Pippen outscored the 2nd option in 5/6 finals and was a 1st team All defense 8x

[FromDowntown]

He also outscored the opponents 1st option once. Not too shabby.

[LAL]

Still can't get over the fact lebron lacks basic skills for a superstar and how he created the ****ing Heatles like a coward. Stop comparing him to MJ. Stats in his very own system from day one and millions of excuses is all you bronsexuals can hold on to. Mj much better player and winner, everyone knows.

[FromDowntown]

Still can't get over the fact lebron lacks basic skills for a superstar and how he created the ****ing Heatles like a coward. Stop comparing him to MJ. Stats in his very own system from day one and millions of excuses is all you bronsexuals can hold on to. Mj much better player and winner, everyone knows.

You good?

Pippen outscored the 2nd option in 5/6 finals and was a 1st team All defense 8x

[LAL]

You good?

Pippen outscored the 2nd option in 5/6 finals and was a 1st team All defense 8x

Besides the stats, what is he better at than MJ? Tell us.

[Vino24]

Besides the stats, what is he better at than MJ? Tell us.

Satisfying Madonna, not killing his father, being a better human ect

[LAL]

Satisfying Madonna, not killing his father, being a better human ect

Try basketball

[nayte]

Adds to mj’s goatness. He enhanced his team mates instead of lessening them like other players . Eye opening thread thanks op

[nayte]

Satisfying Madonna, not killing his father, being a better human ect

Gotta admit pretty funny this one .

[LAmbruh]

Gotta admit pretty funny this one .

hey mate, welcome back

[LAL]

Gotta admit pretty funny this one .

Pimping out your mom to a teammate is funnier and true, but we were talking basketball.

[warriorfan]

it’s amazing what happens when you don’t turn your most talented teammates into spot up shooters.

[nayte]

hey mate, welcome back

Thanks mate. Been a bit . I hope u are doing well

[nayte]

Pimping out your mom to a teammate is funnier and true, but we were talking basketball.

Whatever I don’t have a side in the flame wars . You are prolly right but meh

[3ball]

Besides the stats, what is he better at than MJ? Tell us.
For the 80th time, Lebron is NOT better statistically

MJ is #1 all time in:

- scoring (PPG)
- efficiency rating (PER)
- box scores (BPM)
- winning contribution (WS/48)
- clutch
- 5 of the top 7 VORP seasons


How does Lebron lead statistically?

[SouBeachTalents]

For the 24,640th time, Lebron is NOT better statistically

MJ is #1 all time in:

- scoring (PPG)
- efficiency rating (PER)
- box scores (BPM)
- winning contribution (WS/48)
- clutch
- 5 of the top 7 VORP seasons


How does Lebron lead statistically?
Fixed

[Vino24]

For the 80th time, Lebron is NOT better statistically

MJ is #1 all time in:

- scoring (PPG)
- efficiency rating (PER)
- box scores (BPM)
- winning contribution (WS/48)
- clutch
- 5 of the top 7 VORP seasons


How does Lebron lead statistically?
Who has the most playoff points? (Who has scored the most points in the most crucial time)

[LAL]

For the 80th time, Lebron is NOT better statistically

MJ is #1 all time in:

- scoring (PPG)
- efficiency rating (PER)
- box scores (BPM)
- winning contribution (WS/48)
- clutch
- 5 of the top 7 VORP seasons


How does Lebron lead statistically?
See what i mean dummy, that's all these bronsexuals have is stats as a reference as to why he's a better passer, rebounder or some +- bs, and you could go on and on with them. But the real question is what is he actually "visible" better at besides what the stat sheet says.. they're left with nothing. Him not having moves, footwork, jumper, creativity, mentality, having his own playmaking stat padding system, six time finals loser, creating the Heatles like a coward etc.. is what's important to me.


Who has the most playoff points? (Who has scored the most points in the most crucial time)

[3ball]

Who has the most playoff points?

(Who has scored the most points in the most crucial time)



MJ did

Down the stretch of tight games (last 5 within 5), Lebron shoots 41% on 3.0 attempts for his playoff career (06-19'), compared to 47% on 3.6 attempts for old MJ in 97' and 98'..

So old MJ attempted 20% more clutch shots on much better efficiency

So that answers your question

[ClipperRevival]

Great stuff OP. So MJ let's his teammates flourish under his leadership. My appreciation for MJ has grown even more thanks to this informative thread.

[3ball]

It's interesting because MJ's third option was destroyed in every Finals except 1998

His help was trash

Weak-scoring 2nd option... no 3rd option... Only the #7 defense.... Yet a three-peat

[tpols]

ive always brought that up.

pat ewing had john starks as his best mate. and in his series against the bulls (and in general) he was absolutely awful. no other real basketball talent just a bunch of goons.

Anthony Mason or Charles Oakley were Ewing's true "best" teammates and theyre just role players.

Scottie Pippen was a top 5 pick in the draft. He had lotto talent. If you swap starks for scottie, i guarantee the knicks win a couple titles.

[sdot_thadon]

ive always brought that up.

pat ewing had john starks as his best mate. and in his series against the bulls (and in general) he was absolutely awful. no other real basketball talent just a bunch of goons.

Anthony Mason or Charles Oakley were Ewing's true "best" teammates and theyre just role players.

Scottie Pippen was a top 5 pick in the draft. He had lotto talent. If you swap starks for scottie, i guarantee the knicks win a couple titles.

I did a post before the forum changed about MJ's comp vs. his help and yeah most of the other stars didn't have all nba level help. Some had allstars but I believe the only star that had a 2 way all nba sidekick was Malone. Scottie gets overrated by many but he's underrated by just as many fans.

[jayfan]

He also outscored the opponents 1st option once. Not too shabby.

Please list the '2nd options' he outscored.

.

[LAL]

ive always brought that up.

pat ewing had john starks as his best mate. and in his series against the bulls (and in general) he was absolutely awful. no other real basketball talent just a bunch of goons.

Anthony Mason or Charles Oakley were Ewing's true "best" teammates and theyre just role players.

Scottie Pippen was a top 5 pick in the draft. He had lotto talent. If you swap starks for scottie, i guarantee the knicks win a couple titles.

Or swapping wade and bosh for paul milsap or roy hibbert or someone on the bobcats.. or maybe wade and bosh for jason terry and tyson chandler?

[tpols]

Or swapping wade and bosh for paul milsap or roy hibbert or someone on the bobcats.. or maybe wade and bosh for jason terry and tyson chandler?

if your point is lebron had much more talented help than his opponents i would agree.

MJ had a talent advantage over certain teams, but not enough to be a perfect 6/6. Even without pippen he's winning 3+ titles til he's bored.

Lebron had MORE talent than MJ, and did much worse. So it's not even close.

[LAL]

if your point is lebron had much more talented help than his opponents i would agree.

MJ had a talent advantage over certain teams, but not enough to be a perfect 6/6. Even without pippen he's winning 3+ titles til he's bored.

Lebron had MORE talent than MJ, and did much worse. So it's not even close.

What was your point then?

[Soundwave]

Pippen's offence in the 2nd threepeat was poor.

95-96 playoffs: 39% shooting (yikes)
96-97 playoffs: 41.7% shooting
97-98 playoffs: 41.5& shooting

There are also misleading things like in the 93 Finals, the Suns supporting cast outplayed the Bulls supporting cast.

(Outside of Jordan's 41 ppg)
Pippen: 21.2 ppg
Armstrong: 13.5 ppg
Grant: 11.2 ppg

(Outside of Barkley's 27.3 ppg)
K. Johnson: 17.2 ppg
Majerle: 17.2 ppg
Dumas: 15.8 ppg

[3ball]

Pippen was a top 5 pick/lotto talent



Sure but lots of #1 Shaq-level picks (Derrick Coleman) were greater talents that one must assume would've been monsters alongside Jordan more than Pippen was....

And right away - a Coleman/MJ tandem wins the title in 89' and 90'.... Now are you telling me that Pippen is going to reverse a trend consisting of being inferior in HS, college, draft, and now 2 rings behind heading into year 4?...

No way - and that's how we know Jordan 'made' Pippen - many guys like #1 picks Worthy or Coleman would've won the title alongside MJ in 89/90, and therefore been a higher-ranked player all-time.






If you swap starks for scottie, i guarantee the knicks win a couple titles.



^^^^ If true, that shows how much greater the Knicks were from the 3 thru 12 spots - i.e. Pippen/Ewing win on Knicks; Pippen/MJ wins on Bulls; but Pippen/Ewing lose on Bulls

The Bulls simply wouldn't have enough scoring to win with Ewing in MJ's place...

Ewing might have the edge in defensive impact, but even when the Bulls had the #1 defense in 96', they still needed 30+ from MJ and the best scorer in league...

So Ewing wouldn't cut it and Pippen gets zero rings with Ewing in MJ's place on bulls.. this shows how much greater help the Knicks had from the 3 thru 12 spots

All that being said - I don't think the Knicks are a lock to win if the swap Starks for Pippen.. see below...





If you swap starks for scottie, i guarantee the knicks win a couple titles.



93' Starks... 17.5 ppg.. 5.1 apg
94' Starks... 19.1 ppg.. 5.9 apg... All-defensive


Peak Starks > 1990 Pippen


So no, I don't think Pippen wins if he was drafted by the Knicks because you have to discount the prime Pippen we know to account for his unique development alongside MJ.. Again, the logic from the previous response (that other picks that were good right away win titles in 89' and 90', which gives them insurmountable lead on Pip from HS thru NBA) shows that Pippen must have developed uniquely alongside MJ, since he ended up ranked higher than guys that were far ahead of him.

[tpols]

What was your point then?

uh... that MJ had much more help than ewing one of his main adversaries. And if he had ever seen them in the playoffs, Hakeem and Robinson as well. Shaq too.

You put Pippen with any of those dudes and theyre knocking him out for at least a couple years.

[LAL]

uh... that MJ had much more help than ewing one of his main adversaries. And if he had ever seen them in the playoffs, Hakeem and Robinson as well. Shaq too.

You put Pippen with any of those dudes and theyre knocking him out for at least a couple years. Maybe MJ would have won 6 with starks, oakley, mason? He was that good like you said, and pippen wasn't that great to win 6/6.. Shaq had penny, dennis scot, nick anderson.. Hakeem with drexler, then barkley, then scottie.. Shawn kemp, payton, shremph, great defenders.. MJ could've won alot with with those teams i believe. No need to make this point or thread because MJ was the deciding factor, every player had help, it's just bronsexual tactics.

[3ball]

uh... that MJ had much more help than ewing one of his main adversaries. And if he had ever seen them, Hakeem and Robinson as well. Shaq too.

You put Pippen with any of those dudes and theyre knocking him out for at least a couple years

.
The Knicks were a possession away from winning with Starks

So they win with Shawn Marion, Mitch Richmond, Bernard King or Pippen.. detlef schrempf would be a lock

So you had a hidden bias for Pippen that set the bar really low to make him look good

I bet you wanted to say that if you swapped Pippen for hornacek, the jazz win... Of course they do, since they almost won with hornacek, so virtually any upgrade pushes them over the top

The bulls' weakness was always their lack of anything in the clutch other than MJ, and also their weakness from the 3 thru 12 spots.. look how badly their #3 scorer got outplayed in every Finals.

[tpols]

the '93 Knicks were the only team to ever make 60 wins. That was their "peak".

John Starks in their series against the bulls had a 95 ORTG and 113 DRTG. Abysmal. Literally a matador defender coupled with extreme offensive inefficiency.

Pat Ewing had a better spread than michael jordan.

They wouldve won if starks wasnt so ass. Replace him with Pippen? It's just a total no brainer. That would have been an easy win.

[LAL]

the '93 Knicks were the only team to ever make 60 wins. That was their "peak".

John Starks in their series against the bulls had a 95 ORTG and 113 DRTG. Abysmal. Literally a matador defender coupled with extreme offensive inefficiency.

Pat Ewing had a better spread than michael jordan.

They wouldve won if starks wasnt so ass. Replace him with Pippen? It's just a total no brainer. That would have been an easy win.
You can make that argument for many ATGs, like swapping magic or kareem for a second option on one of those weak western conference teams. Or bird, or lebron, kobe or shaq? MJ winning 6 rings with scottie is goat stuff.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Tpols isn't lying.

NY dropped the ball by trading X-Man and Mark Jackson. That 93 squad would've been a nightmare with those two.

[RRR3]

Tpols isn't lying.

NY dropped the ball by trading X-Man and Mark Jackson. That 93 squad would've been a nightmare with those two.
How many times have we heard this about the Knicks? :oldlol:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

How many times have we heard this about the Knicks? :oldlol:

True enough.

[Soundwave]

The Bulls "supporting cast" was outscored in many Finals actually. Looking at double figure scorers outside of the top player for each team:

91 Finals (minus Jordan's 31.2 ppg)
Pippen: 20.8 ppg
Grant: 14.6 ppg
Paxson: 13.4 ppg

Lakers (minus Magic)
Divac: 18.2 ppg
Worthy: 19.3 ppg
Perkins: 16.6 ppg

Advantage: Lakers

92 Finals (minus Jordan's 35.8 ppg)
Pippen: 20.8 ppg
Paxson: 10.3 ppg
Grant: 9.2 ppg
Cartwright: 6.3 ppg

Blazers (minus Drexler)
Porter: 16.2 ppg
Kersey: 14.8 ppg
Robinson: 10.3 ppg
Ainge: 10 ppg

Advantage: Blazers (though its a bit closer here)

1993 Finals (minus Jordan's whopping 41 ppg)
Pippen: 21.2 ppg
Armstrong: 13.5 ppg
Grant: 11.2 ppg

Suns (minus Barkley)
K. Johnson: 17.2 ppg
Majerle: 17.2 ppg
Dumas: 15.8 ppg

Advantage: Suns

1996 Finals (minus Jordan's 27.3 ppg)
Pippen: 15.7 ppg
Kukoc: 13 ppg
Longley: 11.7 ppg

Sonics (minus Kemp)
Payton: 18 ppg
Schrempf: 16.3 ppg
Hawkins: 13.3 ppg

Advantage: Sonics

1997 Finals (minus Jordan's 32.3 ppg)
Pippen: 20 ppg
Kukoc: 8 ppg
Bison Dele: 6.8 ppg

Jazz (minus Malone)
Stockton: 15 ppg
Hornacek: 12 ppg
Russell: 11.3 ppg

Advantage: Jazz

1998 Finals (minus Jordan's 33.5 ppg)
Pippen: 15.7 ppg
Kukoc: 15.2 ppg
Harper: 5.3 ppg

Jazz (minus Malone)
Hornacek: 10.7 ppg
Stockton: 9.7 ppg
Russell: 8.8 ppg

Advantage: Bulls, largely on Kukoc having a good series but keep in mind Pippen basically was crippled by game 6 with a back injury.


The main takeaway I see is the Bulls were top heavy, and other teams actually had better overall depth scoring a lot of the time, the Bulls were especially weak with a 3rd scoring option.

Overall the premise that Jordan had far more help versus his opponents doesn't really fly unless you believe basketball is a 2-on-2 sport. Jordan was simply way better than the top players on the other teams, the Bulls players no.2-no.10 weren't necessarily better than many teams.

[3ball]

the '93 Knicks were the only team to ever make 60 wins. That was their "peak".

John Starks in their series against the bulls had a 95 ORTG and 113 DRTG. Abysmal. Literally a matador defender coupled with extreme offensive inefficiency.

Pat Ewing had a better spread than michael jordan.

They wouldve won if starks wasnt so ass. Replace him with Pippen? It's just a total no brainer. That would have been an easy win.
^^^ Jordan did that to everyone

He almost always held the opposing 2-guard to 35-43% shooting, while Pippen usually let his man shoot 50-60%

Also, it's been explained that if a team almost wins WITH a guy like Starks, then they will win with virtually any upgrade, like say, Dale Ellis.. so saying Pippen would win in Starks place means nothing, except that you're biased for feeling the need to say it

[LAL]

The Bulls "supporting cast" was outscored in many Finals actually. Looking at double figure scorers outside of the top player for each team:

91 Finals (minus Jordan's 31.2 ppg)
Pippen: 20.8 ppg
Grant: 14.6 ppg
Paxson: 13.4 ppg

Lakers (minus Magic)
Divac: 18.2 ppg
Worthy: 19.3 ppg
Perkins: 16.6 ppg

Advantage: Lakers

92 Finals (minus Jordan's 35.8 ppg)
Pippen: 20.8 ppg
Paxson: 10.3 ppg
Grant: 9.2 ppg
Cartwright: 6.3 ppg

Blazers (minus Drexler)
Porter: 16.2 ppg
Kersey: 14.8 ppg
Robinson: 10.3 ppg
Ainge: 10 ppg

Advantage: Blazers (though its a bit closer here)

1993 Finals (minus Jordan's whopping 41 ppg)
Pippen: 21.2 ppg
Armstrong: 13.5 ppg
Grant: 11.2 ppg

Suns (minus Barkley)
K. Johnson: 17.2 ppg
Majerle: 17.2 ppg
Dumas: 15.8 ppg

Advantage: Suns

1996 Finals (minus Jordan's 27.3 ppg)
Pippen: 15.7 ppg
Kukoc: 13 ppg
Longley: 11.7 ppg

Sonics (minus Kemp)
Payton: 18 ppg
Schrempf: 16.3 ppg
Hawkins: 13.3 ppg

Advantage: Sonics

1997 Finals (minus Jordan's 32.3 ppg)
Pippen: 20 ppg
Kukoc: 8 ppg
Bison Dele: 6.8 ppg

Jazz (minus Malone)
Stockton: 15 ppg
Hornacek: 12 ppg
Russell: 11.3 ppg

Advantage: Jazz

1998 Finals (minus Jordan's 33.5 ppg)
Pippen: 15.7 ppg
Kukoc: 15.2 ppg
Harper: 5.3 ppg

Jazz (minus Malone)
Hornacek: 10.7 ppg
Stockton: 9.7 ppg
Russell: 8.8 ppg

Advantage: Bulls, largely on Kukoc having a good series but keep in mind Pippen basically was crippled by game 6 with a back injury.


The main takeaway I see is the Bulls were top heavy, and other teams actually had better overall depth scoring a lot of the time, the Bulls were especially weak with a 3rd scoring option.

Overall the premise that Jordan had far more help versus his opponents doesn't really fly unless you believe basketball is a 2-on-2 sport. Jordan was simply way better than the top players on the other teams, the Bulls players no.2-no.10 weren't necessarily better than many teams.

That's impressive

[3ball]

The Bulls "supporting cast" was outscored in many Finals actually. Looking at double figure scorers outside of the top player for each team:

91 Finals (minus Jordan's 31.2 ppg)
Pippen: 20.8 ppg
Grant: 14.6 ppg
Paxson: 13.4 ppg

Lakers (minus Magic)
Divac: 18.2 ppg
Worthy: 19.3 ppg
Perkins: 16.6 ppg

Advantage: Lakers

92 Finals (minus Jordan's 35.8 ppg)
Pippen: 20.8 ppg
Paxson: 10.3 ppg
Grant: 9.2 ppg
Cartwright: 6.3 ppg

Blazers (minus Drexler)
Porter: 16.2 ppg
Kersey: 14.8 ppg
Robinson: 10.3 ppg
Ainge: 10 ppg

Advantage: Blazers (though its a bit closer here)

1993 Finals (minus Jordan's whopping 41 ppg)
Pippen: 21.2 ppg
Armstrong: 13.5 ppg
Grant: 11.2 ppg

Suns (minus Barkley)
K. Johnson: 17.2 ppg
Majerle: 17.2 ppg
Dumas: 15.8 ppg

Advantage: Suns

1996 Finals (minus Jordan's 27.3 ppg)
Pippen: 15.7 ppg
Kukoc: 13 ppg
Longley: 11.7 ppg

Sonics (minus Kemp)
Payton: 18 ppg
Schrempf: 16.3 ppg
Hawkins: 13.3 ppg

Advantage: Sonics

1997 Finals (minus Jordan's 32.3 ppg)
Pippen: 20 ppg
Kukoc: 8 ppg
Bison Dele: 6.8 ppg

Jazz (minus Malone)
Stockton: 15 ppg
Hornacek: 12 ppg
Russell: 11.3 ppg

Advantage: Jazz

1998 Finals (minus Jordan's 33.5 ppg)
Pippen: 15.7 ppg
Kukoc: 15.2 ppg
Harper: 5.3 ppg

Jazz (minus Malone)
Hornacek: 10.7 ppg
Stockton: 9.7 ppg
Russell: 8.8 ppg

Advantage: Bulls, largely on Kukoc having a good series but keep in mind Pippen basically was crippled by game 6 with a back injury.


The main takeaway I see is the Bulls were top heavy, and other teams actually had better overall depth scoring a lot of the time, the Bulls were especially weak with a 3rd scoring option.

Overall the premise that Jordan had far more help versus his opponents doesn't really fly unless you believe basketball is a 2-on-2 sport. Jordan was simply way better than the top players on the other teams, the Bulls players no.2-no.10 weren't
necessarily better than many teams.





Wow

and I remember this one from the ECF:



Xavier 92' ECF.... 18.6 on 50%
Pippen 92' ECF... 16.0 on 40%


Ewing had better help at 2nd option and better players at the 3 thru 12 spots, but still lost

[sdot_thadon]

Overall the premise that Jordan had far more help versus his opponents doesn't really fly unless you believe basketball is a 2-on-2 sport. Jordan was simply way better than the top players on the other teams, the Bulls players no.2-no.10 weren't necessarily better than many teams.

There's almost always an alternative way to view these arguments.....when you form these type of hypotheses, do you consider maybe his(MJ's) 3rd option and below scores less than the opponent 3rd option because the opponents 1st option usually shoots the ball less than Mj, leaving more attempts available for the role players?

[Soundwave]

There's almost always an alternative way to view these arguments.....when you form these type of hypotheses, do you consider maybe his(MJ's) 3rd option and below scores less than the opponent 3rd option because the opponents 1st option usually shoots the ball less than Mj, leaving more attempts available for the role players?

The bottom line is the Bulls no.2-no.5 (your primary secondary scoring) options really did not outscore opponents' no.2-no.5 options if you really look at every one of the 6 Bulls Finals.

In fact they got outscored 5/6 times.

The reason the Bulls won those Finals is because Jordan completely dominated the other team's best player in most cases.

91 - Jordan (31.2 ppg, 11.4 apg) vs. Magic (18.6 ppg, 12.4 apg)
92 - Jordan (35.8 ppg) vs. Drexler (24.8 ppg)
93 - Jordan (41 ppg) vs. Barkley (27.3 ppg)
96 - Jordan (27.3 ppg) vs. Kemp (23.3 ppg)
97 - Jordan (32.3 ppg) vs. Malone (23.8 ppg)
98 - Jordan (33.5 ppg) vs. Malone (25 ppg)

The Bulls options no.2-no.5 (some mix of Pippen, Grant, Armstrong, Paxson, or Kukoc, Longley, etc.) really did not outplay options 2-5 on their opponents by anywhere near that large of a difference, quite frankly often times not at all.

The difference is Jordan, plain and simple.

[sdot_thadon]

The bottom line is the Bulls no.2-no.5 (your primary secondary scoring) options really did not outscore opponents' no.2-no.5 options if you really look at every one of the 6 Bulls Finals.

In fact they got outscored 5/6 times.

The reason the Bulls won those Finals is because Jordan completely dominated the other team's best player in most cases.

91 - Jordan (31.2 ppg, 11.4 apg) vs. Magic (18.6 ppg, 12.4 apg)
92 - Jordan (35.8 ppg) vs. Drexler (24.8 ppg)
93 - Jordan (41 ppg) vs. Barkley (27.3 ppg)
96 - Jordan (27.3 ppg) vs. Kemp (23.3 ppg)
97 - Jordan (32.3 ppg) vs. Malone (23.8 ppg)
98 - Jordan (33.5 ppg) vs. Malone (25 ppg)

The Bulls options no.2-no.5 (some mix of Pippen, Grant, Armstrong, Paxson, or Kukoc, Longley, etc.) really did not outplay options 2-5 on their opponents by anywhere near that large of a difference, quite frankly often times not at all.

The difference is Jordan, plain and simple.

and yet after all that you chose not to engage the point I made. Check MJ's shot attempts in those same finals vs the opposition's 1st option and tell me if the other team will have more shots available beyond no.1

[warriorfan]

Imagine if MJ joined with Charles Barkley(2nd in PER) and Hakeem Olajuwon(4th in PER) and lost in the Finals while being outscored by John Starks (Jason Terry)

That is what LeBron did.

[LostCause]

That 96 Sonics team had some incredible depth. It doesn’t look that way now to people who dont know the players, but having Detlef Schrempf and Nate McMillan was huge.

Shrimp for was a 3x AllStar and 2x 6man of the year. He actually was coming off an All-NBA season as well

Nate was a defensive beast (2nd alltime in career DBPM). Was coming off a season on the All-Def 2nd team

Solid guys like Hawkins and Perkins as well

[FromDowntown]

it’s amazing what happens when you don’t turn your most talented teammates into spot up shooters.

Does Dray to this to Curry in the Finals each year?

[FromDowntown]

3ball grasping on to 4th options and one ECF series in MJ's 15 year career :lol

Yikes

No Pip...

[warriorfan]

Imagine if MJ joined with Charles Barkley(2nd in PER) and Hakeem Olajuwon(4th in PER) and lost in the Finals while being outscored by John Starks (Jason Terry)

That is what LeBron did.

:roll:

[zeerghit]

:roll:

u such a clown:lol how many times u will expose urself???

[FromDowntown]

:roll:

Imagine winnning 73 games but ...

Imagine winning UMVP but ...

Imagine calling KD from the parking lot after a Finals loss in 2016

This is what Curry did

[FromDowntown]

For the 80th time, Lebron is NOT better statistically

MJ is #1 all time in:

- scoring (PPG)
- efficiency rating (PER)
- box scores (BPM)
- winning contribution (WS/48)
- clutch
- 5 of the top 7 VORP seasons


How does Lebron lead statistically?

How? Um. He is #1 in all playoff stats by a wide margin:

-Points
-Game winning shots
-Steals
-VORP
-Win shares

MJ is a distinct #2 in all of these...He was #1 for a while until LeGoat passed him...It happens...