Magic's loss as a massive favorite in 1990 is similar to Lebron's in 2009

[3ba11]

Both tried to be dominant scorers, but both lacked sufficient brand to carry the scoring load against a good team (too ball-dominant), so they lost as massive favorite.

They simply aren't elite scorers because they can't carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat good teams.

Since they can't carry the scoring load, they need all-time scorers at sidekick that can nearly match their scoring... So they need more help than an off-ball expert like Curry - Curry can carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat good teams, so he can win with secondary producers at sidekick like Wiggins that average far less than the 1st option.

[StrongLurk]

Keep it up OP. You are almost to 150,000 posts about Lebron. You can do this!

[8Ball]

Keep it up OP. You are almost to 150,000 posts about Lebron. You can do this!

Over 2000 lebron threads on ISH alone and managed to convince 0 people of his arguments.

[Full Court]

Over 2000 lebron threads on ISH alone and managed to convince 0 people of his arguments.

Not true. I was a MASSIVE Lebum fan and had him as not just the GOAT of basketball, but the GOAT of the entire sporting world until 3ball showed me the light.

He's in fact a chronic loser who was incapable of winning organically. :confusedshrug:

[TheMan]

Not true. I was a MASSIVE Lebum fan and had him as not just the GOAT of basketball, but the GOAT of the entire sporting world until 3ball showed me the light.

He's in fact a chronic loser who was incapable of winning organically. :confusedshrug:

This, 3ba11 showed me that LeBron is a stat padding, front running, colluding fraud who has come up short more times than not...participation awards isn't a thing...fringe top 10.

[8Ball]

Not true. I was a MASSIVE Lebum fan and had him as not just the GOAT of basketball, but the GOAT of the entire sporting world until 3ball showed me the light.

He's in fact a chronic loser who was incapable of winning organically. :confusedshrug:


This, 3ba11 showed me that LeBron is a stat padding, front running, colluding fraud who has come up short more times than not...participation awards isn't a thing...fringe top 10.

Lies. Both of you are Chicago Bulls fans aka LeBron Haters from years ago, before 3ball's account was created.

3ball has only succeeded in making you more demented, not less.


Professor 8ball sees all and knows all. Nobody can fool me, least of all Jordan fans.

[TheMan]

Lies. Both of you are Chicago Bulls fans aka LeBron Haters from years ago, before 3ball's account was created.

3ball has only succeeded in making you more demented, not less.


Professor 8ball sees all and knows all. Nobody can fool me, least of all Jordan fans.

Lies, I was a charter member of the original LeBron Fam until 3ba11 opened my eyes, I was right there along with SilkktheShocker and Number Six amongst other old school Bran Fam members...

I still believe you too will one day have the veil of deceit lifted from your eyes and will recognize the fraud that false "king" is!

[8Ball]

Lies, I was a charter member of the original LeBron Fam until 3ba11 opened my eyes, I was right there along with SilkktheShocker and Number Six amongst other old school Bran Fam members...

I still believe you too will one day have the veil of deceit lifted from your eyes and will recognize the fraud that false "king" is!

Wrong, took me 10 seconds to rebuke another lie. You've been a hater forever.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?338329-Replace-LeBron-with-MJ-in-2011-Finals



I miss SilkktheShocker, the king of ISH.

[Phoenix]

Both tried to be dominant scorers, but both lacked sufficient brand to carry the scoring load against a good team (too ball-dominant), so they lost as massive favorite.



The favorites were the Pistons, who were the defending champs. The Lakers were actually tied with the Suns in terms of betting odds, so it was essentially a pick em series.

[NBAGOAT]

we dont deserve to have a basketball board if 3ball is actually convincing people to change their positions on basketball.

[3ba11]

The favorites were the Pistons, who were the defending champs. The Lakers were actually tied with the Suns in terms of betting odds, so it was essentially a pick em series.


Magic and Lebron can't win titles as dominant scorers that carry the scoring load because they can't carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat the top teams (too ball-dominant).

That's why they need ridiculous scoring help and teammates to nearly match their Finals scoring

Otoh, off-ball experts like Curry can carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat Finals teams, so he can win with secondary scorers at sidekick like Wiggins or Klay or Pippen

[kawhileonard2]

Both tried to be dominant scorers, but both lacked sufficient brand to carry the scoring load against a good team (too ball-dominant), so they lost as massive favorite.

They simply aren't elite scorers because they can't carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat good teams.

Since they can't carry the scoring load, they need all-time scorers at sidekick that can nearly match their scoring... So they need more help than an off-ball expert like Curry - Curry can carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat good teams, so he can win with secondary producers at sidekick like Wiggins that average far less than the 1st option.
Yep!

[Carbine]

Isn't is strange to criticize the two players who won as much or more than anyone from the moment they entered the league until they retired (or currently in LeBron's case)

[3ba11]

Isn't is strange to criticize the two players who won as much or more than anyone from the moment they entered the league until they retired (or currently in LeBron's case)


They're 9-10 in the Finals

if THOSE two guys aren't winners on the championship level, then we know that ball-dominance isn't a winner on the championship level... :confusedshrug:

And both guys routinely got beat by better ball movement teams like the 80's Celtics, 90's Bulls, 11' Mavs, Spurs and Warriors

Btw, both guys had super-teams for the better part of 10 years..

And Magic/Kareem are supposed to be top 5, but not with a 5-4 Finals record - one must get bumped down and I choose the ball-dominator

[Carbine]

And yet they won as much or more than anyone during their era.

LeBron has beat said "better brand" teams in the Spurs '13, Warriors '17.

Magic beat "better brand" teams in the Celtics multiple times.

[3ba11]

And yet they won as much or more than anyone during their era.

LeBron has beat said "better brand" teams in the Spurs '13, Warriors '17.

Magic beat "better brand" teams in the Celtics multiple times.


People say that Magic/Kareem are top 5 but they should be 9-0 in the Finals if that was the case

That's the problem with ball-dominators - it's a bad brand of ball, which causes favored talent to underacheive..

Indeed, Magic/Lebron have arguably the biggest record of underacheving the expectation - Magic lost as a favorite in 84', 91' and numerous years in between, while Lebron's preseason favorite fell to Finals underdog or loser for 6 straight years (11-16') except the Ray Allen miracle.. He also lost with a 1 seed or preseason favorite in 09', 10', 21', and 22'.

Btw, those are Kareem's rings - he's the higher ranked player, so it's a lie to say that Magic was the biggest winner of his era.. And Lebron was a career loser like Luka until "the decision"

[Carbine]

How is being the most successful winners of their era equate to under achieving?

Great players lose as the favorite all the time. Besides Jordan. Curry has the biggest stain of any all time top ten ish player on his resume losing while up 3-1 with a 73 win team. It happens

[3ba11]

How is being the most successful winners of their era equate to under achieving?

Great players lose as the favorite all the time. Besides Jordan. Curry has the biggest stain of any all time top ten ish player on his resume losing while up 3-1 with a 73 win team. It happens


Lebron/Magic have a garbage Finals record compared to combo guys (on-ball and off-ball) like Curry, MJ, Kobe, Kawhi, Dirk, Bird

The combo guys are massive winners, while Magic/Lebron have a lottery record in the Finals (Lebron is 22-33 overall in the Finals - he's the worst "comp"/easiest win in Finals history)

[Phoenix]

Magic and Lebron can't win titles as dominant scorers that carry the scoring load because they can't carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat the top teams (too ball-dominant).

That's why they need ridiculous scoring help and teammates to nearly match their Finals scoring

Otoh, off-ball experts like Curry can carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat Finals teams, so he can win with secondary scorers at sidekick like Wiggins or Klay or Pippen

It would be a nice change of pace if you actually addressed my point. You said the Lakers were massive favorites. In reality, the odds on favorite in 90 were the Pistons, with the Lakers and Suns were tied after that. So the Lakers were neither the favorite to win the title that year, or favored over the Suns as their odds were the same. Next time you shit out one of your usual hyberbolic statements, make sure it actually aligns with reality.

[Phoenix]

How is being the most successful winners of their era equate to under achieving?

Great players lose as the favorite all the time. Besides Jordan. Curry has the biggest stain of any all time top ten ish player on his resume losing while up 3-1 with a 73 win team. It happens

I gave a reply to his earlier bullshit, but you're gonna waste your evening going back and forth with that clown. He's not interested in discussing basketball, just reinforcing his own warped sensibilties regardless of what information is presented in response.

[1987_Lakers]

It would be a nice chnage of pace if you actually addressed my point. You said the Lakers were massive favorites. In reality, the odds on favorite in 90 were the Pistons, with the Lakers and Suns were tied after that. So the Lakers were neither the favorite to win the title that year, or favored over the Suns as their odds were the same. Next time you shit out one of your usual hyberbolic statements, make sure it actually aligns with reality.

https://i.imgflip.com/1rby2f.jpg

[StrongLurk]

You guys don't realize OP is just trolling with the Magic stuff. He doesn't CARE about Magic at all.

All the Magic/Lebron threads from OP over the last few months are because I pushed his shit in so hard that I forced him to apply his dumb Lebron standards to Magic...and lo and behold now OP has to trash Magic...really though he's not even think about Magic, he's only thinking about Lebron.

[3ba11]

It would be a nice change of pace if you actually addressed my point. You said the Lakers were massive favorites. In reality, the odds on favorite in 90 were the Pistons, with the Lakers and Suns were tied after that. So the Lakers were neither the favorite to win the title that year, or favored over the Suns as their odds were the same. Next time you shit out one of your usual hyberbolic statements, make sure it actually aligns with reality.


Are you being serious?

The 90' Lakers were a 63-win 1 seed with homecourt throughout the playoffs

Heading into the series, they were massive -700 favorites over the Suns.. That's the same -700 that the Cavs were favored over the 09' Magic

[Lakers Legend#32]

The Bulls were favored in that series.

[3ba11]

The Bulls were favored in that series.


Who said anything about the Bulls'?

The 1990 Lakers the 1 seed and heavily-favored over the Suns just like Lebron's Cavs were heavily-favored over the Magic in 09'





The Bulls were favored in that series.


Based on Vegas odds, but anyone who watched in 1991 Finals knows that the Bulls were severe underdogs, which NBA.com documents in their history archives:


the Bulls were considered big underdogs to the Lakers in the Finals and the vast majority of media "experts" predicted an easy Lakers' victory.

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/top-20-moments-1990-91-season.html/


The Bulls were 1st timers while the Lakers had 9x Finals trips

[Phoenix]

Are you being serious?

The 90' Lakers were a 63-win 1 seed with homecourt throughout the playoffs

Heading into the series, they were massive -700 favorites over the Suns.. That's the same -700 that the Cavs were favored over the 09' Magic

The Pistons were the 1990 favorites going into the season, and the Lakers and Suns were tied for 2nd. So yes, I'm being serious. And in terms of talent, the Suns beating the Lakers shoudn't have registered as a shock. Hell I'd say the Suns with KJ/Chambers/Hornachek/Eddie Johnson/Majerle had more firepower than the Lakers that year.

[3ba11]

The Pistons were the 1990 favorites going into the season, and the Lakers and Suns were tied for 2nd. So yes, I'm being serious. And in terms of talent, the Suns beating the Lakers shoudn't have registered as a shock. Hell I'd say the Suns with KJ/Chambers/Hornachek/Eddie Johnson/Majerle had more firepower than the Lakers that year.


Heading into the series, the Lakers were massive -700 favorites over the Suns, just like the Cavs were over the Magic in 09':

https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/nba-playoffs-series/?y=all&o=s


So the thread title stands

Btw, the 90' Lakers were far more loaded with Worthy demolishing anyone on the Suns

[paksat]

3 ball is annoying, but he's right

pick and roll offense is garbage, as is 1v1 ( unless matchup issues )

coming off of screens with a lethal jumpshot is the way to be a champion. cp3, lebron, and quite a few others that handle the rock WAY too much will never get their teams to where they need to be.

[Phoenix]

Heading into the series, the Lakers were massive -700 favorites over the Suns, just like the Cavs were over the Magic in 09':

https://www.sportsoddshistory.com/nba-playoffs-series/?y=all&o=s


So the thread title stands

Ultimately meaningless in terms of what happened on the court. The Lakers had HCA and a better season record. Big whoop.

In reality, the Suns had more firepower than the Lakers that year and beating them wasn't some massive failure on the part of the Lakers. The game is won and loss on the court.

BTW, who was favored in the 91 WCFs?

[3ba11]

Ultimately meaningless in terms of what happened on the court. The Lakers had HCA and a better season record. Big whoop.

In reality, the Suns had more firepower than the Lakers that year and beating them wasn't some massive failure on the part of the Lakers. The game is won and loss on the court.


Losing with the league's best record as a -700 favorite isn't a failure?

Seems like you're boxed in a corner

it was a shock and considered an huge upset when the suns won - this is historical record and common knowledge fact.

And Worthy > anyone on the Suns

But regardless, you're missing the point - similar to Lebron, Magic can't beat top teams while carrying the scoring load (too ball-dominant), so he lost as the favorite and needs all-time scorers at sidekick that can nearly match his Finals scoring.

[Phoenix]

Btw, the 90' Lakers were far more loaded with Worthy demolishing anyone on the Suns

Leading scorers for the 90 Suns/Lakers series:

Magic 30.2
KJ 22.0
Chambers 21.6
Worthy 21.2
Hornachek 20.8
West 14.4
Byron Scott 13.2
Woolridge 11.6

4 of the top 6 scorers were Suns players. So BTW, nope.

[Phoenix]

Losing with the league's best record as a -700 favorite isn't a failure?

Seems like you're boxed in a corner

it was a shock and considered an huge upset when the suns won - this is historical record and common knowledge fact.

And Worthy > anyone on the Suns

But regardless, you're missing the point - similar to Lebron, Magic can't beat top teams while carrying the scoring load (too ball-dominant), so he lost as the favorite and needs all-time scorers at sidekick that can nearly match his Finals scoring.

No, because the game is won and lost on the court. The Lakers had HCA and a better season record, and usually those conditions will lead to being favored. Doesn't mean that's how it will play out on the court. So no, I'm not boxed in a corner. The game is won and lost on the floor, not the betting room. What about that is beyond your comprehension?

End of the day, Magic was never considered in the upper echelon of scorers, so what's the point of your thread? He wouldn't win titles playing like Steph and Steph wouldn't have won his titles playing like Magic. No shit.

[3ba11]

Leading scorers for the 90 Suns/Lakers series:

Magic 30.2
KJ 22.0
Chambers 21.6
Worthy 21.2
Hornachek 20.8
West 14.4
Byron Scott 13.2
Woolridge 11.6





^^^ the top 2 scorers for the Lakers outscored KJ/Chambers by 10 ppg

The Lakers had two top 50 guys and easily the best 2 players in the series

It's like Shaq/Kobe facing the 00' Blazers - Lakers had the edge despite the Blazers having better #4 and #5 guys, etc

This is common knowledge.. That's why the 63-win, 1-seeded Lakers were massive favorites over the Suns






4 of the top 6 scorers were Suns players.





^^^ that's the profile of any series with MJ, Curry or Kobe - they outscore everyone by a lot, SO THEIR CAST IS ALWAYS OUTSCORED - yet they win, while Magic lost

Magic and Lebron simply cannot win titles as a dominant scorers - specifically, they can't beat top teams while carrying the scoring load (too ball-dominant), so they need all-time scorers at sidekick to nearly match their Finals scoring..

Said another way, Lebron/Magic can't carry the scoring load with sufficient brand to beat Finals teams, so they need all-time scorers at sidekick to nearly match their Finals scoring.

[StrongLurk]

Keep going OP. Let's get you to 10,000 posts on this ALT account of yours.

[Phoenix]

^^^ the top 2 scorers for the Lakers outscored KJ/Chambers by 10 ppg

The Lakers had two top 50 guys and easily the best 2 players in the series

It's like Shaq/Kobe facing the 00' Blazers - Lakers had the edge despite the Blazers having better #4 and #5 guys, etc

This is common knowledge.. That's why the 63-win, 1-seeded Lakers were massive favorites over the Suns



It doesn't matter if Magic/Worthy outscored KJ/Chambers by 10 when Hornacek/West outscored Scott/Woolrdige by 10, and the rest of the Suns role players outscored their Laker counterparts. The Suns had three 20ppg scorers on their side, ergo more firepower. It's funny how you're now trying to dispute that for someone who's entire arguments center around PPG.

The Lakers may have had the top 2 players, but 4 of the top 6 were on the Suns, which balances it out. Tom Chambers and KJ were both 2nd team all-NBA and considering that both Chambers and Worthy were forwards, that means Tom was considered to be better than year regardless of their relative historical stature.

As for Magic not being able to carry a scoring load to beat finals teams...again I ask, who was arguing otherwise?

[Hey Yo]

Who said anything about the Bulls'?

The 1990 Lakers the 1 seed and heavily-favored over the Suns just like Lebron's Cavs were heavily-favored over the Magic in 09'







Based on Vegas odds, but anyone who watched in 1991 Finals knows that the Bulls were severe underdogs, which NBA.com documents in their history archives:


the Bulls were considered big underdogs to the Lakers in the Finals and the vast majority of media "experts" predicted an easy Lakers' victory.

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/top-20-moments-1990-91-season.html/


The Bulls were 1st timers while the Lakers had 9x Finals trips

Nowhere in that link does it say what you quoted above. But it did confirm what you've been denying for years that Pippen did indeed guard Magic for majority of the series.


:roll: