This is all accurate in my opinion, but it doesn't acknowledge that Jokic does do some things better than Hakeem. Jokic is better at passing and dribbling. You would never run a high-post offense through Hakeem and Jokic is amazing at it. That said, Hakeem is 10X better in almost every defensive skill, and is also significantly better in post offense. I also feel confident saying that Hakeem would be shooting 3's at a nice clip and taking the ball down the court if he were playing in this era... we just don't know how elite he might be doing it. This is a danger of comparing players of different eras. Likewise, Jokic would probably have a different skillset if he were playing 30 years ago - probably a better post game.
I wouldn't say Livingston was "lethal" from midrange. He was a low volume scorer. He picked his spot playing with all those shooters on the Golden State team. I don't know what kind of player he would be if he didn't have that terrible injury that forever limited his mobility. He could no longer create shots for himself other than posting up shorter guards.
I don't think teams fear Jokic... i think they fear Embiid... Jokic is very very good though and definitely elite offensively... But but he's not in Dream's league
but he was a guard and couldnt even spot up for 3s...admit you were wrong...you will feel better.... and yes his midrange were lethal as far as rockets are concerned...almost literally... this example was just from the top of my brain i am sure a lot of examples could be found that midrange doesn't always translate to 3s well and vice versa how about christian wood?
Hakeem's footwork was the best EVER. His fadeaway was the best behind Jordan. Jokic isn't in the same stratosphere. We're not even counting defense
Livington was a PG. He's a passer. Why would you want him to spot up? Your logic is flawed. Just because there are players who don't like shooting 3 or don't like shooting midrange doesn't mean they couldn't if they worked on it. If you want a good example, let me give you one. Calvin Murphy was one of the best shooters in NBA history. He said he didn't like shooting 3s, didn't even try to practice. He came from the era when there were no 3pt shots. And he didn't want to change his game. Does that mean he couldn't be a good 3pt shooter if he wanted to? No. I have been an advocate of adding back the midrange in a player's game amidst the 3pt craze era. I know you are too. But you have gone to extreme (as you do just about everything) and seem to hate the 3pt shot. I don't know why you are against players adding the 3 in their game, just like I don't know why people are against players adding the midrange.
lolol now livingston is a passer lololololl lol you are totally deflecting discussion (not sure its strawmaning or redharringing) from what we originally were in dispute about...i will take it as your admission you were wrong and i was right( thank you!) ....you are not discussing in good spirit, you are mad at me because i owned you, and now you trying to confuse everything to hide the fact you were owned and toucheed... you are inferring weird conclusion from my writing and attaching them to me...i am surely not against people adding 3pt shot... i even did it myself in my own life, eventho i own the paint, the moves and the postup game... all that i claimed is its not given hakeem would be a good 3 pt shooter just because he was good from midrange and i have given you plenty of real life examples... like Livingston a guard that is good shooter from midrange area on a squad that shoot 3 points prolifically and values spacing i am sure it wasnt his personal choice(like moses malone) not to add the shot and mess with their spacing... he just couldnt do it... yeah perhaps hakeem could have added 3 pt shot , but its not a given...he had his chance and he didnt do it... perhaps jokic could have added muscle mass and got ripped like lebron if he played in the age when hakeem played and 3 pt shooting wasnt an option for big man... GAMEOVER
Nothing you said really addresses the actual claim about who is “more skilled”. It seems like you are taking it to mean a more general statement that Jokic is a greater player or more effective player. This really just comes down to what we mean by “skill”, and how do we weight different types of skills. But there is no clear formula for this. It’s better to take a look at some specific skills and then compare who exhibits superior ability in those areas. If you take, for example, the guard-oriented skills from the Allstar Skills Challenge, it seems totally reasonable to think Jokic would fare much better. What sort of skills challenge could one design that would give Hakeem an edge over Jokic? That would be a more interesting and relevant discussion to me than which player is the more dominant or what Hakeem would have done if playing in this era.
Dude, you gave me an example. I gave you an example. I addressed your example. You didn't address mine. But if thinking that you have won an argument makes you sleep better, go right ahead. I have no interest in continuing with someone whose goal is to "own" someone he's discussing with.
Was just tuning in to this elimination game with 33 seconds left between the Warriors/Nuggets and Jokic isn’t playing. Warriors have the ball, down two. I thought maybe Jokic is injured or fouled out. The announcer says “the MVP is on the bench because of defense...”
Duncan maybe the most underrated legend. Olajuwon got a little boost from YouTube so he isn't has overlooked as before.
To be fair, it was a situational substitution at the end of a tight game. Once they had made a stop, they'd call a timeout to sub him back in. You can do that with limited possessions.
Jokic is a better passer for sure, and can do more on the perimeter to create his own shot. But if skills include defense, then he is woefully lacking and he's not really a great two way player like Hakeem. Hakeem was an adequate passer but people should note they played in different eras, and in the modern game, where passing and shooting for a big man is a more premium skill, I think Hakeem would have adjusted his game from a young age and excelled. People forget he was a great handball player and thus was more than capable of passing the ball.
Don’t compare Jokic to Hakeem or ever say he’s better than Hakeem. That is embarrassing. Don’t forget that the Nuggets take Jokic out of game ending plays because he’s a defensive liability. Hakeem was a defensive God. And an offense master. Jokic doesn’t come close.
Adequate? The Rockets won back to back chips running their offense through Dream34. He passed well enough to get it done at the highest level.
Like I said before, the only universe where Jokic is more "skilled" than Hakeem is one where you discount HALF THE GAME as involving any type of skill. Thing is, we don't live in such a world and defense is the accumulation of various defensive skills in which Jokic is average at best and Hakeem is a living god. To put it bluntly, while Jokic is a much better passer and better playmaker, Hakeem far eclipses Jokic with the difference in EVERY defensive skills than Jokic does on the few offensive skills he is better at.
This. Rudy and Dream were the pioneers of constructing an inside-out offensive system and Dream was a consistently reliable passer from the post to the perimeter when needed. He was just too good to need to pass out most of the time and this was the golden era of big men too.
