Jordan's help. Wow.

[QUOTE=Euroleague]

[IMG]https://media3.giphy.com/media/SEp6Zq6ZkzUNW/200.gif[/IMG]

[/QUOTE]

Show me where a player was required to:


1) score at least 10 more ppg than his 2nd option for every playoff series of his career (except two, where MJ scored 8 ppg and 5 ppg more)

2) lead his team in passing by assisting on the highest proportion of teammate FG's (MJ led his team in assist percentage [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11713121&postcount=49]for both 3-peats[/url])

3) AND play goat-level defense.


I'll wait.
.

[QUOTE=feyki]:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

This all you can do when it comes to MJ stans.

[QUOTE=3ball][SIZE="3"][I]You're saying Pippen's contribution compared to MJ's??.... :yaohappy:

[COLOR="darkred"]Jordan scored at least 10 ppg more than Pippen in EVERY playoffs series, except two, when he averaged 5 ppg and 8 ppg more.
[/COLOR]
In addition to scoring literally 50-300% more than Pippen in every playoff series, Jordan assisted on a higher proportion of teammate field goals - he led the team in assist %:[/I][/SIZE]


[B]Assist Percentage 1991-1993 Playoffs:[/B]

Jordan: 31.1%
Pippen: 23.3%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1991-1993-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[B]Assist Percentage 1996-1998 Playoffs:[/B]

Jordan: 22.3%
Pippen: 22.0%

[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]
[url]http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/pippesc01.html#1996-1998-sum:playoffs_advanced[/url]


[SIZE="3"][I]So MJ scored 50-300% more than Pippen, while leading the team in passing and playing GOAT defense... MJ carried the biggest load of all time.. No one else is close[/I][/SIZE]



It doesn't matter that you overrate Jordan's cast - regardless of how much you overrate Jordan's cast, his cast was worse than anyone he's compared to.

[B]Let's compare MJ's teammates to Magic's, Kareem's, Bird's, Duncan's, Lebron's, Kobe's - YOU NAME IT - his cast simply had far less talent than these guys...[/B]

This is easily proven by counting each player's [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11988792&postcount=121]all-star teammates[/url] and comparing results achieved with said teammates.[/QUOTE]

And let's compare competition to what Magic and Bird faced, as well. Give me the list of teams that MJ facerd that had anywhere near the talent of the 80's Lakers and Celtics. Or the talent of the Moses-led Sixers. Or the talent of the prime Bad Boys (and not the shell of what they were in '91)?

Again, the 90's were so watered down that a '94 Bulls team was a TRUE TITLE CONTENDER...withOUT Jordan.

And then, with Jordan, they STILL couldn't win in '95. So what did they do next? They added HOFer Rodman!

BY FAR the most talented teams in the league.

And we saw what an injury-riddled '94 Bulls team could do...without Jordan.

So, let's remove the best player from every team in that decade, including MJ, and how many titles do the 90's Bulls win???? I would argue easily six. How many titles would the Rockets have won without Hakeem? The Sonics without Payton? The Suns without Barkley? The Jazz without Karl?

That is CONTEXT my friend.

Euroleague and 3ball going at it :lol


[IMG]https://49.media.tumblr.com/f8d306007614d5c2bdddd86fdfbc94e0/tumblr_nna5xeJO681t9sksvo1_400.gif[/IMG]

.
[COLOR="Red"][SIZE="4"]Proof that Jordan would've won 2007 Finals:[/SIZE][/COLOR]


[I][SIZE="2"]Game 1 was an eight point game in 4th quarter, despite only 10 points on 5-15 from Lebron.. Games 3 and 4 were nail-biters, despite Lebron's 25 points on 39% and 24 points on 33%, respectively.

Now if Jordan shoots 15-25 percentage points better from the field, [COLOR="Navy"]like all these guys did against the same Spurs team[/COLOR], the Cavs win all three of those games:[/SIZE][/I]


[B][I]Melo vs. Spurs in 2007 1st Rd[/I]: [COLOR="Red"]27 ppg on 48%[/COLOR]

[I]Dirk vs. Spurs in 2007[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] WCF[/I]: [COLOR="Red"]27 ppg on 53%[/COLOR]

[I]Bonzi vs. Spurs in 2006 1st Rd[/I]: [COLOR="Red"]23/12 on 61%[/COLOR]

[I]Kobe vs. Spurs in 2008[COLOR="White"]..[/COLOR] WCF[/I]: [COLOR="Red"]29 ppg on 53%[/COLOR]

[I][COLOR="Navy"]Lebron vs. Spurs in 2007 Finals:[/COLOR][/I][COLOR="blue"] 22 ppg on 35%[/COLOR][/B]



[I][SIZE="2"]Lebron shot 65.4% at the rim (40% of offense), so his lower overall efficiency compared to his peers was due SPECIFICALLY to his jumpshooting efficiency:[/SIZE][/I]


[COLOR="White"].................................[/COLOR][SIZE="2"][B]Jumpshot Efficiency vs. Spurs in 2006-2008 Playoffs
[/B]

[COLOR="White"]....................... [/COLOR]midrange jumpshot FG%[COLOR="White"].....[/COLOR] 3-point jumpshot FG%[COLOR="White"].....[/COLOR] Jumpshot proportion of offense

[url=http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/1719/stats/shooting/?Season=2005-06&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=1]Bonzi 2006 1st Rd[/url] ..............50.0........................... 62.5............................... 32.2
[url=http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/1717/stats/shooting/?Season=2005-06&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=3]Dirk 2006 WCF[/url] ..................41.3........................... 50.0 .............................. 61.2
[url=http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/2546/stats/shooting/?Season=2006-07&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=1]Melo 2007 1st Rd[/url] ...............37.5........................... 50.0 .............................. 59.1
[url=http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/977/stats/shooting/?Season=2007-08&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=3]Kobe 2008 WCF[/url] .................50.0........................... 33.3............................... 63.3
[url=http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/2544/stats/shooting/?Season=2006-07&SeasonType=Playoffs&PORound=4]Lebron 2007 Finals[/url] .............[I][COLOR="red"]14.8........................... 20.0............................... 52.2[/COLOR][/I]
[/SIZE]


[size="2"][I]

Since jumpshot efficiency was the key to good overall efficiency against the Spurs, MJ would've had great efficiency, since he was a better midrange shooter than all these guys and frequently relied on his jumpshot to have big games.

Clearly, the Spurs' jumpshooting defense wasn't prohibitive, since everyone shot well on jumpshots, EXCEPT Lebron - Lebron simply can't shoot..[/i][/size]
.

[QUOTE=3ball]Essentially, no one in history has led their team in scoring BY THAT MUCH, while also leading them [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11713121&postcount=49]in passing[/url], and playing goat defense.

Only MJ did this.. :pimp:[/QUOTE]

Wilt routinely led his teams in scoring, rebounding, FG%, and often in passing...all while playing THE GOAT defense.

Unfortunately for him, his teams were vastly over-matched in those years by Celtic teams with FIVE to NINE HOFers.

And when he finally had a supporting cast that was the equal of Russell's, and healthy, they destroyed the "Dynasty"...all with Chamberlain dominating in every facet of the game.

TEAM game. When Jordan was surrounded with 55+ win rosters, and facing teams with less talent....yes, he won six rings.

3ball you have to realize what a loser you are if freaking Euroleague just dissmises you with a simple gif and doesn't even bother responding :roll:

[QUOTE=3ball]Show me where a player was required to:


1) score at least 10 more ppg than his 2nd option for every playoff series (except two, where MJ scored 8 ppg and 5 ppg more)

2) lead his team in passing by assisting on the highest proportion of teammate FG's (MJ led his team in assist percentage [url=http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11713121&postcount=49]for both 3-peats[/url])

3) AND play goat-level defense.


I'll wait.[/QUOTE]

You are in for a long ass wait.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS][B]And yet, in the '91 ECF's, when MJ once again had his numbers decline[/B], but this time against a Piston team that was a shell of what they had been the three previous seasons...it was Pippen and Grant coming up huge![/QUOTE]

1) I can't believe I just read this. Before you write another sentence, you should go back and watch these game again. Games 3 and 4 especially is some of the most dominant basketball that's ever been played. I know you've been watching Basketball-Reference.com but I still can't figure how you can make that statement because even there, aside from Game 1, his numbers look [I]good[/I].

2) What do you mean by "once again"?

[QUOTE=Da_Realist]1) I can't believe I just read this. Before you write another sentence, you should go back and watch these game again. Games 3 and 4 especially is some of the most dominant basketball that's ever been played. I know you've been watching Basketball-Reference.com but I still can't figure how you can make that statement because even there, aside from Game 1, his numbers look [I]good[/I].

2) What do you mean by "once again"?[/QUOTE]

His scoring and efficiency declined against the prime Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. In '91, he finally had a normal efficiency, but again, his scoring declined ..albeit, slightly.

Same with Shaq against the Robinson led Spurs from '99 thru '02. And Kareem's fell off the cliff against Wilt and Thurmond in the early 70's.

That's why I find it laughable whenever some idiot brings up Wilt's ":decline" in the post-season (and really, only his scoring). Chamberlain faced the Russell-led Celtics EIGHT times; the Thurmond-led Warriors THREE times; the Reed-led Knicks FOUR times; and the Kareem led Bucks TWICE. Hell, he seldom had the luxury of first round cannon-fodder, or post-seasons with 3-4 playoff series.

Think about this...Russell basically beefed up his entire post-season numbers in FIVE series against the Lakers (he faced them six times BTW, and in the one in which he faced WILT, he did virtually nothing.)

And yet, Chamberlain never faced the Lakers at all in his entire post-season career. And he put up staggering numbers against them in his regular season H2H's (in seasons of between 8-12 games against them.) Safe-to-say, that had Wilt faced them FIVE times in his prime, and he likely would hold virtually every post-season scoring record.


In any case, we saw what MJ did with poor-to-average rosters. Nothing. Struggled to win a damn game. Meanwhile Wuilt was taking essentially last place rosters to within and eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in NBA history. And we all know what happened when he FINALLY had an equal roster (that was healthy.)

MJ took good-to-great supporting casts, in a weaker 90's, to six titles. Not knocking him, per se, but those that somehow believe he was a miracle worker didn't actually see him play, either. The man did not walk on water.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]

'94 Bulls team was a [B][COLOR="Red"]TRUE TITLE CONTENDER[/COLOR][/B]

[/quote]
The Bulls were a 2nd Round team in 1994 (that almost got swept if not for Kukoc walk-off miracle).

3-peat chemistry will get ANY team to the 2nd Round with marginal talent - and that's exactly what happened in 1994.

Furthermore, the Bulls weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and do better the next year - they were a 2nd Round team PERMANENTLY without Jordan, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.

Obviously, the gap between permanent 2nd Round team and 3-peat dynasty is utterly massive.


[quote=Euroleague]

How many titles would the Rockets have won without Hakeem? The Sonics without Payton? The Suns without Barkley? The Jazz without Karl?

[/QUOTE]
All of these teams had superior talent after their #1 option... But none of these teams had 3-peat chemistry and teamwork.

And that's the difference.. Because we already know that the Bulls needed MJ to be the best scorer ever and score 10 ppg more than his 2nd option for every playoff series.

So when the Bulls made the 2nd Round in 1994, it wasn't because they had talented scorers - it was due to the 3-peat caliber of chemistry, mental ability and teamwork from 3-peating with MJ.
.

[QUOTE=3ball]T[B]he Bulls were a 2nd Round team in 1994 (that almost got swept if not for Kukoc walk-off miracle).

3-peat chemistry will get ANY team to the 2nd Round with marginal talent - and that's exactly what happened in 1994.[/B]

Furthermore, the Bulls weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and do better the next year - they were a 2nd Round team PERMANENTLY without Jordan, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.

If we were to measure the gap between permanent 2nd Round team and 3-peat dynasty with our arms, we can't spread our arms wide enough.. It's a massive gap.



All of these teams had superior talent after their #1 option... But none of these teams had 3-peat chemistry and teamwork.

And that's the difference - the Bulls needed MJ to be the best scorer ever and score 10 ppg more than his 2nd option for every playoff series.

So when the Bull made the 2nd Round in 1994, it wasn't because they had talented scorers - it was due to the 3-peat caliber of chemistry, mental ability and teamwork from 3-peating with MJ.[/QUOTE]

You are obviouslky referring to the '95 Bulls, who were brutalized in the ECSF's by a team that would get swept by another 47-35 team in the Finals.

In the '94 ECSF's, the Bulls were a play away from winning that series in six games. Furthermore, had they been healthy during the regular season, they likely would have won considerably more games than their actual 55. In fact, had Pippen and Grant not missed a combined 22 games, they likely would have easily won 60+.

Which would have been HUGE. Because, as we all know, they went 3-0 against the 56-26 Knicks at HOME in the ECSF's. And lost a close game seven, to a NY team that would lose a close game seven to the 58-24 Rockets in the Finals. Oh, and the Bulls outscored the Knicks in their series, and the Knicks outscored the Rockets in their's.

A TRUE TITLE-CONTENDING TEAM.

That interview was done in 2003, soon after the zone rules were introduced, [B]BUT BEFORE 2005[/B], when defensive 3 seconds and hand-check ban were introduced..

After the hand-check ban and defensive 3 seconds was introduced in 2005 - McGrady, Kobe, Garnett, Ron Artest, Shaq and others have all said the game is "[I]soft[/I]" and it isn't a "[I]man's game[/I]" anymore - Kobe flat-out said that [url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SY3ezX73M1I]today's defenses are weak[/url]..

When the zone was first introduced in 2001, Jordan made similar comments about how the zone was bad... But just like the other guys mentioned previously, Jordan ALSO changed his tune after the new defensive 3 seconds rule and hand-check ban were introduced in 2005... He said he [url=http://uproxx.com/dimemag/michael-jordan-if-i-played-today-i-could-have-scored-100-points/]would score 100[/url] under the new 2005 rules.

Those guys all thought the zone was bad for offensive players, until the zone was busted by defensive 3 seconds, and of course the hand-check ban - these are the facts.



Lebron's most damning stat is his abnormally-high time of possession - the top 50 players in time of possession are all point guards, [urlexcept Lebron and Harden.

Lebron's abnormally high time of possession from the forward position means that he adds a 2nd high time of possession player IN ADDITION TO THE EXISTING POINT GUARD.. This means his teammates have less time with the ball than other teams, whose forwards have a normal time of possession for forwards.

Also, starting fives normally have only 1 ball-dominant, low-assisted player that teammates rarely throw assists to - the point guard.. But Lebron's point guard style from the forward position adds a 2nd low-assisted player that teammates can't throw assists to - he turns a normally high assisted forward position into a low assisted one, which lowers the assist capacity of the team relative to other teams whose forwards are highly-assisted.

[QUOTE=3ball]Nope - I'm referring to the 1994 Bulls, who were a 2nd Round team in 1994 (that almost got swept if not for Kukoc walk-off miracle).

3-peat chemistry will get ANY team to the 2nd Round with marginal talent - and that's exactly what happened in 1994.

Furthermore, the Bulls weren't going to rebound from their 2nd Round defeat and do better the next year - t[B]hey were a 2nd Round team PERMANENTLY[/B] without Jordan, after being a 3-peat dynasty with him.

Obviously, the gap between permanent 2nd Round team and 3-peat dynasty is utterly massive.[/QUOTE]

I say that they might have been a permanent second round team WITH Jordan.

It took the signing of HOFer Rodman to get them over the hump. MJ couldn't win without an OUTSTANDING PF (like Grant and Rodman.)

Clearly, their team chemistry was better with Pippen-Grant, than Pippen-MJ.

[QUOTE=LAZERUSS]His scoring and efficiency declined against the prime Bad Boys from '88 thru '90. In '91, he finally had a normal efficiency, but again, his scoring declined ..albeit, slightly.

Same with Shaq against the Robinson led Spurs from '99 thru '02. And Kareem's fell off the cliff against Wilt and Thurmond in the early 70's.

That's why I find it laughable whenever some idiot brings up Wilt's ":decline" in the post-season (and really, only his scoring). Chamberlain faced the Russell-led Celtics EIGHT times; the Thurmond-led Warriors THREE times; the Reed-led Knicks FOUR times; and the Kareem led Bucks TWICE. Hell, he seldom had the luxury of first round cannon-fodder, or post-seasons with 3-4 playoff series.

Think about this...Russell basically beefed up his entire post-season numbers in FIVE series against the Lakers (he faced them six times BTW, and in the one in which he faced WILT, he did virtually nothing.)

And yet, Chamberlain never faced the Lakers at all in his entire post-season career. And he put up staggering numbers against them in his regular season H2H's (in seasons of between 8-12 games against them.) Safe-to-say, that had Wilt faced them FIVE times in his prime, and he likely would hold virtually every post-season scoring record.


In any case, we saw what MJ did with poor-to-average rosters. Nothing. Struggled to win a damn game. Meanwhile Wuilt was taking essentially last place rosters to within and eyelash of beating the greatest dynasty in NBA history. And we all know what happened when he FINALLY had an equal roster (that was healthy.)

MJ took good-to-great supporting casts, in a weaker 90's, to six titles. Not knocking him, per se, but those that somehow believe he was a miracle worker didn't actually see him play, either. The man did not walk on water.[/QUOTE]
Huh he averged 30 pppg on 53%. What in the actual **** are you talking about? Are you saying because his ppg dropped by 2, but stayed at the same efficiency 53% he had a bad series.:roll:

Wilt scoring plummeted. It didn't go down 1-3 ppg bro. It was way more. Wilt Choked with HCA many times and idc about your list of excuses