SHAQ: Lebron will destroy Reaves upon return - so y'all LYING about Bron's high IQ?

[QUOTE=Axe;15043116]Who do you think is better between the two, op? Sga or haliburton?

[Img]https://i.ibb.co/JmpGnKz/IMG-20230528-095117.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]


[B]SGA[/B] = [U]not a high assist player[/U], so not a full ball-dominator, i.e. by having lower assists, SGA isn't using teammates as bailout options as often because HE'S the closer via great mid-range

[B]Haliburton[/B] = [U]not a high scorer[/U], so not a full ball-dominator, i.e. he doesn't have high volume of unassisted buckets like [I]high-scoring[/I] primary ballhandlers (ball-dominators)



Who's better? SGA obviously... But even though SGA isn't as cancerous as a high assist ball-dominator (aka Harden, Westbrook, Luka, Lebron), he still has many unassisted buckets that produces weaker chemistry than prior era off-ball guys like MJ, Curry or Duncan.. The issue is that [B]everyone today is a "downhill" player, so one of them has to win.. it happens to be SGA[/B], who has the advantage of lower assists/greater closing than other ball-dominant players that use teammates as bailout options more often than him

Duncan never even averaged over 25 ppg for a single title run. The only reason Duncan gets included in these discussions is because in '03, against the powerhouse 49 win Nets, he outscored his 2nd option by 10 ppg while in the 2013 Finals LeBron outscored his 2nd option by 6 ppg.

This is literally the criteria OP judges entire careers on, a 4 ppg differential by which they outscored their 2nd option over a single series sample size. A very intelligent methodology :lol

.
[B]Thread cliffs [/B]


Don't you guys get tired of using defense as an excuse for Lebron's underwhelming/underachieving teams??

Don't you wonder why it's always the same story?

The reality is that ball-dominance is a bad brand of ball and therefore needs RIDICULOUS offensive star help, thus preventing the GM from getting the right defenders/others, aka elite roster construction.. aka ball-dominators prevent elite roster construction.. Furthermore, there's the attrition battle described earlier (ball-dominance lets defenses rest, so they're super fresh on offense)

Carry on tho

Of course you didn't address a single point I made, but you know what I said is 100% accurate, but seeing it spelled out it's so indefensibly stupid you had to ramble on about whatever nonsense you jus typed.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15043147]Duncan never even averaged over 25 ppg for a single title run. The only reason Duncan gets included in these discussions is because in '03, against the powerhouse 49 win Nets, he outscored his 2nd option by 10 ppg while in the 2013 Finals LeBron outscored his 2nd option by 6 ppg.

This is literally the criteria OP judges entire careers on, a 4 ppg differential by which they outscored their 2nd option over a single series sample size. A very intelligent methodology :lol[/QUOTE]


Not only did Duncan carry the scoring load (defeat max defensive attention) for the playoffs AND championship level (Finals), but his brand of ball on offense is top notch, thus allowing the GM to find the right defenders/others... Otoh, Lebron's ball-dominance is a bad brand of ball and therefore needs RIDICULOUS offensive help, thus preventing the GM from getting the right defenders/others, aka elite roster construction.. aka ball-dominators prevent elite roster construction..

Duncan barely averages more ppg than Pippen during the majority of his title runs, so yes, the one instance I specified before is literally the only reason he gets included in these discussions positively. If Parker or Manu average a couple more ppg in a single series against a 49 win team, suddenly Duncan's entire career & 20 year body of work is judged completely differently by you.

[QUOTE=3ba11;15042955]Uh... Negative

Reaves averaged 28 ppg without Lebron last year, compared to under 20 in the games they both played.

Lebron's downhill skillset simply craters the 3rd option - for his entire career - it started with Hughes and then Jamison, and then Bosh, Love, Westbrook, and now Reaves

Btw, Reaves and AD joined the Lakers in 2020, so AD was the off-ball assist target that a young ballhandler needs to develop - aka AD developed Reaves.. Remember that AD and Lebron were equal-scoring partners, so they could theoretically both get credit for Reaves' development - however, it's clear that AD was the great fit for Reaves while Lebron cratered Reaves and held him back[/QUOTE]

LeBron is the reason you know who Reaves is. He vouched for him when he was an undrafted rookie. Lakers probably never would have signed him if Bron didn't see something in him.