Do people often say MJ is the GOAT just to avoid being ostracized?

[atljonesbro]

I'm curious to how many people who say MJ is the GOAT only says that because it's perceived as "common knowledge" that he's the GOAT and they may be perceived as "dumb" or "lacking basketball knowledge". You can absolutely make cases over MJ, it's not some sure fire thing he's the GOAT and I'm sure people believe players besides MJ are greater, but they won't say it so they don't "look dumb".

[magnax1]

No, its pretty much a sure fire thing for the foreseeable future

[To4]

Not really. If you watched him play, know his mindset, the hunger and tenacity, the skill, global impact, everything... You know he is GOAT.

[SouBeachTalents]

No, they say it because between stats, championships, personal accolades etc, he has the best argument out of any other player

[NumberSix]

It's hilarious when people try to tell John Salley that Jordan is the best player of all time.

[Asukal]

Maybe we should start saying LBJ is the GOAT and that we are witnesses. :rolleyes:

[moe94]

You can make arguments for KAJ based on career resume, which is as good as Jordan's. You could say Russell if you're really high on rangz. Wilt if you're into statistical domination. When it really comes down to it, though, Jordan has the best case. Run through the accolades and stats if you must. There really is no other answer.

inb4 Nike Koolaid deluded the masses

nah, he's just the GOAT. Deal with it.

[Legends66NBA7]

I doubt many people have serious argument in real life about who the basketball GOAT is.

If it's here, lot of things back up Jordan. How can it be dumb if there are facts that back his stance ?

[atljonesbro]

Maybe we should start saying LBJ is the GOAT and that we are witnesses. :rolleyes:
How insecure are you? This thread has nothing to do with LeBron.

[Roundball_Rock]

It largely is a function of marketing. If you have a campaign where one candidate spends $10 million, another spends $1 million, the third spends $250,000 and the fourth spends $100,000 the guy with the $10 million budget will win via repetition. People have come from nowhere to win major elections via outspending opponents by massive margins. You only hear of MJ's case for GOAT in the media. You don't hear Wilt, Kareem, or Russell's. Is it then a shocker that 90% of people today designate MJ as the GOAT? If these players were given equal time in the press there would be more diversity of opinion on who the GOAT is.

[Akrazotile]

The funniest thing is how people try to pass it off as a literal fact. Like its a statistic or something. "MJ is the GOAT, theres no other right answer."

[Asukal]

How insecure are you? This thread has nothing to do with LeBron.

He's the reason why you guys make these topics. You always wonder why? Why oh why is Jordan better? Why do people don't recognize LBJ as the GOAT? Why? :oldlol:

[moe94]

The funniest thing is how people try to pass it off as a literal fact. Like its a statistic or something. "MJ is the GOAT, theres no other right answer."

I think you need to watch Space Jam again. You're being awkward.

[Akrazotile]

I think you need to watch Space Jam again. You're being awkward.


What do you mean 'again'?

[moe94]

What do you mean 'again'?

It all makes sense now. Understand it's not too late. You can be saved.

[9erempiree]

I approve of this thread.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_daNgLy6d96o/TIGWsW77W6I/AAAAAAAACFw/Qu8TJzqT-JM/s400/Stamp+of+Approval+6.jpg

[Roundball_Rock]

This says it all:

Google News search results for:

Michael Jordan 149,000
Wilt Chamberlain 1,710
Kareem Abdul Jabbar 3,190
Bill Russell 86,700

Kevin Durant 27,400
Kobe Bryant 29,200
Peyton Manning 12,500
Sidney Crosby 8,360

Wayne Gretzky 2,790
Jerry Rice 12,200
Muhammad Ali 30,200
Jack Nicklaus 11,300
Willie Mays 2,190
Richard Petty 5,350


Is it any wonder he is the "clear GOAT"?

Russell and Ali are the outliers because they have more common names. The search will turn up any article with both, say, "Muhammad" and "Ali" in it.

[SouBeachTalents]

This says it all:

Google News search results for:

Michael Jordan 149,000
Wilt Chamberlain 1,710
Kareem Abdul Jabbar 3,190
Bill Russell 86,700

Kevin Durant 27,400
Kobe Bryant 29,200
Peyton Manning 12,500
Sidney Crosby 8,360

Wayne Gretzky 2,790
Jerry Rice 12,200
Muhammad Ali 30,200
Jack Nicklaus 11,300
Willie Mays 2,190
Richard Petty 5,350


Is it any wonder he is the "clear GOAT"?

Russell and Ali are the outliers because they have more common names. The search will turn up any article with both, say, "Muhammad" and "Ali" in it.

LeBron: 8,860,000

[Milbuck]

Some people sure do. It's not nearly as annoying, though, as the people who constantly shit out edgy one-liners about how MJ isn't the GOAT and how his status is product of the media, yet have never once come up with a thorough argument for why he isn't or how someone else is the GOAT.

[Kvnzhangyay]

Some people sure do. It's not nearly as annoying, though, as the people who constantly shit out edgy one-liners about how MJ isn't the GOAT and how his status is product of the media, yet have never once come up with a thorough argument for why he isn't or how someone else is the GOAT.

This. Although those people are pretty easy to identify when they say no other player is even comparable

[Collie]

Because he generally has the best case when it comes to peak+accolades+stats+championships+narrative. Guys like Wilt (choker), Russell (glorified roleplayer, no offense) and KAJ (needed Magic to win, didn't have the flawless career arc of MJ, relied on longevity rather than dominance) all have things that they can be criticized for. Even MJ's faults (not winning early in his career) can be attributed to part of his career arc.

[moe94]

Some people sure do. It's not nearly as annoying, though, as the people who constantly shit out edgy one-liners about how MJ isn't the GOAT and how his status is product of the media, yet have never once come up with a thorough argument for why he isn't or how someone else is the GOAT.
/thread

[sportjames23]

I'm curious to how many people who say MJ is the GOAT only says that because it's perceived as "common knowledge" that he's the GOAT and they may be perceived as "dumb" or "lacking basketball knowledge". You can absolutely make cases over MJ, it's not some sure fire thing he's the GOAT and I'm sure people believe players besides MJ are greater, but they won't say it so they don't "look dumb".


No, they say it because they actually seen him play, dumbass.

[Roundball_Rock]

LeBron: 8,860,000

Yeah, since he has gotten a torrent of news coverage due to his return to Cleveland. Check his number in September and see what it is then to get a more accurate read. Right now he has more than even Barack Obama.

Vladmir Putin 206,000

So MJ gets 75% as much press mentions as the president of a major country involved in a conflict with potential global implications. :roll:


and KAJ (needed Magic to win

KAJ without Magic: 1 ring, 2 Finals, 4 conference finals, 5 MVP's

Jordan without Pippen as a starter:

38-44, 1-3 in the playoffs
9-9, 0-3 in the playoffs
40-42, 0-3 in the playoffs
50-32, 2-2 in the playoffs
13-12
24-11
30-30, missed playoffs
37-45, missed playoffs

1 MVP, 0 rings, 0 Finals, 0 ECF's, 0 series won.

[sportjames23]

It's hilarious when people try to tell John Salley that Jordan is the best player of all time.

It's hilarious how John Salley was on MJ's jock for years and now craps on him. MJ musta stole his chick.

[KNOW1EDGE]

Get over it dude, Michael Jordan is the best basketball player of all time and that won't change in the foreseeable future.

[atljonesbro]

No, they say it because they actually seen him play, dumbass.
Yeah a lot of people watch LeBron right now. In twenty years do you really want all the 10-15 year old kids who are watching him now to be preaching the word of LeBron like most Jordan stans are currently doing on this forum?

[9erempiree]

I'm curious to how many people who say MJ is the GOAT only says that because it's perceived as "common knowledge" that he's the GOAT and they may be perceived as "dumb" or "lacking basketball knowledge". You can absolutely make cases over MJ, it's not some sure fire thing he's the GOAT and I'm sure people believe players besides MJ are greater, but they won't say it so they don't "look dumb".

I don't know if you have been reading my old threads or what. I have always said it was politically correct, as basketball fans, to say MJ is the GOAT to avoid confrontation. People just say it, so they would be taken serious as a basketball fan.

For example...I was talking to this guy at a bar and proceed to tell him how Kobe is better than Michael Jordan. He went on with his incoherent rambling about how MJ is better and how he was GOAT. No legit reasons, just "because".

So I did something totally out of my norm, I politely agreed so he can shut up and go back to his table.

To be fair, the tide has changed. People saying that MJ is the best are mostly morons. You can't be a fan of basketball when history has provided us with so many great players such as Kareem, Wilt, Kobe, Bird and Magic...etc...etc. We would be doing the game a disservice by merely saying MJ is the "only" GOAT.

It's like a Christian proclaiming the only God is Jesus. When we know there are many beliefs in this world and many gods alike.

[DonDadda59]

It largely is a function of marketing. If you have a campaign where one candidate spends $10 million, another spends $1 million, the third spends $250,000 and the fourth spends $100,000 the guy with the $10 million budget will win via repetition. People have come from nowhere to win major elections via outspending opponents by massive margins. You only hear of MJ's case for GOAT in the media. You don't hear Wilt, Kareem, or Russell's. Is it then a shocker that 90% of people today designate MJ as the GOAT? If these players were given equal time in the press there would be more diversity of opinion on who the GOAT is.

You checking updates on your LeBron app, bruh? Are you ready to 'Witness' the homecoming tour this season?

You excited yet, bruh?

[SouBeachTalents]

I don't know if you have been reading my old threads or what. I have always said it was politically correct, as basketball fans, to say MJ is the GOAT to avoid confrontation. People just say it, so they would be taken serious as a basketball fan.

For example...I was talking to this guy at a bar and proceed to tell him how Kobe is better than Michael Jordan. He went on with his incoherent rambling about how MJ is better and how he was GOAT. No legit reasons, just "because".

So I did something totally out of my norm, I politely agreed so he can shut up and go back to his table.

To be fair, the tide has changed. People saying that MJ is the best are mostly morons. You can't be a fan of basketball when history has provided us with so many great players such as Kareem, Wilt, Kobe, Bird and Magic...etc...etc. We would be doing the game a disservice by merely saying MJ is the "only" GOAT.

So is anyone who thinks Kobe is better than Jordan

[KNOW1EDGE]

I didn't realize people actually believed MJ is not the GOAT.

That is new to me...

What player(s) are better than Michael Jordan?

[moe94]

lmfao @ 9er sneaking in Kobe. What a legend.

[9erempiree]

I didn't realize people actually believed MJ is not the GOAT.

That is new to me...

What player(s) are better than Michael Jordan?

No particular order...these guys are better or equal to him.

Kareem
Magic
Kobe
Bird
Hakeem
Shaq
Duncan

What case do people have that he is better than these guys? I can play this game too but I won't. At least I have recognized there is no "only" GOAT.

Heck, put all their names in a hat and pick. Which ever name comes up, that is the GOAT. There is an argument for many. History has provided us with many greats.

[Roundball_Rock]

I didn't realize people actually believed MJ is not the GOAT.

That is new to me...

What player(s) are better than Michael Jordan?

Kareem, Wilt, and Russell all have cases for GOAT that are as valid as MJ's. Shaq, Magic, Bird, Oscar have weak cases for GOAT but can be argued over any of the first four.

Right now I have KAJ and MJ tied for #1 with Russell #3, Wilt #4 and Shaq #5.

[DonDadda59]

I didn't realize people actually believed MJ is not the GOAT.

That is new to me...

They don't. They just think it makes them hip or edgy to type it (while most likely wearing Jordans mind you).

Worst than holocaust deniers, the whole lot of them.


What player(s) are better than Michael Jordan?

Been hearing a lot of talk about Magic's geriatric sidekick lately. :oldlol:

[moe94]

No particular order...these guys are better or equal to him.

Kareem
Magic
Kobe
Bird
Hakeem
Shaq
Duncan

What case do people have that he is better than these guys? I can play this game too but I won't. At least I have recognized there is no "only" GOAT.

Heck, put all their names in a hat and pick. Which ever name comes up, that is the GOAT. There is an argument for many. History has provided us with many greats.
:roll: :roll:

[SouBeachTalents]

No particular order...these guys are better or equal to him.

Kareem
Magic
Kobe
Bird
Hakeem
Shaq
Duncan

What case do people have that he is better than these guys? I can play this game too but I won't. At least I have recognized there is no "only" GOAT.

Heck, put all their names in a hat and pick. Which ever name comes up, that is the GOAT. There is an argument for many. History has provided us with many greats.

Ok, what's your argument for those guys being the GOAT over Jordan?

[9erempiree]

Ok, what's your argument for those guys being the GOAT over Jordan?

You're like that guy at the bar that I mentioned in my example....therefore I am just going to agree that MJ is the GOAT, so I don't have to waste your time and my time to read your rambles.

Perhaps another time. It's late and I want to save myself for a paper later.

I will leave it at this, how can you call yourself a basketball fan when you have limited yourself to thinking MJ is the only GOAT?

[DonDadda59]

You're like that guy at the bar that I mentioned in my example....therefore I am just going to agree that MJ is the GOAT, so I don't have to waste your time and my time to read your rambles.

Perhaps another time. It's late and I want to save myself for a paper later.

Could've just said you don't have an argument, bruh. Woulda saved you some paragraphs. :confusedshrug:

[GimmeThat]

because showing people the product of winning is so much easier than explaining/teaching/preaching about the path to winning

[9erempiree]

Could've just said you don't have an argument, bruh. Woulda saved you some paragraphs. :confusedshrug:

Just not in the mood. I got some stuff I got to do. To say I don't have an argument when I have been arguing this for years is funny.

[SouBeachTalents]

You're like that guy at the bar that I mentioned in my example....therefore I am just going to agree that MJ is the GOAT, so I don't have to waste your time and my time to read your rambles.

Perhaps another time. It's late and I want to save myself for a paper later.

I will leave it at this, how can you call yourself a basketball fan when you have limited yourself to thinking MJ is the only GOAT?

I personally think Jordan is the GOAT, but I don't believe it's an open and shut case, I'm open minded and objective about it. You said those players were better than Jordan, I'd like to hear your arguments why

[DonDadda59]

Just not in the mood. I got some stuff I got to do. To say I don't have an argument when I have been arguing this for years is funny.

http://www.anarchyinthesandbox.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/post-18879-Jon-Hamm-Yeah-Ok-gif-1dnC.gif


I personally think Jordan is the GOAT, but I don't believe it's an open and shut case, I'm open minded and objective about it. You said those players were better than Jordan, I'd like to hear your arguments why

He's too busy. Got shit to do. Otherwise he'd make his argument.

Oh well, maybe next time. :cheers:

[RRR3]

Jordan has crazy ****ing stats. His advanced stats are off the charts as well. So he appeals to us stat nerds :D

He also was a superb playoff performer and dominated in the finals.


I didn't watch him, but from what I've heard he was pretty adept at nearly every facet of basketball, the best scorer ever while also being a lockdown defender, etc, etc


Oh yeah and he has 6 rings and 6 fmvps (not that I care too much about this, but it is impressive as ****)

[6 for 24]

I personally think Jordan is the GOAT, but I don't believe it's an open and shut case, I'm open minded and objective about it. You said those players were better than Jordan, I'd like to hear your arguments why

I am certainly no 98erempiree-- his time is obviously at a much higher premium based on how little he posts here-- but I would like to weigh in, if I may.

To pick an arbitrary player from his list, let's look at Kobe "the self-proclaimed Black Mamba" Bryant. Admittedly, he and Jordan are almost identical in raw numbers and accolades. So you have to really dig deeper into the numbers to see why Bryant comes up on top. Let's roll the tape!

1) Career-high points: Jordan got 69. Not bad. But the self-proclaimed Mamba got an unthinkable 81. The fact that this came against the best defense in the league during another championship season is just extra credit! Point for the Bean!

2) Career-high FGA: Jordan had an amazing 49-shot game, the most in the modern era. Kobe "only" managed 47. BUT-- Kobe also has five of the top seven (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/fga_game.html) most FGA in a game, showing consistent elite chucking. So while this is ostensibly close, really we can see who the better shot jacker is. Point for Kobe!

3) 30/30 club: 30+ FGA on <= 30 FG% -- continuing to to shoot in the face of adversity (when some of the "threes with the hand in the face" aren't going down) is the ultimate sign of leadership and killer-instinct. Kobe is a five-time member (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pgl_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=game&year_min=&year_max=&age_min=0&age_max=99&team_id=&opp_id=&is_playoffs=N&round_id=&game_num_type=&game_num_min=&game_num_max=&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&is_starter=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&c1stat=fga&c1comp=gt&c1val=30&c2stat=fg_pct&c2comp=lt&c2val=30&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=pts) of this club. MJ-- never joined! Point for the Mamba! (BTW, impressive to see fellow chucker Allen Iverson dominating this category!)

So when you look "beyond the box-score", you can begin to see how it isn't really close at all.

Warmest regards,

Ayotunde Ndiaye

[LeBird]

I am certainly no 98erempiree-- his time is obviously at a much higher premium based on how little he posts here-- but I would like to weigh in, if I may.

To pick an arbitrary player from his list, let's look at Kobe "the self-proclaimed Black Mamba" Bryant. Admittedly, he and Jordan are almost identical in raw numbers and accolades. So you have to really dig deeper into the numbers to see why Bryant comes up on top. Let's roll the tape!

1) Career-high points: Jordan got 69. Not bad. But the self-proclaimed Mamba got an unthinkable 81. The fact that this came against the best defense in the league during another championship season is just extra credit! Point for the Bean!

2) Career-high FGA: Jordan had an amazing 49-shot game, the most in the modern era. Kobe "only" managed 47. BUT-- Kobe also has five of the top seven (http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/fga_game.html) most FGA in a game, showing consistent elite chucking. So while this is ostensibly close, really we can see who the better shot jacker is. Point for Kobe!

3) 30/30 club: 30+ FGA on <= 30 FG% -- continuing to to shoot in the face of adversity (when some of the "threes with the hand in the face" aren't going down) is the ultimate sign of leadership and killer-instinct. Kobe is a five-time member (http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pgl_finder.cgi?request=1&player_id=&match=game&year_min=&year_max=&age_min=0&age_max=99&team_id=&opp_id=&is_playoffs=N&round_id=&game_num_type=&game_num_min=&game_num_max=&game_month=&game_location=&game_result=&is_starter=&is_active=&is_hof=&pos_is_g=Y&pos_is_gf=Y&pos_is_f=Y&pos_is_fg=Y&pos_is_fc=Y&pos_is_c=Y&pos_is_cf=Y&c1stat=fga&c1comp=gt&c1val=30&c2stat=fg_pct&c2comp=lt&c2val=30&c3stat=&c3comp=gt&c3val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=pts) of this club. MJ-- never joined! Point for the Mamba! (BTW, impressive to see fellow chucker Allen Iverson dominating this category!)

So when you look "beyond the box-score", you can begin to see how it isn't really close at all.

Warmest regards,

Ayotunde Ndiaye

:lol This guy is my new fav poster.

As to the thread; of course they do. I think some of them do it as they themselves have bought into the hype.

If you are truly unbiased and looking at the facts; there are about 6 legit GOAT contenders. Yet the way you hear these GOAT discussions, there is only 1 name.

But the stans that keep propping up his name and ignore the others will one day rue this kind of propping up. Because the next guy is coming and he's gonna have even more push.

[The Choken One]

I'd say that's accurate. People are so used to hearing it that any other suggestion is crazy to them.

Nowadays, you randomly get loonies saying LBJ and being 100% serious, but most of the time they don't even watch basketball, just ESPN.

I say KAJ whenever I get the chance and I stand by that. No doubt in my mind KAJ was the best basketball player to ever play.

[livinglegend]

Some people sure do. It's not nearly as annoying, though, as the people who constantly shit out edgy one-liners about how MJ isn't the GOAT and how his status is product of the media, yet have never once come up with a thorough argument for why he isn't or how someone else is the GOAT.

I have a great argument for Russell. The goal of basketball is to win. As a player you need to do everything in your power to make your team win. Russell as the leader did that better than anybody else in the history. Everywhere he went he won. Before he came in Boston, the team wasnt winning, then, after he came, they started winning. After he left Boston, they started losing. At college, his team broke records. He also won with team USA.
He also became the coach to help to win his team.

You can make these type of arguments for atleast 2 other players.

[Soundwave]

You can make arguments for KAJ based on career resume, which is as good as Jordan's. You could say Russell if you're really high on rangz. Wilt if you're into statistical domination. When it really comes down to it, though, Jordan has the best case. Run through the accolades and stats if you must. There really is no other answer.

inb4 Nike Koolaid deluded the masses

nah, he's just the GOAT. Deal with it.

MJ is basically the fusion of Wilt (statistical domination) with Russell (lots of ring bling).

That's generally why he has the best case for GOAT, beyond the clutch factor where he trumps most everyone.

There is no virtually no weakness in his resume, other than perhaps retiring in '93 and not winning two more titles in that stretch.

[livinglegend]

MJ is basically the fusion of Wilt (statistical domination) with Russell (lots of ring bling).

That's generally why he has the best case for GOAT, beyond the clutch factor where he trumps most everyone.

There is no virtually no weakness in his resume, other than perhaps retiring in '93 and not winning two more titles in that stretch.

at the end, all that matters is winning and Russell did it best as the leader. He won 11 championships in 12 tries, much much much better than Jordan.

[Soundwave]

at the end, all that matters is winning and Russell did it best as the leader. He won 11 championships in 12 tries, much much much better than Jordan.

In a 10 team league where he had by far the most talented team ... sure.

He doesn't have the statistical dominance that Jordan had either, he could be the 3rd, 4th option on that Celtics squad on many nights.

Championships are one barometer, they're not the only one for a full GOAT resume, otherwise Robert Horry would be like the no.3 GOAT and Pippen should be above Magic, Bird, Kobe, Hakeem, Shaq, etc.

[Warfan]

at the end, all that matters is winning and Kobe did it best as the leader. He won 5 championships in 7 tries, much much much better than LeBron.

Great post :applause: Future repped

[livinglegend]

In a 10 team league where he had by far the most talented team ... sure.

He doesn't have the statistical dominance that Jordan had either, he could be the 3rd, 4th option on that Celtics squad on many nights.

Championships are one barometer, they're not the only one for a full GOAT resume, otherwise Robert Horry would be like the no.3 GOAT and Pippen should be above Magic, Bird, Kobe, Hakeem, Shaq, etc.

10 team league? so what? He still won 11 times in 12 tries. You cant do better than.

He had the most talented team? Yes, so did Jordan. He team was a contender without him. His team won 55 games without him.

He was the 3rd, 4th scoring option. Basketball is much more than scoring. Lewis changed the whole game 4 or 5 ( I dont remember the exact game) vs Indiana with his defense on David West. His stats in that game were 0 points, 0 rbs and 0 ass. Russell was the leader of the team. He dominated the game in many other areas other than scoring. His domination showed in his wins. He won everywhere he won. Winning is all that matters.

And dont bring Horry. I clearly said the best winner as the leader. Horry wasnt the leader of any team.

[livinglegend]

Great post :applause: Future repped

lame

[played0ut]

I personally think MJ is GOAT for so many reasons. But i've seen people vilified for saying someone other than MJ being their greatest competition.


i.e, Payton saying Stockton was more of a nightmare to guard. All these analysts were ready to crucify him before even hearing him out.


That's when it gets ridiculous. It's fine to say he's GOAT, but to blindly disagree with anything against him 'just cause' irks me.

[Soundwave]

10 team league? so what? He still won 11 times in 12 tries. You cant do better than.

He had the most talented team? Yes, so did Jordan. He team was a contender without him. His team won 55 games without him.

He was the 3rd, 4th scoring option. Basketball is much more than scoring. Lewis changed the whole game 4 or 5 ( I dont remember the exact game) vs Indiana with his defense on David West. His stats in that game were 0 points, 0 rbs and 0 ass. Russell was the leader of the team. He dominated the game in many other areas other than scoring. His domination showed in his wins. He won everywhere he won. Winning is all that matters.

And dont bring Horry. I clearly said the best winner as the leader. Horry wasnt the leader of any team.

Then why isn't Sam Jones like the no.2 GOAT. He has 10 titles with the Celtics and was actually the leading scorer for the Celtics for many of those rings, where Russell could more or less just focus on rebounds and blocks.

And to be honest I don't think Jordan always had the most talented team. The Blazers were arguably deeper in talent than the Bulls in '92. They were so deep Petrovic couldn't even get playing time on that squad.

The '93 Suns were fairly evenly talented. The '96 Magic were more purely talented than the Bulls. The Sonics were fairly close too with 5 double digit scorers and three All-Star caliber players.

The Bulls were a barely .500 team when Jordan came back to them in 1995, they instantly turned in a 13-4 team down the stretch (with two of those losses come in the first 3 games), which means he took a .500 team more or less and turned them into a 60 win pace almost immediately after not playing for almost 2 years.

[LeBird]

I personally think MJ is GOAT for so many reasons. But i've seen people vilified for saying someone other than MJ being their greatest competition.


i.e, Payton saying Stockton was more of a nightmare to guard. All these analysts were ready to crucify him before even hearing him out.


That's when it gets ridiculous. It's fine to say he's GOAT, but to blindly disagree with anything against him 'just cause' irks me.
:lol I remember that Payton clip.

Even in the recent one with Dr J, as he is just touching on his reasonings why Jordan isn't in his top 5, Steven A looks like he's about to jump out of his seat to rebut. I haven't seen religious zealots this bothered.

[livinglegend]

Then why isn't Sam Jones like the no.2 GOAT. He has 10 titles with the Celtics and was actually the leading scorer for the Celtics for many of those rings, where Russell could more or less just focus on rebounds and blocks.

And to be honest I don't think Jordan always had the most talented team. The Blazers were arguably deeper in talent than the Bulls in '92. They were so deep Petrovic couldn't even get playing time on that squad.

The '93 Suns were fairly evenly talented. The '96 Magic were more purely talented than the Bulls. The Sonics were fairly close too with 5 double digit scorers and three All-Star caliber players.

He wasnt the leader of his team. Russell was. He orchestrated their whole defense which is 50% of the game of basketball. Great D often leads to great offense. Russell was the one that started most of their fastbreaks. Also, everyone ( the coach, players, ...) who watched those teams said that Russell was the leader. No one said Sam Jones.

And I think Jordan had the most talented teams and when the years he didnt, he went 1-9 ( all without Pippen) in the playoffs.

[Soundwave]

He wasnt the leader of his team. Russell was. He orchestrated their whole defense which is 50% of the game of basketball. Great D often leads to great offense. Russell was the one that started most of their fastbreaks. Also, everyone who watched those teams said that Russell was the leader. No one said Sam Jones.

And I think Jordan had the most talented teams and when the years he didnt, he went 1-9 ( all without Pippen) in the playoffs.

You still have to score the basketball to win a game, that's the objective of the game, to score more points than the opposition. Russell was often the 3rd or even 4th offensive option for the Celtics.

Jordan played on some horrible teams for 3 seasons, name me one player in NBA history that would make any of those early Bulls teams an NBA champion.

Magic was so horrified of the thought of playing for the Bulls that he flat out told the Bulls he would refuse to play for them if they drafted him.

The Bulls are fortunate really (so is the rest of the league) that Portland didn't take Jordan. Because if that had happened then he would've had a loaded supporting cast from day 1 (like Magic and Bird had) and probably could've won 8+ in that scenario.

The fact that he went to Chicago, paid his dues, didn't cry/demand a trade out, and eventually built a champion there is part of what makes him great. He had to earn it, it wasn't just handed to him on a silver platter.

[livinglegend]

You still have to score the basketball to win a game, that's the objective of the game, to score more points than the opposition. Russell was often the 3rd or even 4th offensive option for the Celtics.

Jordan played on some horrible teams for 3 seasons, name me one player in NBA history that would make any of those early Bulls teams an NBA champion.

Magic was so horrified of the thought of playing for the Bulls that he flat out told the Bulls he would refuse to play for them if they drafted him.

The Bulls are fortunate really (so is the rest of the league) that Portland didn't take Jordan. Because if that had happened then he would've had a loaded supporting cast from day 1 (like Magic and Bird had) and probably could've won 8+ in that scenario.

There are many ways to affect the scores. Everything you do on the court affect the score. If you dont take a rebound, the other team may take it from you and score. If you dont set a pick properly, your teammate may find himself in a bad position and cant score. If you set it properly, he may find himself in a good position and score. Russell always did things that made his team have the higher score. Everywhere he went, his team won.
Also, if it were all about scoring the ball, Beasley would be playing instead of Lewis in the playoffs. And he didnt.

And I dont believe in the ifs, or shoulds, coulds, etc. Facts tell me that Jordan couldnt win without Pippen. Pippen won 55 games without Jordan and Bulls were contending with other great teams even without their best player. That s how good they were.

[Soundwave]

There are many ways to affect the scores. Everything you do on the court affect the score. If you dont take a rebound, the other team may take it from you and score. If you dont set a pick properly, your teammate may find himself in a bad position and cant score. If you set it properly, he may find himself in a good position and score. Russell always did things that made his team have the higher score. Everywhere he went, his team won.

And I dont believe in the ifs, or shoulds, coulds, etc. Facts tell me that Jordan couldnt win without Pippen. Pippen won 55 games without Jordan and Bulls were contending with other great teams even without their best player. That s how good they were.

How many total playoff rounds did the Bulls win with Pippen?

Since you don't believe in ifs, or shoulds, or coulds.

Jordan was both a dominant scorer AND defender too. You don't to pick or choose one with Jordan because he could dominate both areas.

That's part of what makes his resume so rock solid. Basically no weakness.

Russell was never a great scorer, Jordan could dominate on both ends of the floor. The highest season ppg for Russell was 18.9 ppg, which wasn't even top *fifteen* in the league that season.

[livinglegend]

How many total playoff rounds did the Bulls win with Pippen?

Since you don't believe in ifs, or shoulds, or coulds.

They won 1 . Jordan won 0 without Pippen.

[livinglegend]

How many total playoff rounds did the Bulls win with Pippen?

Since you don't believe in ifs, or shoulds, or coulds.

Jordan was both a dominant scorer AND defender too. You don't just have to focus on one.

That's part of what makes his resume so rock solid. Basically no weakness.

Russell was never a great scorer, Jordan could dominate on both ends of the floor.

As I said, there are many ways of affecting the scores. Offensively, you can help your team without scoring.

[Soundwave]

As I said, there are many ways of affecting the scores. Offensively, you can help your team without scoring.

Still it's a primary part of basketball, I think if you really want to be GOAT, you have to have shouldered the role of being the no.1 option on offence. It's part of the trial by fire ... can you handle that role? It's not easy to score, it's arguably the most exhausting, most pressure involved aspect of basketball.

Even moreso in crunch time, that's when you see which players are hype and who's the real deal.

I could be wrong, but I'm not even sure if Russell ever led the Celtics in scoring once.

Often times he was no.3 on the scoring chart.

Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Wilt, Kareem, all have experienced what it takes to have to handle that pressure of being "the guy" that has to lead offensively.

Russell? Not so much.

Beyond that I think the league was simply weaker back then. The average player was smaller and far less skilled circa 1961, and the average coach was less versed in actual strategy/defensive schemes. There was only one (one!) 7 footer (total) in the entire NBA as the 60s started.

Any championship dynasty team post-Magic/Bird era would shred the 60s a new a-hole if they were put into that era IMO.

[Warfan]

They won 1 . Jordan won 0 without Pippen.

:facepalm


Jordan his first 3 seasons plays twice against Birds Celtics (averaged 43/6/6 with the best playoff scoring performance ever, and 36/7/6 the following year) and as a rookie he went up against a very good bucks team (59 wins, and Mj averaged 29/6/9)


1988 Bulls:

Scottie is a rookie, plays 20mpg, averages 8/4/2 and the Bulls win 50 games. First round against Cleveland, Chicago wins. MJ averages 45/5/5 and has these performances
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTsIlw9A4AY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZcNHcVWYgQ
And puts up 39 in the elimination game. Meanwhile Scottie averages 10/5/2.


1989 Bulls:

Chicago upsets the 57 win Cavs. MJ averages 40/6/8, and has these performances
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0muIsBfGY5s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzmqelfuStE
Meanwhile Scottie averages a measly 15/8/4 on sub 40% shooting

Next series the Bulls upset the 2nd seeded Knicks. MJ averages 36/9/8 (41/10/9 the last 4 games). He has these performances:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1C8tZN53eM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P4gHuwySB4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEkcUcCUtHk
Scottie averages 15/7/5


As you can see MJ was playing GOAT level basketball, and carrying that team. And in 90' if Scottie doesn't shit himself and have a headache against Detroit in game 7, the Bulls likely win the championship.

So stop with this 1-9 BS, MJ was able to carry the team deep in the playoffs with his dominance whilst Scottie had not yet blossomed into the star that he was in the 90's.

[Soundwave]

:facepalm


Jordan his first 3 seasons plays twice against Birds Celtics (averaged 43/6/6 with the best playoff scoring performance ever, and 36/7/6 the following year) and as a rookie he went up against a very good bucks team (59 wins, and Mj averaged 29/6/9)


1988 Bulls:

Scottie is a rookie, plays 20mpg, averages 8/4/2 and the Bulls win 50 games. First round against Cleveland, Chicago wins. MJ averages 45/5/5 and has these performances
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTsIlw9A4AY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZcNHcVWYgQ
And puts up 39 in the elimination game. Meanwhile Scottie averages 10/5/2.


1989 Bulls:

Chicago upsets the 57 win Cavs. MJ averages 40/6/8, and has these performances
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0muIsBfGY5s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzmqelfuStE
Meanwhile Scottie averages a measly 15/8/4 on sub 40% shooting

Next series the Bulls upset the 2nd seeded Knicks. MJ averages 36/9/8 (41/10/9 the last 4 games). He has these performances:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1C8tZN53eM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P4gHuwySB4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEkcUcCUtHk
Scottie averages 15/7/5


As you can see MJ was playing GOAT level basketball, and carrying that team. And in 90' if Scottie doesn't shit himself and have a headache against Detroit in game 7, the Bulls likely win the championship.

So stop with this 1-9 BS, MJ was able to carry the team deep in the playoffs with his dominance whilst Scottie had not yet blossomed into the star that he was in the 90's.

Thanks, you just ethered that lame argument.

B ... bu ... but only Pippen could've average 10-15 ppg, MJ couldn't possibly have won playoff rounds with anyone else :oldlol:

If Jordan had been drafted by Portland and had Drexler to play with from day 1, IMO they start winning titles full stop by '87 or '88 (sorry Bad Boys).

[Milbuck]

:facepalm


Jordan his first 3 seasons plays twice against Birds Celtics (averaged 43/6/6 with the best playoff scoring performance ever, and 36/7/6 the following year) and as a rookie he went up against a very good bucks team (59 wins, and Mj averaged 29/6/9)


1988 Bulls:

Scottie is a rookie, plays 20mpg, averages 8/4/2 and the Bulls win 50 games. First round against Cleveland, Chicago wins. MJ averages 45/5/5 and has these performances
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wTsIlw9A4AY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZcNHcVWYgQ
And puts up 39 in the elimination game. Meanwhile Scottie averages 10/5/2.


1989 Bulls:

Chicago upsets the 57 win Cavs. MJ averages 40/6/8, and has these performances
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0muIsBfGY5s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzmqelfuStE
Meanwhile Scottie averages a measly 15/8/4 on sub 40% shooting

Next series the Bulls upset the 2nd seeded Knicks. MJ averages 36/9/8 (41/10/9 the last 4 games). He has these performances:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1C8tZN53eM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P4gHuwySB4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEkcUcCUtHk
Scottie averages 15/7/5


As you can see MJ was playing GOAT level basketball, and carrying that team. And in 90' if Scottie doesn't shit himself and have a headache against Detroit in game 7, the Bulls likely win the championship.

So stop with this 1-9 BS, MJ was able to carry the team deep in the playoffs with his dominance whilst Scottie had not yet blossomed into the star that he was in the 90's.
/thread :applause:

[bdreason]

1. Kareem
2. MJ

[TheMan]

There are several players along with Mike who have strong arguments for GOAT, IMO...

KAJ, pros = his career longetivity, cons = won chips when he wasn't the team's best player, won most of his chips with another Top 5 GOAT.

Wilt, pros = his personal stats, cons = Not enough titles, 2 chips isn't GOAT, IMO, playoffs stats inferior to postseason stats.

Bill Russell, pros = Most titles of all the GOAT candidates, cons = played with stacked ass teams full of HOFers and his personal stats are easily the inferior of all the GOATs, a monster defensively, offensively, not so much.

MJ has the most well rounded resume of the GOAT candidate, has the career accolades, won every title as clearly the best player, GOAT offensive and defensive attributes, mental factor, clutch as fvck, hardly no weaknesses in his game...

Larry Bird and Magic are a tier below, while offensive jauggernauts, their defense wasn't on par with their offense.


livinglegend...MJ GOAT, U MAD?

[Psileas]

It's not that much that people claim Jordan is the GOAT just to avoid confrontations, it's that such kinds of people usually don't even offer their opinion, because they know they'll get attacked by hords of lunatics and few will read and seriously respond to their arguments, as long as they are serious themselves.
However, people who are only very casual NBA fans or don't know or care about basketball that much, but still feel the need to voice their opinion (this category includes many women), will, almost invariably, claim that Jordan is the GOAT, since they'll probably know next to nothing about other GOAT candidates - they often won't know they even exist. Of course, these people couldn't form a top-50 to save their lives, they probably couldn't name 50 NBA players' names at all.


MJ is basically the fusion of Wilt (statistical domination) with Russell (lots of ring bling).

That's generally why he has the best case for GOAT, beyond the clutch factor where he trumps most everyone.

There is no virtually no weakness in his resume, other than perhaps retiring in '93 and not winning two more titles in that stretch.

Both Wilt and Russell are significantly above Jordan in the field they mostly dominated, so calling Jordan a fusion of Wilt and Russell isn't exactly accurate. He's closer to a "fusion of Wilt and Russell multipled by 1/2", which may either be or not be a better combo than "100% Russell" or "100 Wilt".

[kshutts1]

I'm sure my response has already been mentioned multiple times...

I think more people say that Jordan is the GOAT because the media vomits that out daily than say it out of fear of ostracization (sp?).

AKA - More people say it because they hear it from "informed" individuals.

As a note... I'm not saying Jordan is not worthy of being considered the GOAT. If that's YOUR opinion, fine. It's not mine, but I accept that. Just saying.. seems like too many people say it without having done their homework, so to speak.

[knicksman]

MJ is the type of player that adds more wins when you have all stars while bran is the type of player that adds more when you have nothing. Bran is a low risk low reward player. If youre not confident in your team building skills you go for lebron but more likely that youre not winning rings with him as the man. While mj has higher risk. Youre gonna fail if you have no idea how to build a team but hes gonna win you multiple rings.

[SouBeachTalents]

MJ is the type of player that adds more wins when you have all stars while bran is the type of player that adds more when you have nothing. Bran is a low risk low reward player. If youre not confident in your team building skills you go for lebron but more likely that youre not winning rings with him as the man. While mj has higher risk. Youre gonna fail if you have no idea how to build a team but hes gonna win you multiple rings.

:biggums:

[knicksman]

:biggums:

I know its hard for low IQs to understand what im saying. Someday youll get it.

[Nick Young]

Kareem is the GOAT.

[GimmeThat]

it's the only way to ignore Wilt's greatness.

[Roundball_Rock]

If you are truly unbiased and looking at the facts; there are about 6 legit GOAT contenders. Yet the way you hear these GOAT discussions, there is only 1 name.

But the stans that keep propping up his name and ignore the others will one day rue this kind of propping up. Because the next guy is coming and he's gonna have even more push.

:applause:


In a 10 team league where he had by far the most talented team

:lol at the irony. How many 90's teams could lose their best player, replace him with a D-Leaguer (not a legitimate replacement like Deng for LeBron) and contend for the #1 seed all year the following season? Let's see the list...


The Blazers were arguably deeper in talent than the Bulls in '92.

94' Blazers: 48 wins with Drexler.


The '93 Suns were fairly evenly talented.

56 wins with Barkley in 94'.


The '96 Magic were more purely talented than the Bulls

Replaced Shaq with a 17/10 center and barely were above .500 in 97'.


The Bulls were a barely .500 team when Jordan came back to them in 1995, they instantly turned in a 13-4 team down the stretch

That is false. They had won 8 of their previous 10 prior to MJ returning, which means they closed the season on a 21-6 roll. MJ definitely helped, but the team was gelling. They had 3 new starters, Longley missed the first 25 or so games and they needed time to adjust to the new roster. Their front line was decimated by their all-star PF, starting C and backup PF leaving or retiring after the 94' season and this was compounded by Longley's early injury; Krause failed to replenish the front line that year.


How many total playoff rounds did the Bulls win with Pippen?

1 more than MJ won without Pippen as a starter. :roll:



They won 1 . Jordan won 0 without Pippen.

:lol


And puts up 39 in the elimination game. Meanwhile Scottie averages 10/5/2.

You left a little fact out. The Bulls blew a 2-0 lead and were facing a decisive Game 5 (the first round was 5 games back then). A desperate Doug Collins inserted Pippen into the starting line-up for the first time in his career. Pippen had 24/7/5 or something to put the Bulls over the top. If Pippen did not start, the Bulls would have lost in the first round for the fourth consecutive season.


Meanwhile Scottie averages a measly 15/8/4 on sub 40% shooting

:lol MJ fans include a game where Pippen played ONE minute and had 0/0/0 in the averages.

It is interesting you brought up 1989...that is when Pippen became a permanent starter. Pippen averaged 10/4/2 in 25 mpg on the bench and 16/7/4 in 35 mpg as a starter. The Bulls started the year 13-12 (0.500 ball was par for the course in the MJ era up to that point); as soon as Pippen became a starter they went on a 9-2 roll and never looked back. They got up to 45-28 before closing poorly and finishing 47-35. The Bulls went 4-5 when Pippen did not play; they were 43-30 when he did play. That is the difference between 36 wins and 48 wins over a season. In other words 89' Pippen's improvement in wins resembled that of 85' Jordan (27 wins to 38 wins).

Pippen becoming a starter was the watershed moment that took the Bulls to the next level, just as Magic joining the Lakers in 80' was for the Lakers, even though in both cases neither was the best player on the team.

[juju151111]

:applause:



:lol at the irony. How many 90's teams could lose their best player, replace him with a D-Leaguer (not a legitimate replacement like Deng for LeBron) and contend for the #1 seed all year the following season? Let's see the list...



94' Blazers: 48 wins with Drexler.



56 wins with Barkley in 94'.



Replaced Shaq with a 17/10 center and barely were above .500 in 97'.



That is false. They had won 8 of their previous 10 prior to MJ returning, which means they closed the season on a 21-6 roll. MJ definitely helped, but the team was gelling. They had 3 new starters, Longley missed the first 25 or so games and they needed time to adjust to the new roster. Their front line was decimated by their all-star PF, starting C and backup PF leaving or retiring after the 94' season; they failed to replace them.



1 more than MJ won without Pippen as a starter. :roll:



:lol



You left a little fact out. The Bulls blew a 2-0 lead and were facing a decisive Game 5 (the first round was 5 games back then). A desperate Doug Collins inserted Pippen into the starting line-up for the first time in his career. Pippen had 24/7/5 or something to put the Bulls over the top. If Pippen did not start, the Bulls would have lost in the first round for the fourth consecutive season.



:lol MJ fans include a game where Pippen played ONE minute and had 0/0/0 in the averages.

It is interesting you brought up 1989...that is when Pippen became a permanent starter. Pippen averaged 10/4/2 in 25 mpg on the bench and 16/7/4 in 35 mpg as a starter. The Bulls started the year 13-12 (0.500 ball was par for the course in the MJ era up to that point); as soon as Pippen became a starter they went on a 9-2 roll and never looked back. They got up to 45-28 before closing poorly and finishing 47-35. The Bulls went 4-5 when Pippen did not play; they were 43-30 when he did play. That is the difference between 36 wins and 48 wins over a season.

Pippen becoming a starter was the watershed moment that took the Bulls to the next level, just as Magic joining the Lakers in 80' was for the Lakers, even though in both cases neither was the best player on the team.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/199006030DET.html The great Scottie caring Mj in 1989 and 1990 Your a classic idiot

[Roundball_Rock]

In any case, Pippen's rookie season happened to coincide with Phil Jackson's initial campaign as an assistant to Doug Collins — and Scottie and PJ hit it off from the get-go. It was Jackson who taught Pippen a pull-up and shoot move. Jackson also saw in Pippen a more athletic version of himself, so he tutored the rookie in the theory and practice of defense.

When Jackson took over from Collins in 1989, the triangle offense was installed and history was in the offing. Jackson felt so comfortable with Pippen's understanding and instincts on the defensive end that he frequently deferred to Scottie's judgment. Oftentimes when Jackson would question why an otherwise intelligent player zigged in a particular defensive sequence instead of executing the required zag, the player would simply say, "Scottie told me to do it." And the coach was satisfied.

In fact, all of the Bulls were somewhat afraid of Michael Jordan (who would ferociously bark at them whenever they made the slightest mistake in positioning or timing). For solace and advice, the players instead turned to Scottie. Throughout the dynasty, it was Pippen who was the team's on-court leader.

:applause: Rosen knows Phil Jackson as well as anyone so he is plugged into how the Bulls actually worked as well as anyone out there.

[SouBeachTalents]

I know its hard for low IQs to understand what im saying. Someday youll get it.

http://daviddemar.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/thewordintelligenceisalsothepolaroppositeofdolan_0 a6e3bd1f9d88e169795acdf58dd97ee.jpg

[Jasper]

another banner thread:eek:

[Skyscraper]

it's water cooler talk for people to make conversation.

just like saying how Wince Carter is always injured (he only ever was in Toronto) or how if Vince Carter tried, he could have been the next Jordan (wrong... even if he tried he would not have been the next Jordan)


it's an easy out for people who don't want to use their brains and analytical abilities (if they even have any)


also it's for social purposes... if you talked with coworkers who aren't your close friends and start getting all analytical, it will begin to fall into the "religion and politics" category.


stupid social rules I know

[knicksman]

at the end of the day, bran was given more than what jordan had and failed to deliver. Jordan went 3 for 3 and couldve been 8 for 8 with just a pippen. The best measure of impact is how much wins you can add with a team with all stars already. Because its harder to add wins when youre already a 50 win team than when youre still a 20 win team. Just like the best measure of your scoring ability is in the clutch and not during 1st quarters or when youre team is down 20. And jordan has proven he can make 55 win team to 67 or a 45 win team to 72. While bran and bosh only added 11 wins to a 47 win team.

[Akrazotile]

This says it all:

Google News search results for:

Michael Jordan 149,000
Wilt Chamberlain 1,710
Kareem Abdul Jabbar 3,190
Bill Russell 86,700

Kevin Durant 27,400
Kobe Bryant 29,200
Peyton Manning 12,500
Sidney Crosby 8,360

Wayne Gretzky 2,790
Jerry Rice 12,200
Muhammad Ali 30,200
Jack Nicklaus 11,300
Willie Mays 2,190
Richard Petty 5,350


Is it any wonder he is the "clear GOAT"?

Russell and Ali are the outliers because they have more common names. The search will turn up any article with both, say, "Muhammad" and "Ali" in it.

But 'Michael' and 'Jordan' are highly uncommon?

[TiagoSimoes]

It's like a Christian proclaiming the only God is Jesus. When we know there are many beliefs in this world and many gods alike.

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

[Dro]

No, its pretty much a sure fire thing for the foreseeable future
This/thread

[Roundball_Rock]

at the end of the day, bran was given more than what jordan had

We will see how good the Heat are without LeBron. :lol

[moe94]

But 'Michael' and 'Jordan' are highly uncommon?
:roll:

[juju151111]

We will see how good the Heat are without LeBron. :lol
Wade is 33 and broken down. Obviously they are not going go be the same.

[Roundball_Rock]

:roll:

Do you guys really think "Jordan" is as common as "Ali"? :lol

[Flash31]

MJ is seen as the GOAT because the media ONLY Pushes him as the goat and no one else.

MJ has by far the biggest marketing campaign out of any athlete.
MJ gets talked about more than any athlete in NbA except LeBron&Kobe and
MJ retired well over 10 years ago and won 16 years ago.


The media doesn't mention Wilt or Kareem.
The literal ONLY reason Bill Russell is mentioned is bc he has 11 rings,the Finals MVP is named after him and he is regularly at Playoff games to where they can't avoid him.

They exclude Wilt from their records all the time and set arbitrar cutoffs so the players theyre promoting and look better.

I mean avg 35-40 pts over a stretch is amazing but if a guy avg 55-60 it dont look so great.
KD avg 25 for a long stretch is great especially in comparison to medias goat MJ but compared to wilt he's not even half as great in that.


The media promotes Magic,Bird,MJ,Hakeem and Dr J but not
Wilt,BR,Oscar,Thurmond,Havlicek.


The reason MJ is only promoted as GOAT is bc hes the main moneymaker and if the media put up Wilt,Russell,Kareem up with him MJ wouldnt look as great and wouldnt be seen as the Sole TOP decreasing his worship and money making status by a bit.

[mehyaM24]

MJ is seen as the GOAT because the media ONLY Pushes him as the goat and no one else.

MJ has by far the biggest marketing campaign out of any athlete.
MJ gets talked about more than any athlete in NbA except LeBron&Kobe and
MJ retired well over 10 years ago and won 16 years ago.


The media doesn't mention Wilt or Kareem.
The literal ONLY reason Bill Russell is mentioned is bc he has 11 rings,the Finals MVP is named after him and he is regularly at Playoff games to where they can't avoid him.

They exclude Wilt from their records all the time and set arbitrar cutoffs so the players theyre promoting and look better.

I mean avg 35-40 pts over a stretch is amazing but if a guy avg 55-60 it dont look so great.
KD avg 25 for a long stretch is great especially in comparison to medias goat MJ but compared to wilt he's not even half as great in that.


The media promotes Magic,Bird,MJ,Hakeem and Dr J but not
Wilt,BR,Oscar,Thurmond,Havlicek.


The reason MJ is only promoted as GOAT is bc hes the main moneymaker and if the media put up Wilt,Russell,Kareem up with him MJ wouldnt look as great and wouldnt be seen as the Sole TOP decreasing his worship and money making status by a bit.

:applause:

one of the best posts. direct and straight to the point.

once again, i am NOT a fan of wilt's, but the freaking guy re-wrote the record books and dominated like no player before or since.

in addition to that, wilt also re-wrote the rule books, as the league passed many rules to try to limit his dominance (for comparisons sake, jordan has been the beneficiary of rules passed to ENHANCE his scoring e.g. the elimination of hanchecking)

meanwhile, ESPN claimed jordan was the greatest athlete of the 20th century. just laughable.

[Dragic4Life]

MJ is the undisputed GOAT. No ifs, ands or buts.

[mehyaM24]

MJ is the disputed GOAT. No ifs, ands or buts.
agreed

[Roundball_Rock]

MJ is seen as the GOAT because the media ONLY Pushes him as the goat and no one else.

MJ has by far the biggest marketing campaign out of any athlete.
MJ gets talked about more than any athlete in NbA except LeBron&Kobe and
MJ retired well over 10 years ago and won 16 years ago.


The media doesn't mention Wilt or Kareem.
The literal ONLY reason Bill Russell is mentioned is bc he has 11 rings,the Finals MVP is named after him and he is regularly at Playoff games to where they can't avoid him.

They exclude Wilt from their records all the time and set arbitrar cutoffs so the players theyre promoting and look better.

I mean avg 35-40 pts over a stretch is amazing but if a guy avg 55-60 it dont look so great.
KD avg 25 for a long stretch is great especially in comparison to medias goat MJ but compared to wilt he's not even half as great in that.


The media promotes Magic,Bird,MJ,Hakeem and Dr J but not
Wilt,BR,Oscar,Thurmond,Havlicek.


The reason MJ is only promoted as GOAT is bc hes the main moneymaker and if the media put up Wilt,Russell,Kareem up with him MJ wouldnt look as great and wouldnt be seen as the Sole TOP decreasing his worship and money making status by a bit.

:applause:

[Bandito]

No, he just is. Lebron nor Kobe or nobody else has knocked him off his pedestal yet.

[beastee]

I do believe some under 30 years old may do this. If you lived to see him play, it just makes sense to refer to him as the GOAT.

My main reasons for this are:
1. In the 90's the league had the best combination of athleticism and superstar talent across the board of any era. Simply put, this decade was the one you would want on your resume to prove you are elite. The 80's was great also (and can be preferred as greater), but anything earlier suffered from too few teams, and a league that had not evolved to its prime form. From 2000 on, we have seen better athletes, but overall skill to star ratio is just not there. Things are looking up for the 10's, but it is still too early.

2. Undebatable best player under 6'7". No one else on the GOAT list had 60% of the players around him taller. Simply put, what he accomplished in a history of giants is unmatched. That is why a PG rarely can win a championship as the best player. the 60's and 70's are prime examples of the dominance of big men who simply had no equals on the court.

3. His overall appeal. Yes, I know this is not bball related, but simply put in the 90's - before twitter- before widespread internet use, he became a global icon. When kids in India and Africa and communist countries knew and wanted to be like Mike, his cross over star is simply too much to overlook. Maybe that is my bias being in the advertising industry, but simply put he was the face of sports for a good 10 year run. Not just the NBA, but the whole world.

The GOAT list is in fact 4-5 debatable deep, but MJ should consistently rise to the top with careful consideration of - Stats, Era, and Maximum impact to the sport itself and globally.

[Legends66NBA7]

just like saying how Wince Carter is always injured (he only ever was in Toronto)

In only 2 seasons.

[Asukal]

I love the common ammo these detractors love to use: "media hype".

:roll: :lol :oldlol: :banana:

[diamenz]

I do believe some under 30 years old may do this. If you lived to see him play, it just makes sense to refer to him as the GOAT.

My main reasons for this are:
1. In the 90's the league had the best combination of athleticism and superstar talent across the board of any era. Simply put, this decade was the one you would want on your resume to prove you are elite. The 80's was great also (and can be preferred as greater), but anything earlier suffered from too few teams, and a league that had not evolved to its prime form. From 2000 on, we have seen better athletes, but overall skill to star ratio is just not there. Things are looking up for the 10's, but it is still too early.

2. Undebatable best player under 6'7". No one else on the GOAT list had 60% of the players around him taller. Simply put, what he accomplished in a history of giants is unmatched. That is why a PG rarely can win a championship as the best player. the 60's and 70's are prime examples of the dominance of big men who simply had no equals on the court.

3. His overall appeal. Yes, I know this is not bball related, but simply put in the 90's - before twitter- before widespread internet use, he became a global icon. When kids in India and Africa and communist countries knew and wanted to be like Mike, his cross over star is simply too much to overlook. Maybe that is my bias being in the advertising industry, but simply put he was the face of sports for a good 10 year run. Not just the NBA, but the whole world.

The GOAT list is in fact 4-5 debatable deep, but MJ should consistently rise to the top with careful consideration of - Stats, Era, and Maximum impact to the sport itself and globally.

great post. the top 4-5 gost list is jordan, and legendary big men. if mike isn't goat, he's the undisputed goat perimeter player.

[Roundball_Rock]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51szshz-qQL._SL500_AA240_.jpg

Why not give KAJ, Wilt, and Russell equal time? Where is the ESPN "Gretzky is the best ever" or "Rice is the GOAT" or "Babe Ruth" special edition issue?

[diamenz]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51szshz-qQL._SL500_AA240_.jpg

Why not give KAJ, Wilt, and Russell equal time? Where is the ESPN "Gretzky is the best ever" or "Rice is the GOAT" or "Babe Ruth" special edition issue?

because mj isn't just the basketball goat, but possibly the goat athlete.

[stalkerforlife]

I say MJ is the GOAT because he's the best player i've ever seen.

I didn't see much of Kareem. I saw none of Russell or Wilt.

[f0und]

ive mentioned this in several threads, but there was a thread a few months back that asked, "those of you who were old enough to watch jordan, who was better between him, kobe, bron, kd, etc.?" among those who actually did watch jordan, it was pretty much unanimous that everyone picked jordan and did so without the slightest doubt.

the only detractors were ones that didnt get to watch jordan in his prime. i have little doubt that this thread and the OP are the same way. the people arguing against jordan didnt see jordan play.

[livinglegend]

:applause:



:lol at the irony. How many 90's teams could lose their best player, replace him with a D-Leaguer (not a legitimate replacement like Deng for LeBron) and contend for the #1 seed all year the following season? Let's see the list...



94' Blazers: 48 wins with Drexler.



56 wins with Barkley in 94'.



Replaced Shaq with a 17/10 center and barely were above .500 in 97'.



That is false. They had won 8 of their previous 10 prior to MJ returning, which means they closed the season on a 21-6 roll. MJ definitely helped, but the team was gelling. They had 3 new starters, Longley missed the first 25 or so games and they needed time to adjust to the new roster. Their front line was decimated by their all-star PF, starting C and backup PF leaving or retiring after the 94' season and this was compounded by Longley's early injury; Krause failed to replenish the front line that year.



1 more than MJ won without Pippen as a starter. :roll:



:lol



You left a little fact out. The Bulls blew a 2-0 lead and were facing a decisive Game 5 (the first round was 5 games back then). A desperate Doug Collins inserted Pippen into the starting line-up for the first time in his career. Pippen had 24/7/5 or something to put the Bulls over the top. If Pippen did not start, the Bulls would have lost in the first round for the fourth consecutive season.



:lol MJ fans include a game where Pippen played ONE minute and had 0/0/0 in the averages.

It is interesting you brought up 1989...that is when Pippen became a permanent starter. Pippen averaged 10/4/2 in 25 mpg on the bench and 16/7/4 in 35 mpg as a starter. The Bulls started the year 13-12 (0.500 ball was par for the course in the MJ era up to that point); as soon as Pippen became a starter they went on a 9-2 roll and never looked back. They got up to 45-28 before closing poorly and finishing 47-35. The Bulls went 4-5 when Pippen did not play; they were 43-30 when he did play. That is the difference between 36 wins and 48 wins over a season. In other words 89' Pippen's improvement in wins resembled that of 85' Jordan (27 wins to 38 wins).

Pippen becoming a starter was the watershed moment that took the Bulls to the next level, just as Magic joining the Lakers in 80' was for the Lakers, even though in both cases neither was the best player on the team.

great post. exposing MJ again! :applause: :applause:

[Soundwave]

MJ is seen as the GOAT because the media ONLY Pushes him as the goat and no one else.

MJ has by far the biggest marketing campaign out of any athlete.
MJ gets talked about more than any athlete in NbA except LeBron&Kobe and
MJ retired well over 10 years ago and won 16 years ago.


The media doesn't mention Wilt or Kareem.
The literal ONLY reason Bill Russell is mentioned is bc he has 11 rings,the Finals MVP is named after him and he is regularly at Playoff games to where they can't avoid him.

They exclude Wilt from their records all the time and set arbitrar cutoffs so the players theyre promoting and look better.

I mean avg 35-40 pts over a stretch is amazing but if a guy avg 55-60 it dont look so great.
KD avg 25 for a long stretch is great especially in comparison to medias goat MJ but compared to wilt he's not even half as great in that.


The media promotes Magic,Bird,MJ,Hakeem and Dr J but not
Wilt,BR,Oscar,Thurmond,Havlicek.


The reason MJ is only promoted as GOAT is bc hes the main moneymaker and if the media put up Wilt,Russell,Kareem up with him MJ wouldnt look as great and wouldnt be seen as the Sole TOP decreasing his worship and money making status by a bit.

What marketing campaign does Jordan even have? How many Jordan TV ads do you see anymore? I don't even associate ESPN with Jordan, they never aired a single Jordan game (that would be NBC).

The reason Jordan is still popular is because the general public won't let him go. They associate Jordan with winning and winning in a modern context ... meaning "being the man". There's fantasy fulfillment in his legacy, and the fact is he has a dramatic story that's almost like a Hollywood movie. It drives tremendous appeal to his mythology even 16 years after his retirement.

The media is just giving the people what they want, though ESPN hypes LeBron and Kobe 1000x more than Jordan these days, so why aren't they as popular?

If it was easy to replicate Jordan simply via marketing then the Stern would've done it a hundred times over by now sitting down with Nike, ESPN, McDonalds, etc. It doesn't work that way (even though the NBA has desperately tried to push about 10 different guys to fill that void).

[livinglegend]

Still it's a primary part of basketball, I think if you really want to be GOAT, you have to have shouldered the role of being the no.1 option on offence. It's part of the trial by fire ... can you handle that role? It's not easy to score, it's arguably the most exhausting, most pressure involved aspect of

These are just your opinions and not facts. Russell showed that you didnt have to be the no.1 scorer to make your team win. Russell always made his team win without having to score. He affected the other ares. Ultimately, winning is all that matters.


Even moreso in crunch time, that's when you see which players are hype and who's the real deal.

I could be wrong, but I'm not even sure if Russell ever led the Celtics in scoring once.

Often times he was no.3 on the scoring chart.

Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Wilt, Kareem, all have experienced what it takes to have to handle that pressure of being "the guy" that has to lead offensively.

Russell? Not so much.

So what? He still won 11 championships in 12 tries as the leader of the team. He won 5 MVPs. He is the GOAT winner and basketball is all about winning.


Beyond that I think the league was simply weaker back then. The average player was smaller and far less skilled circa 1961, and the average coach was less versed in actual strategy/defensive schemes. There was only one (one!) 7 footer (total) in the entire NBA as the 60s started.

Any championship dynasty team post-Magic/Bird era would shred the 60s a new a-hole if they were put into that era IMO.

Those are things Russell didnt have control. He had the best career possible.

[Roundball_Rock]

It is funny how rings are the be all end all for MJ stans. 6>5. 6>3. 6>2. 6>6 ( :lol ). Except when it comes to Russell--who was 11 for 12 in rings (MJ was 5 for 15). Then all of a sudden context, how good the player was individually matters.

[Soundwave]

It is funny how rings are the be all end all for MJ stans. 6>5. 6>3. 6>2. 6>6 ( :lol ). Except when it comes to Russell--who was 11 for 12 in rings (MJ was 5 for 15). Then all of a sudden context, how good the player was individually matters.

There's only two players in 100+ years of basketball that have 6 titles as the main player on the team.

Two total.

Actually though the number of rings isn't as impressive to me, if it was Kobe should be no.3 or 4 GOAT too ... he has 5 rings.

Have to look at the entire resume, that's just logical.

[Roundball_Rock]

I agree. I just see MJ fans overemphasizing the rings card because he has more than most of his competitors for GOAT. It should be a factor but a lot of MJ fans act as if 6>5 or 6>2 is dispositive.

[Calabis]

It is funny how rings are the be all end all for MJ stans. 6>5. 6>3. 6>2. 6>6 ( :lol ). Except when it comes to Russell--who was 11 for 12 in rings (MJ was 5 for 15). Then all of a sudden context, how good the player was individually matters.

:roll: Guy screaming out context, yet Russell had an entirely different burden then MJ

Russell was a defensive player/rebounder....he rarely lead Boston offensively. Don't get me wrong, he was a huge cog in the wheel, that was relied upon to rebound and play defense. Not one time did Russell lead his team in scoring during the playoffs in any of his chips

Chip 1: 4 other of his teammates outscored Russell in the postseason, he shot 36% as a post player

Chip 2: 4th leading scorer during regular season, shot 45%, in playoffs 4 other teammates outscore him and he shoots 40% from the post.

Chip 3: he did his thing

Chip 4: he did his thing

Chip 5: he did his thing

Chip 6: he did his thing

Chip 7: 3 other teammates outscored him in he playoffs and he shot 35.6% as a post player:facepalm

Chip 8: 2 other teammates outscored him in the playoffs

Chip 9: 2 other teammates outscored him

Chip 10: 3 other teammates outscored him

Chip 11: 6 other teammates outscored him:roll:


Jordan never could have let 4 other teammates outscore him on the playoffs and still win chips...that's context.....I would have loved to see what Russell could have done, if he was forced to dominate on offense...my guess is a lot less rings.

[Roundball_Rock]

Jordan never could have let 4 other teammates outscore him on the playoffs and still win chips...t

True. This also is true:

Boston Celtics before Russell: 39-33, lost in the first round.
Russell's first season: 44-28, NBA champions.
Russell's final season: 48-34, NBA champions.
Boston Celtics after Russell: 34-48, missed playoffs.

Russell also won 2 rings as a coach/player. That is a burden greater than just scoring.

[Calabis]

True. This also is true:

Boston Celtics before Russell: 39-33, lost in the first round.
Russell's first season: 44-28, NBA champions.
Russell's final season: 48-34, NBA champions.
Boston Celtics after Russell: 34-48, missed playoffs.

Russell also won 2 rings as a coach/player. That is a burden greater than just scoring.

Good post, not trying to discredit Russell(huge cog in the wheel)....you can't go wrong, with him, Wilt, KAJ or Jordan...they all have a case for GOAT.

Hell even Jordan said he doesn't consider himself GOAT, because he never got to play against guys like West, Baylor, Russell, etc.

[Roundball_Rock]

Yeah. I think everyone respects MJ's game. People just don't like some of his stans saying MJ>>>>>everyone else and crediting him with everything the Bulls did. I personally can't decide between KAJ and MJ as #1 and I have never had MJ lower than 4th.

MJ was super clutch. Whenever the Bulls were down late I had faith that MJ would lead us back; often he did. :rockon:

[Soundwave]

:roll: Guy screaming out context, yet Russell had an entirely different burden then MJ

Russell was a defensive player/rebounder....he rarely lead Boston offensively. Don't get me wrong, he was a huge cog in the wheel, that was relied upon to rebound and play defense. Not one time did Russell lead his team in scoring during the playoffs in any of his chips

Chip 1: 4 other of his teammates outscored Russell in the postseason, he shot 36% as a post player

Chip 2: 4th leading scorer during regular season, shot 45%, in playoffs 4 other teammates outscore him and he shoots 40% from the post.

Chip 3: he did his thing

Chip 4: he did his thing

Chip 5: he did his thing

Chip 6: he did his thing

Chip 7: 3 other teammates outscored him in he playoffs and he shot 35.6% as a post player:facepalm

Chip 8: 2 other teammates outscored him in the playoffs

Chip 9: 2 other teammates outscored him

Chip 10: 3 other teammates outscored him

Chip 11: 6 other teammates outscored him:roll:


Jordan never could have let 4 other teammates outscore him on the playoffs and still win chips...that's context.....I would have loved to see what Russell could have done, if he was forced to dominate on offense...my guess is a lot less rings.

No disrespect but I'm genuinely curious ... why was his FG% so low? He was one of the biggest players in the game at that time (I believe there isn't even a single 7 footer in the NBA when Russell entered the league) and played near the basket, yet he routinely seemed to shoot in the 40s, even dropping to the 30s in some playoffs whereas Wilt was pretty much always at 50%-60%+.

[DonDadda59]

It is funny how rings are the be all end all for MJ stans. 6>5. 6>3. 6>2. 6>6 ( :lol ). Except when it comes to Russell--who was 11 for 12 in rings (MJ was 5 for 15). Then all of a sudden context, how good the player was individually matters.

John Havlicek has 8 rings. Why is he never mentioned in GOAT talk but Russell is (not really)?

Sam Jones has 7.

[Legends66NBA7]

John Havlicek has 8 rings. Why is he never mentioned in GOAT talk but Russell is (not really)?

Sam Jones has 7.

Sam Jones has 10.

[livinglegend]

:roll: Guy screaming out context, yet Russell had an entirely different burden then MJ

Russell was a defensive player/rebounder....he rarely lead Boston offensively. Don't get me wrong, he was a huge cog in the wheel, that was relied upon to rebound and play defense. Not one time did Russell lead his team in scoring during the playoffs in any of his chips

Chip 1: 4 other of his teammates outscored Russell in the postseason, he shot 36% as a post player

Chip 2: 4th leading scorer during regular season, shot 45%, in playoffs 4 other teammates outscore him and he shoots 40% from the post.

Chip 3: he did his thing

Chip 4: he did his thing

Chip 5: he did his thing

Chip 6: he did his thing

Chip 7: 3 other teammates outscored him in he playoffs and he shot 35.6% as a post player:facepalm

Chip 8: 2 other teammates outscored him in the playoffs

Chip 9: 2 other teammates outscored him

Chip 10: 3 other teammates outscored him

Chip 11: 6 other teammates outscored him:roll:


Jordan never could have let 4 other teammates outscore him on the playoffs and still win chips...that's context.....I would have loved to see what Russell could have done, if he was forced to dominate on offense...my guess is a lot less rings.

Bring scoring as much as you want, it wont change a thing. Russell was a winner, the best winner in the history of basketball ,and the ultimate goal of a basketball player is to win for his team.

[livinglegend]

John Havlicek has 8 rings. Why is he never mentioned in GOAT talk but Russell is (not really)?

Sam Jones has 7.

because they weren the best player and the leader of the team. How many MVPs did those players have? Russell had 5.
Russell was the only constant in the Celtics dynasty. When he came in, they started to win. When he left, they started to lose. When he got injured, they lost. .

[Soundwave]

Bring scoring as much as you want, it wont change a thing. Russell was a winner, the best winner in the history of basketball ,and the ultimate goal of a basketball player is to win for his team.

That makes the GOAT list easy

1. Russell
2. Sam Jones
3. Tom Heinsohn
4. K.C. Jones
5. Tom "Satch" Sanders
6. John Havlicek
7. Jim Lostcuff

Also Horry > Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe

[DonDadda59]

Sam Jones has 10.

I knew that. Why the hell did I type 7? :confusedshrug:

Anyway... Just furthers my point.

[livinglegend]

That makes the GOAT list easy

1. Russell
2. Sam Jones
3. Tom Heinsohn
4. K.C. Jones
5. Tom "Satch" Sanders
6. John Havlicek
7. Jim Lostcuff

Also Horry > Jordan, Duncan, Shaq, Kobe

the best winner as the leader and the best player.
Sam Jones, Horry and all the other celtics player werent the leaders

[Soundwave]

Out of curiousity, how many titles do people think the Russell Celtics would win in the 70s/80s/90s/2000s?

[Soundwave]

the best winner as the leader and the best player.
Sam Jones, Horry and all the other celtics player werent the leaders

Nope your context is arbitrary and therefor irrelevant. After all we're apparently not "allowed" to take into context "scoring" (not like you need to score to win a basketball game) when discussing GOAT. Just winning.

Sam Jones as the 1B GOAT confirmed.

[DonDadda59]

because they weren the best player and the leader of the team. How many MVPs did those players have? Russell had 5.
Russell was the only constant in the Celtics dynasty. When he came in, they started to win. When he left, they started to lose. When he got injured, they lost. .

Havlicek won 2 rings without Russell, including a finals MVP (and should've won another in '69 when they gave it to West in a losing effort).

[livinglegend]

Out of curiousity, how many titles do people think the Russell Celtics would win in the 70s/80s/90s/2000s?

11 in 12 tries.
You cant prove me wrong.

[livinglegend]

Nope your context is arbitrary and therefor irrelevant. After all we're apparently not "allowed" to take into context "scoring" (not like you need to score to win a basketball game) when discussing GOAT. Just winning.

Sam Jones as the 1B GOAT confirmed.

as i said, sam jones wasnt the best player. How many MVPs did he win?

[PsychoBe]

it doesnt even matter about the "ifs". michael jeffrey jordan was the greatest basketball player to have ever lived. if you think about the combination of athleticism, talent, fundamentals, defense, leadership, intangibles, flawless in the finals, cultural impact, and etc, he's just the greatest.

end of discusshin.

[livinglegend]

Havlicek won 2 rings without Russell, including a finals MVP (and should've won another in '69 when they gave it to West in a losing effort).

So?

[Soundwave]

as i said, sam jones wasnt the best player. How many MVPs did he win?

Why is MVP relevant? You yourself said winning is the only thing that matters. :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

John Havlicek has 8 rings. Why is he never mentioned in GOAT talk but Russell is (not really)?

The same reason his 90's version Scottie Pippen is not, even though Pippen has 6 rings, more than Magic, Bird, Shaq, Kobe, Hakeem, Duncan, LeBron and as many as KAJ and MJ.


Russell was the only constant in the Celtics dynasty. When he came in, they started to win. When he left, they started to lose. When he got injured, they lost. .

Yup--and they were not even competitive before or after him, although they later rebounded because they sucked so much they were able to draft future MVP Dave Cowens.


the best winner as the leader and the best player.

Isn't that their manta? "Rings as the man"? That is what they use against KAJ (since he has 6 rings as well an additional qualifier is needed beyond the simple 6>2 they do with Wilt).


how many titles do people think the Russell Celtics would win in the 70s/80s/90s/2000s?

Less. Similarly, the 90's Bulls would not win 6 in the 80's, 2000's or 2010's.

[livinglegend]

Why is MVP relevant? You yourself said winning is the only thing that matters. :lol
:facepalm
MVPs show that Russell was the best player on that team and not Sam Jones.

[livinglegend]

The same reason his 90's version Scottie Pippen is not, even though Pippen has 6 rings, more than Magic, Bird, Shaq, Kobe, Hakeem, Duncan, LeBron and as many as KAJ and MJ.



Yup--and they were not even competitive before or after him, although they later rebounded because they sucked so much they were able to draft future MVP Dave Cowens.



Isn't that their manta? "Rings as the man"? That is what they use against KAJ (since he has 6 rings as well an additional qualifier is needed beyond the simple 6>2 they do with Wilt).



Less. Similarly, the 90's Bulls would not win 6 in the 80's, 2000's or 2010's.

:applause: :applause:

[DonDadda59]

So?

You asked when anyone besides Russell was the best player on the Celtics and that they only won when he was there and lost when he left.

Pointed out that Havlicek was the best player on the team (and Cousy was MVP and Heinsohn ROY in Russell's first year) and won 2 championships (1 finals MVP) after Russell retired.


The same reason his 90's version Scottie Pippen is not, even though Pippen has 6 rings, more than Magic, Bird, Shaq, Kobe, Hakeem, Duncan, LeBron and as many as KAJ and MJ.

Pippen was never the best player on the Bulls when Jordan was on the team and never won finals MVP. Havlicek can claim both, with 8 championships to his name.

But the Joakim Noah/Dennis Rodman of his era is the only one mentioned (again, not really) in nonsense GOAT discussions.

[Soundwave]

The same reason his 90's version Scottie Pippen is not, even though Pippen has 6 rings, more than Magic, Bird, Shaq, Kobe, Hakeem, Duncan, LeBron and as many as KAJ and MJ.



Yup--and they were not even competitive before or after him, although they later rebounded because they sucked so much they were able to draft future MVP Dave Cowens.



Isn't that their manta? "Rings as the man"? That is what they use against KAJ (since he has 6 rings as well an additional qualifier is needed beyond the simple 6>2 they do with Wilt).



Less. Similarly, the 90's Bulls would not win 6 in the 80's, 2000's or 2010's.

I think the Bulls would win 4 in the 80s (if given the full decade to work with, Pistons won 2), 5-6 in the 2000s and 6, maybe 7 in the 2010s.

I don't think those Celtic teams would match any of those totals in those respective decades.

[Calabis]

Bring scoring as much as you want, it wont change a thing. Russell was a winner, the best winner in the history of basketball ,and the ultimate goal of a basketball player is to win for his team.

Yes because in Basketball, scoring is irrelevant and has zero impact.....what is the point of having a clutch category...apparently it means nothing since it usually involves scoring.

I guess Robert Horry is the best player ever of this generation, hell he has 7 rings, he won for his team:confusedshrug:

[Calabis]

it doesnt even matter about the "ifs". michael jeffrey jordan was the greatest basketball player to have ever lived. if you think about the combination of athleticism, talent, fundamentals, defense, leadership, intangibles, flawless in the finals, cultural impact, and etc, he's just the greatest.

end of discusshin.

:wtf:

You can't use all those things!

[Soundwave]

Championships aren't the only metric for judging GOAT in any sport.

They are a major one sure, but for example Gretzky isn't even in the top 10 for titles in NHL history.

It's championships + individual statistical dominance, usually in some kind of offensive metric categorey (goals scored, points totals, yards thrown, touchdowns thrown, yards ran, home runs, hitting percentage, etc.)/

That's not just basketball, that's basically the standard in all the major team sports.

That's why Jordan is considered the GOAT by the general public and many basketball die-hards and that's why Gretzky has the same title for hockey.

When looking at the best quarterback ever we don't just look at Superbowl rings (though that's important), yards thrown, touchdowns thrown, etc. are high on the list of things weighed.

You can throw your hissy fit on ISH as to why you think that's not true, but it's pretty much how the public at large views it, it's not some ESPN conspiracy.

The GOAT in any sport should represent not only team dominance but individual dominance as well, that's what people want to see when looking for the best player to ever player a sport.

[Roundball_Rock]

I think the Bulls would win 4 in the 80s (if given the full decade to work with, Pistons won 2), 5-6 in the 2000s and 6, maybe 7 in the 2010s.

Yeah I pretty much agree. I, of course, am assuming that if your transport the Bulls back to the 80's they get a fourth all-star caliber player in the less diluted league. If you took their 90's roster and put them back in the 80's they wouldn't do as well but if you throw a fourth all-star caliber player, to match the kind of rosters top 80's teams had, they would be strong, especially the second three-peat team with Kukoc as your 4th/5th best player. The only thing I disagree with is your 7 in the 2010's and 6 in the 2000's. They would simply have tougher competition in those eras with the Spurs, the two Laker iterations this century, and the Heat, than they did in the 90's. I would guess 3-4 in the 80's (they would be in the East so they wouldn't get an annual bye to the Finals like the Lakers), 4-5 in the 2000's and 2010's.


I don't think those Celtic teams would match any of those totals in those respective decades.

It is hard to say since the league was much bigger by the 80's. That Celtics roster would be substantially diluted if the Celtics time traveled to the 80's. It is easier to envision the 90's Bulls going to the 80's since their roster would not be that much different.


But the Joakim Noah/Dennis Rodman of his era is the only one mentioned (again, not really) in nonsense GOAT discussions.

http://www.facepalm.de/images/facepalm.jpg

Here is the MVP voting for Russell, Cousy, and Havelick in the Russell years:

1957: Cousy 1st, Russell 7th
1958: Russell 1st, Cousy 6th
1959: Russell 2nd Cousy 4th
1960: Russell 2nd, Cousy 4th
1961: Russell 1st, Cousy N/A
1962: Russell 1st, 8th
1963: Russell 1st, Cousy 8th (Cousy's final season), Havelick 10th
1964: Russell 3rd, Havelick N/A
1965: Russell 1st, Havelick N/A
1966: Russell 4th, Havelick N/A
1967: Russell 3rd, Havelick N/A
1968: N/A for both
1969: Russell 4th, Havelick N/A (Russell's last season)

Havelick placed 10th in 63' but did not receive a single MVP vote again until 1972. He had one 4th place MVP finish, a 5th, 7th, and 9th from 1972-1975 (the results are not listed chronologically) in addition to that 10th place as a rookie.

It is interesting Pippen was compared to Havelick. Here are Pippen's MVP results from 1992-1998: 9th (one first place vote in 92'), N/A, 3rd, 7th, 5th, 11th, 10th (half a season). That is a very similar track record, and actually slightly better, than Havelick's (Pippen's high was 3rd, not 4th and he received MVP votes in one more season than Havelick did).

[G.O.A.T]

Jordan never could have let 4 other teammates outscore him on the playoffs and still win chips...that's context.....I would have loved to see what Russell could have done, if he was forced to dominate on offense...my guess is a lot less rings.

What would have happened if Jordan had to be the defensive anchor for his team and/or guard the oppositions best player each night? My guess is lot less points.

I don't think Russell was going to be the greatest offensive player ever, or even an elite scorer, but he had so many great games and series scoring when it was needed that I am confident he would have adjusted his game however it need be. Think of it this way, when did Bill Russell's lack of scoring ever cost his team a series?


There's only two players in 100+ years of basketball that have 6 titles as the main player on the team.

Two total.

Three guys actually since the NBA era. Mikan has seven.


John Havlicek has 8 rings. Why is he never mentioned in GOAT talk but Russell is (not really)?

Sam Jones has 7.

Jones has 10, not seven. and the reason is really obvious. Russell was the best player on his team and one of the best in the league for all of those titles. Russell was voted the greatest player ever in 1970 and 1980, those other Celtics weren't, that's why Russell is in the conversation and they are not. Same Reason Jordan's in the conversation and Pippen, Rodman and Grant are not. Same reason Magic and Kareem are in the conversation and Byron Scott, James Worthy and Jamaal Wilkes are not. Bird in, Mchale, Parrish, DJ not. It's pretty easy to figure out.


Nope your context is arbitrary and therefor irrelevant. After all we're apparently not "allowed" to take into context "scoring" (not like you need to score to win a basketball game) when discussing GOAT. Just winning.


The team has to score to win, not the individual. And for the individual to score, other members of the team must execute their roles without scoring. Doing things like dribbling, passing, setting screens and spacing the floor. Also because scoring is how you win the game, stopping the other team from scoring is pretty important too, some might say equally even.

In basketball one individual can impact every single player on both teams on any given play. That's the beauty of the sport and that's what separates the all-time greats from the rest.

[mehyaM24]

i have kareem and russell over jordan

dominated against better competition (relative to position, jordan faced perimeter players at an average height of 6'4 :facepalm)

boiled down: russell has more rings, kareem has more mvps

[Soundwave]

"Greatest winner" really isn't the metric for best player in any of the other team sports anyway.

Jim Brown or Jerry Rice are generally considered the NFL GOATs, not Joe Montana who has more Superbowl rings. Jim Brown only has 1 Superbowl ring.

Wayne Gretzky is NHL GOAT, but he's not even close to the greatest winner in NHL history. He has 4 Cups to Maurice Richard's 11.

Joe DiMaggio and Yogi Barra have more World Series rings than Babe Ruth, but most people put Ruth at no.1 or no.2 because of individual dominance on top of a good number of WS wins.

And all of these guys are star players too, these aren't the "Robert Horry's" of their sport.

It's the intersection of individual dominance and team dominance that people want to see when determining who's the best. People look at these two in unison because they want to see who's the best player, not who played in the best situation.

[sportjames23]

Championships aren't the only metric for judging GOAT in any sport.

They are a major one sure, but for example Gretzky isn't even in the top 10 for titles in NHL history.

It's championships + individual statistical dominance, usually in some kind of offensive metric categorey (goals scored, points totals, yards thrown, touchdowns thrown, yards ran, home runs, hitting percentage, etc.)/

That's not just basketball, that's basically the standard in all the major team sports.

That's why Jordan is considered the GOAT by the general public and many basketball die-hards and that's why Gretzky has the same title for hockey.

When looking at the best quarterback ever we don't just look at Superbowl rings (though that's important), yards thrown, touchdowns thrown, etc. are high on the list of things weighed.

You can throw your hissy fit on ISH as to why you think that's not true, but it's pretty much how the public at large views it, it's not some ESPN conspiracy.

The GOAT in any sport should represent not only team dominance but individual dominance as well, that's what people want to see when looking for the best player to ever player a sport.


:cheers:

[LoneyROY7]

F*ck Michael Jordan.

[funnystuff]

Would have got 0 rings without Pippen.

[Soundwave]

Would have got 0 rings without Pippen.

No he would've demanded a trade by the early 90s away from Chicago and won 5-6 somewhere else (probably LA since they seem to sucker all the GMs to trade them their star and Jerry Buss had a bigger hard on for Jordan than any of his lady friends). Same thing that happened to Barkley being traded from the crap 76ers to the Suns, except Jordan would actually win.

Jordan was too big of a star to rot in Chicago forever if they couldn't get their crap together.

And he'd have more than 6 if he was drafted by the Blazers and had Drexler to play alongside from day 1.

Being drafted by Chicago and have to earn his chips has a certain romance to it, but the cold, hard truth is Portland was actually probably the better situation, it would have put him into championship contention much more quickly, like Magic and Bird had the benefit of.

[livinglegend]

You asked when anyone besides Russell was the best player on the Celtics and that they only won when he was there and lost when he left.

Pointed out that Havlicek was the best player on the team (and Cousy was MVP and Heinsohn ROY in Russell's first year) and won 2 championships (1 finals MVP) after Russell retired.



Pippen was never the best player on the Bulls when Jordan was on the team and never won finals MVP. Havlicek can claim both, with 8 championships to his name.

But the Joakim Noah/Dennis Rodman of his era is the only one mentioned (again, not really) in nonsense GOAT discussions.

You are making up things. Havlicek wasnt the best player on the team. Russell was.

[livinglegend]

Yeah I pretty much agree. I, of course, am assuming that if your transport the Bulls back to the 80's they get a fourth all-star caliber player in the less diluted league. If you took their 90's roster and put them back in the 80's they wouldn't do as well but if you throw a fourth all-star caliber player, to match the kind of rosters top 80's teams had, they would be strong, especially the second three-peat team with Kukoc as your 4th/5th best player. The only thing I disagree with is your 7 in the 2010's and 6 in the 2000's. They would simply have tougher competition in those eras with the Spurs, the two Laker iterations this century, and the Heat, than they did in the 90's. I would guess 3-4 in the 80's (they would be in the East so they wouldn't get an annual bye to the Finals like the Lakers), 4-5 in the 2000's and 2010's.



It is hard to say since the league was much bigger by the 80's. That Celtics roster would be substantially diluted if the Celtics time traveled to the 80's. It is easier to envision the 90's Bulls going to the 80's since their roster would not be that much different.



http://www.facepalm.de/images/facepalm.jpg

Here is the MVP voting for Russell, Cousy, and Havelick in the Russell years:

1957: Cousy 1st, Russell 7th
1958: Russell 1st, Cousy 6th
1959: Russell 2nd Cousy 4th
1960: Russell 2nd, Cousy 4th
1961: Russell 1st, Cousy N/A
1962: Russell 1st, 8th
1963: Russell 1st, Cousy 8th (Cousy's final season), Havelick 10th
1964: Russell 3rd, Havelick N/A
1965: Russell 1st, Havelick N/A
1966: Russell 4th, Havelick N/A
1967: Russell 3rd, Havelick N/A
1968: N/A for both
1969: Russell 4th, Havelick N/A (Russell's last season)

Havelick placed 10th in 63' but did not receive a single MVP vote again until 1972. He had one 4th place MVP finish, a 5th, 7th, and 9th from 1972-1975 (the results are not listed chronologically) in addition to that 10th place as a rookie.

It is interesting Pippen was compared to Havelick. Here are Pippen's MVP results from 1992-1998: 9th (one first place vote in 92'), N/A, 3rd, 7th, 5th, 11th, 10th (half a season). That is a very similar track record, and actually slightly better, than Havelick's (Pippen's high was 3rd, not 4th and he received MVP votes in one more season than Havelick did).

Thanks for owning them once again. These MVP votes clearly show that Russell was the best player on those Celtics team.

[livinglegend]

What would have happened if Jordan had to be the defensive anchor for his team and/or guard the oppositions best player each night? My guess is lot less points.

I don't think Russell was going to be the greatest offensive player ever, or even an elite scorer, but he had so many great games and series scoring when it was needed that I am confident he would have adjusted his game however it need be. Think of it this way, when did Bill Russell's lack of scoring ever cost his team a series?



Three guys actually since the NBA era. Mikan has seven.



Jones has 10, not seven. and the reason is really obvious. Russell was the best player on his team and one of the best in the league for all of those titles. Russell was voted the greatest player ever in 1970 and 1980, those other Celtics weren't, that's why Russell is in the conversation and they are not. Same Reason Jordan's in the conversation and Pippen, Rodman and Grant are not. Same reason Magic and Kareem are in the conversation and Byron Scott, James Worthy and Jamaal Wilkes are not. Bird in, Mchale, Parrish, DJ not. It's pretty easy to figure out.



The team has to score to win, not the individual. And for the individual to score, other members of the team must execute their roles without scoring. Doing things like dribbling, passing, setting screens and spacing the floor. Also because scoring is how you win the game, stopping the other team from scoring is pretty important too, some might say equally even.

In basketball one individual can impact every single player on both teams on any given play. That's the beauty of the sport and that's what separates the all-time greats from the rest.

:applause: :applause:

[livinglegend]

"Greatest winner" really isn't the metric for best player in any of the other team sports anyway.

Jim Brown or Jerry Rice are generally considered the NFL GOATs, not Joe Montana who has more Superbowl rings. Jim Brown only has 1 Superbowl ring.

Wayne Gretzky is NHL GOAT, but he's not even close to the greatest winner in NHL history. He has 4 Cups to Maurice Richard's 11.

Joe DiMaggio and Yogi Barra have more World Series rings than Babe Ruth, but most people put Ruth at no.1 or no.2 because of individual dominance on top of a good number of WS wins.

And all of these guys are star players too, these aren't the "Robert Horry's" of their sport.

It's the intersection of individual dominance and team dominance that people want to see when determining who's the best. People look at these two in unison because they want to see who's the best player, not who played in the best situation.

I dont know about other sports and i dont care about what people look at when they make their goat list. For me, basketball is about winning and i look at who made his team win as the best player. Russell did wayyyyy better than anyone else, thus he is the GOAT for me.
Posters in here claim that no other player ( other than Jordan) has a good GOAT argument. I think this is a pretty great argument for Russell.
Great arguments could also be made for 2-3 other players.

[G.O.A.T]

"Greatest winner" really isn't the metric for best player in any of the other team sports anyway.

Jim Brown or Jerry Rice are generally considered the NFL GOATs, not Joe Montana who has more Superbowl rings. Jim Brown only has 1 Superbowl ring.

Wayne Gretzky is NHL GOAT, but he's not even close to the greatest winner in NHL history. He has 4 Cups to Maurice Richard's 11.

Joe DiMaggio and Yogi Barra have more World Series rings than Babe Ruth, but most people put Ruth at no.1 or no.2 because of individual dominance on top of a good number of WS wins.

And all of these guys are star players too, these aren't the "Robert Horry's" of their sport.

It's the intersection of individual dominance and team dominance that people want to see when determining who's the best. People look at these two in unison because they want to see who's the best player, not who played in the best situation.


Basketball is much different then the rest, it's a much more individual game though equal to those others a team game.

As examples

In Basketball a player has the opportunity to impact every single offensive and defensive possession. That does not happen in any of the other three sports.

In football, the quarterback is unquestionably the most important position and can impact at most 55% of the plays in a game.

In Baseball a hitter impacts only 10-15% of the plays in a game and as a fielder your percentage can be even lower. The player with the greatest impact on each game (the starting pitcher) plays only once every four or five games.

In Hockey, while on the Ice, it is similar to basketball, but even the very best players rarely play much more than a third of the game.

Because of the greater emphasis on individual excellence, you see fewer upsets in basketball. In the NFL, NHL and MLB the lowest playoff seed has won the title at least once in the last decade, that has never happened in basketball and seems almost impossible.

Aside from Mikan, who gets excluded for era. Most everyone has the same top 12 or at least 10-12 of these guys in their top 12: Russell, Jordan, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Wilt, Shaq, Hakeem, Duncan, Kobe, LeBron, Mikan. Those are the 12 guys who won an MVP, Finals MVP and two titles as their teams best player. So those things matter in basketball, at least when it comes to the very best.

I've often spoken of how those 12 players combined have played in nearly every NBA finals from '49 to today. Try to do that in baseball or hockey or football. Only two MVP's in NBA history has never played in the finals (Nash, Rose), only three never made it to the finals in their prime. (Add McAdoo) You won't see that in other sports either.

The correlation between individual excellence and team success is undeniably greater in basketball than in the other three majors. That's why it's different in basketball, because it's different in basketball.

Now of course it needs to be noted always that this does not suggest things should be simplified to more rings = better player, or even more rings as best player equals better player, just that it is a very important and legitimate criteria to consider when evaluating the best players.

[sportjames23]

F*ck Michael Jordan.


And your mama.

[sportjames23]

Would have got 0 rings without Pippen.


Remind me again how many rings Pippen won without MJ.

[Roundball_Rock]

Thanks for owning them once again. These MVP votes clearly show that Russell was the best player on those Celtics team.

I do what I can. :pimp:


Remind me again how many rings Pippen won without MJ.

Yup, they won together and needed each other to reach the high level of achievement they did.

http://images2.sina.com/english/sports/p/2010/0815/U164P200T1D334058F14DT20100815200741.jpg

[Just2McFly]

man oh man

[SamuraiSWISH]

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51szshz-qQL._SL500_AA240_.jpg

Why not give KAJ, Wilt, and Russell equal time? Where is the ESPN "Gretzky is the best ever" or "Rice is the GOAT" or "Babe Ruth" special edition issue?
Why as a "Bulls fan" with the cover of this magazine even bother you?

[GODbe]

It's pretty much exactly that. I think the general public deep down has already accepted Kobe surpassed him a couple years ago. They just continue to say that overrated scrub is GOAT so they don't get dirty looks from people like them.

[knicksman]

It is funny how rings are the be all end all for MJ stans. 6>5. 6>3. 6>2. 6>6 ( :lol ). Except when it comes to Russell--who was 11 for 12 in rings (MJ was 5 for 15). Then all of a sudden context, how good the player was individually matters.

So how many russell type of players have won since russell esp in the modern era. NONe. I dont know why bran stans are so stupid. But I guess as they say, empty vessels make the most noise. :lol

[knicksman]

Saying wilt is a candidate just shows your lack of IQ. LOL wilt. The best way to judge a player is how he performs when it matters. Only idiots think RS=playoffs=finals or 1st quarter scoring=clutch scoring. Same idiots who think Wilt=jordan because of regular season stats. LOL judge them during tough times and the overrateds(wilt, bran) get exposed.