How much does defense matter for being the best player

[jose melendez]

All of the talk about Jokic being the best player in the NBA has gotten me thinking: How much does defense matter when assessing who is the NBA's best player?

Jokic is pretty decisively the best offensive player in the NBA, but he's at best neutral at the defensive end. Offense has almost always been given precedence over defense in these things, but I don't really see why that should be. Is Jokic sufficiently superior to Giannis and Embid at the offensive end to justify calling him the best player in the NBA? I'm not good with basketball's advance stats, but I think it's really hard to say that he is.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Defense is good, offense, particularly all around offense (ie not just scoring efficiently, but improving teammates) is more important, specifically when talking about the top players and improving the margins. For a star the two key things to being the best in the NBA are...
1. Being able to help your team score at a high level, particularly in the playoffs
2. Not being a total liability on D.

Also, individual on-ball D is wildly overrated, so a lot of guys get tagged as bad defenders when they're just bad at Iso, and don't really have much more negative impact than the guy who is all over his guy in Iso but bad at off-ball and help.

I think Jokic is clearly the best player in the league. He's capable of holding his own in team D, and he's the engine for a dominant offense. Also, he is an excellent rebounder, which does matter on D, not allowing 2nd chances is a huge part of success on that end.

 

[Kliq]

Pretty much the same as CD; I think you probably can't be the best player in the world if you are a total liability on defense, but if you are the best offensive player in the game and passable on defense, that probably puts you ahead of a better defender who isn't as good offensively, especially because in the playoffs being multi-faceted on offense is so important.

The only person I would rate on the same level as Jokic at the moment is Giannis. Giannis is a much, much better defensive player, but Jokic has an edge in that what he does on offense feels more unstoppable and sustainable than Giannis', even if Giannis himself is an unstoppable offensive player.

 

[ElUno20]

I think neutral is the floor. Although "neutral" can be very objective based on what your team asks you to do, system, etc.

As you guys have noted, you just can't be a complete liability/not even try. There were some atrocious harden years that come to mind.

 

[Jimbodandy]

Pretty much the same as CD; I think you probably can't be the best player in the world if you are a total liability on defense, but if you are the best offensive player in the game and passable on defense, that probably puts you ahead of a better defender who isn't as good offensively, especially because in the playoffs being multi-faceted on offense is so important.

The only person I would rate on the same level as Jokic at the moment is Giannis. Giannis is a much, much better defensive player, but Jokic has an edge in that what he does on offense feels more unstoppable and sustainable than Giannis', even if Giannis himself is an unstoppable offensive player.

Agree with this completely.

Also the useful advanced metrics (DARKO and LEBRON, BBRef) say that Jokic is somewhere between a good and a plus defender, regardless of what the eyeball test says. Which is why he's the best player on earth right now. If he were a net neutral or slightly below average, the delta between him and Giannis would not be so clear.

 

[Rusty Gate]

His defense is well above neutral if you take into account his stellar defensive rebounding. He fits right in the Denver scheme that seems to emphasize staying at home and controlling the defensive boards over Boston-style ball pressure with aggressive switching and strategic doubling. In the match-up against Bam, IMO his straight-up defense has been pretty good if not great. So defense as a whole is at most a very slight negative in evaluating him against other elite players.

 

[Auger34]

The only person I would rate on the same level as Jokic at the moment is Giannis. Giannis is a much, much better defensive player, but Jokic has an edge in that what he does on offense feels more unstoppable and sustainable than Giannis', even if Giannis himself is an unstoppable offensive player.

100%. Jokic’s game also feels like it will age much better than Giannis (who relies a ton on his elite athleticism/strength)

I don’t think Embiid is at that level and, IMO, he’s not particularly close. It’s a mix of conditioning/health/trying to grift way too much in the clutch/not being great against double teams but I’ve never feared Embiid nearly as much as I fear Jokic or Giannis.

 

[Jimbodandy]

100%. Jokic’s game also feels like it will age much better than Giannis (who relies a ton on his elite athleticism/strength)

I don’t think Embiid is at that level and, IMO, he’s not particularly close. It’s a mix of conditioning/health/trying to grift way too much in the clutch/not being great against double teams but I’ve never feared Embiid nearly as much as I fear Jokic or Giannis.

The best ability is availability.

IMO peak Embiid is more dominant than anyone. But the health/conditioning stuff isn't just worrisome--it robs him of his Embiid-ness with regularity. You're right, people don't fear him because everyone knows that he can't sustain an elite level of performance even for a 7-game series.

 

[jose melendez]

This makes intuitive sense to me.

Is defensive rebounding generally viewed as part of defense? I always sort of thought it was its own category.

 

[Jimbodandy]

This makes intuitive sense to me.

Is defensive rebounding generally viewed as part of defense? I always sort of thought it was its own category.

Box score based metrics will often include defensive rebounds in the general D ratings from a "well, the offense didn't get the rebound and attempt to score again because of you" POV.
On/off based metrics more or less capture the same thing...because the offense actually scored less because you rebounded their first shot.

Overall rebounding has become more democratic, since so many shots are being launched from 25+ feet away and granting all sorts of long rebounds. But cleaning up defensive rebounds still matters.

 

[HereComesthePizza]

I think Giannis is more versatile and he will elevate the surrounding pieces no matter where their deficiencies are. I think Jokic needs the right guys to support him on defense. Denver has found that cast and they have the chance to be special over the next few years.

 

[lars10]

I think Giannis is more versatile and he will elevate the surrounding pieces no matter where their deficiencies are. I think Jokic needs the right guys to support him on defense. Denver has found that cast and they have the chance to be special over the next few years.

What versatility does Giannis have at the offensive end? He has very little in the way of post moves or shooting ability outside of ten feet.. has he shown what he’ll be able to turn to when he loses his ability to run people over?

 

[HereComesthePizza]

What versatility does Giannis have at the offensive end? He has very little in the way of post moves or shooting ability outside of ten feet.. has he shown what he’ll be able to turn to when he loses his ability to run people over?

He went for 30,13, and 5 in their championship run while providing exceptional defense. When I said versatile, I meant playing both sides of the floor.

 

[benhogan]

All of the talk about Jokic being the best player in the NBA has gotten me thinking: How much does defense matter when assessing who is the NBA's best player?

Jokic is pretty decisively the best offensive player in the NBA, but he's at best neutral at the defensive end. Offense has almost always been given precedence over defense in these things, but I don't really see why that should be. Is Jokic sufficiently superior to Giannis and Embid at the offensive end to justify calling him the best player in the NBA? I'm not good with basketball's advance stats, but I think it's really hard to say that he is.

Depends on who is on the floor with the player. We've seen over the years that surrounding Giannis, LeBron, Curry, Durrant with the right teammates brings out their best.

I read last year that NBA front offices consider DARKO as the best-advanced metric so that deserves respect.
Joker's +/-(On/Off) over quite a few seasons tells me he's the best or one of the 5 best in the game.

Giannis was banged up for the playoffs, but didn't love that he was scared to hold the ball late/tight. Not saying he's going SIMMONS but it's really hard to call him the BEST when he's not great from the FT line/outside the lane.

 

[Kliq]

I probably wouldn't be wondering "Can Giannis really get it done?" after he destroyed everything in his path to win a championship two years ago and he averaged 34-15-7 against the Celtics last year. Shaq was undisputedly the best player in the NBA at his peak and he had even less skills outside of the paint than Giannis.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Agree with this completely.

Also the useful advanced metrics (DARKO and LEBRON, BBRef) say that Jokic is somewhere between a good and a plus defender, regardless of what the eyeball test says. Which is why he's the best player on earth right now. If he were a net neutral or slightly below average, the delta between him and Giannis would not be so clear.

I'd be interested to know whose eyeballs show Jokic to be a below average defender. Between his size, rebounding and positional awareness he appears to be as the metrics show in that he's pretty good on that end of the floor.

 

[Jimbodandy]

I'd be interested to know whose eyeballs show Jokic to be a below average defender. Between his size, rebounding and positional awareness he appears to be as the metrics show in that he's pretty good on that end of the floor.

Well he's a doughy big guy. First look, folks are going to assume that he doesn't impact defense as much as some guy who looks like he was lifted off the front page of a bodybuilding magazine.

People still judge guys based on height in sneakers rather than factoring in wingspan and standing reach. We still have folks complaining about batting average on the main page when a hitter might have a high wOBP. Change takes time.

 

[Tony C]

Aside from the physical (racial, as well? maybe a touch of that, too) stereotyping, I think that he's not a huge shot blocker fits into it as well. Blocked shots are great, but also in terms of "eye balls" probably the flashiest part of a good defensive player, so explains in part why the other parts of Jokic's super solid defensive profile get overlooked.

 

[benhogan]

I probably wouldn't be wondering "Can Giannis really get it done?" after he destroyed everything in his path to win a championship two years ago and he averaged 34-15-7 against the Celtics last year. Shaq was undisputedly the best player in the NBA at his peak and he had even less skills outside of the paint than Giannis.

Who is wondering If "Can Giannis really get it done?"

The question was does Joker's Offense make-up for his defense.

All of the talk about Jokic being the best player in the NBA has gotten me thinking: How much does defense matter when assessing who is the NBA's best player?

Since Giannis is obviously in the BEST conversation they were compared.

IMO Joker's offense does make up for that defensive difference, since Giannis isn't as impactful as Joker when the defense clogs the lane.

If people would rather have Giannis that's cool, a lot of it depends on the supporting cast around these guys.

 

[Jimbodandy]

...I think that he's not a huge shot blocker fits into it as well. Blocked shots are great, but also in terms of "eye balls" probably the flashiest part of a good defensive player, so explains in part why the other parts of Jokic's super solid defensive profile get overlooked.

That's a great point. Lots of folks still judging defensive (and offensive for that matter) contributions from box score numbers. Blocks, steals, and def rebounds tells you something, but not much really. A guy like Myles Turner (one of my personal binkies for a long time) has actually gotten worse defensively as his block count increases, presumably because he's getting worse at other more important things and perhaps selling out to whack balls into the fifth row like a Mo Bamba.

 

[ManicCompression]

I hate to say it, but it feels like it really depends on who the player's teammates are. Jokic's faults can be hidden somewhat when he's playing with Aaron Gordon, Bruce Brown, KCP, Christian Braun, etc. Take those guys away and put him with Monte Morris and Will Bynum and he looks a lot worse on that end of the floor, to the point where people wonder whether you can win with him at C.

 

[Euclis20]

I hate to say it, but it feels like it really depends on who the player's teammates are. Jokic's faults can be hidden somewhat when he's playing with Aaron Gordon, Bruce Brown, KCP, Christian Braun, etc. Take those guys away and put him with Monte Morris and Will Bynum and he looks a lot worse on that end of the floor, to the point where people wonder whether you can win with him at C.

Certainly. This Denver team is definitely built well around Jokic, but it still seems noteworthy that exactly zero of the Nuggets seeing playoff minutes has ever made an all-star team. Even on their deep bench, there is just one all-star (DeAndre Jordan made the ASG once, 6 years ago). Jokic elevates these guys in a big way, particularly Gordon.

Giannis' flaws (late game offense and free throw shooting) were well hidden by Middleton and (to a lesser degree) Holiday, none of these guys are considered the best without some support (no Cleveland era Lebrons here). Giannis plays with 2 recent all-stars, and a 3rd (Lopez) who hasn't made it in awhile but is a key piece for Milwaukee. Comparing their teammates gives Jokic and even bigger edge over Giannis, imo.

Looking at their supporting casts really hammers home the fact that Embiid, despite all of his strengths and seeming lack of on-court weaknesses, just isn't in the same category as Jokic/Giannis. If you compare their supporting casts over the last few years, Embiid's is just as good if not better (multiple all-star and all-NBA level guys in Simmons, Harden and butler, plus lots of solid roleplayers) but while Jokic and Giannis have both won titles (probably) and have multiple conference finals trips, Embiid hasn't won past the 1st round. It's going to be really hard for anyone to seriously put Embiid in their class until he at least makes a trip to the finals.

 

[ManicCompression]

Certainly. This Denver team is definitely built well around Jokic, but it still seems noteworthy that exactly zero of the Nuggets seeing playoff minutes has ever made an all-star team. Even on their deep bench, there is just one all-star (DeAndre Jordan made the ASG once, 6 years ago). Jokic elevates these guys in a big way, particularly Gordon.

The prism of "all-star" is not the one to look at. Having Jokic is like having Tom Brady or Pat Mahomes or Aaron Rodgers - they don't need pro-bowl receivers to helm an above average offense; they are one on their own. Likewise, Denver doesn't need James Harden or Doncic because they essentially get an above-average offense with Jokic and some scrubs (and a league leading offense when he has Murray and Porter).

Jokic needs strong defensive role players who can shoot and/or cut. He's never had that in Denver until this year. That's why I called out previous players on his team who were good offensively, but poor defenders. When Jokic is playing with them, of course his defense looks really bad because he's not that great in the first place and he's trying to cover up their mistakes.

So to the OPs question, yes defense matters, but it's the most contextual aspect of basketball. Dame Lillard's defense wouldn't matter if he was surrounded by Embiid and Mikal Bridges and Bruce Brown, but it looks like a major weakness in the context of Jusef Nurkic and Anfernee Simons. Steph Curry looks like an average defender with Dray, Klay and the host of wings they've had for 8 years, but it would really suck if he was paired with Vukevic and Zach Lavine.

 

[Euclis20]

The prism of "all-star" is not the one to look at. Having Jokic is like having Tom Brady or Pat Mahomes or Aaron Rodgers - they don't need pro-bowl receivers to helm an above average offense; they are one on their own. Likewise, Denver doesn't need James Harden or Doncic because they essentially get an above-average offense with Jokic and some scrubs (and a league leading offense when he has Murray and Porter).

Jokic needs strong defensive role players who can shoot and/or cut. He's never had that in Denver until this year. That's why I called out previous players on his team who were good offensively, but poor defenders. When Jokic is playing with them, of course his defense looks really bad because he's not that great in the first place and he's trying to cover up their mistakes.

So to the OPs question, yes defense matters, but it's the most contextual aspect of basketball. Dame Lillard's defense wouldn't matter if he was surrounded by Embiid and Mikal Bridges and Bruce Brown, but it looks like a major weakness in the context of Jusef Nurkic and Anfernee Simons. Steph Curry looks like an average defender with Dray, Klay and the host of wings they've had for 8 years, but it would really suck if he was paired with Vukevic and Zach Lavine.

This is all fair and generally agreed, though at the end, I don't think Lillard's defense deserves mention in the same category as Steph or Jokic. Those two have moments where they are taken advantage of defensively but they are attacked ALL the time and generally hold their own. Lillard is legitimately terrible defensively, and maybe that changes if he's surrounded with all-defense level players, but he's closer to Trae Young on that end than Curry or Jokic, who I think are generally about league average (which can get exploited in later playoff rounds, but isn't a liability every day).

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Certainly. This Denver team is definitely built well around Jokic, but it still seems noteworthy that exactly zero of the Nuggets seeing playoff minutes has ever made an all-star team. Even on their deep bench, there is just one all-star (DeAndre Jordan made the ASG once, 6 years ago). Jokic elevates these guys in a big way, particularly Gordon.

While not an inaccurate statement to include Jamal Murray as JAG is disingenuous. He's not a large gap from Jokic as to the level of importance to the Nuggets in this postseason. He makes their 2-man action with Jokic unguardable and they went to it repeatedly in G3 which was missing to that degree in the first two games.

 

[ManicCompression]

Lillard is legitimately terrible defensively, and maybe that changes if he's surrounded with all-defense level players, but he's closer to Trae Young on that end than Curry or Jokic, who I think are generally about league average (which can get exploited in later playoff rounds, but isn't a liability every day).

Maybe - we've never seen it. He's always - pretty much every single year in Portland - been paired with a 6'1" shooting guard who sucks on defense just as much as he does, as well as a defensive liability at the center position. We make an assumption that it would be the exact same effort and performance if he were on another team, but I think we'd see him be just as "average" if the players around him were defensive-minded and playing in high stakes games.

Steph would not be seen as average next to Anfernee Simons/CJ McCollum and Nurkic.

 

[Devizier]

While not an inaccurate statement to include Jamal Murray as JAG is disingenuous.

I would probably take Murray over Jaylen, for what it’s worth. I felt that way at the draft, too, although with his superior health Jaylen has been better to date.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I would probably take Murray over Jaylen, for what it’s worth. I felt that way at the draft, too, although with his superior health Jaylen has been better to date.

Murray looks like a perennial All-Star if he remains healthy. He is elite scorer at multiple levels and his two-man game w Jokic has the potential to be among the best of all time when it's all said and done.

 

[TripleOT]

I would probably take Murray over Jaylen, for what it’s worth. I felt that way at the draft, too, although with his superior health Jaylen has been better to date.

I liked Jokic over James Young in the 2014 draft lol

In an alternative universe, the Celtics don’t trade their 2014 pick to move up for Olynyk, select Giannis in 2013 and Jokic in the second round in 2014.

Murray is an amazing player, and is perfect for Jokic. At the time, I preferred a wing like JB over a PG, a
though I like Murray a lot. It’s good to see him healthy. He loves the bright lights, and has some memorable playoff games on his resume.

 

[BigMike]

Aside from the physical (racial, as well? maybe a touch of that, too) stereotyping, I think that he's not a huge shot blocker fits into it as well. Blocked shots are great, but also in terms of "eye balls" probably the flashiest part of a good defensive player, so explains in part why the other parts of Jokic's super solid defensive profile get overlooked.

Yeah, I think that is a good part of it.

I think Jokic's profile means there are some times where he gets a mismatch and looks bad against speed/quickness, and people view those occasional 1-1 matchups and use that to say he is a bad defensive player

 

[TripleOT]

In Game 4, Jokic executed four kick saves, with a couple stopping back door layups. He also had a big swipe down on a Heat layup attempt when Miami was trying to whittle the Denver lead. He isn‘t a great defender, but he’s a smart defender who can hold his own out on the floor on pick/roll, and muck it up in the paint. Very intelligent player in all facets of the game.

 

[Jimbodandy]

Murray looks like a perennial All-Star if he remains healthy. He is elite scorer at multiple levels and his two-man game w Jokic has the potential to be among the best of all time when it's all said and done.

Murray has looked like god for a couple of weeks before. Guy has great skills but finds a way to disappear for months and months. Career .560TS player with pretty bad defense whose numbers would suffer even more if he had to maintain a 30+ usage (i.e., if he weren't playing next to Jokic). Fwiw, I appreciate these peaks of his when they come though. It's a joy to watch, and like three years ago his timing is impeccable.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Murray has looked like god for a couple of weeks before. Guy has great skills but finds a way to disappear for months and months. Career .560TS player with pretty bad defense whose numbers would suffer even more if he had to maintain a 30+ usage (i.e., if he weren't playing next to Jokic). Fwiw, I appreciate these peaks of his when they come though. It's a joy to watch, and like three years ago his timing is impeccable.

I don't see that at all. Murray made a leap the year he tore his ACL and after missing a year and a half has returned to that level, maybe beyond, once he got his legs back around Christmas. Having a guy who raises his level in the postseason is a desirable trait in a star.

 

[lovegtm]

Pretty much the same as CD; I think you probably can't be the best player in the world if you are a total liability on defense, but if you are the best offensive player in the game and passable on defense, that probably puts you ahead of a better defender who isn't as good offensively, especially because in the playoffs being multi-faceted on offense is so important.

The only person I would rate on the same level as Jokic at the moment is Giannis. Giannis is a much, much better defensive player, but Jokic has an edge in that what he does on offense feels more unstoppable and sustainable than Giannis', even if Giannis himself is an unstoppable offensive player.

Offensively, I'd also note that the Bucks are pretty meh, while Jokic + anybody is a recipe for a decent offense, while Jokic + somebodies is ridiculously elite.

I think there's a pretty big offensive gap between Nikola and Giannis, and that the latter is much less "unstoppable".

 

[lovegtm]

Murray looks like a perennial All-Star if he remains healthy. He is elite scorer at multiple levels and his two-man game w Jokic has the potential to be among the best of all time when it's all said and done.

And as long as we're talking about defense in this thread, he has held up really well on that end in the Finals.

 

[slamminsammya]

Murray looks like a perennial All-Star if he remains healthy. He is elite scorer at multiple levels and his two-man game w Jokic has the potential to be among the best of all time when it's all said and done.

Amazingly he has not yet been an all star.

 

[Spelunker]

Offensively, I'd also note that the Bucks are pretty meh, while Jokic + anybody is a recipe for a decent offense, while Jokic + somebodies is ridiculously elite.

I think there's a pretty big offensive gap between Nikola and Giannis, and that the latter is much less "unstoppable".

To put it a different way, no one is slowing down Jokic with the likes of Grant Williams.

 

[lovegtm]

To put it a different way, no one is slowing down Jokic with the likes of Grant Williams.

No one is even slowing down Jokic with the likes of Anthony Davis, which is insane when you say it out loud.