Nick Wright Is Right AGAIN

[FireDavidKahn]

https://twitter.com/FTFonFS1/status/1315789768949747712

DUde's always been right.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

This is why Jason Biggs with autism shouldn't be an analyst. Nobody ever called Butler a goat level player.

[FireDavidKahn]

This is why Jason Biggs with autism shouldn't be an analyst. Nobody ever called Butler a goat level player.

Neither did he.

[Cyrus334]

Except Jimmy Butler isn't an all time great player. It doesn't hurt his legacy because no one expected this of him. Lebron's a GOAT candidate. He's held to a completely different standrard and if he's trying to surpass MJ, having more losses than wins hurts him.

[red1]

nick right

[MaxPlayer]

Except Jimmy Butler isn't an all time great player. It doesn't hurt his legacy because no one expected this of him. Lebron's a GOAT candidate. He's held to a completely different standrard and if he's trying to surpass MJ, having more losses than wins hurts him.

So for GOAT-level players it's better to lose in the first round than lose in the Finals, but for lesser players it's actually better to go to the Finals?

Shit be confusing

[scuzzy]

https://twitter.com/FTFonFS1/status/1315789768949747712

DUde's always been right.
https://i.postimg.cc/65794gs8/Capt.png (https://postimages.org/)https://media.giphy.com/media/L4eiv18RmXFd6nnb4S/giphy.gif

[Axe]

Great now jimmy buckets gets loathed for coming up short in the finals.

[SouBeachTalents]

So for GOAT-level players it's better to lose in the first round than lose in the Finals, but for lesser players it's actually better to go to the Finals?

Shit be confusing
Shit be retarded

[J Shuttlesworth]

Except Jimmy Butler isn't an all time great player. It doesn't hurt his legacy because no one expected this of him. Lebron's a GOAT candidate. He's held to a completely different standrard and if he's trying to surpass MJ, having more losses than wins hurts him.

Incredibly stupid point here to base a players legacy on their expectations. You rate a player based on their production/play level, not what the narrative surrounding them before they came into the league was.

[bullettooth]

That parrot looking prepubescent nasal voice bran jock sniffer is really shook. 6 finals losses. Accept it and move on.

[3ball]

https://twitter.com/FTFonFS1/status/1315789768949747712

DUde's always been right.

Losing with a good team/high seed = bad (lebron in Finals)

Losing with a bad team/8 seed = who cares (jordan's 1st round)

[Axe]

Incredibly stupid point here to base a players legacy on their expectations. You rate a player based on their production/play level, not what the narrative surrounding them before they came into the league was.
Lmao the thing is, any player or team will get criticized regardless of the results. Anything to downplay their success.

[DMAVS41]

This is why Jason Biggs with autism shouldn't be an analyst. Nobody ever called Butler a goat level player.

The level of the player is not relevant.

It is simply better to make the finals and lose than it is to lose earlier...for every player ever.

How the **** is this not understood?

[Lebron_James]

Best analyst .

[FireDavidKahn]

Losing with a good team/high seed = bad (lebron in Finals)

Losing with a bad team/8 seed = who cares (jordan's 1st round)

The Heat weren't a bad team.

[3ball]

The Heat weren't a bad team.

Weren't they a low seed?

When did lebron make Finals with a low seed?

[HoopsNY]

Nick Wrong fails to understand that making the finals and comparing it that to every other player is not what is at hand. The issue is comparing players of similar repute and their finals achievements. So you're not comparing Jimmy Butler or Giannis to LeBron.

You're comparing LeBron with other greats like MJ, Kareem, Russell, Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Bird, etc, for the purposes of solidifying a top 5 ranking.

And if making the finals is the end all be all, then history should have a much more favorable view of the Buffalo Bills, Atlanta Braves, or we should move up Elgin Baylor for making 8 finals appearances in comparison to other all-time greats, considering Baylor was a dominant player who put up 27/13.5 on a nightly basis (in one season doing nearly 40/20).

[DMAVS41]

Nick Wrong fails to understand that making the finals and comparing it that to every other player is not what is at hand. The issue is comparing players of similar repute and their finals achievements. So you're not comparing Jimmy Butler or Giannis to LeBron.

You're comparing LeBron with other greats like MJ, Kareem, Russell, Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Bird, etc, for the purposes of solidifying a top 5 ranking.

And if making the finals is the end all be all, then history should have a much more favorable view of the Buffalo Bills, Atlanta Braves, or we should move up Elgin Baylor for making 8 finals appearances in comparison to other all-time greats, considering Baylor was a dominant player who put up 27/13.5 on a nightly basis (in one season doing nearly 40/20).

No, he's just making the point that actually making the finals and losing is better than not making the finals and losing.

[FireDavidKahn]

No, he's just making the point that actually making the finals and losing is better than not making the finals and losing.

It's amazing how people can't grasp this exceedingly easy topic.

[Trollsmasher]

of course broussard's dumb ass falls for it:lol

[J Shuttlesworth]

Nick Wright actually called all the Lakers series correctly, and predicted Nuggets in 7 over Clips.

Shannon Sharpe also kept saying the Clippers need to worry about their own chemistry and not worry about the Lakers since there's no guarantee the Clippers will make WCF

LeBron stans in the media are smarter than the rest

[HoopsNY]

No, he's just making the point that actually making the finals and losing is better than not making the finals and losing.

Right, in order to solidify GOAT status. The reason why people criticize it is because of the previously mentioned reasons.

[SouBeachTalents]

Right, in order to solidify GOAT status. The reason why people criticize it is because of the previously mentioned reasons.
But just the notion that it's better to lose earlier to help establish GOAT status is unbelievably stupid, especially when you've already won several championships

[DMAVS41]

Right, in order to solidify GOAT status. The reason why people criticize it is because of the previously mentioned reasons.

But it doesn't make sense.

For example, if Lebron ends up making 14 finals and wins 6 titles...are you actually going to argue that he'd have been better off not making the finals in those other 8 years he lost?

[HoopsNY]

But it doesn't make sense.

For example, if Lebron ends up making 14 finals and wins 6 titles...are you actually going to argue that he'd have been better off not making the finals in those other 8 years he lost?

Of course not. That's certainly not my argument, but is that really anyone else's?

[DMAVS41]

Of course not. That's certainly not my argument, but is that really anyone else's?

So what is your argument?

[MrFonzworth]

:roll:

[Lebron_James]

https://youtu.be/zbw5VKfEVSc?t=429

He had Nuggets over Clippers before playoffs start

[FireDavidKahn]

Of course not. That's certainly not my argument, but is that really anyone else's?

YES!

That's what LeHaters always use.

[FireDavidKahn]

https://youtu.be/zbw5VKfEVSc?t=429

He had Nuggets over Clippers before playoffs start

Damn.

Nailed it 100%

LeFam stays winning

:hammertime::hammertime::hammertime::hammertime:

[highwhey]

:pimp:

[TheCorporation]

THICC Wright

https://i.postimg.cc/W17WpHf9/THRONE-CLAIM.png

[TheCorporation]

https://youtu.be/zbw5VKfEVSc?t=429

He had Nuggets over Clippers before playoffs start

What a G

https://i.postimg.cc/nrcV5556/thicc-wright-brackett.png

Nick Wright knew it

[3ball]

But it doesn't make sense.

For example, if Lebron ends up making 14 finals and wins 6 titles...are you actually going to argue that he'd have been better off not making the finals in those other 8 years he lost?
No, just win those Finals, except maybe 2018

Don't lose them and say you're better than someone that won them all

Having a brand that's bad at winning Finals lowers championship expectation compared to someone with a brand that wins most Finals

[TheCorporation]

No, just win those Finals, except maybe 2018

Don't lose them and say you're better than someone that won them all

Having a brand that's bad at winning Finals lowers championship expectation compared to someone with a brand that wins most Finals

I know how to destroy your weak premise in 2 ez steps

1) Let's downgrade all of LeBron's 4th round Finals losses to 1st round MJ 1-9 exits. That way instead of making 10 Finals he only makes 4 and goes 4 for 4, which is WORSE than 4-10

2) Put any of MJ's 4 best rings against LeBron's 4, who did better? MJ even has 6 to choose from, can you produce better championships?

Your move :pimp:

[3ball]

I know how to destroy your weak premise in 2 ez steps

1) Let's downgrade all of LeBron's 4th round Finals losses to 1st round MJ 1-9 exits. That way instead of making 10 Finals he only makes 4 and goes 4 for 4, which is WORSE than 4-10

2) Put any of MJ's 4 best rings against LeBron's 4, who did better? MJ even has 6 to choose from, can you produce better championships?

Your move :pimp:

You can't downgrade lebron's 4th round exits to 1st round because then you'd have high seeds losing in the 1st round

That would be ridiculous.. it's certainly worse for a high seed to lose in the first round.. but not a low seed

The reason MJ lost in the 1st round was because he faced with he 8 vs 1 matchup.. lebron never faced such a deficit, yet still lost by record amount a few times.. this fool lost by record amount with high seeds... Lololololol

[BigtimeNBAFan]

No, just win those Finals, except maybe 2018

Don't lose them and say you're better than someone that won them all

Having a brand that's bad at winning Finals lowers championship expectation compared to someone with a brand that wins most Finals

All 5 Finals in Cleveland they were heavy underdogs. Finals Record is the dumbest argument of all time. If you want to argue 6>>>4, use that all day, but losing in the first round is not more impressive than winning your conference.

[DMAVS41]

No, just win those Finals, except maybe 2018

Don't lose them and say you're better than someone that won them all

Having a brand that's bad at winning Finals lowers championship expectation compared to someone with a brand that wins most Finals

Again, this doesn't make sense.

You are arguing that Lebron would have been better off not dragging the 07 Cavs to the finals, for example...

You can say that he should have won more in the finals or something, but just putting up his finals record is a nonsensical argument because making the finals is better than losing earlier. Like usual, your arguments don't make sense...

It was not better for Jordan to lose in 88, 89, and 90 to the Pistons before the Finals.

[Stanley Kobrick]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1093193985525452805

[TheCorporation]

You can't downgrade lebron's 4th round exits to 1st round because then you'd have high seeds losing in the 1st round

That would be ridiculous.. it's certainly worse for a high seed to lose in the first round.. but not a low seed

The reason MJ lost in the 1st round was because he faced with he 8 vs 1 matchup.. lebron never faced such a deficit, yet still lost by record amount a few times.. this fool lost by record amount with high seeds... Lololololol

I'll give you a second chance before you duck me (like always) and embarrass yourself again

I know how to destroy your weak premise in 2 ez steps

1) Let's downgrade all of LeBron's 4th round Finals losses to 1st round MJ 1-9 exits. That way instead of making 10 Finals he only makes 4 and goes 4 for 4, which is WORSE than 4-10

2) Put any of MJ's 4 best rings against LeBron's 4, who did better? MJ even has 6 to choose from, can you produce better championships?

Your move :pimp:

[TheCorporation]

https://twitter.com/i/status/1093193985525452805

Ouch :lol

"You can't say Davis has a better chance of winning with LeBron in LA over Kyrie in Boston"

:roll::roll:

[Stanley Kobrick]

What a G

https://i.postimg.cc/nrcV5556/thicc-wright-brackett.png

Nick Wright knew it
:milton

[3ball]

Again, this doesn't make sense.

You are arguing that Lebron would have been better off not dragging the 07 Cavs to the finals, for example...

You can say that he should have won more in the finals or something, but just putting up his finals record is a nonsensical argument because making the finals is better than losing earlier. Like usual, your arguments don't make sense...

It was not better for Jordan to lose in 88, 89, and 90 to the Pistons before the Finals.
If lebron doesn't deserve blame for losing the Finals (because his conference was so weak that any conference-winner isn't really worthy), then don't give him props for making the Finals - his conference is apparently weak and any winner doesn't deserve to be there

And I think that's the right idea - Jordan's 89' Bulls would've beaten the 07' Pistons (#6 SRS) because they beat the #1 SRS (89' Cavs)!!!... The 89' Cavs > any team that lebron beat in the East.. so again, if a conference-winner has zero chance in the Finals, then winning that conference means nothing... Beating weak teams means nothing - the 88' Bulls win the 07' and 09' East

Heck, the raptors were the 1 seed in 2018, but got beat by near-record amount - but then the Cavs were beat by record amount in the Finals, so that shows how bad the raptors were.. meanwhile, harden took the KD warriors to 7 games and AD even won a game off the dubs, so the warriors weren't invincible - the East just sucked that badly

Ultimately, lebron lost 2 Finals he was expected to win (11' and 14')... And many people thought he would win in 17', like Nick Wright (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AjQR259CrwQ&t=01m02s).. finally, he played like Iverson offensively in 2015, and Kukoc defensively, yet still almost beat the Curry Warriors - so playing like MJ on both ends would've won it

[DMAVS41]

If lebron doesn't deserve blame for losing the Finals (because his conference was so weak that any conference-winner isn't really worthy), then don't give him props for making the Finals - his conference is apparently weak and any winner doesn't deserve to be there

And I think that's the right idea - Jordan's 89' Bulls would've beaten the 07' Pistons (#6 SRS) because they beat the #1 SRS (89' Cavs)!!!... The 89' Cavs > any team that lebron beat in the East.. so again, if a conference-winner has zero chance in the Finals, then winning that conference means nothing... Beating weak teams means nothing - the 88' Bulls win the 07' and 09' East

Heck, the raptors were the 1 seed in 2018, but got beat by near-record amount - but then the Cavs were beat by record amount in the Finals, so that shows how bad the raptors were.. meanwhile, harden took the KD warriors to 7 games and AD even won a game off the dubs, so the warriors weren't invincible - the East just sucked that badly

Ultimately, lebron lost 2 Finals he was expected to win (11' and 14')... And many people thought he would win in 17', like Nick Wright (https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AjQR259CrwQ&t=01m02s).. finally, he played like Iverson offensively in 2015, and Kukoc defensively, yet still almost beat the Curry Warriors - so playing like MJ on both ends would've won it

I never said that. I simply said that making the finals is better than losing early.

Of course Lebron's finals count is inflated from playing in the East and with quality help compared to other guys, but it is also extremely impressive.

My advice for you is to just focus on 2011 rather than all the other crap you spew on here endlessly. It is by far your best argument. Jordan never had a black mark like that for his career. It was peak/prime Lebron in his 8th year in the league with proven championship level help...and it remains probably the worst superstar performance in modern NBA history and cost his team the title.

Just acknowledge that Lebron is one of the best players ever with what is pretty clearly the best longevity ever, but he peaked lower than MJ and his extended prime doesn't make up for that difference.

People can disagree, but at least you'll be making coherent points.

[SouBeachTalents]

I never said that. I simply said that making the finals is better than losing early.

Of course Lebron's finals count is inflated from playing in the East and with quality help compared to other guys, but it is also extremely impressive.

My advice for you is to just focus on 2011 rather than all the other crap you spew on here endlessly. It is by far your best argument. Jordan never had a black mark like that for his career. It was peak/prime Lebron in his 8th year in the league with proven championship level help...and it remains probably the worst superstar performance in modern NBA history and cost his team the title.

Just acknowledge that Lebron is one of the best players ever with what is pretty clearly the best longevity ever, but he peaked lower than MJ and his extended prime doesn't make up for that difference.

People can disagree, but at least you'll be making coherent points.
While not on the level of 2011, he also was awful against the Spurs in '07 and had some dreadful stretches against Boston in '08 & '10. Since 2012 though his playoff record, at least individually, is pretty infallible, not one poor performance to point too

I'm just curious though, what other players do you feel peaked higher than LeBron?

[3ball]

I never said that. I simply said that making the finals is better than losing early.



no one cares that mj lost as the 8 seed, but his legacy would take a hit if he lost a Finals that many people thought he could win..

for example, MJ would get knocked for losing in 2014 because he's held to a higher standard than lebron, who had excuses are made for him





Of course Lebron's finals count is inflated from playing in the East and with quality help compared to other guys, but it is also extremely impressive.



Bolded is contradictory

Jordan's 89' Bulls beat the #1 SRS Cavs, so they would beat the #4 Magic in 09', and the #6 SRS Pistons from 09'





My advice for you is to just focus on 2011 rather than all the other crap you spew on here endlessly. It is by far your best argument.



So 2011 is the only argument against lebron when comparing to Jordan?

What a joke

Lebron has a ball-dominant skillset that prevents the best strategy (ball movement), so he isn't good at beating regular Finals teams, thereby lowering his team's long run championship odds compared to Jordan, Kobe, Bird and others.. lower long run expectation = inferior player.. brands that are good at winning Finals > brands that are good at winning conference finals






Jordan never had a black mark like that for his career.



- Jordan never averaged 22 on 35% (lebron 07' Finals)

- Jordan never averaged 26 on 35% (08' ECSF)

- Jordan never won the ECF by averaging 22 ppg (2014)

- Jordan would never team up with rivals

- Jordan was never outscored by a teammate in a series, whereas lebron was outscored nearly 10 times (entire 11' and 20' playoffs, and various series in 2016)

- Jordan never let his defensive assignment win FMVP (Lebron 4 times to 3 different guys)

- Jordan would never go 8 years in his prime with no league MVP or 6 years without 1st team defense

- Jordan wouldn't have an lower production rate (#1 all-time in BPM, PER, WS/48, and VORP seasons)

- Jordan was never a net negative in the Finals like lebron in 2013

- Jordan never needed 7 games in the Finals because he never averaged 16 on 39% for the first 3 games like lebron in 2013... or 24 and 6 TO's like lebron in 2016 thru 4 games


Jordan never had any mark - he never had a "bad" series and every close series or series loss can be traced to pippen playing poorly.. this isn't me spewing crap - it's a ****ing fact - look it up..

pippen averaged 16 on 39% in the 98' ECF, which is why the series went 7 games.. this exercise can be done with ANY close series or series loss







Just acknowledge that Lebron is one of the best players




I acknowledged that without the colluding, lebron's resume would be like Dr. J

Dr. J is an all-time great player with a better 1-foot leap than lebron, despite zero modern training.. so it isn't an insult to lebron





People can disagree, but at least you'll be making coherent points.


.

A my points are coherent. You guys are just dumb with poor reading comp, or trolls

[Mr. Woke]

3ball in shambles again lmao!

[And1AllDay]

so lets get the numbers out

mike has less points and weaker rings and could not do anything without pip

what is mike fighting for at this point, top 5 :oldlol:

[PhutureDynasty]

*Quietly eats popcorn*

[And1AllDay]

until this gets passed up bran is top 1

https://i.postimg.cc/85rLcZbJ/top-1-goatzzzz.png



https://media.giphy.com/media/l0IyhKF1MNYjKSVs4/giphy.gif

[light]

Well Wright's right, right?

Giannis' reputation improved because he avoided losing in the Finals. Giannis smart. Butler's reputation clearly suffered for being a Finals loser.

[Cali Syndicate]

Well Wright's right, right?

Giannis' reputation improved because he avoided losing in the Finals. Giannis smart. Butler's reputation clearly suffered for being a Finals loser.

Nope. No one expected the heat to win, let alone win 2 games WITHOUT their 1b star player. Giannis on the other hand was at least supposed to make the finals, but even then lakers were expected to win it. Nick Wright is basic as fcuk, shit aint painted black and white. No one blames lebron for his finals loses. They blame him for his losses when he was supposed to win.

Funny how non of yall lebron pole smokers want to give the 2015 warriors credit cause Irving was out, but lebron alongside a mvp caliber AD taking 6 to beat an injured 5th seed is some all time historical feat. Yall some clown azz bums.

[TheGoatest]

https://twitter.com/FTFonFS1/status/1315789768949747712

DUde's always been right.

LeBron haters watching the irrefutable points Wright is making in this vid like:

https://cdn3.whatculture.com/images/2019/05/cafc573a508c1203-600x338.gif

:roll:

[DMAVS41]

While not on the level of 2011, he also was awful against the Spurs in '07 and had some dreadful stretches against Boston in '08 & '10. Since 2012 though his playoff record, at least individually, is pretty infallible, not one poor performance to point too

I'm just curious though, what other players do you feel peaked higher than LeBron?

He was so young in 07 and on such a bad team...penalizing him for that doesn't make sense. Again, just getting to the finals that year was pretty amazing.

[DMAVS41]

3ball...

You don't have coherent points and your arguments don't hold up...this has been explained to you time and time again.

You can keep pissing in the wind wasting your time...or you can argue with at least some semblance of evidence and basis in reality. Either way you are a joke though and rightly laughed at constantly.

[Manny98]

That's why they call him "Nick Right" :applause:

[NBASTATMAN]

I never said that. I simply said that making the finals is better than losing early.

Of course Lebron's finals count is inflated from playing in the East and with quality help compared to other guys, but it is also extremely impressive.

My advice for you is to just focus on 2011 rather than all the other crap you spew on here endlessly. It is by far your best argument. Jordan never had a black mark like that for his career. It was peak/prime Lebron in his 8th year in the league with proven championship level help...and it remains probably the worst superstar performance in modern NBA history and cost his team the title.

Just acknowledge that Lebron is one of the best players ever with what is pretty clearly the best longevity ever, but he peaked lower than MJ and his extended prime doesn't make up for that difference.

People can disagree, but at least you'll be making coherent points.


Mj was horrible in plenty of Playoff series.. The difference was he was playing shitty teams.. Take a look at how he performed vs Miami Heat in the 1997 playoffs.. He was being guarded by VESHOWN Leonard I believe.. He was good two games and absolutely horrible the other three.. Huge difference was he played on much better teams.. Dallas was a great team in 2011.. I dont understand how everyone forgets that Dallas swept an excellent Kobe led team that year.. They had Kidd, Terry, Dirk, and The Matrix on that team as well as defensive player of the year Tyson Chandler.. He won a year to two later.. Lebron def played shitty but he has never played on a team except that Heat team that won 65games that could win with him playing BAD.. While MJ had plenty of bad series where his team won easily.. Imagine Lebron going 9=35 or 11-31 vs Voshwon Leonard.. LOL

[red1]

That parrot looking prepubescent nasal voice bran jock sniffer is really shook. 6 finals losses. Accept it and move on.

hahaha nick wright is laughing at virgin haters like you :roll:



deal with it chump

[dankok8]

This Jordan-Lebron debate has become so stupid because anyone with any criticism of Lebron is viewed as a hater. Not that a lot of Jordan stans like 3ball have good arguments. They don't. Bottom line for me why Jordan is still better is that he accomplished more. For Lebron to be considered the GOAT with lesser accomplishments, he would have to be a clearly better player. And he isn't clearly (or IMO at all) better than Jordan. I don't care about collusion etc. although if the question was which player I would draft first, then loyalty to a team could be an important factor to consider. Here in this debate it isn't.

To make the long story short, as long as Lebron has fewer titles as the best player than Jordan, he'll always be the clear underdog in that argument. Because winning is what matters. Everything else is subjective. And despite his insane longevity I doubt Lebron can win two or three more titles as the best player on his team.

[Roundball_Rock]

https://twitter.com/FTFonFS1/status/1315789768949747712

DUde's always been right.

Nick Right. :bowdown:

[Gray GOAT]

The best part was Multiple Sauces Broussard actually thought Thicc Right was being serious. :roll: What a clueless buffoon.

[FireDavidKahn]

This Jordan-Lebron debate has become so stupid because anyone with any criticism of Lebron is viewed as a hater. Not that a lot of Jordan stans like 3ball have good arguments. They don't. Bottom line for me why Jordan is still better is that he accomplished more. For Lebron to be considered the GOAT with lesser accomplishments, he would have to be a clearly better player. And he isn't clearly (or IMO at all) better than Jordan. I don't care about collusion etc. although if the question was which player I would draft first, then loyalty to a team could be an important factor to consider. Here in this debate it isn't.

To make the long story short, as long as Lebron has fewer titles as the best player than Jordan, he'll always be the clear underdog in that argument. Because winning is what matters. Everything else is subjective. And despite his insane longevity I doubt Lebron can win two or three more titles as the best player on his team.

Solid post. Disagree with some of it but a good post nonetheless.

The funny thing though is that Thicc Right has been spot on throughout these play offs and everything he is harping on about is 100% true.

Nothing LeBron can do will even move the needle an inch to his haters. He gets shit for making it to the Finals and losing whereas people legitimately are saying he would have been better off losing before even getting to the Finals. It's lunacy the arguments people use against LeBron.

The video I linked had nothing to do about comparing MJ and LeBron but rather the idiotic narratives that people use against LeBron while not applying it to everyone else.

[dankok8]

Solid post. Disagree with some of it but a good post nonetheless.

The funny thing though is that Thicc Right has been spot on throughout these play offs and everything he is harping on about is 100% true.

Nothing LeBron can do will even move the needle an inch to his haters. He gets shit for making it to the Finals and losing whereas people legitimately are saying he would have been better off losing before even getting to the Finals. It's lunacy the arguments people use against LeBron.

The video I linked had nothing to do about comparing MJ and LeBron but rather the idiotic narratives that people use against LeBron while not applying it to everyone else.

Narratives in general are bullshit. Regardless of player or team or whatever. The purpose of basketball is simple. To win games and more specifically to win championships.

Both Jordan and Lebron are incredible players in their primes, both had good teammates... All of the mitigating factors are more or less close. Jordan won 6 titles as the best player. Lebron won 4 titles as the best player. Therefore, Jordan is better. That might be simplistic but the sport is simple. The goal is to win. With players of comparable ability (and they are comparable even if Jordan is better) and circumstances the one who wins more is always considered better.

[Bronbron23]

https://twitter.com/FTFonFS1/status/1315789768949747712

DUde's always been right.

Bruh anyone who quotes nick wright is fakkit and it has nothing to do with him liking lebron. Sharpe loves lebron and he's cool as shit. Nick wright has bitch ass fakkit written all over him and everyone but bron stans knows it.

[FireDavidKahn]

Bruh anyone who quotes nick wright is fakkit and it has nothing to do with him liking lebron. Sharpe loves lebron and he's cool as shit. Nick wright has bitch ass fakkit written all over him and everyone but bron stans knows it.

So you're a shoot the messenger and not the message type of person?

Got it:roll:

[Bronbron23]

So you're a shoot the messenger and not the message type of person?

Got it:roll:

Not at all its just a dumbass point. Of course losing in the first round isn't better than losing in the finals. Its not much better either though. You still lost. Butler said it himself. Theres nothing to be proud about.

As far as the topic at hand i think both sides are wrong. 6/6 is overrated because as you and nick point out mj has lost many times before that. 10 finals appearances is overrated because getting there disnt mean shit. You have to win. You dont get extra points for runner ups.

[SATAN]

Narratives in general are bullshit. Regardless of player or team or whatever. The purpose of basketball is simple. To win games and more specifically to win championships.

Both Jordan and Lebron are incredible players in their primes, both had good teammates... All of the mitigating factors are more or less close. Jordan won 6 titles as the best player. Lebron won 4 titles as the best player. Therefore, Jordan is better. That might be simplistic but the sport is simple. The goal is to win.

I highly doubt MJ is winning against some of the competition LeBron has faced though.

[Bronbron23]

I highly doubt MJ is winning against some of the competition LeBron has faced though.

What? He'd beat all of them with the exception of maybe the kd warriors and even that one mj probably wins. Remember rockets almost beat them and they did it primarily with their defense. Mj's bulls were way better defensively. They were tailored to defend that warriors team and on top of that you have a guy thats probably the best scorer ever.

[Roundball_Rock]

What? He'd beat all of them with the exception of maybe the kd warriors and even that one mj probably wins. Remember rockets almost beat them and they did it primarily with their defense. Mj's bulls were way better defensively. They were tailored to defend that warriors team and on top of that you have a guy thats probably the best scorer ever.

You can use that logic in the other direction. The Bulls had trouble against teams with John Starks and Rik Smits as the second option. On the Warriors Starks would be the #5 or #6 option.

It is hard to compare across eras since teams are so much different.

Also, MJ stans say the Bulls were a one man team. So how do they beat the Warriors, Spurs, or OKC 3? :confusedshrug:

[BigtimeNBAFan]

What? He'd beat all of them with the exception of maybe the kd warriors and even that one mj probably wins. Remember rockets almost beat them and they did it primarily with their defense. Mj's bulls were way better defensively. They were tailored to defend that warriors team and on top of that you have a guy thats probably the best scorer ever.

The only title Jordan wins if everything is equal and you put him in for Lebron is 2011. Talking about the "Bulls" doesn't work since Lebron didn't play for the 90's Bulls. He played for the teams he played for.

[BigtimeNBAFan]

You can use that logic in the other direction. The Bulls had trouble against teams with John Starks and Rik Smits as the second option. On the Warriors Starks would be the #5 or #6 option.

It is hard to compare across eras since teams are so much different.

Also, MJ stans say the Bulls were a one man team. So how do they beat the Warriors, Spurs, or OKC 3? :confusedshrug:

Yeah the Bulls struggled with the Jazz who had 2 stars that were in their mid 30's (stockton's best years were well behind him by 98 especially), but would somehow beat the Warriors with 4 all stars and two mvps in their prime? Yeah, not buying it.

[HoopsNY]

YES!

That's what LeHaters always use.

If they do then it's pitiful. But I haven't seen it. You would have to show me.


So what is your argument?

See the above where I spoke about comparing finals as an apples to apple measure amongst all-time greats, not in comparison to every player, especially those who just started their careers.

[Bronbron23]

You can use that logic in the other direction. The Bulls had trouble against teams with John Starks and Rik Smits as the second option. On the Warriors Starks would be the #5 or #6 option.

It is hard to compare across eras since teams are so much different.

Also, MJ stans say the Bulls were a one man team. So how do they beat the Warriors, Spurs, or OKC 3? :confusedshrug:

Alot of mj stans are idiots just like bron stans. Bulls definitely weren't a one man show.

And teams like the knicks could use the physicality like the 2000's pistons and bad boys pistons. Pacers did the same. You cant play that way anymore so its hard to compare.

[HoopsNY]

I never said that. I simply said that making the finals is better than losing early.

Of course Lebron's finals count is inflated from playing in the East and with quality help compared to other guys, but it is also extremely impressive.

My advice for you is to just focus on 2011 rather than all the other crap you spew on here endlessly. It is by far your best argument. Jordan never had a black mark like that for his career. It was peak/prime Lebron in his 8th year in the league with proven championship level help...and it remains probably the worst superstar performance in modern NBA history and cost his team the title.

Just acknowledge that Lebron is one of the best players ever with what is pretty clearly the best longevity ever, but he peaked lower than MJ and his extended prime doesn't make up for that difference.

People can disagree, but at least you'll be making coherent points.

Pretty spot on I'd say, but I would also add that the 2007 finals performance is also a tremendous blemish that has to be considered. People forget that games 3 and 4 were decided by a total of 3 points, despite LeBron's play. 22 year old MJ was dropping 44 a night against the Celtics who ranked #1 defensively. So we have not one, but two finals performances that don't stack up to MJ's playoff/finals performances.

In addition, I'd add that MJ was never definitively outplayed by an assignment or an opposing player, whereas you could make the argument that LeBron was against multiple players, including his own teammate.

This is normal btw. Players aren't perfect. But when we look at resumes, that has to count for something.

[Roundball_Rock]

The only title Jordan wins if everything is equal and you put him in for Lebron is 2011. Talking about the "Bulls" doesn't work since Lebron didn't play for the 90's Bulls. He played for the teams he played for.

Yeah, and if you put LeBron on the Bulls instead of MJ what changes? They win in 94' but don't win in 98'. Still 6 chips.


Yeah the Bulls struggled with the Jazz who had 2 stars that were in their mid 30's (stockton's best years were well behind him by 98 especially), but would somehow beat the Warriors with 4 all stars and two mvps in their prime? Yeah, not buying it.

Yup. Comparing across eras is tough. You have to compare teams relative to the contemporary comp. By that measure, the 10's Warriors are the 90's Bulls analogue.

If the Bulls did time travel to the 10's they would get another star on top of MJ, Pippen, Rodman since that era was more stacked in absolute terms. 90's and 00's were an outlier where teams could contend with a player like Miller (Klay without the defense) as your best player. No way you can do that today or in the 80's.


Alot of mj stans are idiots just like bron stans. Bulls definitely weren't a one man show.

And teams like the knicks could use the physicality like the 2000's pistons and bad boys pistons. Pacers did the same. You cant play that way anymore so its hard to compare.

Yeah, more physical then. Today, the 3ball is huge and centers extinct. Apples and oranges.

[HoopsNY]

He was so young in 07 and on such a bad team...penalizing him for that doesn't make sense. Again, just getting to the finals that year was pretty amazing.

It's not about penalizing him. When you're comparing apples to apples, you can't (not saying you but LeBron stans in general) knock MJ's finals competition then conveniently leave out the 2007 finals performance, whereas MJ never performed that way for a single series in his career, including the series against the '86 Celtics, one of the greatest teams of all-time.

Last time I checked, the '07 Spurs are not up there with the likes of the 2017 Warriors, 1996 Bulls, 1986 Celtics, 1983 Sixers, 2000 Lakers, etc.

[Bronbron23]

The only title Jordan wins if everything is equal and you put him in for Lebron is 2011. Talking about the "Bulls" doesn't work since Lebron didn't play for the 90's Bulls. He played for the teams he played for.

Hard to say if we're putting mj on brons teams. 2011 is a given. 2014 and 2015 is a possibility also. Brons numbers were good for the series but he struggled against kawhi when he was on him.i dont see a prime 29 year old mj struggling the same way. He was way quicker and more skilled than bron.

In 2015 bron actually had to play more like mj than than ever before. With love and kyrie out he was forced to be a volume shooter. Often forced to shoot the mid which isnt a strength of him but was for mike. You couldn't just give mj the mid like iggy and Warriors did. He would of dropped 40 plus on 50% all day long.

[Roundball_Rock]

Hard to say if we're putting mj on brons teams. 2011 is a given. 2014 and 2015 is a possibility also
.

The problem with saying MJ could win with JR Smith as his #2 option (15' finals) as when Jordan didn't have HOF teammates we all know what the actual results were. Jordan couldn't get out the first round with Orlando Woolridge (a 25 PPG scorer at his peak, and we know how MJ fans fetishize PPG) but would win a chip with JR Smith?

2014--the Heat got smoked. Are you saying MJ>LeBron by so much that the Heat losing 4-1 would turn into a Heat win? I think MJ is better but not by much. The differences between the two would be small IMO, like the Bulls would lose with LeBron in 98'.

[HoopsNY]

Mj was horrible in plenty of Playoff series.. The difference was he was playing shitty teams.. Take a look at how he performed vs Miami Heat in the 1997 playoffs.. He was being guarded by VESHOWN Leonard I believe.. He was good two games and absolutely horrible the other three.. Huge difference was he played on much better teams.. Dallas was a great team in 2011.. I dont understand how everyone forgets that Dallas swept an excellent Kobe led team that year.. They had Kidd, Terry, Dirk, and The Matrix on that team as well as defensive player of the year Tyson Chandler.. He won a year to two later.. Lebron def played shitty but he has never played on a team except that Heat team that won 65games that could win with him playing BAD.. While MJ had plenty of bad series where his team won easily.. Imagine Lebron going 9=35 or 11-31 vs Voshwon Leonard.. LOL

Not a fair take. The Heat as a team won 61 games and were #1 in Drtg. And it was still a better performance than LeBron's 2007 finals.

Mj vs. Miami (1997): 30/8/3 with 2.6 turnovers, on 39% FGs/48% TS%
LBJ vs. San Antonio (2007): 22/7/7 with nearly 6 turnovers on 36% FGs/43% TS%

Not to mention the Bulls gave them the gentlemen's sweep whereas the Cavs were swept, and games 3 and 4 were decided by a total of 3 points.

[Bronbron23]

Yeah, and if you put LeBron on the Bulls instead of MJ what changes? They win in 94' but don't win in 98'. Still 6 chips.



Yup. Comparing across eras is tough. You have to compare teams relative to the contemporary comp. By that measure, the 10's Warriors are the 90's Bulls analogue.

If the Bulls did time travel to the 10's they would get another star on top of MJ, Pippen, Rodman since that era was more stacked in absolute terms. 90's and 00's were an outlier where teams could contend with a player like Miller (Klay without the defense) as your best player. No way you can do that today or in the 80's.



Yeah, more physical then. Today, the 3ball is huge and centers extinct. Apples and oranges.

Yeah kareem said it best on first take today. We'll never know the goat is until we build a time machine and put all the greats up against one another. Everything else is just opinion and shit talk.

[DMAVS41]

It's not about penalizing him. When you're comparing apples to apples, you can't (not saying you but LeBron stans in general) knock MJ's finals competition then conveniently leave out the 2007 finals performance, whereas MJ never performed that way for a single series in his career, including the series against the '86 Celtics, one of the greatest teams of all-time.

Last time I checked, the '07 Spurs are not up there with the likes of the 2017 Warriors, 1996 Bulls, 1986 Celtics, 1983 Sixers, 2000 Lakers, etc.

Could you try to explain what your argument is? I'm not even sure you know.

Lebron was 22 at the time and was a huge underdog to even make the finals.

How is it better that Jordan got smoked in the 2nd round in his 4th year?

Also, I'm not sure what you are referencing when it comes to the 07 Spurs...from 05 through 07...they lost one playoff series...they were historically good.

It is true that Lebron has more "blackmarks" on his career than Jordan...and I'd still give Jordan that nod as the better player, but I feel like you aren't understanding the arguments in favor of Lebron. It isn't that he had a higher peak or he has less bad series than Jordan...it is that his sustained excellence and longevity makes up for having a lower peak and some of the series that he wasn't great in like 07, 10, 11...etc.

It isn't ignoring that stuff...it is building it all in while realizing that good stuff he's done as well...

[HoopsNY]

I highly doubt MJ is winning against some of the competition LeBron has faced though.

Why? The Rockets in the WCF of 2018 took the Warriors to 7 games without Chris Paul in games 6 and 7. The year prior the Cavs with LeBron-Kyrie-Love-Thompson couldn't win more than 1 game against Golden State. Put in 32 year old MJ that includes GOAT perimeter defensive IQ and that series can very well swing in the Cavs' favor, especially when you consider having a player like MJ who can actually defend guys like Steph and Klay.

Put MJ on the 2011 Mavs and he doesn't win?

What about a 29 year old MJ on the 2014 Heat?

The 2007 finals in games 3 and 4 were decided by just 4 total points. Is MJ putting up that kind of performance at the age of 22, when he put up 44 a game against the #1 Drtg team, who also happened to be one of the greatest teams of all-time?

[Roundball_Rock]

The Spurs outscored the Heat by 14 PPG. The Heat's win was by 2. The Spurs' wins were by 15, 19, 23, 17. Are we saying prime MJ>prime LeBron so much that those 15, 19, 23, 17 point defeats turn into Heat wins?

The 14' Heat weren't winning unless you put both MJ and LeBron on the team. :oldlol:

[HoopsNY]

Could you try to explain what your argument is? I'm not even sure you know.

Lebron was 22 at the time and was a huge underdog to even make the finals.

How is it better that Jordan got smoked in the 2nd round in his 4th year?

Also, I'm not sure what you are referencing when it comes to the 07 Spurs...from 05 through 07...they lost one playoff series...they were historically good.

I'm not going to type all of that again. I know exactly what I'm talking about, but I think you're conflating my arguments with others who have an erroneous take when it comes to making the finals.

My issue isn't about him reaching the finals at 22. That is to his credit, not his detriment. My issue is with the way that he lost. It was by far his worst series performance in his career, in the most crucial moment, especially when games 3 and 4 were within reach.

That matters, why? Because MJ didn't perform that way at any point of his career. It's not about who won this chip and that chip. I'm never the one who hangs onto rings as an exclusive argument. If rings are an exclusive argument, then Russell wins this debate hands down with no competition, period.

And finally, while the Spurs were historically good, they were not the 1985-86 Celtics. Look at any greatest teams of all-time list. The Celtics are up there. The 2007 Spurs aren't.

[DMAVS41]

Why? The Rockets in the WCF of 2018 took the Warriors to 7 games without Chris Paul in games 6 and 7. The year prior the Cavs with LeBron-Kyrie-Love-Thompson couldn't win more than 1 game against Golden State. Put in 32 year old MJ that includes GOAT perimeter defensive IQ and that series can very well swing in the Cavs' favor, especially when you consider having a player like MJ who can actually defend guys like Steph and Klay.

Put MJ on the 2011 Mavs and he doesn't win?

What about a 29 year old MJ on the 2014 Heat?

The 2007 finals in games 3 and 4 were decided by just 4 total points. Is MJ putting up that kind of performance at the age of 22, when he put up 44 a game against the #1 Drtg team, who also happened to be one of the greatest teams of all-time?

You realize that it would not be a lock, by any means, that Jordan even gets to the finals in 07. Lebron got so much extra out of that team...sharing the ball and getting Daniel Gibson to be a real impact player. Could Jordan? Sure, is it for sure like winning in 11? Absolutely not.

Again though, you aren't dealing with the real argument for Lebron...it his longevity.

[HoopsNY]

The Spurs outscored the Heat by 14 PPG. The Heat's win was by 2. The Spurs' wins were by 15, 19, 23, 17. Are we saying prime MJ>prime LeBron so much that those 15, 19, 23, 17 point defeats turn into Heat wins?

The 14' Heat weren't winning unless you put both MJ and LeBron on the team. :oldlol:

Surely you watched the series? Kawhi's games 3-4-5 performances were legendary, especially his defensive efforts that changed the dynamics of the series. If MJ is guarding Kawhi, does he shift things as much as he did? We tend to forget that the point differential had a lot to do with defense.

In addition, does Mike do more scoring than LeBron? Probably.

This is why I always argue for Hakeem. People don't look at how he changed the course of games defensively, and MJ could do similarly.

Now in fairness, you might be correct. But it's still food for thought.

[HoopsNY]

You realize that it would not be a lock, by any means, that Jordan even gets to the finals in 07. Lebron got so much extra out of that team...sharing the ball and getting Daniel Gibson to be a real impact player. Could Jordan? Sure, is it for sure like winning in 11? Absolutely not.

Again though, you aren't dealing with the real argument for Lebron...it his longevity.

Why not? What does 22 year old LeBron have that 22 year old MJ didn't? I'm saying if you swapped places, MJ doesn't play that way, period.

I've already conceded that LeBron > MJ when it comes to longevity; that's a given.

[DMAVS41]

I'm not going to type all of that again. I know exactly what I'm talking about, but I think you're conflating my arguments with others who have an erroneous take when it comes to making the finals.

My issue isn't about him reaching the finals at 22. That is to his credit, not his detriment. My issue is with the way that he lost. It was by far his worst series performance in his career, in the most crucial moment, especially when games 3 and 4 were within reach.

That matters, why? Because MJ didn't perform that way at any point of his career. It's not about who won this chip and that chip. I'm never the one who hangs onto rings as an exclusive argument. If rings are an exclusive argument, then Russell wins this debate hands down with no competition, period.

And finally, while the Spurs were historically good, they were not the 1985-86 Celtics. Look at any greatest teams of all-time list. The Celtics are up there. The 2007 Spurs aren't.

You make it sound like Jordan lost to the Celtics every year. He didn't.

Also, nobody with a brain thinks that Lebron has an argument over Jordan for peak or lack of poor series. The argument is longevity. You focusing on such small portions of Lebron's career isn't actually dealing with the argument.

Again, I still think Jordan deserves the nod right now, but you aren't engaging with the real argument....which is...

What is more valuable...Jordan's 13 years or Lebron's 17.

[HoopsNY]

You make it sound like Jordan lost to the Celtics every year. He didn't.

Also, nobody with a brain thinks that Lebron has an argument over Jordan for peak or lack of poor series. The argument is longevity. You focusing on such small portions of Lebron's career isn't actually dealing with the argument.

Again, I still think Jordan deserves the nod right now, but you aren't engaging with the real argument....which is...

What is more valuable...Jordan's 13 years or Lebron's 17.

So i'll repeat for a third time...LeBron > MJ in longevity.

[DMAVS41]

Why not? What does 22 year old LeBron have that 22 year old MJ didn't? I'm saying if you swapped places, MJ doesn't play that way, period.

I've already conceded that LeBron > MJ when it comes to longevity; that's a given.

You aren't understanding. I agree that if you drop MJ in the finals...he'd have played better against the Spurs. No doubt.

However, my point was that it would not be a lock that MJ leads Daniel Gibson, Big Z, and company to the finals. Lebron doesn't get enough credit for what he gets out of guys like Boobie Gibson. He made him into an impact player that way. Could MJ do that? Sure, he's the best ever imo, but is it a lock? No...it isn't.

So your framing of that comparison is flawed imo. You don't get to just automatically make the finals in place of Lebron on that team with young Jordan.

[DMAVS41]

So i'll repeat for a third time...LeBron > MJ in longevity.

Great.

And I've already stated that Jordan peaked higher and had less bad series. So I ask again, what is your point?

[HoopsNY]

Great.

And I've already stated that Jordan peaked higher and had less bad series. So I ask again, what is your point?

Nothing bro. Let's just agree to agree.

[Roundball_Rock]

Kawhi's games 3-4-5 performances were legendary, especially his defensive efforts that changed the dynamics of the series. If MJ is guarding Kawhi, does he shift things as much as he did? We tend to forget that the point differential had a lot to do with defense.

In addition, does Mike do more scoring than LeBron? Probably.

The margin was too great. LeBron was 28/8/4. For the Heat to win Jordan would have to be at something like 42/9/6. Kawhi is an all-time great defender. For the Heat to win Jordan would have to roast him. Extremely unlikely.

Wade and Bosh were bad in the 14' finals. LeBron lifts his teammates more than Jordan since he is an elite passer with a pass first mentality. It is possible they would be even worse with MJ.


However, my point was that it would not be a lock that MJ leads Daniel Gibson, Big Z, and company to the finals. Lebron doesn't get enough credit for what he gets out of guys like Boobie Gibson. He made him into an impact player that way. Could MJ do that? Sure, he's the best ever imo, but is it a lock? No...it isn't.

Agreed. What evidence is there that MJ could contend with a bad team? When he had bad teams his teams did nothing. Orlando Woolridge or Oakley were better than anyone on the 07' Cavs.

Jordan's skill is achieving GOAT team ceilings; LeBron is the guy for floors. Prime LeBron on almost any team is 50+ wins and a contention. He just isn't going to give you all-time great teams like the 92', 96', 97' and arguably 91' Bulls. Jordan could have a team go 40-42 with him 2nd in MVP but if you give him a 55 win team, he takes it to 72 wins.

[k0kakw0rld]

Except Jimmy Butler isn't an all time great player. It doesn't hurt his legacy because no one expected this of him. Lebron's a GOAT candidate. He's held to a completely different standrard and if he's trying to surpass MJ, having more losses than wins hurts him.
9 NBA FINALS in the last 10 years.

The GOAT ARGUMENT isn't just about who's got the best record in the finals or who won the most rings.

Nobody ever played 82 regular season games and 20+ Playoffs during a NBA season, by himself. You got teammates around you. When MJ didn't have Pippen what was his record?

[Stanley Kobrick]

https://streamable.com/70h41r

[bullettooth]

https://streamable.com/70h41r

LOL, what a cornball. They have to keep this guy around for the comedic relief, everyone else in that panel is laughing at this stooge.

[Stanley Kobrick]

LOL, what a cornball. They have to keep this guy around for the comedic relief, everyone else in that panel is laughing at this stooge.you sound upset. nick wright makes me mad too

[Pipes2.0]

This Jordan-Lebron debate has become so stupid because anyone with any criticism of Lebron is viewed as a hater. Not that a lot of Jordan stans like 3ball have good arguments. They don't. Bottom line for me why Jordan is still better is that he accomplished more. For Lebron to be considered the GOAT with lesser accomplishments, he would have to be a clearly better player. And he isn't clearly (or IMO at all) better than Jordan. I don't care about collusion etc. although if the question was which player I would draft first, then loyalty to a team could be an important factor to consider. Here in this debate it isn't.

To make the long story short, as long as Lebron has fewer titles as the best player than Jordan, he'll always be the clear underdog in that argument. Because winning is what matters. Everything else is subjective. And despite his insane longevity I doubt Lebron can win two or three more titles as the best player on his team.

With this logic, are you conceding that Bill Russel is greater than Michael Jordan?

[Stanley Kobrick]

With this logic, are you conceding that Bill Russel is greater than Michael Jordan?
Giannis > Bill. no finals losses

[BigtimeNBAFan]

Giannis > Bill. no finals losses

You are better than Lebron. Lebron has lost in the finals 6x and that is the worst thing anyone can do. I'm guessing you have zero finals losses. Congrats man!

[Stanley Kobrick]

You are better than Lebron. Lebron has lost in the finals 6x and that is the worst thing anyone can do. I'm guessing you have zero finals losses. Congrats man!
:cheers:

[BigtimeNBAFan]

The margin was too great. LeBron was 28/8/4. For the Heat to win Jordan would have to be at something like 42/9/6. Kawhi is an all-time great defender. For the Heat to win Jordan would have to roast him. Extremely unlikely.

Wade and Bosh were bad in the 14' finals. LeBron lifts his teammates more than Jordan since he is an elite passer with a pass first mentality. It is possible they would be even worse with MJ.



Agreed. What evidence is there that MJ could contend with a bad team? When he had bad teams his teams did nothing. Orlando Woolridge or Oakley were better than anyone on the 07' Cavs.

Jordan's skill is achieving GOAT team ceilings; LeBron is the guy for floors. Prime LeBron on almost any team is 50+ wins and a contention. He just isn't going to give you all-time great teams like the 92', 96', 97' and arguably 91' Bulls. Jordan could have a team go 40-42 with him 2nd in MVP but if you give him a 55 win team, he takes it to 72 wins.

Yep, saying Jordan would have won in 2014 IS A BIG REACH! You would be asking Jordan to by himself to make up 14 points per game in the series. And that is replacing a guy who went 28/8/4. I concede the Heat win in 2011 with Jordan, but no way in 2014. There is not one Cleveland title Jordan wins if you replace him with Lebron.

[BigtimeNBAFan]

:cheers:

:banana:

After Sunday, better than Butler as well who really hurt his legacy this year by making the finals.

[TheGoatest]

Giannis > Bill. no finals losses

Also, Dave Cowens > Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Shaquille O'Neal & Hakeem Olajuwon
Better finals record.

[Stanley Kobrick]

Also, Dave Cowens > Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Shaquille O'Neal & Hakeem Olajuwon
Better finals record.
no 2nd place finals losses = perfection. cowen goat

[dankok8]

To be fair, I don't see the 2007 playoff run as an amazing achievement by Lebron. It's one of the least impressive postseason years of his career.

In the first two rounds, his Cavs beat two 41 win teams with negative SRS in Wizards and Nets. Then in the ECF, they beat a 53-win Pistons team with +3.69 SRS. Good, decent team but these Pistons were nothing special. The Cavs cast was obviously weak but I can easily imagine 22-year old Michael Jordan leading the Cavs to the finals against the Spurs as well and playing much better there to boot. The Cavs had good defensive talent with Show, Hughes, Gooden, and Varejao. In fact, they were an elite team defensively and that was before Lebron entered his defensive prime so he wasn't impactful on that end as he would become in later years.

What Lebron did from 2012-2020 is obviously extremely impressive but assigning him a huge longevity edge over MJ is misleading. People look at his regular season stats being similar from 2005 to present and assume that it's been the same Lebron for 15 years. Up until 2011, Lebron was a shadow of what he would become from 2012 onwards. There were flashes of brilliance in a few games and the 2009 playoff run but he was actually an underwhelming playoff performer for most of his first stint with the Cavs. He just didn't have it psychologically.

Jordan on the other hand was a killer in the playoffs from as early as his rookie year. The real comparison in the playoffs is 1985-1993 and 1995-1998 Jordan - 13 years vs. 2009 and 2012-2020 Lebron - 10 years. Other versions of Lebron were nowhere near as good as prime MJ. Another thing is that Jordan was a much more consistent defensive player. For 10 straight seasons from 1988, MJ was all-world on defense whereas Lebron's defensive peak was 5 seasons from 2009-2013 and after that period he could give you some great stretches but he wasn't an elite defender consistently anymore.

They obviously have very different styles that are hard to compare. At the end too 6 > 4 and ends this debate pretty quickly.

[JohnMax]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EkQpA7zXYAAICwY?format=jpg&name=large

https://twitter.com/GSWKinta111/status/1316222090505224197

[SpaceJam]

https://twitter.com/getnickwright/status/1316013808469463041

Nick got em riled again

[Bronbron23]

The problem with saying MJ could win with JR Smith as his #2 option (15' finals) as when Jordan didn't have HOF teammates we all know what the actual results were. Jordan couldn't get out the first round with Orlando Woolridge (a 25 PPG scorer at his peak, and we know how MJ fans fetishize PPG) but would win a chip with JR Smith?

2014--the Heat got smoked. Are you saying MJ>LeBron by so much that the Heat losing 4-1 would turn into a Heat win? I think MJ is better but not by much. The differences between the two would be small IMO, like the Bulls would lose with LeBron in 98'.

That was different for a few reasons. One was He was going up against better teams. Mj was in the tougher conference while bron up until now has always been in the weakest. Bron only won the title 3 times when he was in the east so we know exactly how many times he'd make the finals if he was in the west and that's 3. His regular season record wouldn't have been the same either so depending on where he placed he could of lost pretty early in the playoffs too. The other reason is bron was in his prime and mj was a puppy. We really dont know how much of mj winning chips was mostly due to pip or just due to mj entertaining his prime. Pip put up some pretty bad numbers in the playoffs and at times was injured and couldn't be a factor defensively and mj still won the chip. Most likely its a bit of both but if i had to weigh one more than the other im going with mj just getting better and smarter.

[Manny98]

https://streamable.com/70h41r

"The only time he beat Larry Bird in the playoffs is when he was coaching the Pacers"

:roll::roll::roll:

[Stanley Kobrick]

https://streamable.com/70h41r


"The only time he beat Larry Bird in the playoffs is when he was coaching the Pacers"

:roll::roll::roll:


https://i.postimg.cc/V6D88hSc/huuhfr.png (https://postimages.org/)

[Drygon]

What a horrible list Nick Wright has made. This can easily be dismissed...

1. A total loser without Pippen

MJ's stats from 1984 to 1990 were still astonishing; numbers which, despite losing, still show just how dominant he was, but that would be useless. It's true, Mike never did win much with a shitty team of unprofessional cocaine snorting assholes.

What I'll argue is that when Pip was the leader in 1994, with a great team, and the best coach ever, he showed what he was made of. Not only weren't his skills enough, he disappointed the team from a leadership standpoint. Compare that to LeBron who could count on D-Wade and AD on 3 of his 4 rings. Worth to note that MJ and Pip were the only two players on both three-peats.

People love to say how Mikes teams got good only when Pip developed and yet never mention how important Mike was in his development. And anyway, you could argue the real gamechanger was Phil and the triangle, cause Pip and MJ + Doug Collins failed miserably. Also, LeBron is also a total loser without good teammates. He needed Bosh and Wade to win his first ring. He needed AD to win his 4th. And even without Kyrie his third is improbable.

2. Never once beat Larry Bird

April 20, 1986. Larry Bird on record saying "that was just God disguised as Michael Jordan" and "that's the greatest player ever". MJ didn't win that game but the person used in this example invalidates this second point. If Larry Bird is a benchmark for greatness, Larry Bird saying you're God at 23 must mean something. And I remind you, it's of a SOPHOMORE Michael Jordan.

Imagine Luka Doncic playing so well Lebron is forced to say that this is the best player ever, adding it's God disguised as Luka. That was GOAT level shit from Mike considering he just got better since 1986.

3. Could never beat a Super Team

That is complete BS. Firstly because back then there were no such things as superteams, secondly because the closest thing to a superteam was the Jazz with two HOFers / Dream Team players and he handed their ass to them in 6. Twice. Back to back.

4. The East was terrible

Firstly, that's bullshit. MJ beat 5 different West teams in the finals, showing even if the East were to be easier, he still was better than the best the West had to offer. The thing about more than 1 Hall of Famer was really dumb. The 1991 Lakers and the 97-98 Jazz had 2 HOFers (but Mike still beat them), but the Blazers, the Suns and the Sonics all had 1 HOFer. The 94 Rockets had only Hakeem before adding Clyde the year later. Point is, even teams in the West didn't usually have more than 1 HOFer.

And besides that, winning contributes to your HOF status. So of course if Penny had won he might be a HOFer right now, same goes for Horace Grant. Unfortunately, they were stopped in 96 by a man called Michael Jordan.

5. Everyone won rings on his watch

It's easy when you take his Wizards stint, but we all know those seasons have an asterisk when considering Jordans career. His rookie years are dumb too, considering how bad his team was. And Hakeem and Drexler are also dumb considering he played half a season after coming back from baseball. You can maybe hold the 87/88 Lakers and the 89-90 Pistons over his head.

If you reason like he did everyone won rings on LeBrons watch; Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Kawhi, Kobe, Gasol, Pierce, Rondo, Garnett, Nowitzki, Jason Kidd, D Wade, Shaq, Curry, Klay, Durant, Draymond, even the ****ing Big Ben-Chauncey Billups Detroit Pistons. What a random fact to state to support LeBrons cause.

[Bronbron23]

Real recognize real and fakkits recognize fakkits. Nick right is definitely a fakkit so......

[Manny98]

What a horrible list Nick Wright has made. This can easily be dismissed...

1. A total loser without Pippen

MJ's stats from 1984 to 1990 were still astonishing; numbers which, despite losing, still show just how dominant he was, but that would be useless. It's true, Mike never did win much with a shitty team of unprofessional cocaine snorting assholes.

What I'll argue is that when Pip was the leader in 1994, with a great team, and the best coach ever, he showed what he was made of. Not only weren't his skills enough, he disappointed the team from a leadership standpoint. Compare that to LeBron who could count on D-Wade and AD on 3 of his 4 rings. Worth to note that MJ and Pip were the only two players on both three-peats.

People love to say how Mikes teams got good only when Pip developed and yet never mention how important Mike was in his development. And anyway, you could argue the real gamechanger was Phil and the triangle, cause Pip and MJ + Doug Collins failed miserably. Also, LeBron is also a total loser without good teammates. He needed Bosh and Wade to win his first ring. He needed AD to win his 4th. And even without Kyrie his third is improbable.

2. Never once beat Larry Bird

April 20, 1986. Larry Bird on record saying "that was just God disguised as Michael Jordan" and "that's the greatest player ever". MJ didn't win that game but the person used in this example invalidates this second point. If Larry Bird is a benchmark for greatness, Larry Bird saying you're God at 23 must mean something. And I remind you, it's of a SOPHOMORE Michael Jordan.

Imagine Luka Doncic playing so well Lebron is forced to say that this is the best player ever, adding it's God disguised as Luka. That was GOAT level shit from Mike considering he just got better since 1986.

3. Could never beat a Super Team

That is complete BS. Firstly because back then there were no such things as superteams, secondly because the closest thing to a superteam was the Jazz with two HOFers / Dream Team players and he handed their ass to them in 6. Twice. Back to back.

4. The East was terrible

Firstly, that's bullshit. MJ beat 5 different West teams in the finals, showing even if the East were to be easier, he still was better than the best the West had to offer. The thing about more than 1 Hall of Famer was really dumb. The 1991 Lakers and the 97-98 Jazz had 2 HOFers (but Mike still beat them), but the Blazers, the Suns and the Sonics all had 1 HOFer. The 94 Rockets had only Hakeem before adding Clyde the year later. Point is, even teams in the West didn't usually have more than 1 HOFer.

And besides that, winning contributes to your HOF status. So of course if Penny had won he might be a HOFer right now, same goes for Horace Grant. Unfortunately, they were stopped in 96 by a man called Michael Jordan.

5. Everyone won rings on his watch

It's easy when you take his Wizards stint, but we all know those seasons have an asterisk when considering Jordans career. His rookie years are dumb too, considering how bad his team was. And Hakeem and Drexler are also dumb considering he played half a season after coming back from baseball. You can maybe hold the 87/88 Lakers and the 89-90 Pistons over his head.

If you reason like he did everyone won rings on LeBrons watch; Duncan, Ginobili, Parker, Kawhi, Kobe, Gasol, Pierce, Rondo, Garnett, Nowitzki, Jason Kidd, D Wade, Shaq, Curry, Klay, Durant, Draymond, even the ****ing Big Ben-Chauncey Billups Detroit Pistons. What a random fact to state to support LeBrons cause.
Meltdown.

[Manny98]

Real recognize real and fakkits recognize fakkits. Nick right is definitely a fakkit so......
Fakkit?

Dude has a beautiful wife and kids and living life whilst your are on here melting down about LeBrons 4th ring :oldlol:

https://i.postimg.cc/Fs3rcwzZ/Dd-GBLr-IVQAA051u.jpg

[Nowoco]

Imagine being that poor son. Your real daddy disappears and your mom brings Nick Wright home :facepalm

[light]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EkQpA7zXYAAICwY?format=jpg&name=large

https://twitter.com/GSWKinta111/status/1316222090505224197

That backfired because the picture looks like someone who got good grades. Like he's a smart dude who will study all of the data and make an intelligent, objective decision.

[Bronbron23]

Fakkit?

Dude has a beautiful wife and kids and living life whilst your are on here melting down about LeBrons 4th ring :oldlol:

https://i.postimg.cc/Fs3rcwzZ/Dd-GBLr-IVQAA051u.jpg

Yeak ok buddy. Literally everyone but bron stans know nick wrights a bitch.

[Manny98]

Yeak ok buddy. Literally everyone but bron stans know nick wrights a bitch.
Thicc Wright is packing an 8 incher, biggest alpha in the media tbh :applause:

[Bronbron23]

Thicc Wright is packing an 8 incher, biggest alpha in the media tbh :applause:

Just when i think you can't make it any gayer you prove me wrong and talk about his junk. Not surprised you like him:facepalm