2018 Celtics were a weaker team than the 89' Cavs or Knicks (that pre-title mj beat)

[3ball]

.
2018 Celtics.... 55 wins... #7 SRS.. 1 all-star.. 3.6 net rating

1989 Cavs........ 57 wins.. #1 SRS.. 3 all-star.. 7.7 net rating
1989 Knicks..... 52 wins.. #8 SRS.. 2 all-star.. 3.7 net rating


It was pre-title Jordan and his sophomore low seed that beat the 89' Cavs, whereas Lebron was a veteran champion with a veteran champion team when he beat the 18' Celtics..

Also, 89' Ewing was a dominant player and vastly superior to anyone on the 18' Celtics..

[AussieSteve]

Is 3ball on the ish payroll?

[Smoke117]

1-9

[Ainosterhaspie]

3ball got his ass handed to him in the other 2018 Cavs thread where his logic leads to the conclusion that peak MJ is inferior to old man LeBron, so he ran to make a new thread asking for another ass whoopin'.

[Axe]

Another rubbish take as usual.

[ShawkFactory]

3ball got his ass handed to him in the other 2018 Cavs thread where his logic leads to the conclusion that peak MJ is inferior to old man LeBron, so he ran to make a new thread asking for another ass whoopin'.

Got his dick chopped off in the Curry thread too. Ran from that one.

Which begs the question..why does he do this to himself and everyone around him :lol

[Lebron23]

.
2018 Celtics.... 55 wins... #7 SRS.. 1 all-star.. 3.6 net rating

1989 Cavs........ 57 wins.. #1 SRS.. 3 all-star.. 7.7 net rating
1989 Knicks..... 52 wins.. #8 SRS.. 2 all-star.. 3.7 net rating


It was pre-title Jordan and his sophomore low seed that beat the 89' Cavs, whereas Lebron was a veteran champion with a veteran champion team when he beat the 18' Celtics..

Also, 89' Ewing was a dominant player and vastly superior to anyone on the 18' Celtics..

Pippen in 1998 is better than 2018 Kevin Love

[HoopsNY]

Man nobody cares 3ball.

[Wally450]

Man nobody cares 3ball.

This. It's the same regurgitated threads over and over. Dude is such a loser.

[Derka]

Dude, get a life. You've reached such a low point with these threads. At this point, hours spent jerking off would be a more valuable use of your time than this.

[tpols]

Well they were... The Cavs had two all star talents in their primes with Mark Price and Brad Daugherty, and a young Ron Harper. The Knicks had Pat Ewing and Mark Jackson who were both all stars, along with Charles Oakley a 1st team defense type of guy.

The 2018 Celtics? :oldlol: They had ZERO all stars, and were being led by rookies and "scary" terry rozier. The Celtics started that year off with great promise because they had signed Gordon Hayward and Kyrie, but both succumbed to injury so they were left a shell and joke of a team. Brad Stevens coaching was the only reason they overachieved with the paltry talent they had out there. Both Giannis and Middleton averaged 25+ ppg against them that year in the first round and somehow lost with nobody on Boston even cracking 20. Team effort, but no star talent at the time.

[3ball]

Well they were... The Cavs had two all star talents in their primes with Mark Price and Brad Daugherty, and a young Ron Harper. The Knicks had Pat Ewing and Mark Jackson who were both all stars, along with Charles Oakley a 1st team defense type of guy.

The 2018 Celtics? :oldlol: They had ZERO all stars, and were being led by rookies and "scary" terry rozier. The Celtics started that year off with great promise because they had signed Gordon Hayward and Kyrie, but both succumbed to injury so they were left a shell and joke of a team. Brad Stevens coaching was the only reason they overachieved with the paltry talent they had out there. Both Giannis and Middleton averaged 25+ ppg against them that year in the first round and somehow lost with nobody on Boston even cracking 20. Team effort, but no star talent at the time.


Larry Nance was a 3rd all-star for the Cavs in 89', and he was also all-defense with 3 blocks per game

So those Cavs had a big 3 plus Ron Harper, which gave them the #1 SRS team in the league and a title-contender - Magic called them the Cavs the "team of the 90's" (url=https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/sunk-history-before-michael-jordan-was-the-goat-he-put-it-all-on-the-line-and-won-big-with-the-shot-213643523.html]here[/url]

[HoopsNY]

Larry Nance was a 3rd all-star for the Cavs in 89', and he was also all-defense with 3 blocks per game

So those Cavs had a big 3 plus Ron Harper, which gave them the #1 SRS team in the league and a title-contender - Magic called them the Cavs the "team of the 90's" (url=https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/sunk-history-before-michael-jordan-was-the-goat-he-put-it-all-on-the-line-and-won-big-with-the-shot-213643523.html]here[/url]

Is anyone saying the 2018 Celtics minus Hayward/Kyrie were better than the '89 Cavs, though?

[3ball]

Is anyone saying the 2018 Celtics minus Hayward/Kyrie were better than the '89 Cavs, though?


People wonder if Jordan could've carried the 18' Cavs to the Finals

But he already beat 2 teams in 89' that were equal or better!!!!....

and this was pre-title Jordan with a sophomore low seed, whereas lebron was a veteran champion with a veteran team when he beat the 18' Celtics

Pre-title Jordan was already beating teams better than the 18' Cavs with young, low seeds, so champion Jordan would easily win with a veteran team

[dankok8]

The OP will be in a lot more pain in 3 months. LeCinco incoming!

[3ball]

The OP will be in a lot more pain in 3 months. LeCinco incoming!


Lebron winning more chips will bolster the case because it provides more evidence of him being carried to titles (compared to Jordan)

This year would be his 3rd ring with an equal-scoring partner and the most he ever averaged more than his sidekick in a winning Finals was 5 points

So he never had to win like Jordan, and each ring demonstrates this clearly

People will delve into the details if lebron starts to match MJ in rings.. and the details is where mj fans shine because the facts are on our side... :dancin:

[Ainosterhaspie]

Notice how 3ball is using the same smoke and mirrors tactics as he did in the other thread. Rather than discussing the actual performance of the teams involved, he uses proxies.

The Cavs were veterans. Doesn't matter if they were the second worst defense in the league. Doesn't matter if they only had one double digit scorer to support LeBron. They were veterans you see so their actual lousy performance against the Celtics is better than the '89 Bulls supporting cast's actual strong performance against the Cavaliers and even stronger performance against the Knicks.

Doesn't matter if Jordan's cast was the #11 defense in the league, and they had three double digit scorers besides MJ with Pippen scoring more than Love both against the Cavs and Knicks. They were young so the combined 45.6 ppg from Jordan's four highest scoring teammates against the Cavss and more against the knicks is somehow less help than the combined 39.4 ppg LeBron's four highest scoring teammates put in.

You see being a veteran magically makes less point more valuable than more points scored by young guys. Being a veteran means crappy defense is good. Being young means good defense isn't.

[dankok8]

Lebron winning more chips will bolster the case because it provides more evidence of him being carried to titles (compared to Jordan)

This year would be his 3rd ring with an equal-scoring partner

He never had to win like Jordan, and each ring demonstrates this clearly

People will start to delve into the details if lebron starts to match MJ in rings.. and the details is where mj fans shine because the facts are on our side

You better believe that if Lebron ties Jordan in rings let alone surpasses him a lot of people will switch over to his side.

[jlip]

Is 3ball on the ish payroll?

I've been seriously wondering this myself, because I can't fathom why he is not permanently banned.

[AirBonner]

No Pip no chip

[tpols]

Is anyone saying the 2018 Celtics minus Hayward/Kyrie were better than the '89 Cavs, though?

Yes the bron kiddie stans have been saying that. There's long threads on the matter. It speaks to Lebrons level as a player that he could be expected to lose to rookie tatum, brown, and terry rozier when he has a prime all star all nba talent and a bunch of very good veteran role players and snipers on his side. The GOAT would never be expected to lose to a bunch of rookies under such circumstances, but alas it makes sense he is nowhere near GOAT.

[mehyaM24]

jordan lost to the 88 pistons who were 54-28 (#3 in DRTG)
for the series, jordan averaged 27/9/5 on 49% shooting from the field

lebron beat the celtics in 2018 who were 55-27 (#1 in DRTG)
for the series, lebron averaged 34/9/8 on 52% shooting from the field

jordan's OWN track record is why making the 18 finals wouldn't be guaranteed.

[tpols]

jordan lost to the 88 pistons who were 54-28 (#3 in DRTG)
for the series, jordan averaged 27/9/5 on 49% shooting from the field

lebron beat the celtics in 2018 who were 55-27 (#1 in DRTG)
for the series, lebron averaged 34/9/8 on 52% shooting from the field

jordan's OWN track record is why making the 18 finals wouldn't be guaranteed.

So your comparing the dynasty pistons to the rookie celtics? Thats why you guys cant be taken seriously.

[mehyaM24]

So your comparing the dynasty pistons to the rookie celtics? Thats why you guys cant be taken seriously.

i'm using team record just like the op. what's the big deal? :confusedshrug:

the 88 pistons werent a "dynasty" either - they lost that year.

[tpols]

i'm using team record just like the op. what's the big deal? :confusedshrug:

the 88 pistons werent a "dynasty" either - they lost that year.

They lost in the Finals to the dynasty Lakers featuring Magic, Worthy, and Kareem in a brutal 7 game series.

:biggums:

And were one phantom call away on KAJ from beating them in 6 games. But "they lost that year" so they were trash right? This might be one of the worst comparisons I've ever seen... that you would even have the balls to say the rookie 2018 celtics were better than the late 80s Detroit Pistons. You fellas are reaching new lows.

[3ball]

i'm using team record just like the op. what's the big deal? :confusedshrug:

the 88 pistons werent a "dynasty" either - they lost that year.


It's clear that:

89' Cavs > 18' Celtics

and it was pre-title Jordan that beat those Cavs with no help and a rookie team, while lebron was a veteran champion with a veteran champion team when he beat the rookie Celtics

[3ball]

Yes the bron kiddie stans have been saying that. There's long threads on the matter. It speaks to Lebrons level as a player that he could be expected to lose to rookie tatum, brown, and terry rozier when he has a prime all star all nba talent and a bunch of very good veteran role players and snipers on his side. The GOAT would never be expected to lose to a bunch of rookies under such circumstances, but alas it makes sense he is nowhere near GOAT.


Champion Jordan wouldn't need help like that to beat the 18' Celtics because pre-title Jordan was already beating a much better team (89' Cavs) with a sophomore low seed

[ShawkFactory]

Soooo...the 89 Cavs were better than the 2018 Celtics. And...?

Is the point that Jordan beat a team once that was better than a team lebron beat one time?

I don’t get it.

[mehyaM24]

They lost in the Finals to the dynasty Lakers featuring Magic, Worthy, and Kareem in a brutal 7 game series.

:biggums:

And were one phantom call away on KAJ from beating them in 6 games. But "they lost that year" so they were trash right? This might be one of the worst comparisons I've ever seen... that you would even have the balls to say to rookie 2018 celtics were better than the late 80s Detroit Pistons. You fellas are reaching new lows.

i'm literally comparing team record just like the op. but you're only whining because it trumps his argument. :oldlol:

and gaslighting your point doesn't make it more true. nobody said they were "trash" pal. again, detroit hadn't won a championship and LOST THAT YEAR. that isn't a dynasty.

[3ball]

So your comparing the dynasty pistons to the rookie celtics? Thats why you guys cant be taken seriously.


Lol absurd

[mehyaM24]

It's clear that:

89' Cavs > 18' Celtics

and it was pre-title Jordan that beat those Cavs with no help and a rookie team, while lebron was a veteran champion with a veteran champion team when he beat the rookie Celtics

its also CLEAR that 18 lebron beat a team with more wins. jordan came up short - more evidence that making the 18 finals isn't clear-cut.

[3ball]

its also CLEAR that 18 lebron beat a team with more wins. jordan came up short - and more evidence that making the 18 finals isn't clear-cut.


I didn't just look at wins

I used SRS, net rating and all-stars, where the 88' Pistons destroy the 18' Celtics

But even without knowing the stats, no sane person would compare the 18' Celtics rookies to the dynasty Pistons (even if you don't like the term dynasty).. it's preposterous

[SouBeachTalents]

2 titles does not make you a dynasty

[mehyaM24]

I didn't just look at wins

I used SRS, net rating and all-stars, where the 88' Pistons destroy the 18' Celtics

But even without knowing the stats, no sane person would compare the 18' Celtics rookies to the dynasty Pistons (even if you don't like the term dynasty).. it's preposterous

the pistons didn't win that year and had NEVER won a championship. far from a "dynasty" bud.


2 titles does not make you a dynasty

they won their first title in 1989 - the following year. b-b-but dynasty! :oldlol:

[tpols]

2 titles does not make you a dynasty

They were a single game away from a 3peat in a loaded era. They went to game 7 with Showtime the year before they repeated, and even Pat Riley admitted the KAJ phantom foul cost them the '88 title. The Pistons were absolutely considered a dynasty back then. First thing that comes up when you search it.



The 1988-89 and 1989-90 Detroit Pistons teams are considered by most to be some of the greatest in NBA history. The “Bad Boys” were largely responsible for the demise of the great Lakers and Celtics teams of the '80s


They beat Magic, Bird, and Jordan. That's dynasty. Are you gonna ride with your boy M and say the 2018 Celtics were on par with them? Its amazing were even debating this.

[mehyaM24]

They were a single game away from a 3peat in a loaded era. They were absolutely considered a dynasty back then. First thing that comes up when you search it.



They beat Magic, Bird, and Jordan. That's dynasty. Are you gonna ride with your boy M and say the 2018 Celtics were on par with them? Its amazing were even debating this.

this guy is up in arms over a team who lost, and had the same record as the 18 celtics. but is cool with op comparing pippen to jr smith. cant make this up :oldlol:

[Ainosterhaspie]

They were a single game away from a 3peat in a loaded era. They were absolutely considered a dynasty back then. First thing that comes up when you search it.



They beat Magic, Bird, and Jordan. That's dynasty. Are you gonna ride with your boy M and say the 2018 Celtics were on par with them? Its amazing were even debating this.

It's not about the 2018 Cavs being better than the 1988 Pistons. The issue is that 3ball's arguments are based on ridiculous rationales which if applied consistently yield patently absurd results like '18 Celtics = '88 Pistons. No one thinks that, but that's what 3ball's argument produces.

[tpols]

You need a new account bud. That comparison is going to follow you around everywhere because it destroys your credibility. Ive never ever compared JR Smith to Pippen so that's not gonna fly. From what I've seen the OP post, he has only said that JR Smith at his best reached Pippens standard level of play, nothing more nothing less. You guys take that to mean JR Smith = Scottie Pippen because your dumb and couldn't properly comprehend his argument. Then again I'm posting with a guy who thinks the 80s pistons were worse than the 2018 celtics so I really shouldn't be expecting too much.

[tpols]

It's not about the 2018 Cavs being better than the 1988 Pistons. The issue is that 3ball's arguments are based on ridiculous rationales which if applied consistently yield patently absurd results like '18 Celtics = '88 Pistons. No one thinks that, but that's what 3ball's argument produces.

He didn't even have to make the argument that way though. Count the all stars on the '89 Cavs, '89 Knicks, and '18 Celtics. The former two teams have all the all star selections. 5 to 0. So they were clearly way better.

[mehyaM24]

You need a new account bud. That comparison is going to follow you around everywhere because it destroys your credibility. Ive never ever compared JR Smith to Pippen so that's not gonna fly. From what I've seen the OP post, he has only said that JR Smith at his best reached Pippens standard level of play, nothing more nothing less. You guys take that to mean JR Smith = Scottie Pippen because your dumb and couldn't properly comprehend his argument. Then again I'm posting with a guy who thinks the 80s pistons were worse than the 2018 celtics so I really shouldn't be expecting too much.

yeah, and the only way that's true is by ignoring defense and playmaking. we know the deal here though pal. you don't question it because it aligns with your agenda lol

i'm simply comparing the records of boston and detroit. you know "nothing more, nothing less"? don't cry the next time i use op's arguments him. :oldlol:

[SouBeachTalents]

They were a single game away from a 3peat in a loaded era. They went to game 7 with Showtime the year before they repeated, and even Pat Riley admitted the KAJ phantom foul cost them the '88 title. The Pistons were absolutely considered a dynasty back then. First thing that comes up when you search it.



They beat Magic, Bird, and Jordan. That's dynasty. Are you gonna ride with your boy M and say the 2018 Celtics were on par with them? Its amazing were even debating this.
No team in any sport has ever been considered a dynasty with only 2 titles. I agree they had huge calls go against them in '88, but after '90 they got swept by the Bulls and were legitimately never relevant again. And the Bird/Magic/Jordan talking point is so disingenuous. They beat Jordan 3 times as the substantial favorite, and the time they "beat" Magic he missed most of the series

[Ainosterhaspie]

It's clear that:

89' Cavs > 18' Celtics

and it was pre-title Jordan that beat those Cavs with no help and a rookie team, while lebron was a veteran champion with a veteran champion team when he beat the rookie Celtics

How do you figure he had no help when he had more scoring help and a better defensive roster? The Cavs cast against the Celtics was a worse defensive team and provided worse scoring support. You keep ignoring actual play and are just running with narratives that are clearly erroneous. It doesn't matter that the 88 or 89 Bulls were young, and the 18 Cavs were veterans. The Bulls support inarguably performed better than the Cavs support.

[3ball]

How do you figure he had no help when he had more scoring help and a better defensive roster? The Cavs cast against the Celtics was a worse defensive team and provided worse scoring support. You keep ignoring actual play and are just running with narratives that are clearly erroneous. It doesn't matter that the 88 or 89 Bulls were young, and the 18 Cavs were veterans. The Bulls support inarguably performed better than the Cavs support.


18' Lebron easily makes the 05' Playoffs because he's about three times better than young lebron

Jordan was the same way - he improved throughout his bulls career - champion Jordan from 1991 probably beats the Pistons in 89' and 90' despite no help

[ShawkFactory]

You need a new account bud. That comparison is going to follow you around everywhere because it destroys your credibility. Ive never ever compared JR Smith to Pippen so that's not gonna fly. From what I've seen the OP post, he has only said that JR Smith at his best reached Pippens standard level of play, nothing more nothing less. You guys take that to mean JR Smith = Scottie Pippen because your dumb and couldn't properly comprehend his argument. Then again I'm posting with a guy who thinks the 80s pistons were worse than the 2018 celtics so I really shouldn't be expecting too much.

You really think that’s all that was said? :lol

He made that statement as a part of an argument. And you know exactly what that argument was.

Put two and two together.

[mehyaM24]

No team in any sport has ever been considered a dynasty with only 2 titles. I agree they had huge calls go against them in '88, but after '90 they got swept by the Bulls and were legitimately never relevant again. And the Bird/Magic/Jordan talking point is so disingenuous. They beat Jordan 3 times as the substantial favorite, and the time they "beat" Magic he missed most of the series

you're giving credence to their titles. and while i agree, 2 titles don't make a dynasty, neither does losing. up until 89, the pistons had never won a championship. so claiming jordan "lost to a dynasty" in 88 is gaslighting. no one at the time thought of them that way. how could they? detroit didn't win anything until the FOLLOWING year.


You really think that’s all that was said? :lol

He made that statement as a part of an argument. And you know exactly what that argument was.

Put two and two together.

plays the woe is me act. we all see through that facade lol

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Well they were... The Cavs had two all star talents in their primes with Mark Price and Brad Daugherty, and a young Ron Harper. The Knicks had Pat Ewing and Mark Jackson who were both all stars, along with Charles Oakley a 1st team defense type of guy.

The 2018 Celtics? :oldlol: They had ZERO all stars, and were being led by rookies and "scary" terry rozier. The Celtics started that year off with great promise because they had signed Gordon Hayward and Kyrie, but both succumbed to injury so they were left a shell and joke of a team. Brad Stevens coaching was the only reason they overachieved with the paltry talent they had out there. Both Giannis and Middleton averaged 25+ ppg against them that year in the first round and somehow lost with nobody on Boston even cracking 20. Team effort, but no star talent at the time.

This. I dont get the point of the thread.

A team led by Al Horford and a bunch of teenagers isnt better than those Cavs or Knicks

[Ainosterhaspie]

No team in any sport has ever been considered a dynasty with only 2 titles. I agree they had huge calls go against them in '88, but after 1990 they got swept by the Bulls and were literally never relevant again. And the Bird/Magic/Jordan talking point is so disingenuous. They beat Jordan 3 times as the substantial favorite, and the time they "beat" Magic he missed most of the series
I'm siding with tpols on this. They may not be a dynasty by the 3 straight titles definition, but then the middle 80s Lakers and late 2010s Warriors don't meet that criteria either and both were dynastic. More important though us the quality of the team, not whether the narrative driven title fits. By the important criteria, the late 80s Pistons were a dynastic level team.

[SouBeachTalents]

I'm siding with tpols on this. They may not be a dynasty by the 3 straight titles definition, but then the middle 80s Lakers and late 2010s Warriors don't meet that criteria either and both were dynastic. More important though us the quality of the team, not whether the narrative driven title fits. By the important criteria, the late 80s Pistons were a dynastic level team.
How would the Lakers & Warriors not meet dynasty criteria? The Warriors won 3 titles in 4 years and made 5 straight Finals, while the Lakers won 5 titles in 9 years. The Pistons run simply falls far below either of those. I'd consider the Big 3 Heat a dynastic level team, but I wouldn't consider them a dynasty either

[Ainosterhaspie]

This. I dont get the point of the thread.

A team led by Al Horford and a bunch of teenagers isnt better than those Cavs or Knicks
The point of the thread is 3ball keeps making bad arguments, gets called on it, then doubles down with new thread pursuing the same basic train of thought that has already been dismantled.

The thread questioning how MJ would do with the 2018 Cavs had 3ball talking about the 2005 Cavs instead of the 2018 Cavs to argue 1990 Jordan would do as good or better as LeBron on that 2018 team. That line of reasoning had several glaring flaws. He got called on them, then made this thread as a continuation of that argument. Only now he's shifting to various other Bulls teams where his rationale still makes no sense and produces absurd results like "2018 Cavs = 1988 Pistons". Rather than abandoning this horrible argument, he keeps doubling down on it.

[Ainosterhaspie]

How would the Lakers & Warriors not meet dynasty criteria? The Warriors won 3 titles in 4 years and made 5 straight Finals and the Lakers won 5 titles in 9 years. The Pistons run simply falls far below either of those. I'd consider the Big 3 Heat a dynastic level team, but I wouldn't consider them a dynasty either

Didn't win 3 straight though.

[SouBeachTalents]

Didn't win 3 straight though.
Lol c'mon, I've never heard of anyone mandating that. By that rationale the Brady/Belichick Pats wouldn't be considered a dynasty :lol

[3ball]

The point of the thread is 3ball keeps making bad arguments, gets called on it, then doubles down with new thread pursuing the same basic train of thought that has already been dismantled.

The thread questioning how MJ would do with the 2018 Cavs had 3ball talking about the 2005 Cavs instead of the 2018 Cavs to argue 1990 Jordan would do as good or better as LeBron on that 2018 team. That line of reasoning had several glaring flaws. He got called on them, then made this thread as a continuation of that argument. Only now he's shifting to various other Bulls teams where his rationale still makes no sense and produces absurd results like "2018 Cavs = 1988 Pistons". Rather than abandoning this horrible argument, he keeps doubling down on it.


My arguments in the other thread showed that the production of the 90' Bulls' cast was superior to the 05' Cavs on both sides of the ball, and this thread shows that Jordan carried this lottery cast over teams that were superior to the 18' Celtics.

Ultimately, Jordan's victories over superior opponents to the 18' Celtics despite having weaker casts than the 05' Cavs is strong evidence that he would cruise to the 18 Finals in Lebron's place.. Lebron had a veteran, champion cast and was a veteran champion himself.. Jordan would win chips every year in his shoes

[Ainosterhaspie]

Lol c'mon, I've never heard of anyone mandating that. By that rationale the Brady/Belichick Pats wouldn't be considered a dynasty :lol

The standard isn't exactly clear though. Is it three titles in a given time span? What is that time span? Can you be one with less than three titles? Like I said though, that's not even what really matter here. They ended two dynasties, delayed another and were just one game short of the three title threshold that would probably earn them the title. At that point it's semantics. They were dynasty quality if not a dynasty in name.

[3ball]

The standard isn't exactly clear though. Is it three titles in a given time span? What is that time span? Can you be one with less than three titles? Like I said though, that's not even what really matter here. They ended two dynasties, delayed another and were just one game short of the three title threshold that would probably earn them the title. At that point it's semantics. They were dynasty quality if not a dynasty in name.


Ultimately, Jordan's victories over superior opponents to the 18' Celtics despite having weaker casts than the 05' Cavs is strong evidence that he would cruise to the 18 Finals in Lebron's place.. Lebron had a veteran, champion cast and was a veteran champion himself.. So Jordan would win chips every year in his shoes, especially since the lesser, pre-title versions of Jordan were already beating superior opponents with no help

And of course, only Jordan had carry-jobs against GOOD teams (top 5 SRS)

[Ainosterhaspie]

My arguments in the other thread showed that the production of the 90' Bulls' cast was superior to the 05' Cavs on both sides of the ball, and this thread shows that Jordan carried this lottery cast over teams that were superior to the 18' Celtics.

Ultimately, Jordan's victories over superior opponents to the 18' Celtics despite casts weaker than the 05' Cavs is strong evidence that he would cruise to the 18 Finals in Lebron's place
And the 05 Cavs have precise nothing to do with the 18 Cavs. Any train of thought that relies on talking about them instead of the 18 Cavs which the thread is about is derailed before it begins its journey. How are you not comprehending that yet? You've got to recognize a shitty argument when it's been pointed out to you. Just because that argument sucks doesn't mean LeBron is GOAT over MJ. Stick to good arguments for MJ instead of absurd tortured reasoning like 05 Cavs > 90 Bulls therefore MJ would do better with 18 Cavs. The conclusion might be correct, but the rationale used to support it doesn't actually support it.

[SouBeachTalents]

The standard isn't exactly clear though. Is it three titles in a given time span? What is that time span? Can you be one with less than three titles? Like I said though, that's not even what really matter here. They ended two dynasties, delayed another and were just one game short of the three title threshold that would probably earn them the title. At that point it's semantics. They were dynasty quality if not a dynasty in name.
I think 3 is the absolute minimum needed to be considered dynasty status. The timeframe of that is certainly where things can become subjective and debatable, but I'd say if you win 3 with the majority of the same core of players, that should be good enough to be considered dynasty level.

I won't necessarily disagree with you that the Pistons were dynasty quality, I just felt like their titles came during a pretty fortunate transition that the league was going through. Bird injured his back and the Celtics were finished after '88, they knocked off the Lakers with Magic missing most of the series and Kareem being a total shell of himself, and with the possible exception of 1990, they beat a Bulls team that didn't remotely resemble the one that would go on to win all those titles, they didn't even have Phil Jackson for those first two matchups.

The fact they came so close to winning in '88 is a valid argument, but a lot of dynasty teams had extremely painful playoff defeats but went to win additional titles. The Pistons got destroyed in '91 and were never heard from again.

[3ball]

absurd tortured reasoning like 05 Cavs > 90 Bulls therefore MJ would do better with 18 Cavs. The conclusion might be correct, but the rationale used to support it doesn't actually support it.





The 05' Cavs looked bad because Lebron wasn't great yet and barely won 40 games with the East all-star center.

18' Lebron was much better and wouldn't be lottery with that team, while 90' Jordan nearly won the title with a less productive cast on both sides of the ball.

People simply don't remember back to 89' or 90'... The bulls were considered the biggest 1-man team in history with special rules designed to stop the goat scoring champ... So don't be surprised that the 05' Cavs compare favorably to them.

Finally, Lebron was a veteran champion in 2018... So Jordan would win chips every year in his shoes since the lesser, pre-title versions of Jordan were already beating superior opponents with no help

And of course, only Jordan had carry-jobs against GOOD teams (top 5 SRS)