How come no one wants to talk about all of Jordan first round exits

[EllisGW]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.

[nathanjizzle]

dirk nowitzki has 7 first round exits out of 14 post seasons, how come nobody ever talks about that?

[EllisGW]

dirk nowitzki has 7 first round exits out of 14 post seasons, how come nobody ever talks about that?
Please stay on topic plus no one is saying dirk is goat.

[Rose'sACL]

Jordan shouldn't be blamed for losing in the first round. He can be blamed for not getting higher seed though considering he came after finishing 4 years of college so he wasn't too young plus east wasn't as stacked as current west. it was more top heavy.

He is still the GOAT though.

[EllisGW]

Jordan never beat any top ten all time great in their prime. The best player he beat in his prime was thomas with the Pistons and he retired two years later. When he played bird he lost and when he played Isaiah in his twenties he lost.

[TheBigVeto]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.

Jordan got his ass beat by prime Bird, so there's no shame in that.

[TheBigVeto]

dirk nowitzki has 7 first round exits out of 14 post seasons, how come nobody ever talks about that?

People (especially racists) always brought up Dirk's first round exit in 2007. It wasn't until he destroyed evil in 2011 that his mad skillz was recognized.

[ClipperRevival]

MJ was drafted into a shitty team with no talent. There was no way a young and inexperienced MJ with a shitty supporting cast was going to beat possibly the best team ever assembled in the mid 1980's Celtics or the late 1980's Pistons. Those teams were two of the greatest teams ever!

MJ needed some more help and he got it when Pippen and Grant arrived a few years after he was in the league. And even after getting those two, they needed a couple of years to mature and jell together.

[Marchesk]

considering he came after finishing 4 years of college so he wasn't too young plus east wasn't as stacked as current west. it was more top heavy..

3 years of college. Jordan is 6/6 with 6 FMVPs, so nobody gives a shit about his early first round exits in a loaded Eastern Conference with prime Bird.

[Asukal]

People (especially racists) always brought up Dirk's first round exit in 2007. It wasn't until he destroyed evil in 2011 that his mad skillz was recognized.

Yeah how come no one wants to talk about lebaldo and his cronies getting slayed by dirk in 2011? :rolleyes:

[DonDadda59]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.

Shaq, Magic, Bird>Beans.

Now imagine if Malone had won those finals. Who would have Beans ranked above him? :confusedshrug:

[Marchesk]

Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.

Jordan also never faced Jason Terry and Boris Diaw in the finals. He had to settle for Gary Payton and John Stockton.

[Beastmode88]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.

Lol lebron never faced prime kobe in the finals. He was too busy getting rolled by prime and old duncan while kobe was dominating prime duncan.

[sportjames23]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.


Because he only lost in his first few years in the league when his team absolutely sucked, dumbass?

Drexler
Barkley
Shaq
Kemp
Payton
Malone
Stockton
Ewing
Mourning
Hardaway
Hardaway
Miller
Motumbo

Funny how when Jordan was in his prime, he BEAT top all time great talent.

Funny how that works, right, bitch?

[jzek]

Because in the end, it doesn't matter.

6/6 is all that matters.

[EllisGW]

People like to give Jordan excuses but not lebron and Kobe. Jordan never beat any top ten all great talent in his prime like Kareem, magic and bird. Jordan had first round exits which is more embracing then losing in the finals.

[Elosha]

Jordan never beat any top ten all time great in their prime. The best player he beat in his prime was thomas with the Pistons and he retired two years later. When he played bird he lost and when he played Isaiah in his twenties he lost.

I never get why people think a 31 year old Magic wasn't in his prime in 1991. 31 isn't really all that old, especially for a player who isn't dependent on athleticism. Magic played very well that year before retiring with HIV in 1992. The 91 Lakers probably weren't as good as they were in their championship years of the 80's, but there's no question that Jordan decisively outplayed Magic in the 91 Finals. And there should be no question that Magic is a top ten player.

[JohnnySic]

I never get why people think a 31 year old Magic wasn't in his prime in 1991. 31 isn't really all that old, especially for a player who isn't dependent on athleticism. Magic played very well that year before retiring with HIV in 1992. The 91 Lakers probably weren't as good as they were in their championship years of the 80's, but there's no question that Jordan decisively outplayed Magic in the 91 Finals. And there should be no question that Magic is a top ten player.
Jordan was miles and miles better than Magic in '91. And the '91 Lakers were well past their peak, Magic notwithstanding.

[Beastmode88]

People like to give Jordan excuses but not lebron and Kobe. Jordan never beat any top ten all great talent in his prime like Kareem, magic and bird. Jordan had first round exits which is more embracing then losing in the finals.

Embracing huh.

Jordon scores 63 on bird in a close out game. He didnt have a team like magic and bird at that point.

[Trollsmasher]

Embracing huh.

Jordon scores 63 on bird in a close out game. He didnt have a team like magic and bird at that point.
he scored 63 in game 2, not close out game

in game 3 he quit on his team with 19 points and purposefully fouled out

to the OP - MJ simply could not win on his own

daily reminder that his career record without Pippen is 194-198 and he is 1-9 without Scottie in the playoff series

[EllisGW]

Jordan leaves his team they almost make the east finals....lebron leaves his team and they lose record nba losses in a row. Heat also were not even in playoffs.

[Relinquish]

Jordan shouldn't be blamed for losing in the first round. He can be blamed for not getting higher seed though considering he came after finishing 4 years of college so he wasn't too young plus east wasn't as stacked as current west. it was more top heavy.

He is still the GOAT though.

3 years, not 4.

[Da_Realist]

in game 3 he quit on his team with 19 points and purposefully fouled out

:facepalm Quit on his team or did Boston throw everything but the kitchen sink at him and forced everyone else to beat them? Read/Watch the interviews and you'll see the Celtics saying just that.

MJ scored 49 and then 63 points in a double overtime game. What do you expect two days later? Fatigue would be a little understandable, no? And he was one assist shy of a triple double. If he quit on his team, why did he work hard enough to foul out?

[Nastradamus]

Because in the end, it doesn't matter.

6/6 is all that matters.

Stupid.

[Marchesk]

Jordan leaves his team they almost make the east finals....lebron leaves his team and they lose record nba losses in a row. Heat also were not even in playoffs.

http://www.dallasnews.com/incoming/20110606-jjbarea.jpg.ece/ALTERNATES/w620/JJBAREA.JPG

[3ball]

Jordan never beat any top ten all time great in their prime.


Pure lies.

Magic was runner-up for MVP in 1991... He was still in his prime at 31 years old and putting up GOAT stats of 19.4 / 12.5 / 7.0 on 62.3% TS.

When Shaq got swept by MJ in 1996, it was his 5th season - he was averaging 27/11/3/2 on 58% FG and had been to the Finals the previous season.. That qualifies as a legit beatdown by MJ.

So there's two top 10 guys right there - Magic and Shaq... Defeated.
.

[LeBird]

He beat all-time greats in their prime...but he didn't really beat any all-time great teams in theirs.

[jstern]

Because they were legit loses, with really bad teams, and he ended up wining 6 championships in ultra dominating fashion. Simple as that. It's not like he lost in the first round 10 times, and each time because he choked.

[3ball]

He beat all-time greats in their prime...but he didn't really beat any all-time great teams in theirs.
The only individuals in history that have defeated all-time great teams are Magic and Larry, because they played each other.

I guess you could say the Lakers beat the Spurs in the early 2000's, back when everyone on the Spurs was in their prime..

But who gets credit for that?.. Shaq or Kobe?... I'd give the credit to Shaq, but it doesn't make sense to even consider because several teams MJ defeated were better than the Spurs..

The only all-time great teams that met multiple times and went back and forth are the Lakers and Celtics - that was a truly glorious but ANOMALOUS time in history where 2 GOAT teams went back and forth.

[dubeta]

1-9 only stat that matters

Pippen without MJ > MJ without Pippen

[b0bab0i]

Because in the end, it doesn't matter.

6/6 is all that matters.
With pippin. They both needed each other to win.
Without pippin, Jordan wouldn't have been the best.

[Young X]

Wow, 3 whole 1st round exits in his 1st 2 and a half seasons on bad teams while facing one of the greatest teams of all time. :rolleyes:

[TylerOO]

Nobody cares about that guy anymore. NBA has a new savior and leader

[Out_In_Utah]

His lack of team and being early in his career can be dismissed because of his prime and winning a bunch of championships.

[sixerfan82]

3 years of college. Jordan is 6/6 with 6 FMVPs, so nobody gives a shit about his early first round exits in a loaded Eastern Conference with prime Bird.

/thread.

[Dragonyeuw]

Jordan's first round exits come up all the time, how many times have we seen '1-9 'without Pippen' on this board?

[TheMan]

Jordan never beat any top ten all time great in their prime. The best player he beat in his prime was thomas with the Pistons and he retired two years later. When he played bird he lost and when he played Isaiah in his twenties he lost.
MJ beat Magic one year removed from his last MVP season :confusedshrug:

[TheMan]

He beat all-time greats in their prime...but he didn't really beat any all-time great teams in theirs.
Name one great team LeBron defeated in their prime? By the time he beat the Pistons and the Big 3 Celtics, they were a shell of their title teams. Same with SA, Duncan, Manu and TP were 30+. Those are really the only great teams he's faced.

[smoovegittar]

Because 90 % of you all weren't around. SMH-

[Dro]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.
Now post MJ's stats in all those playoff exits and tell me what else he should have done. Average 40 instead of 30+? Turn Dave Corzine into a stretch 5? :lol

[Roundball_Rock]

Jordan shouldn't be blamed for losing in the first round. He can be blamed for not getting higher seed though considering he came after finishing 4 years of college so he wasn't too young plus east wasn't as stacked as current west. it was more top heavy.

He is still the GOAT though.

This.

Jordan's record in his first few years was 38-44 (only an 11 game improvement from the year before), 9-9 and 40-42. Name any other GOAT caliber player who had that many years where he could not get his team above 0.500. I think Wilt had one losing season as did KAJ (40-42--so just barely) and Shaq was 0.500 his first year (a 20 game improvement) but that may be it. All other GOAT candidates had a greater immediate impact on their teams--and most of them were high draft picks who joined lousy teams too. Jordan needed several years of the Bulls' building around him for Chicago to start competing. It is interesting, Jordan with scrubs and Kobe with scrubs and Wade with scrubs (with Kobe and Wade being at their peaks during those periods) could not lift their teams to a competitive level. That suggests something about the SG position being tougher to build around. Chicago in MJ's fifth year was a mere 13-12 to start the year and did not get rolling until Pippen became a permanent starter (and "coincidentally" never looked back--ECF that year and 55, 61, 67, 57 and 55 wins in the following years along with 3 rings and 5 ECF's in that 6 year span)).

Jordan did the least of any top-tier great with weak rosters--even LeBron out of high school improved his team more (17 wins to 35 versus MJ's 27 to 38). That said, MJ did the most with good rosters, hence seasons of 72, 69 and 67 wins and two three-peats. MJ still is my co-GOAT along with KAJ but MJ does have a blemish on his resume--as do all the other top players of all-time. MJ is the only one whose blemish tends to get ignored.

[JerrySeinfeld]

because he's 6/6 in the finals

[Young X]

Jordan did the least of any top-tier great with weak rosters--even LeBron out of high school improved his team more (17 wins to 35 versus MJ's 27 to 38). That said, MJ did the most with good rosters, hence seasons of 72, 69 and 67 wins and two three-peats. MJ still is my co-GOAT along with KAJ but MJ does have a blemish on his resume--as do all the other top players of all-time. MJ is the only one whose blemish tends to get ignored.That's because it's not a real blemish you fool. Nobody gives a f*ck about what he did in his rookie year on a bad team or what he did on the Wizards, he's evaluated on what he did in the prime of his career. You're just grasping at straws at this point.

[Dro]

This.

Jordan's record in his first few years was 38-44 (only an 11 game improvement from the year before), 9-9 and 40-42. Name any other GOAT caliber player who had that many years where he could not get his team above 0.500. I think Wilt had one losing season as did KAJ (40-42--so just barely) and Shaq was 0.500 his first year (a 20 game improvement) but that may be it. All other GOAT candidates had a greater immediate impact on their teams--and most of them were high draft picks who joined lousy teams too. Jordan needed several years of the Bulls' building around him for Chicago to start competing. It is interesting, Jordan with scrubs and Kobe with scrubs and Wade with scrubs (with Kobe and Wade being at their peaks during those periods) could not lift their teams to a competitive level. That suggests something about the SG position being tougher to build around. Chicago in MJ's fifth year was a mere 13-12 to start the year and did not get rolling until Pippen became a permanent starter (and "coincidentally" never looked back--ECF that year and 55, 61, 67, 57 and 55 wins in the following years along with 3 rings and 5 ECF's in that 6 year span)).

Jordan did the least of any top-tier great with weak rosters--even LeBron out of high school improved his team more (17 wins to 35 versus MJ's 27 to 38). That said, MJ did the most with good rosters, hence seasons of 72, 69 and 67 wins and two three-peats. MJ still is my co-GOAT along with KAJ but MJ does have a blemish on his resume--as do all the other top players of all-time. MJ is the only one whose blemish tends to get ignored.
There is NO WAY you're a Jordan fan. None. I don't think you actually like him at all really. And I know 3ball, and a few others can make people hate MJ but then again, I don't understand that either. Maybe if there was like a legion of Jordan stans on this site but there's really like 3-4? Then you have others who appreciate the fact that he's probably GOAT, and then you have the haters, which are to be expected.

[DonDadda59]

Jordan's record in his first few years was 38-44 (only an 11 game improvement from the year before), 9-9 and 40-42. Name any other GOAT caliber player who had that many years where he could not get his team above 0.500.

Holy shit you're a clown :oldlol:

You're using Jordan's rookie season and his truncated 'second season' (only started 7 games... team went 21-43 without him) where he only played a relative handful of games with putrid lineups against him?

For the record, just after the Big O left Milwaukee (won 59, made it to the finals, lost in 7 his last season) they went 38-44. Kareem went to LA right after and the team went 40-42 (same as Jordan's second full season, playing w/ HOFer Gail Goodrich, Kareem won MVP :oldlol:). And this was smack dab in the middle of Kareem's career, not the beginning like a rookie/sophomore MJ.

Stop it.

[Im Still Ballin]

Because Mike wasn't that good at elevating teams that didn't already have a plethora of talent

He could elevate a 55 win team to 59 wins (This happened)

People try to say that he was everything for the team, which is just not true. He was as much a role player as Scottie. Whenever Jordan was asked to do more than that, he lost... And usually in the first round.

[Roundball_Rock]

There is NO WAY you're a Jordan fan. None. I don't think you actually like him at all really.

I am not a Jordan fan and have not claimed to be such. The only exception is when I first joined ISH in 2009. I was pro-MJ--look at threads from that period and you will see me arguing for MJ against Kobe fans and I even posted a pro-MJ thread or two. Since then, though, I have been anti-MJ, in large part due to the mythology surrounding him and also due to the legions of annoying Jordan fans, whose numbers are far beyond 3-4.

All that said, what did I say that was so egregious? I was comparing MJ to GOAT-caliber players. So what if MJ fares worst among the most elite subset the sport has had? Still, the facts are the facts. Which other GOAT-caliber player had as many poor seasons with weak teams? The answer is none because they were able to elevate their poor rosters more--including out the gate.


He could elevate a 55 win team to 59 wins (This happened)

You mean 69? Keep in mind that 55 win team had a D-Leaguer starting at SG. With a NBA-caliber starting SG that team would have won 60+, even with Pippen and Grant missing games. Still, in favor of MJ, to jump from 60 wins to 69 or 72 is a lot tougher than making the jump from, say, 50 wins to 60 or 45 to 55. Few teams have ever won 67+ and MJ's teams did so thrice--and would have done it a fourth time if Pippen played the entire 98' season. MJ was the primary reason for that. MJ, as a result of his ability to succeed with good rosters, never underachieved in the playoffs in years where he had a decent team. Even when his team sucked you can't say MJ underachieved in the playoffs--his low seeds had no shot--but the fault you can ascribe to him is that they were such low seeds in the first place. Can you see Shaq or Bird or Magic or Duncan going 40-42 in their third year?

[triangleoffense]

MJ = Illuminati Conspiracy

6/6 with 6 FMVP = 666

ILLUMINATI CONFIRMED

[juju151111]

I am not a Jordan fan and have not claimed to be such. The only exception is when I first joined ISH in 2009. I was pro-MJ--look at threads from that period and you will see me arguing for MJ against Kobe fans and I even posted a pro-MJ thread or two. Since then, though, I have been anti-MJ, in large part due to the mythology surrounding him and also due to the legions of annoying Jordan fans, whose numbers are far beyond 3-4.

All that said, what did I say that was so egregious? I was comparing MJ to GOAT-caliber players. So what if MJ fares worst among the most elite subset the sport has had? Still, the facts are the facts. Which other GOAT-caliber player had as many poor seasons with weak teams? The answer is none because they were able to elevate their poor rosters more--including out the gate.
Mj doesn't fares worse amoung the elite. He top 3 and has 6 rings,5 mvps.

[sportjames23]

Because Mike wasn't that good at elevating teams that didn't already have a plethora of talent

He could elevate a 55 win team to 59 wins (This happened)

People try to say that he was everything for the team, which is just not true. He was as much a role player as Scottie. Whenever Jordan was asked to do more than that, he lost... And usually in the first round.


This is one of the stupidest posts in ISH history. And considering dubeta, Silkk, Roundball_Rock and Rose's ACL all post here, that's saying something.

[Straight_Ballin]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.

When someone can go 6/6 in finals and show perfection every time they actually have a team good enough to get to the finals, then we can start comparing other things like first round exits between both players.

I'm waiting.

[Lebron23]

http://i.imgur.com/vvLM2Oe.gif

[Dragonyeuw]

People always talk about that 94 season and the 55 wins without Jordan, compared to the 93 team and 57 wins with Jordan, but forget that the Bulls won 67 in 92, that Jordan and Pippen were coasting at times coming off the dream team leading to 'only' 57 wins, and that the Bulls were a .500 team in 95 and went 13-4 when Jordan came back. Even with a 'rusty' MJ, the 95 team instantly became a legit threat that eventually met its comeuppance due to an incredibly weak frontline, which did them in against the Magic and would have done them in against the Rockets had they made the finals. But otherwise, the 95 bulls were mediocre till MJ came back, but that gets glossed over. I also find it interesting that a 35 year old, past prime MJ led the Bulls to 62 wins with Pippen missing 38 games gets overlooked, but eh.....

With that 94 team, despite Jordan's absence they were still a well-oiled, well coached team with championship poise, with their main players coming into their primes with the addition of Kukoc off the bench. But, bad calls aside against the Knicks, what Jordan brought was that playoff gear that was unmatched, the one that can average 40 in a finals series, go off for 35 in a half against a contemporary, or go off for 50+ against a bruising defensive squad when in an 0-2 hole. Regular season success relative to the prior season with Jordan is ultimately irrelevant,because they were missing that element that would have gotten them over the hump. The bad call that swung that series in the knicks favor would have been a non-issue if MJ had been there, because it wouldn't have gone 7 games and on the chance it did, are you really betting against prime MJ to not close the deal in that situation? 94 Bulls with MJ likely wins close to 70 games and the championship.

[D.J.]

Did anyone see those Bulls squads from 1985-1987 after MJ? They were putrid. They had no shot whatsoever. No star wins alone. And going 6/6 in the Finals while winning Finals MVP in all 6 kind of negates his first round exits his first three years in the league.

[andgar923]

I am not a Jordan fan and have not claimed to be such. The only exception is when I first joined ISH in 2009. I was pro-MJ--look at threads from that period and you will see me arguing for MJ against Kobe fans and I even posted a pro-MJ thread or two. Since then, though, I have been anti-MJ, in large part due to the mythology surrounding him and also due to the legions of annoying Jordan fans, whose numbers are far beyond 3-4.

All that said, what did I say that was so egregious? I was comparing MJ to GOAT-caliber players. So what if MJ fares worst among the most elite subset the sport has had? Still, the facts are the facts. Which other GOAT-caliber player had as many poor seasons with weak teams? The answer is none because they were able to elevate their poor rosters more--including out the gate.



You mean 69? Keep in mind that 55 win team had a D-Leaguer starting at SG. With a NBA-caliber starting SG that team would have won 60+, even with Pippen and Grant missing games. Still, in favor of MJ, to jump from 60 wins to 69 or 72 is a lot tougher than making the jump from, say, 50 wins to 60 or 45 to 55. Few teams have ever won 67+ and MJ's teams did so thrice--and would have done it a fourth time if Pippen played the entire 98' season. MJ was the primary reason for that. MJ, as a result of his ability to succeed with good rosters, never underachieved in the playoffs in years where he had a decent team. Even when his team sucked you can't say MJ underachieved in the playoffs--his low seeds had no shot--but the fault you can ascribe to him is that they were such low seeds in the first place. Can you see Shaq or Bird or Magic or Duncan going 40-42 in their third year?
Jordan made Pip.

[Dro]

I am not a Jordan fan and have not claimed to be such.
My bad, got you mixed up with somebody else...

[Straight_Ballin]

Jordan made Pip.

And it's not even debatable.

In fact there was a 15 pg thread a few months ago comparing Pippen to Lebron which made very compelling arguements as to why Pippen was a better wingman to Jordan than Bron was to Wade.

[Roundball_Rock]

People always talk about that 94 season and the 55 wins without Jordan, compared to the 93 team and 57 wins with Jordan, but forget that the Bulls won 67 in 92, that Jordan and Pippen were coasting at times coming off the dream team leading to 'only' 57 wins, and that the Bulls were a .500 team in 95 and went 13-4 when Jordan came back.

You left out some key--and inconvenient facts:

*55 wins with a D-Leaguer at SG thanks to MJ retiring at the last minute. Had Jordan retired in the summer when free agents were available--or the Bulls pulled off the Hornacek trade mid-season--the Bulls would have been even better and presumably won 60+ and come out the East.
*55 wins with Pippen and Grant missing a combined 17 games. When they played Chicago was on a 63 win pace--and HCA was key in the Knicks series.
*The 0.500 team in 95' was after they lost Grant and failed to replace him. In fact, the Bulls declined more when they lost Grant than they lost Jordan. With Grant--or Rodman--the 95' Bulls would have been battling for the top spot in the East again. How many teams can lose their best and third best player and still remain a 5th-6th place team in their conference?

I do agree Jordan's impact in 95' speaks for itself: 34-31 to 13-4.

Fair points on the Knicks series but remember the 93' Knicks series was no Bulls cakewalk. The difference between the two series, essentially, was in 93' Game 5 broke Chicago's favor with the Charles Smith stuffings and in 94' Game 5 went New York's way courtesy of one of the worst foul calls in history. It is not as if there was a light years difference in the two series. Both were close series. That said, MJ clearly was missed at the end of games.

No problem, Dro.

[Euroleague]

Because people are idiots. It's the same thing with all of the idiots that say "Joe Montana was perfection and was the absolute perfect quarterback and obvious GOAT because he never lost a Super Bowl".

They don't want to talk about all of the one and done playoff games Montana had (second most all time behind Peyton Manning) and all of the a$$ whoopings Montana had in the NFC title game either (some of the most epic beat downs ever).

It's this same nonsense with Jordan - "he was 6 for 6 in the NBA Finals, so he is obviously perfect and can't ever be criticized for anything and is obviously therefore perfect in every way imaginable and conceivable".

It's basically the type of person that has the same IQ as Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless. You know, because that's the type of in depth critical thinking in sports analysis they come up with, and it's pretty much the same thing you see repeated 1 million times over and over in all US sports media and in 90% of all social media in USA - because the average person is retarded, having an IQ at or below room temperature.

[bobeticus]

MJ was drafted into a shitty team with no talent. There was no way a young and inexperienced MJ with a shitty supporting cast was going to beat possibly the best team ever assembled in the mid 1980's Celtics or the late 1980's Pistons. Those teams were two of the greatest teams ever!

MJ needed some more help and he got it when Pippen and Grant arrived a few years after he was in the league. And even after getting those two, they needed a couple of years to mature and jell together.

This.

The First GOAT BIG 3 of the 90's Era :rockon: :rockon: :rockon: :rockon:

Mike needs help also :confusedshrug:

[ChrisKreager]

Let's look at those three one-and-dones:

1985: 38-44 Bulls against the 59-23 Bucks, the solid Moncrief era Bucks who would have made at least one NBA Finals that decade if they were still in the West

1986: 32-50 Bulls against the '86 67-15 Celtics, considered one of the greatest teams ever

1987: 40-42 Bulls against a 59-23 Celtics team

Yeah, it's really on him for not beating teams that finished damn near 20 games ahead of them.

[sekachu]

If this was lebron or Kobe they would get crushed. To behonst lebron and especially Kobe, he played with more top talent. Jordan never faced Duncan and lebron in his prime like Kobe. When Jordan played top all time great talent in their prime he lost. Jordan never faced a guy like Kobe during his prime like lebron did.





Because MJ went for 6/6 final at the end of the day. Would you talk Bill gates about not even complete the college? lol


kobe and lebron never face ewing, shaq, olajuwan, penny, grant hill, drexeler. :coleman:

[sportjames23]

Because MJ went for 6/6 final at the end of the day. Would you talk Bill gates about not even complete the college? lol


kobe and lebron never face ewing, shaq, olajuwan, penny, grant hill, drexeler. :coleman:


Slight correction: Kobe actually did face Olajuwon and Drexler, but that's when they were old as shit.

[StephHamann]

plus east wasn't as stacked as current west. it was more top heavy.



I'm dying :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[Dragonyeuw]

You left out some key--and inconvenient facts:

*55 wins with a D-Leaguer at SG thanks to MJ retiring at the last minute. Had Jordan retired in the summer when free agents were available--or the Bulls pulled off the Hornacek trade mid-season--the Bulls would have been even better and presumably won 60+ and come out the East.
*55 wins with Pippen and Grant missing a combined 17 games. When they played Chicago was on a 63 win pace--and HCA was key in the Knicks series.
*The 0.500 team in 95' was after they lost Grant and failed to replace him. In fact, the Bulls declined more when they lost Grant than they lost Jordan. With Grant--or Rodman--the 95' Bulls would have been battling for the top spot in the East again. How many teams can lose their best and third best player and still remain a 5th-6th place team in their conference?



You gain and lose with Hornacek. Obviously, he's a significant offensive boast but as marginal as Myers was overall, he was a good defensive piece in a team that was built around defense complemented by the all-around play of Pippen. Simply swapping Myers out with Hornacek in no way guarantees anything beyond what transpired. In fact, simply swapping out players is very simplistic, basketball is very dynamic and you're well-versed enough in the sport to know that. There's a fairly big difference between 'maybe' getting to the ECF, or possibly more, and basically a lock to win the championship.

I already conceded that losing a tough PF did the Bulls in more than MJ's rust, because though he made a few late-game errors he was still producing well enough if they had a Rodman or Grant to defend/rebound on the interior.

[KembaWalker]

the 95' Bulls would have been battling for the top spot in the East again. How many teams can lose their best and third best player and still remain a 5th-6th place team in their conference?
.

This year's Cavs basically, lost Batman Irving and Love to injuries yet they in the finals gawd damn

[ILLsmak]

It's the way the world works. In fact, people want you to fail before you succeed.

The key I think is not failing after you reach the top and MJ didn't. That's another reason why he's media GOAT, his trajectory. He started as insanely talented dude who couldn't get out of the 1st round, then he battled the Pistons, then he spent 6 years on top. Sure, he retired, and that's kind of a sketchy detail, but his story fits well for the "guy who got cut from his HS team."

It's the American way, people have to overcome some adversity to be loved by the masses.

-Smak

[dunksby]

Holy shit you're a clown :oldlol:

You're using Jordan's rookie season and his truncated 'second season' (only started 7 games... team went 21-43 without him) where he only played a relative handful of games with putrid lineups against him?

For the record, just after the Big O left Milwaukee (won 59, made it to the finals, lost in 7 his last season) they went 38-44. Kareem went to LA right after and the team went 40-42 (same as Jordan's second full season, playing w/ HOFer Gail Goodrich, Kareem won MVP :oldlol:). And this was smack dab in the middle of Kareem's career, not the beginning like a rookie/sophomore MJ.

Stop it.
Maybe you should stop spreading BS:

Lakers gutted their squad to get Kareem, look at the Bucks record before (27-55) Kareem and after he joined (56-26). Kareem won MVP awards voted by players not journalists.

:no:

[Dbrog]

Basically people refuse to look at Jordan objectively (both the stans and the haters). Jordan has MANY holes in his resume that people won't admit. Losing all those times in the 1st round is one of them (though he was supposed to lose many of those series). People act like Jordan is this infallible ball player but that honor actually goes to Russell. You literally can't win more than he did. Regardless of team, he did something that is basically impossible in professional sports. Jordan never did anything of the sort.

HOWEVER, he was super fun to watch because he would just destroy team's wills. I mean, he's definitely one of the most clutch players to ever play (but yes, he had shitty performances too which no one talks about). He had flash and style and swag which is how he became the popular superstar that he is. In the same sense above though, what teams was he "supposed to" lose against in his finals runs. He was always the favorite if memory serves correct. People have to realize the 90s was a special decade. You didn't need a big 3 (see: 80s or today). Really 1 superstar could get you as far as you needed if you had great roleplayers. People don't realize by having Pippen and grant or rodman, Jordan probably had the most stacked team in the league. Does this take away from his great legacy? Hell no. At the end of the day it's about results. We've seen many stacked teams fail miserably. He didn't and there's a reason for that. I wish people could look at him more objectively though instead of, "even if this dude wins 10 chips he won't be a good as Jordan."

[Dragonyeuw]

Jordan has MANY holes in his resume that people won't admit. Losing all those times in the 1st round is one of them (though he was supposed to lose many of those series).



The question is, can you even consider that a flaw/hole losing to a team you're supposed to lose to, as you say? There's no shame in losing to the mid 80's Celtics as a 22/23 year old, with a significantly inferior roster. It would be more a flaw if he was a primary reason for why his teams lost when they were supposed to win. Which quite literally never happened in the playoffs. So, objectively you could say MJ neither over or underachieved, though I suppose you could say the 89 Bulls reasonably should have lost to Cavs if not for 'the Shot' from Jordan, they were the lower seed hence the underdog. Overall, he won in circumstances that dictated that he should, and lost in circumstances that dictated that he should.

Personally I don't hold Lebron accountable, as a 22 year old, for getting swept by the Spurs in 2007: he was getting by on raw talent at that point and that Cavs team really had no business being in the finals. I'd hold him moreso to account for his mental collapses in the 2010 playoffs, or his play against Dallas in the finals. Those are more reasonable and fair criticisms.

[Dbrog]

The question is, can you even consider that a flaw/hole losing to a team you're supposed to lose to, as you say? There's no shame in losing to the mid 80's Celtics as a 22/23 year old, with a significantly inferior roster. It would be more a flaw if he was a primary reason for why his teams lost when they were supposed to win. Which quite literally never happened in the playoffs. So, objectively you could say MJ neither over or underachieved, though I suppose you could say the 89 Bulls reasonably should have lost to Cavs if not for 'the Shot' from Jordan. Overall, he won in circumstances that dictated that he should, and lost in circumstances that dictated that he should.

Personally I don't hold Lebron accountable, as a 22 year old, for getting swept by the Spurs in 2007: he was getting by on raw talent at that point and that Cavs team really had no business being in the finals. I'd hold him moreso to account for his mental collapses in the 2010 playoffs, or his play against Dallas in the finals. Those are more reasonable and fair criticisms.

I think you are exactly right. He never really had a run where he just wasn't supposed to win at all but did (03 Duncan, 11' Dirk, 94 Hakeem). However, he ALWAYS got the job done when he was supposed to which sounds easy but isn't. Also, he obviously won way more than these guys so I guess it doesn't matter anyway. It's definitely an interesting concept though. Btw: I agree that Bron should definitely NOT be held accountable for that sweep. He had no business winning a game against that squad.

[Da_Realist]

So, objectively you could say MJ neither over or underachieved, though I suppose you could say the 89 Bulls reasonably should have lost to Cavs if not for 'the Shot' from Jordan, they were the lower seed hence the underdog. Overall, he won in circumstances that dictated that he should, and lost in circumstances that dictated that he should

I think he did overacheive. His competitiveness and maniacal focus on winning kept the team sharp. More like blood thirsty. There were no lapses. He won when he was supposed to. Other than Russell, how many leaders can say that? He didn't lose to any teams he was supposed to beat but he also didn't lose to a lack of focus or a lack of urgency or laziness or complacency or internal team turmoil or not being 100% or the trappings of fame or the pressure to keep winning or arrogance or any other foe that eventually beats most players/teams.

[Da_Realist]

I think you are exactly right. He never really had a run where he just wasn't supposed to win at all but did (03 Duncan, 11' Dirk, 94 Hakeem).

I think part of that was because he was Michael Jordan and not many people would bet any money against him. He was the primary reason his team was hardly an underdog. Over and over again you'd hear guys say, "This team is good but i wouldn't bet against Michael Jordan."

His team wasn't the runaway favorite to win every year during his run. 91 Lakers, 93 Knicks, 93 Suns, 98 Pacers and 98 Jazz all had many people who thought they'd beat the Bulls. 92 Blazers weren't favored but it was close.

[Sarcastic]

For the same reason that no one wants to talk about Lebron missing the playoffs the first two years of his career.

[pauk]

Lebron/Kobe indeed got much more criticized for literally ANYTHING....

Lebron got criticized for his Finals losses and Kobe got criticized for not being able to win without Shaq more than Jordan got criticized for being 1-9 in the playoffs without a single Finals appearance (his Finals win % would be 0% if he got to the Finals those playoffs runs) before Pippen etc.

[Dbrog]

I think part of that was because he was Michael Jordan and not many people would bet any money against him. He was the primary reason his team was hardly an underdog. Over and over again you'd hear guys say, "This team is good but i wouldn't bet against Michael Jordan."

His team wasn't the runaway favorite to win every year during his run. 91 Lakers, 93 Knicks, 93 Suns, 98 Pacers and 98 Jazz all had many people who thought they'd beat the Bulls. 92 Blazers weren't favored but it was close.

Many people thought the 76ers could beat the Lakers in 2001. That doesn't make it true. None of the teams you listed were clear favorites and Pacers, Suns, and Jazz were definitely underdogs. 93 knicks were kinda like the webber's Kings. They had a real shot but ultimately always fell short. Again though, they had a shot. They weren't looked at as the favorites. Laker's may have been the only team that was truly an up in the air matchup.

I was actually watching a game in that Blazers series the other day haha. It was pretty funny hearing the announcers consistently compare Drex to Jordan and said they'd basically cancel each other out. Jordan proceeded to largely outplay him. Announcers do this today though too. I think they do it to just hype up the matchup and not because they really believe the players are equal. You heard people say, "I wouldn't bet against MJ" because 1) they were often the defending champs (announcers ALWAYS say this about defending champs) and 2) they knew that there were no teams at the time that were more stacked than those Bulls teams.

Again, this is not a knock on MJ, it's just saying he did the rare feat of winning when he was supposed to and losing when he was supposed to.

Edit: I would question your other post on overachieving btw. History shows he actually couldn't keep up his focus and satisfaction, hence retiring twice and coming back. Russell would never do something like that...or Kobe for that matter. He could've very easily gone to Italy in that one offseason and play his later prime years making hundreds of millions of $$$ but chose not to. This is truly one of my biggest knocks on MJ (regardless of the circumstances).

[Da_Realist]

Many people thought the 76ers could beat the Lakers in 2001.

That's absolutely not true.


Edit: I would question your other post on overachieving btw. History shows he actually couldn't keep up his focus and satisfaction, hence retiring twice and coming back. Russell would never do something like that...

His dad was killed. People get depressed over things like that. My wife has dealt with depression for less than that the last couple of years. MJ wasn't depressed but the point is knowing your father (and best friend) was killed and taken away suddenly can make you rethink your life. That's not the same thing as packing it in because you're complacent. This shouldn't really need to be talked about but this is ISH, where no one seems to have any life experience other than typing on a keyboard or cell phone.

[Dbrog]

That's absolutely not true.



His dad was killed. People get depressed over things like that. My wife has dealt with depression for less than that the last couple of years. MJ wasn't depressed but the point is knowing your father (and best friend) was killed and taken away suddenly can make you rethink your life. That's not the same thing as packing it in because you're complacent. This shouldn't really need to be talked about but this is ISH, where no one seems to have any life experience other than typing on a keyboard or cell phone.

What about the 2nd retirement? Why did he play baseball after his dad was killed? Why is there also talk that he retired the 1st time partially due to the gambling scandal? There are a lot of non-basketball related questions with MJ. This wasn't the case with other Legends. It hurts his rep for me especially since he's regarded as the person with the toughest mental fortitude ever (which is BS).

76ers WAS true when they won game 1....at least as true as it was when you said people thought Suns could win vs the Bulls. The majority knew the Bulls would still win. The majority knew the Lakers would still win. It would be like saying the Cavs AREN'T underdogs right now vs the Warriors. They very clearly are to most people.

[dunksby]

Lebron/Kobe indeed got much more criticized for literally ANYTHING....

Lebron got criticized for his Finals losses and Kobe got criticized for not being able to win without Shaq more than Jordan got criticized for being 1-9 in the playoffs without a single Finals appearance (his Finals win % would be 0% if he got to the Finals those playoffs runs) before Pippen etc.
I started foruming in 99 most people probably did around the same time or later, I remember having discussions with my friends about MJ at school, he had haters obviously but back then kids didn't get to spread their agenda online.

[Sarcastic]

Lebron/Kobe indeed got much more criticized for literally ANYTHING....

Lebron got criticized for his Finals losses and Kobe got criticized for not being able to win without Shaq more than Jordan got criticized for being 1-9 in the playoffs without a single Finals appearance (his Finals win % would be 0% if he got to the Finals those playoffs runs) before Pippen etc.


Complete and utter bullshit. Jordan got criticized all the time for not winning a ring, until 1991. Then when he won and never lost again, the criticism stopped.

[LeBird]

The question is, can you even consider that a flaw/hole losing to a team you're supposed to lose to, as you say? There's no shame in losing to the mid 80's Celtics as a 22/23 year old, with a significantly inferior roster. It would be more a flaw if he was a primary reason for why his teams lost when they were supposed to win. Which quite literally never happened in the playoffs. So, objectively you could say MJ neither over or underachieved, though I suppose you could say the 89 Bulls reasonably should have lost to Cavs if not for 'the Shot' from Jordan, they were the lower seed hence the underdog. Overall, he won in circumstances that dictated that he should, and lost in circumstances that dictated that he should.


The problem with this logic is that it fails to take into account the RS. Meaning, Jordan was not much of a net positive for his team on the whole despite his otherworldly numbers. There are many instances of other players (Bird and Lebron come to mind straight away) who improve their team approx. 20 games just by their influence alone and that helps them in terms of seeding for the playoffs.

Jordan did not lift his teams, and consequently they had awful records, and they got raped in the playoffs. I mean, he couldn't even win 1 game against the Celtics during that period, nevermind actually beating them in a series.

It shows you two things: Jordan's impact on the team was negligible until Phil Jackson came in and Pippen and Grant gained stature. Even then, when he left near his peak, the team was barely worse replacing him with Myers.

It also shows you that individualistic players who put up freak numbers put a ceiling on their team's output. No one player wins on their own.


Complete and utter bullshit. Jordan got criticized all the time for not winning a ring, until 1991. Then when he won and never lost again, the criticism stopped.

Except he did lose when he came back. They just had a tonne of excuses for him.

Jordan's the most mollycoddled star in NBA history. They used his pulling power to bring money in the league and they had to push him, and not bring him down, in any way possible. Even if that meant demeaning his teammates or shortening the 3 point line :lol

[Dragonyeuw]

Jordan did not lift his teams, and consequently they had awful records, and they got raped in the playoffs. I mean, he couldn't even win 1 game against the Celtics during that period, nevermind actually beating them in a series.



Do you really think the 86 Bulls had a snowball's chance in hell to win one game against one of the top 5 teams in NBA history? We're talking a second year Jordan against a prime Bird/Celtics. I'd say the Celtics would have underachieved dropping a game to the 86 Bulls. There's no reason at all for the 86 Celtics to have dropped a game to the 86 Bulls.

I can agree that as an individual, Jordan's style for the first 3 years wouldn't amount to much more than highly entertaining basketball from a showmanship standpoint, but the substance was lacking till he learned how to incorporate his talents moreso into a team concept( which coincided with him having decent pieces around him which basically wasn't the case till Pippen and Grant developed and PJ came onboard.)

[Dragonyeuw]

I think he did overacheive. His competitiveness and maniacal focus on winning kept the team sharp. More like blood thirsty. There were no lapses. He won when he was supposed to. Other than Russell, how many leaders can say that? He didn't lose to any teams he was supposed to beat but he also didn't lose to a lack of focus or a lack of urgency or laziness or complacency or internal team turmoil or not being 100% or the trappings of fame or the pressure to keep winning or arrogance or any other foe that eventually beats most players/teams.

I wouldn't call meeting expectations as overachieving. Now, a good argument can be made that meeting expectations, not crumbling under the pressure of being expected to win, is tougher than overachieving in situations where you're not expected to triumph.

[LeBird]

Do you really think the 86 Bulls had a snowball's chance in hell to win one game against one of the top 5 teams in NBA history? We're talking a second year Jordan against a prime Bird/Celtics. I'd say the Celtics would have underachieved dropping a game to the 86 Bulls. There's no reason at all for the 86 Celtics to have dropped a game to the 86 Bulls.

I can agree that as an individual, Jordan's style for the first 3 years wouldn't amount to much more than highly entertaining basketball from a showmanship standpoint, but the substance was lacking till he learned how to incorporate his talents moreso into a team concept( which coincided with him having decent pieces around him which basically wasn't the case till Pippen and Grant developed and PJ came onboard.)

You've basically ignored the gist of my argument because the answer to your question is in that post. Yes, I expect Jordan, if he is the water-walking prophet that his fans believe him to be, to win 1 game. The reason is clear: even those great Celtics lost to other teams and certainly dropped games against weaker opponents. No team is immune to bad form or luck.

The wider point being that Jordan should have lifted his teams far higher. Heck, even Magic improved the Lakers in his first year more than Jordan did with the Bulls in his; and Magic actually came into an already good team (which makes improving them harder - diminishing returns).

[Dragonyeuw]

You've basically ignored the gist of my argument because the answer to your question is in that post. Yes, I expect Jordan, if he is the water-walking prophet that his fans believe him to be, to win 1 game. The reason is clear: even those great Celtics lost to other teams and certainly dropped games against weaker opponents. No team is immune to bad form or luck.

The wider point being that Jordan should have lifted his teams far higher. Heck, even Magic improved the Lakers in his first year more than Jordan did with the Bulls in his; and Magic actually came into an already good team (which makes improving them harder - diminishing returns).

I haven't basically ignored anything, I simply don't agree with it. A singular, 2nd year talent coming off missing most of the year like MJ did wouldn't( and shouldn't) be enough for the Bulls to win one game in the playoffs against a team like the 86 Celtics, regardless of whether they lost to weaker teams at some point( I assume you mean in the regular season, because the Bulls were the weakest team they faced in the playoffs).

I can admit to being a MJ fan, but I can be objective and don't hold him as infallible the way some do. I also know you like to piss on him every chance you get, so having a decent discussion about it is likely not in the cards.

[Elosha]

The problem with this logic is that it fails to take into account the RS. Meaning, Jordan was not much of a net positive for his team on the whole despite his otherworldly numbers. There are many instances of other players (Bird and Lebron come to mind straight away) who improve their team approx. 20 games just by their influence alone and that helps them in terms of seeding for the playoffs.

Jordan did not lift his teams, and consequently they had awful records, and they got raped in the playoffs. I mean, he couldn't even win 1 game against the Celtics during that period, nevermind actually beating them in a series.

It shows you two things: Jordan's impact on the team was negligible until Phil Jackson came in and Pippen and Grant gained stature. Even then, when he left near his peak, the team was barely worse replacing him with Myers.

It also shows you that individualistic players who put up freak numbers put a ceiling on their team's output. No one player wins on their own.



Except he did lose when he came back. They just had a tonne of excuses for him.

Jordan's the most mollycoddled star in NBA history. They used his pulling power to bring money in the league and they had to push him, and not bring him down, in any way possible. Even if that meant demeaning his teammates or shortening the 3 point line :lol

As for the bolded portions above:
(1) Just off the top of my head, seasons of 72, 69, 67, 62, 61 and multiple seasons of 50+ wins. I'm pretty sure he had a big impact in the regular season.

(2) Remind me what playoff seeding Lebron had for his first two years in the league. Oh that's right...

(3) Funny, I remember multiple commentators and players in 1995 questioning his skill, age, and ability during the his shortened season and after they lost to Orlando, which helped fuel Jordan to lead the Bulls to 72/10 and a fourth championship the following year. Nick Anderson said after beating the Bulls game 1 of 95 ECSF, (paraphrased) "The old Jordan could just take off and do anything he wanted. This new Jordan just doesn't seem to have the same ability."

(4) Are you seriously suggesting the NBA intentionally shortened the 3 point line for the sole purpose of helping MJ? You do realize that Jordan was never reliant on three pointers for his offensive domination. And if "they" demean Jordan's teammates today, you could say the same and more for Lebron's teammates over the years, who never get the credit they deserve, even the times when Lebron is mediocre.

[LeBird]

I haven't basically ignored anything, I simply don't agree with it. A singular, 2nd year talent coming off missing most of the year like MJ did wouldn't( and shouldn't) be enough for the Bulls to win one game in the playoffs against a team like the 86 Celtics, regardless of whether they lost to weaker teams at some point( I assume you mean in the regular season, because the Bulls were the weakest team they faced in the playoffs).

I can admit to being a MJ fan, but I can be objective and don't hold him as infallible the way some do. I also know you like to piss on him every chance you get, so having a decent discussion about it is likely not in the cards.

Let me break it down for you.

In the 86 season, where Jordan was injured, the Celtics faced off with the Bulls 6 times in the RS. 5-1 to the Celtics. In the Playoffs, they got swept.

The only game they won against the Celtics that year...Jordan didn't play. :lol

And that's just one season. How about the next season when Jordan was fit from start to finish? They play the Celtics 6 times in the regular season winning 0. They get swept again. You're telling me across all these games he couldn't win 1 game? Does it not strike you as odd that the Bulls team got to the playoffs despite Jordan missing most of the season?

And never mind those seasons...how about 84-85? They played the Bucks and only managed to win 1 game. So the 'GOAT' plays 3 post-seasons in a row and only had 1 win? Are you shitting me?

Listen, the guy is just not a great net positive for a team. He was fortunate to have a team built around his incredible individual skills by an all-time great coach but the reason he didn't go further in the playoffs is not entirely down to his team. Heck, Bird took a 29 win team (2nd worst in the league; just like Jordan with the Bulls) and took them to a 60+ win season and the conference finals in his rookie year. As aforesaid; even Magic in his Rookie year improved an already good Lakers team more than Jordan did the Bulls.

Stop with the excuses. Jordan may have won a title when he had the team to do it and didn't win the title when he didn't...but that doesn't excuse the inbetween when he had nowhere near GOAT caliber impact on his teams and they were a joke.

That's why the comparisons of what Jordan would do in a lesser team are funny. We already have ample proof: he didn't do jack. He needed his teammates as much as his teammates needed him. He wasn't like a Lebron who could just hop onto any team and make them a contender.


As for the bolded portions above:
(1) Just off the top of my head, seasons of 72, 69, 67, 62, 61 and multiple seasons of 50+ wins. I'm pretty sure he had a big impact in the regular season.

Yes, when he had a great team around him.


(2) Remind me what playoff seeding Lebron had for his first two years in the league. Oh that's right...


You got me there. Yes, I'll have to admit, 18-19 year old Lebron wasn't good enough to lead his garbage team to the playoffs. He just lead them to the finals when he was older...unlike Jordan who did it never.



(3) Funny, I remember multiple commentators and players in 1995 questioning his skill, age, and ability during the his shortened season and after they lost to Orlando, which helped fuel Jordan to lead the Bulls to 72/10 and a fourth championship the following year. Nick Anderson said after beating the Bulls game 1 of 95 ECSF, (paraphrased) "The old Jordan could just take off and do anything he wanted. This new Jordan just doesn't seem to have the same ability."


Excuses. He came back to a team that won 55 games (could have won more but for injuries) and were a bad call away from another possible finals appearance.

He came back and was dropping 40+ points in that season. The reason he didn't go further is simple: he'd lost the guy who'd bang on the boards for him (Grant) - and that is always a big need for someone like Jordan since it is a skillset he simply cannot compete in. Unlike Lebron, Magic or Larry. He only got back to the top of the pile when they got Rodman - the greatest rebounder of all-time.


(4) Are you seriously suggesting the NBA intentionally shortened the 3 point line for the sole purpose of helping MJ? You do realize that Jordan was never reliant on three pointers for his offensive domination. And if "they" demean Jordan's teammates today, you could say the same and more for Lebron's teammates over the years, who never get the credit they deserve, even the times when Lebron is mediocre.

It was a quip, chill out. I'm saying the NBA and the media marketing machine in general lubed up for Jordan compared to lots of other stars. That's why his failures are minimised and his successes overblown. Some people are stupid enough to believe that Jordan was actually carrying those teams or that they weren't stacked because he had to be the league leading scorer (3ball). 'Brainwashed' I think they call it.

[Young X]

This dude just said MJ wasn't a great net positive for his team and he's dead serious. :oldlol:

I mean he only led his team to 6 rings and the 2 best records in league history while playing at a ridiculously high level on both ends. What else do you want him to do? :lol

[BigBoss]

Because 95% of ISH weren't alive when it happened.

[Jacks3]

This dude just said MJ wasn't a great net positive for his team and he's dead serious. :oldlol:

I mean he only led his team to 6 rings and the 2 best records in league history while playing at a ridiculously high level on both ends. What else do you want him to do? :lol

Seriously. What the **** is that dude talking about? :oldlol:

[dunksby]

Seriously. What the **** is that dude talking about? :oldlol:
LeBird = Nash = Pauk.

[scandisk_]

LeBird = Nash = Roundball.

fixed

[Dragonyeuw]

Let me break it down for you.

In the 86 season, where Jordan was injured, the Celtics faced off with the Bulls 6 times in the RS. 5-1 to the Celtics. In the Playoffs, they got swept.

The only game they won against the Celtics that year...Jordan didn't play. :lol

And that's just one season. How about the next season when Jordan was fit from start to finish? They play the Celtics 6 times in the regular season winning 0. They get swept again. You're telling me across all these games he couldn't win 1 game? Does it not strike you as odd that the Bulls team got to the playoffs despite Jordan missing most of the season?

And never mind those seasons...how about 84-85? They played the Bucks and only managed to win 1 game. So the 'GOAT' plays 3 post-seasons in a row and only had 1 win? Are you shitting me?

Listen, the guy is just not a great net positive for a team. He was fortunate to have a team built around his incredible individual skills by an all-time great coach but the reason he didn't go further in the playoffs is not entirely down to his team. Heck, Bird took a 29 win team (2nd worst in the league; just like Jordan with the Bulls) and took them to a 60+ win season and the conference finals in his rookie year. As aforesaid; even Magic in his Rookie year improved an already good Lakers team more than Jordan did the Bulls.

Stop with the excuses. Jordan may have won a title when he had the team to do it and didn't win the title when he didn't...but that doesn't excuse the inbetween when he had nowhere near GOAT caliber impact on his teams and they were a joke.

That's why the comparisons of what Jordan would do in a lesser team are funny. We already have ample proof: he didn't do jack. He needed his teammates as much as his teammates needed him. He wasn't like a Lebron who could just hop onto any team and make them a contender.



.

But unlike Lebron, you cant point to any instances of MJ costing his team a title due to mental midgetry. Yeah, I'll give Lebron his props for taking that 2007 Cavs team to the finals to get swept- Jordan never did anything like that . He also never had a 2011 finals moment, or a 2010 Boston series moment, where in his prime he shrunk several notches below his capabilties getting outplayed by past their prime career at journeymen stage like Terry and Marion were in 2011- the same Marion that 40 year old MJ was lighting up. Jordan may have figured out 'how to win' later on, but once he did, you never had to fear whether he would show up on the biggest stage.

As I said before, as a Jordan fan I don't hold him to deity standards. But I wonder if, in your quest to piss on him, you hold Lebron to account for his own flaws and failures

[sportjames23]

LeBird stay gettin' reck't.

Hold these, breh:


http://prolinecap.com/l.jpg

[Asukal]

Leloser getting clowned in every thread. :roll: :lol :oldlol: :banana:

[scandisk_]

But unlike Lebron, you cant point to any instances of MJ costing his team a title due to mental midgetry. Yeah, I'll give Lebron his props for taking that 2007 Cavs team to the finals to get swept- Jordan never did anything like that . He also never had a 2011 finals moment, or a 2010 Boston series moment, where in his prime he shrunk several notches below his capabilties getting outplayed by past their prime career at journeymen stage like Terry and Marion were in 2011- the same Marion that 40 year old MJ was lighting up. Jordan may have figured out 'how to win' later on, but once he did, you never had to fear whether he would show up on the biggest stage.

As I said before, as a Jordan fan I don't hold him to deity standards. But I wonder if, in your quest to piss on him, you hold Lebron to account for his own flaws and failures

Each has different standards or view of greatness though. Wilt fans has different standards compared to KAJ, kobe or Russell fans or any other GOAT level player. No point arguing, most of them know MJ is G.O.A.T. It's the constant slandering of Lebron thats ticks them into defensive mode.

[Asukal]

Each has different standards or view of greatness though. Wilt fans has different standards compared to KAJ, kobe or Russell fans or any other GOAT level player. No point arguing, most of them know MJ is G.O.A.T. It's the constant slandering of Lebron thats ticks them into defensive mode.

Well if they stop putting lebaldo on the GOAT pedestal then the slandering will stop. :hammerhead:

[Dragonyeuw]

Each has different standards or view of greatness though. Wilt fans has different standards compared to KAJ, kobe or Russell fans or any other GOAT level player. No point arguing, most of them know MJ is G.O.A.T. It's the constant slandering of Lebron thats ticks them into defensive mode.

And thats perfectly fine. MJ is my favorite but Im not one to declare he's the undisputed goat, but we're dealing with one sided slandering when the guy being propped up has more than his share of failure. I fully accept that MJ had his failures but to me it doesnt lessen his greatness. All of the goat candidates have their share of failures.

[scandisk_]

And thats perfectly fine. MJ is my favorite but Im not one to declare he's the undisputed goat, but we're dealing with one sided slandering when the guy being propped up has more than his share of failure. I fully accept that MJ had his failures but to me it doesnt lessen his greatness. All of the goat candidates have their share of failures.

It hurts when your boy is being toyed left and right, just sayin :oldlol:

p.s. I still think Lebron's goin to win it all. Though I kinda hate the guy's guts, he'll bring that elusive title to Cleveland. Teh Warriors ain't ready for bron.

[LeBird]

But unlike Lebron, you cant point to any instances of MJ costing his team a title due to mental midgetry. Yeah, I'll give Lebron his props for taking that 2007 Cavs team to the finals to get swept- Jordan never did anything like that . He also never had a 2011 finals moment, or a 2010 Boston series moment, where in his prime he shrunk several notches below his capabilties getting outplayed by past their prime career at journeymen stage like Terry and Marion were in 2011- the same Marion that 40 year old MJ was lighting up. Jordan may have figured out 'how to win' later on, but once he did, you never had to fear whether he would show up on the biggest stage.

As I said before, as a Jordan fan I don't hold him to deity standards. But I wonder if, in your quest to piss on him, you hold Lebron to account for his own flaws and failures

Yes but the point is no one claims LeBron is without any fault. I think people rightfully criticise him for 2011. That's why no one is opening a thread about why LeBron gets a pass for 2011 - because he quite clearly doesn't. He is hammered on any point that the stans of other fans can muster up.

That's not the case with Jordan and where this thread is relevant. So people bringing up 6/6 to try to paint Jordan as some amazing play off performer can't hide behind his team not being good enough. They may have not been good enough to win the title, but they should have done better than they did. And it is far better to go further, even losing in the finals, than not getting there and only winning when you do.

It's the same shit Montana fans bring up against Brady and the same thing Jordan fans bring up against LeBron.

The logical thing - or the obvious thing - to do would be to acknowledge LeBron as a great player on par with the GOAT candidates and still stick to Jordan or whoever as your choice... Than to bring up shitty and mythical arguments that go against plain logic just so you can deify Jordan. I'm not saying you're doing this, quite clearly you're logical, but that it happens a lot. And not just in troll forums like this one.

[OldSchoolBBall]

That's not the case with Jordan and where this thread is relevant. So people bringing up 6/6 to try to paint Jordan as some amazing play off performer can't hide behind his team not being good enough..

I love your language here. Like anyone has to "paint" Jordan - pretty clearly the BEST playoff player in history - to be an amazing playoff performer. LMAO @ this clown. :roll:

[scandisk_]

The logical thing - or the obvious thing - to do would be to acknowledge LeBron as a great player on par with the GOAT candidates and still stick to Jordan or whoever as your choice... Than to bring up shitty and mythical arguments that go against plain logic just so you can deify Jordan. I'm not saying you're doing this, quite clearly you're logical, but that it happens a lot. And not just in troll forums like this one.

The moment you become emotionally invested in a basketball discussion or in a forum is the day you lose sanity. see pauk or jlauber/milwad. No one in their right mind would paint LeBron as a bum. It's just trolling yo!

[Dresta]

Yes but the point is no one claims LeBron is without any fault. I think people rightfully criticise him for 2011. That's why no one is opening a thread about why LeBron gets a pass for 2011 - because he quite clearly doesn't. He is hammered on any point that the stans of other fans can muster up.

That's not the case with Jordan and where this thread is relevant. So people bringing up 6/6 to try to paint Jordan as some amazing play off performer can't hide behind his team not being good enough. They may have not been good enough to win the title, but they should have done better than they did. And it is far better to go further, even losing in the finals, than not getting there and only winning when you do.

It's the same shit Montana fans bring up against Brady and the same thing Jordan fans bring up against LeBron.

The logical thing - or the obvious thing - to do would be to acknowledge LeBron as a great player on par with the GOAT candidates and still stick to Jordan or whoever as your choice... Than to bring up shitty and mythical arguments that go against plain logic just so you can deify Jordan. I'm not saying you're doing this, quite clearly you're logical, but that it happens a lot. And not just in troll forums like this one.
2011 was far worse than anything MJ ever did. It was probably the worst choke by an all-time-great of all time.

Not even remotely comparable to early career first round exits :roll:

[Da_Realist]

Let me break it down for you.

In the 86 season, where Jordan was injured, the Celtics faced off with the Bulls 6 times in the RS. 5-1 to the Celtics. In the Playoffs, they got swept.

The only game they won against the Celtics that year...Jordan didn't play. :lol

And that's just one season. How about the next season when Jordan was fit from start to finish? They play the Celtics 6 times in the regular season winning 0. They get swept again. You're telling me across all these games he couldn't win 1 game? Does it not strike you as odd that the Bulls team got to the playoffs despite Jordan missing most of the season?

And never mind those seasons...how about 84-85? They played the Bucks and only managed to win 1 game. So the 'GOAT' plays 3 post-seasons in a row and only had 1 win? Are you shitting me?

I don't think it's hard to understand. MJ came in the league and grabbed everyone's attention right away. He didn't just garner interest, he started to drive it. The established stars started to take notice. MJ went into Boston Garden and dropped 49 and then 63 points against the consensus greatest team ever led by the best player in the league in the NBA's most storied arena. To this day, the Celtics have to talk about MJ's 63, which is still a postseason record. Don't think that put a giant bulls-eye on his back?

Add to that MJ's trash talking...


One year later, Jordan hit a jump shot over Bird's outstretched hand and then, as he backpedaled on defense, told Larry, "Take that All Star."
"Come on, you little bitch, bring it back here", Bird said, then went down and drained a perimeter shot of his own.
"You know, you are the biggest prima donna I've ever seen", Jordan said.
"What the hell is a prima donna?" Bird asked

MJ wasn't really trying to be your friend; he wanted to bring the best out of his opponents so that he could play his best. Today everyone follows each other on twitter.

Not a surprise that the Bulls with their hot shot guard with the big mouth would grab the attention of the league's best teams and players. Dropping 63 on the future champs in their building is a good way to get their attention. There was such a disparity of talent and experience between the Bulls and Celtics that if the Celtics decided to take the game seriously, they would win no matter what Jordan did. I guarantee they were sleepwalking through the one game the Bulls won without MJ.


The 1984-85 season was the pilot for Pat Riley's "Career Best Effort" project. The Lakers coach recorded data from basic categories on the stat sheet, applied a plus or a minus to each column, and then divided the total by minutes played. He calculated a rating for each over the course of the season. If they succeeded, it became a CBE, or Career Best Effort. For Kareem and Magic, it was a significant challenge because they were already operating at such a high level.
Riley's system was simplistic, but it was how the coach manipulated the data that made it so effective. He routinely recorded the performances of every NBA player and highlighted the success rates of Bird and Michael Jordan in particular. Solid, reliable players generally rated a score in the 600's, while elite players scored at least 800. Magic, who submitted 138 triple-doubles in his career, often scored over 1,000. Riley trumpeted the top performances in the league in bold lettering on the blackboard each week and measured them against the corresponding players on his own roster.
Johnson was usually the lone player in the locker room while Riley and assistant coach Bill Bertka often used that quiet time to tweak his star with his statistical ammunition.
"Earvin," Riley would say, "you've got great numbers for a point guard, but look at what your boy Bird did this week. He croaked you."
Johnson would remain silent.
"You had a bad week, Buck", Riley would continue. "Look at what numbers Michael put up."
Still, Magic would say nothing. There wasn't anything subtle about what Riley was doing yet Johnson couldn't help but fall into the trap. He resented having his numbers up on the blackboard trailing the league's top stars for his teammates' viewing pleasure. He plotted to usurp both Bird and Jordan the next time his coach's "ratings" were revealed, just as his coach had hoped.

Pat Riley was using a rookie Jordan to goad a Top-2 guy in the league already holding two titles and two Finals MVPs. MJ didn't sneak up on the calendar and catch guys sleeping, despite his team's record. No one wanted to be embarrassed, posterized or endlessly humiliated on the highlight shows. When teams played the Bulls, they were motivated because the game would bring exposure. Dominique took his battles with MJ personally and played that way. When the Bulls played the Celtics or Lakers, a normal, routine game turned into an answer to two questions..."Who is the best player in the league?" and "Who's the face of the league?"

MJ's Bulls might have had the record of the New Jersey Nets but they garnered the interest of the league's best teams.

[LeBird]

The moment you become emotionally invested in a basketball discussion or in a forum is the day you lose sanity. see pauk or jlauber/milwad. No one in their right mind would paint LeBron as a bum. It's just trolling yo!

LOL, I'm not emotionally invested. I actually enjoy the fun baiting. There are those like 3ball that actually believe what they're writing and then there are posters like the one I was addressing who clearly doesn't have an agenda even if they still think Jordan is the GOAT.


I don't think it's hard to understand. MJ came in the league and grabbed everyone's attention right away. He didn't just garner interest, he started to drive it. The established stars started to take notice. MJ went into Boston Garden and dropped 49 and then 63 points against the consensus greatest team ever led by the best player in the league in the NBA's most storied arena. To this day, the Celtics have to talk about MJ's 63, which is still a postseason record. Don't think that put a giant bulls-eye on his back?

Add to that MJ's trash talking...

Irrelevant to what I'm talking about. And ironically, at the time people did call him a choker or just an empty statsman. It's in revision of that history that people talk like he was the perfect player.

And the reason people talk about the 63 is because it was by mr hype-man Jordan himself. No one should care about a high scoring game in what was a first round game of an ultimately one-sided series.

The great irony is that those matches give the best examples of why Jordan wasn't a net positive for his team: he was a one-man band who even putting up ridiculous numbers couldn't get his team across the line because it wasn't conducive to team-play.




....

Irrelevant. What does your eulogy have to do with what's being discussed? You're just playing the stereotype - love-sick fan who is just waiting to go on reminiscing - instead of addressing what I'm talking about.

Jordan's failures have been conveniently swept under the run, unlike a lot of the other GOAT candidates. He's treated like he's got the perfect record - this lie is so great that people think 6>11>all - when in fact he always struggled to utilise his individualistic talents to mesh in a team concept until Phil and Pippen arrived. Their records without Jordan speaks for itself; Jordan's without them does too.

[tmacattack33]

LOL at you talking about him not facing a top 10 player in his prime.

Newsflash: Basketball is 5-on-5. A team can be great without a top 10 player.

The OP's post sounds like he's talking about boxing.



And by the way...the 90's were legendary for its dynamic duos....Stockton & Malone, Shaq & Penny, Kemp & Payton, Zo & Tim Hardaway ...and MJ beat all of these teams.

So I could probably do the same thing and talk about how Duncan and Lebron never faced any dynamic duos.

[Dragonyeuw]

Yes but the point is no one claims LeBron is without any fault. I think people rightfully criticise him for 2011. That's why no one is opening a thread about why LeBron gets a pass for 2011 - because he quite clearly doesn't. He is hammered on any point that the stans of other fans can muster up.

That's not the case with Jordan and where this thread is relevant. So people bringing up 6/6 to try to paint Jordan as some amazing play off performer can't hide behind his team not being good enough. They may have not been good enough to win the title, but they should have done better than they did. And it is far better to go further, even losing in the finals, than not getting there and only winning when you do.

It's the same shit Montana fans bring up against Brady and the same thing Jordan fans bring up against LeBron.

The logical thing - or the obvious thing - to do would be to acknowledge LeBron as a great player on par with the GOAT candidates and still stick to Jordan or whoever as your choice... Than to bring up shitty and mythical arguments that go against plain logic just so you can deify Jordan. I'm not saying you're doing this, quite clearly you're logical, but that it happens a lot. And not just in troll forums like this one.

Fair enough, and I do. I have no issues acknowledging, just taking accolades out of the question as that is contextual, that Lebron is one of the 5 best/ most impactful players I've ever *seen*, I say it like that because I didn't see guys like Wilt or Russell, West, etc. With that said, there are lots of people here who bring up that Jordan is 1-9 before Pippen/Grant etc. Usually those arguments come about from hardcore Kobe/Lebron fans arguing against Jordan.

The reality is, as I said, there's no GOAT level player that you can point to without some flaw if one is prepared to be objective about it. My position is that the guys that typically show up in the top ten GOAT lists, there really isn't a lot of separation between them as far as 'greatness' goes. Which is why I don't nitpick over $hit when it comes to rankings, everyone has their own criteria.

[Dragonyeuw]

It hurts when your boy is being toyed left and right, just sayin :oldlol:



Not really, I'm not so invested in who the greatest player ever is that I refuse to accept that anyone can be better than MJ or whoever else. It really makes no difference to me.