If LeBron doesn't win a ring the rest of his career.. does he have enough to be top 5

[Kidbasketball20]

Yes

[JerrySeinfeld]

2/6 = top 5 now?

:biggums:

[Kobe_6/8]

If he won MVP every season the rest of his career and made the Finals every season the rest of his career, he might have a chance.

[LAZERUSS]

Depends. There is nothing wrong with getting teams to the Finals.

If he goes to 10 Finals...hey, that would be impressive. Still, I can't see him being greater than Wilt, MJ, Magic, Kareem, or Russell.

[Rocketswin2013]

He'll need two impressive title runs to move past Shaq, Magic, and Duncan for me. Maybe if he has another 2-peat. Time is running out. His ability to decide to dominate games is diminishing.

At a certain point, he won't be able to just decide to destroy a team like his '13 Finals g7, or Boston game.

[Rocketswin2013]

What exactly makes Magic a top 5 player? I'd take Duncan, and even Shaq over him.

[JerrySeinfeld]

What exactly makes Magic a top 5 player? I'd take Duncan, and even Shaq over him.

lol I'd even consider taking LeBron over him. Magic is one of the most overrated players ever.

[knicksman]

Definitely. No 5 players have more mvps than him

[Kukoc]

No.

But a top 10 yes.

[nzahir]

Top 8 locked for sure, can enter top 3-5 with another ring

[TheBigVeto]

lol I'd even consider taking LeBron over him. Magic is one of the most overrated players ever.

True.

[Kvnzhangyay]

Depends. There is nothing wrong with getting teams to the Finals.

If he goes to 10 Finals...hey, that would be impressive. Still, I can't see him being greater than Wilt, MJ, Magic, Kareem, or Russell.

He has a chance (granted, low) at passing Magic, and possibly Wilt depending on what you place emphasis on for all-time rankings imo, if he keeps up sustained levels of great play and wins a few more rings

[LAZERUSS]

lol I'd even consider taking LeBron over him. Magic is one of the most overrated players ever.

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Magic was the game' greatest "winner", and he did so in the most stacked era in NBA history. I'm sorry, but the Sixers of the early 80's, the Piston's of the late 80's, and the Celtics of the entire decade of the 80's were considerably greater than any team in the 90's, with the possible exception of the '96 Bulls.

Again, move MJ's 90's Bulls into the 80's, and he isn't going "6/6."

[scandisk_]

:roll: :roll: :roll:

Magic was the game' greatest "winner", and he did so in the most stacked era in NBA history. I'm sorry, but the Sixers of the early 80's, the Piston's of the late 80's, and the Celtics of the entire decade of the 80's were considerably greater than any team in the 90's, with the possible exception of the '96 Bulls.

Again, move MJ's 90's Bulls into the 80's, and he isn't going "6/6."

lol way to downplay Russ and Boston.

try again

[LAZERUSS]

lol way to downplay Russ and Boston.

try again

Not at all. BUT, in term's of career Winning Percentage...Magic is #1.

[sportjames23]

2/6 = top 5 now?

:biggums:


Bran stan logic, breh.

[warriorfan]

Not at all. BUT, in term's of career Winning Percentage...Magic is #1.

What about Finals winning percentage?

[sportjames23]

What exactly makes Magic a top 5 player? I'd take Duncan, and even Shaq over him.


:facepalm

[dubeta]

Well... he DID do better than 1-9 without Wade so that gives him an advantage

[outbreak]

Even if he wins a ring he doesn't become top 5

[LAZERUSS]

What about Finals winning percentage?


How about Finals% percentage as compared to his career. NINE Finals in 12 full seasons...or 75% of the time!

And BTW, he won FIVE of them, and in the most stacked era in NBA history.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Not at all. BUT, in term's of career Winning Percentage...Magic is #1.

Winning percentage isn't the only criteria that determines "greatest winner." How many (consecutive) 50 win seasons does Magic have? What's his finals winning percentage? Having the most stacked team in the weakest conference your entire career doesn't mean you're the greatest winner. Playing with another GOAT candidate doesn't mean you're the greatest winner either.

[Mr. Jabbar]

top 5 :lol

[Spurs5Rings2014]

How about Finals% percentage as compared to his career. NINE Finals in 12 full seasons...or 75% of the time!

And BTW, he won FIVE of them, and in the most stacked era in NBA history.

How was his conference in this stacked era? Where were all the stacked teams? How many title contending teams were in his conference for this era? How many made it to the finals?

[Rocketswin2013]

How about Finals% percentage as compared to his career. NINE Finals in 12 full seasons...or 75% of the time!

And BTW, he won FIVE of them, and in the most stacked era in NBA history.
:lol

[LAZERUSS]

Winning percentage isn't the only criteria that determines "greatest winner." How many (consecutive) 50 win seasons does Magic have? What's his finals winning percentage? Having the most stacked team in the weakest conference your entire career doesn't mean you're the greatest winner. Playing with another GOAT candidate doesn't mean you're the greatest winner either.

Magic was 11/11 in 50+ win full seasons, and in the one in which he was injured, his team went 26-11 with him or, on pace for 58 wins. Same with his comeback season in '95-96, when he led his team to a 22-10 record...or on pace for 56 wins.

As for another "GOAT"...true Kareem was still a great player in Magic's rookie season. After that...merely a near-great offensive player until his '86-87 season. Furthermore, Magic led the Lakers to records of 63-19 and 58-24 withOUT Kareem, including yet one more Finals.

BTW, in their ten seasons in the league together...their winning percentage in games in which one of them did not play...

Kareem was at .604...

Magic.... at .750.

And ONE MORE TIME...


What do you think of Bird then?

Here are the FACTS my friend.

Magic's teams beat 13 50+ win teams, and two of them won 60+ games.

Bird's Celtics beat 10 50+ win teams, and only one of them won 60+ games.


In the Finals, Magic's teams beat the 59-23 Sixers, the 58-24 Sixers, the 63-19 Celtics, the 59-23 Celtics, and the 54-28 Pistons.
Bird's Celtics beat the 40-42 Rockets, the 54-28 Lakers, and the 51-31 Rockets.



Furthermore, Magic's teams beat two 50+ win teams, and one 60+ win team AFTER Kareem retired.


Magic is THE greatest "winner" (Career W-L%) in NBA history. And BTW, his career W-L% was .740. In all of his games withOUT Kareem (including his 95-96 season)... .742.

Oh, and how about the records of the team's in which Magic's Lakers lost in the Finals...

Philly 65-17
Boston 62-20
Detroit 63-19
Chicago 61-21

Not too bad was it?

[nathanjizzle]

Lebrons exclusion from the top 5 GOAT has already been solidified. His next accomplishment will be solidifying his exclusion from the top 10.

[dubeta]

Lebrons exclusion from the top 5 GOAT has already been solidified. His next accomplishment will be solidifying his exclusion from the top 10.

By taking another dump on the Bulls??

[Asukal]

Not at all. BUT, in term's of career Winning Percentage...Magic is #1.

Suddenly, winning is important.... :facepalm

Of course there's the agenda of downplaying Kareem to prop up that other guy. :rolleyes:

[LAZERUSS]

How was his conference in this stacked era? Where were all the stacked teams? How many title contending teams were in his conference for this era? How many made it to the finals?

First of all, he routinely beat 50+ win teams from his OWN conference, including the defending champion, and 56-26 Sonics in '80. And in his last full season, he led his 58-24 Lakers to a 4-2 series win over a 63-19 Blazer team.

In between, he was beating the best of the EAST, year-after-year.

He did considerably better against 50+ win teams than Bird did. AND, he did better against the EAST in the post-season, than what Bird did against the EAST in the post-season.

[LAZERUSS]

Suddenly, winning is important.... :facepalm

Of course there's the agenda of downplaying Kareem to prop up that other guy. :rolleyes:

Magic > Kareem. All you need to know.

[Asukal]

Magic > Kareem. All you need to know.

All shit aside, I agree. But that's only because it is true when you take into context who made the team a better winner. Still doesn't change the fact you have another agenda. :hammerhead:

[LAZERUSS]

All shit aside, I agree. But that's only because it is true when you take into context who made the team a better winner. Still doesn't change the fact you have another agenda. :hammerhead:

Agenda? I'm sorry my friend, but I have been "pro-Magic" since his first NBA game.

We saw what Kareem's career was like before Magic arrived, and what it was after Magic arrived. And BTW, we also saw Magic carrying teams to records of 63-19 and 58-24 AFTER Kareem. AND, withOUT Magic... records of 43-39 and 39-43.

It was MAGIC who made those Laker teams great, and it was MAGIC who added FIVE more rings to KAJ's resume.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

Agenda? I'm sorry my friend, but I have been "pro-Magic" since his first NBA game.

We saw what Kareem's career was like before Magic arrived, and what it was after Magic arrived. And BTW, we also saw Magic carrying teams to records of 63-19 and 58-24 AFTER Kareem. AND, withOUT Magic... records of 43-39 and 39-43.

It was MAGIC who made those Laker teams great, and it was MAGIC who added FIVE more rings to KAJ's resume.

If Magic literally carried Kareem to 5 more titles, then why do you even have Kareem in your top 5 then?

[LAZERUSS]

If Magic literally carried Kareem to 5 more titles, then why do you even have Kareem in your top 5 then?

Easy...a peak Kareem, circa from '70 thru '74, was among the three greatest peaks in NBA history (Wilt and MJ being the other two.) And, BTW, he was a major contributor in three of those five rings with Magic, and I would even give him the bulk of the ring in '80.

[Spurs5Rings2014]

So your top 5 criteria is heavily weighted towards 'peak' and doesn't factor in much else. Why am I not surprised.

:oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

So your top 5 criteria is heavily weighted towards 'peak' and doesn't factor in much else. Why am I not surprised.

:oldlol:

Kareem played 20 years in the NBA, and was slaughtering the likes of Hakeem and Ewing at ages 38-40.

[Asukal]

Kareem played 20 years in the NBA, and was slaughtering the likes of Hakeem and Ewing at ages 38-40.

He slaughtered Wilt too. :rolleyes:

[LAZERUSS]

He slaughtered Wilt too. :rolleyes:

Outscored him...yes.

Slaughtered him?

:roll: :roll: :roll:

An old Wilt, a year removed from major knee surgery, and in the midst of the worst season in his career...in the '70-71 season...statistically EQUALLED a PEAK Kareem in their five regular season, and five post-season H2H's. In fact, most intelligent observers gave THIS Wilt, a 3-1-1 edge in their five post-season H2H's.

Then, in the 71-72 WCF's, again, while Kareem heavily outscored Chamberlain...it was UNIVERSALLY acknowledged that Wilt had OUTPLAYED him in that series. Especially in the last four games of that series, when Kareem couldn't hit the ocean from a life-raft (shooting .414 in those four games.)

Then, in their six regular season H2H's in Wilt's last season, Chamberlain outshot Kareem by a .737 to .450 margin, which included one game in which he outscored Kareem, 24-21, and outshot him from the field, 10-14 to 10-27.

Oh, and in their ONLY H2H before Wilt shredded his knee...Chamberlain easily outplayed him. He outscored him 25-23; outrebounded him, 25-20; outassisted him, 5-2; outblocked him, 3-2 (including TWO sky-hooks); and outshot him from the floor by a 9-14 to 9-21 margin.

Too bad we never got to witness a PRIME Chamberlain, circa '64 thru '68, playing against that PEAK Kareem. Given what we saw in their actual H2H's...I suspect that, like everyone else he faced in the 60's...Chamberlain would have dominated Kareem.

[Asukal]

I recall this Wilt interview where he said he needed help to guard a young Lew Alcindor. Outright outplayed and slaughtered like a fish. :oldlol:

[LAZERUSS]

I recall this Wilt interview where he said he needed help to guard a young Lew Alcindor. Outright outplayed and slaughtered like a fish. :oldlol:

And yet...it NEVER happened.

Chamberlain played Kareem ONE-ON-ONE exclusively.

Not only that, but he was knocking the "unblockable" sky-hook all over the gym.

But, please go ahead and post us this footage in which Chamberlain is getting help.

[Asukal]

And yet...it NEVER happened.

Chamberlain played Kareem ONE-ON-ONE exclusively.

Not only that, but he was knocking the "unblockable" sky-hook all over the gym.

But, please go ahead and post us this footage in which Chamberlain is getting help.

But he did say it in an interview and Kareem scored on him with ease. Of course it was old man Wilt not prime Wilt so I guess he gets a pass. Why so salty? :oldlol: :lol :roll:

[LAZERUSS]

But he did say it in an interview and Kareem scored on him with ease. Of course it was old man Wilt not prime Wilt so I guess he gets a pass. Why so salty? :oldlol: :lol :roll:

Kareem scored on his with ease?

How about this...

a 38-42 year old Kareem outscored a 22-26 year old Hakeem in their 23 career H2H's, and also outshot him by a .607 to .512 margin.

In 20 of those 23 H2H's, a way-past-his-prime Kareem shot 50%+, with 12 games of 60%, and five of 70%.

In his 28 career H2H's with an aging Wilt, a PEAK Kareem shot ...get this... .464.

Furthermore, in their LAST TEN straight games, Kareem shot .434 against Wilt.

He only had TEN games of 50%+, and only ONE of 60%+ against Wilt, with SIX below 40%.


And how about this recap from their '70-71 WCF's...

[QUOTE]Game 5 April 18, 1971

Bucks Await Championship Series
Wilt Wins 7-Foot Battle But Loses 7-Game Set
By BOB GREENE
Associated Press Sports Writer

MILWAUKEE

[LAZERUSS]

But he did say it in an interview and Kareem scored on him with ease. Of course it was old man Wilt not prime Wilt so I guess he gets a pass. Why so salty? :oldlol: :lol :roll:

I find it fascinating that you claim Russell was the better player in his H2H's with Chamberlain, despite having better rosters, and despite Chamberlain massively outscoring, outrebounding, and outshooting Russell...much of which was against a prime Russell.

And yet, when a PEAK Kareem, with a roster that went 66-16 and then 63-19, outscores a way-past-his prime Wilt, but is badly outshot from the field, and also outrebounded...

AND, in their four years in the league together, Wilt held a 3-1 Finals margin, an basically had more TEAM success (even taking a 48-34 roster to a 69-13 record)...

and you seem to be favoring Kareem.

Seems a bit hypocritical don't you think.

[BigTicket]

No, he does not.

He is top 10 without another ring, but not top 5.