RealGM

I think by extension of this logic there is zero chance anyone wins a title this year.

crows2 wrote:

Roseability wrote:Bruce Brown is not better than Peyton Watson. Also, Christian Braun has improved. Denver has a solid three man bench though not deep bench.

Bruce Brown is absolutely better than Watson. I’ve said a few times that Denver is weaker than they were last year because of their substandard bench. They could still win the championship, but it won’t be in dominant fashion like last year’s was.

Watson might be a better defender than Brown but he’s a big downgrade offensively. Denver’s transition game is suffering because they don’t have Brown to push the pace. Brown is a better shooter, passer and ball handler/creator than Watson. Watson is still at the point of his career where he is a near offensive zero in the playoffs and that’s a big downgrade from Brown.

If Brown were on this team he’d be playing 25mpg. There’s a reason Watson is playing 10mpg.

People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Every player in history requires a really good team to win a championship. Even Jordan and LeBron and Kareem never won titles without it. The question is just where that line is. If Murray plays like he’s played so far in the playoffs, then the Nuggets don’t actually have a really good team, especially when you also take their bench into account. With a bad Murray and not much depth, there’s just not enough there for the team to win—especially against the type of teams they’re going to have to play to win the title (including, most pertinently right now, the Wolves). Of course, we’ll see how things go moving forward. Only Game 1 has happened so far, and obviously it’s quite possible the Nuggets will win the series. But if they do, it’d almost certainly have required Murray to start playing much better. That’s not an indictment on Jokic, but rather just a realistic assessment of what it takes for even the best players to win a title. And, for my part, I’ll note that I repeatedly said before the playoffs even started that the Nuggets need Murray to not have a reversion to the mean in terms of playoff performance, in order to actually win. And I’ve said that despite also thinking Jokic is the best basketball player I’ve ever seen. So this view is not a reaction to Game 1 of this series, but rather a view that I’ve held all along.

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Start drinking early today before typing that did ya?



Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

RRyder823 wrote:

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Start drinking early today before typing that did ya?



Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

If you want to argue that Jokic won last year without the services of Jamal and a good bench, be my guest.

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Doesn't require a good bench to win championship, just not 0 point 1st halves from his 2nd best player would be a great start...

"Regular superstars" don't win 3 MVPs in 4 years...lay off the bottle this early...

Some people don't realize that no matter how good one player is, it's actually a team game.

UglyBugBall wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Start drinking early today before typing that did ya?



Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

If you want to argue that Jokic won last year without the services of Jamal and a good bench, be my guest.

If u want to argue that any champion in history has won without a good team you're drunk

Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

Cubbies2120 wrote:

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Doesn't require a good bench to win championship, just not 0 point 1st halves from his 2nd best player would be a great start...

"Regular superstars" don't win 3 MVPs in 4 years...lay off the bottle this early...

The fact is Jokic has required a second star to win it last year. This year we'll see if he can get it done himself like other all time greats, or if he is a system player.

I thought the expectation of good teams is that they run it bad anyway? RGM is such a moving target.

Handlez wrote:Champions have to tinker with roster if they hope to repeat.

Denver did nothing and lost a great role player in Brown.

It's absolutely insane they didn't do anything they could to help an all time great player in his prime.

If Minny doesn't end them, Dallas/OKC or Boston will.

They simply can't keep up without substantial help off the bench.

Denver front office should be ashamed.

Obviously 0 chance makes you unqualified and a liar unless you always tend to exaggerate.

At smart poster at least use slim chance when down 0-3 but the Nuggets true chance is down from 95% to 84% at worst and I am being generous for the Wolves.

UglyBugBall wrote:

Cubbies2120 wrote:

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Doesn't require a good bench to win championship, just not 0 point 1st halves from his 2nd best player would be a great start...

"Regular superstars" don't win 3 MVPs in 4 years...lay off the bottle this early...

The fact is Jokic has required a second star to win it last year. This year we'll see if he can get it done himself like other all time greats, or if he is a system player.

So first it was he needs a great bench, now he needs a 2nd star...

If he wins it all this year he's a top 10 player...2 rings, 3 MVPs, 2 FMVPs under 30 years old ...but I'm sure you'll come up with other arguments against it in your head

Which other all-time greats are you referring to winning multiple rings without a star player?

Can't be:
Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Jordan, LeBron, etc. so I'm curious who you're comparing him to...

Man, all this stuff about Bruce Brown. You won't find many Raptor fans in here singing the praises of Bruce Brown...

Sixth men for the most dominant champs since the 90s:

Bulls - BJ then Kukoc
Rockets - Cassell
Lakers - Horry
Spurs - Manu
Lakers pt 2 - Odom/Bynum
Heat - Ray
Warriors - Iguodala (finals mvp)

List goes on. You need 10 guys to win a ring. 1 major rotation player (even a defender) is a big hit for any contender. Tricky part is retaining the depth while salaries increase.

UglyBugBall wrote:

RRyder823 wrote:

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Start drinking early today before typing that did ya?



Sent from my SM-S918U using RealGM mobile app

If you want to argue that Jokic won last year without the services of Jamal and a good bench, be my guest.

Tell me one Superstar, that wins the Title by himself lol
Its still a teamgame

UglyBugBall wrote:

Cubbies2120 wrote:

UglyBugBall wrote:People calling Jokic an all-time great, yet in the same paragraph admit that he requires a good bench to win championships. This is exactly why I don't consider Jokic an all-time great yet. He's required the services of Jamal and good benches to win before. You remove the help around him and he's a regular superstar, not a champion.

Doesn't require a good bench to win championship, just not 0 point 1st halves from his 2nd best player would be a great start...

"Regular superstars" don't win 3 MVPs in 4 years...lay off the bottle this early...

The fact is Jokic has required a second star to win it last year. This year we'll see if he can get it done himself like other all time greats, or if he is a system player.

Name me other all time greats that have done it by themselves

Top 5 point differential is always the best predictor of true contenders. This season's top 5 was

1. Celtics
2. OKC
3. Minnesota
4. Denver
5. Knicks

I think everyone was just underrating the Wolves. They're fair competition for Denver this season

Chuck Everett wrote:The Nuggets all year have had way more close games than what you'd expect for a team that won 57 games. My sense is that because they're the defending champs and they've been getting everyone's best shot night after night. It really has worn them down.

Everyone was talking about the Nuggets as some god tier team last year on the way to the title. They won "only" 53 games that year. What makes the team special is Joker. You need to beat him 4 out of 7 with his home court advantage. Playing a series is much different than playing 7 regular season game stretch where you're playing probably 5 to 7 different teams. You get to game plan much better and try to stop what the other team has working. Problem is when it's a Joker level talent, you can't really stop him, you can only try to limit him. Been saying many times on these boards, Murray/Gordan/MPJ are nice players yes, they have no All Star or All NBA accolades. This is no super team, but they do have a superstar player yes.

Denver is all in on their starting 5. The problem is if you build a team to directly counter their starting 5 which is what Minnesota is designed to do.

It just so happens that the GM of the current Timberwolves team also happened to be the GM that built the championship Denver Nuggets.