Losing with home court advantage (top 12 players of all time)

[Magic 32]

Bird = 7 (1980, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 1990, 1991) :eek:

Duncan = 6 (2001, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2012)

Kareem = 5 (1973, 1974, 1977, 1981, 1986)

Shaq = 5 (1994, 1995, 2004, 2005, 2010)

Wilt = 5 (1961, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1973)

Oscar = 4 (1962, 1965, 1973, 1974)

Magic = 4 (1981, 1986, 1990, 1996)

Lebron = 3 (2009, 2010, 2011)

Hakeem = 2 (1985, 1987)

Kobe = 2 (2004, 2011)

Russell = 1 (1958)

MJ = 0

[KyleKong]

This is a really cool and interesting stat. Damn Bird and Duncan, :lol .

[K Xerxes]

Now how many of those were (partly) down to the individuals in question just playing poorly?

You can't really blame LeBron in 09 (39-8-8) or Hakeem in 87 (31-13-4). Just two examples.

What about the others?

[Magic 32]

Now how many of those were (partly) down to the individuals in question just playing poorly?

You can't really blame LeBron in 09 (39-8-8) or Hakeem in 87 (31-13-4). Just two examples.

What about the others?

That a great discussion. Have at it.

Can't blame Duncan for 2006 as well.

[TheMarkMadsen]

MJ goatin it up as always

[G-Funk]

nice

[kennethgriffin]

Now how many of those were (partly) down to the individuals in question just playing poorly?

You can't really blame LeBron in 09 (39-8-8) or Hakeem in 87 (31-13-4). Just two examples.

What about the others?


lebron went away from what was working all year. forced his stat padding and took everyone out of the game.. standing around looking for kick out assists

when kobe trys to do too much and has great stats but loses. its his fault for hogging

when lebron does it. its not his fault.


go figure :lol

[Magic 32]

lebron went away from what was working all year. forced his stat padding and took everyone out of the game.. standing around looking for kick out assists

when kobe trys to do too much and has great stats but loses. its his fault for hogging

when lebron does it. its not his fault.


go figure :lol

Not a completely unfair assessment (close though).

Lebron shooting a lot definitely didn't work for that team.

http://oi41.tinypic.com/2w34y9d.jpg

[tpols]

IDK about Bird but Duncan never take flack for losses, they get the oh hes such a great teammate! praise when they lose, and OMG 2003! when they win.


Its no surprise the greatest winners, and players with the strongest will MJ and Russel top this list.. if the ball was in their court, they got it done.

[blood yes]

And then they say Larry Bird is better than LeBron, LMFAO.

Jordan>Kobe>LeBron>>>>>>>Larry Bird

THis is no disrespect to bird, he was a great player, but this shows it

[kennethgriffin]

the reason nobody hates on tim duncan is because nobody cares about tim duncan



nobody cares.


hes a nobody. never was important to basketball. flew under the radar his whole career. had no fans. no pressure. no impact

not legendary.

good team mate. great player... but not on the level of a shaq, hakeem, kobe, or even lebron

[NumberSix]

Now how many of those were (partly) down to the individuals in question just playing poorly?

You can't really blame LeBron in 09 (39-8-8) or Hakeem in 87 (31-13-4). Just two examples.

What about the others?
Fcuk are you talking about. How can a team possibly lose if their best player plays well?:confusedshrug:

[Magic 32]

And then they say Larry Bird is better than LeBron, LMFAO.

Jordan>Kobe>LeBron>>>>>>>Larry Bird

THis is no disrespect to bird, he was a great player, but this shows it

It is kind of shocking.

But Bird played in a super competitive eastern conference and was in the mix his entire career. The very early years and the later injuries should be part of the jugement.

[KG215]

the reason nobody hates on tim duncan is because nobody cares about tim duncan



nobody cares.


hes a nobody. never was important to basketball. flew under the radar his whole career. had no fans. no pressure. no impact

not legendary.

good team mate. great player... but not on the level of a shaq, hakeem, kobe, or even lebron
You're a special kind of stupid.

[Hoopz2332]

Interesting stat:coleman:

[TheBigVeto]

This is a really cool and interesting stat. Damn Bird and Duncan, :lol .

To be fair to them, they also had to deal with David Stern. He hated them. So home court advantage didn't really mean anything. They were playing 5 vs 9.

[jzek]

Only the 657,258,258 reason why MJ is the unanimous GOAT.

[Young X]

Jordan's Bulls: 24-0 with homecourt and 5 series won without homecourt

That's my GOAT :(

[Magic 32]

To be fair to them, they also had to deal with David Stern. He hated them. So home court advantage didn't really mean anything. They were playing 5 vs 9.

Yes, David Stern is the reason Bird was swept by the Bucks in 83. :hammerhead:

[Droid101]

Jordan's Bulls: 24-0 with homecourt and 5 series won without homecourt

That's my GOAT :(
Also, if I'm not mistaken, never lost a game in the first round on his six championship runs.

[Marchesk]

the reason nobody hates on tim duncan is because nobody cares about tim duncan



nobody cares.


hes a nobody. never was important to basketball. flew under the radar his whole career. had no fans. no pressure. no impact

not legendary.

good team mate. great player... but not on the level of a shaq, hakeem, kobe, or even lebron

And yet we're all taking Duncan over Kobe to start our franchise with.

[kennethgriffin]

And yet we're all taking Duncan over Kobe to start our franchise with.


i would to

but that doesnt make him the better player. just a more rare position to be great at

big men have to be drafted first in a fantasy all time draft because the gap between a legendary big and the average big is much greater than the gap between a legendary guard and the average guard



how many centers can put up 20ppg... hardly any

how many guards can put up 20ppg... millions


because guards are generally more skilled and tallented. they grew up learning how to play the game

while bigs are mostly made up of guys who didn't give a sh*t about basketball and were pushed into it to make a living



if i take kobe and have to wait till round 2 to take a center after 29 other teams draft. i'm gonna have to select a guy like neil johnston, jack sikma, or clyde lovelette


but if i take shaq, duncan, hakeem, kareem wilt or russell

then by round 2 i'l still have a guy like earl monroe or clyde drexler to select




and a team of drexler/kareem will beat kobe/sikma


so it has nothing to do with duncan being better. you select a big because theyre not as great as guards for the most part

[rmt]

and a team of drexler/kareem will beat kobe/sikma

so it has nothing to do with duncan being better. you select a big because theyre not as great as guards for the most part

Huh?

Maybe it's because bigs impact the game more than guards. That's why the top 20 is dominated by bigs over the other 3 positions.

[JimmyMcAdocious]

12 seems like an arbitrary number. I'm guess you have LeBron at 12 and you wanted to include him?

Random, but interesting stat.

[Magic 32]

12 seems like an arbitrary number. I'm guess you have LeBron at 12 and you wanted to include him?

Random, but interesting stat.

Just couldn't decide who was number 13, 14 and 15 (Moses, West, Dr. J, Baylor, Dirk.......)

And for the record.

1. MJ (greatest player)
2. Russell (greatest winner)
3. Wilt (greatest individual force)
4. Kareem (greatest longevity)
5. Magic (greatest playermaker)
6. Bird (greatest mind)

7. Kobe (greatest player part 2)
8. Duncan (greatest winner part 2)
9. Shaq (greatest individual force part 2)
10 Hakeem (greatest longevity part 2)
11. Lebron (greatest playermaker part 2)
12. Oscar (greatest mind part 2)

One way of doing it anyway.

[KG215]

you select a big because theyre not as great as guards for the most part


You're a special kind of stupid.

...

[zoom17]

Bird = 7 (1980, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 1990, 1991) :eek:

Duncan = 6 (2001, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2012)

Shaq = 5 (1994, 1995, 2004, 2005, 2010)

Wilt = 5 (1961, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1973)

Kareem = 4 (1973, 1974, 1977, 1981)

Oscar = 4 (1962, 1965, 1973, 1974)

Lebron = 3 (2009, 2010, 2011)

Magic = 3 (1981, 1990, 1996)

Hakeem = 2 (1985, 1987)

Kobe = 2 (2004, 2011)

Russell = 1 (1958)

MJ = 0

:biggums: dang bird

[zoom17]

And then they say Larry Bird is better than LeBron, LMFAO.

Jordan>Lebron>Bird>>>>>>>Kobe

THis is no disrespect to bird, he was a great player, but this shows it

fixed

[jlip]

Russell = 1 (1958)



Russell didn't lose that series. He got injured and couldn't finish it. He missed 2 1/2 games of a 6 game series.

[Magic 32]

Russell didn't lose that series. He got injured and couldn't finish it. He missed 2 1/2 games of a 6 game series.

Didn't know that :applause:

Still going to keep as it is, just because of what he said about Wilt not playing at the end of game 7 :pimp:

[andgar923]

How many times did MJ have home court advantage tho?

[Magic 32]

How many times did MJ have home court advantage tho?

24 times.

[andgar923]

24 times.


GOAT gonna GOAT

[SamuraiSWISH]

MJ goatin it up as always:pimp:

[kennethgriffin]

Huh?

Maybe it's because bigs impact the game more than guards. That's why the top 20 is dominated by bigs over the other 3 positions.


ya.. bigs are the difference maker because theres so very few great ones

like i said..


you select a big because theyre not as great as guards for the most part

if a team has a great center. they have an advantage over most teams because theres very few of them


you usually need to pare a great outside player with a great inside player to win


so the few lucky teams to get one of those rare bigs will have that championship level advantage


thats why theres so many bigs in the top 20

but if you noticed... all of those bigs had great players to help them


just like most of those non bigs had bigs to help them. it goes both ways



its that combo that you need to make in order to win. so thats why you select a big first.





ofcourse the team with shaq is gonna win. ofcourse the team with kareem is gonna win... ofcourse the team with russell is gonna win

they had kobe/magic/cousy... and while many other teams in the league had great wings ...no other team ( or maybe 1 ) had anyone comparable to shaq/kareem or russell


its not that theyre better. they just get to take advantage of the other teams scrubs more often than any other position

kobe had to go up against legends every other game. shaq had to go up against todd mcculloughs

[KG215]

ya.. bigs are the difference maker because theres so very few great ones

like i said..



if a team has a great center. they have an advantage over most teams because theres very few of them


you usually need to pare a great outside player with a great inside player to win


so the few lucky teams to get one of those rare bigs will have that championship level advantage


thats why theres so many bigs in the top 20

but if you noticed... all of those bigs had great players to help them


just like most of those non bigs had bigs to help them. it goes both ways



its that combo that you need to make in order to win. so thats why you select a big first.





ofcourse the team with shaq is gonna win. ofcourse the team with kareem is gonna win... ofcourse the team with russell is gonna win

they had kobe/magic/cousy... and while many other teams in the league had great wings ...no other team ( or maybe 1 ) had anyone comparable to shaq/kareem or russell


its not that theyre better. they just get to take advantage of the other teams scrubs more often than any other position

kobe had to go up against legends every other game. shaq had to go up against todd mcculloughs
There's so many holes and flaws in your logic...as always.

[jlip]

Also, if I'm not mistaken, never lost a game in the first round on his six championship runs.

Every champion from 1985- 1998 swept the first round other than Hakeem's Rockets.

[SamuraiSWISH]

1. MJ (greatest player)
2. Russell (greatest winner)
3. Wilt (greatest individual force)
4. Kareem (greatest longevity)
5. Magic (greatest playermaker)
6. Bird (greatest mind)

7. Kobe (greatest player part 2)
8. Duncan (greatest winner part 2)
9. Shaq (greatest individual force part 2)
10 Hakeem (greatest longevity part 2)
11. Lebron (greatest playermaker part 2)
I can be down with this assessment

:applause:

[TheMarkMadsen]

Just couldn't decide who was number 13, 14 and 15 (Moses, West, Dr. J, Baylor, Dirk.......)

And for the record.

1. MJ (greatest player)
2. Russell (greatest winner)
3. Wilt (greatest individual force)
4. Kareem (greatest longevity)
5. Magic (greatest playermaker)
6. Bird (greatest mind)

7. Kobe (greatest player part 2)
8. Duncan (greatest winner part 2)
9. Shaq (greatest individual force part 2)
10 Hakeem (greatest longevity part 2)
11. Lebron (greatest playermaker part 2)
12. Oscar (greatest mind part 2)

One way of doing it anyway.

Good list. I have Kobe at 6. Although having Duncan as greatest winner over Kobe , Kareem & Magic? Eh idk but an arguement can definitely be made

[kennethgriffin]

There's so many holes and flaws in your logic...as always.


no.. its a fact that the gap between average centers and great centers is way bigger than average guards/forwards compared to great guards/forwards


if you dont have a center averaging 20/10.. 90% of the time your lucky just to have a big man who can get you 10/8

but when you dont have a great guard/forward averaging 25/5 for you. you can atleast depend on an average good guard/forward to get you 18/4


and 2 way players ( offense/defense ) is much more common in guards/forwards


its even more rare to find a center thats great at both sides of the floor

if your lucky to even find a guy whos great at defense. you give that big man a huge contract even if he cant average over 10ppg

like larry sanders is about it get

[KG215]

no.. its a fact that the gap between average centers and great centers is way bigger than average guards/forwards compared to great guards/forwards


if you dont have a center averaging 20/10.. 90% of the time your lucky just to have a big man who can get you 10/8

but when you dont have a great guard/forward averaging 25/5 for you. you can atleast depend on an average good guard/forward to get you 18/4


and 2 way players ( offense/defense ) is much more common in guards/forwards


its even more rare to find a center thats great at both sides of the floor

if your lucky to even find a guy whos great at defense. you give that big man a huge contract even if he cant average over 10ppg

like larry sanders is about it get
I don't care how many different ways you try to explain it, the entire premise behind your line of thought is still severely flawed. Of course that's nothing new when it comes to your posts, yet you always post the same general things over and over, like you believe you're educating people, when in all reality 99.9% of what you post isn't worth reading.

And yes, I've wasted too much time reading your posts.

[tpols]

I don't care how many different ways you try to explain it, the entire premise behind your line of thought is still severely flawed. Of course that's nothing new when it comes to your posts, yet you always post the same general things over and over, like you believe you're educating people, when in all reality 99.9% of what you post isn't worth reading.

And yes, I've wasted too much time reading your posts.
Well, when talking about people saying who theyd take in a draft right now, hes kind of right.

Good bigs in this league are far more scarce than good perimeter players.

If you have to choose between prime Chris Webber and prime Tmac you probably take webber. Because he can cause far more matchup problems. If tmac sees lebron in the finals hell probably get outplayed. If Webber sees Bosh in his current form he probably spanks him and gives his team a big differential there that needs to be made up elsewhere.

[fpliii]

Well, when talking about people saying who theyd take in a draft right now, hes kind of right.

Good bigs in this league are far more scarce than good perimeter players.

If you have to choose between prime Chris Webber and prime Tmac you probably take webber. Because he can cause far more matchup problems. If tmac sees lebron in the finals hell probably get outplayed. If Webber sees Bosh in his current form he probably spanks him and gives his team a big differential there that needs to be made up elsewhere.

I don't know about KG, but I agree with that. This part:


you select a big because theyre not as great as guards for the most part

I have a problem with in griff's post.

[KG215]

Well, when talking about people saying who theyd take in a draft right now, hes kind of right.

Good bigs in this league are far more scarce than good perimeter players.

If you have to choose between prime Chris Webber and prime Tmac you probably take webber. Because he can cause far more matchup problems. If tmac sees lebron in the finals hell probably get outplayed. If Webber sees Bosh in his current form he probably spanks him and gives his team a big differential there that needs to be made up elsewhere.
I don't necessarily disagree with that, but the majority of the greatest players in history are big men. I just don't agree with his premise of it being because there's fewer great big men, or the gap between a great center/big is bigger than the gap between a great guard/wing.

The great big men are inherently better and more impactful because their size allows them to impact the game to a greater degree on the defensive end, and the great bigs are/were also very good to great offensive players.



you select a big because theyre not as great as guards for the most part
And like fpliii said, that's the part that I really have a problem with.

[tpols]

I don't know about KG, but I agree with that. This part:



I have a problem with in griff's post.
Yea I took that part as 'guards are more skilled, well rounded basketball players'.. like he said earlier, a 6'5 guy is no lock to come close to the professional ranks.. he has to have great handles, shooting, passing, defense.. hes got to be a complete basketball player.

But if you're 6'11 and can run in a straight line/jump/ etc. you pretty much dont have to work as hard to make it. Centers nowadays cant shoot, have weak post moves, dont know how to control an offense on the block, all they do is defend, rebound, and throw up a few simple offensive moves.. for the most part, guards are more impressive basketball players.. that happen to be shorter and less impactful than big men who can change the game in more ways directly due to their height.

if that makes sense lol

[fpliii]

Yea I took that part as 'guards are more skilled, well rounded basketball players'.. like he said earlier, a 6'5 guy is no lock to come close to the professional ranks.. he has to have great handles, shooting, passing, defense.. hes got to be a complete basketball player.

But if you're 6'11 and can run in a straight line/jump/ etc. you pretty much dont have to work as hard to make it. Centers nowadays cant shoot, have weak post moves, dont know how to control an offense on the block, all they do is defend, rebound, and throw up a few simple offensive moves.. for the most part, guards are more impressive basketball players.. that happen to be shorter and less impactful than big men who can change the game in more ways directly due to their height.

if that makes sense lol

Eh, a lot of great wings have been sieves defensively. I agree the path is easier for a seven footer, but you can't teach size. The size advantage (which helps on defense obviously, particularly in paint protection, as well as with rebounding) is a huge part of it. Non-bigs obviously have the ability to be more impactful on offense due to ball-handling.

I do think from an aesthetic POV the bolded is true (though obviously your Hakeems are the exceptions), since the best points and wings are generally incredibly skilled (and have a sense of flair). But it can't make up the size/presence disadvantage. That's just my opinion though (but I think it's pretty sound/logical).

[ProfessorMurder]

I like how every body has taken this as a shit on Bird party.

3 of those series were after his back problems started, the team was ancient, and they lost 2 of those three to the f*cking Bad Boys. It's not like they got rolled by the current Bobcats. The other was a Knicks team with prime Ewing.

3 more of the series they lost to Philadelphia. If you're thinking Philadelphia wasn't an awesome team you're retarded. From 77-85 Philadelphia was in the ECF or finals 7 times. 7. They had great players, Mo Cheeks, Andrew Toney, Dawkins, Dr. J, and Moses. Andrew Toney was unbelievable for a stretch.

The only series that was bad was losing to the Bucks.

I believe Philly or Detroit would've won at least another title in their runs if Boston didn't tire them out before the championship.

[kennethgriffin]

I don't know about KG, but I agree with that. This part:



I have a problem with in griff's post.


maybe i worded it wrong

people assume i'm saying a guard/forward PERIOD is better than a center PERIOD

when infact when i say "for the most part" i'm trying to say theres more great non big men out there

like in the league today.. theres maybe 2-3 great bigs

but theres like 30 great non bigs

and even 10-13 years ago.. when shaq was dominating.. who were the centers he faced in the finals

rick smits at the end of his career
dekembe mutombo at the end of his career
todd macculloch?

who did the bulls face in the finals? gregg ostertag, sam perkins, oliver miller, buck williams and vlade divac

and people were all like "jordan didnt have a great center!"

yea niether did any of the other contending teams at the time... cept for hakeems rockets who only showed up in jordans off years for some reason

:lol

[KG215]

I like how every body has taken this as a shit on Bird party.

3 of those series were after his back problems started, the team was ancient, and they lost 2 of those three to the f*cking Bad Boys. It's not like they got rolled by the current Bobcats. The other was a Knicks team with prime Ewing.

3 more of the series they lost to Philadelphia. If you're thinking Philadelphia wasn't an awesome team you're retarded. From 77-85 Philadelphia was in the ECF or finals 7 times. 7. They had great players, Mo Cheeks, Andrew Toney, Dawkins, Dr. J, and Moses. Andrew Toney was unbelievable for a stretch.

The only series that was bad was losing to the Bucks.

I believe Philly or Detroit would've won at least another title in their runs if Boston didn't tire them out before the championship.
Good points. And I'm sure you could find similar instances for other players on the OP's list. As is the case the majority of the time, you can't just take things like this at face value. You have to put them into context.

[fpliii]

maybe i worded it wrong

people assume i'm saying a guard/forward PERIOD is better than a center PERIOD

when infact when i say "for the most part" i'm trying to say theres more great non big men out there

like in the league today.. theres maybe 2-3 great bigs

but theres like 30 great non bigs

and even 10-13 years ago.. when shaq was dominating.. who were the centers he faced in the finals

rick smits at the end of his career
dekembe mutombo at the end of his career
todd macculloch?

the bulls faced gregg ostertag, sam perkins, oliver miller, buck williams and vlade divac

and people were all like "jordan didnt have a great center!"

yea niether did any of the other contending teams at the time

:lol

Dude you're cherry-picking here. The Bulls are the exception to the rule (the current Heat are like that as well, as were the West/Baylor Lakers), and Shaq played in one of the weaker eras for centers. But you know very well that you don't always face the best team in the Finals, and the Spurs had two of the best big men in league history. The Bulls went up against Ewing and Shaq in the playoffs (and Malone twice in the Finals if he counts), even though it wasn't in the Finals (put Jordan/Pippen in the 80s and they might not win a single championship without a great big). BTW Deke was DPOY that season (Shaq abused him but he was just on another level).

Given a great big and a great non-big, I'll take the big. Given a good big and a good non-big, I'll take the big. Given an average big and an average non-big, I'll take the big. Hell, even if we're talking scrubs give me the big and he can at least be a body in the paint.

[KG215]

maybe i worded it wrong

people assume i'm saying a guard/forward PERIOD is better than a center PERIOD

when infact when i say "for the most part" i'm trying to say theres more great non big men out there

like in the league today.. theres maybe 2-3 great bigs

but theres like 30 great non bigs
First off, there's not 30 "great" non bigs in the NBA right now. That is unless you've got a very loose definition of the word great.

Secondly, the last 10 or so years is generally regarded as the weakest era for big men ever, even though there's been some great non-center bigs like Duncan, KG, and Dirk.



who did the bulls face in the finals? gregg ostertag, sam perkins, oliver miller, buck williams and vlade divac

and people were all like "jordan didnt have a great center!"

yea niether did any of the other contending teams at the time... cept for hakeems rockets who only showed up in jordans off years for some reason

:lol
And just about every single word of this is wrong. Almost every other contender in Jordan's era had an all-time level great big man. Even if you're just breaking it down to centers, the Knicks (Ewing), Magic (Shaq), Rockets (Hakeem), and Spurs (Robinson) were contenders in Jordan's era.

[ProfessorMurder]

Good points. And I'm sure you could find similar instances for other players on the OP's list. As is the case the majority of the time, you can't just take things like this at face value. You have to put them into context.

Exactly, context is everything.

[ProfessorMurder]

Also, Bird had no McHale in 1980.

I decided to do a couple more.

Duncan -

01 - Lost to prime Shaq during threepeat
04 - Lost to Lakers super team, a young Manu/TP were the help
06 - Lost to the Mavs who should've won the championship
09 - They were pretty old, lost to the Mavs again
11 - Manu's broken arm against Memphis
12 - Lost to OKC

I'd give them a pass for 01, 04, and 06 for sure. The other three times they were beaten by youth. Even if they beat Memphis they'd lose to someone else.

2012 is probably the only year I'd say they f*cked up.

Shaq
94 - Second year with nobody good around him, Pacers had vets
95 - Hakeem's rockets were the better team
04 - Detroit was the better team, Kobe chucked, Detroit went on a run of 7 ECFs
05 - Detroit again
10 - Old fat Shaq beaten by the very good Celtics

Shaq was beaten with good team work so you can't really blame him for the losses against better teams. I wouldn't blame Shaq specifically for any of those years. If you want someone to blame, blame Kobe in 04 and LeBron in 10.

Hakeem
85 - lost as a rookie on a weaker team to a slightly better Jazz team
87 - lost as a 3rd year player with a pretty weak team to a stronger Sonics team

The 2nd best guy was Ralph Sampson, then and old Cornbread Maxwell in 87.

Neither were Hakeem's fault.


------

Face it, home court doesn't mean you have a better team. Basketball is all match ups, and regular season strength of schedule can totally skew seeding. The better teams usually win regardless of home court.

[BoutPractice]

The first thing those stats show, of course, is that Bird and Duncan very often had homecourt advantage... meaning their teams won a lot.

[jlip]

The first thing those stats show, of course, is that Bird and Duncan very often had homecourt advantage... meaning their teams won a lot.

Yep. I think Bird's Celtics averaged 60 wins per season from '80-'88.

[9erempiree]

The first thing those stats show, of course, is that Bird and Duncan very often had homecourt advantage... meaning their teams won a lot.

and they lost a lot too. Those stats show a lot of years but it shows losses.

I'm sure Kobe and MJ had way more than zero or 2 series where they had home court, you just don't see it because they hardly lost and both their teams have won a lot of games too.

[Overdrive]

I don't care how many different ways you try to explain it, the entire premise behind your line of thought is still severely flawed. Of course that's nothing new when it comes to your posts, yet you always post the same general things over and over, like you believe you're educating people, when in all reality 99.9% of what you post isn't worth reading.

And yes, I've wasted too much time reading your posts.

His premise is true actually, the problem kicks When he spins his own argument to make. Kobe greater.

If the average C is a scrub and the avg G is useful great Centers are greater.

Average natriumchlorid is useful, great salt is just a little bit more useful. Average carbon is less useful than salt, yet diamonds...


BTW the only time Kobe's team solely depended on him he didn't have HCA.

[sportjames23]

Dat MJ doe. :bowdown:

[Magic 32]

Also, Bird had no McHale in 1980.

I decided to do a couple more.

Duncan -

01 - Lost to prime Shaq during threepeat
04 - Lost to Lakers super team, a young Manu/TP were the help
06 - Lost to the Mavs who should've won the championship
09 - They were pretty old, lost to the Mavs again
11 - Manu's broken arm against Memphis
12 - Lost to OKC

I'd give them a pass for 01, 04, and 06 for sure. The other three times they were beaten by youth. Even if they beat Memphis they'd lose to someone else.

2012 is probably the only year I'd say they f*cked up.

Shaq
94 - Second year with nobody good around him, Pacers had vets
95 - Hakeem's rockets were the better team
04 - Detroit was the better team, Kobe chucked, Detroit went on a run of 7 ECFs
05 - Detroit again
10 - Old fat Shaq beaten by the very good Celtics

Shaq was beaten with good team work so you can't really blame him for the losses against better teams. I wouldn't blame Shaq specifically for any of those years. If you want someone to blame, blame Kobe in 04 and LeBron in 10.

Hakeem
85 - lost as a rookie on a weaker team to a slightly better Jazz team
87 - lost as a 3rd year player with a pretty weak team to a stronger Sonics team

The 2nd best guy was Ralph Sampson, then and old Cornbread Maxwell in 87.

Neither were Hakeem's fault.


------

Face it, home court doesn't mean you have a better team. Basketball is all match ups, and regular season strength of schedule can totally skew seeding. The better teams usually win regardless of home court.


I wonder if Kobe or Lebron would get that many "breaks" from NBA fans.

Just to show that you can play devil's advocate on some of these....

Tim Duncan

01 - Didn't show up in the second half of game 2. Didn't show up for game 3 at all (when Robinson finally did).
04 - Lost to Lakers super team, but the Pistons made it look easy. Lost 4 straight games while shooting below 40% in 3 of those games.
09 - They were pretty old (but apparently not too old, because the core made to the finals 4 years later).
11 - Losing to an 8 seed is bad, period
12 - Lost to OKC. Again, had a 2-0 lead.

[Sarcastic]

Also, Bird had no McHale in 1980.

I decided to do a couple more.

Duncan -

01 - Lost to prime Shaq during threepeat
04 - Lost to Lakers super team, a young Manu/TP were the help
06 - Lost to the Mavs who should've won the championship
09 - They were pretty old, lost to the Mavs again
11 - Manu's broken arm against Memphis
12 - Lost to OKC

I'd give them a pass for 01, 04, and 06 for sure. The other three times they were beaten by youth. Even if they beat Memphis they'd lose to someone else.




How were the Spurs "old" in 09, but good enough to make the finals this year?

Duncan also never was able to repeat as champion, which is a flaw in his resume. Most of the other players in the top 10 were able to defend their titles, with Wilt being the exception but he played in the Russell era which is his excuse and he has outstanding stats.

[Doranku]

Damn. Bron with the 3peat. :roll:

[SamuraiSWISH]

How were the Spurs "old" in 09, but good enough to make the finals this year?
Built in excuses for Timmy.

:oldlol:

[K Xerxes]

How were the Spurs "old" in 09, but good enough to make the finals this year?

Duncan also never was able to repeat as champion, which is a flaw in his resume. Most of the other players in the top 10 were able to defend their titles, with Wilt being the exception but he played in the Russell era which is his excuse and he has outstanding stats.

I'm with you on the excuses for Duncan in the past few years, but Bird didn't repeat either. Not to mention that Kareem only repeated when he was 39/40 and very much a role player behind Magic, Worthy and Scott. He never repeated as 'the man'.

[tpols]

Also, Bird had no McHale in 1980.

I decided to do a couple more.

Duncan -

01 - Lost to prime Shaq during threepeat
04 - Lost to Lakers super team, a young Manu/TP were the help
06 - Lost to the Mavs who should've won the championship
09 - They were pretty old, lost to the Mavs again
11 - Manu's broken arm against Memphis
12 - Lost to OKC

I'd give them a pass for 01, 04, and 06 for sure. The other three times they were beaten by youth. Even if they beat Memphis they'd lose to someone else.

2012 is probably the only year I'd say they f*cked up.

Shaq
94 - Second year with nobody good around him, Pacers had vets
95 - Hakeem's rockets were the better team
04 - Detroit was the better team, Kobe chucked, Detroit went on a run of 7 ECFs
05 - Detroit again
10 - Old fat Shaq beaten by the very good Celtics

Shaq was beaten with good team work so you can't really blame him for the losses against better teams. I wouldn't blame Shaq specifically for any of those years. If you want someone to blame, blame Kobe in 04 and LeBron in 10.

Hakeem
85 - lost as a rookie on a weaker team to a slightly better Jazz team
87 - lost as a 3rd year player with a pretty weak team to a stronger Sonics team

The 2nd best guy was Ralph Sampson, then and old Cornbread Maxwell in 87.

Neither were Hakeem's fault.


------

Face it, home court doesn't mean you have a better team. Basketball is all match ups, and regular season strength of schedule can totally skew seeding. The better teams usually win regardless of home court.
Looks like a giant list of excuses...

[guy]

Bird = 7 (1980, 1982, 1983, 1985, 1988, 1990, 1991) :eek:

Duncan = 6 (2001, 2004, 2006, 2009, 2011, 2012)

Shaq = 5 (1994, 1995, 2004, 2005, 2010)

Wilt = 5 (1961, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1973)

Kareem = 4 (1973, 1974, 1977, 1981)

Oscar = 4 (1962, 1965, 1973, 1974)

Lebron = 3 (2009, 2010, 2011)

Magic = 3 (1981, 1990, 1996)

Hakeem = 2 (1985, 1987)

Kobe = 2 (2004, 2011)

Russell = 1 (1958)

MJ = 0

You forgot 1986 for Magic and Kareem.

[guy]

IDK about Bird but Duncan never take flack for losses, they get the oh hes such a great teammate! praise when they lose, and OMG 2003! when they win.


Its no surprise the greatest winners, and players with the strongest will MJ and Russel top this list.. if the ball was in their court, they got it done.

I don't hear anyone praise Duncan when he loses. Duncan doesn't take much flack, because no one gives a sh*t about him. He's almost always put on the bottom end of the top 10, and no one ever says he's arguably the GOAT or close to it.

[Magic 32]

You forgot 1986 for Magic and Kareem.

fixed :cheers:

[ILLsmak]

if you have Kobe over Shaq on your goat list you're ****ing up.

-Smak