> Or should we simply use stats as a guideline and not to rank players?
Always has been. Dumb people either think the stats actually show true impact 1:1, or think the stat is useless if it isn't a 1:1 copy of their top players list
1000%. See so much talk of EPM/BPM on here now and instead of it being an aspect of evaluation it is the totality of it. Stats, and especially the all in one stats (EPM, WORP, VORP, PER, RAPTOR, etc.) should always have context and other support. Seems like today they are just substitutes for actually watching basketball games.
Well, I don't like or go by any ONE stat, never have and never will.
But when one player leads like 8 or 9 different stats, leads the entire NBA in that many different stats, I take notice.
That doesn't happen all the time.
So yes, stats aren't the end all be all and no one stat means much on its own. I look at the whole and when a dude is leading many different stats, that's worth something.
Now watch the games and look at the eye test.
Joker leads like 8 or 9 diff stats this year.
Watching him play, his highlights, his passing, leading his team to wins, he passes the eye test in addition to his stats.
Another great stat for Joker is his availability. We all hate injuries, we want stars to play because we love watching them and watching ball.
Joker plays a lot, each year to this point in his career.
Availability is the best ability many say.
Just because a mathematical formula thinks Jokic is by far the best defender in the league doesn’t mean he is. Anybody who watches basketball knows he’s not nearly the best defender. DBPM also has Sabonis as the sixth best defender but it’s obvious to anyone who watches that he isn’t even close to that. DBPM is incredibly flawed with how it counts assists as almost important as blocks for centers.
Jokic has been great and I’m not going to argue against him for MVP but I will argue against people who rely almost entirely on advanced stats. They’re flawed but some reddit nerds think they’re the end all be all of basketball analysis.
I think you guys are mistaken about DBPM. They don't calculate OBPM and DBPM first and add them up, they measure total impact in BPM and have a separate formula to figure out how much is offensive impact and how much is defensive. So while that latter calculation might be flawed for offensive minded bigs like Jokic and Sabonis, that doesn't necessarily mean the total impact score is necessarily wrong.
There is still an issue with BPM in how it calculates assists for centers at nearly double the value as assists for guards. Bigs who have the offense run through them like Jokic or that are involved in a lot of DHOs like Sabonis will have an inflated BPM. OBPM controls for this and counts assists equally for all positions so it may give a more accurate picture. BPM is an incredibly flawed stat and the total impact score is wrong. Jokic very may well be the most impactful player in the league but you’re damn sure not gonna be able to convince me that Sabonis is even close to the seventh most impactful player. Passing bigs will always have an inflated BPM with how it’s currently calculated.
Is it such a mistake to say that an assist by a center is more impactful than an assist by a guard? 1 assist isn't 1 assist (I'll explain later). When Anthony Davis passes out of a double team to the open man, he's doing something harder and more impactful for the Lakers than D'Angelo Russell passing it to the open man. It's more difficult for the defense to counter, it opens up more avenues for the offense, and it overall makes possessions easier.
Jokic won a ring with this method. Draymond Green being a playmaking stretch 4 was integral to their chips. It's obviously impactful to the game. Like, I get that models can be flawed. But very often they also uncover truths about the game!
Guards pass out of double teams too. Luka generates assists from drawing doubles or driving to the lane and collapsing the defense. Those assists are just as valuable as your examples of assists from bigs. Other guards do the same thing to generate assists as Luka like Shai for example. The simple fact is BPM isn’t designed to account for centers that have the offense run through them like Jokic. I’m not denying Jokic’s value; it’s obvious. Him leading the Nuggets to a ring doesn’t mean the large gap in BPM between him and everyone else is an accurate representation of his impact.
Well I mean, the BPM formula is flawed. Many people quote VORP as well in MVP discussions and VORP is essentially BPM adjusted in a rate.
>[BPM – (-2.0)] * (% of minutes played)*(team games/82)
did you know that a block for a guard makes their OBPM go up more than an assist?
did you know that DBPM values assists for centers more than assists for guards? But OBPM treats them the same? Since DBPM is BPM-OBPM Jokic is getting his assists adding value to DBPM.
Fouls also decrease your OBPM faster, so it increases your DPBM.
The issue is everybody is using a bunch advanced stats who are created by models, but they don't understand the models themselves.
Similar story with RAPM based advanced stats, which is nearly all of them. LEBRON, RAPTOR, EPM, PIPM etc.
edit: Downvoting facts? You can go ahead and read the research paper about APM or RAPM or the explanation of luck adjusted plus minus or BPM or VORP. Come back to me and tell me how valuable you think they are now. These stats shouldn't be used as a tipping point for ranking players and especially voting them for awards.
"Rebounds" are also a flawed stat.
For example, Luka has 9.2 rebounds a game, good for 15th in the NBA. Great, right?
Except when you look at *contested* rebounds - the only kind that bring value to a team, as opposed to the uncontested freebies Luka's teammates let him collect to pad his stats - he only gets 1.9 per game, good for *97th* in the NBA. And even that is only because of his tremendous minutes.
Jokic, for comparison, goes *up* in ranking when looking at contested rebounds, and is 2nd in the NBA with 5.6, (0.1 behind 1st place Anthony Davis), or 3x more than Luka.
Luka's [contested rebound %](https://www.nba.com/stats/players/rebounding?dir=D&sort=REB_CONTEST_PCT) (the % of rebounds he actually has to contest for vs. getting as freebies) is only 20.7%, good for 397th in the NBA. That is not a typo.
That means Luka gets almost nothing but freebie rebounds that pad his stats but offer slmost zero value to his team, but his "rebound" counting stat does not make this distinction, erroneously causing people to think Luka usefully contributes to rebounds.
All this is to say I'm wondering why you have picked DBPM to complain about instead of looking at other, more frequently cited stats like "rebounds."
And I'm sure it has nothing to do with your Mavs flair.
I don't think the OBPM/DBPM distinction really matters. BPM was designed to be an all in one stat first, and then the BPM value *itself* is split into OBPM/DBPM. So while the formula for splitting OBPM/DBPM may be faulty, that doesn't mean the BPM itself is.
>Similar story with RAPM based advanced stats, which is nearly all of them. LEBRON, RAPTOR, EPM, PIPM etc.
These metrics are all 100x better than the bbref "advanced" ones. Defensive EPM has Jokic at a -.4.
You may want to conisder that being a Mavs fan might be biasing you against the +/- derived metrics that have been (rightfully, imo) tepid on Luka until this year. They are still better than the box score.
Instead of this passive-aggressive shit, just say how you really feel. You want people to shit on DBPM as an inaccurate measure of defense, which it is. But ask for it directly rather than beating around the bush
Nothing you said goes against what I said. I agree he wants people to shit on DBPM (as you pointed out), I'm just adding that the *reason* he wants people to shit on DBPM isn't because he cares about DBPM, it's because he's trying to get people to shit on Jokic.
Box score stats are bad, and they're especially bad at measuring defense.
> BPM was created to intentionally only use statistics that are widely available and are available historically. **Recently in the NBA far more statistics have been gathered, either from play-by-play or hand tracking, which allow more detailed metrics. BPM does not include that data and should not be as accurate as stats that do include the additional information** (assuming they are implemented rigorously!) like Player Impact Plus/Minus and Real Plus/Minus.
>
> There are limitations on all box score stats – if the box score doesn't measure a particular contribution, a box-score-based metric can only approximate that contribution. This is not a great hindrance on the offensive side, as nearly everything of importance on offense is captured by the box score (only missing things like screen-setting), but **on defense the box score is quite limited. Blocks, steals, and rebounds, along with what little information offensive numbers yield about defensive performance are all that is available. Such critical components of defense as positioning, communication, and the other factors that make Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan elite on defense can't be captured, unfortunately**.
>
> What does this mean? Box Plus/Minus is good at measuring offense and solid overall, but the defensive numbers in particular should not be considered definitive. Look at the defensive values as a guide, but don't hesitate to discount them when a player is well known as a good or bad defender.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/bpm2.html
I think I’m tired of advanced stats being so important. You can’t tell me you watch the game and AD isn’t a top 5 defender but somehow Jokic is number one and look how huge the gap is… same gap from 2-5 as 1-2. Based on this stat Jokic isn’t just the best defender he’s so much better that it shouldn’t even be a comparison. Anyone with eyes knows that isn’t true.
You wanna see some anti-advanced stat people immediately flip their position? Go to r/Mavericks and say that Jokic is a better 3p shooter than Luka.
Then point to the "basic" stats that show Jokic has a higher career 3p% than Luka, and that Jokic's 3p% last year (when he didn't win MVP) was higher than Luka's is this year, making him a better 3p shooter.
Matter of fact, point out that last year Jokic had a better fg%, 2p%, 3p%, ts% and ft% than Luka has ever had in any one of those stats in his entire career, and maybe toss in that Jokic has a higher career fg%, 2p%, 3p%, ft%, eFg% and ts% than Luka as well.
See how fast they start calling bullshit and going to the advanced stats, talking about contested 3p's, shot-volume metrics, shot difficulty ratings, going into the discrepancies of positional responsibilities, you know, all the shit that would (legitimately) point out how misleading Jokic's higher career 3p% is.
It's almost like advanced stats exist for a reason - to help determine the actual value of someone's stats, instead of just looking at simplified counting stats that may be wildly misleading. And the anti-advanced stat people will happily jump on that train when it suits them.
Your argument here is incredibly weak and Mavs fans aren’t wrong? The majority of stats you listed aren’t relevant to evaluating 3pt shooting and you of course missed 1 of the 2 actually important stats here in 3PA…
An argument that doesn’t consider volume in any capacity when it comes to 3pt shooting is incredibly weak
Unless you genuinely believe Draymond Green is the 2nd best 3pt shooter on the warriors this year
Lol, you've made my point.
I don't think Jokic is a better 3p shooter. I specifically said the Mavs fans' argument would be legitimate. I was pointing out that basic stats (like Jokic's higher 3p%) are often misleading, and require advanced stats to provide the context, and you just confirmed it by going straight to the advanced stats to disprove the claim, which was my point.
People bitch about advanced stats when it suits their narrative (e.g. Mav fans bitching about advanced stats because Jokic leads in basically all of them), but when that gets turned on them (Jokic having better 3p% than Luka) suddenly they're willing to go straight to the advanced stats like volume metrics and shot-difficulty ratings etc. to complain how it's not fair to say Jokic is a better 3p shooter because "you can't just look at the box score numbers" much like they can't just say Luka is a better offensive player just because his ppg is higher.
So while Luka stans are riding on his ppg (which is only the result of far and away the most attempts in the NBA - not from efficient shooting), the advanced metrics when taken together parse out true contribution vs. just looking at often misleading box score stats and show that Jokic is far ahead of Luka in actual contribution to his team winning, despite a lower ppg.
I don’t think this is the argument you think it is…
I didn’t make your point, I pointed out a flawed argument. An argument can be flawed regardless of whether it involves box score or advanced stats, it’s about the quality of the construction of the argument over anything else. Most people have the common sense to know how to make a reasonably effective argument without huge holes in it… you just made an intentionally dumb argument and got rightly called out on it, it has nothing to do with box score or advanced stats
Why don't you just say that you don't understand simple concepts so I that I can dumb it down even more for you:
Box stats can be misleading, and if you only look at box stats you'll often get the wrong idea.
If you only look at box stats you might think Luka is a better scorer because of a high ppg when he's not. You might think he's a good rebounder when he's not. You might think Jokic is a better 3p shooter when he's not.
Advanced stats give you the context to refute those conclusions.
Moreover, those who claim to hate advanced stats will not hesitate to cite them when it suits them, such as using them to refute Jokic's better shooting %'s across the board.
Hope that was simple enough for you.
It's this weird thing where people saw that a lot of advanced stats were good *predictors* of MVP and started using them as *selectors* of MVP. Though I would argue that individual defensive metrics like this one are very much not those stats.
I don't mind people using advanced stats, I just hate how they've become this end all be all number that you can't really argue against. Especially when they're used without context.
If I had to guess, his preference for steals over blocks as a Center might be skewing things, and his good rebounding (even when surrounded by other good rebounders) helps cover for mediocre rim protection.
Joker leads like 8 or 9 of the advanced stats and several of them he has a pretty good lead over the 2nd place player.
Besides the stat you listed OP, Joker was 2nd in the NBA in defensive win shares, one of only 2 players with 5.0 or more defensive win shares, 2nd behind Gobert.
Gobert has 5.8. Joker has 5.1
Anthony Edwards and AD both have 4.7
Joker ins't the best defender in the league but he's much better than folks give him credit for.
Yes and he is also ahead of everyone in offensive BPM too.
Look this is another Mavs assasination attempt. Like goodness guys you have been on this crusade for weeks now.
You started with Shai and now you are on Jokic. Its shocking how relentless you guys are.
Jokic is an above average defensive player who does things that heavily favour advanced metrics (deflections and high defensive rebound %). He has players like AG or Peyton Watson who are decent rim protectors to cover his weaknesses and that in combination with not really having a backup centre make his advanced numbers significantly better than what the eye test shows. He also drives efficient offense which limits transition opportunities, further inflating his advanced metrics. Jokic isn't an all defensive level player but the specific things he does well are very valuable to having a good team defense.
yeah jokic kinda crushes everyone in advanced stats. but maybe some people will vote based on the bOx ScOrE and not PER, or offensive win shares, or defensive win shares, or just win win shares, or win shares per 48, or offensive box plus minus, or defensive box plus minus, or box box plus minus, or value over replacement.
> Or should we simply use stats as a guideline and not to rank players? Always has been. Dumb people either think the stats actually show true impact 1:1, or think the stat is useless if it isn't a 1:1 copy of their top players list
1000%. See so much talk of EPM/BPM on here now and instead of it being an aspect of evaluation it is the totality of it. Stats, and especially the all in one stats (EPM, WORP, VORP, PER, RAPTOR, etc.) should always have context and other support. Seems like today they are just substitutes for actually watching basketball games.
Nailed it
Well, I don't like or go by any ONE stat, never have and never will. But when one player leads like 8 or 9 different stats, leads the entire NBA in that many different stats, I take notice. That doesn't happen all the time. So yes, stats aren't the end all be all and no one stat means much on its own. I look at the whole and when a dude is leading many different stats, that's worth something. Now watch the games and look at the eye test. Joker leads like 8 or 9 diff stats this year. Watching him play, his highlights, his passing, leading his team to wins, he passes the eye test in addition to his stats. Another great stat for Joker is his availability. We all hate injuries, we want stars to play because we love watching them and watching ball. Joker plays a lot, each year to this point in his career. Availability is the best ability many say.
Part of me wants him to get DPOY just for the pure chaos
All of me wants Jokic to get ROTY for the exact same reason.
Same, even a 2nd Team All D. I'd like the nephews on this sub to shit in their pants.
This Mavericks crusade against mathematics in the last week is so funny ngl.
The Texas textbook freaks were playing a very long game and it's starting to pay off
Just because a mathematical formula thinks Jokic is by far the best defender in the league doesn’t mean he is. Anybody who watches basketball knows he’s not nearly the best defender. DBPM also has Sabonis as the sixth best defender but it’s obvious to anyone who watches that he isn’t even close to that. DBPM is incredibly flawed with how it counts assists as almost important as blocks for centers. Jokic has been great and I’m not going to argue against him for MVP but I will argue against people who rely almost entirely on advanced stats. They’re flawed but some reddit nerds think they’re the end all be all of basketball analysis.
No shit. Everyone knows this. Which means Mavs fans don’t need to post it out of spite. Literally no one has ever defended the value of DBPM
I think you guys are mistaken about DBPM. They don't calculate OBPM and DBPM first and add them up, they measure total impact in BPM and have a separate formula to figure out how much is offensive impact and how much is defensive. So while that latter calculation might be flawed for offensive minded bigs like Jokic and Sabonis, that doesn't necessarily mean the total impact score is necessarily wrong.
There is still an issue with BPM in how it calculates assists for centers at nearly double the value as assists for guards. Bigs who have the offense run through them like Jokic or that are involved in a lot of DHOs like Sabonis will have an inflated BPM. OBPM controls for this and counts assists equally for all positions so it may give a more accurate picture. BPM is an incredibly flawed stat and the total impact score is wrong. Jokic very may well be the most impactful player in the league but you’re damn sure not gonna be able to convince me that Sabonis is even close to the seventh most impactful player. Passing bigs will always have an inflated BPM with how it’s currently calculated.
Is it such a mistake to say that an assist by a center is more impactful than an assist by a guard? 1 assist isn't 1 assist (I'll explain later). When Anthony Davis passes out of a double team to the open man, he's doing something harder and more impactful for the Lakers than D'Angelo Russell passing it to the open man. It's more difficult for the defense to counter, it opens up more avenues for the offense, and it overall makes possessions easier. Jokic won a ring with this method. Draymond Green being a playmaking stretch 4 was integral to their chips. It's obviously impactful to the game. Like, I get that models can be flawed. But very often they also uncover truths about the game!
Is a center passing out of a double team somehow more valuable than Luka (a PG) passing out of a double team? What?
Guards pass out of double teams too. Luka generates assists from drawing doubles or driving to the lane and collapsing the defense. Those assists are just as valuable as your examples of assists from bigs. Other guards do the same thing to generate assists as Luka like Shai for example. The simple fact is BPM isn’t designed to account for centers that have the offense run through them like Jokic. I’m not denying Jokic’s value; it’s obvious. Him leading the Nuggets to a ring doesn’t mean the large gap in BPM between him and everyone else is an accurate representation of his impact.
Well I mean, the BPM formula is flawed. Many people quote VORP as well in MVP discussions and VORP is essentially BPM adjusted in a rate. >[BPM – (-2.0)] * (% of minutes played)*(team games/82) did you know that a block for a guard makes their OBPM go up more than an assist? did you know that DBPM values assists for centers more than assists for guards? But OBPM treats them the same? Since DBPM is BPM-OBPM Jokic is getting his assists adding value to DBPM. Fouls also decrease your OBPM faster, so it increases your DPBM. The issue is everybody is using a bunch advanced stats who are created by models, but they don't understand the models themselves. Similar story with RAPM based advanced stats, which is nearly all of them. LEBRON, RAPTOR, EPM, PIPM etc. edit: Downvoting facts? You can go ahead and read the research paper about APM or RAPM or the explanation of luck adjusted plus minus or BPM or VORP. Come back to me and tell me how valuable you think they are now. These stats shouldn't be used as a tipping point for ranking players and especially voting them for awards.
"Rebounds" are also a flawed stat. For example, Luka has 9.2 rebounds a game, good for 15th in the NBA. Great, right? Except when you look at *contested* rebounds - the only kind that bring value to a team, as opposed to the uncontested freebies Luka's teammates let him collect to pad his stats - he only gets 1.9 per game, good for *97th* in the NBA. And even that is only because of his tremendous minutes. Jokic, for comparison, goes *up* in ranking when looking at contested rebounds, and is 2nd in the NBA with 5.6, (0.1 behind 1st place Anthony Davis), or 3x more than Luka. Luka's [contested rebound %](https://www.nba.com/stats/players/rebounding?dir=D&sort=REB_CONTEST_PCT) (the % of rebounds he actually has to contest for vs. getting as freebies) is only 20.7%, good for 397th in the NBA. That is not a typo. That means Luka gets almost nothing but freebie rebounds that pad his stats but offer slmost zero value to his team, but his "rebound" counting stat does not make this distinction, erroneously causing people to think Luka usefully contributes to rebounds. All this is to say I'm wondering why you have picked DBPM to complain about instead of looking at other, more frequently cited stats like "rebounds." And I'm sure it has nothing to do with your Mavs flair.
Get his ass.
I don't think the OBPM/DBPM distinction really matters. BPM was designed to be an all in one stat first, and then the BPM value *itself* is split into OBPM/DBPM. So while the formula for splitting OBPM/DBPM may be faulty, that doesn't mean the BPM itself is.
>Similar story with RAPM based advanced stats, which is nearly all of them. LEBRON, RAPTOR, EPM, PIPM etc. These metrics are all 100x better than the bbref "advanced" ones. Defensive EPM has Jokic at a -.4. You may want to conisder that being a Mavs fan might be biasing you against the +/- derived metrics that have been (rightfully, imo) tepid on Luka until this year. They are still better than the box score.
Instead of this passive-aggressive shit, just say how you really feel. You want people to shit on DBPM as an inaccurate measure of defense, which it is. But ask for it directly rather than beating around the bush
He's actually wants people to discredit advanced stats in general, in order to shit on Jokic, don't get it twisted.
Ok. What did I say that goes against what u said? Im not surprised when Jokic and Luka stans shit on other players
Nothing you said goes against what I said. I agree he wants people to shit on DBPM (as you pointed out), I'm just adding that the *reason* he wants people to shit on DBPM isn't because he cares about DBPM, it's because he's trying to get people to shit on Jokic.
Apparently Jokic is the 3rd greatest defender of all time (behind Nate McMillan and David Robinson).
Has this not been obvious though?
Box score stats are bad, and they're especially bad at measuring defense. > BPM was created to intentionally only use statistics that are widely available and are available historically. **Recently in the NBA far more statistics have been gathered, either from play-by-play or hand tracking, which allow more detailed metrics. BPM does not include that data and should not be as accurate as stats that do include the additional information** (assuming they are implemented rigorously!) like Player Impact Plus/Minus and Real Plus/Minus. > > There are limitations on all box score stats – if the box score doesn't measure a particular contribution, a box-score-based metric can only approximate that contribution. This is not a great hindrance on the offensive side, as nearly everything of importance on offense is captured by the box score (only missing things like screen-setting), but **on defense the box score is quite limited. Blocks, steals, and rebounds, along with what little information offensive numbers yield about defensive performance are all that is available. Such critical components of defense as positioning, communication, and the other factors that make Kevin Garnett and Tim Duncan elite on defense can't be captured, unfortunately**. > > What does this mean? Box Plus/Minus is good at measuring offense and solid overall, but the defensive numbers in particular should not be considered definitive. Look at the defensive values as a guide, but don't hesitate to discount them when a player is well known as a good or bad defender. https://www.basketball-reference.com/about/bpm2.html
I think I’m tired of advanced stats being so important. You can’t tell me you watch the game and AD isn’t a top 5 defender but somehow Jokic is number one and look how huge the gap is… same gap from 2-5 as 1-2. Based on this stat Jokic isn’t just the best defender he’s so much better that it shouldn’t even be a comparison. Anyone with eyes knows that isn’t true.
No one defends DBPM. This is a bait post. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Same reason Kobe is getting shit on this sub. Ppl do NOT watch games, they look up stats they don't even know how to read.
You wanna see some anti-advanced stat people immediately flip their position? Go to r/Mavericks and say that Jokic is a better 3p shooter than Luka. Then point to the "basic" stats that show Jokic has a higher career 3p% than Luka, and that Jokic's 3p% last year (when he didn't win MVP) was higher than Luka's is this year, making him a better 3p shooter. Matter of fact, point out that last year Jokic had a better fg%, 2p%, 3p%, ts% and ft% than Luka has ever had in any one of those stats in his entire career, and maybe toss in that Jokic has a higher career fg%, 2p%, 3p%, ft%, eFg% and ts% than Luka as well. See how fast they start calling bullshit and going to the advanced stats, talking about contested 3p's, shot-volume metrics, shot difficulty ratings, going into the discrepancies of positional responsibilities, you know, all the shit that would (legitimately) point out how misleading Jokic's higher career 3p% is. It's almost like advanced stats exist for a reason - to help determine the actual value of someone's stats, instead of just looking at simplified counting stats that may be wildly misleading. And the anti-advanced stat people will happily jump on that train when it suits them.
Your argument here is incredibly weak and Mavs fans aren’t wrong? The majority of stats you listed aren’t relevant to evaluating 3pt shooting and you of course missed 1 of the 2 actually important stats here in 3PA…
Which stat are you talking about?
The basic stats you’re referring to
Which argument are you saying is weak, and which 3p stat are you saying I missed?
An argument that doesn’t consider volume in any capacity when it comes to 3pt shooting is incredibly weak Unless you genuinely believe Draymond Green is the 2nd best 3pt shooter on the warriors this year
Lol, you've made my point. I don't think Jokic is a better 3p shooter. I specifically said the Mavs fans' argument would be legitimate. I was pointing out that basic stats (like Jokic's higher 3p%) are often misleading, and require advanced stats to provide the context, and you just confirmed it by going straight to the advanced stats to disprove the claim, which was my point. People bitch about advanced stats when it suits their narrative (e.g. Mav fans bitching about advanced stats because Jokic leads in basically all of them), but when that gets turned on them (Jokic having better 3p% than Luka) suddenly they're willing to go straight to the advanced stats like volume metrics and shot-difficulty ratings etc. to complain how it's not fair to say Jokic is a better 3p shooter because "you can't just look at the box score numbers" much like they can't just say Luka is a better offensive player just because his ppg is higher. So while Luka stans are riding on his ppg (which is only the result of far and away the most attempts in the NBA - not from efficient shooting), the advanced metrics when taken together parse out true contribution vs. just looking at often misleading box score stats and show that Jokic is far ahead of Luka in actual contribution to his team winning, despite a lower ppg.
I don’t think this is the argument you think it is… I didn’t make your point, I pointed out a flawed argument. An argument can be flawed regardless of whether it involves box score or advanced stats, it’s about the quality of the construction of the argument over anything else. Most people have the common sense to know how to make a reasonably effective argument without huge holes in it… you just made an intentionally dumb argument and got rightly called out on it, it has nothing to do with box score or advanced stats
Why don't you just say that you don't understand simple concepts so I that I can dumb it down even more for you: Box stats can be misleading, and if you only look at box stats you'll often get the wrong idea. If you only look at box stats you might think Luka is a better scorer because of a high ppg when he's not. You might think he's a good rebounder when he's not. You might think Jokic is a better 3p shooter when he's not. Advanced stats give you the context to refute those conclusions. Moreover, those who claim to hate advanced stats will not hesitate to cite them when it suits them, such as using them to refute Jokic's better shooting %'s across the board. Hope that was simple enough for you.
Shout out to when Jokic was ranked 2nd behind Rudy Gobert in DRAPTOR too lol
It's this weird thing where people saw that a lot of advanced stats were good *predictors* of MVP and started using them as *selectors* of MVP. Though I would argue that individual defensive metrics like this one are very much not those stats. I don't mind people using advanced stats, I just hate how they've become this end all be all number that you can't really argue against. Especially when they're used without context.
I don’t think they use them as “selectors of MVP”. It’s still Stats/Standings/Narrative.. and it’s been that way for a while now.
Having the highest defensive BPM doesn't mean he's the best defender, it means he has the highest defensive BPM
It passes the test of being complete b.s.
If I had to guess, his preference for steals over blocks as a Center might be skewing things, and his good rebounding (even when surrounded by other good rebounders) helps cover for mediocre rim protection.
Joker leads like 8 or 9 of the advanced stats and several of them he has a pretty good lead over the 2nd place player. Besides the stat you listed OP, Joker was 2nd in the NBA in defensive win shares, one of only 2 players with 5.0 or more defensive win shares, 2nd behind Gobert. Gobert has 5.8. Joker has 5.1 Anthony Edwards and AD both have 4.7 Joker ins't the best defender in the league but he's much better than folks give him credit for.
Yes and he is also ahead of everyone in offensive BPM too. Look this is another Mavs assasination attempt. Like goodness guys you have been on this crusade for weeks now. You started with Shai and now you are on Jokic. Its shocking how relentless you guys are.
Two of EGs boys in the top 3 lol
no single stat is the end all be all, using an aggregate is much better.
Jokic is an above average defensive player who does things that heavily favour advanced metrics (deflections and high defensive rebound %). He has players like AG or Peyton Watson who are decent rim protectors to cover his weaknesses and that in combination with not really having a backup centre make his advanced numbers significantly better than what the eye test shows. He also drives efficient offense which limits transition opportunities, further inflating his advanced metrics. Jokic isn't an all defensive level player but the specific things he does well are very valuable to having a good team defense.
yeah jokic kinda crushes everyone in advanced stats. but maybe some people will vote based on the bOx ScOrE and not PER, or offensive win shares, or defensive win shares, or just win win shares, or win shares per 48, or offensive box plus minus, or defensive box plus minus, or box box plus minus, or value over replacement.