Who else enjoyed this level of transaction activity & roster improvements?

.
.
8 of 8 "DOMINANT CHAMPIONS" THAT AVERAGED 1 LOSS PER ROUND OR LESS (4 LOSSES MAX) REQUIRED BIGS OR JUMPSHOOTERS AT 1ST OPTION FOR THAT PLAYOFF RUN:



[Indent]1. 2017 Warriors (16-1).............. DURANT

2. 2001 Lakers (15-1)................. SHAQ

3. 1999 Spurs (15-2).................. DUNCAN

4. 2024 Celtics (16-3)................ TATUM

5. 2023 Nuggets (16-4)............... JOKIC

6. 2007 Spurs (16-4).................. DUNCAN

7. 2002 Lakers (15-4).................. SHAQ

8. 1997 Bulls (15-4).................... JORDAN[/Indent]





4 0f 4 "DYNASTIES" THAT MOSTLY WON FOR A MATERIAL STRETCH OF 5+ YEARS (I.E. 3 IN 5) REQUIRED BIGS OR JUMPSHOOTERS AT 1ST OPTION:



[INDENT]1. CHICAGO BULLS..................... JORDAN

2. LOS ANGELES LAKERS)............ SHAQ

3. SAN ANTONIO SPURS.............. DUNCAN

4. GSW WARRIORS..................... CURRY[/INDENT]



[I]^^^ 12 of 12 instances of dynasties or dominant champions (the best basketball) required bigs or jumpshooters at 1st option.[/I]

.
Thread Cliffs

Lebron is the only player that enjoys 3x the free throw disparity as any other team, and 5x the transaction activity, and also allowed to heist the opposing franchise player of his choice to team-up with.. And yet despite this stacked deck, play-in teams are produced due to the worst chemistry of all-time, aka bron-ball.

Lebron's skillset of high-scoring, point guard-style play, aka "ball-domination" entails a bunch of unassisted buckets that reduces teammates' assists while increasing their assisted rate or spot up role... By turning everyone into spot-up shooter, elite roster construction is impossible for high-scoring ball-dominators, so they cannot be 1st option for dynasties or dominant champions ("the best basketball"), as shown in the previous post above.

Since ball-dominators cannot produce the best basketball, they're inferior to the best of other skillsets that can (bigs & jumpshooters), which puts Lebron and all ball-dominators outside of the top 10 all-time.. Specifically, anyone can select who they feel are the best jumpshooters and bigs in history and put them above all ball-dominators like Lebron.. So a hypothetical top 10 could be: MJ, Russell, Wilt, Kareem, Bird, Kobe, Duncan, Shaq, Curry, Jokic, Magic, Lebron, Oscar - that's a top 13 with ball-dominators bringing up the rear.

In addition to their inability to be 1st option for the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions), high-scoring ball-dominators make it harder to win titles in general by virtue of the aforementioned lowering of teammate assists and having low assist teams, versus the high-assist teams and ball movement associated with the average title team.. Ultimately, the suboptimal style of ball-dominators underachieves rosters the most, such as Lebron going 3-4 with preseason favorites, 4-7 with all-star teammates, 4-6 with Finals teams, 4-5 with 1 or 2 seeds, and 3 losses with homecourt, while the GOAT standard is to never lose in any of these scenarios.

The 1987 Lakers & 1990 Pistons meet those qualifications and neither had a big or jumpshooter as first option.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;14972744]The 1987 Lakers & 1990 Pistons meet those qualifications and neither had a big or jumpshooter as first option.[/QUOTE]


Worthy was the leading scorer for the dominant run in 1987, and I'll get to why Isiah doesn't matter either.

But for various statistical reasons that I'll get into, we're only talking about the dynasties and dominant champions since 1997 when possession-tracking began.. And since possession-tracking began, 12 of 12 dynasties or dominant champions required bigs or jumpshooters as 1st option (never ball-dominators).

The reason that we need possession-tracking is that the entire critique is of [I]high-scoring[/I] ball-dominators, since they have a [I]high volume[/I] of unassisted buckets that reduce everyone's assists while increasing their assisted rate or spot-up role.. By turning everyone into spot-up shooter, elite roster construction is impossible around a high-scoring ball-dominator, so they can't be the leading scorer for the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions)... This is why Isiah doesn't matter because he isn't a high-scoring ball-dominator - again, the critical problem with high-scoring ball-dominators is their high volume of unassisted buckets, which reduces everyone's assist and turns them into spot-up shooter, thus preventing elite roster construction - this flow of logic requires the assisted rates (possession data), so we know whose scoring is unassisted by teammates (low assisted rates, aka ball-dominator), versus the higher assisted rates of bigs and jumpshooters (the 1st option for every dynasty or dominant champions).

With the assisted rate data, we can segment the players into player-types based on their assisted rates... i.e. everyone with a career assisted rate below 40% is a ball-dominator like Lebron, Luka, Tim Hardaway, Iverson, etc and the high-scoring ones are never the 1st option for dynasties or dominant champions, while all bigs and jumpshooters have career assisted rates above 40% (1st option for 12 of 12 dynasties or dominant champions).

3ball is it true you make the nurses at the senior home you live at check under the bed for LeBron every night?

[QUOTE=RRR3;14972752]3ball is it true you make the nurses at the senior home you live at check under the bed for LeBron every night?[/QUOTE]


A long time ago, everyone laughed when i said that ball-domination was bad, and now we have enough historical data to show that it is - it produces lower-assist teams, weaker chemistry and it's never been 1st option for the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champion), aka 0 for 12.. let me know if you need detail on any of this

[QUOTE=RRR3;14972752]3ball is it true you make the nurses at the senior home you live at check under the bed for LeBron every night?[/QUOTE]
Lmao.

[QUOTE=3ba11;14972754]A long time ago, everyone laughed when i said that ball-domination was bad, and now we have enough historical data to show that it is - it produces lower-assist teams, weaker chemistry and it's never been 1st option for the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champion), aka 0 for 12.. let me know if you need detail on any of this[/QUOTE]
So yes? You make them check under the bed for LeBron? Nightly?

[QUOTE=3ba11;14972750]Worthy was the leading scorer for the dominant run in 1987, and I'll get to why Isiah doesn't matter either.[/QUOTE]
Dominant run was a gimme for LA in the 1987 postseason. The first 3 rounds their opponents were a combined 10gms under .500.

From 1980 to 1990 they were the #1 seed in the West every year except for 1981.

[QUOTE=3ba11;14972754]A long time ago, everyone laughed when i said that ball-domination was bad, and now we have enough historical data to show that it is - it produces lower-assist teams, weaker chemistry and it's never been 1st option for the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champion), aka 0 for 12.. let me know if you need detail on any of this[/QUOTE]

On the contrary all you've really proven with your 1000s of posts is that ball dominance in the hands of a proper operator yields a goat candidate worth 15 plus years of debate with a guy i never thought could be touched in my lifetime.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo;14972761]

Dominant run was a gimme for LA in the 1987 postseason. The first 3 rounds their opponents were a combined 10gms under .500.

From 1980 to 1990 they were the #1 seed in the West every year except for 1981.


[/QUOTE]


Magic diluted the West by demanding to play with the best player in the conference and top 3 all-time player to that point in time (Kareem).. This is similar to Lebron demanding to play with the modern Kareem (AD) or putting the top 3 PER's in the league on 1 team (Lebron, Wade, Bosh).

[QUOTE=3ba11;14973312][B]Magic diluted the West by demanding to play with the best player in the conference[/B] and top 3 all-time player to that point in time (Kareem).. This is similar to Lebron demanding to play with the modern Kareem (AD) or putting the top 3 PER's in the league on 1 team (Lebron, Wade, Bosh).[/QUOTE]

Oh shit is that how that happened?

[QUOTE=ShawkFactory;14973320]Oh shit is that how that happened?[/QUOTE]


Yup - all these guys had WWE aspects of their career such as team-ups with opposing franchise players like Magic/Kareem, Kobe/Shaq, or Lebron/whoever.

Accordingly, only Jordan did it the right way by taking a lottery cast and simply losing until they were good enough to win on their 4th try - this natural approach of true teeth-cutting instead of using cheat code to skip levels produced the strongest and greatest team of all-time - true greatness

[QUOTE=3ba11;14973326]Yup - all these guys had WWE aspects of their career such as team-ups with opposing franchise players like Magic/Kareem, Kobe/Shaq, or Lebron/whoever.

Accordingly, only Jordan did it the right way by taking a lottery cast and simply losing until they were good enough to win on their 4th try - this natural approach of true teeth-cutting instead of using cheat code to skip levels produced the strongest and greatest team of all-time - true greatness[/QUOTE]

Bro you’re washed :lol

[IMG]https://fadeawayworld.net/.image/ar_4:3%2Cc_fill%2Ccs_srgb%2Cfl_progressive%2Cq_auto:good%2Cw_1200/MTk0MTY0MDU1MTYwNjYxNjgx/gervin-jordan.jpg[/IMG][IMG]https://media.gettyimages.com/id/693872726/photo/from-left-dennis-rodman-scottie-pippen-michael-jordan-ron-harper-and-toni-kukoc-were-big-parts.jpg?s=612x612&w=gi&k=20&c=6Xtr0whE3ZoL6WUa0knvxWL8yyPM-IHJSzvonanRJps=[/IMG][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSz_-mZztf1mpMq5YLIKqWROGSs34D1hgsTvg&s[/IMG][IMG]https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTRPtA0daZ9dUfmxiEeMXJpM5-CNhAk5DJVTmxNXxenChYDXPuvhyfHwRkrZ5LFTtU6uFs&usqp=CAU[/IMG]