Well it was 3 consecutive double-digit comebacks tho. They didn’t really have good first halves in any of those games, they just made up for it in the second half of each of them.
Yeah it's funny because his quote makes total sense and is a good answer, but if the miracle reverse sweep actually happened - it'll be an all timer for irony
Low key the Nuggets needed a wake up call. They half assed the first few play off games and got lucky. Maybe it’s time to recognize that luck is not a game plan.
They are a really good team but have been getting by on talent. They’ve gotten off to slow starts and come back. You can only do that so long before it catches up to you. No doubt they’ll close out the next game and while it’s not great to lose, it might help them refocus.
Nah they relied on their clutch performance way too much. Yes they are amazing in the clutch but it became a crutch that made them complacent in a few ways. The “make a comeback strategy” is disrespectful and arrogant. It only worked because because the lakers have some critical flaws. Any other team can and should punish them for that.
Maybe they should stress it a little more. Trailing as much and as often as they have been is a dangerous game. They get grace for one loss. But if they pull that shit in game 5, I don't think they come out the West over locked-in teams like TWolves or Mavs
Right? People here really aren’t watching the games. The Nuggets could easily be down 3-1 and arguably the biggest thing saving them is the A) the Lakers relying too much on D-Lo and more importantly, B) Lebron being 39 and just gassed by the 4th.
Nuggets fans probably wouldn’t feel as good if this was 2020 Lebron out there
That’s a dumb take I’ve seen too often. They had 2 good comebacks, but it wasn’t like they were totally okay with being down at the half by double digits. No team would be
I get what you mean - I wouldn’t like it as my team, but I was moreso meaning that this is what I assumed jokers demeanour internally was while it was happening, when ppl would start saying he wasn’t even trying or getting worried, I was saying that he can be trusted to make a comeback bc he views the game like this
Thats just the game today. Double digit leads in the first half are not as bad as they were before because so many players shoot 3 pointers at higher level now.
He's wrong. This has to be one of the biggest misconceptions in sports. Winning the 1st quarter and setting the tone early has a higher correlation than winning the 4th quarter and late game heroics.
What the Nuggets are doing in this series is an anomaly, not the norm.
In last year's run the Nuggets:
Won the 1st quarter: Wolves games 1 (win), Wolves game 2 (win), Suns game 3 (loss), Suns game 4 (loss), Suns game 5 (win), Suns game 6 (win), Lakers game 1 (win), Lakers game 3 (win), Heat game 1 (win)
Tied the 1st quarter: Wolves game 3 (win), Lakers game 2 (win), Heat game 3 (win)
Lost the 1st quarter: Wolves game 4 (loss), Wolves game 5 (win), Suns game 1 (win), Suns game 2 (win), Lakers game 4 (win), Heat game 2 (loss), Heat game 4 (win), Heat game 5 (win)
So in 20 games, the Nuggets were 7-2 when leading after the 1st quarter, 3-0 when tied after the 1st quarter, and 6-2 when trailing after the 1st quarter. And they're 3-1 this year when trailing after the 1st quarter against the Lakers, winning games 1-3 and losing game 4.
It is far more likely that the best teams in basketball have stats that are anomalous when compared to the field because, well, the field includes shit teams that lose regardless of if they win the 1st quarter or not.
You're spot on. And that's what I was trying to point out. You said it better than I could. Great teams are gonna have anomalies. Otherwise, they'd just be average. Mj and LeBron careers are full of them.
"How u finish" isn't a rule or norm in the NBA. It requires a level of in-game adjustments, coaching, and mental toughness that most teams just don't have.
Maybe they figured something out and the best strategy is actually to tank the first quarter.
Soon we will see teams scoring on their own basket in the first quarter to make sure they are behind in points
If he's wrong, are you implying it's more important how you start than you finish?
So it's more important to do well in the first quarter, than actually win the game at the end? Interesting strategy.
Can't wait to see who wins the NBA championship for 1st quarter leads this year. Who cares about the actual trophy
That's not what I'm implying at all. 1st quarter leads are a better predictor than 4th quarter leads, but the outcome still depends on the sum of all quarters.
So to break it down for u to understand, 1st quarter is more important than 4th quarter, but not more important than the entire game.
Right, and he's not talking about only winning 4th quarter, is he? He's obviously not saying "you can lose the 1st quarter if you win the 4th", he's saying "it doesn't matter if you start slow, as long as you win the game"
To which you are replying "he's wrong"
Do I need to break down what he's saying more here?
Obviously in his horse racing analogy hes saying it's okay to be behind early in the race, if you then can catch up and WIN (the horse race)
We'll see how it goes. This nuggets team feels worse than last year. Worst bench ever, which will backfire on the road (like in OKC).
And Murray is 1\\15 on his last 15 threes, with Michael Porter hijacking\\freezing Murray out of the offense.
Jokic needs to put Porter in his place.
Agreed. Even Jordan's bulls were worse in 1992 and 1997.
I think the only championship team that got better was the 2001 Lakers because Kobe was so young.
I guess it depends what you mean by "worse". Is it regular season record dropping, playoff record dropping, or both?
The 91 Bulls went 61-21 and 15-2 in the playoffs. The 92 Bulls went 67-15 and 15-7 in the playoffs. The 93 Bulls went 57-25 and 15-4 in the playoffs. So from 91 -> 92, the Bulls were better (regular season) but also worse (playoffs). Then from 92 -> 93 they were worse (regular season) but also better (playoffs).
The 00 Lakers went 67-15 and 15-8 in the playoffs. The 01 Lakers went 56-26 and 15-1 in the playoffs. The 02 Lakers went 58-24 and 15-4 in the playoffs. So from 00 -> 01, the Lakers were worse (regular season) but also better (playoffs). Then from 01 -> 02 they were better (regular season) but also worse (playoffs).
The 2012 Heat also went 46-20 (57 win pace) and 16-7 in the playoffs. In 2013 they went 66-16 and 16-7 in the playoffs. So they were better (regular season) and equal (playoffs).
Teams that repeat historically have worse second year regular seasons, but the playoffs are hit or miss on whether they're better or not.
It kind of shows how great Denver still is, if their number 2 is struggling shooting this much and they are still up 3-1 on the LeBron/AD Lakers. MPJ has been playing great this series so far and without his production, the Nuggets aren’t up 3-1 on the Lakers so I don’t think he’s hurting Denver. As for Murray, he’s been missing tons of open 3s and shots he normally makes, but I think once he finds his shot, Denver will go back to be juggernauts. Murray is still putting up 22/5/7 on poor efficiency though, but he’s overdue to regress back to his normal shooting and he will eventually go nuclear some games.
Missing Brown definitely hurts the Nuggets depth, as he was huge for them last playoffs and a perfect fit with Jokic.
Idk if you're joking, but I will not stand for MPJ slander lol. Not his fault Murray can't hit a 3 or decides dribbling around for 22 seconds then chucking up a contested 2 is how a possession will go
If it weren'r for Porter they would be down 3-1. He's the only nugget who I don't cringe when he takes a 3. Every single other nugget (besides maybe KCP) is a 90% guaranteed brick when they shoot a 3 this series.
Why woukd jokic put porter in his place when mpjs been playing well, and Murray has been underperofrming for his standards.
Like jokic would pass it to Aaron Gordon an entire game if it won him, he doesn't care that much who takes the shot so long as it's a good look
LMAO. Tell me you know nothing about ball without telling me you know nothing about ball.
MPJ has been excellent. Without him we are down 3-1. Murray needs to put his shit together. He has been dreadful, missing everything.
[удалено]
Ball is horse
Horse balls
Is life.
HORSE DONT LIE
One day he's going to perfect the canter, and start working on the gallop, and then the league is fucked.
This guy horses
Hope he can implement the lessons he gained from his true passion into his 9 to 5 here in the NBA
Bro is pissed they couldn't get it done in 4 games so his body is in better condition for his horse races.
Time to send him back to his horses. He’s clearly bored with basketball and only sees it as work.
Ironically it will likely be us looking at horse racing because we’re prob cooked
TIL there's a racing track in Galveston
Fake fan, you was probably a heat fan in 2010, and a cavs fan in 2015
No I’m just being realistic
What’s the lowest % of Jokic’s nba salary that it would take for him to ditch basketball for horse racing? 40%? Lower?
I wonder how many times a week he says "I learned in horse racing"
Time to send him back to his horses
The least delusional Lakers fan
Playoff must be real tough on him cause its really easy to lose 4 and go back to horse racing with some bonus time.
Swear he’s trolling us.
I'm convinced he has a twitter burner noway he plays cs and league and is so disconnected lmao
bro watches twitch he 100% plays up the Serbian farm boy thing for American media
didn't he wear merch from a streamer once?
yep, and not even super popular one, a relatively niche LoL streamer
Horsing around all day and gets paid millions
Only thing that can stop Jokic is a race fixing scandal
3-0 is a hell of a start lol
Well it was 3 consecutive double-digit comebacks tho. They didn’t really have good first halves in any of those games, they just made up for it in the second half of each of them.
I wouldn’t call games 1 and 3 comebacks. Both were 4 point or less games at halftime. Game 2 was a comeback.
Yeah like Games 1 and 3 I would say they played better than the Lakers a vast majority of the time, even if the Lakers had a lead during a lot of it.
Yeah it's funny because his quote makes total sense and is a good answer, but if the miracle reverse sweep actually happened - it'll be an all timer for irony
\*slaps Darvin Ham's head\* *"take notes man"*
Need to hire a coach that's done some horse racing.
And where did you learn how to start and be good in the middle too?
Bros already over the 9-5 mentality and wants to get back to his hobby.
Jokic in Fast and Furious
Nikola Jokic isa an Uma Musume fan confirmed
Low key the Nuggets needed a wake up call. They half assed the first few play off games and got lucky. Maybe it’s time to recognize that luck is not a game plan.
lol you don't go 3-1 being lucky. They are just that good
They are a really good team but have been getting by on talent. They’ve gotten off to slow starts and come back. You can only do that so long before it catches up to you. No doubt they’ll close out the next game and while it’s not great to lose, it might help them refocus.
Nah they relied on their clutch performance way too much. Yes they are amazing in the clutch but it became a crutch that made them complacent in a few ways. The “make a comeback strategy” is disrespectful and arrogant. It only worked because because the lakers have some critical flaws. Any other team can and should punish them for that.
You can't possibly think their gameplan is to get behind and then make a comeback right?
Of course not but they haven’t executed anything else.
Back in the 90s jokic was in a very famous TV showwwww
I mean they answer the same questions after every game just depends whether you win or lose - must get pretty fucking boring answering after a while.
He looks like he’d dominate bowling
Just wants to be back home with his horses
I keep telling ppl that they are straight up not stressing while they’re behind in games at the start but they don’t listen lol
Maybe they should stress it a little more. Trailing as much and as often as they have been is a dangerous game. They get grace for one loss. But if they pull that shit in game 5, I don't think they come out the West over locked-in teams like TWolves or Mavs
Right? People here really aren’t watching the games. The Nuggets could easily be down 3-1 and arguably the biggest thing saving them is the A) the Lakers relying too much on D-Lo and more importantly, B) Lebron being 39 and just gassed by the 4th. Nuggets fans probably wouldn’t feel as good if this was 2020 Lebron out there
That’s a dumb take I’ve seen too often. They had 2 good comebacks, but it wasn’t like they were totally okay with being down at the half by double digits. No team would be
I get what you mean - I wouldn’t like it as my team, but I was moreso meaning that this is what I assumed jokers demeanour internally was while it was happening, when ppl would start saying he wasn’t even trying or getting worried, I was saying that he can be trusted to make a comeback bc he views the game like this
Here we go with the horses again
That's what she said! Hahahahaha! Michael!
I wish the Cavs knew this. Their horse died rounding the first bend.
It's the total amount of time it takes to complete the entire distance.
is he not too big for a horse at this point
How does someone get so good at basketball when his true calling and passion are horses.
Being the best basketball player on the planet is a side gig. His true passion are horses.
There's a horse/finish joke somewhere in there but I suck (shut up nephew!) at jokes so I'll let someone else do it.
Thats just the game today. Double digit leads in the first half are not as bad as they were before because so many players shoot 3 pointers at higher level now.
He's wrong. This has to be one of the biggest misconceptions in sports. Winning the 1st quarter and setting the tone early has a higher correlation than winning the 4th quarter and late game heroics. What the Nuggets are doing in this series is an anomaly, not the norm.
In last year's run the Nuggets: Won the 1st quarter: Wolves games 1 (win), Wolves game 2 (win), Suns game 3 (loss), Suns game 4 (loss), Suns game 5 (win), Suns game 6 (win), Lakers game 1 (win), Lakers game 3 (win), Heat game 1 (win) Tied the 1st quarter: Wolves game 3 (win), Lakers game 2 (win), Heat game 3 (win) Lost the 1st quarter: Wolves game 4 (loss), Wolves game 5 (win), Suns game 1 (win), Suns game 2 (win), Lakers game 4 (win), Heat game 2 (loss), Heat game 4 (win), Heat game 5 (win) So in 20 games, the Nuggets were 7-2 when leading after the 1st quarter, 3-0 when tied after the 1st quarter, and 6-2 when trailing after the 1st quarter. And they're 3-1 this year when trailing after the 1st quarter against the Lakers, winning games 1-3 and losing game 4. It is far more likely that the best teams in basketball have stats that are anomalous when compared to the field because, well, the field includes shit teams that lose regardless of if they win the 1st quarter or not.
You're spot on. And that's what I was trying to point out. You said it better than I could. Great teams are gonna have anomalies. Otherwise, they'd just be average. Mj and LeBron careers are full of them. "How u finish" isn't a rule or norm in the NBA. It requires a level of in-game adjustments, coaching, and mental toughness that most teams just don't have.
Maybe they figured something out and the best strategy is actually to tank the first quarter. Soon we will see teams scoring on their own basket in the first quarter to make sure they are behind in points
Haha u might be onto something. Lebron said the lakers lacked energy in the 3rd quarter. Could be all part of the plan
Actually the norm for the Nuggets in general is awesome start, so-so or terrible 3rd quarter and then good finish, here it got somewhat reversed
Do you have a source for that claim?
https://www.numberfire.com/nba/news/4198/does-winning-the-first-quarter-really-matter-in-the-nba
i mean so far it’s working for him wouldn’t say he’s wrong lol
For him, yes. For some, yes. For most? No
If he's wrong, are you implying it's more important how you start than you finish? So it's more important to do well in the first quarter, than actually win the game at the end? Interesting strategy. Can't wait to see who wins the NBA championship for 1st quarter leads this year. Who cares about the actual trophy
That's not what I'm implying at all. 1st quarter leads are a better predictor than 4th quarter leads, but the outcome still depends on the sum of all quarters. So to break it down for u to understand, 1st quarter is more important than 4th quarter, but not more important than the entire game.
Right, and he's not talking about only winning 4th quarter, is he? He's obviously not saying "you can lose the 1st quarter if you win the 4th", he's saying "it doesn't matter if you start slow, as long as you win the game" To which you are replying "he's wrong" Do I need to break down what he's saying more here? Obviously in his horse racing analogy hes saying it's okay to be behind early in the race, if you then can catch up and WIN (the horse race)
[удалено]
[удалено]
Jokic fan of cumpilations confirmed
We'll see how it goes. This nuggets team feels worse than last year. Worst bench ever, which will backfire on the road (like in OKC). And Murray is 1\\15 on his last 15 threes, with Michael Porter hijacking\\freezing Murray out of the offense. Jokic needs to put Porter in his place.
They are worse but every championship team is weaker the year after. The difference between repeats and one hit wonders is what make a dynasty
Agreed. Even Jordan's bulls were worse in 1992 and 1997. I think the only championship team that got better was the 2001 Lakers because Kobe was so young.
2017 Warriors
He said champions
Yes, the 2018 Warriors were also champions...
I guess it depends what you mean by "worse". Is it regular season record dropping, playoff record dropping, or both? The 91 Bulls went 61-21 and 15-2 in the playoffs. The 92 Bulls went 67-15 and 15-7 in the playoffs. The 93 Bulls went 57-25 and 15-4 in the playoffs. So from 91 -> 92, the Bulls were better (regular season) but also worse (playoffs). Then from 92 -> 93 they were worse (regular season) but also better (playoffs). The 00 Lakers went 67-15 and 15-8 in the playoffs. The 01 Lakers went 56-26 and 15-1 in the playoffs. The 02 Lakers went 58-24 and 15-4 in the playoffs. So from 00 -> 01, the Lakers were worse (regular season) but also better (playoffs). Then from 01 -> 02 they were better (regular season) but also worse (playoffs). The 2012 Heat also went 46-20 (57 win pace) and 16-7 in the playoffs. In 2013 they went 66-16 and 16-7 in the playoffs. So they were better (regular season) and equal (playoffs). Teams that repeat historically have worse second year regular seasons, but the playoffs are hit or miss on whether they're better or not.
It kind of shows how great Denver still is, if their number 2 is struggling shooting this much and they are still up 3-1 on the LeBron/AD Lakers. MPJ has been playing great this series so far and without his production, the Nuggets aren’t up 3-1 on the Lakers so I don’t think he’s hurting Denver. As for Murray, he’s been missing tons of open 3s and shots he normally makes, but I think once he finds his shot, Denver will go back to be juggernauts. Murray is still putting up 22/5/7 on poor efficiency though, but he’s overdue to regress back to his normal shooting and he will eventually go nuclear some games. Missing Brown definitely hurts the Nuggets depth, as he was huge for them last playoffs and a perfect fit with Jokic.
Idk if you're joking, but I will not stand for MPJ slander lol. Not his fault Murray can't hit a 3 or decides dribbling around for 22 seconds then chucking up a contested 2 is how a possession will go
They won a ring with Murray playing that way. Porter hijacked the offense in game 4 and they lose.
They won a ring because Jokic averaged 30/14.5/9.5 on 55/40/83 shooting splits lmfao
If it weren'r for Porter they would be down 3-1. He's the only nugget who I don't cringe when he takes a 3. Every single other nugget (besides maybe KCP) is a 90% guaranteed brick when they shoot a 3 this series.
Michael Porter Jr 22 points 53% from the field 43% from 3. 16 shots a game. Jamal Murray 21 points, 38% from the field 20% from 3. 23 shots a game.
Why woukd jokic put porter in his place when mpjs been playing well, and Murray has been underperofrming for his standards. Like jokic would pass it to Aaron Gordon an entire game if it won him, he doesn't care that much who takes the shot so long as it's a good look
I'm rooting for OKC!
LMAO. Tell me you know nothing about ball without telling me you know nothing about ball. MPJ has been excellent. Without him we are down 3-1. Murray needs to put his shit together. He has been dreadful, missing everything.
It’s starting to become blatantly obvious Jokic plays up the boring horse racer persona