The Nuggets' Good Enough Problem

Can Denver win a title while not being elite?

Getty Images via Unsplash

Some thoughts in the aftermath of the Nuggets’ 10-game winning streak ending vs. the Lakers in a blowout loss Saturday and where the team stands heading into the last 25 games.

THE GOOD-ENOUGH PROBLEM

Is Denver good enough? That’s the real key here.

At the start of the season, I said on Locked on Nuggets that the Nuggets would not be good enough to contend at the start of the season after losing Kentavious Caldwell-Pope and where the team was at, but the goal was to be good enough by the end of the season.

At the beginning of the season, they were not.

On opening night, they were blisteringly outclassed by the Thunder and beaten by the Wolves amid their early-season (and ongoing) dysfunction. They also lost to the Wizards and went to overtime with the Raptors and Nets. It was apparent that they were not good enough.

But look where they are at Game 67.

37-20, seventeen games above .500. Fifth in schedule-adjusted net rating, 2nd in offense. The three-seed in the West.

That’s a good team. They came within one game of the 40-20 rule.¹

They are 12-14 against teams over .500. That’s not exceptionally bad for top teams. The Grizzlies, Clippers, Wolves, and Knicks are all under .500 vs. over .500 teams.

But it’s not good. The Lakers are 20-15 vs. teams over .500.

Denver is 5-6 vs. Western Conference non-play-in teams.

My acting premise on the Nuggets has been that they don’t have to be all-world good. They have to be good in four specific series they play.

This is the era we’re in. There are no great teams. The Thunder look great. The Celtics look great. They might be great. But in my mind, they have not proven it.

Boston had problems with playoff collapses and math dependency until last year, when they were both better than ever and faced three consecutive teams that were missing their best players.

The Thunder remain without proof against a convincing test. Will Lu Dort, Alex Caruso, and Casan Wallace make the shots they need to? Or will they 2019 Milwaukee-Bucks it?

Denver is not good enough. Their defense is 19th and slipping. Their backline defense in support of their primary at-level pick-and-roll coverage is nearly broken due to inexperience and lack of athleticism. Their transition defense is terrible, exacerbated by their turnover problems.

Their bench is still meaningfully short on reliable players and still dependent on incomplete young players building their skill sets, some of which will never develop. They put offense on, they take defense off. They put defense on, they take offense off.

Jokic’s defense is the worst it has been in his MVP tenure. Jamal Murray’s consistency has improved but remains concerning. Aaron Gordon’s defense has slid. Zeke Nnaji’s better but still not meaningfully good. Julian Strawther is both meaningfully good offensively and meaningfully terrible and harmful defensively.

They were outclassed, outworked, outcoached, outplayed by the Lakers. They got hit with a tsunami of a dramatically changed matchup and a tailor-made playoff-level game plan from JJ Redick. They never saw it coming… or didn’t care to.

After the game, Malone said, “No one’s scared the Nuggets are coming in.” Jokic said maybe they “tricked” themselves by beating bad teams. ²

Denver, I think, still knows it’s not good enough. But one of the things about their position is you have no alternative but to keep going. You can’t pivot. You can’t tank. The deadline passed with no movement.

You keep going, you keep trying to get better, and you try to figure out the four puzzles you’ll face come April.

And Denver can solve those problems. If the Wolves are a bad matchup and the Lakers are suddenly a bad matchup³ and the Clippers are a bad matchup, is it great? No. But what if they face Warriors, Rockets, Grizzlies? What if the matchups are different in a playoff series?

Outsiders call this cope or whatever. In reality, this is true for every team. Yes, even the Thunder.

Denver may not be good enough by mid-April. They might not have to be. They exist in limbo, between not good enough and good enough, trying to find their way out of the gray and into the green.

MPJ’S CHANGED REALITY

MPJ was so good vs. the Lakers under the previous dynamic. So good.

He gave them nightmares, but they also opted into that nightmare, consistently sending help off him to Jokic.

The Lakers didn’t do that.

OK, yes, the spacing here is nighmarish. But it’s also consistent with what Denver ran and how the Lakers covered it.

Goodwin stayed locked on him. MPJ on the weakside.

Watch Austin Reaves here, who the Nuggets consistently exploited in previous matchups when matched with MPJ:

This has been a consistent issue for the playoff-level matchups. Don’t leave him. The DHO options are tougher when you have the right length matchups and scheme to show on him.

A CURIOUS QUESTION

But also… Denver didn’t run post-ups cleared out with Porter on the strong side. They didn’t run pick and roll to force the help down from his spot. They didn’t really push the buttons.

I want to be clear: adjustments were needed to defeat the Lakers’ scheme, and they were not made. Malone said after the game that they were outcoached.

What has bugged me since is that the Nuggets have told us over and over and over again that they have seen every type of coverage. Jokic said after the game the fronting scheme was nothing new, the Lakers did it in the playoffs last year.

So.. why did it beat them all of a sudden? The Lakers made smart plays in the passing angles. Jokic noted that they played the angles without fear of getting beat. They risked being exposed to overplay for the pass, and it worked.

The Nugget’s execution was poor, they played sloppy and unfocused. They cut into one another and didn’t spring back in transition. Their second-effort on rotations was nowhere to be found. They were beaten, soundly, and convincingly, by a team that was much better than them on Saturday night.

But I can’t help look back at this game and wonder what exactly Denver chose… and chose not to show.

I don’t think Malone is playing 4D chess; it’s not his style. I don’t think they are rope-a-doping the Lakers. The matchup is fundamentally different. But I also think the baffling way Denver lost to a team that still employs most of the players they’ve owned in this matchup through the years was… curious.

1. 40 wins before 20 losses, prescribed by Phil Jackson as a sign of being a true contender.

2. These comments always sound so dramatic and terrible from Jokic when written or tweeted. They never feel that way when he says them because he doesn’t take it that seriously. It’s not a shot across the bow, it’s a matter-of-fact description when answering a question.

3. I’m not convinced.