Kareem Abdul Jabbar vs Michael Jeffery Jordan ( for the undisputed GOAT ) round 1

[kennethgriffin]

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa280/cashforcards/HYREHYT_zpsa7b58685.png


who you got?

[MAC system]

Op has a baby dick

[LongLiveTheKing]

Knowing you it will lead back to Kobe, so Kobe.

[kennethgriffin]

Knowing you it will lead back to Kobe, so Kobe.

well i pick kareem... so as it stands



Mike - 0
Kareem - 1
Kobe - 1

:lol

[unbreakable]

WOW kareem has more assists than MJ :eek:

[RoundMoundOfReb]

mj

[Djahjaga]

:sleeping

[The Choken One]

I still kinda of think MJ is GOAT, but I'd easily draft KAJ before MJ.

Big men > Guards/Forwards

[kennethgriffin]

WOW kareem has more assists than MJ :eek:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoKsZ1EA9iY

[Vertical-24]

It's a close argument but I still think MJ is the GOAT.

Btw, what does religion have to do with anything? Ali was muslim, yet is heavily regarded as the boxing GOAT.

[pauk]

Kareem definitely has his case, just as Bill Russell has. I think you can talk about who the 10 or 100 greatest players were, but to rank them in order is just never really accurate... i admit it is fun to talk about but there is no real accurate final conclusion.... There is a reason a ranked GOAT list (Top 10, Top 20 and so on) doesnt officially exist... all those/our lists are opinions based on criterias and priorities of accolades or individual play.... with a hint of bias...

[lilblingy]

Jabbar > Jordan in terms of basketball achievements. Jordan had a greater impact on the game though. You could argue that it was mostly because of Jordan having the benefit of playing in the 90s and getting TV hype but it is what it is.

To me, they are more or less interchangeable. I don't really get upset if i see someone place Jabbar #1 and MJ #2

[RoundMoundOfReb]

It's a close argument but I still think MJ is the GOAT.

Btw, what does religion have to do with anything? Ali was muslim, yet is heavily regarded as the boxing GOAT.
he isn't the GOAT. and almost no hardcore boxing fan regards him as such. Ray Robinson is the GOAT. A legitimate argument can be made for Joe Louis being GOAT Heavyweight as well.

[Yao Ming's Foot]

Its Kareem and its not even close.

[Beatlezz]

:applause: :applause:

[Breezy]

I think you are cherry picking stats. Here are the real stats.

Buzzer beaters to beat Cleavland:
63 point playoff games:
Amount of triple doubles in an 11 game span:
Finals MVP's:
Career scoring average:
69 point regular season games:
Beating Karl Malone in the Finals:
Dunks on Patrick Ewing:
3 point percentage:
PER:
Scoring titles:
Number of people who are the next you:
Op's a f@ggot:
Highest number on a Jersey worn:
Gatorade commercials:
Ball handling:

[kennethgriffin]

It's a close argument but I still think MJ is the GOAT.

Btw, what does religion have to do with anything? Ali was muslim, yet is heavily regarded as the boxing GOAT.


on nearly every greatest boxer list ive seen sugar ray robinson is #1

Ali is only regarded as the best ever by the ladder of uninformed people

and most dont care that hes muslim because most most dont care about boxing to begin with. its all a battle between guys nobody cares about

[kennethgriffin]

I think you are cherry picking stats. Here are the real stats.

Buzzer beaters to beat Cleavland.. lol a game winner?:
63 point playoff games in a loss:
Amount of triple doubles in an 11 game span.
Finals MVP's
Career scoring average:
69 point regular season games in double overtime.
Beating Karl Malone in the Finals LOL
Dunks on Patrick Ewing wowoow LOLLL
3 point percentage: they both sucked
PER :lol
Scoring titles:
Number of people who are the next you: duh its easier to dublicate jordans than kareems
Op's a f@ggot: u mad?
Highest number on a Jersey worn:... que :oldlol:
Gatorade commercials:
Ball handling:


:roll: :hammerhead: :biggums:

[KOBE143]

KAJ

But MJ still has a strong case tho.. He's the closest player to Kobe that we've seen..

[eurobum]

I think you are cherry picking stats. Here are the real stats.

Buzzer beaters to beat Cleavland:
63 point playoff games:
Amount of triple doubles in an 11 game span:
Finals MVP's:
Career scoring average:
69 point regular season games:
Beating Karl Malone in the Finals:
Dunks on Patrick Ewing:
3 point percentage:
PER:
Scoring titles:
Number of people who are the next you:
Op's a f@ggot:
Highest number on a Jersey worn:
Gatorade commercials:
Ball handling:

Whatever. Put some playoff numbers in this thread and see who comes out on top.

:bowdown: Yahweh.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

KAJ

But MJ still has a strong case tho.. He's the closest player to Kobe that we've seen..
This made me lol.

[Breezy]

Whatever. Put some playoff numbers in this thread and see who comes out on top.

:bowdown: Yahweh.

I think I really hit the Key stats that everyone looks for in a true GOAT. But I'll play your game.

Finals Losses:
50 point playoff games:
Mid air hand switches for a layup:
Eastern Conference championships:
Passes to Steve Kerr for game winning shots:
Playoff scoring average:
Total Playoff points:
Double Figure assist averages in Finals:
Shaking Byron Russell:
Playoff steals:

THE REAL PLAYOFF STATS!

[Deuce Bigalow]

Michael Jordan's Playoff Records:

Finals MVPs, 6
Highest PPG, 33.4
Career Points, 5987
30 point games, 109
40 point games, 38
50 point games, 8
60 point games, 1
Most points in a game, 63
Free-throws made, 1463
Highest single Finals series PPG, 41.0

[Mr. Jabbar]

<------

[bdreason]

These are my #1 and #2 GOAT's as well. I go back and forth, but typically give the nod to MJ, mainly because I actually watched his career.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Michael Jordan's Playoff Records:

Finals MVPs, 6
Highest PPG, 33.4
Career Points, 5987
30 point games, 109
40 point games, 38
50 point games, 8
60 point games, 1
Most points in a game, 63
Free-throws made, 1463
Highest single Finals series PPG, 41.0
I'm a bit surprised there has only been 1 60 point play off game and it was a double overtime.

[Deuce Bigalow]

I'm a bit surprised there has only been 1 60 point play off game and it was a double overtime.
Game 5 of the 1962 NBA Finals

http://001-jk-files.s3.amazonaws.com/images/boxscores/196204140BOS.jpg

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Game 5 of the 1962 NBA Finals

http://001-jk-files.s3.amazonaws.com/images/boxscores/196204140BOS.jpg
Nice..

[kennethgriffin]

Game 5 of the 1962 NBA Finals

http://001-jk-files.s3.amazonaws.com/images/boxscores/196204140BOS.jpg


i'l take 2 less points and the W


thankyou verry much

[Scholar]

I'm a bit surprised there has only been 1 60 point play off game and it was a double overtime.

C'mon, RMOR. I expected better from you. :facepalm Study your NBA history.

[knicksman]

replace kareem with magic. KAJ is one of the most overrated players of all time

[SilkkTheShocker]

I would rather have Kareem. But I don't think there is a clear-cut GOAT. More of a preference really. Jordan is definitely harder to build around. But with Kareem you gotta to be concerned with how long he is staying.

[SilkkTheShocker]

replace kareem with magic. KAJ is one of the most overrated players of all time

If you're building a team from the ground up, Kareem is the guy you take. If you already have a disgustingly stacked team and want to sell tickets, than Magic is your guy.

[eurobum]

I think I really hit the Key stats that everyone looks for in a true GOAT. But I'll play your game.

Finals Losses:
50 point playoff games:
Mid air hand switches for a layup:
Eastern Conference championships:
Passes to Steve Kerr for game winning shots:
Playoff scoring average:
Total Playoff points:
Double Figure assist averages in Finals:
Shaking Byron Russell:
Playoff steals:

THE REAL PLAYOFF STATS!

Your point is kind of lost when you post both legit ones and 'Jordan propaganda ones' together. Anyways, one could do same for any player like:

Most games played alongside the greatest point guard ever, Magic Johnson:
Most seasons played alongside 3+ all-stars:
Etc.

[miles berg]

I've always preferred Kareem.

[DMV2]

WOW kareem has more assists than MJ :eek:
Well, one guy played 20 seasons in the NBA. The other didn't.

My vote: Kareem for basketball at all levels.
Jordan for GOAT NBA player ever.

[Vertical-24]

he isn't the GOAT. and almost no hardcore boxing fan regards him as such. Ray Robinson is the GOAT. A legitimate argument can be made for Joe Louis being GOAT Heavyweight as well.

I'm not saying he is the GOAT. But where i'm from a lot of people consider him to be, paticularly the old heads. Point is, him being muslim never hindered his popularity nor his status in people's minds.

[longhornfan1234]

Kareem could only win one ring in the 70s. 70s is the weakest era.

[OldSchoolBBall]

KAJ was the best player on his team for only 2-3 of his championships co-equal for one more. So he really isn't MJ's equal when it comes to championships.

Jordan was just as individually dominant if not more so, never played with a fraction of the talent KAJ did, and won more when accounting for role. Also, for all the nonsense some people talk about the 90's being a "watered down" era, KAJ only managed to win one title in THE weakest era in league history ('72-'79). This, even when one man teams like Barry's Warrior were winning titles.

[Odinn]

There is no undisputed goat.



Like I always say. Compare Jordan's playoff numbers to Kareem's, and theirs your answer. When you look at Jordan's stats, just remind yourself, that a guard is putting up those %'s.

Not a knock on Kareem. If you wanna say 1a and 1b, i'd be completely fine with that.


Jordan played 12 full seasons for Bulls and in 1998 playoffs he was 34.
At the end of 1983 playoffs, Kareem was 36 and completed his 14th full season.

33.4/6.4/5.7/1.8 vs. 28.8/14.0/3.7/3.4

Much more closer than you think. Huh?

I rank both of MJ & Kareem as #1. More like your "1a-1b". But there is a reason for Jordan's career playoff #s looking better.


If 1985-86 season would be Kareem's last season;

His career numbers;
35108 points (all-time scoring leader until 2002-12-18)
16105 rebounds
5248 asissts
1025 steals
2915 blocks
2087 turnovers

26.4 ppg
12.1 rpg
4.0 apg
1.0 spg
2.9 bpg
3.0 tpg

0.562 fg%
0.720 ft%


His playoff numbers;
4912 points
2168 rebounds
676 asissts
161 steals
393 blocks
339 turnovers

27.3 ppg
12.0 rpg
3.8 apg
1.2 spg
2.8 bpg
3.0 tpg

0.541 fg%
0.732 ft%


His accomplishments;
6x MVP (6.203 total MVP share, only 2 times left out top5)
2x FMVP
4x NBA Champion (in 1971 and 1980, clear-cut best player on a championship team and "arguably" best player in 1982 and 1985)
16x All-Star
10x All-NBA First Team
5x All-NBA Second Team
5x All-NBA Defensive First Team
6x All-NBA Defensive Second Team
NBA Rookie of The Year
3x NCAA Champion
3x NCAA MOP
Naismith College Player of the Year

In conclusion; his last 3 years only lowered his career averages. He still would have a legitimate case for GOAT if he was retired after 1985-86 season.

I am not saying missing the playoffs or not getting deep in the playoffs is not fine. But while you're averaging 35/18/4/4/2 on 60% in the playoffs, 30/16/4/4 on 61% against an all-time great match-up and still you are not winning, it is not your fault.

The level of play Kareem has reached was good enough to be the goat. Jordan played a little bit longer than Kareem on goat level of play. But Kareem has the advantage on longevity for sure. He dominated the game at all levels.

---

I am not saying Jordan is not the goat. But the same goes with Kareem. Both of them have strong cases.

[Overdrive]

i'l take 2 less points and the W


thankyou verry much

I'd also take Jerry West as a teammate instead of anything Jordan had before Pippen came along.

[Greg Oden 50]

replace kareem with magic. KAJ is one of the most overrated players of all time

ARE U SMOKE ???:wtf:

[Ne 1]

KAJ was the best player on his team for only 2-3 of his championships co-equal for one more. So he really isn't MJ's equal when it comes to championships.

He didn't have the great situation Jordan did for most of his prime. To argue "rings as the best player " you have to assume they had equal opportunities to win rings in their youth when this clearly was not the case. Jordan has a case over Kareem but "rings as the best player" is not a strong reason to argue him over Kareem. Let's be real: put Kareem on the Bulls from 1985-1998. How many "rings as the best player" does he win? He sure as hell would win more than 3.

The key when people look at Kareem's 6 rings and Jordan's 6 rings is that Kareem didn't even have a great team around him for his absolute prime years, whereas Jordan did. Still it doesn't matter, rings are rings and Kareem won 6 rings, 3 of them clearly as the best player, he remained the go-to guy until the 5th title. Statistically more dominant than Jordan. More valuable to his teams than Jordan (seriously 15-20 wins to 50+ wins? That's insane!). No one is matching Kareem's production over an entire decade either.

Seriously why do people cling to this "rings as the best player" bullshit? Even so Kareem was the best player for his first three and probably the fourth. Even for his fifth he averaged 22/7 as part of a balanced three-headed Magic/Kareem/Worthy attack. Only during his final championship year could he fairly be described as a "role player" and even then his presences alone was still huge along with his production being solid much like Duncan on the Spurs in recent years.

In terms of legacy if you want to use the faux category "rings as the best player" then you could say Jordan edges out Kareem, but that's only really because Kareem didn't get the casts or breaks he needed. It's definitely not because Jordan is the better player. I mean would anyone really take prime Jordan over prime Kareem, if you are starting off a team?

I consider Jordan a little "lucky" in the way/time his career was set up, when you look at the careers of Kareem, Wilt, Bird, Hakeem...you can see why. Kareem's legacy almost seems like it came down to that one game, where his teammates couldn

[willds09]

Kareem was amazing, but I have to take m.j on this one:applause:

[Harison]

GOAT - MJ
I would draft - Kareem.

[guy]

Maybe I'm mistaken, and someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't a significant criticism of Kareem about his leadership ability? I've heard people say he rarely ever inspired his teammates, bringing the best out of them, and wasn't even that passionate about the game for a part of his career, and that was basically a huge void that Magic ended up filling. I believe I read a very old quote a while ago from Kareem where he basically implied that he was only playing basketball for the money.

If this was the case, you can't just look at his career and point out his stats and the quality and performances of his teammates and say he shouldn't shoulder any blame for not winning more in the 70s. Those characteristics are part of a player's greatness.

[guy]

The 70s was an era in which you had 8 different champions in 10 years! The competition and parity was insane. A team that had a shot at winning it all, could easily lose in the first round. The journey to the championship was just much harder, especially with the casts that Kareem had for the latter half of the 70s.


That means absolutely nothing. If the Bulls didn't exist in the 90s, then there probably would've been 7-8 champions as well in that decade, but that obviously wouldn't make it a more competitive league.

[gengiskhan]

That means absolutely nothing. If the Bulls didn't exist in the 90s, then there probably would've been 7-8 champions as well in that decade, but that obviously wouldn't make it a more competitive league.

1990-1999 MINUS Bulls franchise

1990: Pistons NBA Champs
1991: Lakers NBA Champs (Magic becomes GOAT with 6 rings)
1992: Knicks NBA Champs (Ewing wins First FMVP)
1993:Knicks NBA Champs (Ewing wins 2nd FMVP)
1994: Rockets NBA Champs (Hakeem wins 1st FMVP)
1995: Rockets NBA Champs (Hakeem wins 1st FMVP)
1996: Sonics NBA Champs (Kemp wins FMVP & probably season MVP too)
1997: Jazz NBA Champs (Malone wins FMVP & season MVP)
1998: Pacers NBA Champs (Miller wins FMVP)
1999: Spurs NBA Champs

Thats 8 NEW Champs for '90s Decade!

[GreatGreg]

Jordan>KAJ>LeBron> Kobe

[GreatGreg]

ARE U SMOKE ???:wtf:
Perhaps he is smoke, what is your problem?

[kennethgriffin]

Jordan>KAJ>LeBron> Kobe


what exactly is your critera?

lebron ahead of kobe? right now ... yea.. but kobes career is vastly superior

only explination for your inclusion of lequeen is current rankings.

so i guess right now jordan and kareem are better than lebron and kobe in todays nba?

:oldlol: :lol :roll:


what a f*cking idiot

[GreatGreg]

what exactly is your critera?

lebron ahead of kobe? right now ... yea.. but kobes career is vastly superior

only explination for your inclusion of lequeen is current rankings.

so i guess right now jordan and kareem are better than lebron and kobe in todays nba?

:oldlol: :lol :roll:

Lmao, "vastly superior". Not 2 years from now, it won't be. :roll:

[kennethgriffin]

Lmao, "vastly superior". Not 2 years from now, it won't be. :roll:


so your rankings are based on hypothetical wishing prediction dreams

HYPOTHETICAL WISHING PREDICTION DREAM RANKINGS BRO


LEBRON WILL WIN MORE THAN 5 CHAMPIONSHIPS AND BECOME 4TH LEADING SCORER ALL TIME IN 2 YEARS

HYPOTHETICAL WISHING PREDICTION DREAM RANKINGS FUTURISTIC PROPHECIES BRO!

:lebroncry:

[La Frescobaldi]

That means absolutely nothing. If the Bulls didn't exist in the 90s, then there probably would've been 7-8 champions as well in that decade, but that obviously wouldn't make it a more competitive league.

I really don't understand that one.

How would the NBA be less competitive if a dynasty team disappeared?

You mean less competitive in terms of the rest of the world?

No question the 70s were the most competitive league... not necessarily the best teams, but the most competitive in the sense that... in many years a good half the league had a chance to go deep in the playoffs

[guy]

I really don't understand that one.

How would the NBA be less competitive if a dynasty team disappeared?

You mean less competitive in terms of the rest of the world?

No question the 70s were the most competitive league... not necessarily the best teams, but the most competitive in the sense that... in many years a good half the league had a chance to go deep in the playoffs

You're right. Competitive is the wrong word to use. I should've said that that doesn't mean the league is STRONGER. Fact is more teams sharing in the success or not doesn't mean the league is stronger or not. Arguments like that are constantly used here but its not logical. Its stupid cause its almost like that means the Bulls dynasty would've looked better if they lost a little more.

[DatAsh]

Kareem is probably in my top 4, but Russell, Jordan, and Johnson were all better in my opinion.

[inclinerator]

jabbar had another top 5 goat

[kNicKz]

http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa280/cashforcards/HYREHYT_zpsa7b58685.png


who you got?

I love how you don't mention Jordan retiring twice, yet list career accomplishments for both. You suck at trolling and should be embarrassed.

[CavaliersFTW]

Mount Rushmore:

Greatest Winner all-time ------------- Greatest Individual Talent all-time

Bill Russell ------- Kareem / MJ / Magic / Larry ---- Wilt Chamberlain

Bill Russell is at one extreme end of the spectrum, Wilt is at the other.

MJ / Kareem etc are all just some form of "in between" players. There is no right or wrong answer, it's all dependent on one's criteria that makes up what you consider "great" and peoples minds change constantly on the subject because it all boils down to nothing but someone's point of view.

But no matter how you look at it, Russell is the most dominant winner of all time, and Wilt is the most dominant individual player of all time. Everyone else is just something in between.

[red1]

Jordan>KAJ>LeBron> Kobe
this is correct. there are many players I would put in the gap before kobe but this is otherwise accurate

[La Frescobaldi]

You're right. Competitive is the wrong word to use. I should've said that that doesn't mean the league is STRONGER. Fact is more teams sharing in the success or not doesn't mean the league is stronger or not. Arguments like that are constantly used here but its not logical. Its stupid cause its almost like that means the Bulls dynasty would've looked better if they lost a little more.
Yeah that's my view too :cheers:

[willds09]

this is correct. there are many players I would put in the gap before kobe but this is otherwise accurate
It seem like u still bitter cuz Kobe scored 81 on u niggahz :roll:

[Cali Syndicate]

GOAT - MJ
I would draft - Kareem.

This

[dh144498]

KAJ

But MJ still has a strong case tho.. He's the closest player to Kobe that we've seen..

:roll:

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[kennethgriffin]

people saying "mj's goat, but i'd take kareem" are basically saying


"kareem is probably the best, but my favorite player is MJ"

:rolleyes:

[b1imtf]

people saying "mj's goat, but i'd take kareem" are basically saying


"kareem is probably the best, but my favorite player is MJ"

:rolleyes:
Wtf? No they aren't

[kennethgriffin]

Wtf? No they aren't


yes they are... if a player is better all time. youd rather have their career... agreed?

so if you could have one of eithers careers and you pick kareem. then kareem is GOAT

people are saying jordans the best but they dont want him are f*cking idiots

[Cali Syndicate]

people saying "mj's goat, but i'd take kareem" are basically saying


"kareem is probably the best, but my favorite player is MJ"

:rolleyes:

Nba goat is based on nba career.

Drafting is typically based on collegiate career.

Not hard to understand.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

yes they are... if a player is better all time. youd rather have their career... agreed?

so if you could have one of eithers careers and you pick kareem. then kareem is GOAT

people are saying jordans the best but they dont want him are f*cking idiots

I'd prefer building a team around David Robinson than I would Kobe. Does that mean he (DRob) is better on an all-time scale? :confusedshrug:

[kennethgriffin]

I'd prefer building a team around David Robinson than I would Kobe. Does that mean he (DRob) is better on an all-time scale? :confusedshrug:


but knowing that robinson had many great teams and couldnt get it done, then needing tim duncan to carry his a** to his first ring would be a clear sign that maybe you would rather take a chance on a guy who you know is going to bring titles to your city with minimal help ( a softy PF whos barely top 100 all time as your running mate )


Nba goat is based on nba career.

Drafting is typically based on collegiate career.

Not hard to understand.

see i guess i just assumed you people were drafting with future knowledge

if we're talking about just college or pre nba then ya sure you take kareem over MJ. infact... you take one of jordans north carolina team mates over him aswell... the guy who carried jordan to his ncaa title ... james worthy

but what the f*ck is the point in pretending we dont know how their careers unfolded?

then we're just arguing over dumb sh*t and saying guys like christian bumler or len dead bias are future hall of famers



how about this... knowing how both careers went... who do you draft? which career is worth more to a franchise

i say kareems. maybe even bill russells are better than michael hogdan mcquits a bunch

[GreatGreg]

^:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: ^

Omg Jeff, ban this fool already

[kennethgriffin]

^:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: ^

Omg Jeff, ban this fool already


why? because kareem had a better career? and i'm pointing it out


BAN THIS GUY! BLASPHEMER!!!!!!!!!! :lol

he who picks muslim evil tyrants over #23 baby jesus should be crucified ! :rant

[dh144498]

why? because kareem had a better career? and i'm pointing it out


BAN THIS GUY! BLASPHEMER!!!!!!!!!! :lol

he who picks muslim evil tyrants over #23 baby jesus should be crucified ! :rant

:roll:

:applause: :applause:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

but knowing that robinson had many great teams and couldnt get it done, then needing tim duncan to carry his a** to his first ring would be a clear sign that maybe you would rather take a chance on a guy who you know is going to bring titles to your city with minimal help ( a softy PF whos barely top 100 all time as your running mate

...And Kobe has been blessed w/ talent his ENTIRE career; better than anything Robinson had save for post-Duncan.

Matter of fact, Bean has NEVER won without an all-star caliber bigman. The irony. :oldlol:

[dh144498]

...And Kobe has been blessed w/ talent his ENTIRE career; better than anything Robinson had save for post-Duncan.

Matter of fact, Bean has NEVER won without an all-star caliber bigman. The irony. :oldlol:

cause he turned him into an all-star. :no:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

cause he turned him into an all-star. :no:

Shaq and Gasol were all-stars before playing with Kobe. Educate yourself son.

[dh144498]

Shaq and Gasol were all-stars before playing with Kobe. Educate yourself son.

pau was in 06, sure. then he wasn't in 07 or 08. Then suddenly when he started a full season with Kobe in 09, look at what happened? 3 straight all star appearances. :applause:

[Cali Syndicate]

but knowing that robinson had many great teams and couldnt get it done, then needing tim duncan to carry his a** to his first ring would be a clear sign that maybe you would rather take a chance on a guy who you know is going to bring titles to your city with minimal help ( a softy PF whos barely top 100 all time as your running mate )



see i guess i just assumed you people were drafting with future knowledge

if we're talking about just college or pre nba then ya sure you take kareem over MJ. infact... you take one of jordans north carolina team mates over him aswell... the guy who carried jordan to his ncaa title ... james worthy

but what the f*ck is the point in pretending we dont know how their careers unfolded?

then we're just arguing over dumb sh*t and saying guys like christian bumler or len dead bias are future hall of famers



how about this... knowing how both careers went... who do you draft? which career is worth more to a franchise

i say kareems. maybe even bill russells are better than michael hogdan mcquits a bunch

I don't get it. I'm drafting a player and his career will pan out exactly as it happened? Then I draft MJ. But then what's the point?

If I'm drafting as a GM, it's much easier to build around a great big man than a great perimeter player so I go Kareem. I wouldn't draft anyone ahead of Kareem actually.

And yes there are a number of players who IMO could easily be drafted ahead of MJ. Perimeter players alone, I would comfortably draft Magic, Bird and Oscar over MJ.

[Ne 1]

guy: Parity has to be considered when assessing championships. The same thing is done in other sports. Brady's rings>Montana's imo because he won in an era of parity. Montana won in an era where it was easier to maintain dynasties. Earnhardt's 7 championships in NASCAR>Petty's 7 imo because he won against much tougher competition. And so on for other sports.

"Rings as the best player" is not a strong argument for Jordan. I don't know why MJ fans dwell on that. We know if you swapped MJ and Kareem, Jordan would not have 6 and Kareem more than 3. Who would have more? That is debatable but l Jordan having less than he won and Kareem.having more than he won as the best player is pretty obvious. Jordan fans should argue how complete a player hewas, how he almost always raised his game in the finals, etc. because"rings as the best player" is a fictional category that is based on subjective factors and is irrelevant. As far as the 90s having more parity if not Jordan didnt play for the Bulls, that's probably true but put Kareem on those teams. He could have had been the centerpiece of one of the best frontlines in history Pippen/Kareem/Grant (best defensive team ever?!). Pippen would get everyone involved, benefit from Kareem's unselfish passing out of the post, the defense would be nuts, Kareem/Pippen would go really well together as a 1-2 punch too. That's an 8-10 peat waiting to happen in the water down 90s, especially since all Kareem has to worry about year after year is outplaying Ewing and Starks (a team even if Kareem got injured, Pippen could manage to beat by himself, and an inferior center like Hakeem beat with scrubs).

[The Choken One]

pau was in 06, sure. then he wasn't in 07 or 08. Then suddenly when he started a full season with Kobe in 09, look at what happened? 3 straight all star appearances. :applause:
That has much more to do with the change in market he experienced. Going from Memphis to LA is a gigantic difference. He finally got exposure, and therefore votes.

[dh144498]

That has much more to do with the change in market he experienced. Going from Memphis to LA is a gigantic difference. He finally got exposure, and therefore votes.

his level of play also went up too.

[Tking714]

I'm taking Shaq over both

[theBIGjabroni]

We'd all choose kaj over mj in a draft. Thats all that matters.

[gengiskhan]

...And Kobe has been blessed w/ talent his ENTIRE career; better than anything Robinson had save for post-Duncan.

Matter of fact, Bean has NEVER won without an all-star caliber bigman. The irony. :oldlol:

A reason why his father named him BEAN.

a BEANY BABY who needs BIG DADDY up front to win him rings. :lol :lol

[GreatGreg]

We'd all choose kaj over mj in a draft. Thats all that matters.
Just like we'd choose David Robinson in a draft over Kobrick. :confusedshrug:

MJ is the GOAT and will be for decades on end, deal with it, queer.

[knicksman]

If you're building a team from the ground up, Kareem is the guy you take. If you already have a disgustingly stacked team and want to sell tickets, than Magic is your guy.

magic is the man of their four championships and is debatable on their 1st championship. kareem is overrated. His team is nowhere until magic came to the lakers. For me, they are on equal level but kareem is already past his prime when he won his rings.

[daily]

Kareem. Always has been.

[guy]

guy: Parity has to be considered when assessing championships. The same thing is done in other sports. Brady's rings>Montana's imo because he won in an era of parity. Montana won in an era where it was easier to maintain dynasties. Earnhardt's 7 championships in NASCAR>Petty's 7 imo because he won against much tougher competition. And so on for other sports.

You don't seem to understand. Parity does not equal tougher competition. More teams sharing in the success doesn't mean it was a tougher era. All it means is that there wasn't one team that really set themselves apart from the rest. You can easily argue that the 90s Bulls faced tougher competition, but they were just that much better then everyone else and thats why they were that successful. Its not far-fetched at all that the 90s Bulls would've still won 6 titles if they played in the 70s.



"Rings as the best player" is not a strong argument for Jordan. I don't know why MJ fans dwell on that. We know if you swapped MJ and Kareem, Jordan would not have 6 and Kareem more than 3.

No we don't know that. Thats a ridiculous assumption to make.

Did you read my previous post?

Maybe I'm mistaken, and someone more knowledgeable correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't a significant criticism of Kareem about his leadership ability? I've heard people say he rarely ever inspired his teammates, bringing the best out of them, and wasn't even that passionate about the game for a part of his career, and that was basically a huge void that Magic ended up filling. I believe I read a very old quote a while ago from Kareem where he basically implied that he was only playing basketball for the money.

If this was the case, you can't just look at his career and point out his stats and the quality and performances of his teammates and say he shouldn't shoulder any blame for not winning more in the 70s. Those characteristics are part of a player's greatness.

Are you knowledgeable enough to be able to address the bolded? I'm asking because if someone who knows that much about Kareem can elaborate, that would be great. But if all of what I said is true, its very doubtful that Kareem with the Bulls win 6, maybe more then 3, but not 6, and with an equally talented team to what Kareem had but just built more around Jordan, its very possible that Jordan still wins 6. I mean, give Jordan what Rick Barry had, teams that were built more around a dominant wing but is considered about equally talented to what Kareem had, and there's a good chance he wins alot of those rings, and it isn't a decade with so many different champions.



Who would have more? That is debatable but l Jordan having less than he won and Kareem.having more than he won as the best player is pretty obvious. Jordan fans should argue how complete a player hewas, how he almost always raised his game in the finals, etc. because"rings as the best player" is a fictional category that is based on subjective factors and is irrelevant.

You're right, rings as the best player aren't the end all be all. But people refer to them because the results are evidence to the factors, like the ones you mentioned, that make up a player's greatness.



As far as the 90s having more parity if not Jordan didnt play for the Bulls, that's probably true but put Kareem on those teams. He could have had been the centerpiece of one of the best frontlines in history Pippen/Kareem/Grant (best defensive team ever?!). Pippen would get everyone involved, benefit from Kareem's unselfish passing out of the post, the defense would be nuts, Kareem/Pippen would go really well together as a 1-2 punch too.

You realize that the 90s Bulls as they were were arguably the greatest defensive team ever already right? You realize that EVERYONE did get involved in the dynasty?

You have no idea how the chemistry would've been. Everyone on the Bulls pushed each other and that started with Jordan and Pippen. They regularly got together at the crack of dawn and trained even before practices. This made them better. On the other hand, Kareem was said to be aloof and not personable even to the point that on plane rides home he would put on ear plugs, read a book, and not talk to anyone. Now, like I said, I don't know to what degree this was an issue with Kareem, so someone please elaborate. But if it was that bad, you can't just simply look at his big stats and excuse him just cause of the quality and performances of his teammates, and you have to take into account that he may not had as strong intangibles. So much of these factors are interconnected.



That's an 8-10 peat waiting to happen in the water down 90s, especially since all Kareem has to worry about year after year is outplaying Ewing and Starks (a team even if Kareem got injured, Pippen could manage to beat by himself, and an inferior center like Hakeem beat with scrubs).

:oldlol: The 90s were nowhere near as watered down as the early 70s, and the era in general isn't considered nearly as bad. You realize that right? The 70s was characterized as a selfish league with half the players on drugs, until Magic and Bird came along.

8-10 peat? :oldlol: Thats a ridiculous assumption to make. And Pippen never beat the Knicks by himself and Hakeem certainly didn't have scrubs on his team.

[Ne 1]

magic is the man of their four championships and is debatable on their 1st championship. kareem is overrated. His team is nowhere until magic came to the lakers. For me, they are on equal level but kareem is already past his prime when he won his rings.
:oldlol: Kareem was the man on the Lakers through the '86 season and Magic wasn't even close to being the man on the Lakers first championship. Heck, all the crap Kobe gets for not being the man during the Lakers 3peat, he was much closer to Shaq in 2001 and 2002 than Magic wad to Kareem in 1980.

[2010splash]

Jordan easily. He was never a coattail riding role player for any of his titles. He was always the clear #1 and carried a far greater load than Kareem. Kareem won titles scoring 4 points in the last games of the Finals and he's supposed to be better than Jordan? Please... only Lakers fans who like to overrate their own rank Kareem over Jordan.

[LongLiveTheKing]

A reason why his father named him BEAN.

a BEANY BABY who needs BIG DADDY up front to win him rings. :lol :lol
Terrible joke. Oh god.
:facepalm
:roll:

[TheMan]

Its Kareem and its not even close.
MJ or KAJ>>>Kobe

Deal wit it, ******

[Sarcastic]

:oldlol: Kareem was the man on the Lakers through the '86 season and Magic wasn't even close to being the man on the Lakers first championship. Heck, all the crap Kobe gets for not being the man during the Lakers 3peat, he was much closer to Shaq in 2001 and 2002 than Magic wad to Kareem in 1980.


So putting up 42/15/7 in game 6 as a rookie isn't being the man?

[knicksman]

:oldlol: Kareem was the man on the Lakers through the '86 season and Magic wasn't even close to being the man on the Lakers first championship. Heck, all the crap Kobe gets for not being the man during the Lakers 3peat, he was much closer to Shaq in 2001 and 2002 than Magic wad to Kareem in 1980.

LMAO only an idiot would think that a 20 ppg 3.6 apg is better than a 17 ppg 9 apg player in the playoffs in their 2nd championship run. Kareem is even outrebounded by magic despite the height difference. The only time kareem has an argument is during magics ROOKIE year. Theres a reason why theres a statue of magic but not kareem. Magic has even won with 14 ppg kareem. But of course youre a kobe fan so youre pushing kareem as the man just like kobe to be the man on those lakers team.

[Ne 1]

So putting up 42/15/7 in game 6 as a rookie isn't being the man?

:oldlol: Kareem was easily the MVP of that 1980 Finals series (Magic led L.A. to 1 win, Kareem was easily more valuable in the other 3, 3>1) and including the MVP of the playoffs, that was one of his best years. He won league MVP and he averaged 32/12/3 during the playoffs with nearly 4 blocks per game.

[Ne 1]

The only time kareem has an argument is during magics ROOKIE year.

No. During their years with the Lakers, this is who the best player was on the team:

1980 - Kareem
1981 - Kareem
1982 - Kareem
1983 - Kareem
1984- Magic/Kareem (1A/1B)
1985- Magic/Kareem (1A/1B) (Kareem at 38 was the best player on either team during the Finals...this includes Magic, Bird, Parish, McHale, Worthy. After being criticized in game 1, he dropped 29/10/6/2 on 61% over the next 5 games...Lakers came back and won 4 of next 5. I really have a tough time giving him #2 when he was the single most important reason Lakers beat their toughest competition and won the ring. Lakers could sleepwalk through the West, but when they finally encountered a legit contender he was playing at a level above anyone else on the floor.)
1986 - Magic
1987 - Magic
1988 - Magic
1989 - Magic


Kareem after 1980ish began playing around 30-33 minutes a game during the season, usually resting legs for the playoffs. Even after 1980, he had playoff lines of...27/17/4/3, 20/9/4/3, 27/8/3/4, 24/8/4/2, 22/8/4/2 up to 1985. He was the most important player for the Lakers in the half court, still the guy they would generally go to for a key basket in a game, the guy who created open looks on the perimeter in the half court, and also anchored their defense. I watch the games and see Kareem still picking up so much of the scoring load of the team all the way up to 1986, and really have a hard time putting him at #2. I think at worst it was 1A/1B all the way to 1985, and then it unquestionably became Magic's team (though even in '86 playoffs, when Kareem was 39, he averaged 26 ppg including torching Hakeem/Sampson a couple of times in the famous Rockets series).

[knicksman]

No. During their years with the Lakers, this is who the best player was on the team:

1980 - Kareem
1981 - Kareem
1982 - Kareem
1983 - Kareem
1984- Magic/Kareem (1A/1B)
1985- Magic/Kareem (1A/1B) (Kareem at 38 was the best player on either team during the Finals...this includes Magic, Bird, Parish, McHale, Worthy. After being criticized in game 1, he dropped 29/10/6/2 on 61% over the next 5 games...Lakers came back and won 4 of next 5. I really have a tough time giving him #2 when he was the single most important reason Lakers beat their toughest competition and won the ring. Lakers could sleepwalk through the West, but when they finally encountered a legit contender he was playing at a level above anyone else on the floor.)
1986 - Magic
1987 - Magic
1988 - Magic
1989 - Magic


Kareem after 1980ish began playing around 30-33 minutes a game during the season, usually resting legs for the playoffs. Even after 1980, he had playoff lines of...27/17/4/3, 20/9/4/3, 27/8/3/4, 24/8/4/2, 22/8/4/2 up to 1985. He was the most important player for the Lakers in the half court, still the guy they would generally go to for a key basket in a game, the guy who created open looks on the perimeter in the half court, and also anchored their defense. I watch the games and see Kareem still picking up so much of the scoring load of the team all the way up to 1986, and really have a hard time putting him at #2. I think at worst it was 1A/1B all the way to 1985, and then it unquestionably became Magic's team (though even in '86 playoffs, when Kareem was 39, he averaged 26 ppg including torching Hakeem/Sampson a couple of times in the famous Rockets series).

Dude i dont care whos the man during the times they didnt won the championship.. All i knew is magic posted better stats in the season and in the playoffs during the times they won a ring starting 1982. And of course youre a kobe fan who only cares about the last shot so you think that the player who shots the last shot is the most important player. Magic is not a scorer so why the fcuk he would be there go to scorer?Man please your IQ is embarrassing. Believing that last second is more important than first 48 mins. All I knew is lakers were nothing before magic. Kareem is clearly past his prime and not impactful as he was in his early years.

[knicksman]

if kobe was discredited for winning 3 rings with shaq, why is kareems credited?He won his mvps during his bucks years which only resulted to 1 ring. But I guess kobe stans have an agenda, to could elevate kobe's status as a top 5 player. LOL

[TheMan]

MJ

[KingBeasley08]

[QUOTE=Ne 1]He didn't have the great situation Jordan did for most of his prime. To argue "rings as the best player " you have to assume they had equal opportunities to win rings in their youth when this clearly was not the case. Jordan has a case over Kareem but "rings as the best player" is not a strong reason to argue him over Kareem. Let's be real: put Kareem on the Bulls from 1985-1998. How many "rings as the best player" does he win? He sure as hell would win more than 3.

The key when people look at Kareem's 6 rings and Jordan's 6 rings is that Kareem didn't even have a great team around him for his absolute prime years, whereas Jordan did. Still it doesn't matter, rings are rings and Kareem won 6 rings, 3 of them clearly as the best player, he remained the go-to guy until the 5th title. Statistically more dominant than Jordan. More valuable to his teams than Jordan (seriously 15-20 wins to 50+ wins? That's insane!). No one is matching Kareem's production over an entire decade either.

Seriously why do people cling to this "rings as the best player" bullshit? Even so Kareem was the best player for his first three and probably the fourth. Even for his fifth he averaged 22/7 as part of a balanced three-headed Magic/Kareem/Worthy attack. Only during his final championship year could he fairly be described as a "role player" and even then his presences alone was still huge along with his production being solid much like Duncan on the Spurs in recent years.

In terms of legacy if you want to use the faux category "rings as the best player" then you could say Jordan edges out Kareem, but that's only really because Kareem didn't get the casts or breaks he needed. It's definitely not because Jordan is the better player. I mean would anyone really take prime Jordan over prime Kareem, if you are starting off a team?

I consider Jordan a little "lucky" in the way/time his career was set up, when you look at the careers of Kareem, Wilt, Bird, Hakeem...you can see why. Kareem's legacy almost seems like it came down to that one game, where his teammates couldn