like Hakeem. The gap between them is very vast. He doesn't have the array of moves or the quickness and athleticism. Yes Jokic is a great player and more often than not he can get the job done, but I'm sorry there ARE moments where he looks sloppy and inept. You rarely if ever saw that from Hakeem.

I mean sure it's great that Jokic can spread the floor and shoot threes but that's not all it takes to be dominant. Hakeem wouldn't have to shoot threes today because chances are everyone else on his team can shoot them. He would simply function as the foundational anchor. No he can't run point like Jokic can but when you factor the other things he brings to the table, like god tier post play and god tier defense, I'm sorry give me Hakeem.

[ArbitraryWater]

He's the same guy who argued the 90's Knicks would be better with Starks than Brunson, just comically biased :lol

Oh thats not even an argument man :lol

[FKAri]

Let's ignore the fact that the league is a lot smaller and Jokic just struggled quite a bit vs Zubac who would be an average big man by 90s standards. Now make Jokic defend the bigs of the 90s while also trying to score against them in the post all game. lol.

"basic iso scorer" yeah ok

Once you get past the top 5, the 90s bigs weren't any different from those in any era post 60's. Zubac clears the vast majority of them. That being said, Jokic's dominance has a lot to do with his size advantage in a smaller league. But I dunno if I hold that against him because all the guys with the size to match him get played off the court. He doesn't. That's special.

[j3lademaster]

Being a two way big now vs in the 90's is completely different. pnr and ball movement are more advanced than ever and bigs are run ragged trying to move around vs basically camping in the paint in the 90's. Shaq didn't even want to close out on 15 footers against Big Country Reeves, let alone 3's. It'd be much tougher for Hakeem to have the same impact on both ends of the floor right now, and I'm saying this as one of the biggest advocates for Olajuwon.

[Jasper]

saw both ... joker 100 %

[StrongLurk]

It's not even looking at just numbers. It looking at their games and analyzing it from a qualitative perspective.

Jokic is an elite 3 level scorer and passer. Post, midrange, and deep he's all elite scoring and passing the ball. Hakeem is only elite in the midrange and post not deep, so he's a 2 level scorer. And when comes to passing out of each level he's just mid at best. In fact early in his career / prime he had a rep as being tunnel visioned and black hole.

Look up the offenses they led relative to their leagues. I'm not comparing directly across eras. Look at the relative ranks. Jokic can lead #1 offense. Most of Hakeems offenses were average at best ranked against their own era.

Tpols, everyone is just ignorant of how good Jokic is. They simply haven't done the research or watched the games.

We really got people claiming Jokic isn't good in the paint (when he's actually been the best post/paint scorer for years in the NBA) and claiming Jokic isn't an elite shooter (when is reality Jokic has elite efficiency at every conceivable spot on the floor).

Jokic over the last 5 years has a legitimate argument for most impactful and skilled offensive player ever. It's not hyperbole.

[Baller234]

Tpols, everyone is just ignorant of how good Jokic is. They simply haven't done the research or watched the games.

We really got people claiming Jokic isn't good in the paint (when he's actually been the best post/paint scorer for years in the NBA) and claiming Jokic isn't an elite shooter (when is reality Jokic has elite efficiency at every conceivable spot on the floor).

Joker over the last 5 years has a legitimate argument for most impactful and skilled offensive player ever. It's not hyperbole.

Most impactful and skilled. :oldlol:

My dude, he has ONE championship. If he is the most impactful offensive player ever, then why is Murray so often the guy for them? Guy completely took over in some of those games. Without Murray they don't win. If Joker were a bucket like you claim he is, they wouldn't have to go to Murray.

I love Joker but you guys really need to stop jumping the gun. There are guys who won MULTIPLE championships on the strength of being a dominant unstoppable scorer. LOTS of guys with more jewelry than Joker because they were a bucket.

[Reggie43]

The obvious thing is that Jokic wouldnt look as good against 90s defenses, rules and style of play.

Imagine him going up against the Knicks frontline of Ewing, Oakley and Mason who are all tough defenders who could give him different looks defensively.

A guy like Mason is basically built to guard him because he is quick enough to guard swingmen in the perimeter and strong enough to guard centers in the post

[StrongLurk]

Most impactful and skilled. :oldlol:

My dude, he has ONE championship. If he is the most impactful offensive player ever, then why is Murray so often the guy for them? Guy completely took over in some of those games. Without Murray they don't win. If Joker were a bucket like you claim he is, they wouldn't have to go to Murray.

I love Joker but you guys really need to stop jumping the gun. There are guys who won MULTIPLE championships on the strength of being a dominant unstoppable scorer. LOTS of guys with more jewelry than Joker because they were a bucket.

Murray has been healthy once since the bubble. Murray missed the 2021 and 2022 playoffs, and was completely hobbled in the 2024 playoffs.

He was fully healthy in 2023, and Jokic wins. You can't judge Jokic of rings because he has way less talent than most all-time greats with multiple rings. Jokic still hasn't had a single teammate make all-star, all-nba, or all-nba defense teams lol. No MVP player has ever had less talent in their first 10 years of playing. Remember, MJ himself was dropping 40 bombs in playoff series but losing every time until Pippen developed in an all-nba player.

Also, Jokic never HAD to have Murray win games you moron. Murray being able to play high level ball is because Jokic is that good of a floor general and everyone plays off of Jokic.

Using your own dumb logic, you'd have to claim Magic Johnson had to have teammates win games for him because Magic wasn't always the leading scorer. Just dumb stuff from you.

[StrongLurk]

The obvious thing is that Jokic wouldnt look as good against 90s defenses, rules and style of play.

Imagine him going up against the Knicks frontline of Ewing, Oakley and Mason who are all tough defenders who could give him different looks defensively.

A guy like Mason is basically built to guard him because he is quick enough to guard swingmen in the perimeter and strong enough to guard centers in the post

Bro, Jokic is basically a Dirk level perimeter shooter. Jokic would literally just shoot over Mason. Also Ewing/Oakley would have to go out of the paint to guard Jokic and Jokic has the dribbling and footwork ability to blow right past them.

[Baller234]

Murray has been healthy once since the bubble. Murray missed the 2021 and 2022 playoffs, and was completely hobbled in the 2024 playoffs.

He was fully healthy in 2023, and Jokic wins. You can't judge Jokic of rings because he has way less talent than most all-time greats with multiple rings. Jokic still hasn't had a single teammate make all-star, all-nba, or all-nba defense teams lol. No MVP player has ever had less talent in their first 10 years of playing.

I'm really not holding Joker's one ring against him. He might win another one. Hey I hope he does, but he actually has to PROVE that first. You can't say he didn't have a chance last year. Right now he just has one.

If Jokic can't lead his team over the hump because Murray is "hobbled", then he's probably not the all time offensive player you think he is. Being great on offense also means being able to score.

Scottie Pippen was "hobbled" during the last dance.


EDIT:

I just saw your edit... are you serious???

There were MULTIPLE possessions down the stretch in those finals where they just gave the ball to Murray and let him go nuts in ISO.

Anyone who thinks the Nuggets could have won those games without Murray doesn't have an effing clue.

[tontoz]

How about Jokic and Hakeem on the same team? How scary would that be?

[bizil]

Peak-prime wise, the only centers I would take over Joker are Shaq, Wilt, Dream, and Kareem. And I've felt that way for a couple of years on now. For the Joker to be on that level before he hit 30 years of age (he's 30 now though), that says a lot. He's the KING of triple doubles among centers. And when his career is over, it's LIKELY he will be #1 in triple doubles of all time AMONG ALL PLAYERS! He's the best offensive center of all time when you look at scoring and assists numbers as a package. We all know he's the best passing center of all time. And scoring skillset wise, he's among the top 5 centers of all time as well.

When it comes to scoring, passing, rebounding, and defense for centers, I value passing ability LAST among those four catergories. Dream can score just as good or better than Joker, can rebound just as good, and is he's arguably the best defensive center of all time. From there, Dream would be the TOUGHEST MATCHUP for Joker when you factor both sides of the court. Joker FOR SURE would get his numbers. Cause he's THAT DAMN GOOD! But the Dream would make him less efficient. If Joker floats out the three point line, Dream for DAMN SURE could defend him out there BETTER than any of the other top 10 GOAT centers. And on the block, Joker wouldn't be able to bully him down low. Plus the Dream was freak athlete on top of it. Inside the three point line, the Dream has a better scoring skillset than Joker. And that's saying a lot. In OTHER WORDS, the Dream has more answers to COUNTERACT Joker than any of the other GOAT centers.

GOAT wise, Joker could VERY WELL pass the Dream by on the GOAT center list. He's that damn good and accomplished. But on a peak-prime level, I go slightly Dream. Which is no knock because Dream at his best when you factor both sides of the court, skill level, and athletic ability as a package, is the best center of all time. Hell the Dream's peak is ARGUABLY top 10 of all time PERIOD regardless of position. Joker can make the same claim too. Which is why this is a great comparison! The centers MOST EQUIPPED to go head up with the Joker are in the past eras. Joker would put in work on ANYBODY ANYTIME ANYWHERE! Just saying he doesn't have ENOUGH COMPETITION at the center spot in today's game to truly push him.

[StrongLurk]

I'm really not holding Joker's one ring against him. He might win another one. Hey I hope he does, but he actually has to PROVE that first. You can't say he didn't have a chance last year. Right now he just has one.

If Jokic can't lead his team over the hump because Murray is "hobbled", then he's probably not the all time offensive player you think he is. Being great on offense also means being able to score.

Scottie Pippen was "hobbled" during the last dance.


EDIT:

I just saw your edit... are you serious???

There were MULTIPLE possessions down the stretch in those finals where they just gave the ball to Murray and let him go nuts in ISO.

Anyone who thinks the Nuggets could have won those games without Murray doesn't have an effing clue.

Bro, Jokic averages 29ppg on 61.7 TS% in the playoffs over the last 5 years. He's an all-time great scorer. He also averages 8.2 assists to 3.4 turnovers. He clearly has an argument for most impactful offensive player.

Murray makes clutch plays, so does Jokic. Murray playing well in 2023 doesn't take away from Jokic at all.

Again, do you think Magic Johnson wasn't a high impact offensive player because he usually averaging less than 20ppg?

Also MJ barely won with a hobble Pippen in a weak era (late 90's). The 98 Bulls don't win anything like post 2008 lol. But again, Murray didn't play AT ALL in 2021 or 2022, so we know MJ wouldn't win anything with Pippen missing entire playoffs...

[Baller234]

Bro, Jokic averages 29ppg on 61.7 TS% in the playoffs over the last 5 years. He's an all-time great scorer. He also averages 8.2 assists to 3.4 turnovers. He clearly has an argument for most impactful offensive player.

Murray makes clutch plays, so does Jokic. Murray playing well in 2023 doesn't take away from Jokic at all.

Again, do you think Magic Johnson wasn't a high impact offensive player because he usually averaging less than 20ppg?

Also MJ barely won with a hobble Pippen in a weak era (late 90's). The 98 Bulls don't win anything like post 2008 lol. But again, Murray didn't play AT ALL in 2021 or 2022, so we know MJ wouldn't win anything with Pippen missing entire playoffs...

This dude is talking about averages. I'm talking about ACTUAL games. ACTUAL moments.

There were WHOLE stretches of finals games where Denver went to Murray over Jokic. Mind you we are not talking about some all time great talent. Very good player of course but you said it yourself he never even made all-star. Good in spurts but his talent was never undeniable.

So what does that say about Jokic that in some cases you're better off going to JAMAL MURRAY. :oldlol:

Could you imagine Michael Jordan EVER having to defer to Jamal Murray? :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[bizil]

How about Jokic and Hakeem on the same team? How scary would that be?

Crazy shit is IT WOULD WORK GREAT!! And their inside-outside game would be scary af! Dream could easily slide to the PF and be able to defend any type of PF pretty much effectively. And the Joker would thrive ANYWHERE on the court offensively. So he could give Hakeem free reign to dominate on down low. And the Dream's midrange game is great so Joker could slide into the post and get busy. If I could pair any two of the top 10 GOAT centers together and slide one to the PF, I think Dream-Joker would be the most seamless fit!

[StrongLurk]

This dude is talking about averages. I'm talking about ACTUAL games. ACTUAL moments.

There were WHOLE stretches of finals games where Denver went to Murray over Jokic. Mind you we are not talking about some all time great talent. Very good player of course but you said it yourself he never even made all-star. Good in spurts but his talent was never undeniable.

So what does that say about Jokic that in some cases you're better off going to JAMAL MURRAY. :oldlol:

Could you imagine Michael Jordan EVER having to defer to Jamal Murray? :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

Again, Jokic never HAD to defer to Murray. It's just better to play team ball and use the hot hand. Jokic is an unselfish player and doesn't need to chuck 30 shots a game. Of course Mike is a better scorer but Jokic is a much better floor general. Jokic is legit a point center lol.

Either way, Jokic is better than Hakeem.

[Baller234]

Again, Jokic never HAD to defer to Murray. It's just better to play team ball and use the hot hand. Jokic is an unselfish player and doesn't need to chuck 30 shots a game. Of course Mike is a better scorer but Jokic is a much better floor general. Jokic is legit a point center lol.

Either way, Jokic is better than Hakeem.

Lol it's not considered "feeding the hot hand" when that guy is scoring totally unassisted. It means he's your go-to guy. It's not like they were playing through Joker and he just happened to find Murray. There are plenty of times down the stretch where the team plays THROUGH Murray.

I don't know about you but if I'm just a run of the mill player I would rather the best guy on my team be the one who demands the ball himself and leads by example. If Jokic is a floor general than Jordan is a spartan king.

If I'm going to war, I want the spartan king.

[bizil]

Dream, Shaq, Wilt, and Kareem are the ONLY CENTERS I would take over Joker on peak-prime level. Joker is gonna do his thing no matter what. But the other four icons I named were so dominant. And could put up stat lines that are CRAZY SICK in addition to making Joker less efficient. I just think it would come down to shit like that. Plus Wilt and Kareem were very good passing centers in their own rights.

[StrongLurk]

Lol it's not considered "feeding the hot hand" when that guy is scoring totally unassisted. It means he's your go-to guy. It's not like they were playing through Joker and he just happened to find Murray. There are plenty of times down the stretch where the team plays THROUGH Murray.

I don't know about you but if I'm just a run of the mill player I would rather the best guy on my team be the one who demands the ball himself and leads by example. If Jokic is a floor general than Jordan is a spartan king.

If I'm going to war, I want the spartan king.

Uh okay? Great? Jokic put up 30/14/7 on 58/42/84 splits in the 2023 finals. It was a completely bonkers performance.

[Im Still Ballin]

These numbers dont really compare when there's 30 year difference between careers... avg number of points per game in 1990 was 101 and 2022 was 115. Lets not even talk about the diff. between bigs and gameplay differences between the eras.

Hakeem PS '86-'95: 26.7 points per 75 poss; 107 TS+
Jokic PS '19-'25: 27.5 points per 75 poss; 107 TS+

Most of that PPG increase has come from the guards and wings.

[Im Still Ballin]

Jokic is not elite in the post when compared to a guy like Hakeem. The gap between them is very vast. He doesn't have the array of moves or the quickness and athleticism.

:roll:

They're both all-time great post players. You can make an argument for either. Passing is a huge part of post-up play. And guys in his era like Kareem, McHale, Dantley, and Barkley were just as good and could be argued as better than Dream from the pivot.

Don't get swayed by the highlight reel; Olajuwon could do a lot of different moves, but he was often one-note, reverting to the baseline fadeaway. His shot selection wasn't as good as that of other great post players. McHale outperformed him as a post-up player in the 1986 NBA Finals.

And quickness and athleticism are features, not indicators of efficacy. Dantley, McHale, and even Daugherty had fewer of those qualities, yet had superior 2PT%.

[Im Still Ballin]

Regarding the era stuff:

It's not a huge deal as some are making out to be, especially with a player as offensively dynamic and versatile as Jokic. He'd have loved to have played in the Illegal Defense era of '81 to '01. Easy post entries all night. His offensive impact would be more or less the same. His defense would be better, though. Or less easily to exploit. You could legitimately play him with another big.

A big and slow, yet smooth and skilled guy like Daugherty was leading the league in TS% back then. McHale led the NBA in FG% twice on high volume. Dantley shot 56.3% FG across 7 years in Utah. Bill Walton, Alvan Adams, and Jeff Ruland were shooting and passing from the elbows. Outlet passes, face-up slashes from the mid-range spots, even bigs shooting spot-up threes (Sikma, Laimbeer). A 6'9" guy handling the ball.

Nikola could play his usual game back then. The distribution of shot/play type might be a little different, but it doesn't matter because he's good at everything.

[Im Still Ballin]

Hakeem in today's NBA would be like a healthy Embiid but with Amen Thompson's athleticism and motor, better durability, but worse shooting, strength, and foul drawing.

Those physical upgrades would amplify the defensive impact, and Embiid's defensive numbers are actually really good. Check his RAPM. Would improve per-possession impact AND productivity. It would be reflected in the box score, player-tracking data, play-by-play numbers, and advanced statistics. More blocks, steals, deflections, charges, forced turnovers, stops, higher STOP%, etc.

Would have the same offensive weaknesses: limited playmaking and questionable shot selection.

A better player, for sure. No doubt. A scoring game more suited to the playoffs. He'd actually translate his regular-season play into the postseason, which Joel has failed to do.

[Im Still Ballin]

The problem with building around Hakeem is a limited team offensive ceiling. There's only so much you can do with limited playmaking and shot selection.

The problem with building around Jokic is a limited team defensive ceiling. There's only so much you can do with limited paint protection.

[Axe]

To me it's Hakeem and it's not close. Hakeem is hands down the most skilled big man to ever play and I don't care which all time legend you stack him up against. Sure you can argue that Wilt was more ahead of his time and Kareem was better at an earlier age, but Dream at his peak was the final evolution. His ability down low was unrivaled.

Jokic is a better passer and 3pt shooter, that's really about it. He's nowhere close to being as good of a scorer and it goes without saying he's not in the same league defensively. Hakeem wouldn't have to change a single thing about his game and he would still dominate today just fine. He would be destroying teams down low and drawing doubles on the regular. In fact the Rockets were the prototype when it came to surrounding a dominant big man with shooters, leading the league in 3 pointers both years they won the championship.

Hakeem went toe to toe with multiple all time HOF'ers at his position in the playoffs and in the finals... and he beat them all.

Sorry but Hakeem > Jokic and it's not much of a debate.
Hakeem is great but joker has had better competition out west regardless if he hasn't beaten a 50-win team in the playoffs yet. Alongside having multiple league mvps.

The homosexual mongoloid above you is a deepthroating psychopath, btw. (https://i.ibb.co/gDsySW3/IMG-20230603-203842.jpg)

[plowking]

Regarding the era stuff:

It's not a huge deal as some are making out to be, especially with a player as offensively dynamic and versatile as Jokic. He'd have loved to have played in the Illegal Defense era of '81 to '01. Easy post entries all night. His offensive impact would be more or less the same. His defense would be better, though. Or less easily to exploit. You could legitimately play him with another big.



I know its easy to call out the big, slow looking white dude as bad on defense - just because he is who he is visually. I mean - Luka is flat out horrible on defense. Way worse than what Harden ever was when he was getting called out for it.

But Jokic is absolutely fine on defense, and a net positive. Kawhi and Powell were bothered by him a fair bit when they got matched up, simply due to length and smarts. He isn't actually someone they target on defense - and that goes for all the teams in the NBA.

The only thing he is poor at is when guys come off the pick and he has to step up to contest floaters that come down the middle. He is actually fairly elite on a lot of defensive schemes and metrics.

[Im Still Ballin]

I know its easy to call out the big, slow looking white dude as bad on defense - just because he is who he is visually. I mean - Luka is flat out horrible on defense. Way worse than what Harden ever was when he was getting called out for it.

But Jokic is absolutely fine on defense, and a net positive. Kawhi and Powell were bothered by him a fair bit when they got matched up, simply due to length and smarts. He isn't actually someone they target on defense - and that goes for all the teams in the NBA.

The only thing he is poor at is when guys come off the pick and he has to step up to contest floaters that come down the middle. He is actually fairly elite on a lot of defensive schemes and metrics.
Oh, I agree. I have Jokic as a positive on defense. Here's what I wrote about it a few weeks back:


DBPM is just BPM - OBPM. The truth is that it's hard to separate/isolate offense and defense. A great offensive player limits opponent transition and early offense opportunities. A great defensive player does the opposite but for his team.

What we do know about Jokic is that he has one of the best defensive rebounding impacts on record per his career regularized adjusted (RA) four factors. +5.2% DREB, which is tied #1 all-time in the 1996-97 to 2024-25 age-curve adjusted database. Nikola significantly limits opponents' second-chance opportunities. Additionally, his DFTR (+3.5%) is strong, and he generates a healthy amount of steals, deflections, and kicked ball violations.

Impact, whether offense or defense, comes in various forms. Jokic's defensive value is of the positional, possession-based variety.

Per RA four factors, he has similarities to Nurkic, Vucevic, Nene, Jason Collins, Domantas Sabonis, and Steven Adams. Here's how they rank in DRAPM and RA four factors:

Jokic: +2.0 DRAPM; +0.3% DEFG, -0.3% DTOV, +5.2% DREB, +3.5% DFTR
Nurkic: +3.0 DRAPM; +1.0% DEFG, 0.0% DTOV, +4.7% DREB, +2.9% DFTR
Vucevic: +0.3 DRAPM; -0.8% DEFG, -0.7% DTOV, +4.7% DREB, +3.7% DFTR
Nene: +4.2 DRAPM; +1.2% DEFG, +0.8% DTOV, +4.8% DREB, +2.5% DFTR
Jason Collins: +4.0 DRAPM; +0.9% DEFG, +0.9% DTOV, +4.2% DREB, +3.3% DFTR
Domantas Sabonis: +1.2 DRAPM; 0.0% DEFG, +0.3% DTOV, +3.4% DREB, +2.5% DFTR
Steven Adams: +0.9 DRAPM; 0.0% DEFG, -0.8% DTOV, +4.0% DREB, +3.5% DFTR

Collins and Nene played in a different era so the comparison isn't as straightforward as with the other guys. Jokic is somewhere between Sabonis/Adams and Nurkic. The numbers may undersell Nikola a little bit too because of his large offensive load. He seems to play better defense in fourth quarters when avoiding fouls is less important.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVPzF57GqOQ

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/44346405/nikola-jokic-quietly-league-analytics-defender


Early in his career, the Nuggets played far more drop coverage on defense, with Jokic often sinking into the paint for rim protection. In recent years, though, he has played much further up against pick-and-rolls -- closer to the arc -- as a way to impede the ball handler and force complicated passes to the roll man.


But for the Joker -- currently on pace to lead NBA centers in deflections (240) for a sixth straight season -- a split second is plenty of time to knock a pass out of the way.

"We have him up at the level [of the screen] a lot, and when teams try to find that pass to the big, to get behind us, Nikola's shown that he has an uncanny ability to break those passes up," Denver coach Michael Malone said. "Hands. Feet. Whatever he's got to use."

And Jokic uses his feet a lot.


Indeed, in recent years no one in the NBA has stopped the game more by kicking the ball than Jokic. Since the start of 2020, the superstar has been whistled for a whopping 127 kicked-ball violations, between his regular-season and postseason games. In the 2022-23 season alone, Jokic logged 56 kicked balls; more than any other team did. For perspective, the league's next-closest player, Chicago Bulls center Nikola Vucevic, has recorded just 66 kicked-ball violations total since the start of 2020.

Aside from the sheer wildness of those numbers -- or the fact that Jokic is extremely balanced, having committed 67 violations with his right foot and 60 with his left -- is the idea that the center has essentially found a cheat code on defense. In being able to time the plays perfectly, Jokic can effectively press pause and short-circuit the opposing team's offense whenever he feels like it, forcing a possession to restart.

[Baller234]

Hakeem is great but joker has had better competition out west regardless if he hasn't beaten a 50-win team in the playoffs yet. Alongside having multiple league mvps.

The homosexual mongoloid above you is a deepthroating psychopath, btw. (https://i.ibb.co/gDsySW3/IMG-20230603-203842.jpg)

Jokic had better competition?? What does that even mean??

They played 30 years apart. :oldlol:

Not even shitting on Joker but what kind of retarded statement is this.

[Baller234]

The problem with building around Hakeem is a limited team offensive ceiling. There's only so much you can do with limited playmaking and shot selection.

The problem with building around Jokic is a limited team defensive ceiling. There's only so much you can do with limited paint protection.

Dude... WHAT???

A team built around Hakeem has a LIMITED offensive ceiling?? :oldlol:

So having the most skilled low post big in history doesn't add anything to your offense?? :oldlol:

Olajuwon doesn't have to run point. You see in basketball we have these things called teammates.

Could you imagine a single coach throughout history being offered Hakeem in his prime and saying, "Geez I dunno doesn't that limit us offensively??"

:oldlol:

[tpols]

Dude... WHAT???

A team built around Hakeem has a LIMITED offensive ceiling?? :oldlol:

So having the most skilled low post big in history doesn't add anything to your offense?? :oldlol:

Olajuwon doesn't have to run point. You see in basketball we have these things called teammates.

Could you imagine a single coach throughout history being offered Hakeem in his prime and saying, "Geez I dunno doesn't that limit us offensively??"

:oldlol:

I think what he means is relative to other GOAT level players and teams dude.

Hakeem played a long time in the NBA and never came close to leading a top ranked #1 offense. It might be possible you were blinded and wow'ed by his fancy moves and aesthetics. Jokic doesn't really care about that, putting the ball in the basket is putting the ball in the basket. He's unbelievably crafty for his size (much bigger heavier than Hakeem) though.

Did you watch him dominate the paint last night in Denvers win? Probably not.

[Im Still Ballin]

Dude... WHAT???

A team built around Hakeem has a LIMITED offensive ceiling?? :oldlol:

Yeah. Isolation-heavy offense, especially with limited playmaking, can only elevate a team's offense (ORtg) so far. Building around a guy implies the offense runs through him. There's a ceiling to how good an offense can be with Hakeem putting up a high volume of shots as the primary option. And it's more limited compared to many of the greats.


So having the most skilled low post big in history doesn't add anything to your offense?? :oldlol:

Strawman. Never said the bolded. Stop misrepresenting my post.

And what do you mean by "most skilled low post big in history"? Skilled is a vague term; it doesn't imply efficacy. If we're talking about the best/most impactful, I'd rank Kareem, Shaq, and McHale above him. Maybe Dantley and Jokic, too.

Olajuwon has the best highlight reel, though.


Olajuwon doesn't have to run point. You see in basketball we have these things called teammates.

Not relevant to what's being discussed. Red Herring.


Could you imagine a single coach throughout history being offered Hakeem in his prime and saying, "Geez I dunno doesn't that limit us offensively??"

:oldlol:

Strawman for the second time. That's a technical foul. One more and you're out of here.

[Baller234]

I think what he means is relative to other GOAT level players and teams dude.

Hakeem played a long time in the NBA and never came close to leading a top ranked #1 offense. It might be possible you were blinded and wow'ed by his fancy moves and aesthetics. Jokic doesn't really care about that, putting the ball in the basket is putting the ball in the basket. He's unbelievably crafty for his size (much bigger heavier than Hakeem) though.

Did you watch him dominate the paint last night in Denvers win? Probably not.

I did watch, did you??

Who was guarding Joker?? Chet Holmgren?? Isiah Heartenstein?? Alex Caruso??? :oldlol:

He's the biggest guy on the court by far. Most of the time he can just bully his way in the paint and exploit the mismatch. NOT the same as Hakeem having to do battle on a nightly basis against other big body HOFers who were also elite on defense.

As for Hakeem not spearheading a "league leading offensive rating", who cares? Defense is part of offense. Rudy emphasized defense which means half court sets and slower pace, not run and gun scoring. That's a choice. Who did they even have running point those years?? Vernon Maxwell?? Kenny Smith?? Not exactly high octane playmakers. At the end of the day Houston outscored the other team when it counted.

[tpols]

I did watch, did you??

Who was guarding Joker?? Chet Holmgren?? Isiah Heartenstein?? Alex Caruso??? :oldlol:

He's the biggest guy on the court by far. Most of the time he can just bully his way in the paint and exploit the mismatch. NOT the same as Hakeem having to do battle on a nightly basis against other big body HOFers who were also elite on defense.

As for Hakeem not spearheading a "league leading offensive rating", who cares? Defense is part of offense. Rudy emphasized defense which means half court sets and slower pace, not run and gun scoring. That's a choice. Who did they even have running point those years?? Vernon Maxwell?? Kenny Smith?? Not exactly high octane playmakers. At the end of the day Houston outscored the other team when it counted.

I dont think anybody is disputing Hakeems advantage on defense bridges the gap between his and Jokic offense. That's pretty much commonly agreed upon. Both GOAT talented centers. You just wouldn't admit that Jokic offense is very clearly superior which was the original point. Fancy moves don't mean you're better. I'm a huge Kobe fan and Jokic is better on offense than him too.

That being said... 300 lb Yolk would body skinny 240 lb Hakeem. And if he wanted to he could drag him out 30 feet where he wasn't even used to defending. 90s centers were pure paint campers.

[1987_Lakers]

Hakeem had an insane peak, but his career overall is pretty underwhelming when you compare him to the other top 10 ATG, he had a 5 year stretch in his prime where he didn't make it out of the first round or even made the playoffs.

Can you imagine the shit any other legend would get if that was the case with them? He is the only player that constantly gets praised for their peak (rightfully so), while the rest of his career is kind of ignored.

[Baller234]

I dont think anybody is disputing Hakeems advantage on defense bridges the gap between his and Jokic offense. That's pretty much commonly agreed upon. Both GOAT talented centers. You just wouldn't admit that Jokic offense is very clearly superior which was the original point. Fancy moves don't mean you're better. I'm a huge Kobe fan and Jokic is better on offense than him too.

That being said... 300 lb Yolk would body skinny 240 lb Hakeem. And if he wanted to he could drag him out 30 feet where he wasn't even used to defending. 90s centers were pure paint campers.

:: Checks weight ::

Jokic: 284 lbs

Hakeem: 255 lbs


Uh.. I think your numbers are a little off sir.

Jokic has 29 lbs on him, not 60.

[Baller234]

Hakeem had an insane peak, but his career overall is pretty underwhelming when you compare him to the other top 10 ATG, he had a 5 year stretch in his prime where he didn't make it out of the first round or even made the playoffs.

Can you imagine the shit any other legend would get if that was the case with them? He is the only player that constantly gets praised for their peak (rightfully so), while the rest of his career is kind of ignored.

I value peak over longevity.

The only time longevity comes into play for me is when the players being compared have comparable peaks.

[tpols]

:: Checks weight ::

Jokic: 284 lbs

Hakeem: 255 lbs


Uh.. I think your numbers are a little off sir.

Jokic has 29 lbs on him, not 60.

Any of those numbers that were gathered how long ago don't mean squat in terms of reality even though they do show a solid discrepancy in size and strength as they are. He's probably around 50lbs heavier than Hakeem. That dude was skinny and they're the same height. Eye test alone you can see Jokic is far heavier and stronger. But still nimble on his feet ready to fake you out 100 different ways.

You ever heard of f=ma? Force is mass times acceleration. Your boy would get bodied from a pure physics perspective. :lol

[StrongLurk]

I value peak over longevity.

The only time longevity comes into play for me is when the players being compared have comparable peaks.

If you value peak, then you'd value Jokic. Dude's peak over the last 5 years is off the charts for impact and metrics. Only Jordan and Lebron have similar numbers. I know you are going to pivot to "rings", but Jokic's help has been less than MJ's/Lebron's.

[hold this L]

Jokic is going to pass Hakeem. He's not there yet, but it feels inevitable the way he's going. Granted Hakeem is probably the most complete player ever at his position and a freak, but Jokic is so much better offensively it may not matter over the long term. Got to see how he does in the PS these next few years.

[Baller234]

If you value peak, then you'd value Jokic. Dude's peak over the last 5 years is off the charts for impact and metrics. Only Jordan and Lebron have similar numbers. I know you are going to pivot to "rings", but Jokic's help has been less than MJ's/Lebron's.

Sorry but there's more to the game than "metrics" and "numbers". I'm seriously wondering if that's all you guys care about. In that case we can just not watch the games altogether and just focus on the box scores.

At his peak from 93-95, Olajuwon was arguably the best offensive player AND defensive player in the league. He went up against the best of the best at his position in both the playoffs and the finals and he outplayed them all. The 94-95 Rockets might have had the toughest playoff path to the finals in history. Dream averaged 33/10/4.5 those playoffs when scoring was actually tougher and offensive numbers weren't as inflated. But hey he didn't fill up the box score with a triple double so I guess it doesn't count for anything.

And miss me this bullshit about Joker having less rings just because he's had less help. It's not like he's consistently run into all time great teams in the playoffs. The Nuggets being a lower tier defensive team has a lot to do with that as well.

Jokic is an all time great player but I'm sorry he hasn't proven himself to that degree yet. He has ONE championship. You can't compare him to guys who did it multiple times under different sets of circumstances. Let him PROVE it first.

[hold this L]

Sorry but there's more to the game than "metrics" and "numbers". I'm seriously wondering if that's all you guys care about. In that case we can just not watch the games altogether and just focus on the box scores.

At his peak from 93-95, Olajuwon was arguably the best offensive player AND defensive player in the league. He went up against the best of the best at his position in both the playoffs and the finals and he outplayed them all. The 94-95 Rockets might have had the toughest playoff path to the finals in history. Dream averaged 33/10/4.5 those playoffs when scoring was actually tougher and offensive numbers weren't as inflated. But hey he didn't fill up the box score with a triple double so I guess it doesn't count for anything.

And miss me this bullshit about Joker having less rings just because he's had less help. It's not like he's consistently run into all time great teams in the playoffs. The Nuggets being a lower tier defensive team has a lot to do with that as well.

Jokic is an all time great player but I'm sorry he hasn't proven himself to that degree yet. He has ONE championship. You can't compare him to guys who did it multiple times under different sets of circumstances. Let him PROVE it first.
He's beaten 1 50 win team in his entire career :lol

[jstern]

Jokic had better competition?? What does that even mean??

They played 30 years apart. :oldlol:

Not even shitting on Joker but what kind of retarded statement is this.

Axe is very young, so his opinions about Hakeem or anything pre 2020 should not be taken seriously.

There's a chance Axe's mother wasn't even born yet when Hakeem won his last NBA championship, if she had him when she was around 15 years old. That's how young he is. (You also have to consider that he's a little dopey, and more than likely has a sub 90 IQ.)

[Axe]

^^Please go away and have an overdose of your adderalls, you extremely autistic piece of shit. :facepalm

[04mzwach]

Is Nash better than CP3? I dont think so. If a guy only operates on one end of the ball mainly he can't be as high as a guy like Hakeem. Nash has a big weakness just like Jokic has a big weakness. Hakeem has very little weakness that you can exploit. It won't change either. Jokic is stuck below Hakeem forever, unless he improves on the defensive end. I doubt Jokic will make that change. He'd have to worry about his diet and do more running, dancing, swimming, etc.

[HoopsNY]

Hakeem had an insane peak, but his career overall is pretty underwhelming when you compare him to the other top 10 ATG, he had a 5 year stretch in his prime where he didn't make it out of the first round or even made the playoffs.

Can you imagine the shit any other legend would get if that was the case with them? He is the only player that constantly gets praised for their peak (rightfully so), while the rest of his career is kind of ignored.

Jokic missed the playoffs his first 3 years and got bounced in the 1st round in his peak. If the argument is, "well he was new to the league", then Hakeem should get credit for also being new to the league but raising the ceiling for his team.

Houston won 29 games in '84, despite having Sampson. They added Hakeem and won 48 games, a +19 increase. And a major part of the reason why the rest of his career gets glossed over is because his cast were done by '87. Cocaine addictions and Sampson's career ending injuries ruined the dynasty that never was.

Houston missing the playoffs in '92 doesn't come without context, either. They won 42 games, but Hakeem missed 12 games that season. Houston was 2-10 in those missed games. They had a 47 win pace with Hakeem, which would have landed them a playoff berth. Btw, 47 wins was good for 5th in the West that year.

It's also disingenuous to think that other ATG players are not criticized for similar. LeBron has three 1st round exits in the last 5 seasons, and missed the playoffs 3 times including his first 2 seasons. MJ had numerous 1st round exits, and missed the playoffs twice in his later years. Granted, he never missed the playoffs and he was 39 and 40, but we're splitting hairs here between 1 and 0 for a guy who had better longevity.

KG got bounced in the 1st round 7x in his first 8 years, missed the playoffs the next three seasons, all in his prime.

Kobe missed the playoffs in 2005 during his peak. He had woeful playoff blunders in both 1997 and 1998, with mediocre to abhorrent finals performances in 2000 and 2004. His 2011 performance against Dallas isn't admirable by any stretch, scoring 17 on 39%, 5 turnovers, no steals or blks.

Shaq didn't make the playoffs his first season, got bounced his second season in the 1st round, didn't make the playoffs in '09 (despite being an AS and All-NBA 3rd Team), and got swept in 1994, 1995, 1996, gentleman swept in 1997, 1998, 1999, gentleman swept in 2004, gentleman swept in 2008, missed playoffs in 2009.

You're pretty familiar with Wilt's performances and past failures, how about Elgin? How about CP3, KD, Westbrook, Ewing, Robinson, etc?

There's context to all of these, but that's precisely my point. Every player including Hakeem has similar criticisms, but I think you unfairly hold him to a much higher standard. Also, we've been through this before, yet you persist like there isn't context to it.

[tpols]

Is Nash better than CP3? I dont think so. If a guy only operates on one end of the ball mainly he can't be as high as a guy like Hakeem. Nash has a big weakness just like Jokic has a big weakness. Hakeem has very little weakness that you can exploit. It won't change either. Jokic is stuck below Hakeem forever, unless he improves on the defensive end. I doubt Jokic will make that change. He'd have to worry about his diet and do more running, dancing, swimming, etc.

Nash actually had just as much playoff success as Paul pretty much. And he didn't choke like him either. Always performed well on the Suns in the playoffs. Plus back to back MVP while Chris Paul has 0. You're kind of making Jokic case here with that analogy.

[StrongLurk]

Is Nash better than CP3? I dont think so. If a guy only operates on one end of the ball mainly he can't be as high as a guy like Hakeem. Nash has a big weakness just like Jokic has a big weakness. Hakeem has very little weakness that you can exploit. It won't change either. Jokic is stuck below Hakeem forever, unless he improves on the defensive end. I doubt Jokic will make that change. He'd have to worry about his diet and do more running, dancing, swimming, etc.

Completely wrong.

[Im Still Ballin]

Individual offense has a higher ceiling of impact. This is supported by large-sample adjusted +/-. This wasn't always the case; we only have PBP (play-by-play) data going back to the mid-'90s. High-end individual defensive impact was as high, if not more so, in the '60s and earlier. Rule changes and improved shooting/optimized style of play are why things most likely changed.

We can look at the 28-year lifetime age curve adjusted RAPM database. The top offensive player is Michael Jordan (+7.4), and the top defensive player is Kevin Garnett (+6.4). KG is way more of an outlier, though. MJ's #1 ranked offensive RAPM is 13% higher than KG's #1 ranked defensive RAPM. The top 5 offensive-ranked players have a 21.63% higher impact than the top 5 defensive-ranked players.

Top 5 offensive players:
- Michael Jordan (+7.4)
- LeBron James (+7.3)
- Stephen Curry (+7.1)
- James Harden (+7.0)
- Nikola Jokic (+6.8)

Top 5 defensive players:
- Kevin Garnett (+6.4)
- Dikembe Mutombo (+5.6)
- Rudy Gobert (+5.3)
- Draymond Green (+5.3)
- Alex Caruso (+5.3)

https://www.nbarapm.com/datasets/LifetimeRAPM

My guess is that Hakeem's impact profile would look similar to bigs like KG, Duncan, and Embiid. That's to say, a two-way, defensively-slanted footprint:

Garnett: +3.1 ORAPM, +6.4 DRAPM, +9.5 RAPM
Duncan: +3.2 ORAPM, +4.9 DRAPM, +8.1 RAPM
Embiid: +3.5 ORAPM, +4.7 DRAPM, +8.2 RAPM

I'd give Olajuwon a +3 to +3.5 range on offense and +5 to +7 for defense, for a total of +8 to +10.5. That's an incredibly safe estimate; the median would be roughly +9.2 to +9.3. If you think that offensive valuation is low, consider that Giannis has a +3.5 mark.

FWIW, Jokic's numbers are +6.8 ORAPM, +2.0 DRAPM, +8.8 RAPM.

I think that lines up with my thoughts on this topic. Hakeem's absolute peak might be a little higher, but it's more theoretical/abstract because it's based on a much smaller sample of games. Nikola has been more consistent with his level of play, which gives me more confidence in his peak - what it is, what it's worth. Hakeem fell off quickly post '96 and had shortcomings pre-1993-94.

We actually have Hakeem's +/- data from 1993-94, 1994-95, and 1995-96:

1993-94: Rockets +7 on, -7.5 off –> +14.5 net, 4th in NBA (Robinson 1st, +19.9)
1994-95: Rockets +5.6 on, -6.3 off –> +11.9 net, 7th in NBA (Robinson 1st, +19.8)
1995-96: Rockets +4.9 on, -5.4 off –> +10.3 net (unknown rank, Robinson 1st, +16.6, Jordan +15.2)

Here are Jokic's last four years:

2021-22: +8.4 on, -8 off, +16.4 net
2022-23: +12.0 on, -9.9 off, +21.9 net
2023-24: +11.6 on, -8.4 off, +20.0 net
2024-25: +10.5 on, -8.5 off, +19.0 net

You can't go wrong with either. Too close to call.

[Baller234]

"We can look at the 28-year lifetime age curve adjusted RAPM database..."

How about we just watch the games.

[Im Still Ballin]

Additionally, I have more confidence in high-end individual offensive impact because defense has been shown to be more influenced by coaching/scheme.

[tpols]

It makes sense. On offense the star has the ball in their hands ready to create. Defense you're at the mercy of the teammates and coaching around you. And the talent of the opposing star with the ball.

[Im Still Ballin]

Also worth mentioning is that we have Hakeem's RAPM from 1996-97 and onwards. 10.2k minutes of on-court play. Even with an age curve adjustment, his numbers only come out to 0.0 ORAPM, +2.6 DRAPM, +2.6 RAPM. We shouldn't compare to players with the majority of prime years occurring post-1996-97. But we can compare with similarly aged guys from that era:

Barkley: +5.6 ORAPM, -1.0 DRAPM, +4.6 RAPM (6.4k minutes)
MJ: +7.4 ORAPM, +1.7 DRAPM, +9.1 RAPM (11.4k minutes)
Stockton: +5.3 ORAPM, +2.2 DRAPM, +7.5 RAPM (15.8k minutes)
Malone: +5.2 ORAPM, -0.4 DRAPM, +4.8 RAPM (21.1k minutes)
Robinson: +2.3 ORAPM, +4.4 DRAPM, +6.7 RAPM (13.1k minutes)

It's surprising that Chuck's is so much higher than Dream's. But it does line up with their unadjusted +/- when they played together:

Hakeem 1997-1999: +4.3 on, +0.2 off, +4.1 net [6269 minutes]
Barkley 1997-1999: +5.2 on, -1.7 off, +6.9 net [5778 minutes]

[Soundwave]

That's a tough one, basically a coin flip to me.

I think I would just go with Hakeem on the basis of him being a very good defensive player on top of a great offensive player too. Joker is a better offensive player when you factor in his elite passing ability, but you're still gonna get like probably era adjust 29-30+ ppg for Hakeem in today's higher scoring era and then the better D with that.

More athleticism for whatever that's worth also. I think that shows up in things like Hakeem having a better offensive rebounds number at his peak, offensive boards are harder to get.

Can't really go wrong either way.

[1987_Lakers]

That's a tough one, basically a coin flip to me.

I think I would just go with Hakeem on the basis of him being a very good defensive player on top of a great offensive player too. Joker is a better offensive player when you factor in his elite passing ability, but you're still gonna get like probably era adjust 29-30+ ppg for Hakeem in today's higher scoring era and then the better D with that.

More athleticism for whatever that's worth also. I think that shows up in things like Hakeem having a better offensive rebounds number at his peak, offensive boards are harder to get.

Can't really go wrong either way.

In terms of rebounding they are pretty similar, but Hakeem's rebounding for whatever took a backseat by 1994. When Hakeem was winning back to back chips which many consider his peak, he wasn't the rebounder Jokic currently is.

[Im Still Ballin]

Young Akeem was a ferocious offensive rebounder. But yeah, he had cooled off by his agreed-upon peak.

I'm trying to think of the best Jokic rebounding comparison from the '90s. Maybe an old, HOU Charles Barkley? He was still an elite ORB threat (3.8/g, 13.1 ORB%) despite losing much of his explosiveness/speed/vertical. He was able to get it done with slow strength, leveraging his wide body, good hands, and quick two-footed leaping.

EDIT: Just watched some game footage. Some similarities. But Chuck, even as an old man, was getting higher off the ground than Nikola ever has. Maybe a bigger, ground-bound HOU Barkley would be more apt.

Shorter Ostertag, maybe.

[dankok8]

^^Some good posts there Im Still Ballin :applause:

Impact data doesn't really like Hakeem. He's well behind MJ, Magic and Robinson. Along with Harvey Pollack's data you posted, we also have the data from Squared2020.

https://squared2020.com/2025/01/26/historical-rapm-1985-1996/

You can also see the data for individual years like 1985, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1993 and 1996.

Funny enough, RAPM doesn't love Jokic that much either. He too trails modern giants in most impact stats.

Assuming Jokic wins another ring, he and Hakeem are both probably just a smidge below top 10 to me.

[rmt]

In terms of rebounding they are pretty similar, but Hakeem's rebounding for whatever took a backseat by 1994. When Hakeem was winning back to back chips which many consider his peak, he wasn't the rebounder Jokic currently is.

How can a true measure without competition considered - be made? Does anyone really think that Jokic would be rebounding at this rate if he played in the past against bigger, taller, stronger opponents vs as Chuck calls them the "midgets" of today?

[Im Still Ballin]

^^Some good posts there Im Still Ballin :applause:

Impact data doesn't really like Hakeem. He's well behind MJ, Magic and Robinson. Along with Harvey Pollack's data you posted, we also have the data from Squared2020.

https://squared2020.com/2025/01/26/historical-rapm-1985-1996/

You can also see the data for individual years like 1985, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1993 and 1996.

Funny enough, RAPM doesn't love Jokic that much either. He too trails modern giants in most impact stats.

Assuming Jokic wins another ring, he and Hakeem are both probably just a smidge below top 10 to me.
8. John Stockton (+4.04 ORAPM; +0.92 DRAPM; +4.96 RAPM) [11,731 total possessions]
343. Karl Malone (+3.02 ORAPM; -2.83 DRAPM; +0.19 RAPM) [12,313 total possessions]

Yikes.

:biggums:

[tpols]

How can a true measure without competition considered - be made? Does anyone really think that Jokic would be rebounding at this rate if he played in the past against bigger, taller, stronger opponents vs as Chuck calls them the "midgets" of today?

Outside of like Shaq and Ewing and Zo most of the centers back then weren't that imposing either. And Jokic could easily take those guys outside. Especially Shaq.

David Robinson was an athletic beast but he was a ***** cat. Hakeem and Mutumbo no offense but skinny Africans. Yolk would hold his own against them and body the luc longleys and bill Cartwrights of that day who probably wouldn't even make NBA today.

[Im Still Ballin]

Nikola rebounded fairly well against MIN with Rudy and KAT.

[Baller234]

How can a true measure without competition considered - be made? Does anyone really think that Jokic would be rebounding at this rate if he played in the past against bigger, taller, stronger opponents vs as Chuck calls them the "midgets" of today?

"Hold on I believe there is a scientific formula for that. If we take E and multiply it by X and divide it by the number of field goal attempts over a 36 minute period, we can determine who the better player was."

- so called basketball experts on ISH

:oldlol:

[1987_Lakers]

How can a true measure without competition considered - be made? Does anyone really think that Jokic would be rebounding at this rate if he played in the past against bigger, taller, stronger opponents vs as Chuck calls them the "midgets" of today?

I hate this logic. Jokic has gone up against guys like AD & Gobert who are top tier rebounders in the playoffs and did just fine. Averaged 16 boards against AD last postseason, went up against Gobert & Kat and out rebounded both of them in 2023.

If Vlade Divac was a decent rebounder in the 90's, I'm sure Jokic would be just fine in that era.

[1987_Lakers]

As a matter of fact, Hakeem was rebounding at pretty much the same rate as Divac by '94.

'94 Divac - 17.2 TRB%
'95 Divac - 16.3 TRB%

'94 Hakeem - 16.2 TRB%
'95 Hakeem - 15.6 TRB%

Now look at the old heads try to convince themselves that Divac who was a known flopper and nowhere near as strong as Jokic would somehow dominate the boards in today's league.

[GOBB]

Elite 2 way player > Jokic


The margin when it comes to them offensively isn’t nearly as large when it comes to defense.


Also difficult to rank Jokic because we are all prisoners of the moment. We see his excellence in real time. We haven’t watched Hakeem in decades. Same with someone like Drob who was amazing but folks forget. Where Jokic ends up when his career ends will be interesting. Better time to revisit this convo

[Baller234]

I hate this logic. Jokic has gone up against guys like AD & Gobert who are top tier rebounders in the playoffs and did just fine. Averaged 16 boards against AD last postseason, went up against Gobert & Kat and out rebounded both of them in 2023.

If Vlade Divac was a decent rebounder in the 90's, I'm sure Jokic would be just fine in that era.

Jokic is a monster. He would be great in ANY time period.

But you have to admit, we are in the retard era right now. Guys are scared to play defense now. Half the guys out there are more concerned with foul hunting.

It's hard to give the man his full props sometimes because there's always this lingering feeling that he's just dominating the special olympics.

[j3lademaster]

How can a true measure without competition considered - be made? Does anyone really think that Jokic would be rebounding at this rate if he played in the past against bigger, taller, stronger opponents vs as Chuck calls them the "midgets" of today?

Very lazy logic. Jokic and Embiid are bigger than the 90's superstar centers outside of Shaq. Gobert is the same size is Dikembe, Anthony Davis is the same size as Olajuwon and just as athletic. The 'bigs' aren't smaller, it's just that today's game is so physically demanding vs just camping a big body in the paint in the 90's. Greg Ostertag and Rony Seikaly would be getting cooked in pnr's, Rik Smits can barely run the floor and don't get me started on Big Country. These guys aren't extinct, the NBA just outgrew them. And besides, Dennis Rodman at 6'6 230 or whatever and Chuck at 6'5 250 did just fine rebounding. Jokic would easily be an elite rebounder in the 90's. If anything you can argue it's harder to rebound as a center today due to the amount of long rebounds going to guards because of excessive long range shooting.

[j3lademaster]

Jokic is a monster. He would be great in ANY time period.

But you have to admit, we are in the retard era right now. Guys are scared to play defense now. Half the guys out there are more concerned with foul hunting.

It's hard to give the man his full props sometimes because there's always this lingering feeling that he's just dominating the special olympics.This myth needs to die already, these playoffs have been plenty physical. Past getting romanticized hard with the rose tinted nostalgia glasses.

[tpols]

As a matter of fact, Hakeem was rebounding at pretty much the same rate as Divac by '94.

'94 Divac - 17.2 TRB%
'95 Divac - 16.3 TRB%

'94 Hakeem - 16.2 TRB%
'95 Hakeem - 15.6 TRB%

Now look at the old heads try to convince themselves that Divac who was a known flopper and nowhere near as strong as Jokic would somehow dominate the boards in today's league.

I dont think old heads realize hed outweigh and outsize everybody from the 90s except Shaq.

[rmt]

Kudos to Gobert for the last game of the last series, but I don't think highly of him. Watching him last night vs that Spencer dude and other midget Warriors was just laughable. But such is the state of the NBA today where Gobert can win 4 DPOY awards.

Some of you are forgetting the Rodmans, Ewings, DRobs, even a young Duncan, Barkley, Wilt, Russell, etc. Or even a no-name like Rasho getting millions just because he had SIZE to guard Shaq. Gobert - sheesh...

[tpols]

Elite 2 way player > Jokic


Embiid fails this test right off the bat since he's far more 2 way than Jokic, yet... worse.

Simpleton logic, no offense.

[Baller234]

This myth needs to die already, these playoffs have been plenty physical. Past getting romanticized hard with the rose tinted nostalgia glasses.

Wheelchair basketball can also be plenty physical. :oldlol:

The game gets physical sometimes absolutely, but half the game is about foul hunting and gaming the system now.

[GOBB]

Embiid fails this test right off the bat since he's far more 2 way than Jokic, yet... worse.

Simpleton logic, no offense.

Where does embiid come into play? This is Hakeem vs Jokic. Hakeem is an elite 2 way player. No clue what triggered the Embiid remark. Unless you’re trolling? Maybe from my prior comments when it came with Embiid and Jokic? Embiid availability or lack thereof makes Jokic better to me. Before I’d argue otherwise which was based on being healthy. I still feel healthy Embiid. But that’s not even a realistic thing. Give me Jokic without thinking twice nowadays.

If this wasn’t your angle? No clue. You lose me. Don’t insult me again.

[SouBeachTalents]

Embiid fails this test right off the bat since he's far more 2 way than Jokic, yet... worse.

Simpleton logic, no offense.
By that rationale you could also claim CP3 > Curry & Magic since he was an elite 2 way player and they weren't.

[SouBeachTalents]

Where does embiid come into play? This is Hakeem vs Jokic. Hakeem is an elite 2 way player. No clue what triggered the Embiid remark. Unless you’re trolling? Maybe from my prior comments when it came with Embiid and Jokic? Embiid availability or lack thereof makes Jokic better to me. Before I’d argue otherwise which was based on being healthy. I still feel healthy Embiid. But that’s not even a realistic thing. Give me Jokic without thinking twice nowadays.

If this wasn’t your angle? No clue. You lose me. Don’t insult me again.
Do you genuinely believe this?

[GOBB]

My bad I should’ve typed Hakeem > Jokic. You dudes are silly here

[warriorfan]

By that rationale you could also claim CP3 > Curry & Magic since he was an elite 2 way player and they weren't.

Center has a lot more defensive responsibility compared to point guard. So the defensive side gets weighed a little more.

[tpols]

Where does embiid come into play? This is Hakeem vs Jokic. Hakeem is an elite 2 way player. No clue what triggered the Embiid remark. Unless you’re trolling? Maybe from my prior comments when it came with Embiid and Jokic? Embiid availability or lack thereof makes Jokic better to me. Before I’d argue otherwise which was based on being healthy. I still feel healthy Embiid. But that’s not even a realistic thing. Give me Jokic without thinking twice nowadays.

If this wasn’t your angle? No clue. You lose me. Don’t insult me again.

You said an elite 2 way player is automatically > .

Embiid is an elite two way player. Jokic isn't. But he's still better. Get it?

[GOBB]

Do you genuinely believe this?

Yes I do. I watched a guy avg over 30ppg while improving as a passer. And maintaining his defensive prowess. Embiid is more imposing to me offensively. Especially when he’s not camped out behind the arc chucking 3’s. When he gets it in the post and knows when to mix it up (shooting)? He’s unstoppable. But he’s never healthy long term for this to even be an argument.

[GOBB]

You said an elite 2 way player is automatically > .

Embiid is an elite two way player. Jokic isn't. But he's still better. Get it?

No I don’t get it. I thought you were bright enough to realize Hakeem is the elite 2 way player. I didn’t think you of all people would not comprehend that. I guess I got to spell out everything for people here even those I thought were smart enough. So no I don’t get your embiid take. He isn’t relevant to this convo nor the comparison. Next time just reply “My mistake I read it wrong”.

[tpols]

No I don’t get it.


That much is frighteningly apparent. You don't even understand the analogy being made. :lol

[GOBB]

That much is frighteningly apparent.

You just want attention.

Wilt elite 2 way player > Jokic
Drob elite 2 way player > Jokic
Duncan elite 2 way player > Jokic
Gianni’s elite 2 way player > Jokic
Anthony Davis elite 2 way player > Jokic
Embiid elite 2 way player > Jokic

There you go bud. Weirdo

[tpols]

Crashing out won't save you pal. At least half your list even you don't believe.

[GOBB]

Crashing out won't save you pal. At least half your list even you don't believe.

Save me from a d*ckhead who read my post wrong and instantly pulled Embiid d*ck out of his rectum? Ok I guess. You’re short of words seeing my list posted. Wonder why? Idiot.

[Im Still Ballin]

Elite 2 way player > Jokic


The margin when it comes to them offensively isn’t nearly as large when it comes to defense.


Also difficult to rank Jokic because we are all prisoners of the moment. We see his excellence in real time. We haven’t watched Hakeem in decades. Same with someone like Drob who was amazing but folks forget. Where Jokic ends up when his career ends will be interesting. Better time to revisit this convo

Okay, so two things:

1) Basketball isn't checking two boxes; simplifying impact and therefore value like so is erroneous, reductive, and disingenuous at best. A player being "two-way" doesn't make them better/more impactful, and it doesn't necessarily make roster construction/team building/building around them more ideal.

The difference in offensive impact and value is greater than you think. It's because you're swayed by the box score and highlight reel. Hakeem's iso-heavy approach, spotty shot selection, and restricted playmaking limit the potential ceiling of his team's offense compared to Jokic and other better offensive greats. And it's about team offense.

2) Nostalgia is just as relevant a factor as recency bias. In fact, I think the majority of NBA fans view the past with rose-colored glasses and don't accurately remember the shortcomings of stars.

[GOBB]

Okay, so two things:

1) Basketball isn't checking two boxes; simplifying impact and therefore value like so is erroneous, reductive, and disingenuous at best. A player being "two-way" doesn't make them better/more impactful, and it doesn't necessarily make roster construction/team building/building around them more ideal.

The difference in offensive impact and value is greater than you think. It's because you're swayed by the box score and highlight reel. Hakeem's iso-heavy approach, spotty shot selection, and restricted playmaking limit the potential ceiling of his team's offense compared to Jokic and other better offensive greats. And it's about team offense.

2) Nostalgia is just as relevant a factor as recency bias. In fact, I think the majority of NBA fans view the past with rose-colored glasses and don't accurately remember the shortcomings of stars.

1. You are correct. But Hakeem defense vs Jokic defense is significant gap wise. Whereas the offense even if you have Jokic better? The gap isn’t nearly as wide as it is defensively.

2. Nostalgia is only applied to those who think everyone places old over new. It’s beginning to become a go too reply when player comparisons from two totally different eras are used. I have Jokic over Drob and Ewing. But yes nostalgia nostalgia. Team construction plays a role in Jokic game as well. Not sure why that’s brought up. I don’t think Jokic can guard Hakeem. I do think Hakeem can guard Jokic. I think Hakeem disrupts a teams offense as a defensive anchor more than Jokic. Jokic playmaking ability is top notch. Best passing big man my eyes have witnessed.

Jokic is what he is. He’s not going to get much better. And if he sustains this level of elite play while accumilating accolades? He may end up better than Hakeem for me. For now he’s not.


If we eliminate any of the accolades etc just break down them as individual players? It’s Hakeem over Jokic.

[DarkSephiroth]

The big debate here seems to be how much we rate defensive impact. And for those who have watched both players (it seems from this thread that most have watched Jokic but not Hakeem), this is actually a difficult decision. Personally, I consider Hakeem the greatest defensive player of all time. This is the only guy who could truly guard all 5 positions. There's great interior defenders and great perimeter defenders, but Hakeem is the first and only player I've ever seen actually good at both. (As versatile as guys like KG were, I wouldn't say he's a top level interior defender as his best seasons were around 2 Blocks per game and he could get bullied inside). Hakeem could defend the pick and roll, block shots better than anyone ever, and even rotate onto the perimeter and get steals like a guard.

Statistically as a defender:
-All time leader in Blocks, with 11 seasons averaging 2.5+ Blocks. (He would be #1 in BPG if Manute Bol and Mark Eaton had longer careers, they both retired early)
-Elite in Steals, only player in NBA History with 2000+ Steals & 2000+ Blocks (More career steals than Jordan & Kobe, 9 seasons averaging 1.5+ Steals)
-From 1986-1995, Houston was a top 5 defense 8 times. And if you saw those rockets teams, they weren't exactly loaded with defenders. Hakeem WAS the system on defense.
-3rd all-time in total Defensive Win Shares (99.5)
-Averaged 3.3 blocks and 1.7 steals per game in the playoffs, even higher than his career averages. So in times that mattered, he improved on that end.

Jokic, on the other hand, sits at 34 in Defensive Win Shares (DWS) so he is an average defender at best. But let's compare them offensively because that seems to be the big area where people's opinions differ:
In their primes (Hakeem '89-'94, Jokic '20-'25)
Hakeem: 24.2 PPG, 13.1 RPG, 2.8 APG, TS: 55.5%, OWS: 6.33
Jokic: 24.9 PPG, 11.7 RPG, 8.4 APG, TS: 65.6%, OWS:9.64

Clearly, Jokic is a more efficient offensive player with better passing. So the big question here is, how much do you value being an assist guy over being the greatest defender of all time? I personally favor the greatest defender ever, because I think they are somewhat close offensively and I'd just pick up a solid point guard to be getting those assists. Jokic is possibly the greatest, most efficient offensive player ever but Hakeem is also extremely good offensively (Say 80-90% as good as Jokic offensively) while being arguably the greatest defender of all time. I do value good offense more than good defense, but due to the huge discrepancy in defense I have to slightly favor Hakeem as an overall player.

TL DR: Jokic is a joy to watch and I'd say one of the best offensive players of all time, possibly the best. But overall, I have to slightly favor Hakeem due to him being great offensively and the greatest ever defensively. Anyone who is saying this argument isn't close doesn't know basketball. An argument could be made for either one.

[Baller234]

Jokic can never be in the discussion for greatest offensive player of all time. Offense requires scoring and Jokic is nowhere close to the top of the list when it comes to unstoppable scorers throughout history. He is great but I wouldn't call his game flawless. He's looked bad in spots.

Yea sure he can run your offense and keep you in the game, but none of that shit matters if you can't close. When it comes to the Nuggets, you never really know who's gonna close. There's never this sense where everyone knows it's going to Jokic.

The most valuable skill an offensive player can bring to the table is being able to score totally unassisted and/or being able to draw a double team. The guy who can do that at the highest level is the guy you want on your team.

[Im Still Ballin]

The big debate here seems to be how much we rate defensive impact. And for those who have watched both players (it seems from this thread that most have watched Jokic but not Hakeem), this is actually a difficult decision. Personally, I consider Hakeem the greatest defensive player of all time. This is the only guy who could truly guard all 5 positions. There's great interior defenders and great perimeter defenders, but Hakeem is the first and only player I've ever seen actually good at both. (As versatile as guys like KG were, I wouldn't say he's a top level interior defender as his best seasons were around 2 Blocks per game and he could get bullied inside). Hakeem could defend the pick and roll, block shots better than anyone ever, and even rotate onto the perimeter and get steals like a guard.

Statistically as a defender:
-All time leader in Blocks, with 11 seasons averaging 2.5+ Blocks. (He would be #1 in BPG if Manute Bol and Mark Eaton had longer careers, they both retired early)
-Elite in Steals, only player in NBA History with 2000+ Steals & 2000+ Blocks (More career steals than Jordan & Kobe, 9 seasons averaging 1.5+ Steals)
-From 1986-1995, Houston was a top 5 defense 8 times. And if you saw those rockets teams, they weren't exactly loaded with defenders. Hakeem WAS the system on defense.
-3rd all-time in total Defensive Win Shares (99.5)
-Averaged 3.3 blocks and 1.7 steals per game in the playoffs, even higher than his career averages. So in times that mattered, he improved on that end.

Jokic, on the other hand, sits at 34 in Defensive Win Shares (DWS) so he is an average defender at best. But let's compare them offensively because that seems to be the big area where people's opinions differ:
In their primes (Hakeem '89-'94, Jokic '20-'25)
Hakeem: 24.2 PPG, 13.1 RPG, 2.8 APG, TS: 55.5%, OWS: 6.33
Jokic: 24.9 PPG, 11.7 RPG, 8.4 APG, TS: 65.6%, OWS:9.64

Clearly, Jokic is a more efficient offensive player with better passing. So the big question here is, how much do you value being an assist guy over being the greatest defender of all time? I personally favor the greatest defender ever, because I think they are somewhat close offensively and I'd just pick up a solid point guard to be getting those assists. Jokic is possibly the greatest, most efficient offensive player ever but Hakeem is also extremely good offensively (Say 80-90% as good as Jokic offensively) while being arguably the greatest defender of all time. I do value good offense more than good defense, but due to the huge discrepancy in defense I have to slightly favor Hakeem as an overall player.

TL DR: Jokic is a joy to watch and I'd say one of the best offensive players of all time, possibly the best. But overall, I have to slightly favor Hakeem due to him being great offensively and the greatest ever defensively. Anyone who is saying this argument isn't close doesn't know basketball. An argument could be made for either one.

I agree with the conclusion; I only take issue with your offensive valuations. My estimate puts Hakeem's team offensive impact between roughly 45 and 50% less, around 3.5 to 4 points per 100 possessions. On the other hand, I've got Jokic's team defensive impact 40 to 70% lower—3 to 5 points per 100 possessions.

There's a greater range for defense because there are more confounding variables (coaching, scheme, lineups) that makes for more uncertainty/less confidence.

[Meticode]

Embiid fails this test right off the bat since he's far more 2 way than Jokic, yet... worse.

Simpleton logic, no offense.

I think this is because Embiid is injury prone. If he had several healthy seasons where he was putting up numbers similar to his MVP numbers he would be in the conversations similar to this current one's topic, but people will automatically discredit him (rightfully so) from the conversation because he couldn't prove his worth long enough because his body wouldn't let him. The year he won MVP he was also Top 10 in DPOY voting. If he had a few years in the running of MVP and DPOY he would be in the same conversation as Jokic as best player in the league, but again...injuries.

But I'm always of the opinion that defense gets undervalued/recognized by most people and the league so I'm naturally going to be biased towards players that are 2-way.

[Im Still Ballin]

Jokic can never be in the discussion for greatest offensive player of all time. Offense requires scoring and Jokic is nowhere close to the top of the list when it comes to unstoppable scorers throughout history. He is great but I wouldn't call his game flawless. He's looked bad in spots.

Yea sure he can run your offense and keep you in the game, but none of that shit matters if you can't close. When it comes to the Nuggets, you never really know who's gonna close. There's never this sense where everyone knows it's going to Jokic.

The most valuable skill an offensive player can bring to the table is being able to score totally unassisted and/or being able to draw a double team. The guy who can do that at the highest level is the guy you want on your team.

Faulty Generalization Fallacy. Also, a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of Jokic's skillset.

Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'Neal, LeBron James, Stephen Curry, Nikola Jokic. They're all in the mix for the greatest offensive player of all time. And they vary regarding position and skillset. You can throw in some other names like Kareem, KD, Dirk, Bird, West, and Oscar for a wider net.

Hakeem's team's offenses were never all that great. Not even with protomodern three-point shooting/spacing or talented teammates (Drexler, Barkley). FWIW, Squared2020's 1985-1996 RAPM sample (https://squared2020.com/2025/01/26/historical-rapm-1985-1996/) has Hakeem's ORAPM at +3.01 (7,835 possessions) and Magic's ORAPM at +7.52 (18,099 possessions)

[Neal Romer]

In most comparisons people have a player they prefer for reasons not exclusive to basketball, and theyre rarely going to change their opinion based on reason or evidence.

Whether it's a hometown hero, or there's (on both sides) a racial pride thing, or it's an old school vs new school preference, most people didnt choose their favorite player based on precise analytical metrics. Theyve got a guy they wanna view as the best, and you wont change their mind. They dont want their mind changed. They have a horse in the race and thats who theyll ride with. And it goes the opposite way too. Look how many people think Lebron is not Top 10. A crazy amount of them are dead ass serious. Because they dont wanna see Bron that way.

Most people see whatever they wanna see. Openness to the objective result is rare.

[Reggie43]

Would Jokic's offensive impact stay the same against traditional frontcourts and tougher defensive rules? He would be able to compete but not sure he would stand out against the other great bigmen in the 90s like Hakeem, Drob, Shaq, Malone, Barkley, Ewing etc

[Im Still Ballin]

Jokic has proven that he can be part of top-performing playoff defenses and 4th quarter/clutch defenses. His on-court playoff opponent regular season ORtg-adjusted DRtg has been around -3 since 2023 (41-game sample size). With more optimal personnel, I think that it can reach -5, maybe -6. Swapping out MPJ for a PF like JJJ/Mobley would do it, IMO.

Add a better bench and you've got an elite defense.

[Im Still Ballin]

Would Jokic's offensive impact stay the same against traditional frontcourts and tougher defensive rules? He would be able to compete but not sure he would stand out against the other great bigmen in the 90s like Hakeem, Drob, Shaq, Malone, Barkley, Ewing etc

If Brad Daugherty, Kevin McHale, and Adrian Dantley were putting up elite TS%, TS+, TS Add, and 56-60% 2PT on high volume, Nikola would have no problems.

Here's what I wrote earlier in this thread:


Regarding the era stuff:

It's not a huge deal as some are making out to be, especially with a player as offensively dynamic and versatile as Jokic. He'd have loved to have played in the Illegal Defense era of '81 to '01. Easy post entries all night. His offensive impact would be more or less the same. His defense would be better, though. Or less easily to exploit. You could legitimately play him with another big.

A big and slow, yet smooth and skilled guy like Daugherty was leading the league in TS% back then. McHale led the NBA in FG% twice on high volume. Dantley shot 56.3% FG across 7 years in Utah. Bill Walton, Alvan Adams, and Jeff Ruland were shooting and passing from the elbows. Outlet passes, face-up slashes from the mid-range spots, even bigs shooting spot-up threes (Sikma, Laimbeer). A 6'9" guy handling the ball.

Nikola could play his usual game back then. The distribution of shot/play type might be a little different, but it doesn't matter because he's good at everything.

[Reggie43]

Dantley and Mchale were 80s guys while Daugherty played in the early 90s before the defense really took over. Those guys were great but in a slower paced defensive minded league they wouldnt be able to maintain that type of efficiency

[Baller234]

Faulty Generalization Fallacy. Also, a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of Jokic's skillset.

Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'Neal, LeBron James, Stephen Curry, Nikola Jokic. They're all in the mix for the greatest offensive player of all time. And they vary regarding position and skillset. You can throw in some other names like Kareem, KD, Dirk, Bird, West, and Oscar for a wider net.

Hakeem's team's offenses were never all that great. Not even with protomodern three-point shooting/spacing or talented teammates (Drexler, Barkley). FWIW, Squared2020's 1985-1996 RAPM sample (https://squared2020.com/2025/01/26/historical-rapm-1985-1996/) has Hakeem's ORAPM at +3.01 (7,835 possessions) and Magic's ORAPM at +7.52 (18,099 possessions)

Lol, tell me this then.

You're building a team. You can choose to build your team around Jordan or Jokic, who are you going with?

For now let's not even take defense into account.

[Im Still Ballin]

Dantley and Mchale were 80s guys while Daugherty played in the early 90s before the defense really took over. Those guys were great but in a slower paced defensive minded league they wouldnt be able to maintain that type of efficiency

Let's not lose sight of what this thread is about: Hakeem and Jokic.

Dantley, McHale, and Daugherty were consistently more efficient scorers than Olajuwon in the '80s and the early '90s.

From 1985-1993, McHale averaged 56.4% 2PT, 61.4% TS, 114 TS+, and totaled 1251.9 FG Add and 1592.1 TS Add. Hakeem? 51.6% 2PT, 55.6% TS, 104 TS+, 603.1 FG Add, and 538.6 TS Add.

From 1985-1991, Dantley averaged 52.7% 2PT, 60.6% TS, 112 TS+, and totaled 405.3 FG Add and 989.7 TS Add. Hakeem? 51.5% 2PT, 55.3% TS, 103 TS+, 444.7 FG Add, and 328.0 TS Add.

From 1987-1994, Daugherty averaged 53.3% 2PT, 59.0% TS, 110 TS+, and totaled 626.7 FG Add and 966.7 TS Add. Hakeem? 51.5% 2PT, 55.6% TS, 104 TS+, 569.8 FG Add, and 564.1 TS Add.

These guys were more efficient scorers than Olajuwon. There's no reason to suggest they'd be less efficient than him from '94 onwards. Kind of an arbitrary cutoff, don't you think? The large career-overlapping sample suggests those guys would be more efficient scorers in any era.

And McHale, Dantley, and Daugherty are analogous to Jokic. Efficient and efficacious interior scorers who made up for a lack of certain physical qualities with skill and intelligence.

[Im Still Ballin]

FYI, here are the definitions of FG Add and TS Add if you're unaware. They're cumulative stats that adjust for the era.

FG Add: The number of extra points added by Field Goal Attempts made above league average.
TS Add: The number of extra points added by True Shot Attempts made above league average.

True shot attempts (TSA) account for possessions used on free throws.

[j3lademaster]

Would Jokic's offensive impact stay the same against traditional frontcourts and tougher defensive rules? He would be able to compete but not sure he would stand out against the other great bigmen in the 90s like Hakeem, Drob, Shaq, Malone, Barkley, Ewing etc

Yes. He's bigger than all of them besides Shaq and more skilled than all of them.

[HoopsNY]

Faulty Generalization Fallacy. Also, a misunderstanding/misrepresentation of Jokic's skillset.

Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Michael Jordan, Shaquille O'Neal, LeBron James, Stephen Curry, Nikola Jokic. They're all in the mix for the greatest offensive player of all time. And they vary regarding position and skillset. You can throw in some other names like Kareem, KD, Dirk, Bird, West, and Oscar for a wider net.

Hakeem's team's offenses were never all that great. Not even with protomodern three-point shooting/spacing or talented teammates (Drexler, Barkley). FWIW, Squared2020's 1985-1996 RAPM sample (https://squared2020.com/2025/01/26/historical-rapm-1985-1996/) has Hakeem's ORAPM at +3.01 (7,835 possessions) and Magic's ORAPM at +7.52 (18,099 possessions)

Depends on how you look at it. They added John Lucas in '85 and by '86, they were 5th in offense. Once Hakeem had the right guys around him, Houston faired much better:

1993: 6th ORTG
1995: 7th*
1997: 7th ORTG
1998: 8th ORTG
1999: 5th ORTG
2001: 5th ORTG

I put a star for '95 because once Houston added Drexler, their ORTG jumped from 108.9 to 112.4, which would have been good for the 4th best offense in the league.

1996 isn't there but that was a reason where most of the lineup suffered injuries. 1999, they're ranked 5th. Surprise surprise, they had a playmaker in Pippen.

2001 is less attributed to Hakeem, but he was part of a faster paced offense with Mobley/Francis, both 2 guards and playmakers in their own right.

I say all of that to say this, Hakeem's career is very strange. No, he's not a better offensive weapon for schemes or could be used on offense as good as someone like Duncan or Jokic, especially Jokic who is far superior in passing and playmaking, but it would be unfair to look at his teams offensive production without context.

Once you gave him players with playmaking ability, then those teams could easily finish top 5 in offense. And they didn't necessarily have to be elite playmakers.

[tpols]

Lol, tell me this then.

You're building a team. You can choose to build your team around Jordan or Jokic, who are you going with?

For now let's not even take defense into account.

MJ wouldn't be able to do anything to limit Jokic game. A skinny little 210 lb guard on 300lb Yoke. He'd get his ass beat. Eastern Europeans aren't as enamored with American celebrities as us, he would roast Mike like he was just another loud mouth scrub at the park.

[HoopsNY]

I'd argue Parker and Ginobili don't come into their own until 2005. How did Duncan's offenses work before then?

'98: 17th ORTG
'99: 11th ORTG
'00: 12th ORTG
'01: 6th ORTG
'02: 9th ORTG
'03: 7th ORTG
'04: 16th ORTG

Duncan had Avery Johnson early on who was a decent playmaker. And even then it wasn't yielding great results. Having the right guys around you makes a difference.

[Im Still Ballin]

Depends on how you look at it. They added John Lucas in '85 and by '86, they were 5th in offense. Once Hakeem had the right guys around him, Houston faired much better:

1993: 6th ORTG
1995: 7th*
1997: 7th ORTG
1998: 8th ORTG
1999: 5th ORTG
2001: 5th ORTG

I put a star for '95 because once Houston added Drexler, their ORTG jumped from 108.9 to 112.4, which would have been good for the 4th best offense in the league.

1996 isn't there but that was a reason where most of the lineup suffered injuries. 1999, they're ranked 5th. Surprise surprise, they had a playmaker in Pippen.

2001 is less attributed to Hakeem, but he was part of a faster paced offense with Mobley/Francis, both 2 guards and playmakers in their own right.

I say all of that to say this, Hakeem's career is very strange. No, he's not a better offensive weapon for schemes or could be used on offense as good as someone like Duncan or Jokic, especially Jokic who is far superior in passing and playmaking, but it would be unfair to look at his teams offensive production without context.

Once you gave him players with playmaking ability, then those teams could easily finish top 5 in offense. And they didn't necessarily have to be elite playmakers.

Yearly rankings are solid, but rORtg is a more apt measure of team offensive performance. 1998-99 was the best-performing offense at +3.2 rORtg. 1985-86 came in second at +2.9 rORtg.

Technically, 2000-01 was #1 (+3.7), but Dream was a broken-down horse at that point. 58 GP, 26.6 MPG. Additionally, the offense was -3.4 points worse when he was on the court versus off it. The fact that they had a better team offense than any year of the Olajuwon era doesn't help Hakeem's case here.

[Baller234]

MJ wouldn't be able to do anything to limit Jokic game. A skinny little 210 lb guard on 300lb Yoke. He'd get his ass beat. Eastern Europeans aren't as enamored with American celebrities as us, he would roast Mike like he was just another loud mouth scrub at the park.

So I repeat.

You're building a team and you have a choice between Jokic and Jordan.

You're choosing Jokic?

[tpols]

So I repeat.

You're building a team and you have a choice between Jokic and Jordan.

You're choosing Jokic?

Yes.

They're similar level scorers, Jokic twice the passer and teammate. MJ has the elite defense but Jokic the elite rebounding. Both super clutch.

[Baller234]

Yes.

They're similar level scorers, Jokic twice the passer and teammate. MJ has the elite defense but Jokic the elite rebounding. Both super clutch.

Never talk about basketball again. :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[tpols]

Jokic is actually more efficient than MJ. He's an equal or better shooter from pretty much everywhere.

For their careers he shoots on 64% TS to Jordan's 57% TS. True shooting percentage incorporates FT%, 2pt%, and 3pt% blanket efficiency for a scorer. Jokic is signifgantly higher.

These are the facts bro. We don't care if you old heads have a nostalgia fetish, when the evidence is this clear here and you choose to bury your head in the sand and remain ignorant.

[HoopsNY]

Let's look at the playoffs for the same years, as well as '86:

'86: 5th ORTG

'93: 8th ORTG
'94: 6th ORTG
'95: 3rd ORTG
'96: 9th ORTG
'97: 1st ORTG
'98: 16th ORTG
'99: 2nd ORTG

It's a bit of a mixed batch, but you do have some years where Houston is up there. I think playoffs should matter in the discussion as well, but the trend still seems to remain the same.

[Im Still Ballin]

Let's look at the playoffs for the same years, as well as '86:

'86: 5th ORTG

'93: 8th ORTG
'94: 6th ORTG
'95: 3rd ORTG
'96: 9th ORTG
'97: 1st ORTG
'98: 16th ORTG
'99: 2nd ORTG

It's a bit of a mixed batch, but you do have some years where Houston is up there. I think playoffs should matter in the discussion as well, but the trend still seems to remain the same.

He's a strong offensive player, and it's possible to construct a potent team offense around him. I just think the potential ceiling is more limited compared to some of the other top players in NBA history.

[Baller234]

Jokic is actually more efficient than MJ. He's an equal or better shooter from pretty much everywhere.

For their careers he shoots on 64% TS to Jordan's 57% TS. True shooting percentage incorporates FT%, 2pt%, and 3pt% blanket efficiency for a scorer. Jokic is signifgantly higher.

These are the facts bro. We don't care if you old heads have a nostalgia fetish, when the evidence is this clear here and you choose to bury your head in the sand and remain ignorant.

"Numbers! Numbers!..."

"Look at the data!... Look at the made up advanced stats and tabulations!..."

"This mathematical formula clearly states!..."

:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:


Context matters when it comes to stats my guy. It can’t just be used in isolation to say one player is “better” than another at scoring, let alone across decades and eras. :oldlol:

In no fu*cking universe is Jokic a better pure scorer than Jordan. Not only was Jordan capable of creating high quality shots under any condition and from anywhere on the floor, he can also score in high volume under pressure. Listen to anyone that played against him and they will tell you he was unguardable and that there was no answer for him. Not only was he insanely quick and athletic, he also tore you apart with tactical precision. No one has ever been better at weaving through holes in the defense or getting to their preferred spot. EVER.

You can chalk it up to nostalgia all you want, the results speak for themselves. Or you can go watch any of the endless highlight reels on Youtube.

FFS these basketball fans are in a very weird place right now. :oldlol:

[HoopsNY]

Yearly rankings are solid, but rORtg is a more apt measure of team offensive performance. 1998-99 was the best-performing offense at +3.2 rORtg. 1985-86 came in second at +2.9 rORtg.

Technically, 2000-01 was #1 (+3.7), but Dream was a broken-down horse at that point. 58 GP, 26.6 MPG. Additionally, the offense was -3.4 points worse when he was on the court versus off it. The fact that they had a better team offense than any year of the Olajuwon era doesn't help Hakeem's case here.

rORTG is just relative to the year. It basically says much of the same but uses the average to come up with a relative score. I'd probably use that if I wanted to look at how dominant an offense was relative to the league. But that's not what's in question in here.

We're looking at the offense itself for any specific year and how well they performed, not necessarily how dominant they were. I only mentioned 2001 because of what playmakers bring to the table, which matters I think.

Take a look at Chicago in 1998. They posted a 104.6 ORTG without Pippen who missed half the season. That's good for 15th in the league. Having a primary playmaker makes a world of difference in the offense. Once Hakeem had guards or wings who could do this, the Rockets became an elite offense.

Even Kobe became less of a playmaker in the Gasol days. How did that go for LAL from 2008-13?

LAL '08: 3rd ORTG
LAL '09: 3rd ORTG
LAL '10: 11th ORTG
LAL '11: 6th ORTG
LAL '12: 10th ORTG
LAL '13: 9th ORTG

Slightly higher ceiling to Hakeem's 5th place teams, but overall much of the same. I think Duncan's results are telling as well. You need a combination of big men and guards with one being a primary playmaker.

[tpols]

Yes dude... the rate at which you put the ball in the hoop... matters. Numbers matter. The team with the higher number at the end of the game wins, you know? You get a higher number by putting the ball in the basket.

It's not like Jokic is operating on a tiny offensive volume. It's the same size as MJs with a little more passing instead and more efficient scoring. That's just what it is. Throwing a tantrum doesn't change the facts.

[Baller234]

Yes dude... the rate at which you put the ball in the hoop... matters. Numbers matter. The team with the higher number at the end of the game wins, you know? You get a higher number by putting the ball in the basket.

It's not like Jokic is operating on a tiny offensive volume. It's the same size as MJs with a little more passing instead and more efficient scoring. That's just what it is. Throwing a tantrum doesn't change the facts.

So in order to determine who the best scorers were, all we have to do is look at TS%? We should ignore all other context?

Okay fine, the following players have a higher career TS% than Jordan:

- Charles Barkley
- Magic Johnson
- Kevin McHale
- Kevin Durant
- James Harden
- Dirk Nowitzki
- Joel Embiid
- Anthony Davis
- Kyrie Irving
- Karl-Anthony Towns
- Kawhi Leonard
- Chris Paul

I guess all of these guys are better scorers than Jordan too??? :oldlol:

[tpols]

So in order to determine who the best scorers were, all we have to do is look at TS%? We should ignore all other context?

Okay fine, the following players have a higher career TS% than Jordan:

- Charles Barkley
- Magic Johnson
- Kevin McHale
- Kevin Durant
- James Harden
- Dirk Nowitzki
- Joel Embiid
- Anthony Davis
- Kyrie Irving
- Karl-Anthony Towns
- Kawhi Leonard
- Chris Paul

I guess all of these guys are better scorers than Jordan too??? :oldlol:

You're not comparing the volumes correctly for a lot of these guys. Some of these players never hit 30 ppg mark like Jokic has. Of the ones that did I think Durant, Dirk, Kawhi, AD, and Barkley were super elite scorers. That's simply what they produced. I didn't say Jokic was a better scorer, I said they are similar level because thats what was produced. Jokic has a mega volume bro. There are only three 30 ppg scorers in today's NBA. Jokic is one of them.

[Baller234]

You're not comparing the volumes correctly for a lot of these guys. Some of these players never hit 30 ppg mark like Jokic has. Of the ones that did I think Durant, Dirk, Kawhi, AD, and Barkley were super elite scorers. That's simply what they produced. I didn't say Jokic was a better scorer, I said they are similar level because thats what was produced. Jokic has a mega volume bro. There are only three 30 ppg scorers in today's NBA. Jokic is one of them.

They're not similar level scorers though. When it comes to the pure scorers from this era, Jokic is but one name in the hat. You could make a case for Curry, you could make a case for Embiid, you could make a case for Kawhi, you could make a case for SGA. Not even just in terms of numbers, but in terms of what they have in their arsenal and how they compromise the defense. In terms of how they get buckets.

When Jordan played there was no case for anyone else. There was no debate. His scoring dominance made the other great scorers of the era look primitive by comparison. When Doug Collins gave him reins to go nuts, he averaged 8 more points than the guy in 2nd place.

And believe me I don't really put everything into stats or averages. I hate bringing up stats. I think everyone has a different role on their team. Having the highest average doesn't automatically mean you were the best scorer, but each year Jordan won the scoring title his team also won the championship. A dynasty was built on the back of Jordan being able to score a shit ton of points and being able to do it consistently throughout the playoffs. He must have been doing something right.

Jokic = ONE of the best scorers of his era, his top years could rank anywhere from top 5 to top 10 in scoring.

Jordan = UNQUESTIONABLY the best scorer of his era, led the league in scoring every year, and delivered multiple championships doing so.


This shouldn't even be a discussion.

[tpols]

They're not similar level scorers though. When it comes to the pure scorers from this era, Jokic is but one name in the hat. You could make a case for Curry, you could make a case for Embiid, you could make a case for Kawhi, you could make a case for SGA. Not even just in terms of numbers, but in terms of what they have in their arsenal and how they compromise the defense. In terms of how they get buckets.

When Jordan played there was no case for anyone else. There was no debate. His scoring dominance made the other great scorers of the era look primitive by comparison. When Doug Collins gave him reins to go nuts, he averaged 8 more points than the guy in 2nd place.

And believe me I don't really put everything into stats or averages. I hate bringing up stats. I think everyone has a different role on their team. Having the highest average doesn't automatically mean you were the best scorer, but each year Jordan won the scoring title his team also won the championship. A dynasty was built on the back of Jordan being able to score a shit ton of points and being able to do it consistently throughout the playoffs. He must have been doing something right.

Jokic = ONE of the best scorers of his era, his top years could rank anywhere from top 5 to top 10 in scoring.

Jordan = UNQUESTIONABLY the best scorer of his era, led the league in scoring every year, and delivered multiple championships doing so.


This shouldn't even be a discussion.

Look I would agree that 1st 3peat MJ was better scorer for sure. But honestly I think Yolk is a better scorer than 2nd 3peat Jordan. He wasn't nearly as efficient there and even had some real stinkers like in the 1996 Finals and other series shooting not good %'s.

[GOBB]

In most comparisons people have a player they prefer for reasons not exclusive to basketball, and theyre rarely going to change their opinion based on reason or evidence.

Whether it's a hometown hero, or there's (on both sides) a racial pride thing, or it's an old school vs new school preference, most people didnt choose their favorite player based on precise analytical metrics. Theyve got a guy they wanna view as the best, and you wont change their mind. They dont want their mind changed. They have a horse in the race and thats who theyll ride with. And it goes the opposite way too. Look how many people think Lebron is not Top 10. A crazy amount of them are dead ass serious. Because they dont wanna see Bron that way.

Most people see whatever they wanna see. Openness to the objective result is rare.

So basically people have their opinion. Others can’t handle it. No one cares to agree or even agree to disagree. This thread in a nutshell? You’re welcome.

[rmt]

Is this what this thread has gotten to - comparing Jokic to MJ?

Seriously, some are data/stats bonkers. 30 ppg across eras?

[Baller234]

Look I would agree that 1st 3peat MJ was better scorer for sure. But honestly I think Yolk is a better scorer than 2nd 3peat Jordan. He wasn't nearly as efficient there and even had some real stinkers like in the 1996 Finals and other series shooting not good %'s.

Ehh I dunno 2nd 3peat Jordan was arguably just as good if not better than 1st 3peat Jordan. What he lost in athleticism he gained in mastery and footwork. Mind you he still led the league in scoring all those years and was outperforming guys like Shaq, Malone, Robinson, etc.

He didn't have the same superhuman hang time or the speed but he still had his quickness and he could still out-think you. If you watch the highlights from those years he was straight embarrassing guys making them look all sorts of silly. The way he would get guys to commit and then bing easy pull up, or yoink head fake I'm already past you, or ahh you bit on that shake now I'm over here. Guy just had endless moves and was always keeping the defender guessing, and even when they knew exactly what he was gonna do they still couldn't stop it.

Push comes to shove when it comes to best version of Jordan I think it's a tossup between 91-92 and 95-96. I could probably make a case for both. In 95-96 he had a huge chip on his shoulder. He was salivating to win that year. Guy was on a mission.

[Meticode]

Is this what this thread has gotten to - comparing Jokic to MJ?

Seriously, some are data/stats bonkers. 30 ppg across eras?

People lose focus oftentimes. I replied talking about Embiid since he was brought up. All it takes is a seed for it to go off the rails.

[Im Still Ballin]

rORTG is just relative to the year. It basically says much of the same but uses the average to come up with a relative score. I'd probably use that if I wanted to look at how dominant an offense was relative to the league. But that's not what's in question in here.

This seems like a poor justification to avoid using a more accurate yardstick of team offensive performance.

[Baller234]

I don't wanna say "I told you so..." but hey.

As you guys saw last night when Jokic's 3 wasn't falling, he had no other go-to attack to fall back on. He just kept bricking 3 after 3.

Also I think its high time we finally put to the rest the notion that he has no help or that he has less help than the 90's guys. Denver had 4 guys last night that went for 20 or more. That would have been extremely rare back then.

[tpols]

Boiling Jokic game down to 3s and saying he can't do anything else if that isn't working is one of the more ignorant takes we've seen in this site.

He just had probably the worst shooting game of his career and you swooped in like a vulture. :lol

But they still won because of his passing and the attention drawn. And total domination of OT.

[SouBeachTalents]

I don't wanna say "I told you so..." but hey.

As you guys saw last night when Jokic's 3 wasn't falling, he had no other go-to attack to fall back on. He just kept bricking 3 after 3.

Also I think its high time we finally put to the rest the notion that he has no help or that he has less help than the 90's guys. Denver had 4 guys last night that went for 20 or more. That would have been extremely rare back then.
As yes, the one game sample size.

[SouBeachTalents]

Ehh I dunno 2nd 3peat Jordan was arguably just as good if not better than 1st 3peat Jordan.
And nah, definitely not :lol 1st 3peat Jordan is the GOAT, 2nd 3peat Jordan is clearly at minimum a tier below that. I'm not even sure he's definitively better than peak Kawhi/Wade/Kobe.

[tpols]

And nah, definitely not :lol 1st 3peat Jordan is the GOAT, 2nd 3peat Jordan is clearly at minimum a tier below that.

It's crazy how he isn't even right about the guy he reps.

Like... almost nobody would agree 2nd 3peat MJ was > 1st 3peat MJ.

[j3lademaster]

Jokic had all good looks out there from 3, okc was willing to give those up. Normally he would kill you if you do that, but that's how jumpshooting works. Sometimes they just don't fall, just ask MJ when he shot 9-35 against Miami in 97.

[j3lademaster]

It's crazy how he isn't even right about the guy he reps.

Like... almost nobody would agree 2nd 3peat MJ was > 1st 3peat MJ.Except for 2k. They usually have 96 MJ as the best version, 91-93 MJ in terms of athleticism but with 90+ 3 pt shooting.

[tpols]

Except for 2k. They usually have 96 MJ as the best version, 91-93 MJ in terms of athleticism but with 90+ 3 pt shooting.

The irony in that is the only time MJ really showed out from 3 was in 1992 vs Clyde. So they ****ed that up big time. I think 1996 may have been his worst shooting year in the playoffs or close to it.

[j3lademaster]

The irony in that is the only time MJ really showed out from 3 was in 1992 vs Clyde. So they ****ed that up big time. I think 1996 may have been his worst shooting year in the playoffs or close to it.

It's very misleading because of the shortened line those couple of seasons, but statistically Jordan shot 43% in the regular season and over 40% in the playoffs on what was considered decent volume for back then.

[warriorfan]

It's very misleading because of the shortened line those couple of seasons, but statistically Jordan shot 43% in the regular season and over 40% in the playoffs on what was considered decent volume for back then.

Jordan with the bulls shot 84% from the free throw line. He was also a midrange assassin. I think it’s a tough case to try to say Jordan was a poor shooter.

Paul George is an 85% FT shooter. Doesn’t have the midrange Jordan did (understandable because Jordan’s athleticism let him create more and better opportunities).

What I’m getting at is if Jordan went to the lab and worked on 3’s it’s not far fetched at all that he could get to Paul George level or better.

[j3lademaster]

Jordan with the bulls shot 84% from the free throw line. He was also a midrange assassin. I think it’s a tough case to try to say Jordan was a poor shooter.

Paul George is an 85% FT shooter. Doesn’t have the midrange Jordan did (understandable because Jordan’s athleticism let him create more and better opportunities).

What I’m getting at is if Jordan went to the lab and worked on 3’s it’s not far fetched at all that he could get to Paul George level or better.

I have no doubt Jordan can develop a 3. Whenever he shot around 3 per game or more it was a more than respectable percentage. The only times he shot horrible percentages were when he shot them almost exclusively as bailout shots on failed possessions. One thing I always respected about MJ and Kobe is that they were always willing to take the low percentage tough bailout shots instead of relegating that to a teammate.

[Im so nba'd out]

I have no doubt Jordan can develop a 3. Whenever he shot around 3 per game or more it was a more than respectable percentage. The only times he shot horrible percentages were when he shot them almost exclusively as bailout shots on failed possessions. One thing I always respected about MJ and Kobe is that they were always willing to take the low percentage tough bailout shots instead of relegating that to a teammate.

Some newspaper article said that Drexler was better than Jordan cause MJ couldn't hit threes. The next night he literally hit 6 threes in game 1 and held the 3 point record for nearly 20 years in a Finals.

[j3lademaster]

Some newspaper article said that Drexler was better than Jordan cause MJ couldn't hit threes. The next night he literally hit 6 threes in game 1 and held the 3 point record for nearly 20 years in a Finals.

I think it said MJ was better at everything except for shooting 3's.

[GOBB]

I think it said MJ was better at everything except for shooting 3's.

How

[Im Still Ballin]

Drexler was a pretty good passer. Could that be argued?

[warriorfan]

Drexler was a pretty good passer. Could that be argued?

Drexler has most career assists all time at SG. Kinda crazy.

[j3lademaster]

Drexler has most career assists all time at SG. Kinda crazy.

MJ played offball to accommodate Pippen though. We all knew what happened when he gunned for triple doubles.

[Im Still Ballin]

Drexler has most career assists all time at SG. Kinda crazy.

He's not a bad LBJ comp—Drexler in Malone's body.

[Baller234]

Boiling Jokic game down to 3s and saying he can't do anything else if that isn't working is one of the more ignorant takes we've seen in this site.

He just had probably the worst shooting game of his career and you swooped in like a vulture. :lol

But they still won because of his passing and the attention drawn. And total domination of OT.

They won because of his passing? He had 6 assists :oldlol:

They won because they had guys step up. In this day and age a team doesn't need star players at every position, they just need guys who can hit 3's and make plays. That's what Denver has. Aaron Gordon has been HUGE for this team.

I'm not criticizing Jokic over his bad shooting night, everyone is allowed a bad night, it's how he kept going about it. And I'm only doing this because you guys claimed he was some scoring GOAT, or at least that's what you said the analytics told you. Okay well you're 0/10 from 3 and the game is getting kind of tight, do you have any other ideas Mr. Scoring GOAT? Care to show us these go-to moves your raving fans keep talking about? I'm not even seeing you try.

So with that said I want to put to rest two myths with this post. The first being that he's the GOAT offensive player or the GOAT scorer, which is clearly not the case. The second being that he has less help than Jordan and the 90's guys, which is also clearly not the case. Those guys were never in a position where almost everyone in the lineup was a legit threat to score every possession down. Bill Cartwright was never going to beat you. As current fans love to point out, Bill Cartwright wouldn't even have a job in the NBA today. Okay well if that's the case then you have to admit Jokic plays with much superior talent.

[tpols]

Hockey assists bro. The same ones Curry produces. Defense traps one guy and covers the slip, but after the roll there's always going to be somebody open with 1 or 2 more passes. It's all action initiated off the initial trap though.

And when he went 0-10 from 3 and the game got tight he seemed to have plenty of ideas because Jokic totally controlled and dominated overtime from the initial tip off (which he won, and immediately scored off)

[HoopsNY]

This seems like a poor justification to avoid using a more accurate yardstick of team offensive performance.

Why would it be a better yardstick? Your original claim was that offenses didn't really do so well with him. I contested that. The response to that was rORtg, which seems to emphasize the dominance factor relative to the average ORTG of the league.

I'm not saying it's not a better measurement as far as dominance is concerned. I fully agree. What I am saying is that Hakeem's teams did perform well offensively. But what's important to note is what happens when you have strategic pieces around you, such as playmakers.

[warriorfan]

He's not a bad LBJ comp—Drexler in Malone's body.

Never even thought about that but it’s actually good. They both are super athletic who are gods in transition. Both have good size for their position. Both don’t have the best first step but once they get going downhill it’s over. Both can shoot pretty well. Both can make some plays.

Obviously Lebron is better but the comparison checks out. Seems like Drexler gets underrated or even forgotten about. When a very good player doesn’t win a title they join a huge group of guys and kinda stop getting talked about.

[GOBB]

*caruso guarding Hakeem*


Hakeem “Ball…now!”

[StrongLurk]

*caruso guarding Hakeem*


Hakeem “Ball…now!”

Caruso is an all-nba defender and OKC arguably has the best defense over the last 25 years. They have a ton of elite defenders and Jokic still managed 28/14/6 on 59.2 TS%. OKC's whole defense was keyed onto Jokic.

Guys like MJ, Kareem, Lebron, etc have all had many worse playoff series. Hakeem for sure has had worse series.

[L.Kizzle]

Caruso is an all-nba defender and OKC arguably has the best defense over the last 25 years. They have a ton of elite defenders and Jokic still managed 28/14/6 on 59.2 TS%. OKC's whole defense was keyed onto Jokic.

Guys like MJ, Kareem, Lebron, etc have all had many worse playoff series. Hakeem for sure has had worse series.
Gary Payton is not going to bother Hakeem when he gets the ball in good position.

[StrongLurk]

Gary Payton is not going to bother Hakeem when he gets the ball in good position.

Are you trying to claim the Hakeem would not struggle at all against this OKC defense? Even though Hakeem has had worse series against worse defenses?

Quite the bold claim.

[L.Kizzle]

Are you trying to claim the Hakeem would not struggle at all against this OKC defense? Even though Hakeem has had worse series against worse defenses?

Quite the bold claim.
Who was holding him, Pooh Richardson?

[j3lademaster]

Who was holding him, Pooh Richardson?

This is the problem when people just want to throw out names instead of using objective stats or talking about what actually happened. How about the 90 LAL Holding Hakeem to 19 ppg on 44% shooting? Caruso wasn't put on Joker to stop him on the block btw, he was put on him to make it difficult to put the ball on the floor while Chet and/ or Hartenstein would swarm him with help, take away passing lanes and help contest close shots. Hakeem would struggle in Jokic's place, I promise you especially since he's an average passer at center.

[SouBeachTalents]

This is the problem when people just want to throw out names instead of using objective stats or talking about what actually happened. How about the 90 LAL Holding Hakeem to 19 ppg on 44% shooting? Caruso wasn't put on Joker to stop him on the block btw, he was put on him to make it difficult to put the ball on the floor while Chet and/ or Hartenstein would swarm him with help, take away passing lanes and help contest close shots. Hakeem would struggle in Jokic's place, I promise you especially since he's an average passer at center.
The bigger issue is, players of the social media era will have their bad moments live on through the internet forever, even the most casual of fans will able to access damning stats and performances through google or twitter instantly.

Meanwhile, you would have to do deep research on the older ATG's to find out the bad moments of their careers. I bet of the people who will likely clown Jokic for this incident going forward, the vast majority of them, in the example of this thread, wouldn't even know Hakeem didn't win a playoff series for 5 years.

Because of this, you'll have a continued trend of people claiming "so and so older ATG would never" when they likely have a track record just as bad as the current player they're discussing.

[StrongLurk]

The fact that people are trying to rip Jokic for his series actually solidifies his GOATness. It's the Lebron syndrome.

If fans are completely ignoring all context about a player and just boiling things down to wins/losses, then that player is GOAT level.

[SouBeachTalents]

The fact that people are trying to rip Jokic for his series actually solidifies his GOATness. It's the Lebron syndrome.

If fans are completely ignoring all context about a player and just boiling things down to wins/losses, then that player is GOAT level.
Just keeping it real, this was an uneven series for a player of Jokic's caliber. He was genuinely terrible in Games 2 & 3, had another very inefficient performance in Game 4, and had a far from great game yesterday.

I'm not trying to claim it was a bad series for him, but imo the final statline doesn't tell the whole story of this series where he was frankly underwhelming in over half the games.

[3ba11]

The fact that people are trying to rip Jokic for his series actually solidifies his GOATness. It's the Lebron syndrome.

If fans are completely ignoring all context about a player and just boiling things down to wins/losses, then that player is GOAT level.


Jokic has tons of help just like Lebron did but the triple-double skillset of 28/10/10 and weak clutch simply doesn't produce the type of strong teams that the dominant scoring skillset of 33/6/6 with dominant clutch.

This has become the historical record... Give me a dominant scorer and clutch assassin any day over a dumb triple-double ball hog that can't score when it matters and looks to teammates to bail him out.. It's pathetic and we see this type of losing time and time again with triple-double guys like Jokic, Lebron, Harden, Luka, Westbrook, etc - they mostly lose and can't produce dominant teams or perennial favorites (always the underdog despite great help).

[StrongLurk]

Thunder had 74 steals in this series. That's the most in a NBA series in the last 30 years of NBA postseason.

Again, this Thunder defense might be the best this century. We will see.

[GOBB]

Caruso is an all-nba defender and OKC arguably has the best defense over the last 25 years. They have a ton of elite defenders and Jokic still managed 28/14/6 on 59.2 TS%. OKC's whole defense was keyed onto Jokic.

Guys like MJ, Kareem, Lebron, etc have all had many worse playoff series. Hakeem for sure has had worse series.

Talk all you want. Hakeem being guarded by Caruso? Bbq chicken. Shaq being guarded by Caruso? Bbq chicken. I see why Shaq talks crazy about big men today. And how he would feast.

The energy is never the same here. It’s always one sided. Jokic topics spammed the board due to prisoner in the moment, knee jerk reactions. Cool. When it’s done in reverse? Outrage lol

But hey you’re convinced he’s top 4 all time. You raised the bar and standards. Now when he doesn’t live up to them deal with the trash talk.

[GOBB]

Thunder had 74 steals in this series. That's the most in a NBA series in the last 30 years of NBA postseason.

Again, this Thunder defense might be the best this century. We will see.

The best this century? Jesus Christ you’re on a roll. lol


Why is it that no one checks you for this crap but soon as someone mentioned a team/player from the past? They come running in with a whole lot to say? Weird.

[3ba11]

"Passers" like Jokic, Lebron, and Luka need great finishers to pass to, while great finishers can win with weak passers that average 3 assists like Derek Fisher or Vernon Maxwell.

Anyone can get a great player the ball - a junior-higher knows how to make a chest pass to the star player, so great passers are entirely overrated - Kobe won 5 chips with zero passing help, while MJ won 6 with a 5 assist guy (pippen)... Hakeem won with no passing help... Ditto Kawhi... Duncan won with non-elite passing help... No one needs a Lebron, Luka, or Jokic - they're overkill - it's much easier to build a team without a ball-monopolizer... a dominant scorer and clutch assassin is much preferred.

[StrongLurk]

The best this century? Jesus Christ you’re on a roll. lol


Why is it that no one checks you for this crap but soon as someone mentioned a team/player from the past? They come running in with a whole lot to say? Weird.

Your ignorance about OKC's defense is astounding. Based on all metrics, stats, awards, and eye tests, OKC is the best defense factually over the last 20 years. I am hesitant to include the 2000-2004 due to how different the NBA played during this time, but OKC clearly has an argument.

[StrongLurk]

Talk all you want. Hakeem being guarded by Caruso? Bbq chicken. Shaq being guarded by Caruso? Bbq chicken. I see why Shaq talks crazy about big men today. And how he would feast.

The energy is never the same here. It’s always one sided. Jokic topics spammed the board due to prisoner in the moment, knee jerk reactions. Cool. When it’s done in reverse? Outrage lol

But hey you’re convinced he’s top 4 all time. You raised the bar and standards. Now when he doesn’t live up to them deal with the trash talk.

Ah you are an embiid stan. No wonder you are crying.

[3ba11]

Ah you are an embiid stan. No wonder you are crying.


you're following me around to each thread and making childish comments... stop... and grow up... grown folks are talking basketball - if you don't want to participate - f*ck off

[StrongLurk]

you're following me around to each thread and making childish comments... stop... and grow up... grown folks are talking basketball - if you don't want to participate - f*ck off

I didn't respond to you at all in this thread. Ironically, you responded to my post which was addressing someone else.

Looks like you are following me around. It's cool, you've been exposed as a mentally ill loser for a decade now. No one sweats you here, it's just too easy to beat all your posts down like a toddler.

[GOBB]

Your ignorance about OKC's defense is astounding. Based on all metrics, stats, awards, and eye tests, OKC is the best defense factually over the last 20 years. I am hesitant to include the 2000-2004 due to how different the NBA played during this time, but OKC clearly has an argument.

Hahahahaha yea sure bud


Side note: Crying about what? I haven’t mentioned Embiid. Where he come from? This is me laughing at Jokic stands squirm when he had a bad game and was being guarded by Alex friggin Caruso. And having to read how great Caruso is defensively and that okc is the best defensive team in 20 years. Lol yikes. I’m done here.

[StrongLurk]

Hahahahaha yea sure bud


Side note: Crying about what? I haven’t mentioned Embiid. Where he come from? This is me laughing at Jokic stands squirm when he had a bad game and was being guarded by Alex friggin Caruso. And having to read how great Caruso is defensively and that okc is the best defensive team in 20 years. Lol yikes. I’m done here.

You are a sixers fan.

Based on all metrics, stats, awards, and eye tests, OKC is the best defense factually over the last 20 years. You can't just try to deny it like you are doing in your posts. Facts trump your feelings.

[fsvr54]

OKC is all-timer defensively, but NOT better than the 04 Pistons. That's the GOAT defense.

[John8204]

The fact that people are trying to rip Jokic for his series actually solidifies his GOATness. It's the Lebron syndrome.

If fans are completely ignoring all context about a player and just boiling things down to wins/losses, then that player is GOAT level.

Look I don't want to bury Jokic he's a fine player, one of the ten best centers of all-time. But people like you just suck the fun out of the sport. The guy has made the conference finals and nba finals twice...that's not good. And people can make excuses but he's not playing in a dynasty era. Hakeem had to beat better teams

[GOBB]

You are a sixers fan.

Based on all metrics, stats, awards, and eye tests, OKC is the best defense factually over the last 20 years. You can't just try to deny it like you are doing in your posts. Facts trump your feelings.

I’m a sixers fan. Thanks captain obvious

03 Spurs and 08 Celtics >>> OKC defense. Only person dealing with feelings is you. After Jokić got clamped by Caruso.

[red1]

caruso is a threat dude locked up Big Jok

[Baller234]

This is the problem when people just want to throw out names instead of using objective stats or talking about what actually happened. How about the 90 LAL Holding Hakeem to 19 ppg on 44% shooting? Caruso wasn't put on Joker to stop him on the block btw, he was put on him to make it difficult to put the ball on the floor while Chet and/ or Hartenstein would swarm him with help, take away passing lanes and help contest close shots. Hakeem would struggle in Jokic's place, I promise you especially since he's an average passer at center.

Hakeem wouldn't be struggling because he wouldn't be catching the ball 23 feet from the basket. If he could give Admiral the business I'm pretty sure he could give Hartenstein the business.

If you guys are going to claim he's the greatest offensive player of all time, then he should have been more dominant this series and exploited the mismatches. Where were all those unstoppable go-to moves I heard so much about?

Joker is great but he is just nowhere close to being the greatest offensive player of all time. That would require being able to score consistently when it counts. He's a very good scorer and he has a decent enough bag but he's never been all time elite like that. You guys can keep focusing on irrelevant advanced stats which mean nothing or you can watch the actual games.

[tpols]

If you watch the tape Hakeem didn't get pressed this hard. We mostly see him dealing with his opposing center 1v1.

Yolk was being blanketed by Caruso only on the perimeter. And the second Jokic caught a pass there immediately gooned by Dort on one side, and Chet on the back end with his lanky ass 7 foot shot blocking frame. Hartenstien chipping at him when ever hes down low, and then you got SGA, Williams, Dreads etc swiping every which way running track meet.

The dude was being triple teamed any time he took more than 1 dribble. How'd OKC do that? Leave pooper Jr and westbrick and Watson wide open. Worked like a charm.

[StrongLurk]

Look I don't want to bury Jokic he's a fine player, one of the ten best centers of all-time. But people like you just suck the fun out of the sport. The guy has made the conference finals and nba finals twice...that's not good. And people can make excuses but he's not playing in a dynasty era. Hakeem had to beat better teams

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massive expanding.

Hakeem is clearly an all-time great, Jokic is better though. It's just facts. You can't boil down individuals to wins/losses with no context. Jokic also has only had one playoff run in the last 5 years with healthy teammates. No MPJ/Murray in 2021, no Murray in 2022, Murray completely hobbled in 2024, MPJ grade 2 shoulder sprain/Gordon pulled hammy for game 7 in 2025.

[StrongLurk]

I’m a sixers fan. Thanks captain obvious

03 Spurs and 08 Celtics >>> OKC defense. Only person dealing with feelings is you. After Jokić got clamped by Caruso.

Okay so all you could do is offer two potential teams that might have a better defense than OKC?

After all those other posts where you completely brushed off OKC's defense?

Yeah you suck at posting man. But let's go with what YOU said. Jokic put 28/14/6 on 59.2 TS% against the 3rd best defense since 2003 and you all are trying to claim he played poorly?

[Baller234]

If you watch the tape Hakeem didn't get pressed this hard. We mostly see him dealing with his opposing center 1v1.

Yolk was being blanketed by Caruso only on the perimeter. And the second Jokic caught a pass there immediately gooned by Dort on one side, and Chet on the back end with his lanky ass 7 foot shot blocking frame. Hartenstien chipping at him when ever hes down low, and then you got SGA, Williams, Dreads etc swiping every which way running track meet.

The dude was being triple teamed any time he took more than 1 dribble. How'd OKC do that? Leave pooper Jr and westbrick and Watson wide open. Worked like a charm.

If Joker could demand double and triple teams each time down the floor, Denver would have multiple guys wide open every possession and they wouldn't need to rely on pick and roll.

Joker just isn't that guy dude. Great player, but not an all time elite scorer. Far from it.

[L.Kizzle]

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massive expanding.

Hakeem is clearly an all-time great, Jokic is better though. It's just facts. You can't boil down individuals to wins/losses with no context. Jokic also has only had one playoff run in the last 5 years with healthy teammates. No MPJ/Murray in 2021, no Murray in 2022, Murray completely hobbled in 2024, MPJ grade 2 shoulder sprain/Gordon pulled hammy for game 7 in 2025.
Hakeem has faced better competition, not even close.

Top 5 centers Jokic faced vs Hakeems. It's night and day.
When Joker entered the league, the All-NBA 1st team center was DeAndre Jordan. Moses Malone was 1st team Hakeems rookie season.

[SouBeachTalents]

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massive expanding.

Hakeem is clearly an all-time great, Jokic is better though. It's just facts. You can't boil down individuals to wins/losses with no context. Jokic also has only had one playoff run in the last 5 years with healthy teammates. No MPJ/Murray in 2021, no Murray in 2022, Murray completely hobbled in 2024, MPJ grade 2 shoulder sprain/Gordon pulled hammy for game 7 in 2025.
Hakeem's '94 supporting cast was definitely not better than Jokic's, his 2nd option averaged 14 ppg on 47%TS in the playoffs. Hakeem would kill for someone like Murray or Gordon on that team.

And I love how an ultimately subjective take that Jokic's better is "just facts" :lol If you polled objective, knowledgeable basketball fans, I'd be confident Hakeem would be getting at minimum 50% of the vote.

Just being honest, you're going full fledged 3ball/xiao right now, all you're going to do is draw unnecessary hate towards Jokic's way, not the best idea coming off an underwhelming Game 7 performance in a pretty humiliating defeat.

[StrongLurk]

Hakeem's '94 supporting cast was definitely not better than Jokic's, his 2nd option averaged 14 ppg on 47%TS in the playoffs. Hakeem would kill for someone like Murray or Gordon on that team.

And I love how an ultimately subjective take that Jokic's better is "just facts" :lol If you polled objective, knowledgeable basketball fans, I'd be confident Hakeem would be getting at minimum 50% of the vote.

Just being honest, you're going full fledged 3ball/xiao right now, all you're going to do is draw unnecessary hate towards Jokic's way, not the best idea coming off an underwhelming Game 7 performance in a pretty humiliating defeat.

Jokic took a 68-win OKC team to a game 7 with an injured MPJ and Aaron Gordon. He had a really good series against an all-time great defense.

This doesn't take anything away from Jokic, in fact, it continues to validate his GOAT impact.

Hakeem's cast RELATIVE to his competition is better than most of what Jokic has played with.

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massively expanding.

[StrongLurk]

Hakeem has faced better competition, not even close.

Top 5 centers Jokic faced vs Hakeems. It's night and day.
When Joker entered the league, the All-NBA 1st team center was DeAndre Jordan. Moses Malone was 1st team Hakeems rookie season.

Why would you make a post framing NBA basketball as a 1-on-1 competition?

It's team offense vs team defense.

[RRR3]

Stronglurk having an epic meltdown after Caruso shut down his hero :roll:


"Boo-boo-boo-buh-buh-buh Jokic is better than Hakeem because of his XVORP!"

[Baller234]

Jokic took a 68-win OKC team to a game 7 with an injured MPJ and Aaron Gordon. He had a really good series against an all-time great defense.

This doesn't take anything away from Jokic, in fact, it continues to validate his GOAT impact.

Hakeem's cast RELATIVE to his competition is better than most of what Jokic has played with.

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massively expanding.

Jokic has multiple players on his team who can score 20-25 on any given night. Gordon was absolutely huge for them. Murray never made all-star but we both know he's one the more talented guys in the league and one of the few players left who can beat you from midrange. Without him they don't win the championship that year.

Hakeem didn't have anyone nearly as good as Murray on the 93-94 team. Not only that he won his first ring against the Pat Riley Knicks which were an all time interior defensive team. AND he held Ewing well below his averages that series.

[brownmamba00]

He's not even better than Dirk

[Keno]

Stronglurk having an epic meltdown after Caruso shut down his hero :roll:


"Boo-boo-boo-buh-buh-buh Jokic is better than Hakeem because of his XVORP!"

can't even lie though, Stronglurk brings some well-reasoned arguments (backed up by facts, stats, eye test, & context) and persuasive points that are tough to counter.

[SouBeachTalents]

Jokic took a 68-win OKC team to a game 7 with an injured MPJ and Aaron Gordon. He had a really good series against an all-time great defense.

This doesn't take anything away from Jokic, in fact, it continues to validate his GOAT impact.

Hakeem's cast RELATIVE to his competition is better than most of what Jokic has played with.

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massively expanding.
He really didn't, like I explained earlier, he was underwhelming-bad in 4 of the 7 games this series, I don't know how you could say that's a "really good series", the final statline is not indicative of how he really played imo.

[Kblaze8855]

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massive expanding.




Really gonna keep posting that as if not making the all star team makes Jamal Murray worse at basketball than a bunch of people who did.

Just…straight up bullshitting.

Nobody on the 94 Rockets did anything close to Murray on his title run even accounting for era differences.

Jamal isn’t even particularly close to the bottom of the list of championship second options.

You could straight up knock five points a game off for the era he plays in and he still had runs better than some champion First options did.

Jokic does not need this bullshit fans have become obsessed with the last 20 years of belittling really good players Who are absolute difference makers for great players accomplishments.

[StrongLurk]

Jokic has multiple players on his team who can score 20-25 on any given night. Gordon was absolutely huge for them. Murray never made all-star but we both know he's one the more talented guys in the league and one of the few players left who can beat you from midrange. Without him they don't win the championship that year.

Hakeem didn't have anyone nearly as good as Murray on the 93-94 team. Not only that he won his first ring against the Pat Riley Knicks which were an all time interior defensive team. AND he held Ewing well below his averages that series.

Your brain doesn't work.

Hakeem's cast RELATIVE to his competition is better than most of what Jokic has played with.

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massively expanding.

The league absolutely SUCKED in 1994 and 1995. Hakeem on these Denver squads doesn't even make the finals, maybe not even the WCF.

[StrongLurk]

Really gonna keep posting that as if not making the all star team makes Jamal Murray worse at basketball than a bunch of people who did.

Just…straight up bullshitting.

Nobody on the 94 Rockets did anything close to Murray on his title run even accounting for era differences.

Jamal isn’t even particularly close to the bottom of the list of championship second options.

You could straight up knock five points a game off for the era he plays in and he still had runs better than some champion First options did.

Jokic does not need this bullshit fans have become obsessed with the last 20 years of belittling really good players Who are absolute difference makers for great players accomplishments.

Jamal Murray? The guy that missed the 21 and 22 playoffs entirely? The guy completely hobbled in the 2024 playoffs? The guy who just put up a 15.2 PER/55.5 TS% 2025 playoff run?

Please buddy. Murray had one great run in 2023 and wow, Jokic easily WON that year.

You can frame Murray however you want, he's not even an all-star level guy in this era and he gets hurt a lot. Imagine Jokic playing with the talent Steph did from 2014-now? Imagine Jokic with Lebron's 2011-2020 talent? Dude easily has 4-5 chips and at least 4 FMVPs.

[Baller234]

Jamal Murray? The guy that missed the 21 and 22 playoffs entirely? The guy completely hobbled in the 2024 playoffs? The guy who just put up a 15.2 PER/55.5 TS% 2025 playoff run?

Please buddy. Murray had one great run in 2023 and wow, Jokic easily WON that year.

You can frame Murray however you want, he's not even an all-star level guy in this era and he gets hurt a lot. Imagine Jokic playing with the talent Steph did from 2014-now? Imagine Jokic with Lebron's 2011-2020 talent? Dude easily has 4-5 chips and at least 4 FMVPs.

Murray hasn't technically made all-star, but to say he isn't all-star level? That's crazy. I don't think anyone would bat an eye if ever made all-star.

I'll give you that he's not the most consistent and he can be streaky, but his highs surpass a lot of guys in the league. When he's having a good game he's a real difference maker on the floor and a very dynamic presence. In fact sometimes he does shit that only he can do.

[Kblaze8855]

Sure. Not on the “level” of VanVleet and Deangelo Russell. As I said Jokic does not need a lying ass/delusional weirdo making teammates out to be bums when they had legit HOF caliber runs. The fans on that shit always breed more resentment than they actually change minds. Jokic gets nothing from this bs but haters he doesn’t deserve.

[RRR3]

Sure. Not on the “level” of VanVleet and Deangelo Russell. As I said Jokic does not need a lying ass/delusional weirdo making teammates out to be bums when they had legit HOF caliber runs. The fans on that shit always breed more resentment than they actually change minds. Jokic gets nothing from this bs but haters he doesn’t deserve.
It's ISH, ever good player has at least one of those people.

[Neal Romer]

Hakeem has faced better competition, not even close.

Top 5 centers Jokic faced vs Hakeems. It's night and day.
When Joker entered the league, the All-NBA 1st team center was DeAndre Jordan. Moses Malone was 1st team Hakeems rookie season.

It's also a lot harder to be successful as a center in today's game. The reason every other team doesnt have a Ewing, DRob, Shaq, Hakeem, Smits, Mourning like in the 90s is not because the whole globalized multibillion dollar industry of basketball suddenly somehow stopped being able to find anyone as good as them.

If you dont have a center who can post up and shoot from outside and pass, then youre not gonna play thru a center. Youll just have a mobile shot swatter like Rob Williams or Chet Homlgren or whoever. The reason theres not as many great centers as in the 90s is because fewer people are worth playing thru in todays three point centric game. Jokic and Embiid* are the rarest of talents who actually make it worth playing thru a center (Embiid only in the regular season and not even that anymore).

Guys like Moses and Ewing and Mourning wouldnt be big stars in this era. They would be Zubac or Bam. Jokic would have easily been a star in the 90s. He can do all the low post things they did back then plus all the perimeter stuff guys do today.

Thats the standard for centers today and not very many people on Earth can do it. Thats why the position sees less emphasis. The center position demands more than what it did back then.

[Baller234]

It's also a lot harder to be successful as a center in today's game. The reason every other team doesnt have a Ewing, DRob, Shaq, Hakeem, Smits, Mourning like in the 90s is not because the whole globalized multibillion dollar industry of basketball suddenly somehow stopped being able to find anyone as good as them.

If you dont have a center who can post up and shoot from outside and pass, then youre not gonna play thru a center. Youll just have a mobile shot swatter like Rob Williams or Chet Homlgren or whoever. The reason theres not as many great centers as in the 90s is because fewer people are worth playing thru in todays three point centric game. Jokic and Embiid* are the rarest of talents who actually make it worth playing thru a center (Embiid only in the regular season and not even that anymore).

Guys like Moses and Ewing and Mourning wouldnt be big stars in this era. They would be Zubac or Bam. Jokic would have easily been a star in the 90s. He can do all the low post things they did back then plus all the perimeter stuff guys do today.

Thats the standard for centers today and not very many people on Earth can do it. Thats why the position sees less emphasis. The center position demands more than what it did back then.

In the 90's you weren't surrounded by 3pt shooters in every direction and you didn't have unlimited space to dribble on offense. If Caruso could stay with him on the perimeter I think the guys in the 90's could also stay with him. Only in the 90's if Jokic has the ball at the top of the key there's a wall of defense waiting for him in the paint. Not an ideal situation for a sluggish 7 footer. He's not pulling that backdown shit on the Pat Riley Knicks.

[Neal Romer]

In the 90's you weren't surrounded by 3pt shooters in every direction and you didn't have unlimited space to dribble on offense. If Caruso could stay with him on the perimeter I think the guys in the 90's could also stay with him. Only in the 90's if Jokic has the ball at the top of the key there's a wall of defense waiting for him in the paint. Not an ideal situation for a sluggish 7 footer. He's not pulling that backdown shit on the Pat Riley Knicks.


You... dont think Jokic can play in the paint?

Is it because you think he lacks the size, the footwork, or the touch?

Which of those do you think he lacks?

Your post was very very weird.

[Baller234]

You... dont think Jokic can play in the paint?

Is it because you think he lacks the size, the footwork, or the touch?

Which of those do you think he lacks?

Your post was very very weird.

No, of course he can play in the paint. I'm telling you he wouldn't be as effective from the perimeter. He couldn't get the ball at the top of the key and just back people down.

He'd have to play more like a traditional center and camp out closer to the basket, but again if he did he wouldn't be as good as Hakeem.

[Neal Romer]

No, of course he can play in the paint. I'm telling you he wouldn't be as effective from the perimeter. He couldn't get the ball at the top of the key and just back people down.

He'd have to play more like a traditional center and camp out closer to the basket, but again if he did he wouldn't be as good as Hakeem.


Ok, but no centers played from the top of the key back then. He wouldnt be expected to do that.

My point was he could play low post back to the basket 90s center ball and be great. Not every great 90s center could be great in the 2020s. Otherwise we'd see more of them.

[Baller234]

Ok, but no centers played from the top of the key back then. He wouldnt be expected to do that.

My point was he could play low post back to the basket 90s center ball and be great. Not every great 90s center could be great in the 2020s. Otherwise we'd see more of them.

What makes you think those guys couldn't be great today? Because they don't shoot 3's?

It's easier to score now. The great scorers from the past would likely do better now.

[Neal Romer]

What makes you think those guys couldn't be great today? Because they don't shoot 3's?

It's easier to score now. The great scorers from the past would likely do better now.

Because we dont see as many dominant centers. So clearly not as many of them from the 90s would be great today, or we'd see their analogs.

The population of every basketball playing country hasnt gotten smaller. The financial incentive to play hasnt gotten lower. So, logically there isnt simply a lack of people capable of playing like centers from the 90s.

But other aspects of the game have become more refined and efficient. For one thing, defensive schemes. Teams taught defensive fundamentals back in 1972 but things like defensive schemes werent as detailed or intricate as what you see today.

Basketball is a competition and therefore is inevitably shaped by darwinian type evolution. Everything gets more and more refined for success. Of course rule changes are also a separate factor in shaping which players succeed, but even without rule changes, things like training, strategies, skills, and general talent would get continuously better. Thats nature. It would be much harder for a player from 1981 to score on a defense today than to score in his own time. But players today also have better offense, so scoring overall is similar.

Playing thru a back to the basket center today just isnt as effective given the way offenses have refined three point shooting and rim running. Or else more teams would do it. Its that simple. Brook Lopez has a 90s center type skillset (before he became exclusively a spacer) and he never was some dominant player. Being good in the 90s is not good ENOUGH today or we'd simply see more of it. Teams score more efficiently thru other means. The fact that Jokic is one of the few guys you can do it with and still win a title is the point. It tells you just how dominant he is to be a three time MVP in an era that evolved beyond conventional centers.

The idea that the best player in the 2020s cant hang with the best players from 1990 and 1970 and 1960 is just... absurd. It makes no sense logically. Thats why you see the GOBBs and RRR3s and highwheys positing such things. It's the kind of thing shallow intellects with emotional agendas would posit

[Neal Romer]

Thats not to say you cant PREFER Hakeem. Of course you can. You can make a case for any top 12-15 player over any other. It's subjective when youre talking about guys that close to the top. Theres not like a clear consecutive hierarchy the way people think there is, just because they see a lot of internet "top 10 lists" and think thats how it really works. "a is better than b who's better than c who's better than d." Thats not the reality.


But if you think Hakeem is objectively on some level well beyond Joker... your brain just isnt serious. Youre on NPC time.

[SouBeachTalents]

Thats not to say you cant PREFER Hakeem. Of course you can. You can make a case for any top 12-15 player over any other. It's subjective when youre talking about guys that close to the top. Theres not like a clear consecutive hierarchy the way people think there is, just because they see a lot of internet "top 10 lists" and think thats how it really works. "a is better than b who's better than c who's better than d." Thats not the reality.


But if you think Hakeem is objectively on some level well beyond Joker... your brain just isnt serious. Youre on NPC time.
Except LeBron.

[Neal Romer]

Except LeBron.


https://media.tenor.com/ga6heG8ZZJ0AAAAC/youre-damn-right-thats-correct.gif

[rmt]

Jokic took a 68-win OKC team to a game 7 with an injured MPJ and Aaron Gordon. He had a really good series against an all-time great defense.

This doesn't take anything away from Jokic, in fact, it continues to validate his GOAT impact.

Hakeem's cast RELATIVE to his competition is better than most of what Jokic has played with.

Jokic hasn't had a single teammate in his 10 year career make an all-star, all-defense, or all-nba team. It's the longest streak for any MVP winner.

Hakeem had better teammate talent and won his chips when MJ was retired and the league was massively expanding.

All-time great defense - mostly judged by today's perimeter oriented game. I'd like to see Jokic vs real big men - you know, the Shaqs, Hakeems, DRobs, etc of the world - not Alex Caruso.

I STRONGLY disagree with the better teammate talent - Hakeem had one of the weakest cast to ever win a ring. Murray can go off for 30 easily.

[Im Still Ballin]

Your ignorance about OKC's defense is astounding. Based on all metrics, stats, awards, and eye tests, OKC is the best defense factually over the last 20 years. I am hesitant to include the 2000-2004 due to how different the NBA played during this time, but OKC clearly has an argument.

-7.0 rDRtg in the regular season, and -9.3 rDRtg so far in the playoffs. Very impressive. Either '08 BOS or '25 OKC it looks like.

[Im Still Ballin]

Funnily enough, Hakeem had the most trouble with swarming, trapping, pressing, mobile defenses like Seattle and post-Kareem LA. OKC fits that style of defense.

[Overdrive]

Stronglurk having an epic meltdown after Caruso shut down his hero :roll:


"Boo-boo-boo-buh-buh-buh Jokic is better than Hakeem because of his XVORP!"

Funny how the tides turn. You used to bring up raptor and stuff like that. The inconsistency of arguments is amazing when it comes to basketball players.

[Overdrive]

All-time great defense - mostly judged by today's perimeter oriented game. I'd like to see Jokic vs real big men - you know, the Shaqs, Hakeems, DRobs, etc of the world - not Alex Caruso.


Taking this for any Alex Caruso argument:

Here's where the Hakeem/Jokic comparison becomes absolutely futile. Hakeem received the ball mid to close range. Sometimes high, sometimes midwing, often low. He wasn't expected to playmake, he was expected to score and suck in the defense. Most of his career he was absolutely trash passing out of double teams and had bad efficiency against doubles and traps until he changed his attitude late into his career. While he was one of my fav players he became massively overrated for one marquee matchup. Putting Caruso on him straight up 10 ft out woild be stupid.

Jokic is asked the absolute opposite. He's asked to receive the ball up top and playmake for his team. Sure it would've been needed to play him low this series, but how easy is it to change your whole system for one matchup?
Sure a great coach could've foreseen this and implemented a fallback system for this, but well in 2 weeks preperation time?

OKC made the smart move, they guarded a 6'11" guard with a guard. That's what most teams fail to do against Jokic. They throw bigs at him 25 ft out, which is kind of useless.

[rmt]

Recency bias or thinking of the sport as it is today (when comparing games/GOATS). Fans of all sports, it seems, do it.

Take tennis - they take past greats in their minds and compare to the Federer/Nadal/Djokovic of recent years IN today's game. (Mostly) they don't say imagine today's players going back in time playing with wooden racquets, fast balls and lightening quick courts - just saying there is no way anyone was winning 20+ Grand Slams back then the way this trio did because the game/rules have changed to encourage that - they have allowed the type of racquets and strings for more power, homogenized the surfaces and slowed down the balls. Now this trio is unlike Jokic in that they played AGAINST each other so at least you have ATGs playing under the same conditions/rules.

And since Jokic is a BIG man - and looking at him vs Embiid - what twice a year? is not going to give much of a sample, do you really compare going back the other way instead of coming forward in time? All I'm saying is both should be done - and wonder what Jokic would be like back in the day without the emphasis on 3 point shooting, laxer defensive rules and vs other similar sized big men. And if some are gonna make the case of 4th GOAT, one should at least think of that. Kudos to Jokic for having a near perfect game for today's NBA but GOAT talk (imo) (especially as high as 4th) needs to be backed up with rings because no matter how pretty his game is (and it is very beautiful to watch), I don't think those numbers/stats stand up vs competition against other ATG big men (back in the day, I mean).

[rmt]

Taking this for any Alex Caruso argument:

Here's where the Hakeem/Jokic comparison becomes absolutely futile. Hakeem received the ball mid to close range. Sometimes high, sometimes midwing, often low. He wasn't expected to playmake, he was expected to score and suck in the defense. Most of his career he was absolutely trash passing out of double teams and had bad efficiency against doubles and traps until he changed his attitude late into his career. While he was one of my fav players he became massively overrated for one marquee matchup. Putting Caruso on him straight up 10 ft out woild be stupid.

Jokic is asked the absolute opposite. He's asked to receive the ball up top and playmake for his team. Sure it would've been needed to play him low this series, but how easy is it to change your whole system for one matchup?
Sure a great coach could've foreseen this and implemented a fallback system for this, but well in 2 weeks preperation time?

OKC made the smart move, they guarded a 6'11" guard with a guard. That's what most teams fail to do against Jokic. They throw bigs at him 25 ft out, which is kind of useless.

Maybe coaches will catch on and put guards on him - we shall see.

[tpols]

Maybe coaches will catch on and put guards on him - we shall see.

It only works if there's a Westbrook type you don't have to guard. And Pooper Jr. Although he was technically hurt.

Anybody can be shut down if they're triple teamed on the 1st dribble, and their teammates aren't making the defense pay for that.

[HoopsNY]

If you watch the tape Hakeem didn't get pressed this hard. We mostly see him dealing with his opposing center 1v1.

Yolk was being blanketed by Caruso only on the perimeter. And the second Jokic caught a pass there immediately gooned by Dort on one side, and Chet on the back end with his lanky ass 7 foot shot blocking frame. Hartenstien chipping at him when ever hes down low, and then you got SGA, Williams, Dreads etc swiping every which way running track meet.

The dude was being triple teamed any time he took more than 1 dribble. How'd OKC do that? Leave pooper Jr and westbrick and Watson wide open. Worked like a charm.

I'm assuming you're referring to the series with Seattle? Complete opposite IIRC. Hakeem got swarmed consistently and that was actually George Karl's strategy. Seattle had solid perimeter defense and could close out better than every team not named Chicago. It worked to their advantage and the end result was what it was.

[Baller234]

Because we dont see as many dominant centers. So clearly not as many of them from the 90s would be great today, or we'd see their analogs.

The population of every basketball playing country hasnt gotten smaller. The financial incentive to play hasnt gotten lower. So, logically there isnt simply a lack of people capable of playing like centers from the 90s.

But other aspects of the game have become more refined and efficient. For one thing, defensive schemes. Teams taught defensive fundamentals back in 1972 but things like defensive schemes werent as detailed or intricate as what you see today.

Basketball is a competition and therefore is inevitably shaped by darwinian type evolution. Everything gets more and more refined for success. Of course rule changes are also a separate factor in shaping which players succeed, but even without rule changes, things like training, strategies, skills, and general talent would get continuously better. Thats nature. It would be much harder for a player from 1981 to score on a defense today than to score in his own time. But players today also have better offense, so scoring overall is similar.

Playing thru a back to the basket center today just isnt as effective given the way offenses have refined three point shooting and rim running. Or else more teams would do it. Its that simple. Brook Lopez has a 90s center type skillset (before he became exclusively a spacer) and he never was some dominant player. Being good in the 90s is not good ENOUGH today or we'd simply see more of it. Teams score more efficiently thru other means. The fact that Jokic is one of the few guys you can do it with and still win a title is the point. It tells you just how dominant he is to be a three time MVP in an era that evolved beyond conventional centers.

The idea that the best player in the 2020s cant hang with the best players from 1990 and 1970 and 1960 is just... absurd. It makes no sense logically. Thats why you see the GOBBs and RRR3s and highwheys positing such things. It's the kind of thing shallow intellects with emotional agendas would posit

You're not really making a logical argument here. Your entire premise hinges on "Well things evolve and players are better today so of course the players back then wouldn't be as good"... but that's just a blanket argument without really looking at the facts.

The players aren't better and more skilled today, they're just playing a different game. They're better at shooting 3's and shot making, but they lack all the other fundamentals. If you removed the 3pt line from the game today, 80% of the players in the league would become useless. The players haven't really evolved, it's the coaching that's evolved.

You say "well skills evolve that's nature", but anyone who's been watching the game for 25+ years can tell you that the big men today don't have anywhere near the same skill that they used to. Yes theoretically the players should become more skilled with time, Hakeem was more skilled than Wilt, but again big men today aren't playing the same game and they're developing in a totally different way. The skillsets we used to value in a big man aren't being emphasized today.

Scoring is way easier now, so logic dictates that the great scorers of the past would have no problem scoring today. I'm not sure how prime Hakeem suddenly becomes less effective in today's game when his Rockets were basically the prototype 3pt shooting team. There are guys in the league who dominate without stretching the floor. Giannis and Zion for example. Olajuwon is better than both of them.

And let's not even talk about defense because sure Hakeem would have to adjust his game defensively, there's defensive 3 seconds now, but lol I'm sure he would still do better than Joker who's basically a human EZ-Pass.