Is Jokic better than Lebron ever was ? Has he already peaked higher ? How long before he surpasses him all time?

[bledredwine]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Lebron repeated 12 and 13 with the heatles superteam

Sure, I mean who was peaking in the NBA during 2011-2014. Roy Hibbert? Luol Deng? Lol.

Kobe, KD, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard were the other members of the 1st team all nba (along with LeBron)

Very well could beat this years 1st team all nba….

Kobe was past his prime 11-14. Kd only started hitting his prime around 13/14
Cp3 and Howard yea
Rose but he was young.
Duncan was out of his prime too. And dirk . Can't think of anyone else.
Maybe bosh, and wade 11 and 12 lol

Ah, you're right. My fault - I was thinking they were another year apart.

[hardenASG13]

There’s certainly some ways that prime LeBron would be better than LeBron was in this current series. As you said, for instance, he had more energy back then. And that’s a big deal! But, at the same time, there are reasons that LeBron in this series put up the kinds of numbers that he did such that they were competitive with prime LeBron numbers—specifically, there were things that he happened to do even better than prime LeBron generally did (again, largely just because it’s a tiny sample). For instance, in this series, LeBron shot 39% from three, 50% on shots from 16 feet to the three-point line, and 60% on shots between 10-16 feet from the basket. In other words, LeBron’s jump shooting overall was way better than normal. We would expect prime LeBron to shoot notably worse than that. So yeah, if you put prime LeBron in this series, there’s definitely things he’d do notably better, but there’s also things he’d almost certainly do notably worse. Which is why the stats from this series look pretty competitive with prime LeBron. We can’t just assume that you’d get all the advantages of prime LeBron while *also* having the same random positive variance that made this an outlier series for current LeBron. Or at least, if we did assume that, then we’d be comparing Jokic to prime LeBron *plus* favorable variance—which obviously isn’t a fair thing to compare to Jokic.

The bottom line is that once we accept the fact that LeBron played substantially better in this series than his current baseline (which you explicitly agreed with), then it really makes no sense to make some analogy that ignores that. The analogy is attenuated anyways, but if you’re going to entertain it, the question is not how much better prime LeBron was than current LeBron, but rather how much better prime LeBron was than LeBron in this particular series (including any advantageous variance he had). And again, I think that’s a much closer call (and statistics generally agree with that), and Jokic was still clearly the better player in the series, so it’s not an analogy that I think fairly leads to the conclusion you’re pushing for.

His shooting has improved out of necessity, because he doesn't have the energy to play like he did at his peak. In his peak, the percentages you referenced, if they were lower, didn't hold him back at all, as a scorer or offensive player. He was better overall then, despite being a better shooter now. And that's what matters, is how much better he was at both ends in his prime. Which I think is significantly, despite the shooting percentages from different zones this year.

As an initial matter, you’re just handwaving away an improvement in his game. If you only think about the ways he was better in the past and don’t consider the ways he was worse, then you’re obviously going to get a distorted picture of exactly how much better he was in the past. In any event, though, this isn’t really just a matter of his shooting being better nowadays. If it was, then LeBron wouldn’t have done much better in this series than his current baseline. For instance, LeBron doesn’t normally shoot 50% from 16 feet to the three-point line and 60% from 10-16 feet. He shot 37% and 31% respectively from those distances in the regular season (and it’s 39% and 35% over the last four years). This was an outlier by the standards of any era of his career, while the three-point-shooting was perhaps not an outlier for LeBron right now but was definitely better than you’d expect from prime LeBron. And that’s not even getting into the shots from short midrange (3-10 feet), which LeBron also made in this series at a rate far above the rate that he makes them now or in his prime. LeBron was just on a heater in general in those 5 games, and if you replace him with prime LeBron you’d get a player who is substantially better in many ways but would presumably not be on the same kind of shooting hot streak. Again, it’s not so clear that the result would be a lot better, and stats don’t really indicate it would be that much better.

And by the way, it’s definitely incorrect to say LeBron’s shooting “didn’t hold him back at all” in his prime. It absolutely did. It was probably the thing that held him back the most his entire career—and I’m sure even LeBron himself would acknowledge that. You seem to be suggesting that prime LeBron just had the energy to go to the hoop all the time. But that’s really not what happened. LeBron has always had to take a lot of jump shots. In fact, from 2006-2020, LeBron took 51.6% of his field goal attempts from 10+ feet (and it was 50.6% in the playoffs), while it has been 50.3% in the last four years. Jump shots have always been about half his FG attempts (the shift in recent years has just been to make more of those jump shots be threes). Granted, I suspect with today’s spacing prime LeBron could get the percent of his shots that are jump shots down a little bit, but it’d still be a really major part of his offensive game. And if you take away the positive shooting variance he had in this series, he genuinely needs to be substantially better in other ways just to make up for that. I do think prime LeBron *would* be enough better in other ways to make up for it, but I don’t know that it’d be *that* much better—nor do stats suggest it necessarily would be. And, again, Jokic was clearly better in this series, so I don’t think the analogy is all that favorable for LeBron when we actually dig into it.

Of course, I also just think it’s an unnecessary analogy in general. Like, this comparison of LeBron in this series to prime LeBron just seems like a needless middleman. If we’re going to be comparing prime LeBron directly to something else, we might as well just cut out the middleman and compare that directly to Jokic.

This whole thread is comparing him to Jokic!

Wow that's alot of stats to research. His shooting didn't hold him back in the sense his game was more to drive and collapse a defense/finish. He was extremely good at it. Of course he also had to take jumpshots. That doesn't mean jumpers were ideal for his game then or now. He's not an all time great because of his jump shot. It was his size, athleticism and feel for the game.

I agree if he was always the caliber of shooter he is now he would've been even better. It doesn't mean he wasn't the best offensive player for like a decade straight though, so it didn't really hold him back at all, he was the best in the league. He clearly isn't anymore, not because guys like Jokic are better than he was. He's just 39 now.

[ScrantonBulls]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Lmao when did you start watching the NBA?

[bledredwine]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Lmao when did you start watching the NBA?

Before you were born lmao.

[Mr Loggins]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

No it is not. Why would it be a debate? Hakeem won 2 championship in a roll and he is not even in the conversation. Neither is Shaq and he won 3 in a roll.

He is absolutely in the conversation, if you care about defense.

And yes, Jokic will have done that, and will have put up better stats. I don't know what else to tell you.

its tough to know what to make of stats in the era of pace & space. I mean, do you consider Westbrooks triple double seasons to be among the greatest seasons of all time?

[dhsilv2]

Wow. 4 more BPM! Awesome!

Um, 4 BPM actually is quite a lot. That’s like the difference between Steph Curry’s career BPM and Mike Conley’s career BPM. Or LeBron’s career BPM and Dame’s. Or Michael Jordan’s and Clyde Drexler’s. It’s not a small difference.

Granted, I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in stats like this in such tiny samples. But that flaw goes more to the argument it seems like you’re making. This weird attenuated argument that current LeBron was purportedly close to peak Jokic in a series and peak LeBron was much better than current LeBron and therefore peak LeBron was much better than peak Jokic is just overly complicated nonsense. Even leaving aside that Jokic was a lot better than LeBron in this past series, a single series is a tiny sample size where there’s tons of variance in how well someone plays, and LeBron played a lot better than his average current level. So yeah, current LeBron is not as good as peak LeBron, but current LeBron playing well above his normal level (as he was in that series) may not be *that* much behind peak LeBron.

Like, for reference on this, LeBron’s Thinking Basketball BPM in these playoffs was 7.8. Meanwhile, he was rocking a 5.8 BPM during the regular season, and last year he had a 4.8 BPM in the regular season and a 5.22 BPM in the playoffs, while it was 5.1 in the 2022 regular season, and 5.6 in the 2021 regular season and 4.22 in the 2021 playoffs. So this performance was a clear outlier from what current LeBron generally is. Which isn’t super surprising to see, since 5 games is a tiny sample, so you’d expect a lot of variance—someone can play a lot better or worse than normal over 5 games. So how does this outlier performance compare to LeBron in his younger years? Well, a 7.8 BPM is above every regular season LeBron has had except 2009, 2010, and 2013! And, in terms of playoff BPM, it’s towards the bottom compared to the rest of his prime years, but it’s ahead of some of them (2007, 2008, 2011, and 2015) and clustered within 0.6 of 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2018. Only the 2009 and 2016 playoffs are more than 1.6 ahead. If we instead look at Basketball-Reference’s BPM, we see a very similar story. LeBron has a 7.0 BBREF BPM in the last 4 seasons (and 6.5 in this season specifically). But his BPM in the playoffs this year was 10.6. Compared to his prime regular seasons, that is only below the 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2013 regular seasons (and only below 2008 and 2012 by a tiny amount). And in terms of playoffs in his prime, it is only below 2009, 2010, 2016, and 2018 (and only 2009 is ahead by more than 2). And, of course, LeBron was doing this in these playoffs while facing better than the average playoff opponent—which you’d expect to skew his output downwards. So, basically, I think the better reading here is that old LeBron is generally pretty far off from prime LeBron, but that in the course of a tiny five-game sample, old LeBron managed to play pretty similar to the level he did in his prime. And that makes the entire logic chain that you’re pushing break down.

You nailed it.....using BPM in a 5 game series isn't some amazing way to evaluate anything. Yes lebron played really well in this series compared to his current baseline. It doesn't mean he played like prime lebron though, and the evidence is having seen prime lebron play, the energy he had. He doesn't have that energy anymore, to take over a game/series like he used to on both ends, breaking down the defense and covering everything. No stats or math needed to see that. I consider prime lebron much better than current lebron, and think based on how well current lebron played in the series, that prime Lebron would've comfortably been the best player in the series. I'm not sure why "math" is needed like dhsilv2 to form an opinion like that. It's OK to have opinions based on logic and not blindly follow formulas made by strangers, especially when talking about the top players, to form all opinions.

Do you think prime Lebron wouldve been significantly better in this series for the Lakers than current lebron? I do, by a pretty wide margin, which is my point. I really don't care about the BPMs, because I saw the games. Current lebron wasn't far off from being the best player in that series, he just ran out of gas and had to pick his spots alot more than he did in his prime. Is anyone on this board capable of talking hoops rather than posting numbers from whatever the hot advanced stats formula is?

Nobody thinks BPM over a small sample is good. It's just better than your argument which is "I feel and nothing can change how my emotions drive me".

[dhsilv2]

There are people on this board who have flat out told me that their approach to rating players doesn't require them to watch games. They just need the advanced stats. That's very sad, and we're seeing that undercurrent here. Jokic is not close to peak Lebron. Not. Close.

Show me where any person here has said that? Unless you're trying to compare two completely night and day different players.

[dhsilv2]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Not sure what's odder...you said this (we all can make a mistake sure) or someone and one'd it. But lebron won in 2012 and 2013...

[Packbuckman]

Murray just hits two clutch shots to win two games against the Lakers to eliminate them and we get a Jokic better than LeBron thread

[hardenASG13]

Um, 4 BPM actually is quite a lot. That’s like the difference between Steph Curry’s career BPM and Mike Conley’s career BPM. Or LeBron’s career BPM and Dame’s. Or Michael Jordan’s and Clyde Drexler’s. It’s not a small difference.

Granted, I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in stats like this in such tiny samples. But that flaw goes more to the argument it seems like you’re making. This weird attenuated argument that current LeBron was purportedly close to peak Jokic in a series and peak LeBron was much better than current LeBron and therefore peak LeBron was much better than peak Jokic is just overly complicated nonsense. Even leaving aside that Jokic was a lot better than LeBron in this past series, a single series is a tiny sample size where there’s tons of variance in how well someone plays, and LeBron played a lot better than his average current level. So yeah, current LeBron is not as good as peak LeBron, but current LeBron playing well above his normal level (as he was in that series) may not be *that* much behind peak LeBron.

Like, for reference on this, LeBron’s Thinking Basketball BPM in these playoffs was 7.8. Meanwhile, he was rocking a 5.8 BPM during the regular season, and last year he had a 4.8 BPM in the regular season and a 5.22 BPM in the playoffs, while it was 5.1 in the 2022 regular season, and 5.6 in the 2021 regular season and 4.22 in the 2021 playoffs. So this performance was a clear outlier from what current LeBron generally is. Which isn’t super surprising to see, since 5 games is a tiny sample, so you’d expect a lot of variance—someone can play a lot better or worse than normal over 5 games. So how does this outlier performance compare to LeBron in his younger years? Well, a 7.8 BPM is above every regular season LeBron has had except 2009, 2010, and 2013! And, in terms of playoff BPM, it’s towards the bottom compared to the rest of his prime years, but it’s ahead of some of them (2007, 2008, 2011, and 2015) and clustered within 0.6 of 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2018. Only the 2009 and 2016 playoffs are more than 1.6 ahead. If we instead look at Basketball-Reference’s BPM, we see a very similar story. LeBron has a 7.0 BBREF BPM in the last 4 seasons (and 6.5 in this season specifically). But his BPM in the playoffs this year was 10.6. Compared to his prime regular seasons, that is only below the 2008, 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2013 regular seasons (and only below 2008 and 2012 by a tiny amount). And in terms of playoffs in his prime, it is only below 2009, 2010, 2016, and 2018 (and only 2009 is ahead by more than 2). And, of course, LeBron was doing this in these playoffs while facing better than the average playoff opponent—which you’d expect to skew his output downwards. So, basically, I think the better reading here is that old LeBron is generally pretty far off from prime LeBron, but that in the course of a tiny five-game sample, old LeBron managed to play pretty similar to the level he did in his prime. And that makes the entire logic chain that you’re pushing break down.

You nailed it.....using BPM in a 5 game series isn't some amazing way to evaluate anything. Yes lebron played really well in this series compared to his current baseline. It doesn't mean he played like prime lebron though, and the evidence is having seen prime lebron play, the energy he had. He doesn't have that energy anymore, to take over a game/series like he used to on both ends, breaking down the defense and covering everything. No stats or math needed to see that. I consider prime lebron much better than current lebron, and think based on how well current lebron played in the series, that prime Lebron would've comfortably been the best player in the series. I'm not sure why "math" is needed like dhsilv2 to form an opinion like that. It's OK to have opinions based on logic and not blindly follow formulas made by strangers, especially when talking about the top players, to form all opinions.

Do you think prime Lebron wouldve been significantly better in this series for the Lakers than current lebron? I do, by a pretty wide margin, which is my point. I really don't care about the BPMs, because I saw the games. Current lebron wasn't far off from being the best player in that series, he just ran out of gas and had to pick his spots alot more than he did in his prime. Is anyone on this board capable of talking hoops rather than posting numbers from whatever the hot advanced stats formula is?

Nobody thinks BPM over a small sample is good. It's just better than your argument which is "I feel and nothing can change how my emotions drive me".

Is it better though? Why post a stat you know is a bad measurement as a main argument then? That's actually just lazy and weak.

There's no emotions. I just noticed how well Lebron did in this series, and that he was gassed and didn't have the energy he used to which would've made a huge difference. Because he's 39. These games were close, but LA consistently couldn't hold a lead. Prime Lebron takes them over the top in that regard imo, because he used to be a monster on both ends all game. I don't think that's crazy to say or emotional at all. I don't see how it can be denied, honestly. Being that these games were so close as is, it leads me to believe prime lebron would've been the best player in this series, and would've won it vs. Prime Jokic. And were here arguing whether Jokics Prime is better than Lebrons.

I'm just glad we're going to get to see Jokic and Denver finally go up against some legit teams the next few rounds, as he didn't get a chance to do that last year. It's where I measure greatness, whether a player can step up, lead and take over a series that is an even fight. I'm really hoping to see a Denver vs Boston (with kristaps) final because I want to see the best vs. the best, and how he will step up to lead his team.

[B-easy]

Murray just hits two clutch shots to win two games against the Lakers to eliminate them and we get a Jokic better than LeBron thread

23 pts on 47ts%. The worst volume shooting in the playoffs so far. Insanely bad.

[EmpireFalls]

Yeah, the answer to me is still no, but I do think Jokic is approaching the tier where you have to split hairs to do it, and that’s ultimately an achievement in itself. LBJ did the same thing in the early 2010s where OK maybe his peak isn’t Jordan or Magic or Shaq (maybe it is) but it’s pretty damn close. That’s how I feel about Jokic’s prime/peak at the moment, it’s approaching the tier where it has to be taken seriously against anyone’s, even if it isn’t the absolute best.

[bledredwine]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Not sure what's odder...you said this (we all can make a mistake sure) or someone and one'd it. But lebron won in 2012 and 2013...

That was pointed out like four times already and I mentioned that I realized my mistake. It's fairly easy to confuse two years in the past. These things can be forgotten and I guarantee that you've made several similar mental slips like this in the past.

[dhsilv2]

You nailed it.....using BPM in a 5 game series isn't some amazing way to evaluate anything. Yes lebron played really well in this series compared to his current baseline. It doesn't mean he played like prime lebron though, and the evidence is having seen prime lebron play, the energy he had. He doesn't have that energy anymore, to take over a game/series like he used to on both ends, breaking down the defense and covering everything. No stats or math needed to see that. I consider prime lebron much better than current lebron, and think based on how well current lebron played in the series, that prime Lebron would've comfortably been the best player in the series. I'm not sure why "math" is needed like dhsilv2 to form an opinion like that. It's OK to have opinions based on logic and not blindly follow formulas made by strangers, especially when talking about the top players, to form all opinions.

Do you think prime Lebron wouldve been significantly better in this series for the Lakers than current lebron? I do, by a pretty wide margin, which is my point. I really don't care about the BPMs, because I saw the games. Current lebron wasn't far off from being the best player in that series, he just ran out of gas and had to pick his spots alot more than he did in his prime. Is anyone on this board capable of talking hoops rather than posting numbers from whatever the hot advanced stats formula is?

Nobody thinks BPM over a small sample is good. It's just better than your argument which is "I feel and nothing can change how my emotions drive me".

Is it better though? Why post a stat you know is a bad measurement as a main argument then? That's actually just lazy and weak.

There's no emotions. I just noticed how well Lebron did in this series, and that he was gassed and didn't have the energy he used to which would've made a huge difference. Because he's 39. These games were close, but LA consistently couldn't hold a lead. Prime Lebron takes them over the top in that regard imo, because he used to be a monster on both ends all game. I don't think that's crazy to say or emotional at all. I don't see how it can be denied, honestly. Being that these games were so close as is, it leads me to believe prime lebron would've been the best player in this series, and would've won it vs. Prime Jokic. And were here arguing whether Jokics Prime is better than Lebrons.

I'm just glad we're going to get to see Jokic and Denver finally go up against some legit teams the next few rounds, as he didn't get a chance to do that last year. It's where I measure greatness, whether a player can step up, lead and take over a series that is an even fight. I'm really hoping to see a Denver vs Boston (with kristaps) final because I want to see the best vs. the best, and how he will step up to lead his team.

First, I didn't send a stat as a main argument. I posted a stat to show I can use data to give me an objective starting point. You can't start with how you FEEL because that is starting from a point of overt bias which we all have.

Second, you're back to all these feelings. I feel lebron was gassed. I feel if he were younger he could have gotten them over the top. Those aren't objective. Those are feelings.

Another poster has already taken you through out objectively this series was an outlier from the current Lebron and how this version of James is an improved shooter of his younger self. Now it's hard to put number to Lebron's continued basketball knowledge growing and how that plays off his decision making. I'm sure we could build that with film study pretty easy, but I'm not sure we could build that case out over a season. Over a series...that's too wishy washy.

Lebron by any reasonable measure had his best playoff run in 2009. But nearly everyone who takes a strict eye test to Lebron's overall game would tend to value 2013 or perhaps 2016 as better playoff runs. This is all driven back on outlier performances. Guys sometimes just have great games and/or series. And players don't peak as the best version of themselves in all areas. Guys lose something here and there and make up for it here and there.

So yes, I agree stats are volatile and not ideal. We however can start with them and see that the gap between the two was HUGE. 4 BPM as another posted covered is the difference in GOAT tier players and really good players. And keep in mind BPM, PER, WS/48...all the box stats say this. That's despite as covered, Lebron had an unusually great series shooting.

TL/DR - I don't have a problem with someone thinking Lebron's peak is better than Jokic. Your line of reasoning here is at best clouded by emotions and feelings and at worst is just downright Skip/SAS level trolling. It's not a reasonable way to even start a discussion let alone a reasonable argument. To better illustrate this, I don't think it's wrong to think a younger lebron's stamina in the current version of Lebron could have won this series. I also don't think it would be unreasonable to argue that this version of Lebron with younger Lebron's stamina would be a notably better player than Lebron ever was. A 2009 stamina 2024 basketball experience/near 40% 3 point shooting Lebron might have won 9 straight titles. That guy never existed.

[DOT]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Not sure what's odder...you said this (we all can make a mistake sure) or someone and one'd it. But lebron won in 2012 and 2013...

That was pointed out like four times already and I mentioned that I realized my mistake. It's fairly easy to confuse two years in the past. These things can be forgotten and I guarantee that you've made several similar mental slips like this in the past.

And now you realize why people don't want to just take y'all at your word about stuff that happened 30+ years ago

[KyRo23]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Lmao when did you start watching the NBA?

Before you were born lmao.

Edit - my bad, you said you made a mistake

[dhsilv2]

If Jokic wins this year, he'll be able to do something Lebron never was able to - repeat.

And he will have done it with a significantly worse supporting cast than any of Lebron's championships.

It's a debate. That's for sure.

Not sure what's odder...you said this (we all can make a mistake sure) or someone and one'd it. But lebron won in 2012 and 2013...

That was pointed out like four times already and I mentioned that I realized my mistake. It's fairly easy to confuse two years in the past. These things can be forgotten and I guarantee that you've made several similar mental slips like this in the past.

I'm sure I have. But that's also why I ask people when they last time they rewatch a game from the 90's or 80's was. Our memories suck sometimes. It's why it's so damn annoying hearing people talk about handchecking would stop 3 point shooting when guys were being left wide open in that era. Even the greats like Bird were taking 3's consistently with nobody even close to them before they received the ball at the line. It's why it's frustrating hearing people talk about how tough defenses were when it was "tough" because 8 guys were all within 10 feet of the basket consistently.

To miss something this well known and pretty damn recent just showcases how annoying it is to constantly have people bring up the past as if they have a photographic memory and can then apply today's players to yesterday's rules and perfectly explain how players would struggle. All the while it being obvious they haven't watched a replay of these games EVER. And then we're told that watching the game on youtube is useless...despite any normal person needing to refresh their memory of the past.

[DOT]

It's why it's so damn annoying hearing people talk about handchecking would stop 3 point shooting when guys were being left wide open in that era. Even the greats like Bird were taking 3's consistently with nobody even close to them before they received the ball at the line. It's why it's frustrating hearing people talk about how tough defenses were when it was "tough" because 8 guys were all within 10 feet of the basket consistently.

To miss something this well known and pretty damn recent just showcases how annoying it is to constantly have people bring up the past as if they have a photographic memory and can then apply today's players to yesterday's rules and perfectly explain how players would struggle. All the while it being obvious they haven't watched a replay of these games EVER. And then we're told that watching the game on youtube is useless...despite any normal person needing to refresh their memory of the past.

Yeah, that's why I made that thread talking about the 93 Finals game 1 and linking the full game cause not only do I like watching basketball but I think just watching highlights isn't the best way to understand what happened back then

It wasn't every possession, but there were multiple times when BJ Armstrong brought the ball up for the Bulls and Kevin Johnson was so far back he had both feet in the paint. And BJ Armstrong was a good 3pt shooter too, but he didn't take those shots because nobody took those shots back then, it's like how teams defend Ben Simmons bringing the ball up. And you can see even today having a PG not capable of scoring off the dribble from range absolutely stifles offense, so back then when basically nobody was doing that, you can guess why defenses looked better

But that's a tangent for a different topic, it's just really annoying to me when people act like the 3pt shooting of the modern day wouldn't have fundamentally changed how defenses in the 90s and earlier played.

[liquidswords]

Even if Jokic has already peaked, he's so fundamentally sound and not reliant on athleticism that his peak should be longer than Lebron's.

[dhsilv2]

It's why it's so damn annoying hearing people talk about handchecking would stop 3 point shooting when guys were being left wide open in that era. Even the greats like Bird were taking 3's consistently with nobody even close to them before they received the ball at the line. It's why it's frustrating hearing people talk about how tough defenses were when it was "tough" because 8 guys were all within 10 feet of the basket consistently.

To miss something this well known and pretty damn recent just showcases how annoying it is to constantly have people bring up the past as if they have a photographic memory and can then apply today's players to yesterday's rules and perfectly explain how players would struggle. All the while it being obvious they haven't watched a replay of these games EVER. And then we're told that watching the game on youtube is useless...despite any normal person needing to refresh their memory of the past.

Yeah, that's why I made that thread talking about the 93 Finals game 1 and linking the full game cause not only do I like watching basketball but I think just watching highlights isn't the best way to understand what happened back then

It wasn't every possession, but there were multiple times when BJ Armstrong brought the ball up for the Bulls and Kevin Johnson was so far back he had both feet in the paint. And BJ Armstrong was a good 3pt shooter too, but he didn't take those shots because nobody took those shots back then, it's like how teams defend Ben Simmons bringing the ball up. And you can see even today having a PG not capable of scoring off the dribble from range absolutely stifles offense, so back then when basically nobody was doing that, you can guess why defenses looked better

But that's a tangent for a different topic, it's just really annoying to me when people act like the 3pt shooting of the modern day wouldn't have fundamentally changed how defenses in the 90s and earlier played.

Exactly. And it's sad that we get those types of discussions. We all understand rules and dribbling standards have moved too. But instead of a real discussion on that...we get this hyperbole about how guys couldn't get down the court and how hand checking would stop all 3 point shooting. It's non sense when you go and watch an actual full game.