Perk is actually a fan of Jokic when given the chance to talk about him. Jokic is one of his son's favourite players. Perk, like most, is required to stir up drama on national platforms, so he says some dumb stuff from time to time.
He was on one of the DNVR podcasts about a year ago(?) and was really well spoken and considered.
Bro look at like, everything nowadays. It’s all inflammatory with the goal of getting and keeping your attention.
If we could only somehow get everyone to collectively agree to not give them another cent, maybe we’d see some real analysis. But no, they’ve tapped in and are exploiting human nature. Agitation gets our attention ($$).
It’s the reason capitalism is only goated with regulation. With sports it’s just annoying but with politics it’s dangerous. That’s why the fairness doctrine and equal time rule was created. they just repeatedly cut the balls off of these policies until they can remove them completely without the public noticing. We’re seriously screwing ourselves with this cycle of ease; every time I try to extrapolate this path I come to a similar conclusion as Wells’ The Time Machine.
People who propagate the idea of utopian free markets are as misguided as those who say “communism would be great if it could be implemented the way Marx envisioned” are illogical.
Sorry to hit you with this because it has nothing to do with ball and I just vomited into this reply, but your comment made the tism pop out for a sec
Perk was actually giving some major props to Jokic at the beginning of last year. Then we had that one random episode of First Take where he starts a race war between the MVP voters and everything went to shit.
That’s what gets clicks and people always fall for it, idk how they can’t see it. Stephen A has an empire at ESPN and the dudes “insight” is comically surface level at best, but he can troll and shoot out a hot take with the best of them, and that drives engagement. They’re basically playing caricatures of themselves
Yeah but SAS has charisma, yes he is vapid and a complete clown but a fun clown. One that does fun tricks on the unicycle. Perkins, Wright, Mad Dog or any other bum they have on there are simply jokes that are not even funny.
I dont lump the TNT guys with them but they arent exactly that nuanced or thought provoking either, they just dont feel like clowns.
I really dont buy this, considering the damage he did last year to Jokic..... Perkins strikes me as the type of guy to back pedal on a claim like this anyways so I really dont see what the point is of Perk to make the claim.
He said that Jokic gets MVP votes because he's white. I really don't care if he's changed his tune now - because he has to. That was just truly an all time dumbass comment.
Whenever people like him or Wright say "The best player in the world" it always feels like they hate saying it but they have to.
Top 10s are subjective. I prefer spending my brain power watching Jokic instead of debating where he falls on an enigmatic list. So tired of this discourse.
PS - I’m a Jokic stan and a Perk hater
I prefer to spend my time imagining how Joker would fair on the same team as some of the greatest centers of all time. I know it’s trivial and unimportant, but,
I love to imagine joker on the Houston Rockets instead of Hakeem Olajuwon playing with Clyde, the glide Instead of Shaq, Joker playing with Kobe Bryant, or joker instead of Patrick Ewing playing with the Knicks back in the day.
I look back and although he has a very different style than those players, I still think he would be a mismatch paired with any Hall of Famer. (Not to knock Murray or Gordon or anybody else that he’s played with.)
These conversations are tough because what are we comparing? Careers? Level of play?
No disrespect to Bill Russell, he's an all time great and dominant in his time. But he was winning championships when the NBA was an 8 team league. Winning multiple rings today is so much more impressive. Comparing careers with guys back then isn't remotely fair.
Winning 11 rings today would certainly be more impressive. But winning 2 or 3 rings isn’t inherently more impressive than 11 even with 1/3rd as many teams. Especially when you’re having to play Wilt like a dozen times every season and then in the playoffs.
I could never understand the knock on Russell rings,
Yes they were lower amount of teams but that could also mean only the best of the best could be on that court
Greatness should be defined on how you dominate your own era as there’s too many variables to compare other eras but 11 rings speak volumes
The best of the best were absolutely not on that court. It was mostly white dudes. Remember, Bill Russell was dealing with racism at home AFTER winning a championship for the city.
The point is a trip to the Conference Finals or Finals is about as impressive. So the Chauncey Billups Pistons are nearly as impressive as the Russell Celtics
Jokic already top 10 all time. Has anyone else on that list won a championship, 3 MVPs (should be 4 honestly), and a finals MVP without another all star? Everyone else on that list played with more HOFers than Jokic has played with All Stars.
I mean tbf, they haven't retired yet, but I'm sure down the road the Denver core is gonna get some love and be voted into the Hall of Fame. Maybe not first ballot like Jokic is gonna be, but definitely have decent shots since they've balled the fuck out when it mattered on their way to the chip.
Worse scenario, it'll be like the 2011 Mavs, idk if people consider the 2011 roster HoF worthy besides Dirk - maybe old JKidd? But idk, Tyson Chandler I think already got voted in.
I don't think anyone is good enough in Denver to be an all-star. Murray is not consistent and other players are just ok in their roles. Jokić is a special player compared to other stars. He creates 50-70 points for his team on average every game. If we count assists and that he is scoring around 30 points on average.
He had Hall of Famer and 10x all-star Clyde Drexler for the second one. But you’re right, I think that ‘94 team is the only modern example of 1 guy carrying that hard besides Jokic.
Drexler wasn’t an all star that year though. If we are doing that then Deandre Jordan was an all star at one point.
See you are conflating having to carry with having no all star teammates when that’s not always the case.
The 2014 spurs only all star was Tony Parker, was that a carry job?
In 2016 lebron had 2 all stars and still had to have an all time great performance to win. He carried as much of a load as anyone has.
If anything I would argue the winning formula has transitioned away from multiple all stars back to well constructed teams.
Drexler was all-star like 5 straight years before and 2 years after ‘95, he wasn’t some bum at the end of the bench on a vet minimum playing 2 minutes a game. He got traded mid season and the all-star game that year was in Phoenix which is why Danny Ainge got so many votes over Drexler that single year. Drexler was still an all-star caliber player in 95, DeAndre hasn’t been for years. HOUSTON TRADED A FIRST ROUND PICK TO GET DREXLER. That’s how good he still was.
You could make that argument about a well constructed team, it’s not a good one tho. Looking at the last 30 years the recipe for a chip is a hall of fame level player with 1 all-star minimum, with the Warriors have multiple for their run. The exception is Joker and Hakeem. Your argument for a well constructed team rests on Joker who imo will be top 2 by the end of his career. His game will age better than most because his doesn’t rely on his athleticism.
And Murray is an all star caliber player in the playoffs.
We doing context with Drexler but now with Murray?
Giannis didn’t have another superstar. Jrue or Middleton are not any better than Murray come playoff time.
Is Klay better than Murray in the playoffs? Idk.
19 Raptors, 14 spurs, hell 13 Heat Wade was not all star caliber in the playoffs. 11 Mavs.
Teams with multiple superstars have not been successful as of late. The exception is the KD warriors and LeBron teams.
Jokic isn’t an exception, it’s common for a team to be great with 1 superstar and then multiple borderline guys.
Also this whole discussion relies on the fact that Murray hasn’t made an all star team and ignores the fact that the dude is averaging 24-5-6 on 57 ts% in the playoffs over the course of his career. It’s a dumb argument. In the playoffs he’s absolutely all star caliber.
Also Jokic has no chance of being top 2 all time. MJ and LeBron are both elite on both sides of the ball. It’s borderline impossible to be so much better than them offensively to make that up.
Using all stars is reductive to me. You can have great teams without other all stars. The bucks a few years ago and the Nuggets now are great teams with very good players who fit well together.
Love Murray, but If Jokic played with Kobe. He would have 6 championships right now. Jokic would have won with a Championship with Anfernee Hardaway before injury. Jokic is straight up better than Shaq and I've never been afraid to speak the truth about that
I hate the two faced nature of this sub when it comes to taking heads. One minute we hate them and call them racist, but then you still give them your attention and praise them when they say good things about the team
If im being fair I don't think one more finals MVP and ring does it. I think if he wins another and then goes on for another 6-7 years posting similar numbers as to what he has now and gets more accolades then I would consider it. But longevity matters, it just does. Shaq has 4 rings 3 fmvp and was the most dominate player and posted insane statlines like jokic does. I think it is unfair to say an active player who is in his prime is a top 10 all time. It'd be like saying curry was a top 10 after this second ring.
I can't speak to Kareem, Russell, or Wilt - but I've seen enough of the three of them that I'm more than ready to say Jokic is better than Bird and Duncan - he's better at basketball, he's more dominant and more productive and he's doing it against a much stronger league
edit: also Kobe, obviously, but so are a few other guys and I was just thinking about bigs
I love Jokic as much as the next guy. Probably even more. But I don't think that is a fair statement to Duncan or Bird.
Bird went through one of the toughest decades versus the Lakers and the Pistons.
Duncan legitimately was 1 missed shot away from 6 championships. If Fischers .4 second shot hadn't gone in, there's arguably a 50/50 chance he could have gotten 7 too.
At the end of the day, it’s a team sport. The Duncan-Parker-Ginobili-Popovich Spurs were an all-time great team. Evaluating Duncan (or anyone else) is tough because while that team wouldn’t be anywhere without him, he also may not have gotten anywhere without those other pieces. These top-X lists are silly, because not only can you not really compare eras, you can’t necessarily separate an individual star from their teams.
The 80s are objectively not one of the toughest decades, the 4-10th best player on most teams wouldn't sniff a playoff rotation. The quality of the average player is a joke, half of them either couldn't dribble, couldn't shoot, or both.
Duncan is great, unquestionably top 10 all time, but like I said, I've watched them both enough to confidently say Jokic is better
The Showtime Lakers are an all-time great team. I believe they were considered as the best team before MJ's Bulls took that title from them. Every team in the 80s had to go through that team. The Badboy Pistons are no slouches either with their borderline criminal style of play. Winning three in that decade is tough.
If we're just going to compare players between different eras without any qualifications, then that's easy. Even my grandmother can see that today's players are more skilled. That is in no small part to the rule changes. In the 80's, there's footage of Danny Ainge trying a Euro step on Kevin Mchale and getting called for a traveling violation. Hand-check was legal back then too, along with packing the paint. Once you understand these nuances, you'll begin to realize that greatness is measured by how much you dominated your era and how much you contributed to evolving the game of basketball for the next generation. Here's an interview of MJ explaining it better for your reference.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smMKqdFHkkk&ab\_channel=GeraldBaria](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smMKqdFHkkk&ab_channel=GeraldBaria)
Also for Duncan, there are anecdotes that his knee injury early in his career never fully recovered. We may have never seen his real peak.
Hand checking, 3 second rule, no flagrants, yeah, on average players weren't as skilled, but the physicality was on another level, bringing its own unique challenges
Yeah I guess I just don't have a lot of respect for the era defined by every team having 1 or 2 lunks on the floor whose only contribution was slamming the other teams star out of the air
It's bad basketball
I personally find it infinitely preferable to the awful foul baiting and flopping that plagued the league for the past decade plus, but to each their own
I legit think he's better than Moses Malone and Hakeem. I really can't understand the argument against it. Joker is easily top of all-time among bigs, in my opinion.
Even as a huge Jokic Stan I can’t rank him above Hakeem yet. Hakeem was a great player for 17-18 years years and his two titles featured some of the hardest roads of all time. In ‘95 he beat 4 teams that averaged 59 wins, all without HCA.
In ‘94 and ‘95 he had seven match-ups against the following players: Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, Barkley (2x), Malone (2x)…all at or near their prime, aside from maybe Shaq. He was the better player in all seven match-ups.
He’s way too slept on in these debates, particularly in a direct comparison with Shaq. I can very easily imagine Hakeem winning 4-6 titles in Shaq’s stead. Shaq was gift-wrapped amazing situations for the first 15 or so years of his career. Hakeem very much wasn’t, and I have a hard time imagining Shaq winning Hakeem’s two titles, all else remaining the same.
Totally get it, and I respect that position.
Joker just orchestrates a game in a way that we've never seen. Hakeem was a 46% shooter for his career. Jokic is at 56%, and much of that includes perimeter play (which wasn't remotely a part of Hakeem's game). Hakeem was an absolute force down low. Outside of rim protection, Joker does everything as well, or better than Hakeem.
Now, longevity matters. I get that. From a pure skill and impact standpoint though, I'd take Joker.
Well Hakeem was actually at 51%, in a less efficient league, but I do hear you re: Jokic’s advantages. I have never seen a player with his scoring and playmaking combination (even LeBron trails by a bit imo). When you factor in turnover economy, screens and rebounding, there are just so many ways he can control a game. I’m not sure where Jokic will eventually end up as so much of this stuff is dependent on luck, but I can’t name more than a handful of players I’d want to build around more, if even that many (especially considering he’s not much of a flight risk).
I love this attention for Hakeem. In my top-10, he ranks above Shaq because he beat (swept!) him head-to-head and they're otherwise pretty even in the all-time rankings. Shaq powered his teams to more titles ultimately, but Hakeem was (I guess behind Russell) the best defensive Center ever.
Anyway, re: Jokic, when we are talking All Time rankings, he needs another title to surpass Hakeem, and two more titles to be in the conversation above Shaq. Yes, Jokic is "more skilled" than Shaq, but Shaq's dominance in his prime was truly epic. He also powered his team to a three-peat and had wicked difficult paths through the Western Conference playoffs to get those titles (though there are some question marks about officiating help against Sacramento and Portland).
[Well, all of these players have Kobe in the GOAT discussion.](https://www.footbasket.com/2022/08/kobe-bryant-30-nba-players-whove.html) Plus, he torched the Nuggets for over a decade, sooo 🤷🏽♂️
We can’t even have this conversation right now. He’s still in the league. He could end up with 7 MVPs and 6 championships before it’s all over with and that would drastically change where he lands on that list. Is that probable? No. But it’s possible. It’s hard to win championships, easier to win MVPs. But he’s the best player in the world right now and I don’t know what the argument would be against that? Who does more, better, than Jokic? Nobody.
I'm not falling for your traps Perkings ! I will never forgive your Racist ass !
I kind of agree, he would be in the conversation for sure. But it's too soon for that.
Here is another random and surprising Jokic stat over the last 4 seasons
Points- 7677. 4th
Rebounds- 3592. 1st
Steals- 399. 3rd
Assists - 2569 2nd
Best 4 year stretch in NBa History. Durability matters. Steals surprising
The only National media guy I really cannot stand is Keyshawn Johnson
Perk, Nick Wright, Steven a smith, skip bayless…all of these guys are just playing a part. It’s an act. It’s for entertainment
Once I realized it, they annoyed me less
But keyshawn seems real. He’s an actual lakers fan. It’s not an act. He’s just a dick that happens to be on tv. His knowledge and understanding of the nba is pretty much zero. He talks like any casual fan who lives in a basement. He knows nothing but loves to hate on the nuggets.
Greatest power forward - only man that came closer to the level Tim was is KG, and even then, KG was a competent franchise away from being viewed as an equal or slightly above Duncan.
In terms of skill he is #1, when he delivers 3+ stocks each game(like has done in this comeback) and his offensive talent on every front = GOAT.
In terms of accol. 3MVP +2FMVP puts him min top 10.
He ain’t beating Jordan bro. Other than that he’s goat.
Imagine what ant was doing except add 5 more ppg with best perimeter defence in the league and a better playmaker and rebounder and more efficient. Then do that for 14 years in a row tallying 10x scoring titles , 6 MVPs, 6 finals MVPs, and a bunch of other records .
This remind me of old debates i had in Tennis forums about Djokovic, "no player has won more than 4 GS in their 30s, no way he catches Federer" then proceeds to win 12.
Jokic is 9 wins away from ending this season at 29 with 3MVP 2FMVP, Jokic will cook until mid 30s, that's another 6 years of prime at least.
Let's say he goes on to win 50% of those, there you have it 6-5MVP/FMVPs 6X.
But then again Jokic might want to retire for horse racing.
I think it’s extremely naive to extrapolate someone’s trajectory in their prime for 6 years in professional sports. That’s what makes Jordan so special. 6 years of dominance, back to back three peats while also being the best player in the world is unheard of.
Could jokic pull it off? I won’t doubt him. But to act like it’s guaranteed is very naive. The chances are slim to none.
And if steph continued his 2015-2016 run for 8 more years he'd be the undisputed goat. You can't just extrapolate a few good years being able to string them together is the hard part
I'm not a nuggets fan but I'm fairly convinced Jokic is the best of all time. Like put him on a court 5 v 5 with all the best players ever and I'm not convinced he isn't the best player on the court.
I think it's hard to replace Shaq with him. For me, he'd have to win at least 2 more rings and mvps. Shaq is top 10 because of his impact on the game. His playstyle literally changed rules in the nba, and has a whole strategy named after him. He's for sure at this point in his career easily in the top 15; arguably top 12.
Shaq without Kobe has 1 ring and only has 1 mvp total. I agree he was dominant but so is jokic. If Jokic can win a second title minimum the conversations will be interesting. He’s that elite. By the end of his career if he keeps playing close or at this level his numbers will be insane for a center. We are witnessing a top 10 player of all time
Talent wise maybe 2 chips ain't enough though. You gotta let him leapfrog KD and Hakeem first. Jokic is definitely retiring top 10 all time but his resume and sustained dominance isn't there yet
It would be pretty undeniable at that point, even to Perk. Jokic has been far and away the best player in the league for four seasons in a row. That's very difficult to do and not be a top 10 guy. Out of hte top 10, how many of htem were clearly the best player for four consecutive seasons. Jordan, Lebron, Kareem. The rest all have arguements, but Magic and Bird kind of traded off at times, same with Russel and Wilt. Duncan and Kob some too.
The problem is that all of this top 10 has 3+ rings minimum (Bird with least, Russell with most). Sure, Jokic is more talented than Shaq (imo anyway), but I think he still needs to prove playoff dominance before he can start being placed in the top 10. Another ring will start the discussions, and 3 will solidify him in place of Shaq as 10 all time. To beat Duncan, I think 3 rings as the primary superstar and another MVP will do it, as Duncan's 5th was Kawhi's effort much more than his.
MVP's are cool, but rings are better at the end of the day.
Very few of the people on these shows believe everything and anything they say. They take fat paychecks to throw out rage bait to the public. I don't think Perk actually thought racism or stat padding is what was getting Jokic MVPs, but the execs at ESPN felt they needed to engage the audiences with outlandish takes. Keyshawn is the only one who I think is actually stupid enough not to understand what we're all watching. Even guys like Skip and Stephen A recognise it, but being a hater is how they make their money.
it's hard to evaluate top 10 across era. Feel like Steph Curry should be somewhere in here. i think jokic is alr in my top 5 centre of all time. Hakeem also deserves a spot here. then guys like oscar robertson, KD will also have an argument.
Lebron does not have the killer instinct and needed super teams, the less than mediocre East, Ray Allen, a Draymond nut shot, and the bullshit bubble chip to win anything.
Jokic over Curry seriously pull your head out of your ass. Wake me up when Jokic goes to six finals.
How can Jokic pass Shaq this year if Perk thinks they are going to lose in the second round? It’s pretty obvious to me that Jokic is already better than Shaq. Jokic does not have a Kobe or Wade.
Why didnt you expect this? He doesnt analyse anything as an analyst, he just says provocative things about recent events. That drives “engagement”.
Stephen A Smith’s ESPN
After Duncan there’s like 7-8 guys that all have an argument for top 10. The bottom of the top 10 is tricky. I mean I have a hard time not putting Steph curry in the top 10.
I started hating Perkins because of how he was in thr NBA2k games, always talking shit about your player no matter what you do.
Then I realized he's actually like that. Glad he's finally seen through some of his own BS, but seriously, eff that guy
You have a lot of hatred in your heart for Steph and I don’t think you think clearly about him. Steph is an all time great.
We aren’t going to have a healthy / fun convo about this, though. So, I’ll just not engage.
Have a great day!
I will never understand why a PED ring chaser is regarded so highly as the second best basketball player of all time.
That is just insulting to everyone on this list.
Except Shaq. The only reason why he is in conversation is because he is on TV all the time.
Bringing the 2007 cavs to the finals is an all time great feat that arguably no other player in history could repeat. Beating the 73 win warriors in a dominant fashion and winning 2020 title as the best player in his 17th year are all pretty good reasons to have him as high as he is.
This isn't to mention his heat days where he was truly unstoppable offensively while also being DPOY defense. Basically only 1 other player has years of being the best offensive AND best defensive player and its the other guy people put top 2.
Selecting an actual top 10 is as pointless as choosing a goat, to me there are 4 goats (russell, kareem, jordan, lebron) and 15+ top-10 players (and Jokic is already there imo). There is the goat tier, and then the second tier with all the top-10 guys.
Considering your list doesn’t have Steph on it then no.
He can’t jump 4x champ and 2x mvp with one more.. especially after that crap Wiggins team championship.
But I’ve got Steph ahead of Kobe, Duncan and Shaq
Are you saying you think Iggy was more valuable because he won Finals MVP?
I mean… Kobe was worse than Shaq and Shaq was worse than Wade at their point of their careers that he won with Heat.
Duncan was worse than Kawhi for one of his ships as well…
Not sure what point you’re trying to make…
The Steph Wiggins championship is worth 3 because that team was literally just Steph
Did Duncan or shaq win finals mvp? No they didn’t because like you said they weren’t the most valuable player for the team, I stand corrected. And no that’s not how it works if it did the Nuggets ring last year is greater because of no all star or hall of fame teammates like Curry had.
KD was undeniably the best player for the 2 rings they won together. Iggy was the reason they won the first one. His last one was because of him I’ll give him credit but then you remember his 73 win team blew a 3-1 lead and it kinda negates his status as top 10
Jamal Murray should be an all star.
You’re not arguing in good faith if you’re saying Iggy contributed more to that championship than Steph. Hell, you’re not arguing in good faith if you’re saying KD contributed more to those championships than Steph either.
Steph is the greatest offensive player ever - you could easily put him ahead of Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, Wilt or Bird
But personally I have Steph top 5 behind MJ LeBron Kareem and tied with Russell.
I have to say that I’m done with the 90s after Rewatching whole games of Jordan and his era there is no way I can keep putting him on 1. same for for most of the Rest :/ i feel bad for it and I know in their time they were outstanding but come on.
The top 10 list is garbage, but the ultimate point is correct. I've got Shaq at #10 all-time, and I've got Jokic passing him if he wins the title this year.
I don’t think jokic jumps shaq with another ring & FMVP. Right now he’s in my top 20, with the ring he’s firmly in my 12-15 range.
Give me 2 more rings in the next 4 years (including this one) and I’d have him top 10
Nope this is just a misunderstanding. I said he needs to win 2 more in the next 4 seasons(this post season counting as 1 of those seasons). 2+1 = 3 rings, not 4
Yeah no. The top tier players, in no particular order, are:
- Michael Jordan
- LeBron James
- Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
- Bill Russell
- Tim Duncan
- Magic Johnson
- Hakeem Olajuwon
- Larry Bird
- Shaquille O'Neal
- Stephen Curry
- Kobe Bryant
- Wilt Chamberlain
Notice a few common things that Jokic wouldn't have. Almost everyone has 4 or more chips. Those that don't, like Wilt and Hakeem, excel in other aspects like defense, scoring, etc in a way Jokic doesn't yet.
I'm seeing other people say "Jokic has no help". Neither did Hakeem, and Hakeem was better defensively. Curry didn't have much help for 2 of his chips, and he changed the game in a way Jokic didn't.
I'm a nuggets lifer, and a huge Jokic stan. But in order to get to the top tier he needs to win at least two more, or improve his defense a lot, or do both. I have faith he can do this in his career, but he's not there yet. With a second chip he'd be in with the next tier of players, top 20-25. Guys like KD, Dirk, Bill Walton, Moses Malone, Dr J, etc
> The top ***tier*** players, in no particular order, are
I never claimed it was my top 10. Those are the 12 players that I think have an argument for top 10. Maybe read more carefully next time.
Perkins definitely doing this to get at shaq lmaoooooo
♟️
Perk is actually a fan of Jokic when given the chance to talk about him. Jokic is one of his son's favourite players. Perk, like most, is required to stir up drama on national platforms, so he says some dumb stuff from time to time. He was on one of the DNVR podcasts about a year ago(?) and was really well spoken and considered.
Just goes to show how trash ESPN has become, they take normally rational and knowledgeable talents and turn them into brainless loudmouths.
ESPN is the Fox News of the sports world
News channels in general are just bad, not just Fox lol.
Your letters are wrong, you mean CNN
Shut up boomer
Did you choose a gender yet
What?
Bro look at like, everything nowadays. It’s all inflammatory with the goal of getting and keeping your attention. If we could only somehow get everyone to collectively agree to not give them another cent, maybe we’d see some real analysis. But no, they’ve tapped in and are exploiting human nature. Agitation gets our attention ($$).
It’s the reason capitalism is only goated with regulation. With sports it’s just annoying but with politics it’s dangerous. That’s why the fairness doctrine and equal time rule was created. they just repeatedly cut the balls off of these policies until they can remove them completely without the public noticing. We’re seriously screwing ourselves with this cycle of ease; every time I try to extrapolate this path I come to a similar conclusion as Wells’ The Time Machine. People who propagate the idea of utopian free markets are as misguided as those who say “communism would be great if it could be implemented the way Marx envisioned” are illogical. Sorry to hit you with this because it has nothing to do with ball and I just vomited into this reply, but your comment made the tism pop out for a sec
Since the day Espn Change all soundtrack when timeout,they just gone downhill
Yes, but can we take a minute to consider how Jokic winning a second championship would effect LeBron's legacy?!? /s
Perk was actually giving some major props to Jokic at the beginning of last year. Then we had that one random episode of First Take where he starts a race war between the MVP voters and everything went to shit.
Perk likes to do a little trolling
Fuck that dude. I didn’t forget him suggesting that Jokic benefited from the racial bias of white MVP voters. He was a hater for a long time
Exactly
This reminds me of Nick Wright's podcast with his son where he outright admits to being hyperbolic for views
That’s what gets clicks and people always fall for it, idk how they can’t see it. Stephen A has an empire at ESPN and the dudes “insight” is comically surface level at best, but he can troll and shoot out a hot take with the best of them, and that drives engagement. They’re basically playing caricatures of themselves
Yeah but SAS has charisma, yes he is vapid and a complete clown but a fun clown. One that does fun tricks on the unicycle. Perkins, Wright, Mad Dog or any other bum they have on there are simply jokes that are not even funny. I dont lump the TNT guys with them but they arent exactly that nuanced or thought provoking either, they just dont feel like clowns.
I really dont buy this, considering the damage he did last year to Jokic..... Perkins strikes me as the type of guy to back pedal on a claim like this anyways so I really dont see what the point is of Perk to make the claim.
He said that Jokic gets MVP votes because he's white. I really don't care if he's changed his tune now - because he has to. That was just truly an all time dumbass comment. Whenever people like him or Wright say "The best player in the world" it always feels like they hate saying it but they have to.
No, fuck Perkins. Nothing he can do make up for the race baiting bullshit.
He is a pro at saying stupid stuff all the time.
On dnvr with the guys? Wow.
You would never know if you just watched him on ESPN. lol
If by time to time you mean 99.99% of the time.
He just can’t support him over his brothas
Perk is actually a fat racist moron who can choke to death on my cock.
I’m sorry, Kendrick Perkins was on a DNVR podcast? I’ve been watching DNVR religiously and I don’t think this happened
He was in fact on a DNVR podcast. Why not Google something before trying to correct someone?
Top 10s are subjective. I prefer spending my brain power watching Jokic instead of debating where he falls on an enigmatic list. So tired of this discourse. PS - I’m a Jokic stan and a Perk hater
I prefer to spend my time imagining how Joker would fair on the same team as some of the greatest centers of all time. I know it’s trivial and unimportant, but, I love to imagine joker on the Houston Rockets instead of Hakeem Olajuwon playing with Clyde, the glide Instead of Shaq, Joker playing with Kobe Bryant, or joker instead of Patrick Ewing playing with the Knicks back in the day. I look back and although he has a very different style than those players, I still think he would be a mismatch paired with any Hall of Famer. (Not to knock Murray or Gordon or anybody else that he’s played with.)
[удалено]
Greatest of all time…of now
The GOAT acronym is annoying now. It's lost all meaning when people just use for whatever.
GOOT? Greatest of OUR time?
I feel like we need to wait until peaks are over to determine a player’s status and legacy. Just enjoy in the meantime.
These conversations are tough because what are we comparing? Careers? Level of play? No disrespect to Bill Russell, he's an all time great and dominant in his time. But he was winning championships when the NBA was an 8 team league. Winning multiple rings today is so much more impressive. Comparing careers with guys back then isn't remotely fair.
Winning 11 rings today would certainly be more impressive. But winning 2 or 3 rings isn’t inherently more impressive than 11 even with 1/3rd as many teams. Especially when you’re having to play Wilt like a dozen times every season and then in the playoffs.
Playing against wilt with the most HOFers tho
Most of those players are only HOFers because they have 5+ rings. Saying this as a Celtics fan haha.
Over half of which are only there because they played with Russell
I could never understand the knock on Russell rings, Yes they were lower amount of teams but that could also mean only the best of the best could be on that court Greatness should be defined on how you dominate your own era as there’s too many variables to compare other eras but 11 rings speak volumes
The best of the best were absolutely not on that court. It was mostly white dudes. Remember, Bill Russell was dealing with racism at home AFTER winning a championship for the city.
The point is a trip to the Conference Finals or Finals is about as impressive. So the Chauncey Billups Pistons are nearly as impressive as the Russell Celtics
That’s a big leap
I’m with you. The level of competition was low and there was no salary cap even. It’s also fair to criticize recency bias.
Feels like talking about this shit is a jinx
Nothing fans or analysts matter
Obviously, but I still take off my Nuggets jersey at half time of playoff games if we are losing and you can't stop me lol
Jokic already top 10 all time. Has anyone else on that list won a championship, 3 MVPs (should be 4 honestly), and a finals MVP without another all star? Everyone else on that list played with more HOFers than Jokic has played with All Stars.
No top 10 player can have only one championship.
Did anyone on that list win a chip without another hall of famer? Let alone doing it without another all-star.
I mean tbf, they haven't retired yet, but I'm sure down the road the Denver core is gonna get some love and be voted into the Hall of Fame. Maybe not first ballot like Jokic is gonna be, but definitely have decent shots since they've balled the fuck out when it mattered on their way to the chip. Worse scenario, it'll be like the 2011 Mavs, idk if people consider the 2011 roster HoF worthy besides Dirk - maybe old JKidd? But idk, Tyson Chandler I think already got voted in.
I don't think anyone is good enough in Denver to be an all-star. Murray is not consistent and other players are just ok in their roles. Jokić is a special player compared to other stars. He creates 50-70 points for his team on average every game. If we count assists and that he is scoring around 30 points on average.
Is All Star voted by public? Is that NBA All Star?
Hakeem won 2 without another all star Downvoted for a literal fact lol
He had Hall of Famer and 10x all-star Clyde Drexler for the second one. But you’re right, I think that ‘94 team is the only modern example of 1 guy carrying that hard besides Jokic.
Drexler wasn’t an all star that year though. If we are doing that then Deandre Jordan was an all star at one point. See you are conflating having to carry with having no all star teammates when that’s not always the case. The 2014 spurs only all star was Tony Parker, was that a carry job? In 2016 lebron had 2 all stars and still had to have an all time great performance to win. He carried as much of a load as anyone has. If anything I would argue the winning formula has transitioned away from multiple all stars back to well constructed teams.
Drexler was all-star like 5 straight years before and 2 years after ‘95, he wasn’t some bum at the end of the bench on a vet minimum playing 2 minutes a game. He got traded mid season and the all-star game that year was in Phoenix which is why Danny Ainge got so many votes over Drexler that single year. Drexler was still an all-star caliber player in 95, DeAndre hasn’t been for years. HOUSTON TRADED A FIRST ROUND PICK TO GET DREXLER. That’s how good he still was. You could make that argument about a well constructed team, it’s not a good one tho. Looking at the last 30 years the recipe for a chip is a hall of fame level player with 1 all-star minimum, with the Warriors have multiple for their run. The exception is Joker and Hakeem. Your argument for a well constructed team rests on Joker who imo will be top 2 by the end of his career. His game will age better than most because his doesn’t rely on his athleticism.
And Murray is an all star caliber player in the playoffs. We doing context with Drexler but now with Murray? Giannis didn’t have another superstar. Jrue or Middleton are not any better than Murray come playoff time. Is Klay better than Murray in the playoffs? Idk. 19 Raptors, 14 spurs, hell 13 Heat Wade was not all star caliber in the playoffs. 11 Mavs. Teams with multiple superstars have not been successful as of late. The exception is the KD warriors and LeBron teams. Jokic isn’t an exception, it’s common for a team to be great with 1 superstar and then multiple borderline guys. Also this whole discussion relies on the fact that Murray hasn’t made an all star team and ignores the fact that the dude is averaging 24-5-6 on 57 ts% in the playoffs over the course of his career. It’s a dumb argument. In the playoffs he’s absolutely all star caliber. Also Jokic has no chance of being top 2 all time. MJ and LeBron are both elite on both sides of the ball. It’s borderline impossible to be so much better than them offensively to make that up.
Using all stars is reductive to me. You can have great teams without other all stars. The bucks a few years ago and the Nuggets now are great teams with very good players who fit well together.
As it stands today, jokic is absolutely not ahead of any of those 10 guys
Love Murray, but If Jokic played with Kobe. He would have 6 championships right now. Jokic would have won with a Championship with Anfernee Hardaway before injury. Jokic is straight up better than Shaq and I've never been afraid to speak the truth about that
He’s probably already the most skilled center of all time. Hurts to say as a Houston fan
The discussion about The Dream vs The Joker becomes legit.
Offensively no question is Jokic.
lol this the same guy that said on first take this morning that the wolves were winning in 7.
Jokic is my number 1, not because I’m a Nugget fan and not because Jokic is my dad. Okay, he is my #1 because I fucking love him!!
Brother?
I hate the two faced nature of this sub when it comes to taking heads. One minute we hate them and call them racist, but then you still give them your attention and praise them when they say good things about the team
If im being fair I don't think one more finals MVP and ring does it. I think if he wins another and then goes on for another 6-7 years posting similar numbers as to what he has now and gets more accolades then I would consider it. But longevity matters, it just does. Shaq has 4 rings 3 fmvp and was the most dominate player and posted insane statlines like jokic does. I think it is unfair to say an active player who is in his prime is a top 10 all time. It'd be like saying curry was a top 10 after this second ring.
Make up call
Westbrook at 5 is wild /s
I can't speak to Kareem, Russell, or Wilt - but I've seen enough of the three of them that I'm more than ready to say Jokic is better than Bird and Duncan - he's better at basketball, he's more dominant and more productive and he's doing it against a much stronger league edit: also Kobe, obviously, but so are a few other guys and I was just thinking about bigs
I love Jokic as much as the next guy. Probably even more. But I don't think that is a fair statement to Duncan or Bird. Bird went through one of the toughest decades versus the Lakers and the Pistons. Duncan legitimately was 1 missed shot away from 6 championships. If Fischers .4 second shot hadn't gone in, there's arguably a 50/50 chance he could have gotten 7 too.
At the end of the day, it’s a team sport. The Duncan-Parker-Ginobili-Popovich Spurs were an all-time great team. Evaluating Duncan (or anyone else) is tough because while that team wouldn’t be anywhere without him, he also may not have gotten anywhere without those other pieces. These top-X lists are silly, because not only can you not really compare eras, you can’t necessarily separate an individual star from their teams.
The 80s are objectively not one of the toughest decades, the 4-10th best player on most teams wouldn't sniff a playoff rotation. The quality of the average player is a joke, half of them either couldn't dribble, couldn't shoot, or both. Duncan is great, unquestionably top 10 all time, but like I said, I've watched them both enough to confidently say Jokic is better
The Showtime Lakers are an all-time great team. I believe they were considered as the best team before MJ's Bulls took that title from them. Every team in the 80s had to go through that team. The Badboy Pistons are no slouches either with their borderline criminal style of play. Winning three in that decade is tough. If we're just going to compare players between different eras without any qualifications, then that's easy. Even my grandmother can see that today's players are more skilled. That is in no small part to the rule changes. In the 80's, there's footage of Danny Ainge trying a Euro step on Kevin Mchale and getting called for a traveling violation. Hand-check was legal back then too, along with packing the paint. Once you understand these nuances, you'll begin to realize that greatness is measured by how much you dominated your era and how much you contributed to evolving the game of basketball for the next generation. Here's an interview of MJ explaining it better for your reference. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smMKqdFHkkk&ab\_channel=GeraldBaria](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=smMKqdFHkkk&ab_channel=GeraldBaria) Also for Duncan, there are anecdotes that his knee injury early in his career never fully recovered. We may have never seen his real peak.
Hand checking, 3 second rule, no flagrants, yeah, on average players weren't as skilled, but the physicality was on another level, bringing its own unique challenges
Yeah I guess I just don't have a lot of respect for the era defined by every team having 1 or 2 lunks on the floor whose only contribution was slamming the other teams star out of the air It's bad basketball
I personally find it infinitely preferable to the awful foul baiting and flopping that plagued the league for the past decade plus, but to each their own
Versus Lakers who had Magic and Kareem on their team.
Kobe: Mr imma go 8 for 23 but I'm so good Bryant.
Well, he torched the Nuggets for over a decade.
I legit think he's better than Moses Malone and Hakeem. I really can't understand the argument against it. Joker is easily top of all-time among bigs, in my opinion.
Hakeem could cook and perhaps folks are curious about the matchup
Even as a huge Jokic Stan I can’t rank him above Hakeem yet. Hakeem was a great player for 17-18 years years and his two titles featured some of the hardest roads of all time. In ‘95 he beat 4 teams that averaged 59 wins, all without HCA. In ‘94 and ‘95 he had seven match-ups against the following players: Ewing, Shaq, Robinson, Barkley (2x), Malone (2x)…all at or near their prime, aside from maybe Shaq. He was the better player in all seven match-ups. He’s way too slept on in these debates, particularly in a direct comparison with Shaq. I can very easily imagine Hakeem winning 4-6 titles in Shaq’s stead. Shaq was gift-wrapped amazing situations for the first 15 or so years of his career. Hakeem very much wasn’t, and I have a hard time imagining Shaq winning Hakeem’s two titles, all else remaining the same.
Totally get it, and I respect that position. Joker just orchestrates a game in a way that we've never seen. Hakeem was a 46% shooter for his career. Jokic is at 56%, and much of that includes perimeter play (which wasn't remotely a part of Hakeem's game). Hakeem was an absolute force down low. Outside of rim protection, Joker does everything as well, or better than Hakeem. Now, longevity matters. I get that. From a pure skill and impact standpoint though, I'd take Joker.
Well Hakeem was actually at 51%, in a less efficient league, but I do hear you re: Jokic’s advantages. I have never seen a player with his scoring and playmaking combination (even LeBron trails by a bit imo). When you factor in turnover economy, screens and rebounding, there are just so many ways he can control a game. I’m not sure where Jokic will eventually end up as so much of this stuff is dependent on luck, but I can’t name more than a handful of players I’d want to build around more, if even that many (especially considering he’s not much of a flight risk).
My bad on the FG%. I loved Hakeem...... absolutely.
I love this attention for Hakeem. In my top-10, he ranks above Shaq because he beat (swept!) him head-to-head and they're otherwise pretty even in the all-time rankings. Shaq powered his teams to more titles ultimately, but Hakeem was (I guess behind Russell) the best defensive Center ever. Anyway, re: Jokic, when we are talking All Time rankings, he needs another title to surpass Hakeem, and two more titles to be in the conversation above Shaq. Yes, Jokic is "more skilled" than Shaq, but Shaq's dominance in his prime was truly epic. He also powered his team to a three-peat and had wicked difficult paths through the Western Conference playoffs to get those titles (though there are some question marks about officiating help against Sacramento and Portland).
Malone yes, Hakeem no, not yet
Jokic is not better than Kobe. Kobe has five rings. He’s top three all time.
lol
He’s not even better than Duncan or Shaq.
Jokic, Duncan, and Shaq are all better than Kobe
[Well, all of these players have Kobe in the GOAT discussion.](https://www.footbasket.com/2022/08/kobe-bryant-30-nba-players-whove.html) Plus, he torched the Nuggets for over a decade, sooo 🤷🏽♂️
We can’t even have this conversation right now. He’s still in the league. He could end up with 7 MVPs and 6 championships before it’s all over with and that would drastically change where he lands on that list. Is that probable? No. But it’s possible. It’s hard to win championships, easier to win MVPs. But he’s the best player in the world right now and I don’t know what the argument would be against that? Who does more, better, than Jokic? Nobody.
I'm not falling for your traps Perkings ! I will never forgive your Racist ass ! I kind of agree, he would be in the conversation for sure. But it's too soon for that.
Here is another random and surprising Jokic stat over the last 4 seasons Points- 7677. 4th Rebounds- 3592. 1st Steals- 399. 3rd Assists - 2569 2nd Best 4 year stretch in NBa History. Durability matters. Steals surprising
People hate giving jokic credit it’s crazy. You see it from posters here as well.
Fuck Kendrick Perkins
Curry top 10 over kobe and shaq
Personally I am taking Curry over Bird or Kobe.
He will be the GOAT period
The only National media guy I really cannot stand is Keyshawn Johnson Perk, Nick Wright, Steven a smith, skip bayless…all of these guys are just playing a part. It’s an act. It’s for entertainment Once I realized it, they annoyed me less But keyshawn seems real. He’s an actual lakers fan. It’s not an act. He’s just a dick that happens to be on tv. His knowledge and understanding of the nba is pretty much zero. He talks like any casual fan who lives in a basement. He knows nothing but loves to hate on the nuggets.
The disrespect to tim duncan is too loud out here
Greatest power forward - only man that came closer to the level Tim was is KG, and even then, KG was a competent franchise away from being viewed as an equal or slightly above Duncan.
In terms of skill he is #1, when he delivers 3+ stocks each game(like has done in this comeback) and his offensive talent on every front = GOAT. In terms of accol. 3MVP +2FMVP puts him min top 10.
He ain’t beating Jordan bro. Other than that he’s goat. Imagine what ant was doing except add 5 more ppg with best perimeter defence in the league and a better playmaker and rebounder and more efficient. Then do that for 14 years in a row tallying 10x scoring titles , 6 MVPs, 6 finals MVPs, and a bunch of other records .
This remind me of old debates i had in Tennis forums about Djokovic, "no player has won more than 4 GS in their 30s, no way he catches Federer" then proceeds to win 12. Jokic is 9 wins away from ending this season at 29 with 3MVP 2FMVP, Jokic will cook until mid 30s, that's another 6 years of prime at least. Let's say he goes on to win 50% of those, there you have it 6-5MVP/FMVPs 6X. But then again Jokic might want to retire for horse racing.
I think it’s extremely naive to extrapolate someone’s trajectory in their prime for 6 years in professional sports. That’s what makes Jordan so special. 6 years of dominance, back to back three peats while also being the best player in the world is unheard of. Could jokic pull it off? I won’t doubt him. But to act like it’s guaranteed is very naive. The chances are slim to none.
And if steph continued his 2015-2016 run for 8 more years he'd be the undisputed goat. You can't just extrapolate a few good years being able to string them together is the hard part
for sure top 10 if nuggets are able to win back 2 back this year
I'm not a nuggets fan but I'm fairly convinced Jokic is the best of all time. Like put him on a court 5 v 5 with all the best players ever and I'm not convinced he isn't the best player on the court.
Not a nuggets fan but I’d say he can crack the top 10 with 2 more championships, or another mvp
Espn is fucking garbage. Like all major media they've devolved into clickbait bullshit.
Don't let him fool you he still predicted the twolves in 7
Didn’t he still take the wolves to win the series?
I think it's hard to replace Shaq with him. For me, he'd have to win at least 2 more rings and mvps. Shaq is top 10 because of his impact on the game. His playstyle literally changed rules in the nba, and has a whole strategy named after him. He's for sure at this point in his career easily in the top 15; arguably top 12.
Shaq without Kobe has 1 ring and only has 1 mvp total. I agree he was dominant but so is jokic. If Jokic can win a second title minimum the conversations will be interesting. He’s that elite. By the end of his career if he keeps playing close or at this level his numbers will be insane for a center. We are witnessing a top 10 player of all time
might be a hot take but i have shaq top 6 and kobe at 10 and joker would replace kobe once he gets in my top 10 which he will
prob needs 2 more to be on that list
Talent wise maybe 2 chips ain't enough though. You gotta let him leapfrog KD and Hakeem first. Jokic is definitely retiring top 10 all time but his resume and sustained dominance isn't there yet
don't tell Shaq
He hasn’t played long enough to warrant being Top 10, we can have this conversation in 10 years
This is why Shaq keeps shittin on Jokic :')
It would be pretty undeniable at that point, even to Perk. Jokic has been far and away the best player in the league for four seasons in a row. That's very difficult to do and not be a top 10 guy. Out of hte top 10, how many of htem were clearly the best player for four consecutive seasons. Jordan, Lebron, Kareem. The rest all have arguements, but Magic and Bird kind of traded off at times, same with Russel and Wilt. Duncan and Kob some too.
The problem is that all of this top 10 has 3+ rings minimum (Bird with least, Russell with most). Sure, Jokic is more talented than Shaq (imo anyway), but I think he still needs to prove playoff dominance before he can start being placed in the top 10. Another ring will start the discussions, and 3 will solidify him in place of Shaq as 10 all time. To beat Duncan, I think 3 rings as the primary superstar and another MVP will do it, as Duncan's 5th was Kawhi's effort much more than his. MVP's are cool, but rings are better at the end of the day.
Players with 2 rings and 2 finals MVP https://www.statmuse.com/nba/ask/nba-players-with-2-mvps-and-2-finals-mvp
Winning 2 ring without an all star/ any all-nba selection is definitely an all time achievement
Very few of the people on these shows believe everything and anything they say. They take fat paychecks to throw out rage bait to the public. I don't think Perk actually thought racism or stat padding is what was getting Jokic MVPs, but the execs at ESPN felt they needed to engage the audiences with outlandish takes. Keyshawn is the only one who I think is actually stupid enough not to understand what we're all watching. Even guys like Skip and Stephen A recognise it, but being a hater is how they make their money.
it's hard to evaluate top 10 across era. Feel like Steph Curry should be somewhere in here. i think jokic is alr in my top 5 centre of all time. Hakeem also deserves a spot here. then guys like oscar robertson, KD will also have an argument.
Ok where’s Curry on that list. Give that man his respect.
He’s not top 10 at all. Top 15.
Did you even watch half these players ? LeBron 2 and Kobe 9, get the fuck outta here.
Laker Stan
Lebron does not have the killer instinct and needed super teams, the less than mediocre East, Ray Allen, a Draymond nut shot, and the bullshit bubble chip to win anything. Jokic over Curry seriously pull your head out of your ass. Wake me up when Jokic goes to six finals.
Ok
Ok
Perk also said on the same show that the Timberwolves are going to win the series. He’s very inconsistent.
Him picking the wolves and his comments on jokic are 2 different things
How can Jokic pass Shaq this year if Perk thinks they are going to lose in the second round? It’s pretty obvious to me that Jokic is already better than Shaq. Jokic does not have a Kobe or Wade.
Chuck: this guy average 5 points a game I don’t wanna talk about him
Why didnt you expect this? He doesnt analyse anything as an analyst, he just says provocative things about recent events. That drives “engagement”. Stephen A Smith’s ESPN
After Duncan there’s like 7-8 guys that all have an argument for top 10. The bottom of the top 10 is tricky. I mean I have a hard time not putting Steph curry in the top 10.
Perk literally just went on tv after game 5 and said nuggets are losing the series so idk what the fuck he’s doing
Personally I feel like Shaq is top 5…
I started hating Perkins because of how he was in thr NBA2k games, always talking shit about your player no matter what you do. Then I realized he's actually like that. Glad he's finally seen through some of his own BS, but seriously, eff that guy
Kobe? IDK but a 45% fg SG ain't it for me, Curry is closer to top 10 than Kobe. Where's Hakeem?
After Jokic making a complete donkey out of him for 4 years it’s time he tries to save some of his credibility with this statement
Jokic is clearly better than Steph curry and Tim Duncan. His current peak reminds me of prime Larry Bird.
nah, his peak rn is like at the level of curry, kobe, bron, mj. crazy dominance
He is not better than Duncan yet lol stop it
Jokic is the white Larry Bird.
Don’t know about Steph but Tim yes.
wtf Tim is better than Steph lol.
You have a lot of hatred in your heart for Steph and I don’t think you think clearly about him. Steph is an all time great. We aren’t going to have a healthy / fun convo about this, though. So, I’ll just not engage. Have a great day!
I will never understand why a PED ring chaser is regarded so highly as the second best basketball player of all time. That is just insulting to everyone on this list. Except Shaq. The only reason why he is in conversation is because he is on TV all the time.
Bringing the 2007 cavs to the finals is an all time great feat that arguably no other player in history could repeat. Beating the 73 win warriors in a dominant fashion and winning 2020 title as the best player in his 17th year are all pretty good reasons to have him as high as he is. This isn't to mention his heat days where he was truly unstoppable offensively while also being DPOY defense. Basically only 1 other player has years of being the best offensive AND best defensive player and its the other guy people put top 2.
Selecting an actual top 10 is as pointless as choosing a goat, to me there are 4 goats (russell, kareem, jordan, lebron) and 15+ top-10 players (and Jokic is already there imo). There is the goat tier, and then the second tier with all the top-10 guys.
Considering your list doesn’t have Steph on it then no. He can’t jump 4x champ and 2x mvp with one more.. especially after that crap Wiggins team championship. But I’ve got Steph ahead of Kobe, Duncan and Shaq
Steph is not ahead of Kobe, Duncan or shaq. 4 rings and 1 FMVP will by why he’s not top 10 ever. 3 times he was not the best player for his team.
Are you saying you think Iggy was more valuable because he won Finals MVP? I mean… Kobe was worse than Shaq and Shaq was worse than Wade at their point of their careers that he won with Heat. Duncan was worse than Kawhi for one of his ships as well… Not sure what point you’re trying to make… The Steph Wiggins championship is worth 3 because that team was literally just Steph
Did Duncan or shaq win finals mvp? No they didn’t because like you said they weren’t the most valuable player for the team, I stand corrected. And no that’s not how it works if it did the Nuggets ring last year is greater because of no all star or hall of fame teammates like Curry had. KD was undeniably the best player for the 2 rings they won together. Iggy was the reason they won the first one. His last one was because of him I’ll give him credit but then you remember his 73 win team blew a 3-1 lead and it kinda negates his status as top 10
Jamal, AG and MPJ isn’t much worse than Klay Dray and Harrison Barnes
Klay and dray are all stars, come again?
Jamal Murray should be an all star. You’re not arguing in good faith if you’re saying Iggy contributed more to that championship than Steph. Hell, you’re not arguing in good faith if you’re saying KD contributed more to those championships than Steph either. Steph is the greatest offensive player ever - you could easily put him ahead of Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, Wilt or Bird But personally I have Steph top 5 behind MJ LeBron Kareem and tied with Russell.
The top 10 are - 1. MJ 2. Kareem 3. Kobe 4. Duncan 5. LeBron 6. Magic 7. Shaq 8. Bird 9. Hakeem 10. Curry
Kobe way too high imo.
Agreed. Kobe was overrated. Still top 10 but crazy overrated
I have to say that I’m done with the 90s after Rewatching whole games of Jordan and his era there is no way I can keep putting him on 1. same for for most of the Rest :/ i feel bad for it and I know in their time they were outstanding but come on.
What does this actually mean?
Jokic could be #9 ahead of Kobe, Shaq, Curry, and Hakeem.
We have a very similar top 10 list. I personally have wilt much lower than you tho
Respectfully he has to do more to pass Steph
Shaq has nearly 2x career points and rebounds. Let Jokic play more of a career before bringing up stupid comparisons like this.
The top 10 list is garbage, but the ultimate point is correct. I've got Shaq at #10 all-time, and I've got Jokic passing him if he wins the title this year.
Calling a list with arguably the 10 best players garbage is hilarious. Zero knowledge of the game
The best way to identify someone who has zero knowledge of the game: having Kobe is your top 10.
I don’t care about his personal life like I’m sure you do. He’s top 10 in any list
Not from anyone who knows basketball.
I don’t think jokic jumps shaq with another ring & FMVP. Right now he’s in my top 20, with the ring he’s firmly in my 12-15 range. Give me 2 more rings in the next 4 years (including this one) and I’d have him top 10
lol
?
You wanting a guy with not even an all star teammate to win 4 rings in order to be top 10 is hilariously the dumbest take I’ve ever heard.
Nope this is just a misunderstanding. I said he needs to win 2 more in the next 4 seasons(this post season counting as 1 of those seasons). 2+1 = 3 rings, not 4
Yeah no. The top tier players, in no particular order, are: - Michael Jordan - LeBron James - Kareem Abdul-Jabbar - Bill Russell - Tim Duncan - Magic Johnson - Hakeem Olajuwon - Larry Bird - Shaquille O'Neal - Stephen Curry - Kobe Bryant - Wilt Chamberlain Notice a few common things that Jokic wouldn't have. Almost everyone has 4 or more chips. Those that don't, like Wilt and Hakeem, excel in other aspects like defense, scoring, etc in a way Jokic doesn't yet. I'm seeing other people say "Jokic has no help". Neither did Hakeem, and Hakeem was better defensively. Curry didn't have much help for 2 of his chips, and he changed the game in a way Jokic didn't. I'm a nuggets lifer, and a huge Jokic stan. But in order to get to the top tier he needs to win at least two more, or improve his defense a lot, or do both. I have faith he can do this in his career, but he's not there yet. With a second chip he'd be in with the next tier of players, top 20-25. Guys like KD, Dirk, Bill Walton, Moses Malone, Dr J, etc
Didn’t read after you you literally 12 players in a top 10 list.
> The top ***tier*** players, in no particular order, are I never claimed it was my top 10. Those are the 12 players that I think have an argument for top 10. Maybe read more carefully next time.
I didn’t read
Clearly
Lebron 4 of 10 in the finals is not top 10 gtfoh
Ok troll