RealGM

Jokic averaging 20-11-9 on just 11.8 FGAs per game! Ranks 2nd in the league in TS% with 71! The rest of his advanced numbers are amazing as well. If his USG% stays that low, he'll become a legit candidate for the #1 pick in our games. In any case, his unselfishness is almost unprecedented for an elite caliber player. Only other name that comes to mind is Magic Johnson.

flaco wrote:Jokic averaging 20-11-9 on just 11.8 FGAs per game! Ranks 2nd in the league in TS% with 71! The rest of his advanced numbers are amazing as well. If his USG% stays that low, he'll become a legit candidate for the #1 pick in our games. In any case, his unselfishness is almost unprecedented for an elite caliber player. Only other name that comes to mind is Magic Johnson.

Steve Nash too--I would throw in Duncan and Curry to that mix of players recently who are unselfish.

Colbinii wrote:

flaco wrote:Jokic averaging 20-11-9 on just 11.8 FGAs per game! Ranks 2nd in the league in TS% with 71! The rest of his advanced numbers are amazing as well. If his USG% stays that low, he'll become a legit candidate for the #1 pick in our games. In any case, his unselfishness is almost unprecedented for an elite caliber player. Only other name that comes to mind is Magic Johnson.

Steve Nash too--I would throw in Duncan and Curry to that mix of players recently who are unselfish.

As great as Nash was, I wouldn't put him in the same tier with Jokic. Timmy is a good shout, but he never averaged anything close to a double-digit assist number. Imo, Curry doesn't belong in the conversation. He's a SG in a PG's body. Don't consider him overly unselfish.

The only other guy that fits the mold in my book is Arvydas Sabonis. Talent-wise, I'd put him in the same tier with Kareem, Wilt, Russ, Shaq and Dream. His BBIQ was out of this world. I truly consider him an even better passer than Jokic. Unfortunately, his prime was cut short due to multiple injuries. He was a shell of himself when he entered the NBA, yet he was still dominant.

flaco wrote:

Colbinii wrote:

flaco wrote:Jokic averaging 20-11-9 on just 11.8 FGAs per game! Ranks 2nd in the league in TS% with 71! The rest of his advanced numbers are amazing as well. If his USG% stays that low, he'll become a legit candidate for the #1 pick in our games. In any case, his unselfishness is almost unprecedented for an elite caliber player. Only other name that comes to mind is Magic Johnson.

Steve Nash too--I would throw in Duncan and Curry to that mix of players recently who are unselfish.

As great as Nash was, I wouldn't put him in the same tier with Jokic. Timmy is a good shout, but he never averaged anything close to a double-digit assist number. Imo, Curry doesn't belong in the conversation. He's a SG in a PG's body. Don't consider him overly unselfish.

The only other guy that fits the mold in my book is Arvydas Sabonis. Talent-wise, I'd put him in the same tier with Kareem, Wilt, Russ, Shaq and Dream. His BBIQ was out of this world. I truly consider him an even better passer than Jokic. Unfortunately, his prime was cut short due to multiple injuries. He was a shell of himself when he entered the NBA, yet he was still dominant.

Using assists as a proxy for unselfishness is a pretty flawed premise.

flaco wrote:

Colbinii wrote:

flaco wrote:Jokic averaging 20-11-9 on just 11.8 FGAs per game! Ranks 2nd in the league in TS% with 71! The rest of his advanced numbers are amazing as well. If his USG% stays that low, he'll become a legit candidate for the #1 pick in our games. In any case, his unselfishness is almost unprecedented for an elite caliber player. Only other name that comes to mind is Magic Johnson.

Steve Nash too--I would throw in Duncan and Curry to that mix of players recently who are unselfish.

As great as Nash was, I wouldn't put him in the same tier with Jokic. Timmy is a good shout, but he never averaged anything close to a double-digit assist number. Imo, Curry doesn't belong in the conversation. He's a SG in a PG's body. Don't consider him overly unselfish.

The only other guy that fits the mold in my book is Arvydas Sabonis. Talent-wise, I'd put him in the same tier with Kareem, Wilt, Russ, Shaq and Dream. His BBIQ was out of this world. I truly consider him an even better passer than Jokic. Unfortunately, his prime was cut short due to multiple injuries. He was a shell of himself when he entered the NBA, yet he was still dominant.

I'm simply saying these players listed were extremely unselfish--in the same tier as Jokic in that regard with how they carried themselves on and off the court--and they all had arguments for best player in the league as Jokic does.

We all know how big of a fanatic you are for Magic and Sabonis--we all have our biases

Fadeaway_J wrote:

flaco wrote:

Colbinii wrote:
Steve Nash too--I would throw in Duncan and Curry to that mix of players recently who are unselfish.

As great as Nash was, I wouldn't put him in the same tier with Jokic. Timmy is a good shout, but he never averaged anything close to a double-digit assist number. Imo, Curry doesn't belong in the conversation. He's a SG in a PG's body. Don't consider him overly unselfish.

The only other guy that fits the mold in my book is Arvydas Sabonis. Talent-wise, I'd put him in the same tier with Kareem, Wilt, Russ, Shaq and Dream. His BBIQ was out of this world. I truly consider him an even better passer than Jokic. Unfortunately, his prime was cut short due to multiple injuries. He was a shell of himself when he entered the NBA, yet he was still dominant.

Using assists as a proxy for unselfishness is a pretty flawed premise.

Passing is the ultimate way to make your teammates better. I would argue that USG% is also a very strong indicator of unselfishness, especially if we're talking about elite calibre players who basically have free rein to shoot at will. Agreed that these aren't the only indicators. Elite defenders make their teammates better as well or elite shooters (due to better spacing). When it comes to passing and USG%, Jokic and Magic are heads and shoulders above everybody else.

flaco wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:

flaco wrote:As great as Nash was, I wouldn't put him in the same tier with Jokic. Timmy is a good shout, but he never averaged anything close to a double-digit assist number. Imo, Curry doesn't belong in the conversation. He's a SG in a PG's body. Don't consider him overly unselfish.

The only other guy that fits the mold in my book is Arvydas Sabonis. Talent-wise, I'd put him in the same tier with Kareem, Wilt, Russ, Shaq and Dream. His BBIQ was out of this world. I truly consider him an even better passer than Jokic. Unfortunately, his prime was cut short due to multiple injuries. He was a shell of himself when he entered the NBA, yet he was still dominant.

Using assists as a proxy for unselfishness is a pretty flawed premise.

Passing is the ultimate way to make your teammates better. I would argue that USG% is also a very strong indicator of unselfishness, especially if we're talking about elite calibre players who basically have free rein to shoot at will. Agreed that these aren't the only indicators. Elite defenders make their teammates better as well or elite shooters (due to better spacing). When it comes to passing and USG%, Jokic and Magic are heads and shoulders above everybody else.

I would definitely include Nash here if you are using passing and Usage. Nash had a lower usage than Magic post-kareem [Late 1980s/early 90s] and was the best playmaker/passer in the league.

Colbinii wrote:

flaco wrote:

Fadeaway_J wrote:Using assists as a proxy for unselfishness is a pretty flawed premise.

Passing is the ultimate way to make your teammates better. I would argue that USG% is also a very strong indicator of unselfishness, especially if we're talking about elite calibre players who basically have free rein to shoot at will. Agreed that these aren't the only indicators. Elite defenders make their teammates better as well or elite shooters (due to better spacing). When it comes to passing and USG%, Jokic and Magic are heads and shoulders above everybody else.

I would definitely include Nash here if you are using passing and Usage. Nash had a lower usage than Magic post-kareem [Late 1980s/early 90s] and was the best playmaker/passer in the league.

Sure, I just think he peaked lower than Magic and Jokic. Talent-wise, I'd put Nash one tier below alongside guys like Stockton and Kidd. All of them were very unselfish players, but imo Jokic is clearly better.

If Jokic finishes the season with ~12 FGAs per game, he'll become a legit #1 pick in our games. No way would I ever consider Nash at #1 (assuming all the mega stars are available).

Hasn’t been a post here in a minute so no idea if this will catch any eyes:

Will this season impact Luka’s value in drafts? On one hand it’s by far his best season to date by any statistical metric. On the other hand he’s accomplished it by taking even more shots (nearly 23 at the time of this post) and embracing an even more heliocentric play style with lots of post-ups that isn’t well loved as a play style in these games.

Snakebites wrote:Hasn’t been a post here in a minute so no idea if this will catch any eyes:

Will this season impact Luka’s value in drafts? On one hand it’s by far his best season to date by any statistical metric. On the other hand he’s accomplished it by taking even more shots (nearly 23 at the time of this post) and embracing an even more heliocentric play style with lots of post-ups that isn’t well loved as a play style in these games.

There are a lot of problems with Luka when it comes to our games. He is quite expensive, not a noted defender, and is a 6-7, 230 pound PG (which has + and -). And as you said, because the Mavericks have no other real offense the entire offense revolves around him. He hasn't yet showed how he would work alongside other legitimate all-star offensive players. I'm sure he'd do great, but there's no proof.

In a vacuum, who do you think is more valuable, 2022 Luka or 2003 TMac? I think that's the best comparison in terms of value in our games. AI and Westbrook are similar to some extent as well although they are wildly inefficient compared to Luka which kills their value.

wackbone wrote:

Snakebites wrote:Hasn’t been a post here in a minute so no idea if this will catch any eyes:

Will this season impact Luka’s value in drafts? On one hand it’s by far his best season to date by any statistical metric. On the other hand he’s accomplished it by taking even more shots (nearly 23 at the time of this post) and embracing an even more heliocentric play style with lots of post-ups that isn’t well loved as a play style in these games.

There are a lot of problems with Luka when it comes to our games. He is quite expensive, not a noted defender, and is a 6-7, 230 pound PG (which has + and -). And as you said, because the Mavericks have no other real offense the entire offense revolves around him. He hasn't yet showed how he would work alongside other legitimate all-star offensive players. I'm sure he'd do great, but there's no proof.

In a vacuum, who do you think is more valuable, 2022 Luka or 2003 TMac? I think that's the best comparison in terms of value in our games. AI and Westbrook are similar to some extent as well although they are wildly inefficient compared to Luka which kills their value.

Luka and it's not even close. He's more efficient. He makes his teammates better despite his high USG%. He's a killer in the clutch.

A few other notable players who will probably see their draft stock rise after this season: Haliburton, SGA, Markkanen, Tatum, amazingly enough Jokic due to fewer FGAs and higher efficiency.

I'd love to pair Markkanen with Giannis.

flaco wrote:

wackbone wrote:

Snakebites wrote:Hasn’t been a post here in a minute so no idea if this will catch any eyes:

Will this season impact Luka’s value in drafts? On one hand it’s by far his best season to date by any statistical metric. On the other hand he’s accomplished it by taking even more shots (nearly 23 at the time of this post) and embracing an even more heliocentric play style with lots of post-ups that isn’t well loved as a play style in these games.

There are a lot of problems with Luka when it comes to our games. He is quite expensive, not a noted defender, and is a 6-7, 230 pound PG (which has + and -). And as you said, because the Mavericks have no other real offense the entire offense revolves around him. He hasn't yet showed how he would work alongside other legitimate all-star offensive players. I'm sure he'd do great, but there's no proof.

In a vacuum, who do you think is more valuable, 2022 Luka or 2003 TMac? I think that's the best comparison in terms of value in our games. AI and Westbrook are similar to some extent as well although they are wildly inefficient compared to Luka which kills their value.

Luka and it's not even close. He's more efficient. He makes his teammates better despite his high USG%. He's a killer in the clutch.

A few other notable players who will probably see their draft stock rise after this season: Haliburton, SGA, Markkanen, Tatum, amazingly enough Jokic due to fewer FGAs and higher efficiency.

I'd love to pair Markkanen with Giannis.

Yeah, you almost have to pair him with Giannis or someone else who can play that classic rim protector role. Teams with poor defensive centers seldom do well in these. Some may point to Jokic but even before his defensive step forward last year he had better metrics than Lauri.

And yeah as much as I like 2003 TMAC he lead his team to 42 wins and a first round exit. Luka is a better all round player. They aren’t really the same type of player though, so it’s not apples to apples. They both shoot a lot and played on teams without much support at their peaks- that’s pretty much it to me.

Snakebites wrote:

flaco wrote:

wackbone wrote:There are a lot of problems with Luka when it comes to our games. He is quite expensive, not a noted defender, and is a 6-7, 230 pound PG (which has + and -). And as you said, because the Mavericks have no other real offense the entire offense revolves around him. He hasn't yet showed how he would work alongside other legitimate all-star offensive players. I'm sure he'd do great, but there's no proof.

In a vacuum, who do you think is more valuable, 2022 Luka or 2003 TMac? I think that's the best comparison in terms of value in our games. AI and Westbrook are similar to some extent as well although they are wildly inefficient compared to Luka which kills their value.

Luka and it's not even close. He's more efficient. He makes his teammates better despite his high USG%. He's a killer in the clutch.

A few other notable players who will probably see their draft stock rise after this season: Haliburton, SGA, Markkanen, Tatum, amazingly enough Jokic due to fewer FGAs and higher efficiency.

I'd love to pair Markkanen with Giannis.

Yeah, you almost have to pair him with Giannis or someone else who can play that classic rim protector role. Teams with poor defensive centers seldom do well in these. Some may point to Jokic but even before his defensive step forward last year he had better metrics than Lauri.

And yeah as much as I like 2003 TMAC he lead his team to 42 wins and a first round exit. Luka is a better all round player. They aren’t really the same type of player though, so it’s not apples to apples. They both shoot a lot and played on teams without much support at their peaks- that’s pretty much it to me.

Starting-calibre stretch 5s don't grow on trees. I mean, the vast majority of bigs prior to the pace-and-space era were non-shooters. Markkanen would definitely fill a need in our games. The Jazz use him mostly at PF/SF, but I'd move him at the 5 if he were playing with Giannis. I envision him in the role of Bobby Portis stretching the floor on offense and hedging against Pick and Rolls. His defensive role is what differentiates him from KAT who's effective only in a drop scheme.

Snakebites wrote:

flaco wrote:

wackbone wrote:There are a lot of problems with Luka when it comes to our games. He is quite expensive, not a noted defender, and is a 6-7, 230 pound PG (which has + and -). And as you said, because the Mavericks have no other real offense the entire offense revolves around him. He hasn't yet showed how he would work alongside other legitimate all-star offensive players. I'm sure he'd do great, but there's no proof.

In a vacuum, who do you think is more valuable, 2022 Luka or 2003 TMac? I think that's the best comparison in terms of value in our games. AI and Westbrook are similar to some extent as well although they are wildly inefficient compared to Luka which kills their value.

Luka and it's not even close. He's more efficient. He makes his teammates better despite his high USG%. He's a killer in the clutch.

A few other notable players who will probably see their draft stock rise after this season: Haliburton, SGA, Markkanen, Tatum, amazingly enough Jokic due to fewer FGAs and higher efficiency.

I'd love to pair Markkanen with Giannis.

Yeah, you almost have to pair him with Giannis or someone else who can play that classic rim protector role. Teams with poor defensive centers seldom do well in these. Some may point to Jokic but even before his defensive step forward last year he had better metrics than Lauri.

And yeah as much as I like 2003 TMAC he lead his team to 42 wins and a first round exit. Luka is a better all round player. They aren’t really the same type of player though, so it’s not apples to apples. They both shoot a lot and played on teams without much support at their peaks- that’s pretty much it to me.

Right I know they don't have the same game, my point was with their high FGA cost and being the only offense on their IRL team. TMac and Luka are more efficient/valuable than guys like AI and Westbrook who also have high FGA cost and have seasons where they are the only offense.

flaco wrote:

Snakebites wrote:

flaco wrote:Luka and it's not even close. He's more efficient. He makes his teammates better despite his high USG%. He's a killer in the clutch.

A few other notable players who will probably see their draft stock rise after this season: Haliburton, SGA, Markkanen, Tatum, amazingly enough Jokic due to fewer FGAs and higher efficiency.

I'd love to pair Markkanen with Giannis.

Yeah, you almost have to pair him with Giannis or someone else who can play that classic rim protector role. Teams with poor defensive centers seldom do well in these. Some may point to Jokic but even before his defensive step forward last year he had better metrics than Lauri.

And yeah as much as I like 2003 TMAC he lead his team to 42 wins and a first round exit. Luka is a better all round player. They aren’t really the same type of player though, so it’s not apples to apples. They both shoot a lot and played on teams without much support at their peaks- that’s pretty much it to me.

Starting-calibre stretch 5s don't grow on trees. I mean, the vast majority of bigs prior to the pace-and-space era were non-shooters. Markkanen would definitely fill a need in our games. The Jazz use him mostly at PF/SF, but I'd move him at the 5 if he were playing with Giannis. I envision him in the role of Bobby Portis stretching the floor on offense and running hedge-and-recover when defending the PnR. His defensive role is what differentiates him from KAT who's effective only in a drop scheme on defense.

Depending on the matchup, putting Giannis at C could pay dividends. I wouldn't want him guarding the typical all time great Cs we normally see, but if going up against a Dikembe or similar, or in a modern pool against most anyone not named Embiid or Jokic, Giannis at C could be a huge advantage.

wackbone wrote:

flaco wrote:

Snakebites wrote:Yeah, you almost have to pair him with Giannis or someone else who can play that classic rim protector role. Teams with poor defensive centers seldom do well in these. Some may point to Jokic but even before his defensive step forward last year he had better metrics than Lauri.

And yeah as much as I like 2003 TMAC he lead his team to 42 wins and a first round exit. Luka is a better all round player. They aren’t really the same type of player though, so it’s not apples to apples. They both shoot a lot and played on teams without much support at their peaks- that’s pretty much it to me.

Starting-calibre stretch 5s don't grow on trees. I mean, the vast majority of bigs prior to the pace-and-space era were non-shooters. Markkanen would definitely fill a need in our games. The Jazz use him mostly at PF/SF, but I'd move him at the 5 if he were playing with Giannis. I envision him in the role of Bobby Portis stretching the floor on offense and running hedge-and-recover when defending the PnR. His defensive role is what differentiates him from KAT who's effective only in a drop scheme on defense.

Depending on the matchup, putting Giannis at C could pay dividends. I wouldn't want him guarding the typical all time great Cs we normally see, but if going up against a Dikembe or similar, or in a modern pool against most anyone not named Embiid or Jokic, Giannis at C could be a huge advantage.

Giannis is hands down the best help defender in the NBA. It seems like he's everywhere at the same time thanks to his elite physical tools and athleticism. The Bucks use him as a free safety on D. I believe this is the best way to maximize his defensive impact. If you play him at Center, you don't take advantage of his elite help defense anymore. I wouldn't use him full time at Center regardless of individual matchups.

flaco wrote:

wackbone wrote:

flaco wrote:Starting-calibre stretch 5s don't grow on trees. I mean, the vast majority of bigs prior to the pace-and-space era were non-shooters. Markkanen would definitely fill a need in our games. The Jazz use him mostly at PF/SF, but I'd move him at the 5 if he were playing with Giannis. I envision him in the role of Bobby Portis stretching the floor on offense and running hedge-and-recover when defending the PnR. His defensive role is what differentiates him from KAT who's effective only in a drop scheme on defense.

Depending on the matchup, putting Giannis at C could pay dividends. I wouldn't want him guarding the typical all time great Cs we normally see, but if going up against a Dikembe or similar, or in a modern pool against most anyone not named Embiid or Jokic, Giannis at C could be a huge advantage.

Giannis is hands down the best help defender in the NBA. It seems like he's everywhere at the same time thanks to his elite physical tools and athleticism. The Bucks use him as a free safety on D. I believe this is the best way to maximize his defensive impact. If you play him at Center, you don't take advantage of his elite help defense anymore. I wouldn't use him full time at Center regardless of individual matchups.

Fair enough. Same with KG.

Snakebites wrote:Hasn’t been a post here in a minute so no idea if this will catch any eyes:

Will this season impact Luka’s value in drafts? On one hand it’s by far his best season to date by any statistical metric. On the other hand he’s accomplished it by taking even more shots (nearly 23 at the time of this post) and embracing an even more heliocentric play style with lots of post-ups that isn’t well loved as a play style in these games.

Guessing it'd be taken sometimes like 2018 Harden or 2004 KG. The 2 extra field goals for this upgraded version of Doncic is not a bad deal.

flaco wrote:

Snakebites wrote:

flaco wrote:Luka and it's not even close. He's more efficient. He makes his teammates better despite his high USG%. He's a killer in the clutch.

A few other notable players who will probably see their draft stock rise after this season: Haliburton, SGA, Markkanen, Tatum, amazingly enough Jokic due to fewer FGAs and higher efficiency.

I'd love to pair Markkanen with Giannis.

Yeah, you almost have to pair him with Giannis or someone else who can play that classic rim protector role. Teams with poor defensive centers seldom do well in these. Some may point to Jokic but even before his defensive step forward last year he had better metrics than Lauri.

And yeah as much as I like 2003 TMAC he lead his team to 42 wins and a first round exit. Luka is a better all round player. They aren’t really the same type of player though, so it’s not apples to apples. They both shoot a lot and played on teams without much support at their peaks- that’s pretty much it to me.

Starting-calibre stretch 5s don't grow on trees. I mean, the vast majority of bigs prior to the pace-and-space era were non-shooters. Markkanen would definitely fill a need in our games. The Jazz use him mostly at PF/SF, but I'd move him at the 5 if he were playing with Giannis. I envision him in the role of Bobby Portis stretching the floor on offense and hedging against Pick and Rolls. His defensive role is what differentiates him from KAT who's effective only in a drop scheme.

The stretch part isn't actually that difficult to find if you're willing to accept a weak defender at the 5, which I just don't think is viable in these games (or in real life for that matter). Portis isn't a very encouraging comparison because he's very much a backup big at the highest level. OK so their teams ask them to hedge in pick-and-rolls, but that's because they aren't offering any rim protection in a drop scheme, not because they're amazing at hedging.

2022-23 is obviously a step in a vacuum, but I'm not sure how much it changes my outlook on Luka in the context of these games. His style of play is very extreme, both in terms of the level of ball-dominance and the type of players you need to put alongside him. I think he's a better player than T-Mac and his draft position usually reflects that, but T-Mac has a game that is easier to fit alongside most other great players. (Back in his era, even the most ball-dominant wing scorers were accustomed to working off the ball, feeding post-up bigs, etc.) If the current spread pick-and-roll playstyle had been in vogue 20 years ago, we would have more high-end players who are natural fits with Luka, but that's not the case in reality.