2023-24 NBA Season Discussion

[cpower]

Pacers really have pathetic defense in this series, especially on Brunson. Just gave him too much space to operate and a lot of times its like they cleared the path for Brunson.. how is Pacers playing in playoffs in the first place?

[Dr Positivity]

Why did TOR trade Precious Achiuwa?

I think he's been better on the Knicks, on Toronto he might have felt pressure to try too much on offense, him and Boucher kind of felt like low IQ energy big combo off the bench that people were sick of. It was a pretty bad constructed roster last year from Masai in general with Barnes and Siakam needing a stretch C beside them if it was going to work not low spacing bigs like Poeltl and Precious.

[GSP]

Pacers really have pathetic defense in this series, especially on Brunson. Just gave him too much space to operate and a lot of times its like they cleared the path for Brunson.. how is Pacers playing in playoffs in the first place?

This series? lol this is who the Pacers have been all season. Theyve been bottom 5 defense all season were even the worst for a stretch. A Bucks team w/o Giannis and Dame on 1 leg and missing games had a 117 Ortg against them

[OhayoKD]

, but the fact that those Gordon-on-Jokic-off minutes have gone well in the playoffs is the output of a super noisy tiny sample. In the regular season since Gordon arrived, the Nuggets have a -12.24 net rating in minutes where Gordon is on and Jokic is off, in games they both played. And that’s still -8.02 just in the last two seasons. So those staggered minutes with Gordon generally have gone quite badly (while the Jokic-on-Gordon-off minutes have gone well—+6.65 since Gordon arrived, and +7.51 in the last two seasons).

Well yes, teammates also tend to look worse without you when you're platooning and/or they're playing high minutes without key teammates

In the regular-season, since Jokic has had good on/off(crossed +10 in 2022):

-> Gordon has played more minutes without Jamal than with, nearly 2/3rds of his Jokic-less minutes are without Jamal.
-> Gordon has played nearly as many minutes without MPJ as with, and nearly 2/3rds of his Jokic-less minutes come without MPJ
-> Gordon has played nearly as many minutes without KCP as with, and more than 2/3rds of his Jokic-less minutes come without KCP

In the playoffs

-> Gordon has played 3 times with Jamal as much as he played without(970-274), Gordon has played roughly 5 times as many of his Jokic-less minutes with Jamal as without (176-39)
-> Gordon has played 2 times as many minutes with MPJ as without(808-405), roughly 5 times as many of his Jokic-less minutes with MPJ as without (88-16)
-> Gordon has played 2 times as many minutes with KCP as without (820-394), played roughly 1/2 as many of his Jokic-less minutes with KCP as without (67-148)

In the RS jokic-less minutes are largely throwaways played with bench pieces. In the playoffs, it is a deliberate strategy from the Nuggets to make-up for some of Jokic's offense with better defense when he isn't on the court. Some of this is also Jokic simply being a better rs defender than a playoff defender and Gordon playing better the other way, but that is why I said "in-between".

Arguing staggering does not negatively effect on/off when you also admit the Nuggets do not have a viable backup center seems alot more "working backwards from a conclusion" to me.

In any event, this is largely just a straw man, since no one is arguing for Jokic merely on the basis of raw on-off. Not because Jokic’s raw on-off isn’t amazing, but because we have better and more reliable measures than that (precisely because of things like staggering and rotations in general affecting on-off).

Your proclivity for reinventing language is tiring me. At no point has anyone claimed your belief in jokic' is merely based on on-off, thus it is impossible for this to be a strawman.

And no, it really wouldn’t be to my chagrin for you to focus on RAPM, where Jokic is #1 for his career in the play-by-play era.

He is #1 in a career-sample from a JE set. He drops to 7th by that same source if you adjust for him playing far less minutes and having an unusually good start as an older arrival in the league, (and yes this was all shown to you only for you to promptly ignore it):

Jokic, like Steph before him, is not nearly as good by RAPM as you say if you use RAPM properly.

Apparently the “proper” way to use RAPM is just to layer on more adjustments until Jokic isn’t #1 anymore
[/quote]

There is no approach to RAPM to get Jokic to #1 beyond comparing the average of a much smaller sample to the average of a much larger one. If it wasn't to your chagrin you would be comparing over similar time frames, or checking frequency.

Comparing even samples is not desperate, it is an essential step and one you are constantly disregarding because you are either desperate for a certain conclusion or are just incompetent with numbers.

Liking Nikola Jokic is not an excuse to pretend averages over half the minutes of another player support him as being better over a similar-time frame(peak, prime, ect), and it's sad this has to be explained to you in the first place.

Speaking of which

Nor would it be to my chagrin for you to focus on WOWY, in which peak Jokic slightly outdoes peak LeBron in WOWY SRS impact once you take out end-of-season garbage off games for both (See the bottom of this post: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=112905068#p112905068). But I digress and would direct you to respond to such statistical comparisons between those players in the thread I just linked, rather than here.

And yet you felt the need to

A. Compare uneven samples(5 years of Lebron: 4 for Jokic)
B. Not choose the best sample for Lebron (swap 2013 for 2008 and...he peaks higher than Jokic)
C. gigantically shrink the sample in a way that throws out Lebron's best data

And the two are still basically tied.

The fact Lebron has multiple 5-year stretches comparable(and one better) to the 4-year one you picked for Jokic(15-17 would also be up there) is a big hint that these are not comparable players. And of course, if you were really worried about "end of season games", you could have always went with what was a similar off-sample with a similar rotation concentrated in a single year(making it a much larger sample per-season):

You are wanting to cherry-pick LeBron’s best time periods in different stats and compare a nonexistent-in-reality combination of those against what Jokic has actually done in one particular time period.

Please stop flinging rhetorical terms you do not understand. Cherrypicking is when you take a smaller part of a whole to draw a conclusion about the whole.

By the measure you chose, Lebron still peaks higher than Jokic. Swapping years to get Lebron peaking lower is an example of cherrypicking. Only choosing 4 years of Jokic as opposed to 5 for Lebron is also cherrypicking. Removing the vast majority of the sample here is...cherrypicking..

The chosen approach and frame of comparison both cherrypick in a manner which negatively affects Lebron's numbers and... Lebron still peaks higher over more years.

At least with RAPM where outliers are artificially scaled down, if you made the comparison uneven enough to get an output that prefers Jokic. With WOWY, not even an uneven approach helps you, which is why you went with a prior instead of just comparing the best samples.

WThe correct and fair approach is to fix the time period for LeBron (which I did, using his pretty undisputed peak years) and compare data from just that time period to peak Jokic.

The correct and fair approach would have been to take the best 4 years of Jokic and compare it to the best 4 years for Lebron. You added an extra step(make it 5 not 4), still could not find the conclusion you wanted, and cooked the numbers accordingly.

Agenda-motivated stat-work at its finest.

Put differently, your approach is to basically create a Frankenstein version of all of LeBron’s best data points that didn’t simultaneously occur, and then compare them to what Jokic has actually done in one specific timeframe.

I will repeat, Lebron peaks higher in the metric and (uneven) time-frame of your choosing, just like he scores a higher average over 13 years than Jokic does over 3. None of these are favorable approaches to Lebron, but Lebron still wins because he's better at basketball and more valuable to winning. As is also reflected in RAPM and, wait for it, on/off.

This is a consistent theme with you. When I’ve pointed out that someone like Steph has vastly superior impact data to LeBron in the years of Steph’s prime (i.e. 2013-2014 onwards), you have repeatedly responded that those aren’t LeBron’s best years and we should be comparing Steph’s data to LeBron’s data in his peak 2009-2013 years.

And this Jake, is an actual strawman. I have never specified 2009-2013 or even a specific time-frame. What I have suggested was factoring in everything and comparing their best data to each other while taking into account the entirety of their careers, as opposed to just Miami, when deciding how to mentally curve/frame things. You don't quite like this because the whole of their careers suggests something very different than what one might derive if they only cared about Miami(and if we're being honest, specifically 2011).

Lebron cooks Curry with the same years he cooks Jokic with and cooks both (again) if one bakes in playoff translation once he returns to Cleveland, and his natural position of small forward, since the cold regular-season data from 15-17 marks him as comparable to both. What is actually happening here is you want to curve down Lebron's best signals with the justification that Miami is his real peak without considering what "peak" implies. It is natural to curve Miami up and Cleveland down. It is natural to adjust the curving based on which is more unusual for the player(hint: it's Miami). It is natural to drop the curving and take the data at face value. What is not natural is throwing out the best signals because they are "no peak" years so you can present the player as worse statistically than he actually is.

In "massively reduced off sample" WOWY, Jokic's best 4 years lose to Lebron's best 5 years. That is the statistical lede but you wanted to bury it and we both know why.

Come up with a LeBron time period that you want to compare peak Jokic to and stick with it across all types of data.

The key here is Lebron wins any frame(including the one you chose) not a particular one, something we can emphasize with:

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

Lebron over 13>Jokic over 2. Lebron over 5 with your approach > Jokic over 4. This is why presenting them as statistical peers is comedy.

Was that what I said?

You're the party here interested in the outputs of advanced all-in-ones.My interest in metrics that do not count defenders dribbled by, or average time of possession, or carries, or paint-load/rim deterrence tracking for a player whose ball-handling is a potential major liability and whose limited paint-protection and lack of mobility is a potentially massive one excepting a rare combination of personell is close to nil because...they are basically useless for capturing what seperates Jokic negatively from other superstars.

Odd, I don't see "granular" anywhere in the passage you replied to.

To clarify, I am uninterested in all-in-one which do not factor in the major negatives for a player. That you are interested in such metrics is why I don't take you seriously.

Of course, not all the things you mentioned even *are* a negative (such as average time of possession, which for someone like Jokic is indicative of quick and decisive decision-making)

No, it's indicative of Jokic being a bad ball-handler relative to most offensive greats. I would reccommend rewatching the first 2 games of the series if you wish to cultivate a "deeper knowledge" on the matter.

But that’s all really beside the point, because you’re just explicitly telling everyone that your entire approach regarding Jokic is to not care about stats whatsoever unless they’re something that you think you can argue as being negative for Jokic

Factoring in negatives =/ only looking at negatives.

I don't know about everyone, but what you're telling me is you didn't read.

You’re playing word games here to defend having essentially confessed to having a totally agenda-driven approach. You say you are “uninterested in all-in-one which do not factor in the major negatives for a player,” but you don’t identify any all-in-one that *does* factor in those supposed negatives, and instead you just identify specific tracking data that you want to focus on. In other words, you say you are uninterested in stats that don’t account for certain things, but then don’t identify any stat that accounts for those things except for specific tracking data that gets at only those things in particular. So yeah, in reality, it’s pretty accurate to say that you’ve declared yourself only interested in specific data that you think might get at something negative for Jokic.
[/quote]
Again, reading:

You're the party here interested in the outputs of advanced all-in-ones.

"I use all-in-ones I like" is said nowhere.

Of course, the irony here is that we actually *do* have an all-in-one that factored in lots of tracking data. Specifically, we have RAPTOR—which factored in a boatload of tracking data

None of which includes the ball-handling component I listed. Additionally, as various people have brought up and you have handwaved, RAPTOR's creator straight up said they think paint-protection and big defense is overrated, 2019 kawhi was the best defender in the nba, and they weighed their inputs accordingly.

Consequently, as multiple posters have brought up, and you have ignored, the defensive part of RAPTOR is 7 times less predictive of RAPM as the offensive part.

In short, one of the major weaknesses I listed is not accounted for, and the other one is devalued to a degree that directly compromises the predictivity of the metric even when it has hundreds of players to dilute the potential biasing. Lastly, if you take out the box inputs...Lebron is the figure who stands as a gigantic outlier over the field. And even with these sorts of box-inputs, which consistently lead to a lower appraisal of Lebron then non-box, Lebron is the dominant force of data-ball if you allow his whole career to be considered even when restricting to shorter time frames.

In short, you are yapping. Jokic is not a match for Lebron in terms of how high his signals peak, how frequently he puts up great signals(replication), or maintained impact over set time frames, or proof of concept across various contexts.

He is not even a match with box-inputs unless you cherrypick when the comparison starts for the bulk of available metrics and pretty much none of said metrics consider Lebron's gigantic advantage as a ball-handler and ball-progressor or what he offers as a defensive floor-general.

Heej has already covered how silly "ball-handling is not a problem" is, so I'll let him cook.

[GSP]

Rudy has some of the worst hands Ive ever seen for a big. Jokic has the best hands and its such an enormous difference. And im not even talking just shooting but simply catching a pass, grabbing a board, ball security.....Rudy has the hands of those 00s 10th man bigs teams would sign just to a body for Shaq lol

[Heej]

Denver whips the ball around even with Jokic on the bench. But man this is one of those games where you really see how sharp Jokic is on the floor so far. Great player with a great team situation.

Ant imo settles for bad shots too much instead of looking to dish. And gambles on D. Very MJ-esque indeed cuz he's playing like the BITW in some games. Brunson imo needs to be in that conversation with what he's doing in the playoffs. He's like a small worse rebounding offensive minded Big O to me.

[OhayoKD]

Jokic is balling not gonna lie.

[GSP]

Jokic hasnt made a single mistake all game this is absurd mastery of the game

[ronnymac2]

Joker's pass was so wicked.

[GSP]

This is one of the best playoff performances ever by Jokic

[OhayoKD]

This is one of the best playoff performances ever by Jokic

this and game 7 vs he clippers are in a tier of their own I think

[TheGOATRises007]

Jokic has been masterful tonight.

His best game of the playoffs.

[GSP]

Theres no argument who the best player has been for a few years now

Lost in Denver still being dominant these playoffs is Murray has been completely mid. You could make a strong case Murray hasnt even been a top 3 Nugget these playoffs and it doesnt matter. Nuggets are still the team to beat b/c of Jokic.

[itsxtray]

The series is over. Shoutout to the Wolves for making it interesting for a week, but a healthy Celtics team actually making their 3's is the only team that can beat the Nuggets. The Wolves were 17th on offense all season and only looked better in the postseason because Ant went on an all-time heater and basically played several tiers above his actual level. He's like Gohan in the time chamber flashing into SS2—the potential is there, but it's not realized yet.

Also, The Wolves consistently make boneheaded plays on offense: dumb charges, missing Gobert on lobs when he's open multiple times, and hitting Gobert on the short roll for some reason (Draymond, he is not). The wrong players taking shots, etc. Finally, Ant really showed his youth tonight. The double team completely befuddled him. He was indecisive, missing easy reads, forcing it when he shouldn't, etc. He has much room to grow.

[sp6r=underrated]

That 3rd Quarter was a masterpiece from Jokic. And I know lots of people hate Rudy but he was doing a great job. That was just a classic example of a GOAT level player going off.

[ShotCreator]

Took a peaking -7 or so defense and totally crushed them inside and out. Boston better be as good as their statistics indicate. They better be a little better actually. 2017 or so Horford could probably guard Jokic better than Gobert tonight just due to strength and center of gravity. As well as experience. Current Horford...Idk.

This is a rare kind of guy. Reminds me of Hakeem and LeBron. Really really matchup proof guy. Skill of Hakeem down low and brain of LeBron on the back end of the series after he's figured out the habits and schemes. He was just way ahead of the Timberwolves tactically.


Anthony Edwards is not that guy, yet. Watching this series, I understand now how he's had these crazy outburts in the playoffs, and why he doesn't play at this level in the RS consistently. He's flustered by very basic defensive tactics and doesn't anticipate well enough. On top of that he's the complete opposite of SGA as an on-ball guy. Super explosive going downhill in a straight line, when you make him dribble horizontally and make decisions on the fly it can all apart and he loses confidence. It's a matter of time for him to figure out these counters to his game though. Peak Harden would've dropped 40/20 getting defended by this defense like that. There's levels.

[GSP]

This is def the widest gap weve seen from the best player to the rest since peak Bron specially since the 2 other candidates in Giannis and Embiid are not like that in playoffs and theres health and durability too. Lukas had his 1st poor postseason too

2nd best player this season is prolly Sga or Brunson

[GSP]

I dont buy the "this is the real finals" narrative for this series

Wolves looked incredible the 1st 6 games but they were the 16th ranked offense for a reason

And this is a team whos 2nd and 3rd best players are notorious playoff droppers and soft weak players even if they were balling out early on

I think us and Okc are def better. Healthy Knicks i would put up there w/ anyone but theyve been wrecked w/ injuries unfortunately

[GSP]

Read on Twitter

Big reason Rudy is the historic playoff dropper he is and doesnt compare at all to the Ads and Bams

Far too one dimensional and only excels in 1 scheme when he can roam from the paint

same old story make 1 adjustment and his teams defense is cooked even if he has great perimeter defenders like now

[The High Cyde]

Haven’t watched individual player highlights since like 2018 Bron, had to tonight for the Joker. That was an all time special performance from him, got the MVP trophy and came out with a vengeance, embarrassed the DPOY along with the “best team defense we've seen in 20 years”, he wins a ring here I have to put him top 10 all time, how can you not career wise. Without an all star on the roster too lmao what!
I already went against the grain and said something sacrilegious with him being better than Jordan ever was already but I stand by it. We’ve seen Jordan clones, but Joker is one of a kind, we’ve never seen an anomaly like him, and you couldn’t accurately replicate his game if you tried. He’s doing this against an absolutely stacked league. And he’s lapping the field.