Notice how Jordan stans don't try to argue that his opposition wasn't in fact trash?

[TheGoatest]

Those who argue that Jordan isn't the GOAT point to the very relevant issue of the post-80s Lakers/Celtics/Pistons power vacuum and the weak competition of the 90s that allowed the entire era to be exploited by one good Bulls team.

Have you ever noticed a Jordan stan stick to the subject of Jordan's competition in the 90s and try to explain that his competition wasn't bad?

They always seem to dodge the question of what was the best team Jordan beat in the playoff series, and what happened with Jordan's perennial opponents in the years 1994 and 1995, where the Bulls didn't win a championship?

[Gohan]

Who cares? At least he was better than all the trash. He’s proven get over it hater

[TheMan]

Those who argue that Jordan isn't the GOAT point to the very relevant issue of the post-80s Lakers/Celtics/Pistons power vacuum and the weak competition of the 90s that allowed the entire era to be exploited by one good Bulls team.

Have you ever noticed a Jordan stan stick to the subject of Jordan's competition in the 90s and try to explain that his competition wasn't bad?

They always seem to dodge the question of what was the best team Jordan beat in the playoff series, and what happened with Jordan's perennial opponents in the years 1994 and 1995, where the Bulls didn't win a championship?

But Jordan's competition wasn't weak :confusedshrug: Boring and nonsensical argument offered up by LeBron stans like you in an effort to throw shade at MJ's accomplishments. :confusedshrug: Not worth the time arguing back and forth against agenda driven fanboy numbskulls like you so whatevs, believe what you want, IDGAF.

[Real Men Wear Green]

OP it's not that Jordan fans can't defend his competition it's just that people don't like talking to you.

[hateraid]

Who cares? At least he was better than all the trash. He’s proven get over it hater

So was Mike Tyson's

[TheGoatest]

Who cares? At least he was better than all the trash. He’s proven get over it hater

Predictable, lame reply.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnaUz48-FX8

Objective basketball fans: "He is playing against children."
Jordan stans: "He is dominating. 9/9 block attempts."

[Airupthere]

Forget about MJ.

Let's look at Lebron's career by itself. He could not win by himself in CLE so he formed a superteam in MIA. They were supposed to blow the league out of the water with 8 rings, instead they ended by with 2/4. His superteam lost to two old teams (gramps Mavs and grams SAS) that did not have to collude. Without comparing to any other past player, that in itself tells you a lot about not being able to go 4/4 with respect to your own competition, losing twice to old teams.

[2much_knowledge]

He has beaten more 50+ win teams in the playoffs than lebron and the 5 teams he beat in the finals have a better record than the teams lebron beat in the finals collectively

Notice i said beat. Lebron fans want to give extra credit for facing better teams and getting their asses kicked lol

[LAmbruh]

Well said OP


5* and repped

[warriorfan]

LeBron’s idea of competition was colluding with 2 of the top 4 in the league in an already historically weak conference. Only then to be outscored by the brutal competition of Jason Terry in the Finals.

https://i.postimg.cc/597r71hB/34-D1-E417-12-C4-4-B64-9-B4-D-98-B098-CDEC57.jpg

[Gohan]

LeBron’s idea of competition was colluding with 2 of the top 4 in the league in an already historically weak conference. Only then to be outscored by the brutal competition of Jason Terry in the Finals.

https://i.postimg.cc/597r71hB/34-D1-E417-12-C4-4-B64-9-B4-D-98-B098-CDEC57.jpg

Let’s not act like Jason terry wasn’t a dog in this cold world

[Stanley Kobrick]

Let’s not act like Jason terry wasn’t a dog in this cold world

always wondered how Jason Terry made playoffs when 2011 Stephen Curry couldn't. i suppose that's where no klay no play originally stemmed

[Gohan]

always wondered how Jason Terry made playoffs when 2011 Stephen Curry couldn't. i suppose that's where no klay no play originally stemmed


Eh iverson didn’t make the playoffs in 2006 when he averaged 33 ppg and he was the second best player in the league that year. Curry has nothing to worry about

[Spurs m8]

Notice how these virgins are still crying about Jordan 20 years on?

Speaks volumes tbh

Also, this thread is just straight up lying and attempted gaslighting.

Op, get a life, mate

No collusion...no ring.

[Gruppenführer]

Lebron stans are the dumbest fan base alive.

[Spurs m8]

Lebron stans are the dumbest fan base alive.

He already has an unlikeable game and unlikeable personality.

Add his fan base and everything about him is cringe and fake.

[8Ball]

LeBron’s idea of competition was colluding with 2 of the top 4 in the league in an already historically weak conference. Only then to be outscored by the brutal competition of Jason Terry in the Finals.

https://i.postimg.cc/597r71hB/34-D1-E417-12-C4-4-B64-9-B4-D-98-B098-CDEC57.jpg

PER is a garbage stat.

Chris Bosh didn't even make 1 All-NBA team that year.

All-NBA team = undisputed best 15 players in the league.


Meanwhile Durant joined a team with 3 All-NBA players in 2016.

[3ball]

We don't refute it because we know that the top-heavy 80's (that featured a few super-teams at the top) was ended by expansion, which spread the talent around the league evenly in the 90's - so instead of a super-team being required to win like the "top-heavy" 80's or 2010's, 2-star champions became the standard for the "parity" 90's, thus allowing more Finals-caliber teams.. Obviously, it's tougher to win with more Finals-caliber teams than being 1 of 2 super-teams at the top (like the Heat/Spurs or Cavs/Warriors from 13-17').

Jordan simply dominated the 2-star vs 2-stsr format like the goat should.. the goat + anyone dominates a 2-star vs 2-stsr format

[dankok8]

Any actual arguments for why the 90's are weak in the first place? Or why MJ faced weak competition?

The onus to provide evidence is on those who make eccentric claims not the other side.

[HoopsNY]

Any actual arguments for why the 90's are weak in the first place? Or why MJ faced weak competition?

The onus to provide evidence is on those who make eccentric claims not the other side.

The reality is that there have been plenty of responses from guys like yourself, 97_Bulls, me, kuniva, etc. But what you'll notice is that no one actually responds to our responses.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Dumb thread. MJ made the opponents look weak ‘cause he beat them every time, while Lebron’s opposition seemed stronger only because Lebron always lost to them. Swap MJ and Lebron and you’d make a post on why 90s competition was so tough and 10s was so trash.

[Chick Stern]

PER is a bs stat, and the 90s were easily the weakest decade.

[warriorfan]

Per is a garbage stat?

What about total points scored? Is that legit? Because Jason Terry outscored LeBron in the Finals while playing far less minutes.

Pretty tough competition.

[Mauzah]

I don't think the 90's Bulls were a supersteam. They were a superteam in that they dominated the entire decade and had Jordan of course but they didn't have some extra superstar piece giving them some unfair advantage over the rest of the league.

Overall the 90's were pretty balanced with the Bulls always coming out on top and those badass rosters you guys crave didn't even exist for the Bulls either. Their roster had plenty of holes and deficiencies to go along with it.

[Smoke117]

Trash competition and still went 1-9 without Pippen. Overrated bum.

[Axe]

always wondered how Jason Terry made playoffs when 2011 Stephen Curry couldn't. i suppose that's where no klay no play originally stemmed
And curry has never made the finals without klay, let alone without some tutelage from steve kerr. That's why curry stans like Stephonit does not have credibility when he says or thinks that he is the goat

[Axe]

Trash competition and still went 1-9 without Pippen. Overrated bum.
You'd realize he is the same bum tho who owns the team your hero hayward plays for ;)

[TheGoatest]

Any actual arguments for why the 90's are weak in the first place? Or why MJ faced weak competition?

The onus to provide evidence is on those who make eccentric claims not the other side.

Yes:

These were the 2nd best players of 90s contender teams:

John Stockton
Kevin Johnson
Shawn Kemp/Gary Payton
John Starks
Rik Smits
Sub 20ppg, past his prime Clyde Drexler (only during the Bulls' 2nd three-peat)
Penny Hardaway (only during the Bulls' 2nd three-peat, was 1-1 against the Bulls in playoff series)

There was nothing that even resembled a super team, let alone a super team that would be considered the favorites against the Bulls in the finals.

And again, you need no further evidence than the fact that no team Jordan faced in the playoffs exploited the opportunity to win the championship in 1994 and 1995 when they didn't have to face Jordan.

[TheGoatest]

Dumb thread. MJ made the opponents look weak ‘cause he beat them every time, while Lebron’s opposition seemed stronger only because Lebron always lost to them. Swap MJ and Lebron and you’d make a post on why 90s competition was so tough and 10s was so trash.

Yes, he sure made them look weak in 1995 and 1994. :oldlol: Just look at him in his defensive stance locking down opponents:

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/711TP4QwXcL._AC_SL1048_.jpg

[Spurs m8]

Jason Terry
JJ Berea
Tyler Herro
Duncan Robinson
20ish year old OKC players

GIVE LeCollusion his damn respect :lebroncry::lebroncry:

[warriorfan]

Jason Terry
JJ Berea
Tyler Herro
Duncan Robinson
20ish year old OKC players

GIVE LeCollusion his damn respect :lebroncry::lebroncry:

:roll: :roll:

Got em

[dankok8]

Yes:

These were the 2nd best players of 90s contender teams:

John Stockton
Kevin Johnson
Shawn Kemp/Gary Payton
John Starks
Rik Smits
Sub 20ppg, past his prime Clyde Drexler (only during the Bulls' 2nd three-peat)
Penny Hardaway (only during the Bulls' 2nd three-peat, was 1-1 against the Bulls in playoff series)

There was nothing that even resembled a super team, let alone a super team that would be considered the favorites against the Bulls in the finals.

And again, you need no further evidence than the fact that no team Jordan faced in the playoffs exploited the opportunity to win the championship in 1994 and 1995 when they didn't have to face Jordan.

Make a list of second options for any era and you'll find a ton of unimpressive 2nd options on contenders. Except maybe the 80's but most of us already acknowledge that was the GOAT era.

Making a similar list for 2nd options on contenders in the 2010's:

Paul Pierce (past his prime)
Joakim Noah
Jason Terry
Roy Hibbert
Russell Westbrook (young version)
Tony Parker
Jeff Teague
Demar Derozan
Klay Thompson
Steph/KD
Jamal Murray
Bam Adebayo (injured)

Most teams that Lebron faced in the East from 2011-2018 weren't even legit contenders so I didn't even bother including them. The kind of teams where Oladipo and 19-year old Tatum were probably their best players. Other than Steph/KD in the 2017 and 2018 Finals Lebron never faced any 2nd options better than those MJ faced. And besides Lebron got absolutely wrecked by those Warriors. I'd understand the argument if he beat them...

Anyways Wade in 2011 and 2012 and Kyrie from 2015 to 2017 are better than all the 2nd options on that list barring Steph/KD of course. And Davis in 2020 was arguably the best player in the entire playoffs.

Of course team quality goes well beyond 2nd options too. The 1993 Suns for instance had a roster that went seven deep. MJ and Pippen were better than Barkley and KJ but Suns were much better beyond that... Dan Majerle, Tom Chambers, Richard Dumas, Danny Ainge, Cedric Ceballos. Beyond Barkley giving you 26 ppg and KJ like 20 ppg those others guys could all give you double digits. You don't know the era or probably any of those players but that was a stacked team. Chambers was 20-22 ppg scorer before Barkley came over. Majerle averaged 17 ppg. Aingle peaked at 20 ppg and was a bit past his prime. Dumas averaged 16 ppg. Ceballos went on to average around 20 ppg the next three seasons. KJ is also very historically underrated. He averaged around 20/10 for 9 straight seasons and led his Suns to the WCF twice before Barkley even came over. He should and probably will be a HOFer eventually.

I could do similar breakdowns for the 1990/1991 Pistons, 1991 Lakers, 1992 Blazers, 1996 Sonics etc.

Using competition as an argument is weak sauce in the first place by the way.

[TheGoatest]

Make a list of second options for any era and you'll find a ton of unimpressive 2nd options on contenders. Except maybe the 80's but most of us already acknowledge that was the GOAT era.

Making a similar list for 2nd options on contenders in the 2010's:

Paul Pierce (past his prime)
Joakim Noah
Jason Terry
Roy Hibbert
Russell Westbrook (young version)
Tony Parker
Jeff Teague
Demar Derozan
Klay Thompson
Steph/KD
Jamal Murray
Bam Adebayo (injured)

Most teams that Lebron faced in the East from 2011-2018 weren't even legit contenders so I didn't even bother including them. The kind of teams where Oladipo and 19-year old Tatum were probably their best players. Other than Steph/KD in the 2017 and 2018 Finals Lebron never faced any 2nd options better than those MJ faced. And besides Lebron got absolutely wrecked by those Warriors. I'd understand the argument if he beat them...

Anyways Wade in 2011 and 2012 and Kyrie from 2015 to 2017 are better than all the 2nd options on that list barring Steph/KD of course. And Davis in 2020 was arguably the best player in the entire playoffs.

Of course team quality goes well beyond 2nd options too. The 1993 Suns for instance had a roster that went seven deep. MJ and Pippen were better than Barkley and KJ but Suns were much better beyond that... Dan Majerle, Tom Chambers, Richard Dumas, Danny Ainge, Cedric Ceballos. Beyond Barkley giving you 26 ppg and KJ like 20 ppg those others guys could all give you double digits. You don't know the era or probably any of those players but that was a stacked team. Chambers was 20-22 ppg scorer before Barkley came over. Majerle averaged 17 ppg. Aingle peaked at 20 ppg and was a bit past his prime. Dumas averaged 16 ppg. Ceballos went on to average around 20 ppg the next three seasons. KJ is also very historically underrated. He averaged around 20/10 for 9 straight seasons and led his Suns to the WCF twice before Barkley even came over. He should and probably will be a HOFer eventually.

I could do similar breakdowns for the 1990/1991 Pistons, 1991 Lakers, 1992 Blazers, 1996 Sonics etc.

Using competition as an argument is weak sauce in the first place by the way.

You can shit on LeBron's eastern competition all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that he beat three legit all-time great teams in the 2012, 2013 and 2016 finals. Jordan didn't beat anything close to an all-time great team.

Some of the third best players from the teams LeBron faced:

Harden
Klay
Duncan/Parker/Kawhi (whoever you consider the third best on those 2014 Spurs)
and now Kyrie

wipe the floor with most of the second best players of Jordan's 90s opponents. And if I mention the actual third best players from Jordan's opponents like Detlef Schrempf, Dan Majerle, Jeff Hornacek and Jerome Kersey, it gets absolutely laughable.

Jordan got destroyed by the Celtics
Then he got destroyed by the Celtics again
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons again
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons yet again

Then these two teams got washed, along with the Lakers. He got the luckiest power vacuum exploitation. If it wasn't for the Bulls, the 1990s were basically the 1970s in terms of power balance. The 70s are known as the weakest decade because of so many different champions. If you take away the Bulls, this is what the champions of the 1990s look like based on who gave the Bulls the most trouble in the playoffs/finals:

1990: Pistons
1991: Lakers
1992: Knicks
1993: Suns
1994: Rockets
1995: Rockets
1996: Sonics
1997: Jazz
1998: Pacers
1999: Spurs

We're looking at a decade with no fewer than 7 and as many as 9 champions in 10 years. Just absolute cannon fodder for one great team to exploit. Kareem would've done the exact same thing throughout the 70s that the Bulls did in the 90s if he had one elite player like Pippen playing next to him. Or if Oscar Robertson was about 10 years younger.

[dankok8]

You can shit on LeBron's eastern competition all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that he beat three legit all-time great teams in the 2012, 2013 and 2016 finals. Jordan didn't beat anything close to an all-time great team.

Some of the third best players from the teams LeBron faced:

Harden
Klay
Duncan/Parker/Kawhi (whoever you consider the third best on those 2014 Spurs)
and now Kyrie

wipe the floor with most of the second best players of Jordan's 90s opponents. And if I mention the actual third best players from Jordan's opponents like Detlef Schrempf, Dan Majerle, Jeff Hornacek and Jerome Kersey, it gets absolutely laughable.

Jordan got destroyed by the Celtics
Then he got destroyed by the Celtics again
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons again
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons yet again

Then these two teams got washed, along with the Lakers. He got the luckiest power vacuum exploitation. If it wasn't for the Bulls, the 1990s were basically the 1970s in terms of power balance. The 70s are known as the weakest decade because of so many different champions. If you take away the Bulls, this is what the champions of the 1990s look like based on who gave the Bulls the most trouble in the playoffs/finals:

1990: Pistons
1991: Lakers
1992: Knicks
1993: Suns
1994: Rockets
1995: Rockets
1996: Sonics
1997: Jazz
1998: Pacers
1999: Spurs

We're looking at a decade with no fewer than 7 and as many as 9 champions in 10 years. Just absolute cannon fodder for one great team to exploit. Kareem would've done the exact same thing throughout the 70s that the Bulls did in the 90s if he had one elite player like Pippen playing next to him. Or if Oscar Robertson was about 10 years younger.

Great competition is only a relevant argument if you beat them. Lebron lost to the 2017 and 2018 Warriors. They were really good competition but Lebron didn't beat them so why bring them up. Especially when the 2017 Cavs were extremely talented themselves. They weren't supposed to go down like a house of cards.

Some of your arguments involve name-dropping without considering the players' form. Harden was a still a puppy in 2012 and not an all-star. Kawhi in 2014 was two years before his first all-star game and three years before his prime. Duncan was 38 averaging 15/10. Not saying they weren't a good team but in terms of talent none of the teams Lebron beat in the Finals in 2012, 2013 and 2016 are better than the 1991 Lakers, 1992 Blazers, 1993 Suns, 1996 Sonics or 1997 Jazz. And the 2020 Heat especially with their injuries would be the worst team MJ ever faced in the Finals.

You dropping names of some 3rd options in the 90's means nothing. Of course modern fans will underrate them because they never heard of let alone watched some of them. Guys like Schrempf, Hornacek, Majerle were really good players...

The problem with the "MJ got destroyed by strong competition." narrative is that MJ didn't have an all-star alongside him till 1990. He was heavily outgunned by those stacked teams from 1985-1989... anyone with any credibility would acknowledge that. Pistons and Lakers got washed up in 1991? Why? Their cores were around 28-31 years old... Is it because the Bulls beat them decisively? Maybe the era was just fine and those Bulls were a dominant juggernaut.

[dankok8]

Jordan in the Playoffs:

Wins Against 60+ Win Opponents: 7
Wins Against 55+ Win Opponents: 13
Wins Against 50+ Win Opponents: 20
Wins Against Sub-50 Win Opponents: 10

Wins Against 7+ SRS Opponents: 3
Wins against 6+ SRS Opponents: 7
Wins Against 5+ SRS Opponents: 14
Wins Against 4+ SRS Opponents: 15

Top 10 Opponents Beat:
1997 FIN Jazz = 64 wins +7.97 SRS
1996 FIN Sonics = 64 wins +7.40 SRS
1993 FIN Suns = 62 wins +6.27 SRS
1998 FIN Jazz = 62 wins +5.73 SRS
1997 ECF Heat = 61 wins +5.56 SRS
1993 ECF Knicks = 60 wins +5.87 SRS
1996 ECF Magic = 60 wins +5.40 SRS
1991 FIN Lakers = 58 wins +6.73 SRS
1998 ECF Pacers = 58 wins +6.25 SRS
1989 R1 Cavaliers = 57 wins +7.95 SRS

Average Opponent Beat: 52.1 wins +3.71 SRS
Average Finals Opponent Beat: 61.2 wins +6.84 SRS

Lebron in the Playoffs:

Wins Against 60+ Win Opponents: 3
Wins Against 55+ Win Opponents: 10
Wins Against 50+ Win Opponents: 18
Win Against Sub-50 Win Opponents: 21

Wins Against 7+ SRS Opponents: 2
Wins against 6+ SRS Opponents: 5
Wins Against 5+ SRS Opponents: 5
Wins Against 4+ SRS Opponents: 8

Top 10 Opponents Beat:
2016 FIN Warriors = 73 wins +10.38 SRS
2011 ECF Bulls = 62 wins +6.53 SRS
2015 ECF Hawks = 60 wins +4.75 SRS
2018 ECSF Raptors = 59 wins + 7.29 SRS
2013 FIN Spurs = 58 wins +6.67 SRS
2012 FIN Thunder = 58 wins +6.44 SRS
2011 ECSF Celtics = 56 wins +4.83 SRS
2016 ECF Raptors = 56 wins +4.08 SRS
2014 ECF Pacers = 56 wins +3.63 SRS
2018 ECF Celtics = 55 wins +3.23 SRS

Average Opponent Beat: 49.0 wins +2.25 SRS
Average Finals Opponent Beat: 59.5 wins +6.51 SRS

Based on every win total and SRS cutoff, Jordan beat more high quality opponents than Lebron despite winning nine fewer playoff series.

List the 2nd options on the top 10 teams Jordan beat and then then ones Lebron beat and let's compare. List the 3rd options too.

[Bronbron23]

Those who argue that Jordan isn't the GOAT point to the very relevant issue of the post-80s Lakers/Celtics/Pistons power vacuum and the weak competition of the 90s that allowed the entire era to be exploited by one good Bulls team.

Have you ever noticed a Jordan stan stick to the subject of Jordan's competition in the 90s and try to explain that his competition wasn't bad?

They always seem to dodge the question of what was the best team Jordan beat in the playoff series, and what happened with Jordan's perennial opponents in the years 1994 and 1995, where the Bulls didn't win a championship?

This is honestly the weakest argument that bron stans use. Yeah there's more stronger teams now but relative to the competition he had no more advantage than bron has had. In all of brons wins he was either even with the comp or he had the better team just like mj did. Both have always lost when they weren't the better team and only bron has lost when he had the clear advantage.

It's all just excuses tbh. The league really isn't that tough. If last years heat can make it to the finals and get 2 games off the best team in the league no reason why mj and the bulls wouldn't be able to dominate this era also. Even the kd warriors weren't unbeatable. A frauden/old ass cp3 lead houston team had them beat and they did it defensively. Just imagine what mj and the bulls would of done.

[TheGoatest]

Great competition is only a relevant argument if you beat them. Lebron lost to the 2017 and 2018 Warriors. They were really good competition but Lebron didn't beat them so why bring them up. Especially when the 2017 Cavs were extremely talented themselves. They weren't supposed to go down like a house of cards.

Some of your arguments involve name-dropping without considering the players' form. Harden was a still a puppy in 2012 and not an all-star. Kawhi in 2014 was two years before his first all-star game and three years before his prime. Duncan was 38 averaging 15/10. Not saying they weren't a good team but in terms of talent none of the teams Lebron beat in the Finals in 2012, 2013 and 2016 are better than the 1991 Lakers, 1992 Blazers, 1993 Suns, 1996 Sonics or 1997 Jazz. And the 2020 Heat especially with their injuries would be the worst team MJ ever faced in the Finals.

You dropping names of some 3rd options in the 90's means nothing. Of course modern fans will underrate them because they never heard of let alone watched some of them. Guys like Schrempf, Hornacek, Majerle were really good players...

The problem with the "MJ got destroyed by strong competition." narrative is that MJ didn't have an all-star alongside him till 1990. He was heavily outgunned by those stacked teams from 1985-1989... anyone with any credibility would acknowledge that. Pistons and Lakers got washed up in 1991? Why? Their cores were around 28-31 years old... Is it because the Bulls beat them decisively? Maybe the era was just fine and those Bulls were a dominant juggernaut.

Trolling is only effective if it's somewhat realistic. Implying that the greatest record of all time 73-9 Warriors don't qualify as "great competition" doesn't even qualify as trolling. Too weak of an attempt. :confusedshrug:

Harden was 6th man of the year and universally recognized as a star player who couldn't get to shine because he played on a team whose perimeter was too stacked. He averaged 26 as soon as he came to the Rockets the following year, scoring 37 and 45 in his first two games with the Rockets, just months after the 2012 NBA Finals
Duncan was All-NBA 1st team and All-defensive 2nd team in 2012-13.
Kawhi was All-defensive 2nd team in 2013-14

Imagine the carnage if these three + Klay Thompson went against Detlef Schrempf, Dan Majerle, Jerome Kersey and Jeff Hornacek in a game. Also, the hilarious thing is that if you want to talk "form", all these players with the possible exception of Majerle had their best seasons prior to meeting Jordan in the finals. And even if you take their best seasons, they still weren't as good as the third best players of those teams LeBron had to face.

The washed Lakers-Pistons of that era didn't only get beat by the Bulls. The Pistons lost to the Knicks in 1992 in the first round and the following year failed to make the playoffs. The Lakers lost to the random-ass Suns. The Celtics lost to the Knicks and the Cavaliers. All 3 of the 80s powerhouses were blatantly washed, leaving a power vacuum to be exploited.

https://i.redd.it/g7vmn1o505r01.jpg

Absolute. Trash. Competition.

And I'm still waiting for the answer to this question: What happened in the 1993-94 and 1994-95 seasons, when Jordan's "mighty" competition were spared from having to face Jordan? Can someone answer this? Or is it to inconvenient for your agenda?

[TheCorporation]

What's MJ's best Finals opponent?

[r0drig0lac]

OP it's not that Jordan fans can't defend his competition it's just that people don't like talking to you.
:roll: :roll:

[TheCorporation]

:roll: :roll:

What's MJ's best Finals opponent?

[Kiddlovesnets]

MJ's team was title favorite for 5 years (92, 93, 96, 97, 98) and he won all 5 of them. Lebron's teams were title favorites for 6 straight years from 11 to 16, and only managed 3 out of 6. This year Lebron had another team favorite to win the trophy, and we will see what happens.

[dankok8]

I said the 2016 Warriors weren't an all-time great team in terms of talent. 1st option was Curry, 2nd option was Klay and 3rd option was Draymond. That's not historically stacked by any stretch of imagination.

Your arguments for "washed" teams are ridiculous. Celtics in 2011 and 2012 were washed. OKC in 2012 was too young. Anyone can play that game. It's dumb. The Lakers in 1991 won 58 games and had an SRS of +6.73 which is really good. In fact it's in line with their 80's teams. Pistons in 1991 won 50 games but that's because Isiah missed a lot of games. In the 48 games Isiah played they played at a 54-win pace and had an approximate SRS of +5. They declined from their 1988-1990 form but they weren't done. In fact no one expected the Bulls to beat them easily. What happened in 1992 is irrelevant to 1991.

Postseason net efficiency is useless because sample sizes are too small and differences in opposition are vast. Besides where are those stats from? They don't agree with numbers from Basketball-Reference.

MJ beat more teams with 60+ wins, 55+ wins and even 50+ wins. Also beat more teams with 7+ SRS, 6+ SRS, 5+ SRS and 4+ SRS. On average the teams he beat in the playoffs and in the finals are better than Lebron's. Your arguments aren't in touch with reality.


Jordan in the Playoffs:

Wins Against 60+ Win Opponents: 7
Wins Against 55+ Win Opponents: 13
Wins Against 50+ Win Opponents: 20
Wins Against Sub-50 Win Opponents: 10

Wins Against 7+ SRS Opponents: 3
Wins against 6+ SRS Opponents: 7
Wins Against 5+ SRS Opponents: 14
Wins Against 4+ SRS Opponents: 15

Top 10 Opponents Beat:
1997 FIN Jazz = 64 wins +7.97 SRS
1996 FIN Sonics = 64 wins +7.40 SRS
1993 FIN Suns = 62 wins +6.27 SRS
1998 FIN Jazz = 62 wins +5.73 SRS
1997 ECF Heat = 61 wins +5.56 SRS
1993 ECF Knicks = 60 wins +5.87 SRS
1996 ECF Magic = 60 wins +5.40 SRS
1991 FIN Lakers = 58 wins +6.73 SRS
1998 ECF Pacers = 58 wins +6.25 SRS
1989 R1 Cavaliers = 57 wins +7.95 SRS

Average Opponent Beat: 52.1 wins +3.71 SRS
Average Finals Opponent Beat: 61.2 wins +6.84 SRS

Lebron in the Playoffs:

Wins Against 60+ Win Opponents: 3
Wins Against 55+ Win Opponents: 10
Wins Against 50+ Win Opponents: 18
Win Against Sub-50 Win Opponents: 21

Wins Against 7+ SRS Opponents: 2
Wins against 6+ SRS Opponents: 5
Wins Against 5+ SRS Opponents: 5
Wins Against 4+ SRS Opponents: 8

Top 10 Opponents Beat:
2016 FIN Warriors = 73 wins +10.38 SRS
2011 ECF Bulls = 62 wins +6.53 SRS
2015 ECF Hawks = 60 wins +4.75 SRS
2018 ECSF Raptors = 59 wins + 7.29 SRS
2013 FIN Spurs = 58 wins +6.67 SRS
2012 FIN Thunder = 58 wins +6.44 SRS
2011 ECSF Celtics = 56 wins +4.83 SRS
2016 ECF Raptors = 56 wins +4.08 SRS
2014 ECF Pacers = 56 wins +3.63 SRS
2018 ECF Celtics = 55 wins +3.23 SRS

Average Opponent Beat: 49.0 wins +2.25 SRS
Average Finals Opponent Beat: 59.5 wins +6.51 SRS

Note that I'm not calling MJ's competition better. The onus is on your to provide evidence that Lebron's competition is better and you haven't done it.

I said in the beginning that the competition argument is weak sauce.

[TheCorporation]

MJ's team was title favorite for 5 years (92, 93, 96, 97, 98) and he won all 5 of them. Lebron's teams were title favorites for 6 straight years from 11 to 16, and only managed 3 out of 6. This year Lebron had another team favorite to win the trophy, and we will see what happens.

What's MJ's best Finals opponent?

[TheCorporation]

I said the 2016 Warriors weren't an all-time great team in terms of talent. 1st option was Curry, 2nd option was Klay and 3rd option was Draymond. That's not historically stacked by any stretch of imagination.

Your arguments for "washed" teams are ridiculous. Celtics in 2011 and 2012 were washed. OKC in 2012 was too young. Anyone can play that game. It's dumb. The Lakers in 1991 won 58 games and had an SRS of +6.73 which is really good. In fact it's in line with their 80's teams. Pistons in 1991 won 50 games but that's because Isiah missed a lot of games. In the 48 games Isiah played they played at a 54-win pace and had an approximate SRS of +5. They declined from their 1988-1990 form but they weren't done. In fact no one expected the Bulls to beat them easily. What happened in 1992 is irrelevant to 1991.

Postseason net efficiency is useless because sample sizes are too small and differences in opposition are vast. Besides where are those stats from? They don't agree with numbers from Basketball-Reference.

MJ beat more teams with 60+ wins, 55+ wins and even 50+ wins. Also beat more teams with 7+ SRS, 6+ SRS, 5+ SRS and 4+ SRS. On average the teams he beat in the playoffs and in the finals are better than Lebron's. Your arguments aren't in touch with reality.



Note that I'm not calling MJ's competition better. The onus is on your to provide evidence that Lebron's competition is better and you haven't done it.

I said in the beginning that the competition argument is weak sauce.

What's MJ's best Finals opponent?

[72-10]

To tell the truth, Michael played with some of the most amazing and most athletic players.

[Axe]

I said the 2016 Warriors weren't an all-time great team in terms of talent. 1st option was Curry, 2nd option was Klay and 3rd option was Draymond. That's not historically stacked by any stretch of imagination.

Your arguments for "washed" teams are ridiculous. Celtics in 2011 and 2012 were washed. OKC in 2012 was too young. Anyone can play that game. It's dumb. The Lakers in 1991 won 58 games and had an SRS of +6.73 which is really good. In fact it's in line with their 80's teams. Pistons in 1991 won 50 games but that's because Isiah missed a lot of games. In the 48 games Isiah played they played at a 54-win pace and had an approximate SRS of +5. They declined from their 1988-1990 form but they weren't done. In fact no one expected the Bulls to beat them easily. What happened in 1992 is irrelevant to 1991.

Postseason net efficiency is useless because sample sizes are too small and differences in opposition are vast. Besides where are those stats from? They don't agree with numbers from Basketball-Reference.

MJ beat more teams with 60+ wins, 55+ wins and even 50+ wins. Also beat more teams with 7+ SRS, 6+ SRS, 5+ SRS and 4+ SRS. On average the teams he beat in the playoffs and in the finals are better than Lebron's. Your arguments aren't in touch with reality.



Note that I'm not calling MJ's competition better. The onus is on your to provide evidence that Lebron's competition is better and you haven't done it.

I said in the beginning that the competition argument is weak sauce.
You will only be called a mj stan for not agreeing with him

[kawhileonard2]

Lebron won 2 bronze medals for America, lost to a career loser in Dwight Howard with HCA, got outplayed by Jason Terry in the finals and didn't make the playoffs for the winniest organization in NBA History.

[TheGoatest]

I said the 2016 Warriors weren't an all-time great team in terms of talent. 1st option was Curry, 2nd option was Klay and 3rd option was Draymond. That's not historically stacked by any stretch of imagination.

Your arguments for "washed" teams are ridiculous. Celtics in 2011 and 2012 were washed. OKC in 2012 was too young. Anyone can play that game. It's dumb. The Lakers in 1991 won 58 games and had an SRS of +6.73 which is really good. In fact it's in line with their 80's teams. Pistons in 1991 won 50 games but that's because Isiah missed a lot of games. In the 48 games Isiah played they played at a 54-win pace and had an approximate SRS of +5. They declined from their 1988-1990 form but they weren't done. In fact no one expected the Bulls to beat them easily. What happened in 1992 is irrelevant to 1991.

Postseason net efficiency is useless because sample sizes are too small and differences in opposition are vast. Besides where are those stats from? They don't agree with numbers from Basketball-Reference.

MJ beat more teams with 60+ wins, 55+ wins and even 50+ wins. Also beat more teams with 7+ SRS, 6+ SRS, 5+ SRS and 4+ SRS. On average the teams he beat in the playoffs and in the finals are better than Lebron's. Your arguments aren't in touch with reality.



Note that I'm not calling MJ's competition better. The onus is on your to provide evidence that Lebron's competition is better and you haven't done it.

I said in the beginning that the competition argument is weak sauce.

You use regular season wins to show that Jordan apparently had good competition, but then move the goal posts when it comes to the 73-9 Warriors and say the regular season wins don't matter there and what matters is "talent"?

These were the 2015-16 Golden State Warriors:

Curry: Unanimous MVP
Dray: All-NBA 2nd team, All-defensive 1st team
Klay: All-NBA 3rd team

Apparently, that's not talent or stacked "by any stretch of imagination".
Meanwhile Schrempf, Majerle and Hornacek were "great players". Can't make this shit up. :oldlol:

Jordan never faced a team with 3 All-NBA players, and that says a lot considering that Mark Price and Latrell Sprewell made all-NBA 1st teams in the 90s. And the few times he faced 2 All-NBA players it was either an All-NBA 1st teamer + 3rd teamer (Magic & Worthy in 91 and Malone and Stockton in 97) or two All-NBA 2nd teamers (Payton and Kemp in 96). Hell, Jordan beat one team with 3 all-stars. LeBron beat 3 x all-star teams regularly, and even two teams with 4.

And I'm STILL waiting for your reply to what happened with your mighty "SRS" Jordan's competition teams in 1993-94 and 1994-95? Why weren't they capable of exploiting the two year gap Jordan didn't play to win a championship for themselves? Seriously, can anyone imagine the 2012 Thunder, 2013 Spurs or 2016 Warriors not using the opportunity to win a championship had LeBron been out of the league those seasons?

[dankok8]

You use regular season wins to show that Jordan apparently had good competition, but then move the goal posts when it comes to the 73-9 Warriors and say the regular season wins don't matter there and what matters is "talent"?

These were the 2015-16 Golden State Warriors:

Curry: Unanimous MVP
Dray: All-NBA 2nd team, All-defensive 1st team
Klay: All-NBA 3rd team

Apparently, that's not talent or stacked "by any stretch of imagination".
Meanwhile Schrempf, Majerle and Hornacek were "great players". Can't make this shit up. :oldlol:

Jordan never faced a team with 3 All-NBA players, and that says a lot considering that Mark Price and Latrell Sprewell made all-NBA 1st teams in the 90s. And the few times he faced 2 All-NBA players it was either an All-NBA 1st teamer + 3rd teamer (Magic & Worthy in 91 and Malone and Stockton in 97) or two All-NBA 2nd teamers (Payton and Kemp in 96). Hell, Jordan beat one team with 3 all-stars. LeBron beat 3 x all-star teams regularly, and even two teams with 4.

And I'm STILL waiting for your reply to what happened with your mighty "SRS" Jordan's competition teams in 1993-94 and 1994-95? Why weren't they capable of exploiting the two year gap Jordan didn't play to win a championship for themselves? Seriously, can anyone imagine the 2012 Thunder, 2013 Spurs or 2016 Warriors not using the opportunity to win a championship had LeBron been out of the league those seasons?

I didn't move any goalposts. You're the one fixated on 1st 2nd and 3rd options. So I was simply responding to that line of arguments and said that in terms of talent the GS trio is not historic. Why is Magic/Worthy/Divac for instance worse than Curry/Klay/Draymond?

Way to ignore all the numbers I posted on which teams they beat. You can go by win totals or SRS.

The 2012 Thunder never made the Finals outside of 2012. So yea if Lebron retired after we can say they definitively wouldn't win a title. The 2013 Spurs ended up winning anyways in 2014 against Lebron and they weren't better than teams like the 1993 Suns, 1996 Sonics or 1997 Jazz. Not by win totals, not by SRS, not even by their playoff performances.

I can give you the 2016 Warriors as an impressive scalp. That's one team. That doesn't make for a good argument. Where are the others? Lebron beat only three 60+ win teams in his playoff career. The 2016 Warriors, the 2011 Bulls and the 2015 Hawks. You want to talk about those Bulls and Hawks being great competition? Who are their 1st/2nd/3rd options? And the 2012 Thunder and 2013 Spurs don't make for a good argument. They were on a similar level to the teams Jordan beat in the Finals. What about the 2020 Heat who would be by far the worst team Jordan faced in the Finals?

There is no argument.


What's MJ's best Finals opponent?

I'd go with the 1996 Sonics. They were a historically great defensive team who were also very deep on offense. Payton/Kemp/Schrempf/Hawkins/Perkins offered pretty great offensive balance. They had five consecutive seasons averaging 60 wins and +7.45 SRS which is pretty insane. They are one of the very best teams never to win a title. And that's across all eras.

[TheGoatest]

I didn't move any goalposts. You're the one fixated on 1st 2nd and 3rd options. So I was simply responding to that line of arguments and said that in terms of talent the GS trio is not historic. Why is Magic/Worthy/Divac for instance worse than Curry/Klay/Draymond?

Way to ignore all the numbers I posted on which teams they beat. You can go by win totals or SRS.

The 2012 Thunder never made the Finals outside of 2012. So yea if Lebron retired after we can say they definitively wouldn't win a title. The 2013 Spurs ended up winning anyways in 2014 against Lebron and they weren't better than teams like the 1993 Suns, 1996 Sonics or 1997 Jazz. Not by win totals, not by SRS, not even by their playoff performances.

I can give you the 2016 Warriors as an impressive scalp. That's one team. That doesn't make for a good argument. Where are the others? Lebron beat only three 60+ win teams in his playoff career. The 2016 Warriors, the 2011 Bulls and the 2015 Hawks. You want to talk about those Bulls and Hawks being great competition? Who are their 1st/2nd/3rd options? And the 2012 Thunder and 2013 Spurs don't make for a good argument. They were on a similar level to the teams Jordan beat in the Finals. What about the 2020 Heat who would be by far the worst team Jordan faced in the Finals?

There is no argument.


What an idiotic question. Because Magic was not MVP that season, let alone a unanimous one. Because Divac wasn't anywhere close to an All-NBA/All-defensive team. And obviously because those three didn't even come close to having a 73-9 record.

Why are Magic/Worthy/Divac better than Butler/Adebayo/Herro or Jokic/Murray/Porter Jr.? Why were Payton and Kemp better than Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah? Why were Clyde Drexler and Terry Porter better than Kyle Lowry and DeMar DeRozan?

Bottom line as far as "talent" is concerned:

Durant-Westbrook-Harden-Ibaka
Duncan-Parker-Ginobili-Kawhi
Curry-Klay-Dray-Iguodala

vs

Magic-Worthy-Divac-Perkins
Drexler-Porter-Kersey-Robinson
Barkley-Johnson-Majerle-Dumas
Payton-Kemp-Schrempf-Hawkins
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell

It's obvious which of the two groups gets really watered down past the second, and often past the first player.

And no shit the 2012 Thunder didn't end up making the finals later. It's almost as if they didn't have a guy capable of scoring 35+ per game and winning MVP in their following seasons. They did have him in 2012 though.

The 2012-13 Spurs won 58 games with:

Tim Duncan missing 13 games
Tony Parker missing 16 games
Manu Ginobili missing 22 games
Kawhi missing 24 games

None of these four ended up missing a single game in the 2013 playoffs. They won 58 games with 4 of their best players load-managing away a quarter of the season. And they weren't better than Jordan's Suns/Sonics/Jazz? You expect people who aren't Jordan extremists to believe that? Those Spurs would obliterate any team Jordan ever beat, especially had they saved themselves for the playoffs like they did against LeBron.

Is your precious "SRS" supposed to beat the argument of Jordan's weak competition being unable to win in 1993-94 and 1994-95?

The 1993-94 New York Knicks had a 6.48 SRS rating. Higher than any Knicks team Jordan faced. Why weren't they lifting the championship trophy at the end of the season then?
The 1993-94 Payton-Kemp Sonics had a whopping 8.68 SRS! Higher than their 7.40 rating from 1995-96 when Jordan ended up facing them. Yet for some odd reason they weren't given championship rings on the opening day of the 1994-95 season.
The 1994-95 Orlando Magic had a 6.44 rating. Higher than the 5.40 rating they had the following season when Jordan beat them. Yet no championship banner ended up being raised in Orlando.
Wha happun? :confusedshrug:

Still dodging answering why Jordan's competition weren't able to win championships in 1993-94 and/or 1994-95. Aside from the obvious answer: They weren't that good.

The 2020 Heat would not be the worst finals team Jordan faced. But that's beside the point, and the indisputable fact that the 2012 Thunder, 2013 Spurs and 2016 Warriors were all unquestionably better than any team Jordan ever beat.

[HoopsNY]

You can shit on LeBron's eastern competition all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that he beat three legit all-time great teams in the 2012, 2013 and 2016 finals. Jordan didn't beat anything close to an all-time great team.

So now the 2012 Thunder and the 2013 are not only great teams, but they're all-time great teams!


Some of the third best players from the teams LeBron faced:

Harden
Klay
Duncan/Parker/Kawhi (whoever you consider the third best on those 2014 Spurs)
and now Kyrie

Revisionist history. You conveniently mention Harden before his All-Star years with Houston, as well as Kawhi before he had a lights out performance in the 2013 finals. The fact is, most of these guys weren't viewed with the same lens because they were still very young and unproven.

LeBron stans like to gauge everything with regards to MJ's competition after the fact. And I love how you include Kyrie before the Lakers even face them in the finals!


wipe the floor with most of the second best players of Jordan's 90s opponents. And if I mention the actual third best players from Jordan's opponents like Detlef Schrempf, Dan Majerle, Jeff Hornacek and Jerome Kersey, it gets absolutely laughable.


The problem with Bran Stans is again, they look at everything after the fact and don't consider anything at the time. You have to look at how those players were viewed then.

Dan Majerle was an All-Star in 1993 and also won All-NBA Defensive honors that same year.

Detlef Schrempf was an All-Star and won All-NBA honors in 1995. In 1996 he started the year 19/5/4 on 63% TS%, only to have a left knee fracture and miss the next 6 weeks, which hurt any chances at a shot at an All-Star appearance or winning All-NBA honors.

In 1997, Schrempf made the All-Star team again. And let's not forget, Schrempf was the NBA's Sixth Man of the Year in both 1991 and 1992. You just never saw this man play. He was an excellent player.

The same happened with Kevin Johnson. KJ missed 33 games in 1992-93. But KJ was one of the best players in the league at that time. KJ recorded 3 consecutive seasons of averaging at least 20 points and 10 assists between 1988-91, becoming only the 5th player all time to do it.

Between 1988 and 1994, KJ was All-NBA every single season except for one. Guess which one? Yep, you guessed it - 1993. Maybe him missing 33 games had something to do with it? Otherwise, KJ was a phenomenal player. He was an amazing scorer, ball handler, and playmaker. And there's no reason to think he wouldn't have repeated that performance with a full season.

The man came out in the playoffs and put up 18/8.5/3 on 51% prior to the '93 NBA finals. It's sad kids such as yourself don't see it. Quite frankly, you don't want to see it.

Jordan's competition was fine. In 1996 and 1998, Scottie Pippen was injured in both the ECF and finals, resulting in his worst performances in his career. The result? Chicago won both titles.

[tpols]

His opposition was good. But imagine if MJ got to play with Kareem... or Shaq... or AD... Etc. He literally won 6 rings with Andre Iguodala. That's GOAT.

[warriorfan]

What an idiotic question. Because Magic was not MVP that season, let alone a unanimous one. Because Divac wasn't anywhere close to an All-NBA/All-defensive team. And obviously because those three didn't even come close to having a 73-9 record.

Why are Magic/Worthy/Divac better than Butler/Adebayo/Herro or Jokic/Murray/Porter Jr.? Why were Payton and Kemp better than Derrick Rose and Joakim Noah? Why were Clyde Drexler and Terry Porter better than Kyle Lowry and DeMar DeRozan?

Bottom line as far as "talent" is concerned:

Durant-Westbrook-Harden-Ibaka
Duncan-Parker-Ginobili-Kawhi
Curry-Klay-Dray-Iguodala

vs

Magic-Worthy-Divac-Perkins
Drexler-Porter-Kersey-Robinson
Barkley-Johnson-Majerle-Dumas
Payton-Kemp-Schrempf-Hawkins
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell

It's obvious which of the two groups gets really watered down past the second, and often past the first player.

And no shit the 2012 Thunder didn't end up making the finals later. It's almost as if they didn't have a guy capable of scoring 35+ per game and winning MVP in their following seasons. They did have him in 2012 though.

The 2012-13 Spurs won 58 games with:

Tim Duncan missing 13 games
Tony Parker missing 16 games
Manu Ginobili missing 22 games
Kawhi missing 24 games

None of these four ended up missing a single game in the 2013 playoffs. They won 58 games with 4 of their best players load-managing away a quarter of the season. And they weren't better than Jordan's Suns/Sonics/Jazz? You expect people who aren't Jordan extremists to believe that? Those Spurs would obliterate any team Jordan ever beat, especially had they saved themselves for the playoffs like they did against LeBron.

Is your precious "SRS" supposed to beat the argument of Jordan's weak competition being unable to win in 1993-94 and 1994-95?

The 1993-94 New York Knicks had a 6.48 SRS rating. Higher than any Knicks team Jordan faced. Why weren't they lifting the championship trophy at the end of the season then?
The 1993-94 Payton-Kemp Sonics had a whopping 8.68 SRS! Higher than their 7.40 rating from 1995-96 when Jordan ended up facing them. Yet for some odd reason they weren't given championship rings on the opening day of the 1994-95 season.
The 1994-95 Orlando Magic had a 6.44 rating. Higher than the 5.40 rating they had the following season when Jordan beat them. Yet no championship banner ended up being raised in Orlando.
Wha happun? :confusedshrug:

Still dodging answering why Jordan's competition weren't able to win championships in 1993-94 and/or 1994-95. Aside from the obvious answer: They weren't that good.

The 2020 Heat would not be the worst finals team Jordan faced. But that's beside the point, and the indisputable fact that the 2012 Thunder, 2013 Spurs and 2016 Warriors were all unquestionably better than any team Jordan ever beat.

So now Magic Johnson is better than Steph Curry? :lol

Love the consistency from LeBron fans. Can never keep their agendas straight. :lol

[tpols]

The 2020 Heat are statistically the worst Finals team of all time. They had +6000 ****ing odds to win. Nobody is worse than that. For reference, those are about the same odds the Washington Bullets had at winning the title in 1991.

Also LOL @ that name can you imagine the PC outrage that would get today :roll:

[TheGoatest]

So now the 2012 Thunder and the 2013 are not only great teams, but they're all-time great teams!

Yes. The only reason why LeBron haters try to say they're not is because they lost to LeBron, so their greatness/talent has to be downplayed as much as possible to make LeBron's achievement of beating them as unimpressive as possible. But just imagine the scenario where the 2012 Thunder, aka:

Kevin Durant (league leading scorer, #2 in MVP rankings that season, future MVP/Finals MVP)
Russell Westbrook (All-NBA 2nd team that season, future MVP)
James Harden (6th man of the year that season, future MVP/35+ ppg scorer)
Serge Ibaka (All-defense 1st team big man that season, a handful of votes away from winning DPOY)

Actually beat the Heat.
How would the 2012 NBA Champions Oklahoma City Thunder be discussed in All-time great team discussions? You could match up those players and their resumé against ANY past NBA champions. Durant, Westbrook and Harden without a reputation as losers (where you could use all of their statistical accomplishments freely without the label of "empty stats" since they would've been champions) discussed against the Magic-Kareem-Worthy Lakers, or Bird-McHale-Parish Celtics. And then on top of that you have #2 in DPOY Serge Ibaka to throw in as a bonus. Meanwhile, had the Bulls lost to the teams they faced in the finals, would anyone think that

Magic-Worthy-Divac-Perkins
Drexler-Porter-Kersey-Robinson
Barkley-Johnson-Majerle-Dumas
Payton-Kemp-Schrempf-Hawkins
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell

were all-time great teams? You would get laughed out of a room if you compared the third best players Jeff Hornacek or Dan Majerle to the third best players James Worthy and McHale/Parish, regardless of whether Jeff Hornacek and Majerle were champions or not.


Revisionist history. You conveniently mention Harden before his All-Star years with Houston, as well as Kawhi before he had a lights out performance in the 2013 finals. The fact is, most of these guys weren't viewed with the same lens because they were still very young and unproven.

Everyone knew that Harden was a well-over 20ppg player in 2012, had he been given the keys to his own team instead of having to share the perimeter with Durant and Westbrook. I repeat: James Harden scored 37 and 45 in his first two games with the Rockets, just months after the 2012 NBA finals had finished. The only revisionism here is someone going back and trying to exploit the fact that Harden couldn't get the minutes and touches because he played behind Durant and Westbrook, aka you.

As for Kawhi, the only reason he wasn't selected to an all-defensive team in 2012-13 is because he only played 58 games that season, aka load managing for the playoffs which makes LeBron beating the 2013 Spurs in the finals even more impressive. But in the games he did play that season Kawhi was 2nd in minutes for the Spurs, and had a sub-100 defensive rating. However, even if you take Kawhi away from the 2012-13 Spurs, the Spurs still had:

Tim Duncan: All-NBA 1st team that season, All-defensive 2nd team that season
Tony Parker: All-NBA 2nd team that season

The resumé of those two that season is greater than any 2 players from a team that Jordan beat in a playoffs/finals series.


LeBron stans like to gauge everything with regards to MJ's competition after the fact. And I love how you include Kyrie before the Lakers even face them in the finals!

No, you see that's the beautiful thing about Jordan retiring in 1993-95. Because those two seasons that the Bulls didn't win can be used as proof that the Barkleys, the Ewings, the Stockton-Malones, the Payton-Kemps, etc. were weak competition because they couldn't exploit those two seasons to win a championship for themselves, even though they were spared the burden of having to face the Almighty, scary Jordan.


The problem with Bran Stans is again, they look at everything after the fact and don't consider anything at the time. You have to look at how those players were viewed then.

Dan Majerle was an All-Star in 1993 and also won All-NBA Defensive honors that same year.

Detlef Schrempf was an All-Star and won All-NBA honors in 1995. In 1996 he started the year 19/5/4 on 63% TS%, only to have a left knee fracture and miss the next 6 weeks, which hurt any chances at a shot at an All-Star appearance or winning All-NBA honors.

In 1997, Schrempf made the All-Star team again. And let's not forget, Schrempf was the NBA's Sixth Man of the Year in both 1991 and 1992. You just never saw this man play. He was an excellent player.

The same happened with Kevin Johnson. KJ missed 33 games in 1992-93. But KJ was one of the best players in the league at that time. KJ recorded 3 consecutive seasons of averaging at least 20 points and 10 assists between 1988-91, becoming only the 5th player all time to do it.

Between 1988 and 1994, KJ was All-NBA every single season except for one. Guess which one? Yep, you guessed it - 1993. Maybe him missing 33 games had something to do with it? Otherwise, KJ was a phenomenal player. He was an amazing scorer, ball handler, and playmaker. And there's no reason to think he wouldn't have repeated that performance with a full season.

The man came out in the playoffs and put up 18/8.5/3 on 51% prior to the '93 NBA finals. It's sad kids such as yourself don't see it. Quite frankly, you don't want to see it.

Jordan's competition was fine. In 1996 and 1998, Scottie Pippen was injured in both the ECF and finals, resulting in his worst performances in his career. The result? Chicago won both titles.

No matter how you look at Majerle and Schrempf, even at their very peaks those players were weak-sauce as far as being 3rd best players on a championship team. Every objective fan knows this. Can you imagine those two or someone like Jerome Kersey being a part of a legit "big 3"?

Why do you mention 1992-93 Kevin Johnson when you know and you mention that he was injured that season when Jordan faced him in the finals. His numbers were clearly worse that particular season than both the season before and the season after, where he didn't face Jordan.

But I'm actually glad that you brought up the whole "at the time" subject up. Because let's look at 1996-98 John Stockton. Michael Jordan gets noted for beating the "Malone-Stockton" Jazz, a misleading title taken out of context because 1996-98 John Stockton was absolute GARBAGE compared to the early 90s John Stockton. After leading the league in assists for 9 straight seasons, 1996-97, aka the season he faced Jordan in the finals was the first season he didn't lead the league in assists. And the following season when he faced the Bulls in the finals the 2nd time he was even worse.

[TheGoatest]

So now Magic Johnson is better than Steph Curry? :lol

Love the consistency from LeBron fans. Can never keep their agendas straight. :lol

So now 2015-16 Steph Curry is worse than 1990-91 Magic Johnson? :lol

Love the consistency from Curry fans. Can never keep their agendas straight. :lol

What agenda do you speak of? I'm not comparing their whole careers, where Magic clearly beats Curry. But show me a past post of mine where I said that 1990-91 Magic Johnson was better than 2015-16 Steph Curry? I've always said that 2015-16 Curry was the one and only season over the past 10 years where Curry was better than LeBron. Or at least would've been had LeBron not beaten him in the finals in the end. Which of course LeBron did.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The reality is that there have been plenty of responses from guys like yourself, 97_Bulls, me, kuniva, etc. But what you'll notice is that no one actually responds to our responses.

Pretty much.

I get along with most people here, but had "arguments" about that stuff in the past. Literally the same debates by Roundball and I.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13986899&viewfull=1#post13986899
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13987403&viewfull=1#post13987403
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13987545&viewfull=1#post13987545
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ/page23

Reading that over, though, its kind of funny seeing "dankok" co-signing Jordan's weak comp. Here though he is saying its an eccentric claim. Yikes :lol

[dankok8]

Harden averaged 12 ppg in the 2012 Finals and was a defensive sieve. Averaged 17 ppg in the regular season. LOL at bringing him up when discussing all-time great casts. 2012 Harden was just ok and didn't even make the All-Star team. What he became in later years is irrelevant. He wasn't a great player while on the Thunder.

Why are these guys like Majerle, Schrempf and Hornacek who were all-star caliber players for several years not good 3rd options? Those guys played better basketball in many of those seasons than Harden did in 2012. Your problem is you're fixated on names. You're right that Stockton in 1998 wasn't that good. Now apply that same standards to 2012 Harden and 2013 Kawhi instead of pretending they were in their primes...

[dankok8]

Pretty much.

I get along with most people here, but had "arguments" about that stuff in the past. Literally the same debates by Roundball and I.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13986899&viewfull=1#post13986899
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13987403&viewfull=1#post13987403
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13987545&viewfull=1#post13987545
http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ/page23

Reading that over, though, its kind of funny seeing "dankok" co-signing Jordan's weak comp. Here though he is saying its an eccentric claim. Yikes :lol

Yes Jordan (and Lebron of course) had weaker competition compared to Kareem who played in the 70's and 80's.

The 70's and 80's were the most difficult eras no doubt about it. Look at the teams Kareem lost to in the 70's:

1970 Knicks (all-time great team...)
1972 Lakers (all-time great team...)
1973 Warriors (bad loss...)
1974 Celtics (all-time great team...)
1977 Blazers (all-time great team...)
1978 Sonics (good team...)
1979 Sonics (good team...)

Kareem had no good casts in those years. 1970 was his rookie year with little support and then Oscar got hurt in 1972 and was never the same.

Apart from 1973 you can't blame him for any of the other losses.

[warriorfan]

Harden averaged 12 ppg in the 2012 Finals and was a defensive sieve. Averaged 17 ppg in the regular season. LOL at bringing him up when discussing all-time great casts. 2012 Harden was just ok and didn't even make the All-Star team. What he became in later years is irrelevant. He wasn't a great player while on the Thunder.

Why are these guys like Majerle, Schrempf and Hornacek who were all-star caliber players for several years not good 3rd options? Those guys played better basketball in many of those seasons than Harden did in 2012. Your problem is you're fixated on names. You're right that Stockton in 1998 wasn't that good. Now apply that same standards to 2012 Harden and 2013 Kawhi instead of pretending they were in their primes...

All 3 of them were 22 and 23 years old. There’s never been a team that won the Finals with a core of guys anywhere near those ages. They did have talent but didn’t have the experience needed to be a powerhouse Finals opponent.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Yes Jordan (and Lebron of course) hade weaker competition compared to Kareem who played in the 70's and 80's.

The 70's and 80's were the most difficult eras no doubt about it. Look at the teams Kareem lost to in the 70's:

1970 Knicks (all-time great team...)
1972 Lakers (all-time great team...)
1973 Warriors (bad loss...)
1974 Celtics (all-time great team...)
1977 Blazers (all-time great team...)
1978 Sonics (good team...)
1979 Sonics (good team...)

Kareem had no good casts in those years. 1970 was his rookie year with little support and then Oscar got hurt in 1972 and was never the same.

Apart from 1973 you can't blame him for any of the other losses.

But this was you just months ago...


90's were weak relatively speaking compared to the Bulls. That's easy to see when you consider that Scottie Pippen was better than any second option on any team in the 90's. Heck he was better than many first options. Injured Worthy, Kevin Porter, injured KJ, Shawn Kemp, John Stockton... Pippen was a better player than all those guys. And he was better than Drexler and Payton who were first options.

It could be that Jordan is so much better than any other player in modern history (as his stans would have you believe) but stats and team results in different circumstances don't support that. Jordan wasn't able to elevate crap teams to championships just like no other player ever could do it (there were a few lucky runs in history but they are rare...). To go on such huge winning runs like Bulls in the 90's or Russell's Celtics in the 60's, it pretty much automatically means you have weaker competition. Bulls haven't faced a single all time great team during their 90's run and that's evidenced by the titles those other teams won. Blazers, Knicks, Suns, Sonics, Heat, Pacers, Jazz... none of these teams won a championship in that era even when Jordan took his vacation or when he basically retired in 1998. Of course Showtime Lakers won titles in the 80's but the 1991 version was injured and well past their best anyway.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13988028&viewfull=1#post13988028

There was no comparison to the 70s or 80s in here. You also used the word "relative", comparing the weak 90s to the 60s.

You're that clown who just posts shit he don't really believe :oldlol:

[dankok8]

But this was you just months ago...



http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13988028&viewfull=1#post13988028

There was no comparison to the 70s or 80s in here. You also used the word "relative", comparing the weak 90s to the 60s.

You're that clown who just posts shit he don't really believe :oldlol:

That was in response to trolls like 3ball who pretend Jordan won with trash. Pippen was better than all the 2nd options in the 90's. No individual player no matter how great can win consistently without a great supporting cast. And that includes MJ.

I didn't say anything contradictory to what I'm saying now... The difference is that LeStans have taken it to a whole other level now so anyone rational looks like a Jordan stan.

Some of my takes were slightly misinformed. My views on some things have evolved.

[TheGoatest]

Harden averaged 12 ppg in the 2012 Finals and was a defensive sieve. Averaged 17 ppg in the regular season. LOL at bringing him up when discussing all-time great casts. 2012 Harden was just ok and didn't even make the All-Star team. What he became in later years is irrelevant. He wasn't a great player while on the Thunder.

Why are these guys like Majerle, Schrempf and Hornacek who were all-star caliber players for several years not good 3rd options? Those guys played better basketball in many of those seasons than Harden did in 2012. Your problem is you're fixated on names. You're right that Stockton in 1998 wasn't that good. Now apply that same standards to 2012 Harden and 2013 Kawhi instead of pretending they were in their primes...

Yes, we all know that the LeBron-led 2012 Heat defense held Harden to 12 ppg in the 2012 finals. Harden was still universally recognized as a star player who was prohibited from being a star because he played on a team whose perimeter was too stacked.

If you want to talk about how their opponents did in the finals against them, then how about mentioning that the second leading scorer for the Jazz in the 1998 Finals averaged 10.7 points. No, that's not a typo. 10.7 points per game! Second leading scorer. On .411 shooting too.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

That was in response to trolls like 3ball who pretend Jordan won with trash. Pippen was better than all the 2nd options in the 90's. No individual player no matter how great can win consistently without a great supporting cast. And that includes MJ.

I didn't say anything contradictory to what I'm saying now... The difference is that LeStans have taken it to a whole other level now so anyone rational looks like a Jordan stan.

Some of my takes were slightly misinformed. My views on some things have evolved.

Sure you did :oldlol:

You literally claimed the 90s were WEAK in that post, relative to the bulls. That is the opposite of what you are saying now.


Some of my takes were slightly misinformed. My views on some things have evolved.

Why not just say that? Instead you're jumping thru hoops and claiming nothing is contradictory.

Don't care either way but a little consistency isn't hard :confusedshrug:

[dankok8]

Sure you did :oldlol:

You literally claimed the 90s were WEAK in that post, relative to the bulls. That is the opposite of what you are saying now.



Why not just say that? Instead you're jumping thru hoops and claiming nothing is contradictory.

Don't care either way but a little consistency isn't hard :confusedshrug:

The Bulls were the most talented team for much of the 90's. That's why they won the most titles. I have no problem admitting that now or ever. This thread is about Jordan's competition being weak compared to Lebron's competition. That's what the point of my posting in this thread was. I never once claimed those teams like Suns, Sonics etc. were better than the Bulls did I?

I was quite surprised when you called me a clown. I respected you as a poster...

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

The Bulls were the most talented team for much of the 90's. That's why they won the most titles. I have no problem admitting that now or ever. This thread is about Jordan's competition being weak compared to Lebron's competition. That's what the point of my posting in this thread was. I never once claimed those teams like Suns, Sonics etc. were better than the Bulls did I?

I agree with this.

But again, that's different than saying the 90s were "weak" because the Bulls were successful. Which is what YOU claimed. :confusedshrug:


I was quite surprised when you called me a clown. I respected you as a poster...

Like I said, not a big deal. Do you. I just think its weird that you're telling posters the complete opposite of what you thought. And then saying they are wrong. That's clownish...and...odd

[Smoke117]

I agree with this.

But again, that's different than saying the 90s were "weak" because the Bulls were successful. Which is what YOU claimed. :confusedshrug:



Like I said, not a big deal. Do you. I just think its weird that you're telling posters the complete opposite of what you thought. And then saying they are wrong. That's clownish...and...odd

Awwwwwwwww... what a sweet and fakkot filled moment you two cupcakes are having. :cheers:

[Axe]

But this was you just months ago...



http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13988028&viewfull=1#post13988028

There was no comparison to the 70s or 80s in here. You also used the word "relative", comparing the weak 90s to the 60s.

You're that clown who just posts shit he don't really believe :oldlol:
Wow, can't believe you're this much good at backtracking.

[kawhileonard2]

Jordan's competition was the best that is why the ratings were the best during his time. Bad ratings equal bad competition: Example 2020 Finals was the worst ratings ever.

[dankok8]

I agree with this.

But again, that's different than saying the 90s were "weak" because the Bulls were successful. Which is what YOU claimed. :confusedshrug:



Like I said, not a big deal. Do you. I just think its weird that you're telling posters the complete opposite of what you thought. And then saying they are wrong. That's clownish...and...odd

Yea compared to the 70's and 80's, the 90's particularly the latter part of the decade, were weaker. That's common knowledge. I didn't tell anyone the opposite of anything. I said in this thread that it is eccentric to consider the 90's a weak era compared to the 10's particularly in the context of Jordan and Lebron which is the subject of this thread. Lebron had a very noticeable talent advantage over almost all good teams he beat. And Jordan beat more great teams by almost any win or SRS cutoff you use. TheGoatest has absolutely no facts to back up his arguments. To make things worse a few threads like this are made every week and the Lebron camp never comes up with any evidence. All we hear is talk about 2nd options and 3rd options and so on. With of course a healthy dose of cherrypicking. There is also no disctinction between winning and losing to good teams. What good is talking about the KD/Curry Warriors when Lebron never beat them...

Whatever advantages in talent Jordan and his Bulls had... Lebron and his teams had comparable if not greater advantages. The thread where I made that "contradictory" post was about comparing the 70's and Kareem to 90's and Jordan. Kareem played under tougher circumstances than Jordan (and Lebron). Again... That should be common knowledge. And it doesn't contradict what I'm saying here even if it looks like that.

I apologize if I use hyperbole in my posts. I'll try to say "weaker" rather than "weak". I guess hyperbole can make a person look stupid when taken out of context especially with opposite sides of the argument! :oldlol:

To clarify my position so there is no confusion:

Kareem's competition > Jordan's competition = Lebron's competition

[97 bulls]

To be fair. The Knicks did make it to the Championship and lost in 7 hard fought games. They only lost that game 7 by 6pts. And that was due in large part to John Starks going 2/18.

[97 bulls]

To be fair, the Knicks did make the Finals and lost in 7 games. The game 7 was lost by 6 pts. And they wouldve won if Starks doesnt shoot a paltry 2/18.

So one bad game by John Starks changes the whole fortune of the Bulls dynasty, Jordan, Hakeem Olajuwan, Patrick Ewing, how the Knicks are viewed? Really?

I also find it funny that this "competition" argument is always only centered around the Finals. Not the regular season or the playoffs. That's always been a weak argument for me. Sample size is very important. Look at John Stark one bad game and how it effects the careers of alltime greats, himself, and 3 Franchises.

[Axe]

I also find it funny that this "competition" argument is always only centered around the Finals. Not the regular season or the playoffs.
That's because they need to show everyone that he's a victim of facing dynasty teams, for the sake of justifying their hero's finals losses.

[SATAN]

This thread is about Jordan's competition being weak compared to Lebron's competition.

The thread was solely about MJ's. The typical lunatics completely deferred and started talking about LeBron.

The obsession is extremely weird.

[Axe]

It must be said that whatever popular fanbase between the two you're rooting for, needless to say you could be obsessed with either if you often engage in topics that talk about them, whether it's hate or love. You're a dumbfukk if you don't realize this so stop acting like a goddamn hypocrite.

[Mr. Woke]

The 90s NBA was weaker and had less talent overall.

LeBron has faced tougher competition, period.

[mehyaM24]

they weren't trash but are overrated by jordan mythologists. people in that camp act like everything back then was a foul. pure bs.

give or take, that era was comparable to the 2000s and MOST YEARS before the 3pt influx. you had outliers like the pistons using flagrant fouls to their advantage. but that stopped when jordan complained to the league office and had them adjust the rulebook. foul is a foul was no longer true.

[light]

It is a matter of fact that talent was diluted in the expansion era (1988 to 2004).

7 additional teams were added during this span and of course it would have an effect on talent distribution.

(It is not a coincidence that the most stacked team of the 90's was also the winningest team of the 90's. Jordan can thank Jerry Krause for creating that advantage for him.)

We've been steady at 30 teams since 2004, this has helped create a situation similar to pre-expansion when there were multiple powerhouses loaded with talent delivering some of the most competitive and entertaining finals of all time.

[dankok8]

Expansion dilutes talent but all eras after an expansion are automatically weaker including today's NBA. It's not like it's only weak right after an expansion.

[HoopsNY]

Yes. The only reason why LeBron haters try to say they're not is because they lost to LeBron, so their greatness/talent has to be downplayed as much as possible to make LeBron's achievement of beating them as unimpressive as possible. But just imagine the scenario where the 2012 Thunder, aka:

Kevin Durant (league leading scorer, #2 in MVP rankings that season, future MVP/Finals MVP)
Russell Westbrook (All-NBA 2nd team that season, future MVP)
James Harden (6th man of the year that season, future MVP/35+ ppg scorer)
Serge Ibaka (All-defense 1st team big man that season, a handful of votes away from winning DPOY)

So now we've redefined the meaning of not only what a super-team is, but also what an all-time great team is. LeBron stans repeatedly try to claim that the '96 Bulls were a "superteam" and now we're hearing that the 2012 Thunder are an all-time great team off of 2 All-NBA players, Harden (Sixth Man), and Ibaka (didn't win DPOY but finished 2nd). More arbitrary rules as we go along. Not to mention, Goatest wants to ignore that Miami had 3 All-Stars (Wade, Bosh, LeBron). But I guess that doesn't count. :lol

So what would this make the 1985 Milwaukee Bucks? The '85 Bucks were a 59 win team (OKC had a 58-59 win pace in 2012), with two All-NBA players and Paul Pressey who won All-Defensive honors as did Sidney Moncrief, and their Head Coach, Don Nelson, was Coach of the Year.

In those days, there was no All-NBA 3rd team, otherwise Pressey probably would have won that, too. But MJ haters routinely disrespect that team.

Here are some numbers:

1985 Bucks

SRS: 6.69 (1st)
ORTG: 6th
DRTG: 2nd

2012 Thunder

SRS: 6.44 (3rd)
ORTG: 2nd
DRTG: 11th

How about the 2007 Suns?

Nash: All-NBA
Amare: All-NBA
Barbosa: Sixth Man of the Year
Marion: 4th in DPOY Voting

Guess they don't qualify. :confusedshrug:

Teams like Milwaukee were filled with "bums" while OKC Thunder are an all-time great team. Put 'em right up there with the 2000 Lakers, 1996 Bulls, 2017 Warriors, and the 1986 Celtics.

2001 Sixers had 2 All-NBA players, the DPOY, the Sixth Man of the Year, the Coach of the Year, and also made it to the finals. Yep, all-time great team for sure, right? :lol

Here's a fun fact, the 1991 Lakers had 2 All-NBA players, the Bulls had 1. That must mean something about competition, right? And notice again the heavy emphasis on KD being a future MVP and Harden also being a future MVP.

For Bran stans, it doesn't matter what your track record was, even as early as the previous season. What matters is what happened after that year, which ultimately determines how good you were for that particular year in question. And when that fails, try to make your competition more than they actually were.

[Smoke117]

So now we've redefined the meaning of not only what a super-team is, but also what an all-time great team is. LeBron stans repeatedly try to claim that the '96 Bulls were a "superteam" and now we're hearing that the 2012 Thunder are an all-time great team off of 2 All-NBA players, Harden (Sixth Man), and Ibaka (didn't win DPOY but finished 2nd). More arbitrary rules as we go along. Not to mention, Goatest wants to ignore that Miami had 3 All-Stars (Wade, Bosh, LeBron). But I guess that doesn't count. :lol

So what would this make the 1985 Milwaukee Bucks? The '85 Bucks were a 59 win team (OKC had a 58-59 win pace in 2012), with two All-NBA players and Paul Pressey who won All-Defensive honors as did Sidney Moncrief, and their Head Coach, Don Nelson, was Coach of the Year.

In those days, there was no All-NBA 3rd team, otherwise Pressey probably would have won that, too. But MJ haters routinely disrespect that team.

Here are some numbers:

1985 Bucks

SRS: 6.69 (1st)
ORTG: 6th
DRTG: 2nd

2012 Thunder

SRS: 6.44 (3rd)
ORTG: 2nd
DRTG: 11th

How about the 2007 Suns?

Nash: All-NBA
Amare: All-NBA
Barbosa: Sixth Man of the Year
Marion: 4th in DPOY Voting

Guess they don't qualify. :confusedshrug:

Teams like Milwaukee were filled with "bums" while OKC Thunder are an all-time great team. Put 'em right up there with the 2000 Lakers, 1996 Bulls, 2017 Warriors, and the 1986 Celtics.

2001 Sixers had 2 All-NBA players, the DPOY, the Sixth Man of the Year, the Coach of the Year, and also made it to the finals. Yep, all-time great team for sure, right? :lol

Here's a fun fact, the 1991 Lakers had 2 All-NBA players, the Bulls had 1. That must mean something about competition, right? And notice again the heavy emphasis on KD being a future MVP and Harden also being a future MVP.

For Bran stans, it doesn't matter what your track record was, even as early as the previous season. What matters is what happened after that year, which ultimately determines how good you were for that particular year in question. And when that fails, try to make your competition more than they actually were.

Meltdown.

[HoopsNY]

Actually beat the Heat.

How would the 2012 NBA Champions Oklahoma City Thunder be discussed in All-time great team discussions? You could match up those players and their resumé against ANY past NBA champions. Durant, Westbrook and Harden without a reputation as losers (where you could use all of their statistical accomplishments freely without the label of "empty stats" since they would've been champions) discussed against the Magic-Kareem-Worthy Lakers, or Bird-McHale-Parish Celtics. And then on top of that you have #2 in DPOY Serge Ibaka to throw in as a bonus. Meanwhile, had the Bulls lost to the teams they faced in the finals, would anyone think that

Magic-Worthy-Divac-Perkins
Drexler-Porter-Kersey-Robinson
Barkley-Johnson-Majerle-Dumas
Payton-Kemp-Schrempf-Hawkins
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell
Malone-Stockton-Hornacek-Russell

were all-time great teams? You would get laughed out of a room if you compared the third best players Jeff Hornacek or Dan Majerle to the third best players James Worthy and McHale/Parish, regardless of whether Jeff Hornacek and Majerle were champions or not.

But they didn't lose. That's the point. Furthermore, if any of those teams had beaten Chicago, then they would have prevailed as underdogs and would probably classified as an all-time great team, since all of those Bulls teams were elite and 60+ win teams, with the exception of the '93 Bulls.

Jerome Kersey was an excellent player. He was amazingly strong and athletic. It's sad that kids such as yourself don't understand how systems worked. The Blazers had a well oiled machine with a lot of talent and athleticism.

Kersey in the 1992 playoffs put up 16/8/4 on 51% and 2 steals. Between 1988-92 in the playoffs, he put up 19/8/3/2/1 on 48%. He just ran into a great defensive team like Chicago.

But you suffer from recency bias. Were you watching basketball during the early 90s? I have my doubts that you were. You fail to realize that players assumed roles and played within systems far more than the iso ball that you see today. That's why they're called teams.

Take Hersey Hawkins for example. Hawkins was a sharpshooter and played alongside Barkley in Philly. He was both a 1st and 2nd option at various points in his career with Philly. He joins the Hornets and became the 3rd option.

In those days, 3rd options were typically shooters (Scott, Toni Kukoc, Hawkins, Hornacek, Mullin (Pacers), Majerle, Schrempf, etc).

In Hawkins' first season in 1994, his PPG dropped from 20 to 14, despite his FG% remaining about the same (47% to 46%). LJ and Zo both missed the entire month of February that season. In those 11 games, Hawkins put up 19/6/3 on 48%. The team went 1-10, but that wasn't Hawkins' fault. The man could play on winning teams and could fit into any system.

You just never saw him play it seems, never saw him move off the ball, or see him in transition. He was an excellent guard. The same can be said about Schrempf. Schrempf was All-NBA 2nd team in 1995. He was Sixth Man of the Year in both 1991 and 1992. In 1996, he started the season averaging 19/5/4 on 63% TS% before getting sidelined for six weeks with a terrible injury. In 1997 he was an All-Star. Schrempf was an excellent player. You just don't accept it because your view of basketball doesn't move beyond your era.

[HoopsNY]

No matter how you look at Majerle and Schrempf, even at their very peaks those players were weak-sauce as far as being 3rd best players on a championship team. Every objective fan knows this. Can you imagine those two or someone like Jerome Kersey being a part of a legit "big 3"?


Yes, because 1993 Majerle averaged 17/5/4 on 57% TS%. He was an All-Star and won All-Defensive honors in 1993. Ask Allan Houston and Latrell Spreewell about the fits he gave them when he guarded them in Miami. Majerle was no scrub.


Why do you mention 1992-93 Kevin Johnson when you know and you mention that he was injured that season when Jordan faced him in the finals. His numbers were clearly worse that particular season than both the season before and the season after, where he didn't face Jordan.

That's exactly the point, though. KJ missed significant time and injuries affected his regular season numbers. In the postseason he did his thing. Chicago's defense got to him in the finals, just look at his numbers in the playoffs prior to the finals.


But I'm actually glad that you brought up the whole "at the time" subject up. Because let's look at 1996-98 John Stockton. Michael Jordan gets noted for beating the "Malone-Stockton" Jazz, a misleading title taken out of context because 1996-98 John Stockton was absolute GARBAGE compared to the early 90s John Stockton. After leading the league in assists for 9 straight seasons, 1996-97, aka the season he faced Jordan in the finals was the first season he didn't lead the league in assists. And the following season when he faced the Bulls in the finals the 2nd time he was even worse.

What does that matter when evaluating the Jazz as a team? They beat the Rockets, Spurs, and Lakers in that playoffs. They beat San Antonio 4-1 and swept a 61 win Lakers team. Let me guess, Duncan, Robinson, Shaq, Jones, and Kobe all sucked then, too?

And what do you know about Stockton in 1998, anyway? This type of analysis is so half baked, it's unbelievable. Stockton missed the first month of the season, and when he returned, he was placed on a minutes restriction. Stockton's first 12 games of the season, he averaged just 24.6 minutes a game.

Here are the splits:

First 12 games: 10.9/1.8/5.8/1.2 on 64% TS%
Final 52 games: 12.2/2.8/9.1/1.4 on 63% TS%

Notice a significant increase in assists for Stockton as his minutes went up. In those final 52 minutes, he averaged 30 minutes per game. Stockton wasn't garbage at all, his production went down due to minutes and injury. Had nothing to do with his actual ability.

1997 Stockton: 35 MPG
1998 Stockton: 29 MPG

:confusedshrug:

[HoopsNY]

It is a matter of fact that talent was diluted in the expansion era (1988 to 2004).

7 additional teams were added during this span and of course it would have an effect on talent distribution.

(It is not a coincidence that the most stacked team of the 90's was also the winningest team of the 90's. Jordan can thank Jerry Krause for creating that advantage for him.)

We've been steady at 30 teams since 2004, this has helped create a situation similar to pre-expansion when there were multiple powerhouses loaded with talent delivering some of the most competitive and entertaining finals of all time.

97_Bulls and I have responded to this point on numerous thread. Still no responses. Just a reiteration of the original claim that has already been debunked.

[kawhileonard2]

The 90s NBA was weaker and had less talent overall.

LeBron has faced tougher competition, period.

Then Lebron should have had better ratings.

[guy]

Then these two teams got washed, along with the Lakers. He got the luckiest power vacuum exploitation. If it wasn't for the Bulls, the 1990s were basically the 1970s in terms of power balance. The 70s are known as the weakest decade because of so many different champions. If you take away the Bulls, this is what the champions of the 1990s look like based on who gave the Bulls the most trouble in the playoffs/finals:

1990: Pistons
1991: Lakers
1992: Knicks
1993: Suns
1994: Rockets
1995: Rockets
1996: Sonics
1997: Jazz
1998: Pacers
1999: Spurs

We're looking at a decade with no fewer than 7 and as many as 9 champions in 10 years. Just absolute cannon fodder for one great team to exploit. Kareem would've done the exact same thing throughout the 70s that the Bulls did in the 90s if he had one elite player like Pippen playing next to him. Or if Oscar Robertson was about 10 years younger.

The 70s are not considered weak cause of so many different champions. They are considered weak because for half of the decade the NBA was splitting the talent pool with another league, so many players were on drugs, selfish basketball wasn't as frowned upon and it wasn't as important to guys to win, and the sport in general was still in a significant growth phase and had yet to hit great levels of popularity so the talent pool wasn't as large. The different champions have nothing to do with it.

I really don’t understand how this became an argument. There’s no logic to it. More or less champions/finals teams over a period of time doesn’t mean shit. By your logic, if you put the 20 greatest teams in the same era, you are probably seeing a revolving door of finals teams, but according to you, that’s a weak era. If in the 90s, you just made the Rockets, Sonics, Suns, and Blazers all significantly worse teams then they were, then the Jazz are making the finals every year vs the Bulls and according to you that’s a stronger era even though clearly a number of teams just got worse? That makes zero sense.

[guy]

And I'm STILL waiting for your reply to what happened with your mighty "SRS" Jordan's competition teams in 1993-94 and 1994-95? Why weren't they capable of exploiting the two year gap Jordan didn't play to win a championship for themselves?

Another team stepped up to take the Bulls place as there best player who is one of the greatest players of all-time was peaking during that time.

What exactly is your point here? That teams like the Suns, Knicks, Sonics, and Jazz were just completely incapable of winning absolutely no matter what the circumstances were? That even if Jordan had been retired in 93, 96-98, then these teams still wouldn't have won? You do realize that there has to be an NBA champion right :oldlol: ? Its not like Jordan would've retired and they wouldn't have been an NBA finals.

Or are you saying someone like Hakeem purposefully ducked Jordan, so in the case if Jordan didn't exist, somehow he wouldn't have lost to the Sonics and Jazz those years and would've beaten all those teams in those years as well? I'm not sure how thats a knock on Jordan.

[8Ball]

You can shit on LeBron's eastern competition all you want, but that doesn't change the fact that he beat three legit all-time great teams in the 2012, 2013 and 2016 finals. Jordan didn't beat anything close to an all-time great team.

Some of the third best players from the teams LeBron faced:

Harden
Klay
Duncan/Parker/Kawhi (whoever you consider the third best on those 2014 Spurs)
and now Kyrie

wipe the floor with most of the second best players of Jordan's 90s opponents. And if I mention the actual third best players from Jordan's opponents like Detlef Schrempf, Dan Majerle, Jeff Hornacek and Jerome Kersey, it gets absolutely laughable.

Jordan got destroyed by the Celtics
Then he got destroyed by the Celtics again
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons again
Then he got destroyed by the Pistons yet again

Then these two teams got washed, along with the Lakers. He got the luckiest power vacuum exploitation. If it wasn't for the Bulls, the 1990s were basically the 1970s in terms of power balance. The 70s are known as the weakest decade because of so many different champions. If you take away the Bulls, this is what the champions of the 1990s look like based on who gave the Bulls the most trouble in the playoffs/finals:

1990: Pistons
1991: Lakers
1992: Knicks
1993: Suns
1994: Rockets
1995: Rockets
1996: Sonics
1997: Jazz
1998: Pacers
1999: Spurs

We're looking at a decade with no fewer than 7 and as many as 9 champions in 10 years. Just absolute cannon fodder for one great team to exploit. Kareem would've done the exact same thing throughout the 70s that the Bulls did in the 90s if he had one elite player like Pippen playing next to him. Or if Oscar Robertson was about 10 years younger.

The Spurs of 2013 would destroy all those teams and sweep the entire 90s.

2012 OKC is stronger than all those 90s teams.

[Gimmedarock]

If we’re honest, there are plenty of modern teams that would crush the best of the 90’s. Can you imagine those guys looking around absolutely lost while modern players are stuffing threes in their mugs. Not one guy scoring like they were use to but 5 guys on the court who all have the green light. Every guy with handles blowing buy the 90’s defenders. Come on now. It’s not disrespectful to Jordan but the game evolves. If his competition was still good in 2021, that would be pretty sad.

[HoopsNY]

If we’re honest, there are plenty of modern teams that would crush the best of the 90’s. Can you imagine those guys looking around absolutely lost while modern players are stuffing threes in their mugs. Not one guy scoring like they were use to but 5 guys on the court who all have the green light. Every guy with handles blowing buy the 90’s defenders. Come on now. It’s not disrespectful to Jordan but the game evolves. If his competition was still good in 2021, that would be pretty sad.

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.

[Gudo]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.

Excellent post :cheers:

[Mr. Woke]

Then Lebron should have had better ratings.

There are more options for consumers nowadays.

The 90s NBA is lucky that it didn't have to compete with Netflix, for example.

[TheMan]

There are more options for consumers nowadays.

The 90s NBA is lucky that it didn't have to compete with Netflix, for example.
Lol, dumb argument.

[TheMan]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.
:applause:

LeBronsexuals absolutely getting bodied ITT :(

[outofstomach]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.very high IQ post

[LAmbruh]

But this was you just months ago...



http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?479740-Would-Kareem-had-won-all-those-chips-in-place-of-MJ&p=13988028&viewfull=1#post13988028

There was no comparison to the 70s or 80s in here. You also used the word "relative", comparing the weak 90s to the 60s.

You're that clown who just posts shit he don't really believe :oldlol:
damn :yaohappy:

[Axe]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.
:cheers:

[mehyaM24]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.

have to admit, good post

i think most greats transition well regardless of the era - at least the players post merger. some eras obviously had it easier defensively like the 80s & to a certain extent, the 90s. but overall a goat is gonna goat. with lebron out of his prime, 90s jordan would likely be the best player now.

[97 bulls]

There are more options for consumers nowadays.

The 90s NBA is lucky that it didn't have to compete with Netflix, for example.

The difference is we actually went outside in the 90s.

[Cyrus334]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.

:bowdown:

[clipps]

Lol, dumb argument.

Yup. I agree with this retard.

[And1AllDay]

Any actual arguments for why the 90's are weak in the first place? Or why MJ faced weak competition?

The onus to provide evidence is on those who make eccentric claims not the other side.

sure

whats his best ring?

[8Ball]

sure

whats his best ring?

If Jordan would have defeated the 86 Celtics like LeBron defeated the 2016 warriors Jordan stans would never let us forget that.

But Jordan didn't.

Only LeBron faced dynasties in the finals and beat them 2013 Spurs and 2016 warriors >>>>> anything Jordan faced.

[Mr. Woke]

Lol, dumb argument.

Those are facts, retard.

Take off the nostalgia goggles.

[Mr. Woke]

The difference is we actually went outside in the 90s.

Dumb argument.

People do plenty of outdoor activities nowadays as well.

[97 bulls]

If Jordan would have defeated the 86 Celtics like LeBron defeated the 2016 warriors Jordan stans would never let us forget that.

But Jordan didn't.

Only LeBron faced dynasties in the finals and beat them 2013 Spurs and 2016 warriors >>>>> anything Jordan faced.

The 91 Lakers won 5 Championships. And the Pistons won 2.

[97 bulls]

Dumb argument.

People do plenty of outdoor activities nowadays as well.

No they dont. Unless theres somehow more time in a day now as opposed to the 90s. Kids dont even want to go outside anymore. They want to play video games.

[Mauzah]

HoopsNY just dunked over the entire Bron fan base all at once :roll:

[Shooter]

It's because deep down they know Michael Jordan had weak rings.

https://i.postimg.cc/PxDWrLNT/6plastics.png

[kawhileonard2]

The 91 Lakers won 5 Championships. And the Pistons won 2.

This!

[BigShotBob]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.

It's over.

[Bawkish]

That's not being honest. That's called disregarding context. Would such games be played with 90s perimeter rules? And if modern teams would crush 90s teams, then they would crush the 2000s, 80s, 70s, 60s, and 50s teams, too.

You mentioned guys with handles. The 90s and 2000s saw ball handlers like Kenny Anderson, Stephon Marbury, Tim Hardaway, Jason Williams, AI, Baron Davis, and Steve Francis. Now total up the NBA titles for those guys. Let's stop acting like showboating really trumps fundamentals. It doesn't.

The game evolving is fine, but if you're going to be "honest", then just disregard the first 60 years of history.

Lavine > Kobe
Giannis > Shaq
Embiid > Hakeem
KD > Bird
Steph > Magic
Jokic > Kareem
Trae > Isiah
Harden > MJ

After all, the old timers can't play in the modern era or hang with the modern era guys, right? Make a list of your top 10. If they include anyone who played from 1950-2014, then you're being a bit disingenuous.

But here's where the argument goes left. Why can LeBron "hang" in the modern era? LeBron came into the league in 2003. Why was he able to adjust and somehow everyone else in history wouldn't be able to?

The reality is that recent fans think this era is the greatest era, and these players are the greatest players. So the top 10 of all time should look something like this:

LeBron
KD
Kawhi
Steph
Kyrie
Harden
Lillard
Jokic
Giannis
Klay

If you say no, then the question is why. If 90s guys can't hang in this era, then neither can 2000s players and definitely not the likes of Russell, Kareem, Wilt, Oscar, Dr. J, Bird, Magic, etc.

One Bron stan just lost his soul after reading this

[bullettooth]

One Bron stan just lost his soul after reading this

There was never one to begin with.

[HoopsNY]

One Bron stan just lost his soul after reading this

Well they all do. Bran stans, be they light, 8ball, Shooter, Rico, or whoever, are a pack of neanderthals postulating themselves as some genuine fan base. They hate basketball, but love their God - LeBron.

It's why they will routinely shit on every single co-star/all-star that LeBron has ever played with. It's why guys like Wade, AD, Kyrie, Love, Ilgauskas, Hughes, Jamison, Bosh, and co will all get downplayed, JUST so they can prop up their boy toy in order to dethrone MJ. This is how obsessed these pack of imbeciles are.

97 Bulls and I have routinely responded to the expansion arguments with in depth, year by year analysis. Bran stans have yet to respond. The most any one of them attempted to was 1987 Lakers, and even he responded with the usual "it's because of 3ball we're trolling."

No, the reality is that Bran stans believe their stupidity. Just like they believe their top 10 consists of the guys I said above. You'll constantly find flaws and holes in their arguments, as well as glaring inconsistencies.

For a while we heard that "Bird sucks cause he wasn't athletic. MJ faced plumbers and janitors like him." Yet the same neanderthals yell for Luka and Jokic to win MVP.

This is the current state of the modern NBA fan. A bunch of "woke" children whose combined IQ reaches Andre Drummond's career free throw %.

[8Ball]

HoopsNY is an old Jordan stan upset that the 90s had garbage teams.

HoopsNY is upset that LeBron plays in the highest skilled era to have ever existed and wins championships in them.

No 80s level dynasties fighting each other.
No WCF brutes in the early 2000s.
No dynasties facing each other like in the 2010s.
No 73 win opponents for Jordan to face.

Just 1 team that was more stacked from head to toe than all the others.



HoopsNY is so upset about the fact that Wade and Pippen are near each other on the all time list. Why?

Because he is a Jordan stan.


HoopsNY you pretend to be objective but you are cut from the same cloth as 3ball. Don't hide it.

[8Ball]

The 91 Lakers won 5 Championships. And the Pistons won 2.

91 Lakers did not have Kareem.

It is like beating up the Warriors today.

[Smoke117]

1-9

[Shooter]

HoopsNY is an old Jordan stan upset that the 90s had garbage teams.

HoopsNY is upset that LeBron plays in the highest skilled era to have ever existed and wins championships in them.

No 80s level dynasties fighting each other.
No WCF brutes in the early 2000s.
No dynasties facing each other like in the 2010s.
No 73 win opponents for Jordan to face.

Just 1 team that was more stacked from head to toe than all the others.



HoopsNY is so upset about the fact that Wade and Pippen are near each other on the all time list. Why?

Because he is a Jordan stan.


HoopsNY you pretend to be objective but you are cut from the same cloth as 3ball. Don't hide it.

It's over

[HoopsNY]

HoopsNY is an old Jordan stan upset that the 90s had garbage teams.

That Pippen played against, yet Pippen and Wade are still equal. Irony? :lol


HoopsNY is upset that LeBron plays in the highest skilled era to have ever existed and wins championships in them.

"Highest skilled era" aka the softest era. Not to mention his collusions. :lol


No 80s level dynasties fighting each other.
No WCF brutes in the early 2000s.
No dynasties facing each other like in the 2010s.
No 73 win opponents for Jordan to face.

The Pistons were a back to back championship team with 3 HOF'ers. Guess that doesn't count.

The Sonics had 3 All-NBA level players in an era that demoted roles and had slower pace, thus players production was reduced, but were a 64 win team with elite defense themselves.

The Lakers had 3 HOF'ers and beat teams that routinely had 3 All-Stars. The Jazz beat a Lakers team with 4 All-Stars.

None of that counts for you stans because you merely want to dismiss it as being irrelevant.


Just 1 team that was more stacked from head to toe than all the others.

If we're talking 1996, sure. But the other years? Definitely not. 1991 certainly not. 1997 and 1998 certainly not. And in 1993, Pippen played on a bad ankle the entire season. Still didn't matter. Chicago maintained winning.

Whereas your boy toy has to routinely recruit stars to play with him just to give him a chance at a title. :lol


HoopsNY is so upset about the fact that Wade and Pippen are near each other on the all time list. Why?

Because he is a Jordan stan.


Again, Pippen played in the "garbage 90s" the "worst era of all time." Yet they're still equal? :roll:


HoopsNY you pretend to be objective but you are cut from the same cloth as 3ball. Don't hide it.

3ball is way better than stans such as yourself. I mean, you spend your entire life trying to prop up an infamous collusion artist who has made a name for himself off of crying and flopping. :lol

[HoopsNY]

It's over

How can it be over. He's a LeBron stan, like you are. It never even began. :lol

[Shooter]

How can it be over. He's a LeBron stan, like you are. It never even began. :lol

Actually it began in 2004 and ended in 2016.

Thanks for playing.

:hammertime:

[HoopsNY]

91 Lakers did not have Kareem.

It is like beating up the Warriors today.

The Lakers won 62 games in 1988 and the NBA title with a 40 year old Kareem.

Regular Season

1988 Kareem: 15/6/2/1 on 53%
1991 Divac: 11/8/1/2 on 57%

Finals

1988 Kareem: 13/4/1/1 on 41%
1991 Divac: 18/9/2/2 on 57%

Yet Divac gets zero credit. And now we're hearing the 1991 Lakers were the equivalent of the Warriors of today!

[Mauzah]

91 Lakers did not have Kareem.

It is like beating up the Warriors today.

Yeah, it's exactly like that. Except one was competing in the finals the other is currently scrapping for an 8th spot playoff seed.

[3ball]

After the super-team 80's, expansion spread the talent evenly so only 2 stars were required to be a Finals-caliber team.. So there were many Finals-caliber teams every year in the 90's, which is a tougher path than being 1 of 2 super-teams with free passes to the Finals

Ultimately, a guy like Woolridge was unlucky to play with MJ in the 80's when a super-team was required to win, while Pippen lucked out by having time to grow with VETERAN mj in a league where only 2 stars were required.. Anyone wins alongside the goat in a 2-star vs 2-star format

Btw, Popovich/Duncan beat Lebron by record amount, but got destroyed by the 98' Jazz

[dankok8]

It's easy to underrate teams from 25 years ago especially when most fans today haven't watched them.

Fans of any current era will always dismiss past eras. The problem is when they give Lebron the nod over Jordan due to supposedly facing tougher competition and yet refuse to give KD the nod over Bird, Steph the nod over Magic, Harden the nod over Kobe... Why is that? That first group of players is superior statistically to the second group, has better longevity and played in a supposedly tougher era. What's the problem? The problem is that every credible list never talks about strong eras and weak eras. The eras are different. You'll hear me saying that today's era is easier to score in and it is compared to 20 years ago. But conversely it's also harder to play defense. A lot of today's stars would put up worse stats in 2001 but would be better defensively.

[DABIGSALSISHA]

After the super-team 80's, expansion spread the talent evenly so only 2 stars were required to be a Finals-caliber team.. So there were many Finals-caliber teams every year in the 90's, which is a tougher path than being 1 of 2 super-teams with free passes to the Finals

Ultimately, a guy like Woolridge was unlucky to play with MJ in the 80's when a super-team was required to win, while Pippen lucked out by having time to grow with VETERAN mj in a league where only 2 stars were required.. Anyone wins alongside the goat in a 2-star vs 2-star format

Btw, Popovich/Duncan beat Lebron by record amount, but got destroyed by the 98' Jazz

Excellent post.
That's exactly what happened when I and many others turned our TVs in the 90s. We knew that every night there were going to be 2 superstars per team. Even charlotte had Morning and Larry Johnson, Booges, etc... it was so entertaining and fun to watch. Those banners on kid's walls in their bedrooms, the sneakers being bought by republicans , lol , good times.

It was all NATURAL, nothing was fabricated by these desperate LeBetas of today, guys LOVED their organizations (or at least respected them and the fans) back then and just stayed there for life . They were paid way less than todays clowns but was still a lot compared to the regular joe, there was no reason to be a RAT like lebron or KD and keeping doing the dirty moves to shift the leagues power/ talent all the time.

These players of today are ROBOTS wearing team jerseys with a clown nose, hair and make up.
Idiots claiming they are the GOAT, Defensive GOAT, 3pt GOAT.... To hell with that! lol

2021 NBA Player getting ready for game:

http://www.videodumbo.org/images/10-clown.jpg

[8Ball]

That Pippen played against, yet Pippen and Wade are still equal. Irony? :lol



"Highest skilled era" aka the softest era. Not to mention his collusions. :lol



The Pistons were a back to back championship team with 3 HOF'ers. Guess that doesn't count.

The Sonics had 3 All-NBA level players in an era that demoted roles and had slower pace, thus players production was reduced, but were a 64 win team with elite defense themselves.

The Lakers had 3 HOF'ers and beat teams that routinely had 3 All-Stars. The Jazz beat a Lakers team with 4 All-Stars.

None of that counts for you stans because you merely want to dismiss it as being irrelevant.



If we're talking 1996, sure. But the other years? Definitely not. 1991 certainly not. 1997 and 1998 certainly not. And in 1993, Pippen played on a bad ankle the entire season. Still didn't matter. Chicago maintained winning.

Whereas your boy toy has to routinely recruit stars to play with him just to give him a chance at a title. :lol



Again, Pippen played in the "garbage 90s" the "worst era of all time." Yet they're still equal? :roll:



3ball is way better than stans such as yourself. I mean, you spend your entire life trying to prop up an infamous collusion artist who has made a name for himself off of crying and flopping. :lol

Meltdown.


1) Pistons curb stomped Jordan 3 years in a row in the late 80s in their prime but by 1991 were a shell of themselves. 1992 they only won 48 games and that was the end. Meanwhile actual dynasties like the Spurs that won in 2014 were still winning 67 games in 2016.

2) Sonics made the finals 1 time. Only 1 time with 3-all nba players? What kind of weak shit is that. Jordan didn't play in the West so Jordan had nothing to do with Sonics making the finals 1 time.

3) Utah Jazz beat a 1 man Shaq team. Kobe was straight garbage until 2000. And want to talk about all-stars? LeBron in 2016 played with zero all-stars.

4) Every list on earth has Pippen next to Wade on the all time list. It bothers you so much you won't stop trying to argue it away like it doesn't exist. But it does exist.

You are upset and its okay to be upset about LeBron overtaking your childhood idol.



You are a 3ball level stan cut from the same cloth as him.

[8Ball]

It's over

I spend as much ATP mental energy countering hoopsNY as I do with 3ball.

I'm starting to see a pattern here. There isn't a challenger.

[8Ball]

It's easy to underrate teams from 25 years ago especially when most fans today haven't watched them.

Fans of any current era will always dismiss past eras. The problem is when they give Lebron the nod over Jordan due to supposedly facing tougher competition and yet refuse to give KD the nod over Bird, Steph the nod over Magic, Harden the nod over Kobe... Why is that? That first group of players is superior statistically to the second group, has better longevity and played in a supposedly tougher era. What's the problem? The problem is that every credible list never talks about strong eras and weak eras. The eras are different. You'll hear me saying that today's era is easier to score in and it is compared to 20 years ago. But conversely it's also harder to play defense. A lot of today's stars would put up worse stats in 2001 but would be better defensively.

Nobody from today would ever say anything negative about the Lakers / Celtic dynasties of the 80s, plus Moses Malone 76ers. Those teams were stacked head to toe with talent all over and they fought each other every year.

I don't see that in the 90s.

[DABIGSALSISHA]

Meltdown.


1) Pistons curb stomped Jordan 3 years in a row in the late 80s in their prime but by 1991 were a shell of themselves. 1992 they only won 48 games and that was the end. Meanwhile actual dynasties like the Spurs that won in 2014 were still winning 67 games in 2016.

2) Sonics made the finals 1 time. Only 1 time with 3-all nba players? What kind of weak shit is that. Jordan didn't play in the West so Jordan had nothing to do with Sonics making the finals 1 time.

3) Utah Jazz beat a 1 man Shaq team. Kobe was straight garbage until 2000. And want to talk about all-stars? LeBron in 2016 played with zero all-stars.

4) Every list on earth has Pippen next to Wade on the all time list. It bothers you so much you won't stop trying to argue it away like it doesn't exist. But it does exist.

You are upset and its okay to be upset about LeBron overtaking your childhood idol.



You are a 3ball level stan cut from the same cloth as him.



What a bunch of JUNK, 8ball, i can tell you didn't live that era at all or was a tiny baby. So much talking so much nonsense. They pave the way for your idols of today. Those old players of the 90's are coaching your players of today, lol, passing them knowledge on how to win.

Supersonics were weak? Are you on crack? They had Payton/ Kemp /Deflet and also other good players. I remember that team well.

Who was good? Durant with OKC ? That also make into the finals let's see..... once in a decade? HARDEN, Westbrook , Durant? All LOSERS waterdown players from THIS ERA. WEAK MINDED PLAYERS, ALL 3 OF THEM THAT NEVER WON A CHIP, except for the Snake Durant that did it the DIRTY WAY. Do you see how easy is to do that?

That's what you guys do all the time.

Do you know that Detroit Team you guys talk about all the time? hum? That team would make your boy Bron and Injury Davis QUIT BEFORE THE SERIES WAS EVEN OVER, Because your idols of today are NUTELLA SOFT, that's all they are.
All Lebron and A.D. would do against them is to be almost at mid court shooting 3s in fear of injuries and getting to the paint lol that would never happen, you would never see them there for the 4-0 series in favour of Detroit. They would complain to the referees, Stern, Democrats, etc.. and they would just say , " you gotta play harder, son."

They wouldn't ever need to come up with a book called Lebron rules either because they wouldn't need to write one, to brutalize your boy like they did with mike. He would just put his tail in between his legs and hide in some place warm away from everything once all the hell broke loose... Davis would be in Intense care, Life or death deal. LMAO. So, so soft this new Gen. It's hilarious. Playing with their cel phones and spending 99% of their lives there as if that is REAL life. hahaha.

Please, Don't talk about what you don't really know or lived to comment about. You are just guessing and pulling stat sheets and all this garbage nobody cared about back then. You won or you lost, no hand shake, no kissy kissy, like today. If You lost, you left the floor and went to the hospital if you needed too, if not go home and recover for the next battle. I played that type of basketball so I know what I'm talking about. I would put my money on a guy like John Stockton and Mark Price 1000 times more before any of these soft ones from this marshmallow era, Yes I would!

The 90's was an AMAZING era.

Have a great day, pal.

[dankok8]

Nobody from today would ever say anything negative about the Lakers / Celtic dynasties of the 80s, plus Moses Malone 76ers. Those teams were stacked head to toe with talent all over and they fought each other every year.

I don't see that in the 90s.

Did they? Moses' Sixers only faced the Celtics and Lakers once each in the playoffs. The Lakers and Celtics faced each other three times.

[DABIGSALSISHA]

Nobody from today would ever say anything negative about the Lakers / Celtic dynasties of the 80s, plus Moses Malone 76ers. Those teams were stacked head to toe with talent all over and they fought each other every year.

I don't see that in the 90s.


That's because you were not watching the 90's LIVE like I was. And to just correct you , you guys are always talking smack about the 80's too. I agree to a certain point because they were still doing coke in the 80s at a high pace and all the partying it was an era of transition, but the 90s was an era of explosion of TALENT all over the place. It was incredible to see.

The Rockets were AMAZING with OLAJUWON for those 2 years. They were loaded. Olajuwon is BY FAR, the best Center I have ever seen. He was the only one that joined skills from soccer and basketball to create all those moves and spins. The guy was truly a legend as was the Rockets coach too.

The Magic with Penny/ Shaq and Grant was a dynasty waiting to happen. Olajuwon and Michel Jordan teams Stopped that from happening.

Utah was a tremendous team with POTENT offense that scored 100 points back then !!!!! That would be equivalent to over 150 points today. Stockton was THE BEST PURE POINT guard of all time, Karl Malone many consider him the greatest P.F. of all time. Hornaceck was a great shooter....

Indiana was A Mega Team too imo. Reggie one of the best shooters of all time, Davis Brothers were tough as nails and the GIANT RiC Smiths was a tower.

Seattle was Good P/ K/ D. Shrempf. Watching the Sonics was like a video game, it was amazing.

Phoenix was Good with Sr Charles, Majerle and KJ. Barkely was one of the best players I have ever seen. A MONSTER, he was a complete player.

Spurs was getting better and better. Robinson, etc..

Cleveland was good, Mark Price ,,

Do you know what prevented a lot of these teams from becoming dynasties?

His name was Michael JORDAN and his team was the freaking bulls. I hated them back then lol . My Knicks and my Magic could never get over the hump. He did not allow these other teams to have any sort of dominance or anything over the bulls , like lebron allowed the spurs to grow over him and he was also on a super team, so no excuses, ok?

[Shooter]

Meltdown.


1) Pistons curb stomped Jordan 3 years in a row in the late 80s in their prime but by 1991 were a shell of themselves. 1992 they only won 48 games and that was the end. Meanwhile actual dynasties like the Spurs that won in 2014 were still winning 67 games in 2016.

2) Sonics made the finals 1 time. Only 1 time with 3-all nba players? What kind of weak shit is that. Jordan didn't play in the West so Jordan had nothing to do with Sonics making the finals 1 time.

3) Utah Jazz beat a 1 man Shaq team. Kobe was straight garbage until 2000. And want to talk about all-stars? LeBron in 2016 played with zero all-stars.

4) Every list on earth has Pippen next to Wade on the all time list. It bothers you so much you won't stop trying to argue it away like it doesn't exist. But it does exist.

You are upset and its okay to be upset about LeBron overtaking your childhood idol.



You are a 3ball level stan cut from the same cloth as him.

Is there NO ONE ELSE?

[8Ball]

What a bunch of JUNK, 8ball, i can tell you didn't live that era at all or was a tiny baby. So much talking so much nonsense. They pave the way for your idols of today. Those old players of the 90's are coaching your players of today, lol, passing them knowledge on how to win.

Supersonics were weak? Are you on crack? They had Payton/ Kemp /Deflet and also other good players. I remember that team well.

Who was good? Durant with OKC ? That also make into the finals let's see..... once in a decade? HARDEN, Westbrook , Durant? All LOSERS waterdown players from THIS ERA. WEAK MINDED PLAYERS, ALL 3 OF THEM THAT NEVER WON A CHIP, except for the Snake Durant that did it the DIRTY WAY. Do you see how easy is to do that?

That's what you guys do all the time.

Do you know that Detroit Team you guys talk about all the time? hum? That team would make your boy Bron and Injury Davis QUIT BEFORE THE SERIES WAS EVEN OVER, Because your idols of today are NUTELLA SOFT, that's all they are.
All Lebron and A.D. would do against them is to be almost at mid court shooting 3s in fear of injuries and getting to the paint lol that would never happen, you would never see them there for the 4-0 series in favour of Detroit. They would complain to the referees, Stern, Democrats, etc.. and they would just say , " you gotta play harder, son."

They wouldn't ever need to come up with a book called Lebron rules either because they wouldn't need to write one, to brutalize your boy like they did with mike. He would just put his tail in between his legs and hide in some place warm away from everything once all the hell broke loose... Davis would be in Intense care, Life or death deal. LMAO. So, so soft this new Gen. It's hilarious. Playing with their cel phones and spending 99% of their lives there as if that is REAL life. hahaha.

Please, Don't talk about what you don't really know or lived to comment about. You are just guessing and pulling stat sheets and all this garbage nobody cared about back then. You won or you lost, no hand shake, no kissy kissy, like today. If You lost, you left the floor and went to the hospital if you needed too, if not go home and recover for the next battle. I played that type of basketball so I know what I'm talking about. I would put my money on a guy like John Stockton and Mark Price 1000 times more before any of these soft ones from this marshmallow era, Yes I would!

The 90's was an AMAZING era.

Have a great day, pal.

You getting way too riled up over a LeBron vs Jordan discussion. I suggest you chill out and calm down.

[Shooter]

You getting way too riled up over a LeBron vs Jordan discussion. I suggest you chill out and calm down.

+1

Kid was too embarassed to post novels on his main account so he made an alt account to hide his embarrassment. This is how low fragile MJ stains live.

[LeCola]

For Lebron stans;

Jordan's opponents and Lebron's teammates are trash.

Lebron's opponents and Jordan's teammates are great. But, of course not as great as Lebron.

[8Ball]

Did they? Moses' Sixers only faced the Celtics and Lakers once each in the playoffs. The Lakers and Celtics faced each other three times.

Lakers made the finals 8 out of 10 years in the 80s while the Celtics made the finals 5x in the 80s. 76ers made the finals 3x in the early 80s before getting old. Pistons made the finals 3x in a row before getting old.

2010s had Miami and Cleveland (LeBron) make the finals 8x
2010s had Warriors make the finals 5x in a row.
2010s Spurs made the finals 2x in a row.

Stacked era. Don't see that in the 90s.

[Shooter]

Lakers made the finals 8 out of 10 years in the 80s while the Celtics made the finals 5x in the 80s. 76ers made the finals 3x in the early 80s before getting old. Pistons made the finals 3x in a row before getting old.

2010s had Miami and Cleveland (LeBron) make the finals 8x
2010s had Warriors make the finals 5x in a row.
2010s Spurs made the finals 2x in a row.

Stacked era. Don't see that in the 90s.

One man wrecking crew.

8ball blasting these kids :lol

[HoopsNY]

Meltdown.

Translation: I got owned.


1) Pistons curb stomped Jordan 3 years in a row in the late 80s in their prime but by 1991 were a shell of themselves. 1992 they only won 48 games and that was the end. Meanwhile actual dynasties like the Spurs that won in 2014 were still winning 67 games in 2016.


Chicago didn't play Detroit in 1992. They played them in 1991 when they were the defending champions, in the ECF.

The Spurs winning 67 games in 2016 is an irrelevant point. Miami beat San Antonio in 2013, not 2016.


2) Sonics made the finals 1 time. Only 1 time with 3-all nba players? What kind of weak shit is that. Jordan didn't play in the West so Jordan had nothing to do with Sonics making the finals 1 time.


Teams like the Heat, Cavs, and Warriors stacked the deck in the 2010s and as a result, were consistently in the finals. Show me how teams in the 90s were stacking the deck in a similar fashion.

LeBron joined together with Wade and Bosh and the Heat were in the finals 4 years in a row. He then joins Kyrie and brings over Love and Cleveland is in the finals for 4 years. KD joins a 73 win GS team and GS ends up in the finals two more years.

Even Toronto got in on that action. They were a 59 win team and added an ATG level player in Kawhi - the result? An NBA title. This is the era of player empowerment and even you can agree to that. Player movement results in finals and championships. Previously, organic team building more often than not resulted in team success.

Isn't that blatantly obvious? You're acting as if the two contexts are the same. They're not.


3) Utah Jazz beat a 1 man Shaq team. Kobe was straight garbage until 2000. And want to talk about all-stars? LeBron in 2016 played with zero all-stars.


So James Harden a Sixth Man of the Year in 2012, gets praised as an "MVP!!!" for OKC, but Kobe, also a Sixth Man of the Year and future MVP, doesn't?

More glaring hypocrisy from Bran stans. And nice job ignoring the fact that LA had 4 all-stars, not just 2.

Furthermore, I love the omission of Kyrie missing 29 games in 2016, most of which was from the first half of the season. Otherwise, he would have been an all-star, too. Kyrie has been an All-Star every single year he's played since his rookie season with the exception of last year when, surprise surprise, he was injured.

But of course you wouldn't mention that.


4) Every list on earth has Pippen next to Wade on the all time list. It bothers you so much you won't stop trying to argue it away like it doesn't exist. But it does exist.


Says the man who shits on the 90s but wants to now say Pippen and Wade are equal.


You are a 3ball level stan cut from the same cloth as him.

Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.

[8Ball]

Translation: I got owned.



Chicago didn't play Detroit in 1992. They played them in 1991 when they were the defending champions, in the ECF.

The Spurs winning 67 games in 2016 is an irrelevant point. Miami beat San Antonio in 2013, not 2016.



Teams like the Heat, Cavs, and Warriors stacked the deck in the 2010s and as a result, were consistently in the finals. Show me how teams in the 90s were stacking the deck in a similar fashion.

LeBron joined together with Wade and Bosh and the Heat were in the finals 4 years in a row. He then joins Kyrie and brings over Love and Cleveland is in the finals for 4 years. KD joins a 73 win GS team and GS ends up in the finals two more years.

Even Toronto got in on that action. They were a 59 win team and added an ATG level player in Kawhi - the result? An NBA title. This is the era of player empowerment and even you can agree to that. Player movement results in finals and championships. Previously, organic team building more often than not resulted in team success.

Isn't that blatantly obvious? You're acting as if the two contexts are the same. They're not.



So James Harden a Sixth Man of the Year in 2012, gets praised as an "MVP!!!" for OKC, but Kobe, also a Sixth Man of the Year and future MVP, doesn't?

More glaring hypocrisy from Bran stans. And nice job ignoring the fact that LA had 4 all-stars, not just 2.

Furthermore, I love the omission of Kyrie missing 29 games in 2016, most of which was from the first half of the season. Otherwise, he would have been an all-star, too. Kyrie has been an All-Star every single year he's played since his rookie season with the exception of last year when, surprise surprise, he was injured.

But of course you wouldn't mention that.



Says the man who shits on the 90s but wants to now say Pippen and Wade are equal.



Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.

1) Detroit was garbage by 1992. Spurs won in 2014, won 55 games in 2015, 67 games in 2016, 61 games in 2017, and we aren't even talking about the 2000s. Spurs is an actual dynasty level team that LeBron faced 2 years in a row. Jordan faced nothing like the Spurs in the 90s.

2) You talked highly about Utah Jazz beating a bunch of Laker all stars without putting into context how well those all-stars played. Case in point I made fun of your argument by showing that LeBron had zero all-stars in 2016. The point flew over your head as usual.

LeBron swept the Atlanta Hawks that had 4 all-stars on their team. Is that Atlanta Hawks team some sort of super team now? You said Utah Jazz defeating a 4 super star Laker team deserves recognition. It actually doesn't.

3) Jordan had a stacked deck in the 90s. Only Jordan had a super team in the 90s. 80s had 3-4 super teams. 2000s had multiple super teams.


You are too easy to argue with. I dumpster your arguments like I dumpster 3ball.

I am your intellectual superior. I know more about basketball than you do.

[8Ball]

And LOL so much at using "all-stars" in your argument, shows me you don't understand basketball at all.

At least evolve your thinking from Neanderthal to Homo Sapien level and start using all-nba teams.

[Shooter]

And LOL so much at using "all-stars" in your argument, shows me you don't understand basketball at all.

At least evolve your thinking from Neanderthal to Homo Sapien level and start using all-nba teams.

This HoopsNY boi probably didn't even know all-stars were voted in by fans only up until recently :lol

[HoopsNY]

1) Detroit was garbage by 1992. Spurs won in 2014, won 55 games in 2015, 67 games in 2016, 61 games in 2017, and we aren't even talking about the 2000s. Spurs is an actual dynasty level team that LeBron faced 2 years in a row. Jordan faced nothing like the Spurs in the 90s.

You keep quoting 1992. Chicago didn't face Detroit in 1992. They faced them in 1991. What happens after you defeat a team and win a ring is irrelevant. So I'm not even sure why you keep bringing up what the Spurs did after 2013.

And of course Jordan faced nothing like the Spurs in the 90s. He went undefeated in the finals. How could he?


2) You talked highly about Utah Jazz beating a bunch of Laker all stars without putting into context how well those all-stars played. Case in point I made fun of your argument by showing that LeBron had zero all-stars in 2016. The point flew over your head as usual.


It didn't fly over my head. You're speaking about context yet failing to do so yourself. Kyrie not making the All-Star team in 2016 means absolutely nothing. The only reason that happened was because he missed almost all of the first half of the season due to injury, not because he was some incapable player.

I mean, did you look at Kyrie in the playoffs and specifically the finals? He outplayed Steph, the league's MVP.

2016 Finals

Steph: 23/5/4/1/1 on 40/40/93 splits, 13.1 GmSc
Kyrie: 27/4/4/2/1 on 47/41/94 splits, 19.1 GmSc


But of course, this doesn't matter to a Bran stan. To them, LeBron won the championship in 2016 and guys like Kyrie were a detriment.


LeBron swept the Atlanta Hawks that had 4 all-stars on their team. Is that Atlanta Hawks team some sort of super team now? You said Utah Jazz defeating a 4 super star Laker team deserves recognition. It actually doesn't.


Yet no one in NBA history will ever consider that Hawks team to be a great team. Their All-Stars are irrelevant.

Let's see, which team is better:

Lakers: Van Exel, Shaq, Kobe, Jones
Hawks: Millsap, Korver, Teague, Horford

I mean, seriously? :facepalm


3) Jordan had a stacked deck in the 90s. Only Jordan had a super team in the 90s. 80s had 3-4 super teams. 2000s had multiple super teams.


Revisionist history. No one was saying this in the 90s. In fact, Chicago was risking a lot by bringing on Dennis Rodman in 1995. Teams didn't want him because he was a locker room cancer. But, you wouldn't know this. You're what, 18? Greg Popovich literally said that offloading Rodman was difficult because teams didn't want him.

Bran stans want to now rebrand Chicago as some artificial superteam to relieve their idol of his self-given title, The SuperTeam Creator.


You are too easy to argue with. I dumpster your arguments like I dumpster 3ball.

I am your intellectual superior. I know more about basketball than you do.

Okay wittle 8ballie....time for bed now. Make sure to put on your pull ups.

[HoopsNY]

This HoopsNY boi probably didn't even know all-stars were voted in by fans only up until recently :lol

Whose man is this? Can I help you little fella? Are you lost or something? :lol

[Shooter]

Whose man is this? Can I help you little fella? Are you lost or something? :lol

wHaT aBouT tHe aLL sTaRs dOe - HoopsNY

:lol

Get lost n00b

[HoopsNY]

wHaT aBouT tHe aLL sTaRs dOe - HoopsNY

:lol

Get lost n00b

Go to bed child. You have school in the morning.

[Shooter]

Go to bed child. You have school in the morning.

b-b-b-b-b-but the all stars doe?

[dankok8]

Lakers made the finals 8 out of 10 years in the 80s while the Celtics made the finals 5x in the 80s. 76ers made the finals 3x in the early 80s before getting old. Pistons made the finals 3x in a row before getting old.

2010s had Miami and Cleveland (LeBron) make the finals 8x
2010s had Warriors make the finals 5x in a row.
2010s Spurs made the finals 2x in a row.

Stacked era. Don't see that in the 90s.

The Warriors with KD were definitely better than any team in the 90's the Bulls faced but it's not like Lebron's Cavs beat them. Teams like Mavs, OKC, Spurs, pre-KD Warriors are very comparable to the Lakers, Blazers, Jazz, Sonics, Suns of the 90's. And the Bulls in the 90's also faced much tougher competition in their own conference whereas Lebron's Cavs/Heat had annual cakewalk draws from 2013 onwards.

At best you can make an argument that Lebron would win 1 more title if he didn't face those Warriors.

[Shooter]

The Warriors with KD were definitely better than any team in the 90's the Bulls faced but it's not like Lebron's Cavs beat them. Teams like Mavs, OKC, Spurs, pre-KD Warriors are very comparable to the Lakers, Blazers, Jazz, Sonics, Suns of the 90's. And the Bulls in the 90's also faced much tougher competition in their own conference whereas Lebron's Cavs/Heat had annual cakewalk draws from 2013 onwards.

At best you can make an argument that Lebron would win 1 more title if he didn't face those Warriors.

2012 Thunder alone is better than anything Jordan beat

KD was 1st team all-nba in 2012, already a top 5 player universally recognized.
Westbrook was 2nd team all-nba in 2012, universally top 10 player.
Harden was 6th man of the year in 2012 and became an amazing MVP scoring talent. He has an assist, scoring and MVP title. Rare company.
Ibaka was 2nd in DPOY in 2012.
Loaded with talent.
The 2012 OKC reverse swept a Spurs team that was on a 20 game win streak and was on a 62 win pace.

The 2012 Thunder entered the Finals with a red hot 12-3 record.

Utah Jazz made the finals only two times in 15 years of Malone and Stockton together :lol

And I haven't even mentioned the Warriors or Spurs dynasties.

Spurs made the finals 6x in Duncan's time and winning 5, and would have made more finals if they didn't have to battle prime Shaq.
Curry Warrior's made 5 straight Finals, only the 2nd player to ever make 5 straight Finals in the modern era besides LeBron

[dankok8]

You guys are cherry-picking your facts. The Thunder only made 1 finals. Those Spurs only made 2 finals. The Mavs made 1 finals. The Warriors pre-KD made 2 straight finals but looked quite underwhelming in those playoffs and VERY BEATABLE. Look up team records and SRS for those teams, preferably over multiple seasons.

Just because they beat Lebron's teams you are elevating some of these teams to insane heights.

[Shooter]

You guys are cherry-picking your facts. The Thunder only made 1 finals. Those Spurs only made 2 finals. The Mavs made 1 finals. The Warriors pre-KD made 2 straight finals but looked quite underwhelming in those playoffs and VERY BEATABLE. Look up team records and SRS for those teams, preferably over multiple seasons.

Just because they beat Lebron's teams you are elevating some of these teams to insane heights.

You're using "1 Finals' arguments to prop up MJ's opponents?

91 Lakers = 1 Finals, Magic had aids
92 Blazers = 1 Finals, Terry Porter :lol
93 Suns = 1 Finals
96 Sonics = 1 Finals
97 Jazz = 1 Finals
98 Jazz = 2x Finals

uhhh? :lol

[HoopsNY]

Translation: I got owned.



Chicago didn't play Detroit in 1992. They played them in 1991 when they were the defending champions, in the ECF.

The Spurs winning 67 games in 2016 is an irrelevant point. Miami beat San Antonio in 2013, not 2016.



Teams like the Heat, Cavs, and Warriors stacked the deck in the 2010s and as a result, were consistently in the finals. Show me how teams in the 90s were stacking the deck in a similar fashion.

LeBron joined together with Wade and Bosh and the Heat were in the finals 4 years in a row. He then joins Kyrie and brings over Love and Cleveland is in the finals for 4 years. KD joins a 73 win GS team and GS ends up in the finals two more years.

Even Toronto got in on that action. They were a 59 win team and added an ATG level player in Kawhi - the result? An NBA title. This is the era of player empowerment and even you can agree to that. Player movement results in finals and championships. Previously, organic team building more often than not resulted in team success.

Isn't that blatantly obvious? You're acting as if the two contexts are the same. They're not.



So James Harden a Sixth Man of the Year in 2012, gets praised as an "MVP!!!" for OKC, but Kobe, also a Sixth Man of the Year and future MVP, doesn't?

More glaring hypocrisy from Bran stans. And nice job ignoring the fact that LA had 4 all-stars, not just 2.

Furthermore, I love the omission of Kyrie missing 29 games in 2016, most of which was from the first half of the season. Otherwise, he would have been an all-star, too. Kyrie has been an All-Star every single year he's played since his rookie season with the exception of last year when, surprise surprise, he was injured.

But of course you wouldn't mention that.



Says the man who shits on the 90s but wants to now say Pippen and Wade are equal.



Coming from you, I'll take that as a compliment.

Crickets.....

[HoopsNY]

You're using "1 Finals' arguments to prop up MJ's opponents?

91 Lakers = 1 Finals, Magic had aids
92 Blazers = 1 Finals, Terry Porter :lol
93 Suns = 1 Finals
96 Sonics = 1 Finals
97 Jazz = 1 Finals
98 Jazz = 2x Finals

uhhh? :lol

You can claim this, but you also have to factor in teaming up with Wade/Bosh, which accounts for 2/4 titles. In addition, LeBron lured AD to LA and beat a Heat team that was better than any of Chicago's opponents? Get real.

The only title that one can claim supercedes any of MJ's titles is the 2016 title. And that still won't make any difference simply because Chicago was significantly better than any of their opponents largely because of MJ. Of course the competition looks "weaker."

And I love how the road through the Eastern Conference is always completely ignored in this discussion for LeBron. :lol

[8Ball]

1) Detroit was garbage by 1992. Spurs won in 2014, won 55 games in 2015, 67 games in 2016, 61 games in 2017, and we aren't even talking about the 2000s. Spurs is an actual dynasty level team that LeBron faced 2 years in a row. Jordan faced nothing like the Spurs in the 90s.

2) You talked highly about Utah Jazz beating a bunch of Laker all stars without putting into context how well those all-stars played. Case in point I made fun of your argument by showing that LeBron had zero all-stars in 2016. The point flew over your head as usual.

LeBron swept the Atlanta Hawks that had 4 all-stars on their team. Is that Atlanta Hawks team some sort of super team now? You said Utah Jazz defeating a 4 super star Laker team deserves recognition. It actually doesn't.

3) Jordan had a stacked deck in the 90s. Only Jordan had a super team in the 90s. 80s had 3-4 super teams. 2000s had multiple super teams.


You are too easy to argue with. I dumpster your arguments like I dumpster 3ball.

I am your intellectual superior. I know more about basketball than you do.

Crickets. No actual proper response to this.

Still waiting.

[8Ball]

2012 Thunder alone is better than anything Jordan beat

KD was 1st team all-nba in 2012, already a top 5 player universally recognized.
Westbrook was 2nd team all-nba in 2012, universally top 10 player.
Harden was 6th man of the year in 2012 and became an amazing MVP scoring talent. He has an assist, scoring and MVP title. Rare company.
Ibaka was 2nd in DPOY in 2012.
Loaded with talent.
The 2012 OKC reverse swept a Spurs team that was on a 20 game win streak and was on a 62 win pace.

The 2012 Thunder entered the Finals with a red hot 12-3 record.

Utah Jazz made the finals only two times in 15 years of Malone and Stockton together :lol

And I haven't even mentioned the Warriors or Spurs dynasties.

Spurs made the finals 6x in Duncan's time and winning 5, and would have made more finals if they didn't have to battle prime Shaq.
Curry Warrior's made 5 straight Finals, only the 2nd player to ever make 5 straight Finals in the modern era besides LeBron

High IQ post.

Nothing more to be said on the subject.

[8Ball]

wHaT aBouT tHe aLL sTaRs dOe - HoopsNY

:lol

Get lost n00b

He brings up 4 all stars as an argument and now suddenly 4 all stars on atlanta hawks is nothing!

He doesn't understand the irony of his dumb arguments. That is why I brought up 4 Atlanta all stars knowing he would just argue against his own point. Point flew over his head as usual.

Neanderthals.

[8Ball]

3 of these Laker all stars in 1998:

15ppg
13ppg
18ppg

All with low assist and rebound numbers.

Any of those players would make all star team in 2021?

HoopsNY you embarrassed yourself. There is nothing left to salvage. You are now beneath me.

[HoopsNY]

Crickets. No actual proper response to this.

Still waiting.

I responded to this already. Learn to read.


He brings up 4 all stars as an argument and now suddenly 4 all stars on atlanta hawks is nothing!

He doesn't understand the irony of his dumb arguments. That is why I brought up 4 Atlanta all stars knowing he would just argue against his own point. Point flew over his head as usual.

Neanderthals.

The original premise was about OKC having "3 MVPs" yet a complete disregard for what LA had playing against Utah (and Utah swept them). If Harden and Westbrook are MVPs in 2012 by virtue of what they did in 2017 and 2018, then Kobe and Shaq get that same consideration.

Furthermore, LA's All-Stars trumps Atlanta's. No one in their right mind would consider a squad with Korver/Horford/Millsap/Teague to be greater than that of Van Exel/Jones/Kobe/Shaq. The two just aren't close. That Hawks team was unquestionably, by everyone's admission, one of the weakest 60 win teams ever.


3 of these Laker all stars in 1998:

15ppg
13ppg
18ppg

All with low assist and rebound numbers.

Any of those players would make all star team in 2021?

Thank you for proving my point about how players from post 2010 are the greatest players of all-time, and none before should be considered. Now go ahead and show us your top 10 of all-time, I dare you.

As for their numbers, then once again you fail to contextualize anything.

2021: 112.3 ORTG, 99.2 Pace, 112.1 PPG
1998: 105.0 ORTG, 95.3 Pace, 95.6 PPG

Slower pace, less threes, and less statistical output, far greater defensive schemes.

Players then had very specific roles, positions, and ran defined plays in the half court set. This era that we see now is the era of position-less basketball where teams run more pick n rolls and iso plays.

But all of this is futile if you can't acknowledge the differences in context. So please share with us your top 10 of all-time. :lol

[Axe]

You can claim this, but you also have to factor in teaming up with Wade/Bosh, which accounts for 2/4 titles. In addition, LeBron lured AD to LA and beat a Heat team that was better than any of Chicago's opponents? Get real.

The only title that one can claim supercedes any of MJ's titles is the 2016 title. And that still won't make any difference simply because Chicago was significantly better than any of their opponents largely because of MJ. Of course the competition looks "weaker."

And I love how the road through the Eastern Conference is always completely ignored in this discussion for LeBron. :lol
I wonder what's the opinion of 3ball's counterpart regarding this.

[StephGonSteph]

I mean.
Through jordans 80s years, he had to face Bird,Isiah, Magic, And more man. The 1990s were actually pretty good competition. Jordan was just the better player who needed someone who can rebound, hit the midrange, and defend. Rodman,and Pippen did pretty well at that.
You could say the sonics were terrible competition.
But I mean if the competition was so bad.. whatever happened to Stockton? Malone?,the whole bad boy pistons era, olajuwon, Ewing,Shaq,Barkley,Robinson,Clyde the glide drexler, and more man.
The opposition wasn't trash, It was just a few good players against a few good players.
And still to this day, the bulls not only have a better team than even the 73-9 warriors, But a better team entirely. Stop showing photos of the bare minimum of what Jordan actually had to deal with and explain this to me.
If Lebron was so dang good, Why does he need Wade,Anthony Davis,Kyrie,kevin love, and more.
So not only does that number even out to how many allstars he played, but it also doubles how many all star teammates Jordan had to team with. Lebron is trying to be jordan by being lazy and letting everyone do it for him. Yes, a great player needs teammates, but not a whole All Star team.

[8Ball]

3 of these Laker all stars in 1998:

15ppg
13ppg
18ppg

All with low assist and rebound numbers.

That's the monster all-star team in 1998.

Give it a break HoopsNY. Your all-star argument is dead in the water.

[StephGonSteph]

Because that Era was more defensive. You cant compare that. OUR WHOLE NBA ERA IS LITERALLY BASED OFF FLASHY DUNKS AND FAR THREES!!!, The only man who actually comes close to MJ if we are talking about teammates and great records, is Stephen Curry.
Wanna know why?
Well, Stephen Curry as of this year is completely carrying this team to a first round playoff Game.
And if it does happen, that proves up and down Steph Curry alone is better than lebron.
Lebron even in 2018 when he "carried them to the finals" was scoring rookie numbers. Not even just that, He had teammates doing all the work for him... Which is why he lost.
Lebron doesn't seem to get that even with the allstars on his team, Basketball is a team game.
If Stephen Curry is scoring 40 points in most of his games, and going to the first round, that shows his first round is better than lebrons finals record.

[8Ball]

.

You keep quoting 1992. Chicago didn't face Detroit in 1992. They faced them in 1991. What happens after you defeat a team and win a ring is irrelevant. So I'm not even sure why you keep bringing up what the Spurs did after 2013.

And of course Jordan faced nothing like the Spurs in the 90s. He went undefeated in the finals. How could he?

Notice how Jordan stans don't try to argue that his opposition wasn't in fact trash.

No Spurs, No warriors, No 2012 OKC team in the 90s.





Yet no one in NBA history will ever consider that Hawks team to be a great team. Their All-Stars are irrelevant.

Let's see, which team is better:

Lakers: Van Exel, Shaq, Kobe, Jones
Hawks: Millsap, Korver, Teague, Horford

I mean, seriously? :facepalm


No one in history considers the 1998 Lakers a great team. Only you do to prop up Utah Jazz in order to prop up Jordan.

You don't even watch basketball. Kobe in 1998 was nothing. Didn't even make an all-nba team. That's why nobody considers the 1998 team any all time great team. Nobody. Only you do.




Revisionist history. No one was saying this in the 90s. In fact, Chicago was risking a lot by bringing on Dennis Rodman in 1995. Teams didn't want him because he was a locker room cancer. But, you wouldn't know this. You're what, 18? Greg Popovich literally said that offloading Rodman was difficult because teams didn't want him.

Bran stans want to now rebrand Chicago as some artificial superteam to relieve their idol of his self-given title, The SuperTeam Creator.

Okay wittle 8ballie....time for bed now. Make sure to put on your pull ups.

Jordan was the only one with a super team in the 1990s. You need to discount Scottie Pippen + Rodman to prop up your idol.


LeBron played with super teams after 2010 and went up mostly against super teams.
Jordan played with super teams and went up against non super teams in the 90s.


This is too easy just like arguing with 3ball. I don't even need to activate any brain cells to demolish your arguments.

[DoctorP]

Official branstain thread

[Axe]

Stephen wardell curry is close to michael jeffrey jordan despite having 0x finals mvps, only 2x mvps and 0x rings with a 70-win team.

But yep, he really is.

[8Ball]

Because that Era was more defensive. You cant compare that. OUR WHOLE NBA ERA IS LITERALLY BASED OFF FLASHY DUNKS AND FAR THREES!!!, The only man who actually comes close to MJ if we are talking about teammates and great records, is Stephen Curry.
Wanna know why?
Well, Stephen Curry as of this year is completely carrying this team to a first round playoff Game.
And if it does happen, that proves up and down Steph Curry alone is better than lebron.
Lebron even in 2018 when he "carried them to the finals" was scoring rookie numbers. Not even just that, He had teammates doing all the work for him... Which is why he lost.
Lebron doesn't seem to get that even with the allstars on his team, Basketball is a team game.
If Stephen Curry is scoring 40 points in most of his games, and going to the first round, that shows his first round is better than lebrons finals record.

Right now is the highest skilled era in NBA history.

[Shooter]

Kobe is closer to MJ than LBJ.

And that's a knock of MJ.