Lebron's style prevents his team from running optimal, equal-opportunity offenses

[3ball]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/NlRpyo.gif


Lebron's role players are the same caliber as any other team - guys like JR Smith, Mosgov, Tristan Thompson and Shumpert are as good (even better) than the role players on other teams.. However, Lebron's low-assisted, pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow his teams to run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses.. This is why the story is always how Lebron's supporting cast underperformed AGAIN.

Due to Lebron's suboptimal, ball-dominant style, the offense of Lebron's teams are not built for teammates to make decisions - it's built for teammates to become ACCUSTOMED to Lebron making all the decisions.. When Lebron is on the floor, his teammates are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. Naturally, it's no surprise that when he leaves the floor, they collapse trying to become playmakers all of a sudden.. And again, when he's on the floor, they're just Lebron's tricks and therefore less of a threat to the defense than if they were playmakers themselves.. Multiple playmaker team > 1-playmaker team.

This is a stark contrast to the NBA's elite teams, who run more optimal, "equal opportunity" offenses that REQUIRE role players to make playmaking decisions at all times, while the star player is on the floor.. Guys like Diaw and Patty Mills don't just wait around for Duncan to toss them a dime - instead, Mills and Diaw are tasked with making plays just like Parker and Duncan are - ditto for guys like Shaun Livingston or Barnes.. So when Duncan or Curry leaves the floor, the role players just continue what they've been doing - making offensive decisions - they don't have to go from tricks waiting for Duncan toss them a dime, to playmakers all of sudden when Duncan goes to the bench - they can just continue being playmakers like they were when Duncan was on the floor.

And ditto for everyone that played in the triangle - the triangle was an equal-opportunity offense, as Phil Jackson describes here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=23m40s).. Every player got the chance to catch it on the post, turn-pivot, explore all the options and make a play - the lesser players like Kerr and Longley normally handed off, but they had the power to make a play if they chose.

Consequently, role players like Mills, Diaw, Kerr, and Longley play better and have a bigger impact than their more talented Cavs counterparts (shumpert, jr smith, mosgov, tristan thompson), who are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. That brand of basketball has never won, and never will win..

Instead of having the capacity within his game to foster the growth of teammates, superior strategy, and an optimal brand of basketball for the team to play, Lebron can only go 2/4 by teaming up with unprecedented supporting talent (i.e. a 10-time all-star and 20/10 player as his 3rd option, Bosh).. Lebron is really a Karl Malone-level player that teamed up with Drexler and Mchale to go 2/4.

Otoh, when you have a guy leading the league in scoring by getting his points like the GIF above (off-ball) - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES the play-making capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's off-ball game and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42

MJ's teams were eventually perceived as one of the NBA's "smart" teams that used the best strategy and had played the best brand of basketball, just like the Warriors, Mavericks and Spurs of today's game.. MJ's goat offensive sophistication enabled him to fit a goat scoring production seamlessly within an optimal, winning framework.
In b4 tldr
.

[ShawkFactory]

Literally the exact same thread you've made multiple times :lol

This won't be open long

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Poor LeBron fans man.

They gotta be pulling their hair out reading 3ball's posts. :lol

[AirFederer]

I agree

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/gay_dance.gif

[riseagainst]

I agree

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/gay_dance.gif


:lol
:roll:

[3ball]

look at the percentages, for each guy, and they tell the exact story of what you saw on those teams.


Sure, let's look at each guy individually - Wade, Love, Bosh - alongside Lebron, their assisted percentage was up (more play-finishing), but their own assist percentage was WAY down (less playmaking).. Lebron's ball-dominance turned them from playmakers into play-finishers, which is suboptimal.. There, I destroyed you again.





Lebron is pretty unique as a player, so I doubt this "like front court players are supposed to be" notion really applies.


Oh, he's unique alright - his ball-dominance turns a high-assisted position into a low-assisted one, thus lowering the assist capacity of his team.. That's super-unique... Unfortunately, his ball-dominance prevents his teams from playing the best brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Since Lebron's teams don't play the best brand of basketball, equal or less-talented opponents have the opportunity to pull the upset by playing a superior brand of basketball.





the majority of Lebron's teammates throughout his career have career highs in assisted percentage years they play alongside him... i.e. Wade, Bosh, Love


Alongside Lebron, their assisted percentage was up (more play-finishing), but their own assist percentage was WAY down (less playmaking).. Lebron's ball-dominance turned them from playmakers into play-finishers, which is suboptimal.. The suboptimal brand of basketball that Lebron's style encourages leaves his team susceptible to being upset by equal or lesser talented teams.

Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.. In Lebron's case, his style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity), which makes them susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball.

Lebron lost 3 times with equal or greater talent - the 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals and 2014 Finals.. But it never happened to MJ, because his style allowed his teams to play an optimal brand of basketball - opponents could never upset the Bulls by offsetting a talent disadvantage with a better brand of basketball.. That's why MJ went 6/6 and never underachieved, while Lebron is 2/6 with several upsets/underachievements on his record.





No you dumb ****, not a stat you made up.


I didn't make up the stat - team possessions per game/team assists per game has always existed and been available, regardless of whether the mainstream media ever uses it - this shows how in-the-box of a thinker you are... For you, it's only a legit stat if you've seen it on espn.. The stat couldn't be simpler, but it's "fake" to you because you never saw it in mainstream media before..

That's pathetic bud - you'll never have a good understanding of the game watching espn, so you'll continue to be routinely surprised by things that happen on the court (i.e. wow, i didn't think so-and-so would be that good"... or, "wow, that team really surprised me", etc, etc.. You scratch your head while I scratch my beard.. :confusedshrug: )

[ShawkFactory]

The fact that Lebron needs his team to play suboptimally for him to be elite hurts him compared to his peers - the reality that he isn't capable of getting elite stats within an optimal, equal-opportunity offense makes him inferior to many greats and puts him outside of the top 15 all-time.

Basketball isn't an experiment to see how many stats you can get - basketball is about WINNING - so the very best wing players of all time MUST be able to get elite stats within optimal, equal-opportunity offenses - Lebron isn't capable of this - he can only get elite stats within suboptimal offenses that need exorbitant levels of supporting talent to win (i.e. having a 10-time allstar and 20/10 player as your 3rd option, Bosh).
Didn't read.

:lol

[ISHGoat]

holy shit, does this guy not realize that practically nobody reads his threads and his shit just screams "plagarize me for essays"

[90sgoat]

3Ball is building a thesis of Jordanology. You uneducated bofoons just don't see it. Step by step he is testing hypothesis against peer review, gradually arriving at a comprehensive 'theory' backed by scientific facts. When you attack him, you strengthen his argument, forcing him to further refine his argument, backing it up with more fact.

You are doing the work for him, it would be best if you just didn't respond but its too late, damage has been done.

[ISHGoat]

3Ball is building a thesis of Jordanology. You uneducated bofoons just don't see it. Step by step he is testing hypothesis against peer review, gradually arriving at a comprehensive 'theory' backed by scientific facts. When you attack him, you strengthen his argument, forcing him to further refine his argument, backing it up with more fact.

You are doing the work for him, it would be best if you just didn't respond but its too late, damage has been done.

this.

OP if you read this i suggest you stop posting your shit on here and write a book or open a blog, atleast youll make some $$ out of it

[90sgoat]

this.

OP if you read this i suggest you stop posting your shit on here and write a book or open a blog, atleast youll make some $$ out of it

Imagine if 3Ball had some screen presence lol, he would make a killing trolling Kobe and Lebron fans on Youtube.

[3ball]

holy shit, does this guy not realize that practically nobody reads his threads and his shit just screams "plagarize me for essays"


Nobody reads my threads yet my last thread had 9 pages in a day.. :facepalm .. As for this thread, the title says it all anyway..

Lebron isn't capable of getting elite stats within an equal-opportunity offense, which makes him inferior to Jordan.. Lebron can only get elite stats within suboptimal offenses that need exorbitant levels of supporting talent to win (i.e. having a 10-time allstar and 20/10 player as your 3rd option, Bosh).. This simply puts him well-below the tier of MJ or Bird.

To get elite stats within an equal-opportunity offense, you have to play off-ball, but Lebron could never play off-ball and average 30+ like MJ - people don't realize how much better this makes MJ, especially considering MJ was better as a primary ballhandler too.

MJ's stats and performance as a PG for 24 games (30/9/11 including 10 triple-doubles in 11 games) was better than anything Lebron has done in an entire CAREER as a point guard.

[Indian guy]

PLAYOFFS

1) Heat (2011-2014) 109.8 ORTG (+4.0 over league average)
2) Bulls (1990-1993) 113.3 ORTG (+3.8 over league average)
3) Lakers (2008-11) 110.5 ORTG (+3.1 over league average)
4) Thunder (2011-14) 108.6 ORTG (+2.9 over league average)
5) Celtics (1984-1987) 113.2 ORTG (+2.8 over league average)

[3ball]

3Ball is building a thesis of Jordanology. You uneducated bofoons just don't see it. Step by step he is testing hypothesis against peer review, gradually arriving at a comprehensive 'theory' backed by scientific facts. When you attack him, you strengthen his argument, forcing him to further refine his argument, backing it up with more fact.

You are doing the work for him, it would be best if you just didn't respond but its too late, damage has been done.
:pimp:

I missed this genius post.. You're a smart man my friend.

Indeed, MJ led the league in scoring within an equal opportunity offense.. Lebron barely lead the league in scoring in a Lebron-only offense, let alone an equal opportunity one.

[Beastmode88]

I literally cant tell if 3ball is a jordan stan or a lebron stan at this rate. :biggums:

[3ball]

PLAYOFFS

1) Heat (2011-2014) 109.8 ORTG (+4.0 over league average)
2) Bulls (1990-1993) 113.3 ORTG (+3.8 over league average)
3) Lakers (2008-11) 110.5 ORTG (+3.1 over league average)
4) Thunder (2011-14) 108.6 ORTG (+2.9 over league average)
5) Celtics (1984-1987) 113.2 ORTG (+2.8 over league average)
League-wide ORtg from 1990-1993 was 108.0, so the Bulls were 5.3 over league average, and #1 on your list..

Since your numbers are wrong, here's the year-over-year league-wide ORtg (last column):

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html


But your list means nothing anyway - Lebron's teams UNDERPERFORM given their talent - they lose despite having equal or greater talent, as they did in 2009, 2011, and 2014.

[Indian guy]

League-wide ORtg from 1990-1993 was 108.0, so the Bulls were 5.3 over league average, and #1 on your list..

It's for the playoffs only. I'm comparing playoff ORTG to league playoff average during those years. Miami comes out on top. Your whole argument is LeBron-ball falls apart against top-quality playoff competition. So why would I compare their playoffs averages to the regular season mean.

[Beastmode88]

It's for the playoffs only. I'm comparing playoff ORTG to league playoff average during those years. Miami comes out on top. Your whole argument is LeBron-ball falls apart against top-quality playoff competition. So why would I compare their playoffs averages to the regular season mean.

Speaking of playoffs, Lebron had the worst 3pt performance (23%) from someone who took 100+ shots in nba playoffs history last year. :rolleyes:

[tpols]

Naturally, When Lebron is on the floor, his teammates are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime..

:oldlol:

[3ball]

So I'm not sure what the point is of listing the top ORtg teams - the Thunder are on that list too - similar to Lebron's effect on a team, the Thunder players ALSO prevent their team from running an optimal, equal-opportunity offense - instead, they play a suboptimal, ball-dominant, 1-on-1 style and consequently underperform despite having ridiculous talent, just like Lebron's teams.. Similar to Lebron's teams, the Thunder lose to the teams that run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses (Spurs, Warriors, Mavs from a few yrs ago).

It's a KNOCK on a player anytime a star player loses despite having equal or better team talent (see 2009 2nd Round, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals, where the Heat lost with equal or better talent) - losing with better talent only happens when an opponent has sufficiently-better chemistry and brand of basketball - this never happened to MJ, because his style facilitated and allowed the best brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Otoh, it happens to Lebron all the time, because his low-assisted pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow a team to play an optimal equal opportunity offense.

The stats show that the Heat were worse with Wade and Lebron on the floor at the same time - this proves they underperformed compared to how they would play if Wade and Lebron played well together.

Basketball isn't an experiment to see how many stats you can get - basketball is about WINNING.. The very best wing players of all time MUST be able to get elite stats within optimal, equal-opportunity offenses, which proves their ability to play basketball at the highest team level - Lebron isn't capable of this - he can only get elite stats within suboptimal offenses that are based on him having PG-level time of possession from the SF position - this type of offense needs exorbitant levels of supporting talent to win (i.e. having a 10-time allstar and 20/10 player as your 3rd option, Bosh).
.

[Megabox!]

Poor LeBron fans man.

They gotta be pulling their hair out reading 3ball's posts. :lol
I don't think anybody here ever reads his posts

[Replay32]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/NlRpyo.gif


Lebron's role players are the same caliber as any other team - guys like JR Smith, Mosgov, Tristan Thompson and Shumpert are as good (even better) than the role players on other teams.. However, Lebron's low-assisted, pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow his teams to run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses.. This is why the story is always how Lebron's supporting cast underperformed AGAIN.

Due to Lebron's suboptimal, ball-dominant style, the offense of Lebron's teams are not built for teammates to make decisions - it's built for teammates to become ACCUSTOMED to Lebron making all the decisions.. When Lebron is on the floor, his teammates are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. Naturally, it's no surprise that when he leaves the floor, they collapse trying to become playmakers all of a sudden.. And again, when he's on the floor, they're just Lebron's tricks and therefore less of a threat to the defense than if they were playmakers themselves.. Multiple playmaker team > 1-playmaker team.

This is a stark contrast to the NBA's elite teams, who run more optimal, "equal opportunity" offenses that REQUIRE role players to make playmaking decisions at all times, while the star player is on the floor.. Guys like Diaw and Patty Mills don't just wait around for Duncan to toss them a dime - instead, Mills and Diaw are tasked with making plays just like Parker and Duncan are - ditto for guys like Shaun Livingston or Barnes.. So when Duncan or Curry leaves the floor, the role players just continue what they've been doing - making offensive decisions - they don't have to go from tricks waiting for Duncan toss them a dime, to playmakers all of sudden when Duncan goes to the bench - they can just continue being playmakers like they were when Duncan was on the floor.

And ditto for everyone that played in the triangle - the triangle was an equal-opportunity offense, as Phil Jackson describes here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=23m40s).. Every player got the chance to catch it on the post, turn-pivot, explore all the options and make a play - the lesser players like Kerr and Longley normally handed off, but they had the power to make a play if they chose.

Consequently, role players like Mills, Diaw, Kerr, and Longley play better and have a bigger impact than their more talented Cavs counterparts (shumpert, jr smith, mosgov, tristan thompson), who are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. That brand of basketball has never won, and never will win..

Instead of having the capacity within his game to foster the growth of teammates, superior strategy, and an optimal brand of basketball for the team to play, Lebron can only go 2/4 by teaming up with unprecedented supporting talent (i.e. a 10-time all-star and 20/10 player as his 3rd option, Bosh).. Lebron is really a Karl Malone-level player that teamed up with Drexler and Mchale to go 2/4.

Otoh, when you have a guy leading the league in scoring by getting his points like the GIF above (off-ball) - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES the play-making capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42

MJ's teams were eventually perceived as one of the NBA's "smart" teams that used the best strategy and had played the best brand of basketball, just like the Warriors, Mavericks and Spurs of today's game.. MJ's goat offensive sophistication enabled him to fit a goat scoring production seamlessly within an optimal, winning framework.

In b4 tldr

This guy. :lol

[Indian guy]

It's for the playoffs only. I'm comparing playoff ORTG to league playoff average during those years. Miami comes out on top. Your whole argument is LeBron-ball falls apart against top-quality playoff competition. So why would I compare their playoffs averages to the regular season mean.

Of course, a more accurate representation of true offensive impact would be seeing what each team's series ORTG was against each opponent(their RS DRTG) they faced in the playoffs. That way, we're factoring in strength of opponent's defense. Doing that, this is what we get....

PLAYOFFS

Bulls (1990-1993) +8.9
Heat (2011-2014) +8.5
Celtics (1984-87) +6.6
Lakers (2008-11) +6.1

As far as wings(SG/SF) go in NBA history, LeBron's only superior in terms of offensive impact is MJ.

[Hey Yo]

:pimp:

I missed this genius post.. You're a smart man my friend.

Indeed, MJ led the league in scoring within an equal opportunity offense.. Lebron barely lead the league in scoring in a Lebron-only offense, let alone an equal opportunity one.
Agree with your ALT often?

[3ball]

PLAYOFFS

1) Heat (2011-2014) 109.8 ORTG (+4.0 over league average)
2) Bulls (1990-1993) 113.3 ORTG (+3.8 over league average)
3) Lakers (2008-11) 110.5 ORTG (+3.1 over league average)
4) Thunder (2011-14) 108.6 ORTG (+2.9 over league average)
5) Celtics (1984-1987) 113.2 ORTG (+2.8 over league average)


No one is arguing Lebron's teams had bad ORtg's - the Heat's ORtg is right there with the Thunder.. But this thread is discusses how Lebron's style affects chemistry and brand of basketball - THAT'S what allowed equal or less-talented opponents to upset his teams.. Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.

Lebron's style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity), which makes them susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball.

Lebron lost 3 times with equal or greater talent - the 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals and 2014 Finals.. But it never happened to MJ, because his style allowed his teams to play an optimal brand of basketball - opponents could never upset the Bulls by offsetting a talent disadvantage with a better brand of basketball.. That's why MJ went 6/6 and never underachieved, while Lebron is 2/6 with several upsets/underachievements on his record.

[Young X]

No one is arguing Lebron's teams had bad ORtg's - the Heat's sheer talent allowed them to produce offensively.. This thread is discusses how Lebron's style affects chemistry and brand of basketball - THAT'S what allowed equal or less-talented opponents to upset his teams.. Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.If Lebron "affected chemistry and brand of basketball" that much then his teams shouldn't have been that successful offensively.

[Kblaze8855]

Considering that only maybe 6 or 7 people of thousands have accomplished anything he has not while he has at least 4 or 5 years left to contend I'm not sure anything needs changing.

It's kind of like when people criticize Kobe's approach when he's won five rings and was the best player for two of them. You can only talk so much shit about people so absurdly accomplished. You might as well say all but 5 people ever should be hated on incessantly.

He's won a ring or made the finals 5 years in a row. Two of his finals teams are among the least talented rosters to ever play a finals game.

He should have three rings at 30 instead of two. No one rational can really make an argument for anything worse than that. If you were great enough that your greatest criticism is that you haven't already surpassed the legacy of all but 3-4 people in the history of the game when you're 30.....you can safely tune out most any criticism.

I mean..... 3 people are really out of reach accomplishment wise at this point. Jordan, Kareem, and Bill russell.

Short of that everyone is comfortably inside a reasonable projection of where he's going to end up in the eyes of history.

Being Charles Barkley would be an immense success for even a Hall of Fame caliber talent. This dudes career is wiping the floor with the accomplishments and legacy of guys who have been mythic almost god-like figures in the game for five decades.

And he has years to add to it.
.
He's doing ok without whatever you think it is that is so greatly holding him and his team's back.

[3ball]

If Lebron "affected chemistry and brand of basketball" that much then his teams shouldn't have been that successful offensively.


No one is arguing whether Lebron's teams had good offenses or not - this thread is about how Lebron's style affects his team's chemistry and brand of basketball - THAT'S what allowed equal or less-talented opponents to upset his teams - the upsets is a large reason why he's 2/6.

Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.. In Lebron's case, his style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity), which makes them susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball.

Lebron lost 3 times with equal or greater talent - the 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals and 2014 Finals.. But it never happened to MJ, because his style allowed his teams to play an optimal brand of basketball - opponents could never upset the Bulls by offsetting a talent disadvantage with a better brand of basketball.. That's why MJ went 6/6 and never underachieved, while Lebron is 2/6 with several upsets/underachievements on his record.

[poido123]

Considering that only maybe 6 or 7 people of thousands have accomplished anything he has not while he has at least 4 or 5 years left to contend I'm not sure anything needs changing.

It's kind of like when people criticize Kobe's approach when he's won five rings and was the best player for two of them. You can only talk so much shit about people so absurdly accomplished. You might as well say all but 5 people ever should be hated on incessantly.

He's won a ring or made the finals 5 years in a row. Two of his finals teams are among the least talented rosters to ever play a finals game.

He should have three rings at 30 instead of two. No one rational can really make an argument for anything worse than that. If you were great enough that your greatest criticism is that you haven't already surpassed the legacy of all but 3-4 people in the history of the game when you're 30.....you can safely tune out most any criticism.

I mean..... 3 people are really out of reach accomplishment wise at this point. Jordan, Kareem, and Bill russell.

Short of that everyone is comfortably inside a reasonable projection of where he's going to end up in the eyes of history.

Being Charles Barkley would be an immense success for even a Hall of Fame caliber talent. This dudes career is wiping the floor with the accomplishments and legacy of guys who have been mythic almost god-like figures in the game for five decades.

And he has years to add to it.
.
He's doing ok without whatever you think it is that is so greatly holding him and his team's back.


Common sense. Good post

[Bosnian Sajo]

He's won a ring or made the finals 5 years in a row. Two of his finals teams are among the least talented rosters to ever play a finals game.



Are you only talking about the past 5 finals appearances? I understand his 07 team was weak, but his teams these past 5 years have been regularly top 3 in the NBA, what are you talking about?

[Lebron23]

You sound like a parrot aka a broken record. I know you are just posting using an alternate account.

Lebron is going to win his 3rd finals MVP, and 5th MVP Award next season. Same numbers of MVP as Jordan.

[Kblaze8855]

I didn't think I needed to explain the Cavs recent situation. Of course the roster itself isn't untalented. But the players on the court in the finals were about as untalented a group of people you will ever see there.

[dankok8]

That's why the 2013 and 2014 Heat have the highest eFG% of any teams in history...

[Indian guy]

If Lebron "affected chemistry and brand of basketball" that much then his teams shouldn't have been that successful offensively.

It's just so :oldlol: to see him keep repeating the same garbage over and over when all facts not only have Miami as one of the best offenses in the league during their 4 year run, but they also match-up very well historically compared to some other teams led by all-time greats. Nothing more needs to be said. 3ball's entire shtick has been thoroughly exposed with facts, but I think in his mind, he thinks if he gets the last word, he has actually proven something or 'won' the argument. But that won't change reality.

[3ball]

The title of this thread explains why Lebron's teams have lost as the favorite many times, and have been upset by teams with less or equal talent - this thread explains why Lebron's teams are always susceptible to being upset.

Losing with equal or better talent only happens when the opponent has better chemistry and brand of basketball - those are the only reasons upsets happen in 7 game series.. It happens to lebron a lot because his ball-dominance prevents his teams from playing optimal (equal opportunity), thus opening up the door for opponents to play more optimal and offset any talent disadvantage.

Otoh, MJ never lost with the Bulls when he had equal or better talent.. Ever.. His teams didn't have this susceptibility to being upset like Lebron's teams.

[NZStreetBaller]

3ball is annoyinf and repetitive but you cant actually argue with what he is saying..... he makes point after point after point. Lebrons game does favour his stat sheet like crazy. Wilt also did the same. Massive awesome stats all round. But only two championships. And we all know that great teamwork wins titles and lebron just doesnt have that. The only reason he passes is for the sake of his assist stat.

[warriorfan]

Some play for stats...

Others play for rings...

[Young X]

That's why the 2013 and 2014 Heat have the highest eFG% of any teams in history...Was just about to bring this up. For as much as this dude talks about Bron hurting his teams offensively, they sure do post great results on that end.

Miami in 2014 had a ridiculous 57.0 eFG% with Bron on the court. You don't get those kind of results with someone who "hurts" his teams.

[Hey Yo]

No one is arguing whether Lebron's teams had good offenses or not - this thread is about how Lebron's style affects his team's chemistry and brand of basketball - THAT'S what allowed equal or less-talented opponents to upset his teams - the upsets is a large reason why he's 2/6.

Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.. In Lebron's case, his style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity), which makes them susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball.

Lebron lost 3 times with equal or greater talent - the 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals and 2014 Finals.. But it never happened to MJ, because his style allowed his teams to play an optimal brand of basketball - opponents could never upset the Bulls by offsetting a talent disadvantage with a better brand of basketball.. That's why MJ went 6/6 and never underachieved, while Lebron is 2/6 with several upsets/underachievements on his record.
If that's the case, then how was Miami able to overcome the favored Thunder 4 games to 1 in 2012?

How were they able to overcome losing HC advantage against the Spurs in 2013? Games 3-4-5 were played in SA with SA up 3-2 going into game 6? You realize how hard it is to win in SA in the postseason?

[3ball]

I didn't think I needed to explain the Cavs recent situation. the players on the court in the finals were about as untalented a group of people you will ever see there.
The Cavs supporting cast was fine - Mosgov was well above-average for a Finals center... Tristan Thompson was above-average for a PF.. JR Smith underperformed, but he was great in the Atlanta series (18/8).. Delladova was like Paxson or something.

The Mavs supporting cast in 2011 wasn't much better, except they played a vastly superior brand of basketball.. Unfortunately, Lebron's style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity), which makes them susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball (as we saw in 2011).
.

[warriorfan]

That's why the 2013 and 2014 Heat have the highest eFG% of any teams in history...

And this has nothing to do with LeBron James sucking the life out of the already historically weak Eastern Conference with his collusion?

:coleman:

[3ball]

If that's the case, then how was Miami able to overcome the favored Thunder 4 games to 1 in 2012?


the 2012 Finals makes my point - the thunder are one of the few teams that had a worse brand of basketball than the heat.... naturally they lost, despite probably having a slight talent advantage.

that's how huge chemistry and brand of basketball is - the players that facilitate it (off-ball players with low time-of-possession) are much better players and more valuable that those that can't (for example, a low-assisted, pg-style playing sf).





How were they able to overcome losing HC advantage against the Spurs in 2013?


Silly question.. Ray Allen crushed SA's soul... It happens, albiet rarely... It happened to me in hs too actually... :cry:

[HurricaneKid]

It's just so :oldlol: to see him keep repeating the same garbage over and over when all facts not only have Miami as one of the best offenses in the league during their 4 year run, but they also match-up very well historically compared to some other teams led by all-time greats. Nothing more needs to be said. 3ball's entire shtick has been thoroughly exposed with facts, but I think in his mind, he thinks if he gets the last word, he has actually proven something or 'won' the argument. But that won't change reality.

I finally gave up just a few days ago and put him on ignore. I assumed that someone who clearly has a great passion for the history of basketball and spends an immense amount of time posting would have SOME interest in increasingly their knowledge and understanding. But in his case that simply isn't happening. He is repeatedly caught defending positions that are insane and believes that by posting massive sheets of words he can overcome facts. You have eviscerated him for days and he is uncowed. The other day he claimed that he had crushed you. I assume he meant with the weight of his unreadable prose. His hubris and lack of self awareness is striking.

But you have done a fantastic job of late. Did you change your name or just start posting more?

[Kblaze8855]

When there are over a hundred hall-of-famers who never led their teams to anything are you people really not seeing the problem with claiming guys who led multiple title teams don't have an approach that leads to victory?


You win or you don't. Once you have won....multiple times at that.... the idea that what you are doing is not conducive to victory is out the window forever.

You can make a reasonable case that some people have a bad approach but are so talented the results don't show it. But being so good you can go down the wrong road and still get to your destination says more good about your driving ability than bad about your navigation.

Is call it a net positive.

With so many hundreds of great players who never did shit obsessing over the supposedly ineffective method of multiple title winners seems more than a little ridiculous.

LeBron has won more in the last 5 years than many franchises have in 50.

He's hardly hurting for success or glory. Losing to an underdog now and then doesn't mean his approach is wrong any more than it did when Showtime did it.

[warriorfan]

When there are over a hundred hall-of-famers who never led their teams to anything are you people really not seeing the problem with claiming guys who led multiple title teams don't have an approach that leads to victory?


You win or you don't. Once you have won....multiple times at that.... the idea that what you are doing is not conducive to victory is out the window forever.

You can make a reasonable case that some people have a bad approach but are so talented the results don't show it. But being so good you can go down the wrong road and still get to your destination says more good about your driving ability than bad about your navigation.

Is call it a net positive.

With so many hundreds of great players who never did shit obsessing over the supposedly ineffective method of multiple title winners seems more than a little ridiculous.

LeBron has won more in the last 5 years than many franchises have in 50.

He's hardly hurting for success or glory. Losing to an underdog now and then doesn't mean his approach is wrong any more than it did when Showtime did it.

I see what you are getting at but the problem I'm having with your post is that we aren't comparing LeBron to the hundreds of hall of famers. We are comparing LeBron to the top 10 ATG players, the cream of the crop. When you put LeBrons career in comparison with your average Hall of Famer it looks fantastic, but we arn't doing that. We are comparing him to All Time Greats.

[3ball]

I didn't think I needed to explain the Cavs recent situation. Of course the roster itself isn't untalented. But the players on the court in the finals were about as untalented a group of people you will ever see there.


Btw, the Cavs would've won the Finals this year if Lebron could've shot 50%.. But we should've known beforehand that he wasn't capable of good efficiency at high shot volume, since he's horrible at the additional midrange and isolations required of high volume shooting.. You can't get 27 fga on all 3-and-D..

Of course, there's no danger in letting Lebron shoot 39%, so Lebron's inability to have good efficiency at high volume allowed the Warriors to permit his secluded 1-on-1 clearouts on the strongside all series long.

Lebron's lack of midrange ability didn't just prevent him from good efficiency at high volumes and subsequent double-teams, but it prevents him from being as good in the 80's, when midrange was the primary option remaining in the absence of the 3-pointers necessary to make screen-roll/drive-and-kick mathematically worthwhile.

[90sgoat]

When there are over a hundred hall-of-famers who never led their teams to anything are you people really not seeing the problem with claiming guys who led multiple title teams don't have an approach that leads to victory?


You win or you don't. Once you have won....multiple times at that.... the idea that what you are doing is not conducive to victory is out the window forever.

You can make a reasonable case that some people have a bad approach but are so talented the results don't show it. But being so good you can go down the wrong road and still get to your destination says more good about your driving ability than bad about your navigation.

Is call it a net positive.

With so many hundreds of great players who never did shit obsessing over the supposedly ineffective method of multiple title winners seems more than a little ridiculous.

LeBron has won more in the last 5 years than many franchises have in 50.

He's hardly hurting for success or glory. Losing to an underdog now and then doesn't mean his approach is wrong any more than it did when Showtime did it.

As of now Wade has more titles than Lebron and Wade has won without Lebron.

Wade has proven he can win without Lebron.

Lebron has yet to prove he can win without a top 5 GOAT shooting guard.

[Indian guy]

But you have done a fantastic job of late. Did you change your name or just start posting more?

I've always been Indian guy. Have never really posted that much unless I really feel like responding to something.

[Hey Yo]

the 2012 Finals makes my point - the thunder are one of the few teams that had a worse brand of basketball than the heat.... naturally they lost, despite probably having a slight talent advantage.
So how was OKC able to practically steamroll through the West to get to the Finals then.......because their style sucked?




Silly question.. Ray Allen crushed SA's soul... It happens, albiet rarely... It happened to me in hs too actually... :cry:
Silly answer, considering I was referring to games 1-5 and having to overcome losing HCA.

Typical deflect by you when ruined.

[3ball]

Lebron has yet to prove he can win without a top 5 GOAT shooting guard.


Agreed, and the Cavs would've won the Finals this year if Lebron could've shot 50%.. But we should've known beforehand that he wasn't capable of good efficiency at high shot volume, since he's horrible at the additional midrange and isolations required of high volume shooting.. You can't get 27 fga on all 3-and-D..

Of course, there's no danger in letting Lebron shoot 39%, so Lebron's inability to have good efficiency at high volume allowed the Warriors to permit his secluded 1-on-1 clearouts on the strongside all series long.

Lebron's lack of midrange ability didn't just prevent him from good efficiency at high volumes and subsequent double-teams, but it prevents him from being as good in the 80's, when midrange was the primary option remaining in the absence of the 3-pointers necessary to make screen-roll/drive-and-kick mathematically worthwhile.

[3ball]

This the question OP answers: Why are Lebron's teams susceptible to losing with equal or greater talent (underachieving)?

It basically explains most of the reason he's 2/6, since some of those losses came with teams of equal or greater talent.

Thank me later guys

[Kblaze8855]

Plenty of the all-time greats you're comparing him to think he's better than they were or just as good. What a maybe 70% complete resume says pales to me in comparison to how good someone is at basketball. I've said and continue to believe I would take Bird over LeBron. You can argue LeBron is more accomplished right now I'm not really that concerned about that.

I prefer his game. Given a few more years of contending LeBron will probably destroy Bird legacy wise. if I don't care now why should I care then? LeBron is whatever he's gonna be....already. Hes probably declining.

I don't too much give a shit what he adds to his resume at this point. Once you hit a certain level the exact tally on rings and accomplishments is affected as much by the health of the league as your own talent.

Probably 10 or 15 championships go the other way with the right player healthy. I'm not using such a thing to decide who I think the best is.

And even if I decided to I wouldn't do it with years left to alter the findings. LeBron will accomplish more and he will win more. exactly what that is we will find out. But I'm not going to act like his tally has to measure up at 30 to get into a conversation his basketball justified before he won anything.


How do I look acting like I can't even compare LeBron to the greats because of circumstantial issues like exact ring count when before he won a single ring Larry Bird himself said LeBron was as good a basketball player as has ever lived? Your basketball gets you into that club. A lot of outside factors determine where the public thinks you fall once you're in it.

[Kblaze8855]

As of now Wade has more titles than Lebron and Wade has won
without Lebron.
Wade has proven he can win without Lebron.
Lebron has yet to prove he can win without a top 5 GOAT shooting
guard.




And Kareem has yet to prove he can win without a top 3 all time point guard. And yet there isn't a single person who saw play a game of basketball who gives a shit. A bunch of 19 year olds on the internet bring it up but no real observer of him playing the game. guys who have unbelievable careers might win once. Nobody wins enough in varied enough situations to remove all the "But did they win without such and such" talk.

People win with who was on their team. Bit much to expect people to win with....whoever. it's incredibly rare to be good enough that you can even be in position to win with two completely different supporting casts much less win.

And some of the people who have we regard much less than quite a few people who didn't. It's just another case of nothing being good enough. Someone looking to hate is going to find a way to do it.

LeBron has the same haters now as the ones who were saying he could never win a title years ago. He wins back to back and they will throw an asterisk on it and pretend it didn't happen.

Enough is never enough.

He's going to have the same haters if he wins three more.

I was here when Kobe had one ring. The people hating have the same argument they had then....four rings later.

in the end nobody gives a shit what happened. only that they get to argue the same thing either way.

[Bay Area Baller]

The fact that Lebron needs his team to play suboptimally for him to be elite hurts him compared to his peers - the reality that he isn't capable of getting elite stats within an optimal, equal-opportunity offense makes him inferior to many greats and puts him outside of the top 15 all-time.

Basketball isn't an experiment to see how many stats you can get - basketball is about WINNING - so the very best wing players of all time MUST be able to get elite stats within optimal, equal-opportunity offenses - Lebron isn't capable of this - he can only get elite stats within suboptimal offenses that need exorbitant levels of supporting talent to win (i.e. having a 10-time allstar and 20/10 player as your 3rd option, Bosh).


3balls is right on with his basketball analysis of Lebron. Life decisionshttp://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Z6IIZ5h1IjA/VIGMlHSMuKI/AAAAAAAAHIA/OsLAtTrUxl4/s1600/lebron-james-checks-stat-sheet.png not so much.

[3ball]

How do I look acting like I can't even compare LeBron to the greats because of circumstantial issues like exact ring count

when before he won a single ring Larry Bird himself said LeBron was as good a basketball player as has ever lived?


There's far more quotes of people in basketball saying MJ is the unquestioned goat and that Lebron is not on his level (many vehemently saying so).

So there's no value in citing the occasional polite platitude of someone in basketball, when citing quotes is not a war you'd ever come remotely close to winning - it's better to cite SUBSTANCE from his game to make your argument, like I did at the top of this page in response to one of yours.

[Kblaze8855]

Your pretending anyone is arguing against MJ is getting more than old.

[guy]

3ball is annoyinf and repetitive but you cant actually argue with what he is saying..... he makes point after point after point. Lebrons game does favour his stat sheet like crazy. Wilt also did the same. Massive awesome stats all round. But only two championships. And we all know that great teamwork wins titles and lebron just doesnt have that. The only reason he passes is for the sake of his assist stat.

This. While some of his arguments might be overblown, this is a good explanation for why the "Lebron didn't have enough help" and the "with Lebron vs w/o Lebron" arguments are so flawed and why he probably won't ever play on a dynasty considered on the level of the 80s Celtics, 80s Lakers, 90s Bulls, early 00s Lakers and Duncan's Spurs.

[ArbitraryWater]

Poor LeBron fans man.

They gotta be pulling their hair out reading 3ball's posts. :lol

since his reputation is piss poor, I doubt anyone cares.. hell, his posting is so bad MJ fans have accused him of actually being a Jordan hater :lol

[ArbitraryWater]

Indian guy has been killing Bron myths with absolute precision

[DonDadda59]

I used to call 3Ball the Luca Brasi of the Jordan Family. But this man is something else...

Bron stans be like (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu0rP2VWLWw)


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/NlRpyo.gif

Look at the Lakers slathering BBQ sauce all over that Jordan zone sandwich. :applause:


He's won a ring or made the finals 5 years in a row. Two of his finals teams are among the least talented rosters to ever play a finals game.

That's more of a function of him playing in the absolute worst conference post merger while hoarding all the talent on his squads. It's no wonder his teams breeze through the East only to get clowned year after year by the West champion. Take away Jesus' miracle shot and the man is 1/6 against the West in the finals.

[Rocketswin2013]

Delusion and insanity.

[CTbasketball92]

Btw, the Cavs would've won the Finals this year if Lebron could've shot 50%.. But we should've known beforehand that he wasn't capable of good efficiency at high shot volume, since he's horrible at the additional midrange and isolations required of high volume shooting.. You can't get 27 fga on all 3-and-D..

Of course, there's no danger in letting Lebron shoot 39%, so Lebron's inability to have good efficiency at high volume allowed the Warriors to permit his secluded 1-on-1 clearouts on the strongside all series long.

Lebron's lack of midrange ability didn't just prevent him from good efficiency at high volumes and subsequent double-teams, but it prevents him from being as good in the 80's, when midrange was the primary option remaining in the absence of the 3-pointers necessary to make screen-roll/drive-and-kick mathematically worthwhile.


You're ignoring the fact that LeBron had to create all of the Cavs' offense and handle the ball like 90% of the time during the finals. He couldv'e gotten to 44-45% easy if Kyrie was there and probably more if kevil love was there too. I just don't see any player in history beating the Warriors this year.

The bigs were good, but they didn't make lebron's job easier. What we saw is what happens when someone has to do too much against an all time great team. LeBron's only lost one finals he was supposed to win.

[90sgoat]

I used to call 3Ball the Luca Brasi of the Jordan Family. But this man is something else...

Bron stans be like (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zu0rP2VWLWw)



Look at the Lakers slathering BBQ sauce all over that Jordan zone sandwich. :applause:



That's more of a function of him playing in the absolute worst conference post merger while hoarding all the talent on his squads. It's no wonder his teams breeze through the East only to get clowned year after year by the West champion. Take away Jesus' miracle shot and the man is 1/6 against the West in the finals.

http://yeahiknowitsucks.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/duane.gif

Damn, Lebronies taking Ls left and right.

Finally I am a part of this blood sport, thank you based Jeff.

[DonDadda59]

http://yeahiknowitsucks.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/duane.gif

Damn, Lebronies taking Ls left and right.

Finally I am a part of this blood sport, thank you based Jeff.

Welcome to the Family. :cheers:

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/06/27/b6/0627b61d5fb2325f93385d55289b594d.jpg

[ArbitraryWater]

http://new2.fjcdn.com/pictures/Epic_3ce8b9_979388.jpg

[warriorfan]

ArbitraryMeltdown

[knicksman]

"A real man doesnt join his peers" -lebron james

[#number6ix#]

I think coaching plays a role in this conversation... It's something Jordan, Kobe, magic,Kareem,bird,Russell,shaq and Duncan had and that's all time great coaches...

How many rings did Pat Riley and Phil Jackson have a hand in and how many rings did these guys win without them

[DonDadda59]

I think coaching plays a role in this conversation... It's something Jordan, Kobe, magic,Kareem,bird,Russell,shaq and Duncan had and that's all time great coaches...

How many rings did Pat Riley and Phil Jackson have a hand in and how many rings did these guys win without them

Run down Phil Jackson's resume before becoming the Bulls head coach. Then do the same for David Blatt.

[LoneyROY7]

Hey OP...

#whatdoyoumean

[#number6ix#]

Run down Phil Jackson's resume before becoming the Bulls head coach. Then do the same for David Blatt.
I get what you are saying but when Phil came his right hand man Tex Winters came along with the Triangle

[Megabox!]

Take away Jesus' miracle shot and the man is 1/6 against the West in the finals.
That's not how it always works......if the Spurs don't lose the way they did in 13' then they don't come back the following year as hungry as they were

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

That's not how it always works......if the Spurs don't lose the way they did in 13' then they don't come back the following year as hungry as they were

Probably not, but the Spurs losing a 5 point lead with 20 something seconds remaining...is pretty freakish, no? Hell, after the series LeBron admitted he got lucky. REALLY lucky.

[3ball]

:facepalm

[3ball]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/NlRpyo.gif


Look at the Lakers slathering BBQ sauce all over that Jordan zone sandwich. :applause:



not that i need to tell you, but when you have a guy leading the league in scoring by getting his points like the GIF above (off-ball) - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES the play-making capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's off-ball game and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42
.

[3ball]

Typical deflect


I'm deflecting?

Not a single person itt has offered even 1 explanation for why Lebron's teams have been upset by teams with equal or worse talent.

In the absence of anyone offering ANY other explanation, the title of the thread stands as the reason:

Lebron's style prevents his team from playing optimally (equal-opportunity), which makes his team susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball.

Like, if Lebron could average 32/6/6/50% for his career playing in a system like the Spurs, he'd never lose in the Finals either......... (or 41/9/6/51% on high volume to keep up with an opponent's juggernaut offense.. see 93' Finals).. But he can't, and that's why Jordan is way better.. Jordan COULD get elite stats in an equal opportunity offense and have good efficiency at high volume, while Lebron cannot do either of these things.

[3ball]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/NlRpyo.gif


You're ignoring the fact that LeBron had to handle the ball like 90% of the time during the finals. He couldv'e gotten to 44-45% easy if Kyrie was there and probably more if kevil love was there too.



I'm not ignoring this fact - i'm FOCUSING on it - i'm saying Lebron handling the ball that much is a flaw in his game - he DOESN'T have to handle the ball that much to get 35 ppg - he can get 35 ppg playing off-ball like MJ (seen in gif above)..

If Lebron could average 32/6/6/50% for his career playing off-ball in a system like the Spurs, he'd never lose in the Finals just like MJ...... (or 41/9/6/51% on high volume to keep up with an opponent's juggernaut offense.. see 93' Finals).. But he can't, and that's why Jordan is way better.. Jordan COULD get elite stats in an equal opportunity offense and have good efficiency at high volume, while Lebron cannot do either of these things.

When you have a MJ leading the league in scoring by getting his points like the GIF above (off-ball) - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES the playmaking capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's off-ball game and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42





I just don't see any player in history beating the Warriors this year.


Not shooting 39% - but if Lebron shot 50% at that shot volume (33 fga), the Cavs would've won.. But we should've known beforehand that he wasn't capable of good efficiency at high shot volume, since he's horrible at the additional midrange and isolations required of high volume shooting.. You can't get 33 fga on all 3-and-D (or even 27 fga, his 2015 playoff average).

Of course, there's no danger in letting Lebron shoot 39%, so Lebron's inability to have good efficiency at high volume allowed the Warriors to permit his secluded 1-on-1 clearouts on the strongside all series long.

Lebron's lack of midrange ability didn't just prevent him from good efficiency at high volumes and subsequent double-teams, but it prevents him from being as good in the 80's, when midrange was the primary option remaining in the absence of the 3-pointers necessary to make screen-roll/drive-and-kick mathematically worthwhile.
.

[Stu Jackson]

get rid of lebron james and mj and bird and kd and tmac would take the warriors to seven games

maybe mj would win he was the best ever

[NZStreetBaller]

No one even argues that jordan is the goat. They only do it when people use jordan to make their favourite player look bad. Which is what 3ball does on the daily lol.

[Stu Jackson]

No one even argues that jordan is the goat. They only do it when people use jordan to make their favourite player look bad. Which is what 3ball does on the daily lol.
there are a lot of people who dont think jordan is the goat especially guys my age but i think they are stuck in the past

mj did things nobody else could dream of and i think he is the best ever

[NZStreetBaller]

there are a lot of people who dont think jordan is the goat especially guys my age but i think they are stuck in the past

mj did things nobody else could dream of and i think he is the best ever

Lol its called delusion. We have yet to see anybody in the league as great as jordan. The guy just has way too much leverage in arguing points over any other player.

I hope i live long enough to witness someone greater. Seriously how cool wud it be to see someone win 7 friggen chips with next to no help averaging 40 playoff points. Come on american negros !!! Breed us another basketball god!!

[Stu Jackson]

Lol its called delusion. We have yet to see anybody in the league as great as jordan. The guy just has way too much leverage in arguing points over any other player.

I hope i live long enough to witness someone greater. Seriously how cool wud it be to see someone win 7 friggen chips with next to no help averaging 40 playoff points. Come on american negros !!! Breed us another basketball god!!
mj could be the best ever even if he never won

hes not the best because he won hes the best because nobody was ever as good

he just did so much on the court the best

i dont think well see someone as good as him again he was a goat athlete and he went to college and there and in the pros let himself be coached

he might be the only player ever to have mastered the game

[sdot_thadon]

http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/5-16-2015/NlRpyo.gif


Lebron's role players are the same caliber as any other team - guys like JR Smith, Mosgov, Tristan Thompson and Shumpert are as good (even better) than the role players on other teams.. However, Lebron's low-assisted, pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow his teams to run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses.. This is why the story is always how Lebron's supporting cast underperformed AGAIN.

Due to Lebron's suboptimal, ball-dominant style, the offense of Lebron's teams are not built for teammates to make decisions - it's built for teammates to become ACCUSTOMED to Lebron making all the decisions.. When Lebron is on the floor, his teammates are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. Naturally, it's no surprise that when he leaves the floor, they collapse trying to become playmakers all of a sudden.. And again, when he's on the floor, they're just Lebron's tricks and therefore less of a threat to the defense than if they were playmakers themselves.. Multiple playmaker team > 1-playmaker team.

This is a stark contrast to the NBA's elite teams, who run more optimal, "equal opportunity" offenses that REQUIRE role players to make playmaking decisions at all times, while the star player is on the floor.. Guys like Diaw and Patty Mills don't just wait around for Duncan to toss them a dime - instead, Mills and Diaw are tasked with making plays just like Parker and Duncan are - ditto for guys like Shaun Livingston or Barnes.. So when Duncan or Curry leaves the floor, the role players just continue what they've been doing - making offensive decisions - they don't have to go from tricks waiting for Duncan toss them a dime, to playmakers all of sudden when Duncan goes to the bench - they can just continue being playmakers like they were when Duncan was on the floor.

And ditto for everyone that played in the triangle - the triangle was an equal-opportunity offense, as Phil Jackson describes here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=23m40s).. Every player got the chance to catch it on the post, turn-pivot, explore all the options and make a play - the lesser players like Kerr and Longley normally handed off, but they had the power to make a play if they chose.

Consequently, role players like Mills, Diaw, Kerr, and Longley play better and have a bigger impact than their more talented Cavs counterparts (shumpert, jr smith, mosgov, tristan thompson), who are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. That brand of basketball has never won, and never will win..

Instead of having the capacity within his game to foster the growth of teammates, superior strategy, and an optimal brand of basketball for the team to play, Lebron can only go 2/4 by teaming up with unprecedented supporting talent (i.e. a 10-time all-star and 20/10 player as his 3rd option, Bosh).. Lebron is really a Karl Malone-level player that teamed up with Drexler and Mchale to go 2/4.

Otoh, when you have a guy leading the league in scoring by getting his points like the GIF above (off-ball) - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES the play-making capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's off-ball game and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42

MJ's teams were eventually perceived as one of the NBA's "smart" teams that used the best strategy and had played the best brand of basketball, just like the Warriors, Mavericks and Spurs of today's game.. MJ's goat offensive sophistication enabled him to fit a goat scoring production seamlessly within an optimal, winning framework.
In b4 tldr
.
I love this notion that Mj played "optimal" ball as if pre 1991 didn't exist.

[Indian guy]

I love this notion that Mj played "optimal" ball as if pre 1991 didn't exist.

MJ embracing the triangle in '91 was a career-changer for him. His movement and decision making on the court pretty much became the model of efficiency from that point on, allowing him to get his without nullifying his teammates' production. That was NOT the case before PJ took over though. Bulls from 1985-1989 were a +0.8 offense, barely hovering above league average. +5.9 from 90-98('94 and '95 excluded), with a #1 ranked offense in 4 of their 6 championship seasons. Obviously, the 90's team had significantly more talent, but the '94 and '95 Bulls were just a +1 offense without MJ. Even finished below league average in 1994! So that talent, offensively anyway, wasn't that good. 90's MJ's offensive game was just that good and that portable. He could take an average offense and comfortably make it the best O in the league under the triangle. LeBron's in the same class. Miami went from a +4.2 offense in 2014(ranked #5) to -1.7 in 2015(ranked #21). Cleveland went from +3.6 in 2010(ranked #6) to -5.1 in 2011(ranked #29). Insane! 2 vastly different teams talent-wise yet LeBron managed to make 'em both elite on offense. His game is more portable than people give him credit for. And his ability to elevate an offense with mediocre talent is probably second to none in NBA history. As an overall offensive player, I'd say MJ's the only non-PG in NBA history who's more impactful.

[BoutPractice]

Yeah, the Cavs definitely would've beaten a historically good team by giving LeBron equal opportunities with the likes of Matthew Dellavedova and Iman Shumpert, who struggled to even dribble the ball and shot 27% from the field combined…

You're right, LeBron ball is a bad idea… that's why a team relying heavily on LeBron pounding the ball will never win 2 championships in a row, or make 5 finals in a row.

Btw, this notion that the Jordan Bulls were an "equal opportunity offense" has always been more spin by Phil Jackson than an actual reality… just watch the games, it's the Jordan and Pippen show. This is not to say that they didn't have a good offense… they did, but that was precisely because it was designed to let Jordan shine doing what he does best - scoring from his comfortable spots.

Similarly, a good offense for a LeBron team would not seek to equalize opportunities between LeBron and teammates, but instead to put LeBron in the best situation to be LeBron, and let the team benefit from that.

(And as for the Spurs example, few remember that the Spurs used to win championships by playing Duncan ball…)

[knicksman]

[QUOTE=BoutPractice]Yeah, the Cavs definitely would've beaten a historically good team by giving LeBron equal opportunities with the likes of Matthew Dellavedova and Iman Shumpert, who struggled to even dribble the ball and shot 27% from the field combined

[BoutPractice]

If Big 3 era Boston was "better" than Big 3 era Miami, why did they win only 1 title and make 2 finals when Miami won 2 titles and made 4 finals?

And if the "stacked deck" is what made the difference, why is it that LeBron and the HOF teammates that supposedly gifted him his championships were mercilessly destroyed by San Antonio in 2014, yet LeBron and a collection of bench players managed to make the series much more competitive facing what arguably was an even better team?

[AirFederer]

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

[sdot_thadon]

MJ embracing the triangle in '91 was a career-changer for him. His movement and decision making on the court pretty much became the model of efficiency from that point on. Bulls from 1985-1989 were a +0.8 offense, barely hovering above league average. +5.9 from 90-98('94 and '95 excluded), with a #1 ranked offense in 4 of their 6 championship seasons. Obviously, the 90's team had significantly more talent, but the '94 and '95 Bulls were just a +1 offense without MJ. Even finished below league average in 1994! So that talent, offensively anyway, wasn't that good. 90's MJ's offensive game was just that good and that portable. He could take an average offense and comfortably make it the best O in the league under the triangle. LeBron's in the same class. Miami went from a +4.2 offense in 2014(ranked #5) to -1.7 in 2015(ranked #21). Cleveland went from +3.6 in 2010(ranked #6) to -5.1 in 2011(ranked #29). Insane! 2 vastly different teams talent-wise yet LeBron managed to make 'em both elite on offense. LeBron's game is more portable than people give him credit for. And his ability to elevate an offense with mediocre talent is probably second to none in NBA history. As an overall offensive player, I'd say MJ's the only non-PG in NBA history who's more impactful.
Great post, some of the lesser known details of Mj in his early days.

[QUOTE=BoutPractice]Yeah, the Cavs definitely would've beaten a historically good team by giving LeBron equal opportunities with the likes of Matthew Dellavedova and Iman Shumpert, who struggled to even dribble the ball and shot 27% from the field combined

[LAZERUSS]

The Lebron who prevents his teams from winning...

As a rookie, he DOUBLED his team's win total.

In his 4th year, he led his team to their first ever Finals.

In his 6th and 7th seasons, he led his team to records of 66-16 (and all-time team record BTW), and 61-21.

He left after that year...and how what happened? They fell to 19-63.

He joined a 47-35 team that had been first round cannon-fodder, and immediately led them to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals.

In the course of his four years with the Heat, they went to four straight Finals, and won two of them. He also led them to a best ever team record of 66-16.

He left the Heat after that, and they plunged to a 37-45 record, and couldn't even make the playoffs in a historically weak conference.

He joins a Cavs team that had gone 33-49 the year before, and he immediately improves them to 53-29...which is deceptive, since they wnt 50-19 with him, and 3-10 without him.

He then single-handedly carries that roster, without his two best teammates, and with his best teammate in the Finals putting up a 12-4-1 .326 series...to TWO wins, and TWO very close losses, against a 67-15 Warrior team, which had just trashed the toughest conference in years, and was by far the best defensive team in the league...with a 36-13-12 Finals.

[DatAsh]

i dont think well see someone as good as him again he was a goat athlete and he went to college and there and in the pros let himself be coached


There were people saying that about Wilt, then Kareem showed up. People said it about Kareem, then we saw Jordan. Assuming basketball doesn't just end, there will be another. Population growth and huge salaries make it even more likely today than it was in Jordan's day.

[J Shuttlesworth]

The Lebron who prevents his teams from winning...

As a rookie, he DOUBLED his team's win total.

In his 4th year, he led his team to their first ever Finals.

In his 6th and 7th seasons, he led his team to records of 66-16 (and all-time team record BTW), and 61-21.

He left after that year...and how what happened? They fell to 19-63.

He joined a 47-35 team that had been first round cannon-fodder, and immediately led them to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals.

In the course of his four years with the Heat, they went to four straight Finals, and won two of them. He also led them to a best ever team record of 66-16.

He left the Heat after that, and they plunged to a 37-45 record, and couldn't even make the playoffs in a historically weak conference.

He joins a Cavs team that had gone 33-49 the year before, and he immediately improves them to 53-29...which is deceptive, since they wnt 50-19 with him, and 3-10 without him.

He then single-handedly carries that roster, without his two best teammates, and with his best teammate in the Finals putting up a 12-4-1 .326 series...to TWO wins, and TWO very close losses, against a 67-15 Warrior team, which had just trashed the toughest conference in years, and was by far the best defensive team in the league...with a 36-13-12 Finals.
Laz:rockon:

[CTbasketball92]

I'm not ignoring this fact - i'm FOCUSING on it - i'm saying Lebron handling the ball that much is a flaw in his game - he DOESN'T have to handle the ball that much to get 35 ppg - he can get 35 ppg playing off-ball like MJ (seen in gif above)..

If Lebron could average 32/6/6/50% for his career playing off-ball in a system like the Spurs, he'd never lose in the Finals just like MJ...... (or 41/9/6/51% on high volume to keep up with an opponent's juggernaut offense.. see 93' Finals).. But he can't, and that's why Jordan is way better.. Jordan COULD get elite stats in an equal opportunity offense and have good efficiency at high volume, while Lebron cannot do either of these things.

When you have a MJ leading the league in scoring by getting his points like the GIF above (off-ball) - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES the playmaking capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's off-ball game and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42



Not shooting 39% - but if Lebron shot 50% at that shot volume (33 fga), the Cavs would've won.. But we should've known beforehand that he wasn't capable of good efficiency at high shot volume, since he's horrible at the additional midrange and isolations required of high volume shooting.. You can't get 33 fga on all 3-and-D (or even 27 fga, his 2015 playoff average).

Of course, there's no danger in letting Lebron shoot 39%, so Lebron's inability to have good efficiency at high volume allowed the Warriors to permit his secluded 1-on-1 clearouts on the strongside all series long.

Lebron's lack of midrange ability didn't just prevent him from good efficiency at high volumes and subsequent double-teams, but it prevents him from being as good in the 80's, when midrange was the primary option remaining in the absence of the 3-pointers necessary to make screen-roll/drive-and-kick mathematically worthwhile.
.


My point is that LeBron can and has won with his style of play, so its a moot point. My other point is that if Dwade and Bosh did what they were supposed to do in the finals, they had a chance against the spurs. They didn't. You put Kyrie (someone who can shoot and is unguardable) w. lebron last year, they might win.

LeBron could NOT let delly and shumpert handle tha ball, they are awful at that. Because of this, LeBron did have to hold onto the ball: he was the first, second and third option, while running the offense as the only perimeter threat.

MJ was a better scorer at a high volume (nd in general) but when he was a high volume scorer on bad teams, his teams were not legit threats. 90-93 he had his whole team. Can we say LeBron wouldn't have beat the magic or or trailblazers or phoenix? Who in the 90s (besides pippen, jordan) is guarding a 2013 LeBron? Who has the size coordination and outright athleticism to do so??

Jordan can fit into a team better than LeBron can, BUT, LeBron is so versatile and so good that any eastern conference team he's going to is definitely going to the finals. DOesn't matter who else is on the team, he can do it. I'm not sure MJ could do that. Basically, I'm not sure MJ wins more than two games against the warriors either ...

ALl of MJ's championship teams have been better than bron's cept' 11, so its not a fair comparison. You take away pippen, grant theres no way the bulls beat the magic. Take away rodman, pippen they are not winnig three str8 in the mid 90s. That's what you have to compare lebron's situation to for this finalss.

[stalkerforlife]

3Ball is building a thesis of Jordanology. You uneducated bofoons just don't see it. Step by step he is testing hypothesis against peer review, gradually arriving at a comprehensive 'theory' backed by scientific facts. When you attack him, you strengthen his argument, forcing him to further refine his argument, backing it up with more fact.

You are doing the work for him, it would be best if you just didn't respond but its too late, damage has been done.

:applause:

[3ball]

The last 7 years LeBron's teams have been:
4th
6th
3rd
8th
2nd
5th
3rd

in ORTG (Pts/100 poss)

So saying he doesn't contribut offensively is just a stupid position to take. But when you look at LBJ's on/off splits you can REALLY see his offensive contributions. Here are the differences in the team with LeBron on the floor offensively vs LeBron off the floor over that same time period:

+12.3pts/100
+8.9pts/100
+11.9pts/100
+12.4pts/100
+4.6pts/100
+15.3pts/100
+13.0pts/100

If you think "LeBron Ball" is inefficient or somehow less than the alternative you don't have the first idea what you are talking about.


Lots of players have great on-off stats and team ORtg.. That means nothing - look at Steve Nash, CP3, etc.

On-off stats and team ORtg doesn't explain why Lebron's teams have been upset by teams with equal or worse talent, just like fellow ball-dominators Nash and CP3 have - all the ball-dominators underachieve.. Unfortunately, your on-off stats and team ORtg's don't explain why.. :confusedshrug:

But I'll tell you why these guys underachieve and lose to teams with equal or worse talent - Their ball-dominant style prevents their teams from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Since their teams can't play an optimal brand of basketball, that leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit.

Get it?

Lebron was upset by equal or less talented teams in 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals - in those series, Lebron's opponent overcame a stalemate or disdvantage in talent by playing a vastly superior brand of basketball.. This never happened to MJ's teams - his teams played an optimal, equal opportunity brand of basketball, so less-talented opponents couldn't upset MJ's teams by playing a superior brand of basketball.
.

[jlip]

The funniest thing about 3ball's criticism of "Lebron ball" using the phrase "equal opportunity offense" is that these were the express words out of MJ's mouth as he initially rejected the triangle. When Phil and Tex tried to get Jordan to abandon "MJ ball" he fought it by referring to the triangle as an "equal opportunity offense. (https://books.google.com/books?id=zilYagKLBM0C&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=%22Jordan+had+spit+out+the+words+%22equal-+opportunity-+offense%22&source=bl&ots=hUAoGSXWbc&sig=NTUW0Q-YXvdQjCpfwJwBPLwmpF4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAGoVChMIlJjpr9zOxwIVwo4NCh2qeg3M#v=on epage&q=%22Jordan%20had%20spit%20out%20the%20words%20%22 equal-%20opportunity-%20offense%22&f=false)"

[jayfan]

Having read nothing more than the thread title, I agree.





.

[3ball]

LeBron could NOT let delly and shumpert handle tha ball, they are awful at that.


This is what I'm talking about - your statement above is easily proven false - Shumpert and Delly are just as good as Patty Mills and Shaun Livingston - yet Mills and Livingston get to handle the rock and make decisions in an equal-opportunity offense (multiple-playmaker team), which makes their team harder to stop than Lebron's 1-playmaker team.

The most pathetic thing about Lebron fans is that if Livingston or Mills played with Lebron, you'd think they sucked and that Lebron needed to make all the decisions for them - Lebron fans don't even know their own player - they don't realize that Lebron's style turns capable role players into tricks just waiting for Lebron to toss them dime.

But on the Spurs or Warriors, guys like Mills, Diaw, Barnes or Livingston aren't waiting around for Duncan to toss them a dime - they play in equal-opportunity offenses and get to partake in the playmaking themselves, which makes their team much tougher.. But keep thinking Lebron HAS TO do all the ballhandling - you'll never understand the game.





MJ was a better scorer at a high volume (nd in general) but when he was a high volume scorer on bad teams, his teams were not legit threats.


MJ's teams never underachieved - he never lost to teams with equal or worse talent - EVER..

Also, he took 33 fga in 1993 Finals just like Lebron this year.. The 1993 Finals were razor-thin close series, where both teams remarkably averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ORtg... But MJ shot 51% instead of Lebron's 39%, so MJ's Bulls were able to squeak by, just like the Cavs would've this year if Lebron shot 51% too.. There's no excuse - Lebron got more secluded 1-on-1 in the 2015 Finals than any player in history.

MJ's off-ball game and resulting high assisted rate maximizes the playmaking capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's off-ball game and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42





Jordan can fit into a team better than LeBron can, BUT, LeBron is so versatile and so good


Lebron is not versatile - he's only elite as the primary ballhandler - he's not elite in any other areas like midrange, off-ball, post or isolations.. So if his team needs him to put up big numbers by doing these things, he CAN'T - he can only put up big numbers as the primary ballhandler, which hampers chemistry.

Otoh, MJ was elite in all these areas - he could put up big numbers from midrange, off-ball, post or isolations, and he was ALSO elite as a primary ballhandler, better than Lebron:

The one time MJ got to dominate the ball like a PG (for 24 games at the end of 1989 season), his 30/9/11 averages and stretch of 10 triple-doubles in 11 games is better than anything Lebron has done in his entire CAREER as a ball-dominator.

Lebron's need to dominate the ball is what this whole thread is about.. Lebron's ball-dominance prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity) - since Lebron's teams can't play an optimal brand of basketball, that leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who make up the talent disadvantage by playing a superior brand of basketball.





Lebron could be put on ANY eastern conference team and they go to Finals


Horseshit - Lebron only had to carry the Cavs starting halfway through the playoffs - Love and Kyrie were healthy all regular season.. Yet the Cavs started out 9-8 and were struggling until the Mosgov trade gave them an additional windfall of talent..

If Lebron had to carry the Cavs without Love or Kyrie the whole year, the Cavs wouldn't have been shit this year.. Again, they weren't shit WITH Love and Kyrie until the Mosgov trade turned everything around.





Take away rodman, pippen they are not winnig three str8 in the mid 90s. That's what you have to compare lebron's situation to for this finalss.


You're overrating the Warriors - Lebron shot 39% and won 2 games... If he shoots 50%, they win.. But we should've known beforehand that he wasn't capable of good efficiency at high shot volume, since he's horrible at the additional midrange and isolations required of high volume shooting.. You can't get 27 fga on all 3-and-D..

Of course, there's no danger in letting Lebron shoot 39%, so Lebron's inability to have good efficiency at high volume allowed the Warriors to permit his secluded 1-on-1 clearouts on the strongside all series long.

Lebron's lack of midrange ability didn't just prevent him from good efficiency at high volumes and subsequent double-teams, but it prevents him from being as good in the 80's, when midrange was the primary option remaining in the absence of the 3-pointers necessary to make screen-roll/drive-and-kick mathematically worthwhile.
.

[ralph_i_el]

This sounds like what was said about MJ before he got the GOAT coach and a top-50 all time player as point forward.

[Stu Jackson]

3ball is right about this

you people who disagree are sissies

[ralph_i_el]

MJ's teams never underachieved - he never lost to teams with equal or worse talent - EVER.




The one time MJ got to dominate the ball like a PG (for 24 games at the end of 1989 season), his 30/9/11 averages and stretch of 10 triple-doubles in 11 games is better than anything Lebron has done in his entire CAREER as a ball-dominator.





Horseshit - Lebron only had to carry the Cavs starting halfway through the playoffs - Love and Kyrie were healthy all regular season.. Yet the Cavs started out 9-8 and were struggling until the Mosgov trade gave them an additional windfall of talent..

If Lebron had to carry the Cavs without Love or Kyrie the whole year, the Cavs wouldn't have been shit this year.. Again, they weren't shit WITH Love and Kyrie until the Mosgov trade turned everything around.



You're overrating the Warriors -

1.MJ lost to Shaq's Magic
2. LeBron had a stretch where he straight up played point guard and put up just as good stats, but his team was actually winning 80% of the games....as opposed to that MJ stretch at PG where his team only played ~.500 ball. Maybe MJ as primary ball handler is there real sub-optimal strategy :confusedshrug:

3. It makes sense that 3 guys who haven't played together would struggle for a bit. Especially playing without an actual center until they got Mozgov (who is just an average starting center, but he was such an improvement over no center at all)

4. The warriors had a historically great season. No team has had a 10 point regular season scoring differential and NOT won a ring. They were the heavy favorites. I predicted a sweep after Love went down.

5. Without LeBron on the floor his supporting cast hit nothing....literally nothing....I'm talking sub 20% shooting.


I love how you judge LeBron's entire skill set by one playoff run. He's put up playoff runs of 40%+ shooting in the midrange multiple times. He's shot well from deep for years. He led the league in PPP from the post just a couple seasons ago.

[Stu Jackson]

1.MJ lost to Shaq's Magic
2. LeBron had a stretch where he straight up played point guard and put up just as good stats, but his team was actually winning 80% of the games....as opposed to that MJ stretch at PG where his team only played ~.500 ball. Maybe MJ as primary ball handler is there real sub-optimal strategy :confusedshrug:

3. It makes sense that 3 guys who haven't played together would struggle for a bit. Especially playing without an actual center until they got Mozgov (who is just an average starting center, but he was such an improvement over no center at all)

4. The warriors had a historically great season. No team has had a 10 point regular season scoring differential and NOT won a ring. They were the heavy favorites. I predicted a sweep after Love went down.

5. Without LeBron on the floor his supporting cast his nothing....literally nothing....I'm talking sub 20% shooting.
you are a sissy 3ball is right

listen to him and warriorfan

[ralph_i_el]

you are a sissy 3ball is right

listen to him and warriorfan

You've convinced me almighty and powerful Stu Jackson :bowdown:

3ball on his knees/
With the GOAT/
Down his throat/
If he had a choice, he'd toss his mom off a lifeboat/
Before MJ/
Copy-paste all day/
Walls of text/
But next to nothing to say

B-b-b-bars bitches

[sdot_thadon]

The funniest thing about 3ball's criticism of "Lebron ball" using the phrase "equal opportunity offense" is that these were the express words out of MJ's mouth as he initially rejected the triangle. When Phil and Tex tried to get Jordan to abandon "MJ ball" he fought it by referring to the triangle as an "equal opportunity offense. (https://books.google.com/books?id=zilYagKLBM0C&pg=PA53&lpg=PA53&dq=%22Jordan+had+spit+out+the+words+%22equal-+opportunity-+offense%22&source=bl&ots=hUAoGSXWbc&sig=NTUW0Q-YXvdQjCpfwJwBPLwmpF4&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAGoVChMIlJjpr9zOxwIVwo4NCh2qeg3M#v=on epage&q=%22Jordan%20had%20spit%20out%20the%20words%20%22 equal-%20opportunity-%20offense%22&f=false)"
Yeah, that's what I was getting at in my earlier post.:applause:

[QUOTE=sam smith]Jordan had spit out the words

[3ball]

This sounds ie what was said about MJ before he got the GOAT coach and a top-50 all time player as point forward.


Lebron's teams have been upset by teams of equal or lesser talent... But Jordan's NEVER were.. Ever.. That's the difference.

Even when Doug Collins was the coach, MJ's teams never underachieved.. In 1989 playoffs, the 6-seeded Bulls were severe underdogs in EVERY SINGLE SERIES, including the first round, where MJ hit the shot - they ended up making ECF and going 6 games with champion Pistons.. Here's Sam Smith talking about how MJ guaranteed victory to all the media members that counted him out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=17m29s

Again, MJ's teams never underachieved.. That's the difference

[ralph_i_el]

Lebron's teams have been upset by teams of equal or lesser talent... But Jordan's NEVER were.. Ever.. That's the difference.

Even when Doug Collins was the coach, MJ's teams never underachieved.. In 1989 playoffs, the 6-seeded Bulls were severe underdogs in EVERY SINGLE SERIES, including the first round, where MJ hit the shot - they ended up making ECF and going 6 games with champion Pistons.. Here's Sam Smith talking about how MJ guaranteed victory to all the media members that counted him out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=17m29s

Again, MJ's teams never underachieved.. That's the difference
Oh, so you're just saying that 22 year old Shaq+ young Penny > Prime MJ and Pippen in terms of talent? Makes sense

[HurricaneKid]

The premise of this thread is so fundamentally idiotic it hurts. And those that would agree are transparent haters.

The last 7 years LeBron's teams have been:
4th
6th
3rd
8th
2nd
5th
3rd

in ORTG (Pts/100 poss)

So saying he doesn't contribut offensively is just a stupid position to take. But when you look at LBJ's on/off splits you can REALLY see his offensive contributions. Here are the differences in the team with LeBron on the floor offensively vs LeBron off the floor over that same time period:

+12.3pts/100
+8.9pts/100
+11.9pts/100
+12.4pts/100
+4.6pts/100
+15.3pts/100
+13.0pts/100

If you think "LeBron Ball" is inefficient or somehow less than the alternative you don't have the first idea what you are talking about.

[3ball]

1.MJ lost to Shaq's Magic


If this is your big knock on MJ - that he came back with 17 games left in the season after a 1.5 year layoff, and lost with a 100% new roster where every single player was different (except Pippen) - then your argument is incredibly weak.

In his first full season back, he led the league in scoring, won regular season MVP, All-Star Game MVP, Finals MVP, and another championship.. :rolleyes:





2. LeBron had a stretch where he straight up played point guard and put up just as good stats


Lebron's stretch was only for 12 games and it came against teams that averaged 34 wins (lottery teams).

Otoh, MJ's stretch was 24 games and came against teams that averaged 45 wins (playoff teams).. Here's a list showing the wins for each team, so you don't think I'm making it up:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11636849&postcount=46





4. The warriors had a historically great season... I predicted a sweep after Love went down.


Again, you can't get past Lebron's 39% shooting - the fact that he won 2 games despite shooting 39%, shows the Cavs would've squeaked by and won if Lebron shot 50%.

This is what happened in 1993 Finals, when MJ took 33 fga - he shot 51%, which allowed the Bulls to barely squeak by - remarkably, both teams averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ORtg for the series - good thing MJ shot 51%... If he had shot 39% instead like Lebron, the Bulls get swept.. :confusedshrug:





5. Without LeBron on the floor his supporting cast hit nothing....literally nothing....I'm talking sub 20% shooting.


Every team's supporting cast plays much worse when the star player isn't on the floor.. So this is nothing to brag about.

Also, the very point of this thread is to explain why his teammates and the team underperforms.. The reality is that Lebron's role players are the same caliber as any other team - guys like JR Smith, Mosgov, Tristan Thompson and Shumpert are as good (even better) than the role players on other teams.. However, Lebron's low-assisted, pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow his teams to run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses.. This is why the story is always how Lebron's supporting cast underperformed AGAIN.

Multiple playmaker team > 1-playmaker team... MJ's game allowed a multiple-playmaker team - his off-ball, high-assisted game was a reservoir of assist opportunities for teammates, which maximized the playmaking capacity of the team.. Otoh, Lebron's ball-dominant style doesn't allow multiple-playmaker teams, which leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit.
.

[97 bulls]

MJ embracing the triangle in '91 was a career-changer for him. His movement and decision making on the court pretty much became the model of efficiency from that point on. Bulls from 1985-1989 were a +0.8 offense, barely hovering above league average. +5.9 from 90-98('94 and '95 excluded), with a #1 ranked offense in 4 of their 6 championship seasons. Obviously, the 90's team had significantly more talent, but the '94 and '95 Bulls were just a +1 offense without MJ. Even finished below league average in 1994! So that talent, offensively anyway, wasn't that good. 90's MJ's offensive game was just that good and that portable. He could take an average offense and comfortably make it the best O in the league under the triangle. LeBron's in the same class. Miami went from a +4.2 offense in 2014(ranked #5) to -1.7 in 2015(ranked #21). Cleveland went from +3.6 in 2010(ranked #6) to -5.1 in 2011(ranked #29). Insane! 2 vastly different teams talent-wise yet LeBron managed to make 'em both elite on offense. LeBron's game is more portable than people give him credit for. And his ability to elevate an offense with mediocre talent is probably second to none in NBA history. As an overall offensive player, I'd say MJ's the only non-PG in NBA history who's more impactful.
This shows the difference in teammates. The major aspect that you're missing is that the Bulls never replaced Jordan in 94 with a competent SG. Granted they got Kukoc, but he was a rookie and playing in a different style of basketball. In 95, they didnt do a good job replacing Grant. The Cavs and Heat did.

[97 bulls]

I do understand 3balls point. The difference is, at one point Jordan played the same way James does now. He had to learn to play a team game.

They beat the Thunder because Scott Brooks is an idiot and also runs an iso offense. The Spurs beat themselves more than the Heat beat them the following year. And James deserves a pass for this past season. Although if he plays more of a team game, the series is probably a lot closer. The Cavs players didnt play that bad. Even stepped up to be honest.

[Young X]

Lots of players have great on-off stats and team ORtg.. That means nothing - look at Steve Nash, CP3, etc.

On-off stats and team ORtg doesn't explain why Lebron's teams have been upset by teams with equal or worse talent, just like fellow ball-dominators Nash and CP3 have - all the ball-dominators underachieve.. Unfortunately, your on-off stats and team ORtg's don't explain why.. :confusedshrug:

But I'll tell you why these guys underachieve and lose to teams with equal or worse talent - Their ball-dominant style prevents their teams from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Since their teams can't play an optimal brand of basketball, that leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit.

Get it?

Lebron was upset by equal or less talented teams in 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals - in those series, Lebron's opponent overcame a stalemate or disdvantage in talent by playing a vastly superior brand of basketball.. This never happened to MJ's teams - his teams played an optimal, equal opportunity brand of basketball, so less-talented opponents couldn't upset MJ's teams by playing a superior brand of basketball.You don't know what you're talking about.

Nash and CP3's teams "underachieve" because of defense. Offensively their teams have great results but lose because of their teams lack rebounding and defense, especially those Suns teams.

You can't win a championship without consistent defense, that's what you idiots don't understand, it's not just about offense.

Miami shot the ball very well in 2014 against the Spurs, but lost because they couldn't stop the Spurs' ridiculous offense. Cleveland lost to Orlando in 2009 because they couldn't stop Dwight, not because of Lebron you fool.

[ralph_i_el]

If this is your big knock on MJ - that he came back with 17 games left in the season after a 1.5 year layoff, and lost with a 100% new roster where every single player was different (except Pippen) - then your argument is incredibly weak.

In his first full season back, he led the league in scoring, won regular season MVP, All-Star Game MVP, Finals MVP, and another championship.. :rolleyes:



Lebron's stretch was only for 12 games and it came against teams that averaged 34 wins (lottery teams).

Otoh, MJ's stretch was 24 games and came against teams that averaged 45 wins (playoff teams).. Here's a list showing the wins for each team, so you don't think I'm making it up:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11636849&postcount=46



Again, you can't get past Lebron's 39% shooting - the fact that he won 2 games despite shooting 39%, shows the Cavs would've squeaked by and won if Lebron shot 50%.

This is what happened in 1993 Finals, when MJ took 33 fga - he shot 51%, which allowed the Bulls to barely squeak by - remarkably, both teams averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ORtg for the series - good thing MJ shot 51%... If he had shot 39% instead like Lebron, the Bulls get swept.. :confusedshrug:



Every team's supporting cast plays much worse when the star player isn't on the floor.. So this is nothing to brag about.

Also, the very point of this thread is to explain why his teammates and the team underperforms.. The reality is that Lebron's role players are the same caliber as any other team - guys like JR Smith, Mosgov, Tristan Thompson and Shumpert are as good (even better) than the role players on other teams.. However, Lebron's low-assisted, pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow his teams to run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses.. This is why the story is always how Lebron's supporting cast underperformed AGAIN.

Multiple playmaker team > 1-playmaker team... MJ's game allowed a multiple-playmaker team - his off-ball, high-assisted game was a reservoir of assist opportunities for teammates, which maximized the playmaking capacity of the team.. Otoh, Lebron's ball-dominant style doesn't allow multiple-playmaker teams, which leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit.
.


JR Smith and Shumpert were given away for next to nothing by one of the worst teams in the league. Mosgov is decent. Thompson is solely a rebounder. They collectively played like ass (not debatable). JR Smith is not a good player. He's like Nick Young. He looks and shoots like an NBA player, but he's actually awful because he's a idiot. Dellavedova shot well under 40% inside the arc during the regular season and the playoffs. They're resigning him for a $1.2m

The team was absolutely decimated in terms of talent when they got to the finals. When I watched, I clearly saw that their strategy was to try and slow the game down, keep the warriors out of transition, and to win close, low scoring games. This is what happened in their two wins.

IN ORDER TO DO THIS LeBron went 1-on-1 a lot with the other team keyed up and ready for him. This obviously isn't the best part of his game, but he's by no means bad at it. He just had to do it against the leagues best defense, with no shooters on the floor with him. It worked in 2 games because Thompson is such an excellent offensive rebounder, so LeBron could afford to run down the clock and get bailed out a few times with boards.

but that's just what I saw :confusedshrug:

In a situation like this, I'd rather have Kobe than LeBron. More suited to going one man army

[ralph_i_el]

I do understand 3balls point. The difference is, at one point Jordan played the same way James does now. He had to learn to play a team game.

They beat the Thunder because Scott Brooks is an idiot and also runs an iso offense. The Spurs beat themselves more than the Heat beat them the following year. And James deserves a pass for this past season. Although if he plays more of a team game, the series is probably a lot closer. The Cavs players didnt play that bad. Even stepped up to be honest.

They shot a collective 37% outside of LeBron

[tmacattack33]

Lebron lead Miami to the Finals 4 straights years, won 2 of them (and 1 of those runs was largely without Chris Bosh in 2012), and lead Cleveland to the Finals two times in which he was surrounded by role players.

I think it's safe to say the way this guy plays basketball leads to a lot of success, even when his supporting cast is not that good.

[97 bulls]

They shot a collective 37% outside of LeBron
Stats can be misleading. They had very good games and bad ones

[knicksman]

If Big 3 era Boston was "better" than Big 3 era Miami, why did they win only 1 title and make 2 finals when Miami won 2 titles and made 4 finals?

And if the "stacked deck" is what made the difference, why is it that LeBron and the HOF teammates that supposedly gifted him his championships were mercilessly destroyed by San Antonio in 2014, yet LeBron and a collection of bench players managed to make the series much more competitive facing what arguably was an even better team?

Boston won more than miami in their first season and a championship. And they are much better the next season until garnett got injured. And we all knew that the refs gave it to lakers in their 3rd season while stern was on a mission to give bran his 1st ring in 2012, thus giving him confidence. Had boston big 3 formed on the same age as miami, they definitely wouldve won at least 2. Meanwhile miami got destroyed in 2014 despite being younger than 2008 boston

[3ball]

Miami lost in 2014 Finals because they couldn't stop the Spurs' ridiculous offense.


So why did the Mavericks 22nd ranked defense hold the Spurs in check and almost beat them, but the Heat's 11th ranked defense couldn't?.. Why didn't the Spurs go nearly as crazy against Portland, who also had a worse-ranked defense than the Heat?

So it's not as simple as "the Heat just didn't play defense"... The notion that they were just a bad defensive team is factually incorrect, just based on stats.

The reality is the Heat's historic margin isn't reflective of the equal talent that existed on both teams - since there was no talent disparity, the margin of loss can only be explained by the Heat's inferior chemistry and brand of basketball... The Heat were just a bad team - they would've lost to virtually EVERY Spurs opponent that year (Dallas, Portland, OKC) - all these teams did much better against the Spurs than the Heat's historic blowout.





Cleveland lost to Orlando in 2009 because they couldn't stop Dwight, not because of Lebron you fool.


Actually, Cleveland was the #3 ranked defensive team that year.. You can't say they weren't a good defensive team.

The reality is that Orlando couldn't stop Lebron even MORE... But as usual, Lebron's ball-dominance and the resulting inferior brand of basketball doomed his team's chances of winning, thus rendered his gaudy stats empty as ****.





Nash and CP3's teams "underachieve" because of defense.


CP3's teams had plenty of defense - his teams had a top 10 defense most years of his career.. He has no excuse - he has a long list of noteworthy playoff failures.. He's the quintessential example that best demonstrates the how ball-dominance leads to a less equal-opportunity offense and a team that doesn't operate at capacity or reach it's ceiling (unlike the Spurs and Warriors, who run equal-opportunity offenses and consequently reach their ceiling/capacity).

As for Nash - his teams haven't had any defense, but that's his fault - his teams CAN'T play defense because their primary objective is to have the fastest pace and score in "7 seconds or less"... So Nash's "7 seconds or less" style prevents his teams from playing a good brand of basketball, which opens the door for opponents to play a BETTER brand to overcome any talent disadvantage or stalemate - and this is exactly what happens - other teams with equal or worse talent win by playing a better brand of basketball (more half-court, and more equal-opportunity).

Btw, these guys get stuffed down the stretch of games in the playoffs - we've seen it time and time again.. Down the stretch of playoff games, the opponent dials in defensively on the only guy that's making plays (nash and cp3) and shuts down these guys' basic offensive attack - they don't get stuffed EVERY game - but just a game or two and that's enough to win the series.. You have to WIN that crucial game in the series, you can't be getting stuffed and solved in it.

[knicksman]

Lebron lead Miami to the Finals 4 straights years, won 2 of them (and 1 of those runs was largely without Chris Bosh in 2012), and lead Cleveland to the Finals two times in which he was surrounded by role players.

I think it's safe to say the way this guy plays basketball leads to a lot of success, even when his supporting cast is not that good.

Bran treats role players and all stars the same. Thats why jordan/kobe w/ role players<bran w/ role players but kobe/jordan w/ allstar>bran w/ all star. Kobe or jordan only needed gasol/pippen to win at least 2 rings while bran struggled with wade+bosh

[97 bulls]

Bran treats role players and all stars the same. Thats why jordan/kobe w/ role players<bran w/ role players but kobe/jordan w/ allstar>bran w/ all star. Kobe or jordan only needed gasol/pippen to win at least 2 rings while bran struggled with wade+bosh
Rodman and Grant for the Bulls and Odom for the Lakers contributed mightly.

[3ball]

Grant contributed mightly.


Grant didn't contribute "mightily" like HOF 3rd options Robert Parish, James Worthy, Manu Ginobili or 10-time all-star Chris Bosh.

Grant was just an 11/8 player - those were his averages during the championship years and for his entire career... He didn't contribute "mightily".. He was easily replaceable - any 11/8 power forward that played decent defense would do.

Horace says it himself - without MJ, we'd never have heard of his 11/8 ass:


"If it wasn't for MJ, I don't think I'd be sitting here right now. Not saying I wouldn't have had a decent career, but for a leader to lead you to 3 championships...."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_aYOQVWSCY&t=14m44s





Rodman contributed mightily


Rodman only contributed significantly in the 1996 playoffs.. That was his last good year... He was 36 years old when the Bulls won championship in 1998 and only averaged 4 ppg and 8 rpg in those Finals.. 4/8 were also his averages for the entire 1997 playoffs too.. So he was MIA for 2 of 3 playoff runs alongside MJ.

For the Bulls championship runs, the only guys that contributed "mightily" were Pippen and MJ for the 1st three peat, and just MJ for the 2nd three-peat (although Rodman played well in 1996 playoffs).

For the 2nd three-peat (1996-1998 playoffs), Pippen averaged 17/7/5 on 40.8%, including 15 ppg on 35% fg in the 1996 Finals and 15 ppg on 41% in the 1998 Finals.. So he didn't contribute "mightily" with those numbers.
.

[3ball]

The Lebron who prevents his teams from winning...


You misread the OP - it said Lebron's style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Since Lebron's teams can't play an optimal brand of basketball, that leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit.

Get it?

Lebron was upset by equal or less talented teams in 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals - in those series, Lebron's opponent overcame a stalemate or disdvantage in talent by playing a vastly superior brand of basketball.. This never happened to MJ's teams - his teams played an optimal, equal opportunity brand of basketball, so less-talented opponents couldn't upset MJ's teams by playing a superior brand of basketball.





As a rookie, he DOUBLED his team's win total.


Lebron's rookie year (2004) was the last year of the old rules where hand-checking and paint-camping was still allowed - he sucked under these rules - he was worse than 40-year old MJ under the old rules:

40-year old MJ in 2003: 19.3 PER.. 44.5% fg.. 49.1% ts
Rookie Lebron in 2004:. 18.3 PER.. 41.7% fg.. 48.8% ts

Also, Lebron missed the playoffs as a rookie even though he played with a top 24 player (all-star) in Zydrunas Illgauskas (17/9 and 2.1 blk).. MJ never played with a top 24 player (all-star) until his 6th year in the league, yet he never missed the playoffs.





In his 4th year (2007), he led his team to their first ever Finals.


In 2007, the 22-year old Lebron didn't have to face a championship team and #1 defense until the Finals, due to weak competition in the Eastern Conference.. Obviously, if he had faced the Spurs in the 1st round, he would've been swept in the first round instead of the Finals..

Otoh, the 22-year-old MJ had to face a championship team and #1 defense in the FIRST ROUND (1986 Celtics), due to superior competition in the Eastern Conference.. Here are both players' performance against championship teams and #1 defenses at 22 years old:

Jordan vs. 1986 Celtics: 44/6/6 on 51%
Lebron vs. 2007 Spurs:. 22/7/6 on 35%





In his 6th and 7th seasons, he led his team to records of 66-16 (and all-time team record BTW), and 61-21.


He had the #1 seed and was upset both years!!!... He lost to the Magic in the 2nd Round in 2009, and quit against the old, post-garnett injury Celtics in 2010!!..

This is exactly what the OP talks about - Lebron's teams play an inferior brand of basketball, which leaves him open to being upset by less talented teams that play a superior brand of basketball.

2009 and 2010 are not seasons to brag about for Lebron - we know for a fact he had a much better supporting cast on those teams than MJ did in 1989:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11647538&postcount=15





He left after that year...and how what happened? They fell to 19-63.


In 2011, the cavs didn't just lose lebron - they lost mo Williams, shaq, delonte, zydrunas, and varejao.

It's like you're autistic - you keep repeating the same lie that the cavs collapsed without lebron - that's factually incorrect - the cavs collapsed without lebron, shaq, mo Williams, zydrunas, delonte, and varejao.





He joined a 47-35 team that had been first round cannon-fodder, and immediately led them to a 58-24 record, and a trip to the Finals.


How could ANYONE brag about joining up with prime Wade and Bosh, but only winning a paltry 11 more games and having the biggest choke in sports history in the Finals???

It's mind-boggling how anyone could brag about colluding to go 2/4 - he underachieved with the Heat - he had three HOF's (Wade/Bosh/Allen) and couldn't 3-peat... Otoh, Jordan 3-peated with just 1 HOF.





Lebron led the 2015 Cavs to TWO wins, and TWO very close losses, against a 67-15 Warrior team


He had zero chance of winning shooting 39%... However, if Lebron shot 50% at that shot volume (33 fga), the Cavs would've won.. But we should've known beforehand that he wasn't capable of good efficiency at high shot volume, since he's horrible at the additional midrange and isolations required of high volume shooting.. You can't get 33 fga on all 3-and-D (or even 27 fga, his 2015 playoff average).

Of course, there's no danger in letting Lebron shoot 39%, so Lebron's inability to have good efficiency at high volume allowed the Warriors to permit his secluded 1-on-1 clearouts on the strongside all series long.

Lebron's lack of midrange ability didn't just prevent him from good efficiency at high volumes and subsequent double-teams, but it prevents him from being as good in the 80's, when midrange was the primary option remaining in the absence of the 3-pointers necessary to make screen-roll/drive-and-kick mathematically worthwhile.
.

[sdot_thadon]

I see you won't touch Jordan's "suboptimal" roots 3ball, why is that? It's part of your shtick.

[Young X]

So why did the Mavericks 22nd ranked defense hold the Spurs in check and almost beat them, but the Heat's 11th ranked defense couldn't?.. Why didn't the Spurs go nearly as crazy against Portland, who also had a worse-ranked defense than the Heat?

So it's not as simple as "the Heat just didn't play defense"... The notion that they were just a bad defensive team is factually incorrect, just based on stats.

The reality is the Heat's historic margin isn't reflective of the equal talent that existed on both teams - since there was no talent disparity, the margin of loss can only be explained by the Heat's inferior chemistry and brand of basketball... The Heat were just a bad team - they would've lost to virtually EVERY Spurs opponent that year (Dallas, Portland, OKC) - all these teams did much better against the Spurs than the Heat's historic blowout.I didn't say Miami was a bad defensive team. I said they couldn't stop SA's ridiculous offense which is exactly what happened in the last 3 games of the series. Spurs shot over 60 eFG% in those games. Are you gonna blame that on Lebron's style of play?


Actually, Cleveland was the #3 ranked defensive team that year.. You can't say they weren't a good defensive team.

The reality is that Orlando couldn't stop Lebron even MORE... But as usual, Lebron's ball-dominance and the resulting inferior brand of basketball doomed his team's chances of winning, thus rendered his gaudy stats empty as ****Once again, I didn't say they weren't a good defensive team. I said they couldn't stop Dwight Howard who averaged nearly 26/13 on 69 TS%. That has nothing to do with Lebron's offense.


Btw, these guys get stuffed down the stretch of games in the playoffs - we've seen it time and time again.. Down the stretch of playoff games, the opponent dials in defensively on the only guy that's making plays (nash and cp3) and shuts down these guys' basic offensive attack - they don't get stuffed EVERY game - but just a game or two and that's enough to win the series.. You have to WIN that crucial game in the series, you can't be getting stuffed and solved in it.

'14 & '15 CP3 playoff on court ORtg: 114.0

'05-'07 Nash playoff on court ORtg: 116.4

Their teams seem to play extremely well on offense with them in the playoffs. :confusedshrug:

[3ball]

You guys don't seem to understand that to lead the league in scoring in an equal opportunity offense, you must be elite in ALL areas, like MJ was - he was elite as the primary ballhandler, off-ball, midrange, isolation, and post.

Lebron is only elite as the primary ballhandler, so he could never be the NBA scoring leader in an equal-opportunity offense.. If Lebron played for the Spurs, he wouldn't be able to get elite stats unless Popovich abandoned his equal opportunity offense and let Lebron dominate the ball - then the Spurs would come up short and you guys would be complaining how Patty Mills and Boris Diaw are garbage..

It's a shame, because if Lebron could average 32/6/6 in an equal opportunity offense like the Spurs, he'd never lose in the Finals just like MJ... But that's the whole point - he can't get elite stats in an equal opportunity offense, because he sin's only elite as the primary ballhandler.

Primary ballhandler is the most stat-padding position on the floor... I guess that's why MJ's stats were so insane the one time he was a primary ballhandler consistently (30/9/11 in 24 games at point guard, including a stretch of 10 triple doubles in 11 games).. That's better than Lebron has ever done in an entire career as primary ballhandler.

MJ was better at Lebron's bread and butter (primary ballhandler) and obviously he was FAR better off-ball, isolations, midrange and post.. This superior versatility is why MJ had the capacity to get 32/6/6 in an equal opportunity offense, or 41/9/6/51 on high volume (33 fga), while Lebron can't do either of these things (get elite stats in an equal opportunity offense or have good efficiency at high volume, while still within an equal opportunity offense).

Here's the reality - MJ's elite stats > Lebron's elite stats because of the way they were achieved..

MJ gets 32/6/6 by being a highly-assisted, off-ball player, which maximized the team's playmaking capacity and strategic options.. Lebron gets 27/7/7 by turning a normally high-assisted position (SF) into a low-assisted position, thus minimizing his team's playmaking capacity and strategic options.

No wonder MJ's role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.
.

[Trollsmasher]

if MJ's role players never underperformed, why do you spend most of your posts bashing them for underperforming?:lol

also why is it that Jordan with his Optimal Brand (tm) never beat a more talented team playing a suboptimal brand of basketball?

Jordan never won even a single series as an underdog. No way all those teams were playing an optimal brand of basketball

[NBAplayoffs2001]

LeBron never had a coach that won 11 rings using that type of style.

[NBAplayoffs2001]

Often times in the 2nd 3 peat, I felt Scottie was the primary ballhandler full court and Jordan was half court. Probably to save MJ's energy.

[Young X]

Why didn't the Bulls didn't win in 1990 3ball?

[sdot_thadon]

Why didn't the Bulls didn't win in 1990 3ball?
He don't wanna talk about that....:no: pre 91 doesn't exist.

[guy]

if MJ's role players never underperformed, why do you spend most of your posts bashing them for underperforming?:lol

also why is it that Jordan with his Optimal Brand (tm) never beat a more talented team playing a suboptimal brand of basketball?

Jordan never won even a single series as an underdog. No way all those teams were playing an optimal brand of basketball

He won plenty of series as an underdog. Bulls were not favored against the 89 Cavs, 89 Knicks, 91 Lakers, 93 Knicks for example. It's easy to look back now and say this, but at the time he was the underdog. People forget that, just like people forget that Lebron was the favorite in 2009 and 2010. Convenient.

[Trollsmasher]

He won plenty of series as an underdog. Bulls were not favored against the 89 Cavs, 89 Knicks, 91 Lakers, 93 Knicks for example. It's easy to look back now and say this, but at the time he was the underdog. People forget that, just like people forget that Lebron was the favorite in 2009 and 2010. Convenient.
they were

check your memory again

[ralph_i_el]

Stats can be misleading. They had very good games and bad ones

They shot under 20% with LeBron off the floor. I don't care what else they were doing, because it doesn't matter when you score that abysmally. Without Kevin Love (elite scoring and rebounding off-ball player) and Kyrie (elite scorer, ball handler, and rebounder) LeBron was FORCED to try and do it all to have any chance.

It's also a FACT that the cavs on offense tried to eat as much clock as possible, due to their talent deficit. When you limit the number of possessions in a game, it makes it more likely that the less talented team can win. The only chance the cavs had at beating the warriors is by making the game as dirty and ugly as possible. Dellavadova may have a low skill level, but he's a big physical guard and he roughed up Curry a lot. Still didn't make up for having no offensive talent :confusedshrug: JR Smith couldn't shoot all series, and he can never be an effective piece unless his shot is falling. Shump was actually ok. Tristan Thompson is a big who has absolutely no range. Mozgov was OK. Who wins a championship with 2 average starters and a bunch of scrubs? NOBODY. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE.

How would MJ have looked going against the bad boy Pistons without Pippen or Grant and with a rookie head coach? His squad would have been spanked and he would have been inneficient.


I dislike LeBron, but I also dislike MJ and Kobe, so I can be REAL.about him. We were cheated out of a good finals due to injuries. Can you actually say LeBron would have shot that poorly with his point guard and stretch 4 actually playing? Kyrie played 1 game and the dude could hardly run.

[sdot_thadon]

He won plenty of series as an underdog. Bulls were not favored against the 89 Cavs, 89 Knicks, 91 Lakers, 93 Knicks for example. It's easy to look back now and say this, but at the time he was the underdog. People forget that, just like people forget that Lebron was the favorite in 2009 and 2010. Convenient.
After back to back titles they weren't favored against the Knicks in 93? Damn. Didn't know that.

[3ball]

I didn't say Miami was a bad defensive team. I said they couldn't stop SA's ridiculous offense which is exactly what happened in the last 3 games of the series. Spurs shot over 60 eFG% in those games. Are you gonna blame that on Lebron's style of play?


Again, you have no explanation for why the Mavericks far worse defense held the Spurs in check, as did Portland's worse defense.

It's not enough to say "it's not Lebron's fault because the Heat's defense was bad", because the Mavericks and Blazers' defense was verifiably worse, yet they did did just fine compared to the Heat.. I have an explanation for this phenomenon here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11659562&postcount=87) (that I don't want to clutter this response with).

The reality is the Heat were just a bad team - they would've lost to virtually EVERY Spurs opponent that year (Dallas, Portland, OKC) - all these teams did much better against the Spurs than the Heat's historic blowout.. Also, the Heat's historic margin isn't reflective of the equal talent that existed on both teams - since there was no talent disparity, the margin of loss can only be explained by the Heat's inferior chemistry and brand of basketball.





Once again, I didn't say they weren't a good defensive team. I said they couldn't stop Dwight Howard who averaged nearly 26/13. That has nothing to do with Lebron's offense.


Who cares - Orlando couldn't stop Lebron even more..

But even though both teams had equal supporting talent, Dwight's role players played better next to him than Lebron's did, because Dwight's team had better chemistry and played a superior brand of basketball - it's the same reason Lebron always loses when he has a favored team.





'14 & '15 CP3 playoff on court ORtg: 114.0

'05-'07 Nash playoff on court ORtg: 116.4


Again, lots of players have great on-off stats and team ORtg.. That doesn't explain why Nash, CP3, and Lebron's teams get upset by opponents with equal or less talent.. The reality is that all these ball-dominators get upset by teams with equal or lesser talent.. Unfortunately, your on-off stats and team ORtg's don't explain why.

But the answer is simple - the only way ANY team overcomes a talent disadvantage or talent stalemate is to play a superior brand of basketball - that's a fact.. Unfortunately, these players' ball-dominant style prevents their teams from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Since their teams can't play an optimal brand of basketball, that leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit or overcoming the talent stalemate.

Get it?

Lebron was upset by equal or less talented teams in 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals - in those series, Lebron's opponent overcame a stalemate or disdvantage in talent by playing a vastly superior brand of basketball.. This never happened to MJ's teams - his teams played an optimal, equal opportunity brand of basketball, so less-talented opponents couldn't upset MJ's teams by playing a superior brand of basketball.
.

[swagga]

Again, you have no explanation for why the Mavericks far worse defense held the Spurs in check, as did Portland's worse defense.

It's not enough to say "it's not Lebron's fault because the Heat's defense was bad", because the Mavericks and Blazers' defense was verifiably worse, yet they did did just fine compared to the Heat.. I have an explanation for this phenomenon here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11659562&postcount=87) (that I don't want to clutter this response with).

The reality is the Heat were just a bad team - they would've lost to virtually EVERY Spurs opponent that year (Dallas, Portland, OKC) - all these teams did much better against the Spurs than the Heat's historic blowout.. Also, the Heat's historic margin isn't reflective of the equal talent that existed on both teams - since there was no talent disparity, the margin of loss can only be explained by the Heat's inferior chemistry and brand of basketball.



Who cares - Orlando couldn't stop Lebron even more, but they had a better offense than the Cavs, so they won.



Again, lots of players have great on-off stats and team ORtg.. That doesn't explain why Nash, CP3, and Lebron's teams get upset by opponents with equal or less talent.. The reality is that all these ball-dominators get upset by teams with equal or lesser talent.. Unfortunately, your on-off stats and team ORtg's don't explain why.

But the answer is simple - the only way ANY team overcomes a talent disadvantage or talent stalemate is to play a superior brand of basketball - that's a fact.. Unfortunately, these players' ball-dominant style prevents their teams from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Since their teams can't play an optimal brand of basketball, that leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit or overcoming the talent stalemate.

Get it?

Lebron was upset by equal or less talented teams in 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals - in those series, Lebron's opponent overcame a stalemate or disdvantage in talent by playing a vastly superior brand of basketball.. This never happened to MJ's teams - his teams played an optimal, equal opportunity brand of basketball, so less-talented opponents couldn't upset MJ's teams by playing a superior brand of basketball.

sup MJ, could you please PM me a signed autograph.
Also, I have friend who is a hornets fan and he implores you to dedicate more time to managing the franchise instead of posting on ISH.
God bless GOAT :applause:

[ralph_i_el]

H
Again, you have no explanation for why the Mavericks far worse defense held the Spurs in check, as did Portland's worse defense.

It's not enough to say "it's not Lebron's fault because the Heat's defense was bad", because the Mavericks and Blazers' defense was verifiably worse, yet they did did just fine compared to the Heat.. I have an explanation for this phenomenon here (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11659562&postcount=87) (that I don't want to clutter this response with).

The reality is the Heat were just a bad team - they would've lost to virtually EVERY Spurs opponent that year (Dallas, Portland, OKC) - all these teams did much better against the Spurs than the Heat's historic blowout.. Also, the Heat's historic margin isn't reflective of the equal talent that existed on both teams - since there was no talent disparity, the margin of loss can only be explained by the Heat's inferior chemistry and brand of basketball.



Who cares - Orlando couldn't stop Lebron even more, but they had a better offense than the Cavs, so they won.



Again, lots of players have great on-off stats and team ORtg.. That doesn't explain why Nash, CP3, and Lebron's teams get upset by opponents with equal or less talent.. The reality is that all these ball-dominators get upset by teams with equal or lesser talent.. Unfortunately, your on-off stats and team ORtg's don't explain why.

But the answer is simple - the only way ANY team overcomes a talent disadvantage or talent stalemate is to play a superior brand of basketball - that's a fact.. Unfortunately, these players' ball-dominant style prevents their teams from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Since their teams can't play an optimal brand of basketball, that leaves them susceptible to getting upset by less talented teams who CAN play a superior brand of basketball, thereby making up the talent deficit or overcoming the talent stalemate.

Get it?

Lebron was upset by equal or less talented teams in 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals - in those series, Lebron's opponent overcame a stalemate or disdvantage in talent by playing a vastly superior brand of basketball.. This never happened to MJ's teams - his teams played an optimal, equal opportunity brand of basketball, so less-talented opponents couldn't upset MJ's teams by playing a superior brand of basketball.

So what you're saying is that basically whenever LeBron stepped on the floor in the last 3/4ths of his career, his teams had a major talent advantage.....whereas in MJ's prime he wasn't talented enough for you to say that?


3ball actually being MJ makes a lot of sense. Think about it:

-even when he's wrong, he's not unintelligent
-obsessive determination
-complete delusion

I'm sold. 3ball is MJ and he dictates his posts to hornets iterns, who copy+paste relevant MJ rants all over ISH. It explains how he can post all the time.

If I'm right, pm me. I have a business proposition.

[guy]

After back to back titles they weren't favored against the Knicks in 93? Damn. Didn't know that.

That seemed to be the general sentiment. They didn't have HCA, people thought they were gassed from so many deep playoff runs and the 92 Olympics, and that was the best Knicks team, who the year before took the Bulls to 7. They won back to back titles but remember no team had ever three-peat since the 60s Celtics. They were expected to fall at some point and the Knicks seemed to be the team with the best chance of knocking them out.

[3ball]

if MJ's role players never underperformed, why do you spend most of your posts bashing them for underperforming



Pippen was not a role player - but yeah, I bash Pippen because he often played VERY poorly - but again, he wasn't a role player.. And I've never knocked Grant's 11/8 - that's not him underperforming.. That's him being him.

MJ's role players - guys like Kerr, Paxson, Wennington - these guys never underperformed and were always lauded for their consistent play - this is a stark contrast to Lebron's underperforming role players who were MORE talented - the story was always how Battier, Chalmers and Cole played poorly - you never heard that about MJ's role players.





Jordan never won even a single series as an underdog.


What planet are you living on?

In 1989, MJ's 47-win Bulls were the 6-seed - they were severe underdogs in every single series they played, including the first round against 57-win Cleveland and their #2 defense, along with their 3 all-stars (Daughtery, Price, Nance... plus 20 ppg, pre-injury Ron Harper).

Cleveland was the heavy favorite - Sam Smith talks about how MJ guaranteed victory against all the reporters that counted the Bulls out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=17m29s






why is it that Jordan with his Optimal Brand (tm) never beat a more talented team playing a suboptimal brand of basketball?


MJ was an underdog for every series during the 1989 playoff run.. And we can statistically and intuitivelly prove that his team had less supporting help than Lebron had in 2009 and 2010.

We've already established that Lebron's supporting cast added enough help on top of his 28/8/7/49 to win 66 games in 2009, while MJ's supporting cast only added enough help to his 33/8/8/54 to win 47 games in 1989.

If you think that all 19 of the Cavs' higher win total was due to worse competition (and not better supporting cast), then consider how much better that makes MJ's playoff stats look, since they came against far better competition... Lebron's 35/9/7/51/1.6 stl playoff averages in 2009 are invalidated compared to MJ's nearly identical 35/7/7/51/2.5 stl playoff averages in 1989, due to facing vastly inferior competition..

Of course, the other alternative is that Lebron's supporting cast was better, in addition to the aforementioned weaker comp.. This of course, must be true.. Lebron's supporting cast included an all-star and a slew of higher-producing veterans, a stark contrast from MJ's young cast.. MJ's 1989 Bulls and the "Jordan Rules" that MJ faced (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=22m52s) were simply more of a 1-man team.. Therefore, the gap in RS records was due to a combination of BOTH competition level and supporting cast - the superior competition Jordan faced and 1 man show he that was is underscored by the Bulls being a 6-seed, and severe underdog in every series, compared to the Cavs being the #1 seed and favorite to make the Finals.

[ralph_i_el]

Pippen was not a role player - but yeah, I bash Pippen because he often played VERY poorly - but again, he wasn't a role player.. And I've never knocked Grant's 11/8 - that's not him underperforming.. That's him being him.

MJ's role players - guys like Kerr, Paxson, Wennington - these guys never underperformed and were always lauded for their consistent play - this is a stark contrast to Lebron's underperforming role players who were MORE talented - the story was always how Battier, Chalmers and Cole played poorly - you never heard that about MJ's role players.



What planet are you living on?

In 1989, MJ's 47-win Bulls were the 6-seed - they were severe underdogs in every single series they played, including the first round against 57-win Cleveland and their #2 defense, along with their 3 all-stars (Daughtery, Price, Nance... plus 20 ppg, pre-injury Ron Harper).

Cleveland was the heavy favorite - Sam Smith talks about how MJ guaranteed victory against all the reporters that counted the Bulls out:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=17m29s




MJ was an underdog for every series during the 1989 playoff run.. And we can statistically and intuitivelly prove that his team had less supporting help than Lebron had in 2009 and 2010.

We've already established that Lebron's supporting cast added enough help on top of his 28/8/7/49 to win 66 games in 2009, while MJ's supporting cast only added enough help to his 33/8/8/54 to win 47 games in 1989.

If you think that all 19 of the Cavs' higher win total was due to worse competition (and not better supporting cast), then consider how much better that makes MJ's playoff stats look, since they came against far better competition... Lebron's 35/9/7/51/1.6 stl playoff averages in 2009 are invalidated compared to MJ's nearly identical 35/7/7/51/2.5 stl playoff averages in 1989, due to facing vastly inferior competition..

Of course, the other alternative is that Lebron's supporting cast was better, in addition to the aforementioned weaker comp.. This of course, must be true.. Lebron's supporting cast included an all-star and a slew of higher-producing veterans, a stark contrast from MJ's young cast.. MJ's 1989 Bulls and the "Jordan Rules" that MJ faced (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIY_4vIxGEE&t=22m52s) were simply more of a 1-man team.. Therefore, the gap in RS records was due to a combination of BOTH competition level and supporting cast - the superior competition Jordan faced and 1 man show he that was is underscored by the Bulls being a 6-seed, and severe underdog in every series, compared to the Cavs being the #1 seed and favorite to make the Finals.

More already-debunked copypasta. You can't just throw out statlines and say one guy is better, especially when you adjust them for pace and LeBron's line is as good if not better.

Address the rumors that you are a team of interns who work for MJ.

[Young X]

MJ's role players - guys like Kerr, Paxson, Wennington - these guys never underperformed and were always lauded for their consistent play - this is a stark contrast to Lebron's underperforming role players who were MORE talented - the story was always how Battier, Chalmers and Cole played poorly - you never heard that about MJ's role players.
Kerr underpeformed in the '96-'98 runs.

Rodman badly underperformed in the '97 & '98 runs.

Kukoc underperformed in '96 and '97.

His entire team disappeared every year against Detroit from '88-'90.

And Pippen underperformed offensively maybe even worse than Wade did in the '96-'98 runs.

[3ball]

More already-debunked copypasta. You can't just throw out statlines and say one guy is better, especially when you adjust them for pace and LeBron's line is as good



You think Lebron's stats being equal explains 19 more wins?.. How dumb are you?

The only thing that explains 19 more wins given equal stats is worse competition and superior supporting cast.

You haven't debunked any of my points - you guys don't even address 95% of the assertions I make (while I address 95% head-on)... Debunk my ass.. More like "I can't respond, so I'll say it's debunked"





Address the rumors that you are a team of interns who work for MJ.


Of course we're a team of interns... :hammerhead:

Paid very well too... You think this genius is just from 1 dude?... :kobe: :kobe:
.

[Trollsmasher]

You think Lebron's stats being equal explains 19 more wins?.. How dumb are you?

The only thing that explains 19 more wins given equal stats is worse competition and superior supporting cast.

You haven't debunked any of my points - you guys don't even address 95% of the assertions I make (while I address 95% head-on)... Debunk my ass.. More like "I can't respond, so I'll say it's debunked"



Of course we're a team of interns... :hammerhead:

Paid very well too... You think this genius is just from 1 dude?... :kobe: :kobe:
.
boxscore watching

[Kblaze8855]

He won plenty of series as an underdog. Bulls were not favored against the 89 Cavs, 89 Knicks, 91 Lakers, 93 Knicks for example. It's easy to look back now and say this, but at the time he was the underdog. People forget that, just like people forget that Lebron was the favorite in 2009 and 2010. Convenient.


Similar to the 2012 finals people now pretend the Heat were favored in.



The Oklahoma City Thunder opened at 10/17 favorites to win the NBA title Monday (money line -170), according to Bovada.lv. Pretty narrow there, with the Heat at 3/2 odds,. The Thunder are also five-point favorites at home Tuesday night in Game of the 2012 NBA Finals.

It's become an interesting storyline since the Heat won the Eastern Conference Championship Saturday night as the Heat find themselves underdogs to a team with three stars who have never one played in an NBA Finals game, and only a handful of supporting role players with Finals experience (though to be fair Derek Fisher has enough for everyone).

Also of note, LeBron James' over/under on points per game in this series is set at 29.5 points per game, with Kevin Durant's at 28.5, right behind him. Durant is favored to win the Finals MVP award at 1/1 odds with James behind him at 2/1. Serge Ibaka is at 20/1 if you feel like setting fire to some cash.

It'll be interesting to see how the Heat perform as underdogs, the superteam behind the young guns in the oddsmakers' eyes.

People rewrite history on that and it was 3 years ago.

Cant expect it to be well known who was favored 25 years ago.

Not that the vegas odds actually mean anything.

[ralph_i_el]

boxscore watching
Exactly.

[knicksman]

Anyone who has deep knowledge of the game knows that, just like gluttony, excessive stats is detrimental to a team. Just look at wilt, oscar, tiny archibald, and young jordan.

[3ball]

Kerr underperformed in the 1997 and 1998 runs


He played well enough for MJ to believe him when Kerr said he'd "be ready" to hit the Finals series-winner in 1997... And he did:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S2BlOTeoZVE&t=0m22s





Rodman badly underperformed in the '97 & '98 runs.


You have a good point here... He was aids... People don't realize that Rodman was DONE in 1997 and 1998.

He was 36 when they won it in 1998, and at that time, he was the same garbage he would be in 1999 on the Lakers - but no one noticed because the Bulls were rockstars in 1997 and 1998.

And yet despite Rodman's underperformance, MJ still won - his underperformance wasn't an excuse like it is for Lebron.





His entire team disappeared every year against Detroit from '88-'90.


Again, this wasn't an underperformance or an upset - they were EXPECTED to lose to Detroit - in 1989 specifically, they were the 6 seed and were the underdog in 1st Round, 2nd Round and ECF.





And Pippen underperformed offensively maybe even worse than Wade did in the '96-'98 runs.


Again, Pippen was not a role player - he simply played really bad on many occasion... He only averaged 17/7/5 on 40.8% in 1996-1998 playoffs - that IS worse than Wade's 20/5/4 on 47.5% in 2011-2014 playoffs.

Infact, Pippen's 20/8/6 on 47.8% during the first 3-peat (1991-1993 playoffs) is barely better than Wade's 20/5/4 on 47.5% in 2011-2014 playoffs..

Obviously, Grant's 11/8 is worse than Bosh's 17/7, especially when you consider that Grant is an ordinary play-finisher, while Bosh was a 10-time all-star and wildly versatile and sophisticated player - his stats were cratered by Lebron-ball, but he was versatile enough to spread the floor for Lebron-ball as a 40% 3-point shooter.
.

[Young X]

^So is Pippen's underperformance because of MJ (like Wade and Bosh underperforming being Lebron's fault) or do you just use that when it fits your argument?

[ralph_i_el]

You think Lebron's stats being equal explains 19 more wins?.. How dumb are you?

The only thing that explains 19 more wins given equal stats is worse competition and superior supporting cast.

You haven't debunked any of my points - you guys don't even address 95% of the assertions I make (while I address 95% head-on)... Debunk my ass.. More like "I can't respond, so I'll say it's debunked"



Of course we're a team of interns... :hammerhead:

Paid very well too... You think this genius is just from 1 dude?... :kobe: :kobe:
.

Well, you're either a team of people being paid, or one crazy mother****er who posts 12 walls of text daily.

[3ball]

^So is Pippen's underperformance because of MJ (like Wade and Bosh underperforming being Lebron's fault)


Potty Pippen played great during the 1st three-peat.. But he was just older during the 2nd one.

heck, during the 1st three-peat, he averaged the same stats he put up in 1994, when MJ was gone - MJ's off-ball game allowed Pippen to play to FULL CAPACITY alongside MJ.

So when MJ came back, he just added his goat stats on top of what was already there without diminishing it - that's what MJ's off-ball game did - it allowed teammates to play to capacity alongside him, which maximized the TEAM'S capacity, thus preventing any underachievement... Otoh, Lebron's ball-dominance craters Wade, Bosh, and Love's stats, so his teams routinely underachieve.





or do you just use that when it fits your argument?


Keep in mind that Lebron's ball-dominance turns a normally high-assisted position (SF) into a low-assisted one, which reduces the playmaking capacity of the team, since teammates can't throw him assists as often.. This kind of ball-dominance from a frontcourt position also limits strategic options - Lebron's teams are locked into a style where he makes all the decisions.

Otoh, when you have a guy like MJ leading the league in scoring by getting his points off-ball - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES teammates' opportunity to get an assist and therefore the playmaking capacity of the team.. No wonder his role players rarely underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11297486&postcount=42

[eliteballer]

Dude always has trouble fitting in with other talent who has to adjust to him(Love, Wade, Bosh)

[sdot_thadon]

Well, you're either a team of people being paid, or one crazy mother****er who posts 12 walls of text daily.
Nah, just one devoted crazy mofo. This isn't the 1st forum I run across this fool on. His posting style has degraded over time though.

[ralph_i_el]

Nah, just one devoted crazy mofo. This isn't the 1st forum I run across this fool on. His posting style has degraded over time though.
Is he also Euroleague?

[sdot_thadon]

Is he also Euroleague?
I don't think so, if he is god help him.:oldlol: