Better peak: Kevin Garnett vs Nikola Jokic

[dygaction]

Jokic has a GOAT-level peak, and I honestly have a hard time picking any peak over him, including LeBron or Jordan. He's a tier above KG.

He's not even close to Lebron, and there are other guys above him too, including probably KG.

LeBron's championships all had at least one HOF/all-nba teammate in their prime, sometimes two; Jokic yet to have an all-star teammate yet. You don't tell me Jokic don't win with Bosh/Wade, or Love/Kyrie.

[One_and_Done]

Jokic has a GOAT-level peak, and I honestly have a hard time picking any peak over him, including LeBron or Jordan. He's a tier above KG.

He's not even close to Lebron, and there are other guys above him too, including probably KG.

LeBron's championships all had at least one HOF/all-nba teammate in their prime, sometimes two; Jokic yet to have an all-star teammate yet. You don't tell me Jokic don't win with Bosh/Wade, or Love/Kyrie.

This is one of those silly technicalities people cite that means nothing.

Firstly, Jamal Murray is clearly an all-star talent, if not an all-nba talent, and at this rate will plainly make the HOF. He's missed out due to poorly timed injuries before the all-star break, and tough competition. Who are you taking? All-NBA Randle, or Jamal Murray? All-star Jameer Nelson, or Jamal? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

Secondly, it's also about fit. Lebron and Wade were clearly not an optimal fit. Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better. Joker has 4 guys starting next to him who fit perfectly. The rest of Denver's guys are not getting enough credit. MPJ has a reduced role because he's the 3rd option on offence, but he got a max contract for a reason. Gordon is a well above average player for his position, as is KCP. There's really no weak link in their starting 5. Even the good fit Miami teams started Chalmers.

Love certainly didn't play like an all-star in Cleveland, he would lose minutes to Tristan Thompson for being a defensive liability. Those Cavs also lost to the stacked Warriors teams. The 17 & 18 Warriors would have torched this Nuggets team.

[dygaction]

He's not even close to Lebron, and there are other guys above him too, including probably KG.

LeBron's championships all had at least one HOF/all-nba teammate in their prime, sometimes two; Jokic yet to have an all-star teammate yet. You don't tell me Jokic don't win with Bosh/Wade, or Love/Kyrie.

This is one of those silly technicalities people cite that means nothing.

Firstly, Jamal Murray is clearly an all-star talent, if not an all-nba talent, and at this rate will plainly make the HOF. He's missed out due to poorly timed injuries before the all-star break, and tough competition. Who are you taking? All-NBA Randle, or Jamal Murray? All-star Jameer Nelson, or Jamal? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

Secondly, it's also about fit. Lebron and Wade were clearly not an optimal fit. Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better. Joker has 4 guys starting next to him who fit perfectly. The rest of Denver's guys are not getting enough credit. MPJ has a reduced role because he's the 3rd option on offence, but he got a max contract for a reason. Gordon is a well above average player for his position, as is KCP. There's really no weak link in their starting 5. Even the good fit Miami teams started Chalmers.

Love certainly didn't play like an all-star in Cleveland, he would lose minutes to Tristan Thompson for being a defensive liability. Those Cavs also lost to the stacked Warriors teams. The 17 & 18 Warriors would have torched this Nuggets team.

Yeah, if he and MPJ did not have season ending injuries, who knows Nuggets might have already 3peated. Null comparison, I would not take Randle or Nelson, I would take Wade or Kyrie.

Jokic is just so easy to build around, you drafted him, develop two later drafts MPJ and Jamal into max players, and trade for some other teams' available pieces like KCP and AG and you have a team. You don't have to assemble several teams' franchise players into one.

Love did not play like an all-star, neither did Bosh. You wonder why

[One_and_Done]

LeBron's championships all had at least one HOF/all-nba teammate in their prime, sometimes two; Jokic yet to have an all-star teammate yet. You don't tell me Jokic don't win with Bosh/Wade, or Love/Kyrie.

This is one of those silly technicalities people cite that means nothing.

Firstly, Jamal Murray is clearly an all-star talent, if not an all-nba talent, and at this rate will plainly make the HOF. He's missed out due to poorly timed injuries before the all-star break, and tough competition. Who are you taking? All-NBA Randle, or Jamal Murray? All-star Jameer Nelson, or Jamal? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

Secondly, it's also about fit. Lebron and Wade were clearly not an optimal fit. Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better. Joker has 4 guys starting next to him who fit perfectly. The rest of Denver's guys are not getting enough credit. MPJ has a reduced role because he's the 3rd option on offence, but he got a max contract for a reason. Gordon is a well above average player for his position, as is KCP. There's really no weak link in their starting 5. Even the good fit Miami teams started Chalmers.

Love certainly didn't play like an all-star in Cleveland, he would lose minutes to Tristan Thompson for being a defensive liability. Those Cavs also lost to the stacked Warriors teams. The 17 & 18 Warriors would have torched this Nuggets team.

Yeah, if he and MPJ did not have season ending injuries, who knows Nuggets might have already 3peated. Null comparison, I would not take Randle or Nelson, I would take Wade or Kyrie.

Jokic is just so easy to build around, you drafted him, develop two later drafts MPJ and Jamal into max players, and trade for some other teams' available pieces like KCP and AG and you have a team. You don't have to assemble several teams' franchise players into one.

Love did not play like an all-star, neither did Bosh. You wonder why

Lebron would have been better served with Jamal Murray over Wade or Kyrie. Better fit, and in Kyrie's case less drama. Bosh is better than Gordon, though it's closer than ppl think. The rest of Denver's starters are better. Immediately MPJ & KCP over Battier and Chalmers, not to minimise Battier's value. I also find it a weird comp, because Lebron won with these guys. When he lost it was when Wade had fallen off and wasn't a star any more, or when the starters included Joel Anthony and a washed M.Bibby. with no 3 point shooting.

[JimmyFromNz]

It seems from some comments that Jamal Murray is getting a lot of mileage off a couple of big time shots, when for the most part he's been very average all playoffs- if not poor.

Also see this thread was disingenuously bumped quoting me when the timberwolves went up 1 game as pro KG argument drawn from a very long bow. I dont think that's panning out how it was intended.

[therealbig3]

I'm ok with people thinking LeBron peaked higher than Jokic, he's clearly a GOAT-level player in his own right, and he has his own advantages over Jokic. But to say it's not close is just incorrect.

[One_and_Done]

It seems from some comments that Jamal Murray is getting a lot of mileage off a couple of big time shots, when for the most part he's been very average all playoffs- if not poor.

Also see this thread was disingenuously bumped quoting me when the timberwolves went up 1 game as pro KG argument drawn from a very long bow. I dont think that's panning out how it was intended.

Murray went 26-7-6 last playoffs. He also gets 21-6 in the last few RSs. It's not like he just had a few good games and was a role player outside of that. He's also getting 20-6 these playoffs. Yeh he's a little banged up, and his efficiency is down, but that's also because he's been defended well by good defensive teams.

[The Explorer]

He's not even close to Lebron, and there are other guys above him too, including probably KG.

LeBron's championships all had at least one HOF/all-nba teammate in their prime, sometimes two; Jokic yet to have an all-star teammate yet. You don't tell me Jokic don't win with Bosh/Wade, or Love/Kyrie.

This is one of those silly technicalities people cite that means nothing.

Facts are not silly technicalities. Some pretty bad arguments here.

Firstly, Jamal Murray is clearly an all-star talent, if not an all-nba talent, and at this rate will plainly make the HOF. He's missed out due to poorly timed injuries before the all-star break, and tough competition. Who are you taking? All-NBA Randle, or Jamal Murray? All-star Jameer Nelson, or Jamal? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

He didn't make an all star team because of tough competition?
He's a HOFamer without making a single all star team? That's pretty much impossible to do.

Secondly, it's also about fit. Lebron and Wade were clearly not an optimal fit. Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better.

It wasn't the best fit because James did not adjust his style of play to the needs of the roster. It was only after Wade adjusted his play that they started seeing some success. Wade was willing to sacrifice, not James.

"I definitely changed mine [game] more," Wade said. "It's not even a conversation. There's no conversation to have. I definitely had to change mine more."

And you do realize James chose his teammates and much of the Heat's rosters right? And despite that he still failed by his own expectations by only winning 2 of 4. Jokic has not General Managed the Nuggets, nor has he had all star teammates, let alone HOF teammates or top 75 teammates, and yet is peaking at a near GOAT level. James, despite all the advantages, failed more than he succeeded.

Love certainly didn't play like an all-star in Cleveland, he would lose minutes to Tristan Thompson for being a defensive liability. Those Cavs also lost to the stacked Warriors teams. The 17 & 18 Warriors would have torched this Nuggets team.

Irving made all-nba in 2015 with James, and made the all-star roster in 2017, which is more elite help than Jokic has ever had thus far.

[One_and_Done]

LeBron's championships all had at least one HOF/all-nba teammate in their prime, sometimes two; Jokic yet to have an all-star teammate yet. You don't tell me Jokic don't win with Bosh/Wade, or Love/Kyrie.

This is one of those silly technicalities people cite that means nothing.

Facts are not silly technicalities. Some pretty bad arguments here.

Firstly, Jamal Murray is clearly an all-star talent, if not an all-nba talent, and at this rate will plainly make the HOF. He's missed out due to poorly timed injuries before the all-star break, and tough competition. Who are you taking? All-NBA Randle, or Jamal Murray? All-star Jameer Nelson, or Jamal? I think the answer is pretty obvious.

He didn't make an all star team because of tough competition?
He's a HOFamer without making a single all star team? That's pretty much impossible to do.

Secondly, it's also about fit. Lebron and Wade were clearly not an optimal fit. Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better.

It wasn't the best fit because James did not adjust his style of play to the needs of the roster. It was only after Wade adjusted his play that they started seeing some success. Wade was willing to sacrifice, not James.

"I definitely changed mine [game] more," Wade said. "It's not even a conversation. There's no conversation to have. I definitely had to change mine more."

And you do realize James chose his teammates and much of the Heat's rosters right? And despite that he still failed by his own expectations by only winning 2 of 4. Jokic has not General Managed the Nuggets, nor has he had all star teammates, let alone HOF teammates or top 75 teammates, and yet is peaking at a near GOAT level. James, despite all the advantages, failed more than he succeeded.

Love certainly didn't play like an all-star in Cleveland, he would lose minutes to Tristan Thompson for being a defensive liability. Those Cavs also lost to the stacked Warriors teams. The 17 & 18 Warriors would have torched this Nuggets team.

Irving made all-nba in 2015 with James, and made the all-star roster in 2017, which is more elite help than Jokic has ever had thus far.

People are not only all-stars in the years they make it. Conley has 1 all-star appearances as an injury replacement, yet Conley is a likely HoFer. Manu had 2. Joe Johnson played in the weak East and had 7. I think it's pretty clear Johnson was worse than Manu, but that's how circumstances go sometimes. If Murray keeps playing this way and isn't injured for a big chunk of games he will clearly make all-star teams, if not all-nba teams. Randle has 3 all-star teams and 2 all-nba teams, but it's obvious Murray is the better player, especially in the playoffs where Randle has sucked.

Wade and Lebron learned to play together, but it was never an optimal fit. What was particularly suboptimal in the 2011 finals, moreso than Wade's synergy with Lebron, was a starting line-up of J.Anthony, Bosh (who didn't shoot 3s back then), Wade and a washed Bibby (who couldn't hit 2s or 3s). Lebron teams need spacing so he can thrive, just like Jokic. That team had zero spacing. The next year they fixed that by starting Bosh at the 5 (with instructions to shoot 3s, adding Battier as a 3@D guy, and switching out Bibby for Chalmers who could shoot 3s. The starting line-up became fast and switchable too.

The claim Lebron 'wasn't willing to sacrifice' is dumb, it's particularly dumb because that's exactly what he tried to do in the 11 finals. He realised playing your-turn my turn with a guy who wanted to play the same role as him was problematic, so he tried to take on the Magic Johnson role. Pace adjusted, Lebron's stats in those finals are similar to Magic in the 80 finals, or the 82 playoffs. It actually almost worked as they got a 2-1 lead, which would have been 3-0 without a blown lead. Eventually though the structural issues noted above were too much. Frankly Wade should have been the one to sacrifice all along, because Lebron was much better than him.

Trust me, Lebron didn't choose Joel Anthony or washed Mike Bibby, and if he had what would it matter? We're judging him as a player not a GM. We all know most players are clueless at valuing other players anyway.

Lebron won the years he should have, and sometimes won even when he shouldn't have (eg 2016). If being great meant you won every year regardless of context then Jokic wouldn't have only 1 ring.

[lessthanjake]

Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better.

I don’t think even LeBron himself believed this in any real sense. Peak LeBron played on a team with merely a borderline-all-star running mate, but surrounded by a bunch of solid pieces that fit really well with him. This is what he had by the end of his first stint with the Cavs. And they were a very good team but he couldn’t win a title and left the team to go play with multiple other major stars. He then won titles. And every career move since then has been to go to another team and team up with one or two major stars. In other words, LeBron had the type of situation we’re talking about—i.e. a well-fitting team but with no superstar talent besides him—and he couldn’t win and decided never to do it again. (The only exception to this is that he did do it again to some degree in his first year with the Lakers. Don’t know that I’d say that team fit well together, but it was definitely a team with a lot of talent but no other major star, and they didn’t make the playoffs.). So yeah, I don’t think the history of LeBron’s career supports your point, nor does LeBron’s own decisionmaking.

[One_and_Done]

Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better.

I don’t think even LeBron himself believed this in any real sense. Peak LeBron played on a team with merely a borderline-all-star running mate, but surrounded by a bunch of solid pieces that fit really well with him. This is what he had by the end of his first stint with the Cavs. And they were a very good team but he couldn’t win a title and left the team to go play with multiple other major stars. He then won titles. And every career move since then has been to go to another team and team up with one or two major stars. In other words, LeBron had the type of situation we’re talking about—i.e. a well-fitting team but with no superstar talent besides him—and he couldn’t win and decided never to do it again. (The only exception to this is that he did do it again to some degree in his first year with the Lakers. Don’t know that I’d say that team fit well together, but it was definitely a team with a lot of talent but no other major star, and they didn’t make the playoffs.). So yeah, I don’t think the history of LeBron’s career supports your point, nor does LeBron’s own decisionmaking.

Who cares what Lebron believes? Like most players he has shown himself to be clueless at player evaluation and team building.

[lessthanjake]

Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better.

I don’t think even LeBron himself believed this in any real sense. Peak LeBron played on a team with merely a borderline-all-star running mate, but surrounded by a bunch of solid pieces that fit really well with him. This is what he had by the end of his first stint with the Cavs. And they were a very good team but he couldn’t win a title and left the team to go play with multiple other major stars. He then won titles. And every career move since then has been to go to another team and team up with one or two major stars. In other words, LeBron had the type of situation we’re talking about—i.e. a well-fitting team but with no superstar talent besides him—and he couldn’t win and decided never to do it again. (The only exception to this is that he did do it again to some degree in his first year with the Lakers. Don’t know that I’d say that team fit well together, but it was definitely a team with a lot of talent but no other major star, and they didn’t make the playoffs.). So yeah, I don’t think the history of LeBron’s career supports your point, nor does LeBron’s own decisionmaking.

Who cares what Lebron believes? Like most players he has shown himself to be clueless at player evaluation and team building.

Well, there’s also the fact that at his peak he had a roster that fit really well with him but did not have a major star running mate and the teams were really good but were nowhere near winning the title.

[JimmyFromNz]

It seems from some comments that Jamal Murray is getting a lot of mileage off a couple of big time shots, when for the most part he's been very average all playoffs- if not poor.

Also see this thread was disingenuously bumped quoting me when the timberwolves went up 1 game as pro KG argument drawn from a very long bow. I dont think that's panning out how it was intended.

Murray went 26-7-6 last playoffs. He also gets 21-6 in the last few RSs. It's not like he just had a few good games and was a role player outside of that. He's also getting 20-6 these playoffs. Yeh he's a little banged up, and his efficiency is down, but that's also because he's been defended well by good defensive teams.

I'm clearly talking about these playoffs.

His streakiness and inconsistency across other seasons is an entirely different conversation. But yes part of the reason he hasn't received accolades some believe he deserves. Outside of the mid-long range shooting, ability to microwave, and off ball movement he really doesn't do a whole lot else above average, not as a playmaker nor defender.

He'll make the end of the bench for a few all star games (which will be deserved) but he's no sure thing. That might not fit the narrative for other debates, but it currently is the reality - quite real as I type this watching him pull for another 1/10 at the half whilst not impacting the game by any other means.

[capfan33]

First off, I want to congratulate everyone on somehow turning a thread about KG and Jokic into another Lebron thread. I'm genuinely impressed. I somewhat jokingly expected it coming in and dismissed it out of hand, and yet somehow...

Peak Lebron would have been better served with a worse running mate who fit better.

I don’t think even LeBron himself believed this in any real sense. Peak LeBron played on a team with merely a borderline-all-star running mate, but surrounded by a bunch of solid pieces that fit really well with him. This is what he had by the end of his first stint with the Cavs. And they were a very good team but he couldn’t win a title and left the team to go play with multiple other major stars. He then won titles. And every career move since then has been to go to another team and team up with one or two major stars. In other words, LeBron had the type of situation we’re talking about—i.e. a well-fitting team but with no superstar talent besides him—and he couldn’t win and decided never to do it again. (The only exception to this is that he did do it again to some degree in his first year with the Lakers. Don’t know that I’d say that team fit well together, but it was definitely a team with a lot of talent but no other major star, and they didn’t make the playoffs.). So yeah, I don’t think the history of LeBron’s career supports your point, nor does LeBron’s own decisionmaking.

"Borderline-all star running mate" is a pretty slick comparison to make here but it's not a serious one. And everyone here (including you) knows it.

And "well-fitting". I mean, in the sense that the other mediocre players couldn't **** the bed too badly and only had to stand at the 3 point line and shoot, yea it was a team that fit well, doesn't mean it had anywhere near the talent level of this Nuggets team. To be clear, having minimal opportunity to screw up and get carried can be rationalized as "well-fitting", what it cannot be rationalized as is good. Lebron would've sold his own mother down a river to have someone like KCP or Gordon.

And besides glossing over the phenomenal fit of Jokic's cast, not to mention the coaching and organization, as well as the fact that very few players have even gotten to the finals much less won without another major star; Jokic's title run was a joke in terms of competition. The 09 Magic and 10 Celtics are vastly superior teams to any team Jokic has gone to 6 games against/had a competitive series against.

Beating the Heat in the finals is basically the modern day equivalent of the Bucks beating the Bullets in 71. Even accounting for the more competitive and evolved league, the opponents he's faced have been incredibly underwhelming. Not nearly comparable to the herculean effort of say, Hakeem in 94.

[Peregrine01]

It seems from some comments that Jamal Murray is getting a lot of mileage off a couple of big time shots, when for the most part he's been very average all playoffs- if not poor.

Also see this thread was disingenuously bumped quoting me when the timberwolves went up 1 game as pro KG argument drawn from a very long bow. I dont think that's panning out how it was intended.

Murray went 26-7-6 last playoffs. He also gets 21-6 in the last few RSs. It's not like he just had a few good games and was a role player outside of that. He's also getting 20-6 these playoffs. Yeh he's a little banged up, and his efficiency is down, but that's also because he's been defended well by good defensive teams.

I'm clearly talking about these playoffs.

His streakiness and inconsistency across other seasons is an entirely different conversation. But yes part of the reason he hasn't received accolades some believe he deserves. Outside of the mid-long range shooting, ability to microwave, and off ball movement he really doesn't do a whole lot else above average, not as a playmaker nor defender.

He'll make the end of the bench for a few all star games (which will be deserved) but he's no sure thing. That might not fit the narrative for other debates, but it currently is the reality - quite real as I type this watching him pull for another 1/10 at the half whilst not impacting the game by any other means.

Issue with Murray is that when he's not shooting well, he's not really adding much else. He doesn't get to the rim well, doesn't draw fouls, doesn't have great vision and consistently over-dribbles into tough shots. For all the talk about him being a big-game player, he's a 57% TS scorer in the playoffs - take away the outlier shooting in the bubble and he's more like a 54% TS scorer. He has glimpses as an all-star level player but he really isn't - especially when considering that he's probably playing in the most ideal situation possible.

[OhayoKD]

Jokic has a GOAT-level peak, and I honestly have a hard time picking any peak over him, including LeBron or Jordan. He's a tier above KG.

He's not even close to Lebron, and there are other guys above him too, including probably KG.

LeBron's championships all had at least one HOF/all-nba teammate in their prime, sometimes two; Jokic yet to have an all-star teammate yet. You don't tell me Jokic don't win with Bosh/Wade, or Love/Kyrie.

Not in 2016. Second cleveland also was statistically worse support than Jokic's Nuggets in the regular season and his teammate lineups went worse in the playoffs without him whether it was kyrie or love no lebron or not kyrie or love no lebron while seeing the opposite effect with.

Even if we're applying a ring filter, 2016 is still on a different level.

Murray went 26-7-6 last playoffs. He also gets 21-6 in the last few RSs. It's not like he just had a few good games and was a role player outside of that. He's also getting 20-6 these playoffs. Yeh he's a little banged up, and his efficiency is down, but that's also because he's been defended well by good defensive teams.

I'm clearly talking about these playoffs.

His streakiness and inconsistency across other seasons is an entirely different conversation. But yes part of the reason he hasn't received accolades some believe he deserves. Outside of the mid-long range shooting, ability to microwave, and off ball movement he really doesn't do a whole lot else above average, not as a playmaker nor defender.

He'll make the end of the bench for a few all star games (which will be deserved) but he's no sure thing. That might not fit the narrative for other debates, but it currently is the reality - quite real as I type this watching him pull for another 1/10 at the half whilst not impacting the game by any other means.

Issue with Murray is that when he's not shooting well, he's not really adding much else. He doesn't get to the rim well, doesn't draw fouls, doesn't have great vision and consistently over-dribbles into tough shots. For all the talk about him being a big-game player, he's a 57% TS scorer in the playoffs - take away the outlier shooting in the bubble and he's more like a 54% TS scorer. He has glimpses as an all-star level player but he really isn't - especially when considering that he's probably playing in the most ideal situation possible.

He's still drawing defenders as the primary ball-handler and still taking on the toughest shot diet on the team. He has "flashes" as in entire playoff runs where he's arguably outplayed prime Jokic and even in the regular season his team jumps a bunch with him(not true for alot of all-stars). I really don't understand this approach to analysing Jokic's help where you ignore all the the things they do that Jokic doesn't, fixate on scoring when a teammate shoots badly, and/or decide the scoring is just a byproduct of Jokic if a teammate shoots well.

Irving made all-nba in 2015 with James, and made the all-star roster in 2017, which is more elite help than Jokic has ever had thus far.

2015, the season Lebron swept a 60-win team and took a 67-win team to 6 with basically no Kyrie or Love....

[OhayoKD]

I'm ok with people thinking LeBron peaked higher than Jokic, he's clearly a GOAT-level player in his own right, and he has his own advantages over Jokic. But to say it's not close is just incorrect.

Is it?

lebron 09-21
656-263 with lebron 0.714% win rate
37-73 without lebron 0.336% win rate
net rating with lebron +6.49 (59 win pace level)
net rating without lebron -5.50 (25 win pace level)
+8.6 ortg difference
-3.68 drtg difference
+12 total swing

jokic 2022-24
136-68 (66.7% win rate) with jokic
8-15 (34.8% win rate) without jokic
+4.1 net rating with jokic (53 win pace)
-4.6 net rating without jokic (28 win pace)
+6.5 ortg change
-2.2 drtg change
+8.7 overall change

Unless you think defense isn't a thing I'm not sure why we'd be arguing it's close

[Peregrine01]

The fact that Murray has a diet of tough shots is essentially the problem. He doesn't have the tools to get into anything that's easier. Compounding this problem is that he willingly takes these tough shots. And if you think he's just being thrown a grenade late in the shot clock, that's just patently false - Jokic leads the league in shots with less than 5 seconds on the clock by a wide margin.

[OhayoKD]

The fact that Murray has a diet of tough shots is essentially the problem. He doesn't have the tools to get into anything that's easier. Compounding this problem is that he willingly takes these tough shots. And if you think he's just being thrown a grenade late in the shot clock, that's just patently false - Jokic leads the league in shots with less than 5 seconds on the clock by a wide margin.

It is a problem for Murray, it doesn't change that those are tough shots his teammates aren't having to take. Combine that with his ball-handling and it leads to Murray being defended in a way most all-stars are not and drawing greater defensive attention than most all-stars and scoring in those spots with better efficiency in the postseason than most all-stars.

And if you really have doubts about this, we can just check what the Nuggets have been without Murray in 2021 and 2022.

[JimmyFromNz]

He's still drawing defenders as the primary ball-handler and still taking on the toughest shot diet on the team. He has "flashes" as in entire playoff runs where he's arguably outplayed prime Jokic and even in the regular season his team jumps a bunch with him(not true for alot of all-stars). I really don't understand this approach to analysing Jokic's help where you ignore all the the things they do that Jokic doesn't, fixate on scoring when a teammate shoots badly, and/or decide the scoring is just a byproduct of Jokic if a teammate shoots well.

I appreciate this Murray evaluation piece for everyone else here heavily leveraged in wanting to support whatever side of a Lebron-Jokic argument they're on, that's clear. However as someone who doesn't care about that side debate, I do agree with Peregine on the murray evaluation in isolation.

The bolded is a very low bar to hold someone to. Yes he is not being ignored, yes he is being guarded like an elite shooter on close outs (note not in the same way an elite scorer would - he doesn't penetrate to an elite level and he doesn't put pressure on the rim through contact of foul drawing), but thats the territory you operate in at an 'all star' level, and the results have frankly been underwhelming.

I wouldn't agree he's outplayed Jokic at all, at any point. Has he hit incredible scoring streaks in the past, thanks largely to unsustainable shooting spurges fed by the underlying benefit of playing off Jokic, yes absolutely. The focus on 'tough shots' I understand, but at some point that needs to be balanced is it actually a 'good shot' compared to the alternate. Many of those 'tough shots' become bad shots. Sure that point tends to get lost amongst the glory of a midrange fadeaway over Anthony Davis to win a playoff game (ignoring the 18 prior missed shots), and I'm sure it will continue to be the next time he does it.

I'd suggest the fixation is not on scoring, rather than everything he doesn't do when he's not scoring, presence isn't simply enough from someone being touted as a perennial allstar snub and all nba level player. Personally I think those issues were well articulated in the above post, which have been long term criticisms of him coming and going, but also timely this playoffs series.