If you are the best player in 6 finals and win only 2, never talk GOAT

[JtotheIzzo]

real talk.

biases aside, just think about the title, all six times LeBron was/is the best player in the series, and on the biggest stage he has only come through twice.

yes its a team game, but no game comes close to basketball in the fact that one player can turn a team great.

this is a crippling statistic for the LeBron argument.

[sportjames23]

OP is on point. :cheers:

[Alamо]

*5 finals. Must I remind you of 2011?

[Real Men Wear Green]

Very few known analysts talk about James as the greatest player ever, furthest most go is greatest SF. Even on this site most of that discussion is people arguing against him being the greatest ever with an opponent that doesn't exist.

[ImKobe]

Wade was better than Lebron in 2011, and he still couldn't win as a 2nd option.

[JtotheIzzo]

Very few known analysts talk about James as the greatest player ever, furthest most go is greatest SF. Even on this site most of that discussion is people arguing against him being the greatest ever with an opponent that doesn't exist.

I can point to countless talking head discussions and articles in the media (mainly ESPN, check out Adande's fluff piece today for the latest excuse making) saying stuff like:

"If LeBron wins this year is he the greatest of all time?"
"Player x says LeBron is better than Jordan."
"The best player on the planet LeBron James might be the best ever."

Its not hard to find, there is no 'opponent' persay but the discussion is in rotation.

[JohnFreeman]

Nobody thinks he is the greatest of all time, op is a ***

[Real Men Wear Green]

I can point to countless talking head discussions and articles in the media (mainly ESPN, check out Adande's fluff piece today for the latest excuse making) saying stuff like:

"If LeBron wins this year is he the greatest of all time?"
"Player x says LeBron is better than Jordan."
"The best player on the planet LeBron James might be the best ever."

Its not hard to find, there is no 'opponent' persay but the discussion is in rotation.
I said "very few," not "no one." Although it's close to no one. He is being talked up as one of the greatest ever but there aren't many rating him over Jordan.

[SwayDizzle]

no one ever said LBJ was GOAT. even his stans don't think so.

[Bernkastel]

OP complaining about click-bait in a click-bait thread.

[LAZERUSS]

Was MJ considered the best player in the league when he led his team to defeat in the '88, '89, '90, and '95 post-seasons?

Shouldn't that be a "black-eye" against his legacy.

Or the fact that Bird may have been considered the greater player in their '86 and '87 H2H's...but geez, 0-6? Couldn't win one stinkin' game?

BTW, was Lebron considered the best player going into the '07 Finals, or do you think it might have been Duncan?

[LAZERUSS]

real talk.

biases aside, just think about the title, all six times LeBron was/is the best player in the series, and on the biggest stage he has only come through twice.

yes its a team game, but no game comes close to basketball in the fact that one player can turn a team great.

this is a crippling statistic for the LeBron argument.

BTW, if you took Lebron off those rosters, and the opposing team's best player off their roster, how many rings does Lebron's team win in those six Finals?

[MP.Trey]

Was MJ considered the best player in the league when he led his team to defeat in the '88, '89, '90, and '95 post-seasons?

Shouldn't that be a "black-eye" against his legacy.

Or the fact that Bird may have been considered the greater player in their '86 and '87 H2H's...but geez, 0-6? Couldn't win one stinkin' game?

BTW, was Lebron considered the best player going into the '07 Finals, or do you think it might have been Duncan?
Nah it only counts as a bad thing if you win three series before losing one.

[LAZERUSS]

Nah it only counts as a bad thing if you win three series before losing one.

That's the ISH philosophy. Hakeem is praised for going "2/3" in his 18 season career, while Wilt is ripped for going "2/6" in his 14 season career. Better to take your team down in flames in the first round, year-after-year, than to lose game seven's in the Finals.

[buddha]

it's time for LeBron stans to admit he's just not as good as they believe him to be.

[buddha]

That's the ISH philosophy. Hakeem is praised for going "2/3" in his 18 season career, while Wilt is ripped for going "2/6" in his 14 season career. Better to take your team down in flames in the first round, year-after-year, than to lose game seven's in the Finals.

usually, losing in the first round is an indication of playing on a bad team. where as, going to the finals and losing is an indication of being a bitch-made buster.

[LAZERUSS]

usually losing in the first round is an indication of playing on a bad team where going to the finals and losing is an indication of being a bitch-made buster.

Yep...Lebron is ripped for getting to Six Finals because he played in the "weak" Eastern Conference. And then he is ripped for going "2/6" in them when he gets there. Had he had the good fortune to have played in the Western Conference, perhaps he never gets to the Finals at all...and he would be held in a much higher regard.

[Hey Yo]

Was MJ considered the best player in the league when he led his team to defeat in the '88, '89, '90, and '95 post-seasons?

Shouldn't that be a "black-eye" against his legacy.

Or the fact that Bird may have been considered the greater player in their '86 and '87 H2H's...but geez, 0-6? Couldn't win one stinkin' game?

BTW, was Lebron considered the best player going into the '07 Finals, or do you think it might have been Duncan?
Also consider MJ quitting the league each time he had a chance to 4peat. The first time while still in his prime and under contract. The second time when he knew the team was old and dismantled and wouldn't be able to get it done the following season.

People say James leaves when the going get's tough but I guess that means the same for MJ, but he just "fakes" retirement over and over to avoid the inevitable.

[MP.Trey]

:roll:

LAZ actually slaying in this thread.

[sdot_thadon]

BTW, if you took Lebron off those rosters, and the opposing team's best player off their roster, how many rings does Lebron's team win in those six Finals?
:applause:

[Viriilink]

BTW, if you took Lebron off those rosters, and the opposing team's best player off their roster, how many rings does Lebron's team win in those six Finals?
Possibly three if you removed Dirk(2011), Durant(2012), and Tony Parker(2013).

[diamenz]

the only people saying bron is goat is the kids that were still seeds when mj was winning chips. if i'm wrong, then they're some sad ass adults.

[Optimus Prime]

Very few known analysts talk about James as the greatest player ever, furthest most go is greatest SF. Even on this site most of that discussion is people arguing against him being the greatest ever with an opponent that doesn't exist.

Someone doesn't watch/read ESPN. I'd say more often than not analysts and writers are slobbering over "Is LeBron the GOAT?! Better than MJ?!?!?!?!"

Hence why I only pay attention to the media to watch actual games and get news and updates. The kind of worship and favoritism LeBron gets is truly pathetic.

:kobe:

[rmt]

Was MJ considered the best player in the league when he led his team to defeat in the '88, '89, '90, and '95 post-seasons?

Shouldn't that be a "black-eye" against his legacy.

Or the fact that Bird may have been considered the greater player in their '86 and '87 H2H's...but geez, 0-6? Couldn't win one stinkin' game?

BTW, was Lebron considered the best player going into the '07 Finals, or do you think it might have been Duncan?

2006-07 MVP voting
Duncan 286 votes
Lebron 183 votes

[Chadwin]

When you don't play any actual competition until the the Finals (or maybe even the ECF), 2/5 matters.

[LAZERUSS]

2006-07 MVP voting
Duncan 286 votes
Lebron 183 votes

Exactly.

And I don't know what the odds were going into that Finals, but I suspect that the Spurs were just overwhelming favorites.

[Elosha]

Also consider MJ quitting the league each time he had a chance to 4peat. The first time while still in his prime and under contract. The second time when he knew the team was old and dismantled and wouldn't be able to get it done the following season.

People say James leaves when the going get's tough but I guess that means the same for MJ, but he just "fakes" retirement over and over to avoid the inevitable.

Highly inaccurate. Jordan quit the first time because his father was murdered during the past summer. He wanted to explore his father's dream for him to play baseball while he was still in his relative prime of life. Doesn't mean that I agree with Jordan's decision, I would have loved to see him play in 94 and 95. I think the Bulls would have won at least one of those years, probably 94.

At some point, Jordan decided he'd done enough to try his father's baseball dream, and went back to where he was truly meant to be. Yes, he deprived us of almost two years of all-time great play, but it's his life. He can deal with personal tragedy in the way he wishes and who are we to decide what he should have done?

As for 98, what do you expect? Reinsdorf and Jerry Krause refused to resign Phil Jackson, and made it clear they would not pay Scottie Pippen. Who does that to their best players/coach after 6 championships? Jordan didn't want to start over with a new coach and new teammates at 35-36 years old, and I don't blame him. He had perfect ending with the Bulls, which could only be sullied moving forward. Had the idiotic Bulls management kept Phil and Scottie, I think Jordan would have stayed and they probably would have won in 99. Everyone would have been more rested in the lockout season, and I don't anyone in the Eastern Conference or the first time Spurs beating the Bulls.

[3ball]

:confusedshrug:

[3ball]

some misinformation itt

[3ball]

Wasn't MJ considered the best player in the league he was defeated in the '88, '89, '90, and '95 post-seasons?.. Shouldn't that be a "black-eye" against his legacy?


MJ didn't have an all-star teammate until 1990... But once he got that 1 all-star teammate, that's all he needed to go 6/6... Whereas Lebron got multiple all-star teammates in Miami and went 2/4..

That's why MJ's losses to the Bad Boys and 80's Celtics aren't counted against him - he never had an all-star teammate - but once he got JUST ONE, it was 6/6... No other player has done so much with so little.

[shrempf_on_rice]

When you don't play any actual competition until the the Finals (or maybe even the ECF), 2/5 matters.

If he played in the Western conference he doesnt make it to the Finals 6 times. This year alone I can name 4 or 5 western teams that wouldve beat them.

[Kblaze8855]

Duncan had a great argument for being better than LeBron in 2007.

Anyway people spent 40 years calling someone who won two out of six finals the greatest ever and no one thought it was an unusual opinion to have until like 3 years ago.

Kinda funny how perspective changes around careers that haven't.

[LAZERUSS]

MJ didn't have an all-star teammate until 1990... But once he got that 1 all-star teammate, that's all he needed to go 6/6... Whereas Lebron got multiple all-star teammates in Miami and went 2/4..

That's why MJ's losses to the Bad Boys and 80's Celtics aren't counted against him - he never had an all-star teammate - but once he got JUST ONE, it was 6/6... No other player has done so much with so little.

I think you are under-valuing MJ's teammates.

No better cases than '92-93 thru '94-95.

In his '92-93 season, the team goes 57-25, and narrowly wins a game six in the Finals.

He retires, and has virtually no replacement...

and his team goes 55-27. Then, they lose a close and controversial seven game series to a Knicks team that went 56-26. The same NY team that barely lost a game seven to the 58-24 Rockets in the Finals...in a series in which they outscored them overall.

Then, MJ comes back fully rested in the last 17 games of the '94-95 season, but with the same roster, sans Grant, and they lose in six in the ECSF's.

Then they BOLSTER than team with Rodman, and reel off three more titles.

[3ball]

In his '92-93 season, the team goes 57-25, and narrowly wins a game six in the Finals.

He retires, and has virtually no replacement...

and his team goes 55-27.


Nothing in life is that simple - just looking at win totals is foolish - anyone can play that game, but it means nothing:

Lebron + Bosh were added to 47-win Heat = 58 wins (+11)
38-year old MJ was added to 18-win Wizards = 37 wins (+19)

Also, you're underrating how rare 3-peating is and the amount of superior strategy, team cohesion and hardened mental strength that is developed along the way.. Only 3 teams have ever done it.. Any team that has developed the level of strategy, optimal play and mental fortitude necessary to 3-peat, will be capable of winning 55 games in the anomalous situation the Bulls found themselves in 1994 when MJ abruptly retired (assuming everyone is in their PRIME).

Now if MJ retired in 1990, 1991, 1992?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. The supporting cast wouldn't have been as good at playing basketball together as they were by the END of the 1993 season..

But new fans won't understand the extent to which a 3-peat supporting cast has improved while being led to 3 consecutive rings, or the amount of optimal play, superior strategy, and mental fortitude THAT IS DEVELOPED while 3-peating, because new fans have only ever seen guys come up SHORT when trying to 3-peat..





and his team goes 55-27.


If MJ led this year's 55-win Memphis Grizzlies to a 3-peat dynasty while getting 2 MVP's, 3 FMVP's and leading the league in scoring every year, he'd be the undisputed GOAT..

Of course, MJ wouldn't need to average 33 PPG on the Grizzlies, because they have far more talent than the 1994 Bulls - this speaks to the little help MJ had on those Bulls teams, considering they required him to average 30+ PPG as a standard.
.

[J Shuttlesworth]

Duncan had a great argument for being better than LeBron in 2007.

Anyway people spent 40 years calling someone who won two out of six finals the greatest ever and no one thought it was an unusual opinion to have until like 3 years ago.

Kinda funny how perspective changes around careers that haven't.
It's even funnier how until 2014, I never really saw people using finals records as a way to judge legacies.

It's also strange how people never consider the circumstances that come along with losing in a season. When people say 2/6, they are actually using 2007, a 22 year old kid leading his team to the finals, as some kind of negative. Same with him this year taking his team to the finals sand Love and Kyrie, and yet he's still "expected" to beat a 67 win team at full strength... Something that even mj didn't do

[Dbrog]

Of course, MJ wouldn't need to average 33 PPG on the Grizzlies, because they have far more talent than the 1994 Bulls - this speaks to the little help MJ had on those Bulls teams, considering they required him to average 30+ PPG as a standard.
.

:biggums: :coleman:

[catch24]

It's even funnier how until 2014, I never really saw people using finals records as a way to judge legacies.

It's also strange how people never consider the circumstances that come along with losing in a season. When people say 2/6, they are actually using 2007, a 22 year old kid leading his team to the finals, as some kind of negative. Same with him this year taking his team to the finals sand Love and Kyrie, and yet he's still "expected" to beat a 67 win team at full strength... Something that even mj didn't do
It's been that way since 2009, and even back in 2008 when I actually tried registering an account here. Use the search function, and look at all the tiresome arguments between Russell/Jordan, Russell/Wilt, and Kobe/Jordan.

Don't get me started with the "winning as the man" stuff. :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

Nothing in life is that simple - just looking at win totals is foolish - anyone can play that game, but it means nothing:

Lebron + Bosh were added to 47-win Heat = 58 wins (+11)
38-year old MJ was added to 18-win Wizards = 37 wins (+19)

Also, you're underrating how rare 3-peating is and the amount of superior strategy, team cohesion and hardened mental strength that is developed along the way.. Only 3 teams have ever done it.. Any team that has developed the level of strategy, optimal play and mental fortitude necessary to 3-peat, will be capable of winning 55 games in the anomalous situation the Bulls found themselves in 1994 when MJ abruptly retired (assuming everyone is in their PRIME).

Now if MJ retired in 1990, 1991, 1992?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. The supporting cast wouldn't have been as good at playing basketball together as they were by the END of the 1993 season..

But new fans won't understand the extent to which a 3-peat supporting cast has improved while being led to 3 consecutive rings, because they've only ever seen guys come up SHORT when trying to 3-peat..



If MJ led this year's 55-win Memphis Grizzlies to a 3-peat dynasty while getting 2 MVP's, 3 FMVP's and leading the league in scoring every year, he'd be the undisputed GOAT..

Of course, MJ wouldn't need to average 33 PPG on the Grizzlies, because they have far more talent than the 1994 Bulls - this speaks to the little help MJ had on those Bulls teams, considering they required him to average 30+ PPG as a standard.

First of all, I have MJ as one of the five players that has a case for GOAT status (Wilt, Magic, Kareem, and Russell being the others.) So it's not like I am just blindly ripping him.

But the '94 season is all anyone needs to know. MJ suddenly retired and the Bulls basically replaced him with scrubs. They STILL went 55-27, and barely lost a seven game series against a team that would lose in a close seven game series in the Finals. CLEARLY, the '94 Bulls were legitimate title-contenders withOUT Jordan.

And again, a fully refreshed MJ couldn't take the basic roster (sans Grant) to a title the next season. Why wasn't the '95 team, with Jordan basically replacing Grant, not as competitive as the '94 team?

[3ball]

:biggums: :coleman:


Do you really want to compare the rosters man-for-man?.. 2015 Griz > 1994 Bulls and it's not close.

Marc Gasol/Zach Randolph = Pippen/Grant.

And the Grizzlies sweep the supporting players:

Mike Conley
Tony Allen
Jeff Green
Vince Carter
Courtney Lee
Tayshaun Prince

>

Toni Kukoc
BJ Armstrong
Steve Kerr
Pete Myers
Luc Longley
Bill Wennington

[LAZERUSS]

Do you really want to compare the rosters man-for-man?.. 2015 Griz > 1994 Bulls and it's not close.

Marc Gasol/Zach Randolph = Pippen/Grant.

And the Grizzlies sweep the supporting players:

Mike Conley
Tony Allen
Jeff Green
Vince Carter
Courtney Lee
Tayshaun Prince

>

Toni Kukoc
BJ Armstrong
Steve Kerr
Pete Myers
Luc Longley
Bill Wennington


First of all, I would take Pippen and Grant by a HUGE margin over Zach and the WAY over-rated Goobersol. Goobersol would have been a backup center in the 90's. Goobersol was butchered by a 6-6 SF at BOTH ends of the floor. DPOY my a$$.

The rest of the rosters are pretty much equal, except BJ Armstrong was better than any of the Memphis guards. Neither were outstanding. But excellent role players on the Bulls to be sure. And to be honest, if you go even deeper, the Bulls supporting cast was better. Williams and Cartwright were servicable players...and the quad of Longley, Wennington, Williams, and Cartwright would have pounded Goobersol.

[Keno]

using context tho, it's not really that bad.

- lebron had no business being in the 2007 finals, he was just that good carrying scrubs.
- wade sabotaged his 2011 finals causing the heat to lose.
- his 2nd option and 3rd option are out for the finals / have been out for most of the playoffs. if he manages to beat gsw this series, he's the undisputed official goat.

[nba_55]

First of all, I have MJ as one of the five players that has a case for GOAT status (Wilt, Magic, Kareem, and Russell being the others.) So it's not like I am just blindly ripping him.

But the '94 season is all anyone needs to know. MJ suddenly retired and the Bulls basically replaced him with scrubs. They STILL went 55-27, and barely lost a seven game series against a team that would lose in a close seven game series in the Finals. CLEARLY, the '94 Bulls were legitimate title-contenders withOUT Jordan.

And again, a fully refreshed MJ couldn't take the basic roster (sans Grant) to a title the next season. Why wasn't the '95 team, with Jordan basically replacing Grant, not as competitive as the '94 team?

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[T_L_P]

using context tho, it's not really that bad.

- lebron had no business being in the 2007 finals, he was just that good carrying scrubs.
- wade sabotaged his 2011 finals causing the heat to lose.
- his 2nd option and 3rd option are out for the finals / have been out for most of the playoffs. if he manages to beat gsw this series, he's the undisputed official goat.

And you guys wonder why LeBron catches so much flak?

2007 is excusable (then again, games 3 and 4 were very tight with LeBron playing like shit and the Cavs had a top five defense even though LeBron wasn't truly elite on that end yet)

The Heat stood very little chance last season, and the Cavs have a monumental task this year.

But blaming 2011 on anyone but LeBron is laughable. The dude was scared to shoot and get outplayed by an old Jason Terry. It's one of the biggest chokejobs in NBA history, and there's no amount of Wade-blaming that will chance that.

2011 freezes him out of GOAT talks, though he will still have a strong top five case when it's all said and done.

[3ball]

misinformation itt

[3ball]

MJ suddenly retired and the Bulls basically replaced him with scrubs. They STILL went 55-27,


The 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Now if MJ retired in 1989, or 1990?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. In those years, the supporting cast had barely BEGUN to develop the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat..

Also, 2+2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for them to win all their championships - this means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that.
.

[nba_55]

The 1994 Bulls didn't win 55 games due to talent... They won due to superior strategy, team cohesion and mental strength developed by 3-peating.

The 1994 Bulls talent falls far short of ANY other 55-win team...

Let's start comparing 55-win teams to the 1994 Bulls to see which has more talent - it will be very obvious those Bulls had below-average talent for a 55-win team..

The 94' Bulls didn't win on talent - they won based on superior strategy, teamwork, and mental strength developed from 3-peating.. Now if MJ retired in 1989, or 1990?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. In those years, the supporting cast had barely BEGUN to develop the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat..

Again, ANY supporting cast that had developed the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat, would win 55 games in the anomalous situation that occurred when MJ retired abruptly.
.

LOL

[LAZERUSS]

And you guys wonder why LeBron catches so much flak?

2007 is excusable (then again, games 3 and 4 were very tight with LeBron playing like shit and the Cavs had a top five defense even though LeBron wasn't truly elite on that end yet)

The Heat stood very little chance last season, and the Cavs have a monumental task this year.

But blaming 2011 on anyone but LeBron is laughable. The dude was scared to shoot and get outplayed by an old Jason Terry. It's one of the biggest chokejobs in NBA history, and there's no amount of Wade-blaming that will chance that.

2011 freezes him out of GOAT talks, though he will still have a strong top five case when it's all said and done.

Jordan basically quit on his team in the '89 ECF's. Those that actually watched that series would tell you the same thing. In a critical game five, he quit...plain-and-simple.

Russell quit on his team in the clinching game five of the '67 EDF's, too.

West was brutalized by Frazier in a game seven. He won a ring with an awful Finals.

Kareem was outplayed by Cowens in a game seven of the Finals, and on his own home court. He was brutalized by Moses and his 40-42 team in the First Round of a playoff series loss. And KAJ's last ring was a joke. I deserved that ring as much as he did.

Kobe was just awful in the '04 and '08 Finals. just horrific. And hell, he won a ring in a game seven in which he shot 6-24 from the field.

You can go right down the list. Lebron is not the only GOAT candidate who has a black mark on his resume.

[LAZERUSS]

The 1994 Bulls didn't win 55 games due to talent... They won due to superior strategy, team cohesion and mental strength developed by 3-peating.

The 1994 Bulls talent falls far short of ANY other 55-win team...

Let's start comparing 55-win teams to the 1994 Bulls to see which has more talent - it will be very obvious those Bulls had below-average talent for a 55-win team..

The 94' Bulls didn't win on talent - they won based on superior strategy, teamwork, and mental strength developed from 3-peating.. Now if MJ retired in 1989, or 1990?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. In those years, the supporting cast had barely BEGUN to develop the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat..

Again, ANY supporting cast that had developed the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat, would win 55 games in the anomalous situation that occurred when MJ retired abruptly.
.

I hate to argue to with you, because I consider you one of the best posters on this site. But, I'm sorry, the '94 Bulls were a very talented team. Pippen, Grant, and Armstrong were all excellent players (hell Pippen was often considered a top-5 player in the league.) And the rest of the roster supplied what they needed.

Again, I would take them over the '15 Grizzlies in a heart-beat.

[3ball]

Bulls won 55 games in 1994 without MJ


The 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Also, 2+2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for them to win all their championships - this means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. :confusedshrug: .. there's no way around that.

[Dbrog]

First of all, I would take Pippen and Grant by a HUGE margin over Zach and the WAY over-rated Goobersol. Goobersol would have been a backup center in the 90's. Goobersol was butchered by a 6-6 SF at BOTH ends of the floor. DPOY my a$$.

The rest of the rosters are pretty much equal, except BJ Armstrong was better than any of the Memphis guards. Neither were outstanding. But excellent role players on the Bulls to be sure. And to be honest, if you go even deeper, the Bulls supporting cast was better. Williams and Cartwright were servicable players...and the quad of Longley, Wennington, Williams, and Cartwright would have pounded Goobersol.

:bowdown: :applause: :rockon:

[LAZERUSS]

The 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Also, 2+2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for them to win all their championships - this means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. :confusedshrug: .. there's no way around that.

Alright...then answer me this...

why couldn't MJ win a ring in seasons in which he averaged 37, 35 and 34 ppg?

In fact, an MJ in his greatest scoring season, went 0-3 in the playoffs.


Look, I consider MJ as a GOAT, but he didn't win without talent. I would argue that Wilt carried far worse teams much further, and against much greater competition.

The only "black eye" to Wilt was his '69 Finals. And those that watched that series, or even researched it, would tell you that it was Wilt's COACH who cost him and his team a ring that year. The rest of his career before that, Wilt was basically carrying inferior rosters, that generally played worse in the post-season to within an eyelash of winning numerous titles. And, after he shredded his knee in early '69, he was never the dominant offensive force again. So, you couldn't blame him for '70, '71, and '73 (albeit, he was the best player in the '70 Finals...and he outplayed Kareem in the '71 WCF's.)

I'll give MJ his due...when he had great supporting casts, he generally won it all. Not every year, however. Those that claim "6/6" are ignoring '90, and '95. Not to mention his other non-winning seasons.

[3ball]

when he had great supporting casts


MJ won with no all-stars in 1991 - he's one of the only players to ever win a ring with no all-stars.. Pippen is all he needed to go 6/6.. Whereas Lebron had a prime Wade and Bosh but went 2/4 in Miami.. There will never be better evidence than that.

And again, the 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Also, 2 + 2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for them to win all their championships.. This means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that.
.

[nba_55]

MJ won with no all-stars in 1991 - he's one of the only players to ever win a ring with no all-stars.. A prime Pippen is all he needed to go 6/6.. Whereas Lebron had a prime Wade and Bosh but went 2/4 in Miami.

And again, the 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Also, 2 + 2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for them to win all their championships.. This means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that.

Alright...then answer me this...

why couldn't MJ win a ring in seasons in which he averaged 37, 35 and 34 ppg?

In fact, an MJ in his greatest scoring season, went 0-3 in the playoffs.


Look, I consider MJ as a great player, but he didn't win without talent. I would argue that Wilt carried far worse teams much further, and against much greater competition.

The only "black eye" to Wilt was his '69 Finals. And those that watched that series, or even researched it, would tell you that it was Wilt's COACH who cost him and his team a ring that year. The rest of his career before that, Wilt was basically carrying inferior rosters, that generally played worse in the post-season to within an eyelash of winning numerous titles. And, after he shredded his knee in early '69, he was never the dominant offensive force again. So, you couldn't blame him for '70, '71, and '73 (albeit, he was the best player in the '70 Finals...and he outplayed Kareem in the '71 WCF's.)

I'll give MJ his due...when he had great supporting casts, he generally won it all. Not every year, however. Those that claim "6/6" are ignoring '90, and '95. Not to mention his other non-winning seasons.

[LAZERUSS]

I answered this already - he had no all-stars on his team...

But the minute he got just 1 all-star, he went 6/6.. One all-star (Pippen) is all MJ needed to go 6/6.. Whereas Lebron had a Wade and Bosh but went 2/4 in Miami.. There will never be better evidence than that.



Your bias is amazing - you make excuse after excuse for Wilt... But MJ takes a two-year hiatus and you're going to knock him for not winning a championship that year?... Scottie admits he choked in Game 7 of ECF, and you blame MJ?.. GTFO with your bias.

MJ won with no all-stars in 1991 - he's one of the only players to ever win a ring with no all-stars..

Also, 2 + 2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for them to win all their championships.. This means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that.

So, then '90, '94, and '95 didn't happen, then, right?

His 55-27 team loses in seven games to a 59-23 team. What team records and playoff series' wins did MJ have before Pippen-Grant?

The '94 Bulls, with only scrubs replacing him, go with 55-27, and are so good that they nearly beat a team that would barely lose to the champions in the Finals.

Then, MJ returns, basically replacing Grant, and they are eliminated in the ECSF's.


Oh, and BTW, I don't think any rational poster here would rank Lebron over MJ.

As for Wilt...swap rosters with Russell in their ten years in the league together, and you tell me how many rings he has.

[3ball]

why couldn't MJ win a ring in seasons in which he averaged 37, 35 and 34 ppg?


I answered this already - he had no all-stars on his team...

But the minute he got just 1 all-star, he went 6/6.. One all-star (Pippen) is all MJ needed to go 6/6.. Whereas Lebron had a Wade and Bosh but went 2/4 in Miami.. There will never be better evidence than that.





Bulls won 55 games in 1994 without MJ


The 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Now if MJ retired in 1989, or 1990?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. In those years, the supporting cast had barely BEGUN to develop the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat..





when MJ had great supporting casts, he generally won it all.. Not every year, however. Those that claim "6/6" are ignoring '90, and '95.


Your bias is amazing - you make excuse after excuse for Wilt... But MJ takes a two-year hiatus and you're going to knock him for not winning a championship that year?... Scottie admits he choked (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367910) in Game 7 of 1990 ECF, and you blame MJ?.. Take those blinders off bro..

MJ won with no all-stars in 1991 - he's one of only 3 players to ever do that..

Also, 2 + 2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for all their championships.. This means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that.
.

[LAZERUSS]

I answered this already - he had no all-stars on his team...

But the minute he got just 1 all-star, he went 6/6.. One all-star (Pippen) is all MJ needed to go 6/6.. Whereas Lebron had a Wade and Bosh but went 2/4 in Miami.. There will never be better evidence than that.



The 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Now if MJ retired in 1989, or 1990?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. In those years, the supporting cast had barely BEGUN to develop the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat..



Your bias is amazing - you make excuse after excuse for Wilt... But MJ takes a two-year hiatus and you're going to knock him for not winning a championship that year?... Scottie admits he choked (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367910) in Game 7 of 1990 ECF, and you blame MJ?.. Take those blinders off bro..

MJ won with no all-stars in 1991 - he's one of only 3 players to ever do that..

Also, 2 + 2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for all their championships.. This means MJ had less scoring help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that.
.


Why do you continually to slide past this...


So, then '90, '94, and '95 didn't happen, then, right?

His 55-27 team loses in seven games to a 59-23 team. What team records and playoff game wins did MJ have before Pippen-Grant?

The '94 Bulls, with only scrubs replacing him, go with 55-27, and are so good that they nearly beat a team that would barely lose to the champions in the Finals.

Then, MJ returns, basically replacing Grant, and they are eliminated in the ECSF's.


Oh, and BTW, I don't think any rational poster here would rank Lebron over MJ.

As for Wilt...swap rosters with Russell in their ten years in the league together, and you tell me how many rings he has.

[3ball]

:facepalm

[3ball]

Why do you continually to slide past this...
I answered every one of your issues... Here... :facepalm ... I'll do it again..

[3ball]

It's pretty obvious..

[3ball]

why couldn't MJ win a ring in seasons in which he averaged 37, 35 and 34 ppg?


I answered this already - he had no all-stars on his team...

But the minute he got just 1 all-star, he went 6/6.. One all-star (Pippen) is all MJ needed to go 6/6.. Whereas Lebron had both Wade AND Bosh but went 2/4 in Miami.. There will never be better evidence than that.





Bulls won 55 games in 1994 without MJ


The 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team.

Instead, they won based on strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Now if MJ retired in 1989, or 1990?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. In those years, the supporting cast had barely begun to develop the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat..





when MJ had great supporting casts, he generally won it all.. Not every year, however. Those that claim "6/6" are ignoring '90, and '95.


Your bias is amazing - you make excuse after excuse for Wilt... But MJ takes a two-year hiatus and you're going to knock him for not winning a championship that year?... Scottie admits he choked (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367910) in Game 7 of 1990 ECF, and you blame MJ?.. Take those blinders off bro.

MJ won with no all-stars in 1991 - he's one of only 3 players to ever do that..

Also, 2 + 2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for all their championships.. This means MJ had less offensive help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that - not to mention he won all those rings without an interior presence/rim protector.
.

[Rose'sACL]

I answered every one of your issues... Here... :facepalm ... I'll do it again..
No, you didn't.

[OldSchoolBBall]

You can go right down the list. Lebron is not the only GOAT candidate who has a black mark on his resume.

You're right - he just has a hell of a lot more of them than Jordan.

[SouBeachTalents]

The first 3ball vs Lazeruss showdown I can recall. About to be some long ass essays written in this thread

[LAZERUSS]

The first 3ball vs Lazeruss showdown I can recall. About to be some long ass essays written in this thread

No need for long essays.

MJ couldn't win shit without QUALITY supporting casts. And even with them, he didn't always win.

No disputing that argument.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

No need for long essays.

MJ couldn't win shit without QUALITY supporting casts. And even with them, he didn't always win.

No disputing that argument.

Neither could Wilt :confusedshrug:

[LAZERUSS]

Neither could Wilt :confusedshrug:

Nor did Kareem, nor Bird, nor Kobe, nor Duncan, nor Shaq, nor Russell.

BUT, Wilt could take last place rosters, that generally played even worse in the post-season, and carry them to within an eyelash of beating the most stacked dynasty in NBA history, on several occasions.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Nor did Kareem, nor Bird, nor Kobe, nor Duncan, nor Shaq, nor Russell.

BUT, Wilt could take last place rosters, that generally played even worse in the post-season, and carry them to within an eyelash of beating the most stacked dynasty in NBA history, on several occasions.

Only LeBron James could do that in the most stacked Eastern conference in history. LeBron James in 2007 had the GOAT season against historic teams such as the Arenas-led Wizards :bowdown:

[LAZERUSS]

Only LeBron James could do that in the most stacked Eastern conference in history. LeBron James in 2007 had the GOAT season against historic teams such as the Arenas-led Wizards :bowdown:

Not sure what your point is here.

In any case, no rational NBA fan is ranking Lebron ahead of MJ right now.

[3ball]

No need for long essays.

MJ couldn't win shit without QUALITY supporting casts. And even with them, he didn't always win.

No disputing that argument.
But MJ won with FAR worst casts than other greats like Magic, Bird, Kobe or Lebron...

That's a fact - just look at the less-replaceable all-star talent.. Pippen is nowhere near Shaq... Nor does Pippen equal Wade, let alone Bosh too.. Obviously, he doesn't compare to McHale, Parish, DJ... or Kareem, Worthy, Green (all-stars).

And again, Pippen admitted he choked (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367910) in Game 7 of 1990 ECF.. and in 1995, MJ was coming off 2-year hiatus... If that's the best you got to knock MJ, then that's further evidence that MJ's easily the GOAT, because there's way more to knock everyone else about.
.

[3ball]

The first 3ball vs Lazeruss showdown I can recall. About to be some long ass essays written in this thread
No long essays needed.. The 1994 Bulls roster had less talent than any other 55-win team in history.. Instead, they won based on superior strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed from 3-peating with MJ.

Now if MJ retired in 1989, 1990, or even 1992?... Those teams don't win 55 games.. In those years, the supporting cast had just begun to develop the strategy, team cohesion and mental strength it took to 3-peat..

MJ won with no all-stars in 1991 - he's one of only 3 players to ever do that.. The minute he got just 1 all-star, he went 6/6.. One all-star (Pippen) is all MJ needed to go 6/6.. Whereas Lebron had both Wade AND Bosh but went 2/4 in Miami.. No one ever did more (6/6) with less.

Also, 2 + 2 = 4... The Bulls needed MJ to lead the league in scoring for all their championships.. This means MJ had less offensive help than anyone in the entire league.. there's no way around that - not to mention he won all those rings without an interior presence/rim protector.
.

[LAZERUSS]

But MJ won with FAR worst casts than other greats like Magic, Bird, Kobe or Lebron...

That's a fact... Pippen is nowhere near Shaq... Nor does Pippen equal Wade, let alone Bosh too..

And again, Pippen admitted he choked (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=367910) in Game 7 of 1990 ECF.. and in 1995, MJ was coming off 2-year hiatus... If that's the best you got to knock MJ, then that's further evidence that MJ's easily the GOAT, because there's way more to knock everyone else about.

Pippen's career just blows Bosh's away.

I could not care less that Pippen was to blame for the '90 ECF's loss. How was MJ doing in the post-season before Pip arrived?

And again, you bring up this "two-year hiatus" nonsense. MJ played 17 games in the regular season, and was, by far, the most rested player in the post-season. And yet, he took the same basic roster that went 55-27 the year before, and basically replaced Grant in doing so...and yet, couldn't lead them any further. In fact, they were worse. A Houston team swept the team that beat them.

Sorry, but MJ's suppporting cast in his run from '91 thru '93 was capable of 50+ wins and challenging for titles. And then his supporting casts from his '96 to '98 run was even better.

MJ was a great player, but he didn't walk on water.

[3ball]

MJ was a great player, but he didn't walk on water.


yeah he did.. Kareem's supporting cast won 60 games without him in 1990...

MJ's lone all-star in Pippen simply doesn't match up to the multiple all-stars of Magic (Kareem/Worthy/Green), Bird (McHale/Parish/DJ), Lebron (Wade/Bosh), or Kobe's Shaq..

MJ had a weaker supporting cast than all those guys.
.

[Eric Cartman]

The first 3ball vs Lazeruss showdown I can recall. About to be some long ass essays written in this thread
It's like watching kobe vs jordan or shaq vs wilt in their primes :applause:

[gts]

It's like watching kobe vs jordan or shaq vs wilt in their primes :applause:


more like Kermit and Miss Piggy to be honest

[3ball]

Pippen's career just blows Bosh's away.


Prime Wade > Pippen.... and you know it... Bringing up Bosh is disingenuous... Bosh was icing on the cake.. Wade already destroyed Pippen.. Try again.





How was MJ doing in the post-season before Pip arrived?


Everyone needs one or more all-star sidekicks..

MJ only needed 1 all-star, and his was worse than Magic's, who needed 3 all-star sidekicks: Kareem/Worthy/Green... Bird needed 3 all-star sidekicks: McHale/Parish/DJ... Meanwhile, Kobe needed Shaq... and Lebron needed Wade/Bosh.

But MJ only needed Pippen... Yet he did better (6/6) than everyone listed above.





MJ took the same basic roster that went 55-27 the year before, and yet, couldn't lead them any further.


What do you expect?.. MJ was playing Shaq and Penny's Magic, not Ewing's Knicks, and he was doing so without a PF.. You expect MJ to win a ring with no PF?

Even WITH Horace, MJ had to average GOAT stats in the Finals: 36.3 PPG, 8 APG, 53% FG in the Finals from 1991-1993.. But you expect MJ to put up better numbers WITHOUT Horace and no replacement so he can still ring??.. That's nonsensical.. Even I don't think MJ is that good.

Just the fact that you think MJ was so super-human, that you expect him to put up better numbers than his already-GOAT 36/6/8/53 shows how unbelievable you really think he is, whether you realize it or not - you think he should be able to win a championship with no PF, by putting up better than 36/6/8, which you don't think about ANY OTHER PLAYER..
.

[Eric Cartman]

more like Kermit and Miss Piggy to be honest

http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/55555126.jpg

[Bless Mathews]

Lazerus is an idiot.

[3ball]

Sorry, but MJ's suppporting cast in his run from '91 thru '93 was capable of 50+ wins and challenging for titles.


That's my point - the 1991 Bulls supporting cast played better together and had developed into better basketball players than they were in 1990.. That's why you couldn't include 1990 in your post above - because you knew the 1990 supporting cast hadn't developed into good enough or smart enough players as they were in 1991.. But why would they stop improving in 1991?...

Obviously they wouldn't.. The supporting cast kept improving each year and getting better at the strategy, decision-making, and mental perseverance.. Hence they were way better at the end of 1993 than they were in 1992.. But the supporting cast still needed Jordan's GOAT 36 PPG/8 APG in the Finals to 3-peat.. This proves that when they won 55 games in 1994, they hadn't done so with with talented players that could score points - they won with superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

Again, The 1994 Bulls didn't win based on talent - they had less talent than any 55-win team ever.. Instead, they won based on superior strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed by 3-peating with MJ.





Bulls almost beat the Knicks in 1994


The "almost this" and "almost that" stuff can go either way.. They "almost" went down 3-0 and got swept, but Toni Kukoc hit a Ray Allen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NSpgbPcxoU


Here's the factual reality: when you take away MJ's 35 PPG and 7 APG playoff averages (thru his 1st three-peat), you go from a 3-peat dynasty (probably 8-peat if not for baseball), to an ordinary 2nd round exit team..

And the fact that they needed 36 PPG from MJ to 3-peat, proves the supporting cast didn't win 55 games because they were talented players that could score points, but instead because they employed superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

[DMAVS41]

That's my point - the 1991 Bulls supporting cast played better together and had developed into better basketball players than they were in 1990.. That's why you couldn't include 1990 in your post above - because you knew the 1990 supporting cast hadn't developed into good enough or smart enough players as they were in 1991.. But why would they stop improving in 1991?...

Obviously they wouldn't.. The supporting cast kept improving each year and getting better at the strategy, decision-making, and mental perseverance.. Hence they were way better at the end of 1993 than they were in 1992.. But the supporting cast still needed Jordan's GOAT 36 PPG/8 APG in the Finals to 3-peat.. This proves that when they won 55 games in 1994, they hadn't done so with with talented players that could score points - they won with superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

Again, The 1994 Bulls didn't win based on talent - they had less talent than any 55-win team ever.. Instead, they won based on superior strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed by 3-peating with MJ.



The "almost this" and "almost that" stuff can go either way.. They "almost" went down 3-0 and got swept, but Toni Kukoc hit a Ray Allen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NSpgbPcxoU


Here's the factual reality: when you take away MJ's 35 PPG and 7 APG playoff averages (thru his 1st three-peat), you go from a 3-peat dynasty (probably 8-peat if not for baseball), to an ordinary 2nd round exit team..

And the fact that they needed 36 PPG from MJ to 3-peat, proves the supporting cast didn't win 55 games because they were talented players that could score points, but instead because they employed superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

I don't know about this now.

I would have initially thought the 91 and 93 Bulls were great supporting casts and I've said as such.

However, the 538 group evaluate the supporting casts and those casts don't come out strong.

The 91 Bulls rank as the 10th worst finals supporting cast
The 93 Bulls rank as the 14th worst finals supporting cast

That is in the last 30 years...meaning out of the 60 teams to make the finals.

So I'm not so inclined to say those teams would have been contending for titles without MJ.

I really do think there is some credence to the argument that MJ was just so ****ing good that he made those guys look a lot better than they actually were.

[3ball]

Here's the factual reality: when you take away MJ's 35 PPG and 7 APG playoff averages (thru his 1st three-peat), you go from a 3-peat dynasty (probably 8-peat if not for baseball), to an ordinary 2nd round exit team.. Add it back for a full season, and you go back to 3-peat dynasty.. It's kind of funny actually.. :oldlol:

And the fact that his supporting cast needed 35 PPG from MJ to 3-peat, the most any supporting cast has EVER needed from a player, proves the supporting cast didn't win 55 games in 1994 because they were talented players that could score points - they won because they employed superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

[Kvnzhangyay]

Here's the factual reality: when you take away MJ's 35 PPG and 7 APG playoff averages (thru his 1st three-peat), you go from a 3-peat dynasty (probably 8-peat if not for baseball), to an ordinary 2nd round exit team.. Add it back for a full season, and you go back to 3-peat dynasty.. It's kind of funny actually.. :oldlol:

And the fact that his supporting cast needed 35 PPG from MJ to 3-peat, the most any supporting cast has EVER needed from a player, proves the supporting cast didn't win 55 games in 1994 because they were talented players that could score points - they won because they employed superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

Clearly you didn't watch the Bulls back then, if you think they weren't talented or stacked

The only person in my top 10 list that didn't have a stacked team and won is Hakeem, and even then his teammates performed far beyond their normal level, same as the '14 Spurs.

On paper, the talent level for the '14 Spurs and Hakeem's rockets weren't that high, but the fact is they played far beyond what they normally do.

[Soundwave]

That's my point - the 1991 Bulls supporting cast played better together and had developed into better basketball players than they were in 1990.. That's why you couldn't include 1990 in your post above - because you knew the 1990 supporting cast hadn't developed into good enough or smart enough players as they were in 1991.. But why would they stop improving in 1991?...

Obviously they wouldn't.. The supporting cast kept improving each year and getting better at the strategy, decision-making, and mental perseverance.. Hence they were way better at the end of 1993 than they were in 1992.. But the supporting cast still needed Jordan's GOAT 36 PPG/8 APG in the Finals to 3-peat.. This proves that when they won 55 games in 1994, they hadn't done so with with talented players that could score points - they won with superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

Again, The 1994 Bulls didn't win based on talent - they had less talent than any 55-win team ever.. Instead, they won based on superior strategy, teamwork and mental strength developed by 3-peating with MJ.



The "almost this" and "almost that" stuff can go either way.. They "almost" went down 3-0 and got swept, but Toni Kukoc hit a Ray Allen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NSpgbPcxoU


Here's the factual reality: when you take away MJ's 35 PPG and 7 APG playoff averages (thru his 1st three-peat), you go from a 3-peat dynasty (probably 8-peat if not for baseball), to an ordinary 2nd round exit team..

And the fact that they needed 36 PPG from MJ to 3-peat, proves the supporting cast didn't win 55 games because they were talented players that could score points, but instead because they employed superior strategy, teamwork, and mental capability learned from 3-peating with MJ.

Yup, pretty much. The Knicks were notorious in the '94 Finals for not being able to seal the deal too.

The same team nearly collapsed against Reggie Miller's Pacers in 7 games too. Reggie Miller got the Pacers closer to beating the Knicks than Scottie Pippen did if you want to be technical about it.

It finally caught up to them in the Finals though, where they lost game 7.

I'll agree too, the Bulls never scared you with overwhelming talent the way the 80s Lakers/Celtics etc. did. They punched above their weight in talent though through teammwork and good defence. Everyone knew their roles on the Bulls, and more or less accepted it.

The Bulls never had really a third player who you could credibly say would be a 20 ppg+ player on his own like the Lakers and Celtics did.

You give Jordan Magic or Bird's supporting casts and he'd have 8 or 9 titles. Or even those 1999-2000 Lakers (in place of Kobe). That would be pure destruction.

[HylianNightmare]

Op is 100% correct

[plowking]

real talk.

biases aside, just think about the title, all six times LeBron was/is the best player in the series, and on the biggest stage he has only come through twice.

yes its a team game, but no game comes close to basketball in the fact that one player can turn a team great.

this is a crippling statistic for the LeBron argument.

You realize Bron has won nearly as many playoff series' as most all time greats, even the ones with more titles than him, right?
I'd say that is turning a team great, particularly when you've consistently played with less talent your whole career than any other member in the top 10. You simply using the finals as a piece of evidence as to why he isn't possibly the greatest doesn't really cut it. He had one bad finals, in 2011, which funnily enough was the only time he went into a finals series with a more talented team.

[LAZERUSS]

I don't know about this now.

I would have initially thought the 91 and 93 Bulls were great supporting casts and I've said as such.

However, the 538 group evaluate the supporting casts and those casts don't come out strong.

The 91 Bulls rank as the 10th worst finals supporting cast
The 93 Bulls rank as the 14th worst finals supporting cast

That is in the last 30 years...meaning out of the 60 teams to make the finals.

So I'm not so inclined to say those teams would have been contending for titles without MJ.

I really do think there is some credence to the argument that MJ was just so ****ing good that he made those guys look a lot better than they actually were.

Obviously "the 538 group" doesn't know shit.

The REALITY was...the '94 Buils were as talented as Hakeem's champions. And the '95 Bulls, WITH JORDAN, were not as successful. They lost to a team that would be swept by Hakeem's Rockets (and yes, Hakeem's TEAMMATES massively outplayed Shaq's in that '95 Finals.)

Plain-and-simple.

Next.

[Poetry]

Only LeBron James could do that in the most stacked Eastern conference in history. LeBron James in 2007 had the GOAT season against historic teams such as the Arenas-led Wizards :bowdown:

Arenas and Butler were both out for the playoffs in 2007.

LeBron went through the 41-41 Wizards, the 41-41 Nets and the 53-29 Pistons to get to the Finals. There were only two 50 win teams in the Eastern Conference that year. The Cavs and the Pistons.

[LAZERUSS]

Lebron on the '09 and '10 Cavs... 66-16 and 62-21. Leaves to go to a Heat team that went 47-35, and were blown out in the first round of the playoffs. The Heat go 58-24 and make the Finals. Meanwhile, Lebron's former team, the Cavs, drop to 19-63. Wade misses a TON of games in Lebron's four years in Miami...and yet, the Heat go 47-19 without him. Lebron takes the Heat to FOUR Finals, two titles, and wins two FMVPs.

Lebron then leaves the Heat team, that had gone 54-28 with him, to a Cavs team that had gone 33-49 the year before. He leads that Cavs team to a 53-29 record, and yet another trip to the Finals. Meanwhile, the Heat without Lebron? 37-45 and miss the playoffs.

Anyone else here see a familiar pattern here?

[Ne 1]

Lebron on the '09 and '10 Cavs... 66-16 and 62-21.

http://oi43.tinypic.com/v8elpi.jpg

[LAZERUSS]

http://oi43.tinypic.com/v8elpi.jpg

:roll: :roll: :roll:


http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_2009_ECF_ORL-CLE.html

http://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/NBA_2010_ECS_BOS-CLE.html

BTW, compare the Celtics roster, 1-5, with Lebron's in 2010. After #1, it's a rout.

[plowking]

http://oi43.tinypic.com/v8elpi.jpg

I honestly find it baffling how this isn't a bigger hit on Bron's career than his finals record. In the finals he has had the lesser talented team outside of 2011, yet against the Celtics, they were probably more talented that year than they were given age and what not.

That and 2011 finals are the two big failures in his career.

[J Shuttlesworth]

http://oi43.tinypic.com/v8elpi.jpg
If only he could have done more than 38/8/8

[LAZERUSS]

If only he could have done more than 38/8/8

Exactly.

And then the next year against the Celtics...

Boston's roster:

Rondo
Garnett
Pierce
R. Allen
T. Allen

and a much deeper bench

Lebron's:

Lebron
Shaq (washed up and playing 23 mpg)
Williams
Jamison
Parker

and nothing but scrubs on the bench.

[JtotheIzzo]

You realize Bron has won nearly as many playoff series' as most all time greats, even the ones with more titles than him, right?
I'd say that is turning a team great, particularly when you've consistently played with less talent your whole career than any other member in the top 10. You simply using the finals as a piece of evidence as to why he isn't possibly the greatest doesn't really cut it. He had one bad finals, in 2011, which funnily enough was the only time he went into a finals series with a more talented team.

Best player has got to come through more than 33% of the time. He's been considered the best player in all six finals. No one said Wade was a better player in 2011 despite Wade doing more in the finals.

The talk with LBJ is not GOAT now, but "if he wins 1,2,3 more?... can we call him GOAT?"

I am saying that this freezes him out regardless of what happens going forward.

[mehyaM24]

If only he could have done more than 38/8/8
anybody that blames lebron for taking THAT team to the ECF/losing, while playing the all-around game, should be banned from talking basketball.

i'm not even biased, and can admit some of lebron's faults. 2010 he could have done more. same with 2011 - 2009 does NOT apply though.

[Ne 1]

If only he could have done more than 38/8/8

It was about how he averaged that. He dominated the ball to an extent not seen since prime Iverson. Also just like the Warriors are doing, the Magic decided to let LeBron get his and stop the shooters. His defense was also pretty poor that series and practically exposed along with him coming up short in 4th quarters. He was specifically guarding the worst opposing player to help on Dwight... yet Dwight had the best series of his career. How is this not partly on LeBron ? People are acting like LeBron '09 was some kind of a demi-god who couldn't have done more. That Orlando team was like really bad outside of Dwight. At the time of watching that series, I doubted whether LeBron outplayed Dwight.

Bottom line is the 2009 Cavs games won 66 games and had a 8.68 SRS over a 82-game sample. Had 2 cupcakes opponents in the 1st 2 rounds, and were healthy going into the ECF, against a weaker Magic team, that didn't have it's All-Star PG. Simply put, they should have won that series, just like they should have beat the Celtics in 2010, and the Heat should have beat the Mavs in 2011.

[LAZERUSS]

Best player has got to come through more than 33% of the time. He's been considered the best player in all six finals. No one said Wade was a better player in 2011 despite Wade doing more in the finals.

The talk with LBJ is not GOAT now, but "if he wins 1,2,3 more?... can we call him GOAT?"

I am saying that this freezes him out regardless of what happens going forward.

Lebron was not a better player than Duncan in 2007. So, forget that one. And, yes, he should have done better in 2011. The 2012, 2013, 2014 Finals...easily the best player on the floor. This year? So far, yes.

So, basically ONE season in which he "underachieved" in his Finals.

[plowking]

I am saying that this freezes him out regardless of what happens going forward.

That is a really stupid comment. Nothing any player does rules him out of being the greatest.

That is like saying Bird lost too many times with homecourt. He is out of the discussion. Shaq got swept too many times. Jordan got knocked out in the first round.

[Ne 1]

anybody that blames lebron for taking THAT team to the ECF/losing, while playing the all-around game, should be banned from talking basketball.

i'm not even biased, and can admit some of lebron's faults. 2010 he could have done more. same with 2011 - 2009 does NOT apply though.

Why did the 2009 Cavs have a better record (besides the '13 Heat) and a better SRS than any of LeBron's teams...if they sucked so bad?

I mean with Wade/Bosh and Irving/Love, he still never duplicated that. Even in a weak East, and with a 27 win streak and 66 wins....they still didn't have the SRS of that 2009 squad. Strange.

You can't give Lebron credit for the 66 wins and steamrolling past the Pistons and Hawks, and then no blame for the fizzle in the ECF. His defense wasn't there yet, nor was his mental game, or his ability to close in the 4th.

[plowking]

It was about how he averaged that. He dominated the ball to an extent not seen since prime Iverson. Also just like the Warriors are doing, the Magic decided to let LeBron get his and stop the shooters.

Can we stop pretending we know what the other team is gameplanning?

Warriors clearly weren't letting Bron just do his thing. Dude was doubled any time he went towards the ring.

[LAZERUSS]

That is a really stupid comment. Nothing any player does rules him out of being the greatest.

That is like saying Bird lost too many times with homecourt. He is out of the discussion. Shaq got swept too many times. Jordan got knocked out in the first round.

I don't often agree with you...

but...

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[SamuraiSWISH]

If only he could have done more than 38/8/8
What about 2010 when he visibly quit mid series?


In the finals he has had the lesser talented team outside of 2011
Hmm, I thought in 2012, it was equal talent wise. Yet the Heat were more seasoned, and mature than the young Thunder. In 2013, it was equal talent wise due to the Spurs big three being much older, and worn down. Pretty much the same teams facing one another in 2014 too.

[LAZERUSS]

What about 2010 when he visibly quit mid series?


Hmm, I thought in 2012, it was equal talent wise. Yet the Heat were more seasoned, and mature than the young Thunder. In 2013, it was equal talent wise due to the Spurs big three being much older, and worn down. Pretty much the same teams facing one another in 2014 too.

See MJ in game five of the '89 ECF's.

Quit...pure and simple.

[Ne 1]

See MJ in game five of the '89 ECF's.

Quit...pure and simple.

MJ did it once, on the road, against a heavily favored team. LeBron did it 3 times, twice at home, against an inferior team. Boston entered the series as underdogs. They won 11 less games than Cleveland. Thus losing that series was way worse for LeBron's career/reputation than MJ losing to the Pistons at the time. The Bulls were a 47 team going up against a 63 win team.

[SamuraiSWISH]

See MJ in game five of the '89 ECF's.

Quit...pure and simple.
What does that have to do with LeBron quitting mid way through series when his team was favored, and in position to win the series at the start?

The game you're referring to however was following a 46 point output, and Collins used MJ as a decoy facilitator. And he accounted for half the team's assists?

[LAZERUSS]

MJ did it once, on the road, against a heavily favored team. LeBron did it 3 times, twice at home, against an inferior team. Boston entered the series as underdogs. They won 11 less games than Cleveland. Thus losing that series was way worse for LeBron's career/reputation than MJ losing to the Pistons at the time. The Bulls were a 47 team going up against a 63 win team.

I want you to honestly take a look at that Celtic roster in '10, and compare it with Lebron's...and tell us all here that the Cavs were the better team.

How good was that Celtic team? They were a Ron Artest shot away from beating the defending champion and 57-25 Lakers in the Finals.

[SouBeachTalents]

I want you to honestly take a look at that Celtic roster in '10, and compare it with Lebron's...and tell us all here that the Cavs were the better team.

How good was that Celtic team? They were a Ron Artest shot away from beating the defending champion and 57-25 Lakers in the Finals.

This, don't let the modest record fool you, the 2010 Celtics were a legitimate team. They came within an eyelash of beating 4 of the top 5 players in the league that postseason

[Dr.J4ever]

Lebron on the '09 and '10 Cavs... 66-16 and 62-21. Leaves to go to a Heat team that went 47-35, and were blown out in the first round of the playoffs. The Heat go 58-24 and make the Finals. Meanwhile, Lebron's former team, the Cavs, drop to 19-63. Wade misses a TON of games in Lebron's four years in Miami...and yet, the Heat go 47-19 without him. Lebron takes the Heat to FOUR Finals, two titles, and wins two FMVPs.

Lebron then leaves the Heat team, that had gone 54-28 with him, to a Cavs team that had gone 33-49 the year before. He leads that Cavs team to a 53-29 record, and yet another trip to the Finals. Meanwhile, the Heat without Lebron? 37-45 and miss the playoffs.

Anyone else here see a familiar pattern here?
:applause:

You win this one, Laz.

Jordan played with some pretty good teams. Pippen is one of the great SFs of all time, and there is no escaping what the Bulls did(very good regular season record and losing narrowly to the knicks) sans Jordan.

Of course, there is no denying how great MJ was, but 6/6 arguments are simplistic and stupid. So we're not counting 1st or 2nd round losses now?:facepalm

Plus, in the 1st half of the 90s, there's no question that the NBA had deteriorated due to expansion. It was talked about widely by many at the time.

[Sarcastic]

I don't know about this now.

I would have initially thought the 91 and 93 Bulls were great supporting casts and I've said as such.

However, the 538 group evaluate the supporting casts and those casts don't come out strong.

The 91 Bulls rank as the 10th worst finals supporting cast
The 93 Bulls rank as the 14th worst finals supporting cast

That is in the last 30 years...meaning out of the 60 teams to make the finals.

So I'm not so inclined to say those teams would have been contending for titles without MJ.

I really do think there is some credence to the argument that MJ was just so ****ing good that he made those guys look a lot better than they actually were.

Pretty sure that 538 article only measured through the conference finals, and basically used contrived stats to back their claim. It's not some end all be all judgment of supporting casts.

[LAZERUSS]

Pretty sure that 538 article only measured through the conference finals, and basically used contrived stats to back their claim. It's not some end all be all judgment of supporting casts.

In any case, the '94 Bulls performed better in the post-season without MJ, than the '95 team did with MJ.

No one is knocking MJ and his rings, but to blindly claim that he didn't have extremely talented rosters is ridiculous.

[SamuraiSWISH]

In any case, the '94 Bulls performed better in the post-season without MJ, than the '95 team did with MJ.
Well MJ was rusty, and they didn't have a solid defensive replacement for Grant. And the 1995 Magic > 1994 Knicks though. And the 1995 Rockets > 1994 Rockets > 1994 Knicks though. So how do you figure? The Bulls were a blown Luc Longley layup (assist from MJ) away in game 6 from pushing it 7 games ...

[LAZERUSS]

Well MJ was rusty, and they didn't have a solid defensive replacement for Grant. And the 1995 Magic > 1994 Knicks though. And the 1995 Rockets > 1994 Rockets > 1994 Knicks though. So how do you figure? The Bulls were a blown Luc Longley layup (assist from MJ) away in game 6 from pushing it 7 games ...

Questionable.

"Rusty?" I don't think so. The man played 17 games before the playoffs. If anything, he was most rested and refreshed player in that post-season.

BUT, are you going to tell us here that MJ joining a team that had gone 55-27 the year before, and were good enough to win the title without him (yes...just look at their series with the Knicks, and then the Knicks-Rockets Finals) and basically replacing Horace Grant...and they shouldn't have won a title in '95?

[Sarcastic]

In any case, the '94 Bulls performed better in the post-season without MJ, than the '95 team did with MJ.

No one is knocking MJ and his rings, but to blindly claim that he didn't have extremely talented rosters is ridiculous.

How did 94 team perform better? They both lost in round 2. 1995 team had baseball Jordan, and tbh the team was about to implode if MJ didn't join them at the end of the year. 1995 team without Jordan probably loses in the first round.

[SamuraiSWISH]

"Rusty?" I don't think so. The man played 17 games before the playoffs. If anything, he was most rested and refreshed player in that post-season.
Well you're a troll, that's why you don't think so.

You say 17 games like it's significant amount of games after missing 1.75 seasons of pro basketball, while playing another sport entirely ... are you serious right now?

Jordan was clearly rusty. He said he was rusty. Teammates said he was rusty. Opponents said he was rusty. He showed flashed of his old self, but it wasn't sustainable or consistent.


BUT, are you going to tell us here that MJ joining a team that had gone 55-27 the year before
That team had Horace Grant ...


and were good enough to win the title without him
They lost in the 2nd round? Anyone who actually watched that team live knew they weren't capable of winning a championship. No reviosionist history glorifying 55 wins and a 2nd round exit = good enough to win a title.

:oldlol:

The '95 Bulls hovered around .500 until MJ came back, and even while rusty gave them a significant boost. I think they went 13 - 4 with Atrophy Jordan. He still managed to raise his game in the playoffs, and as underdogs pushed the Magic to 6 games.

And like I said, were a blown Luc Longley layup away thanks to Mike away from pushing it 7 games.

[knicksman]

Lazerus is an idiot.

anyone who stans for a 2/5 or 2/7 is an idiot

[LAZERUSS]

How did 94 team perform better? They both lost in round 2. 1995 team had baseball Jordan, and tbh the team was about to implode if MJ didn't join them at the end of the year. 1995 team without Jordan probably loses in the first round.

'94 team had Grant and no MJ.
'95 team had MJ and no Grant.

Both lost in the second round.

'94 team lost to a 56-26 Knicks team in a close seven game series. The same Knicks team that lost a close seven game series to the 58-24 Rockets (BTW, they outscored Houston in that series.)

'95 team lost 4-2 in second round to a 60-22 Magic team, that would then get swept in the Finals by a 47-35 Rockets team.

"Baseball" Jordan was the most rested player in the '95 playoffs. He had a 17 game "exhibition" season, then went to work in the playoffs.

MJ in the '92-93 playoffs: 35.1 ppg, 6.7 rpg, 6.0 apg, .475 FG%, .805 FT%.

MJ in the 95-95 playoffs: 31.5 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 4.5 apg, .484 FG%, .810 FT%

MJ in the 95-96 playoffs: 30.7 ppg, 4.9 rpg, 4.1 apg, .459 FG%, .818 FT%.

The "drop" in MJ's '95 post-season was neglible, and in fact, his decline in the very next post-season was even worse.


Here again...looks like Grant meant as much to the '94 team, as MJ did to the '95 team. In fact, Grant was on the team that beat MJ's in the '95 playoffs.


Interesting that MJ never sniffed a title without Pippen...AND, a PF who was among the best in the league (Grant and then Rodman.)


Again...the bottom line here...MJ had stacked rosters from '90 thru '98.

[Taller than CP3]

Michael Jordan needs both hands to show all of his rings.

Kobe and Duncan need their entire hand.

Lebron is stuck throwing the peace sign.

[SouBeachTalents]

Michael Jordan needs both hands to show all of his rings.

Kobe and Duncan need their entire hand.

Lebron is stuck throwing the peace sign.

False

http://ballerball.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Michael-Jordan-Rings.jpg

[masonanddixon]

lmao

Duncan in 07, Dirk in 11 were both easily better as was even Wade

[LAZERUSS]

lmao

Duncan in 07, Dirk in 11 were both easily better as was even Wade

If we don't count this year's Finals,

Lebron has played in five Finals. He was not a better player than Duncan in '07, and not only that, he played with a much worse roster. So, you can't count '07 against him.

Lebron SHOULD have been the best player in '11, and wasn't. You can hold that Finals against him.

Lebron was easily the best in the '12, '13, and yes, the '14 Finals.

As for this year's Finals...well, it is only one game so far, but yes, he has been the best player in this year's Finals so far.

The ONLY Finals in which he can be blamed for anything, was in '11.


Of course, he carried pathetic rosters to 66-16 and 61-21 in '09 and '10, and played brilliantly in the '09 post-season, and watched helplessly as his teammates were overwhelmed by a MUCH better Boston team in the '10 playoffs. And yes, he was easily the best player in those losing series, as well.

[masonanddixon]

If we don't count this year's Finals,

Lebron has played in five Finals. He was not a better player than Duncan in '07, and not only that, he played with a much worse roster. So, you can't count '07 against him.

Lebron SHOULD have been the best player in '11, and wasn't. You can hold that Finals against him.

Lebron was easily the best in the '12, '13, and yes, the '14 Finals.

As for this year's Finals...well, it is only one game so far, but yes, he has been the best player in this year's Finals so far.

The ONLY Finals in which he can be blamed for anything, was in '11.


Of course, he carried pathetic rosters to 66-16 and 61-21 in '09 and '10, and played brilliantly in the '09 post-season, and watched helplessly as his teammates were overwhelmed by a MUCH better Boston team in the '10 playoffs. And yes, he was easily the best player in those losing series, as well.

Dirk was better than him throughout the entire regular season and postseason in 2011.

2012 he was slightly better than Durant.

2013-2014 he was the best player.

2015 I don't think he's better than Curry.

[warriorfan]

LeBron is hovering around Moses Malone territory for me

[sportjames23]

How did 94 team perform better? They both lost in round 2. 1995 team had baseball Jordan, and tbh the team was about to implode if MJ didn't join them at the end of the year. 1995 team without Jordan probably loses in the first round.


Hell, the 1995 team was on the verge of missing the playoffs until MJ came back late in the season with 17 games left.

Yes, trolls (specifically you in this thread, Lazerus), a rusty MJ returned with 17 games left in the season to lift the Bulls into the playoffs.

[DMAVS41]

Pretty sure that 538 article only measured through the conference finals, and basically used contrived stats to back their claim. It's not some end all be all judgment of supporting casts.

I completely agree it's not an end all be all judgment, but the results are interesting and do match up very well with my own take.

We all knew, for example, the 99 Kincks, 94/95 Rockets, 07 Cavs, 11 Mavs, and the 15 Cavs were very much weak supporting casts. Those would routinely be listed as some of the worst supporting casts around stars to make the finals before this study came out.

Well, those teams are all at the bottom of this study. So while it's certainly not the only thing that matters...I'm also not going to sit here and say we should ignore it.

If some of my views differ from it, I need to go back and look at some of my views just to make sure.

For example, I think there might be some stuff to the 03 Spurs being a little better than I initially thought...same with the 91/93 Bulls.

Just disregarding it completely is silly. There is balance here to all this...

[Prometheus]

So in this thread, OP is already counting the Cavaliers out. These Finals are 1-0 Warriors, and the only game played so far went to overtime.

Hence OP states that LeBron is already 2/6.

This means that he believes losing Kyrie while still missing Varejao and Love is enough to negate any chance that the Cavaliers had of winning.

And he is using this to discredit LeBron.

...

You believe a 1-0 series is over already, and yet here you are diminishing the leader of the losing squad for not being able to get it done.

You sir... are dumb.

[ArbitraryWater]

So in this thread, OP is already counting the Cavaliers out. These Finals are 1-0 Warriors, and the only game played so far went to overtime.

Hence OP states that LeBron is already 2/6.

This means that he believes losing Kyrie while still missing Varejao and Love is enough to negate any chance that the Cavaliers had of winning.

And he is using this to discredit LeBron.

...

You believe a 1-0 series is over already, and yet here you are diminishing the leader of the losing squad for not being able to get it done.

You sir... are dumb.

wow... hit the nail on the head.

[NumberSix]

So why did Jordan lose so many 1st round series as the best player on the court?