Printable View
[QUOTE=RogueBorg;14646827]The Spurs never won back-to-back let alone Three-Peat cheapening Lebrons strength of opponents.[/QUOTE]
I guess the Showtime Lakers weren't a great team since they didn't 3 peat.
Or Bird's Celtics since they never won back to back
Low Iq confirmed.
[QUOTE=RogueBorg;14646827]The Spurs never won back-to-back let alone Three-Peat cheapening Lebrons strength of opponents.[/QUOTE]
Retarded logic lmao. For you, that seems worse than jordan's ringless opponents in the finals.
[QUOTE=Axe;14646818]You asked if either the celtics, the pistons or the knicks in the 80s and 90s were dynasties bt. And i just showed you that one. ;)[/QUOTE]
You didn't show anything besides that you're wrong about me having alts lol
[QUOTE=theman93;14646832]You didn't show anything besides that you're wrong about me having alts lol[/QUOTE]
Huh, i never said they were your 'alts' coach. Wtf. :confusedshrug:
What i'm pointing out there was how they apply the term 'dynasty' to successful teams. They say if they never 'three-peated', then they're never one to begin with.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14646826]You already admitted LeBron was better.[/QUOTE]
When that's my starting position, it's not an admission. Do you understand basic debate?
My position has been clear -
Individually: 37 y/o Lebron > 38 y/o MJ
Team Elevation: 38 y/o MJ > 37 y/o Lebron
You've done nothing to dispute this fact. :lol
[QUOTE=Axe;14646833]Huh, i never said they were your 'alts' coach. Wtf. :confusedshrug:
What i'm pointing out there was how they apply the term 'dynasty' to successful teams. They say if they never 'three-peated', then they're never one to begin with.[/QUOTE]
Why do I care how 2 other posters are applying the term dynasty? It's irrelevant. The point being is that Jordan facing the 80's Celtics and 80/90's Pistons is a significantly harder challenge than facing the 90's Knicks.
[QUOTE=Axe;14646828]Probably to win a scoring title despite missing 64 games that season. :yaohappy:[/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.sportscasting.com/frustrated-michael-jordan-fuming-when-bulls-tried-secure-better-draft-position-1986/[/url]
[QUOTE]“That’s when I felt more frustrated than anything. More than anything, I felt they were positioning themselves for the draft, and I didn’t feel good being part of that. I felt I was an all-out player who didn’t half-ass anything, and they wanted to move up (in the draft). I was a player, I wanted to play.”
[/QUOTE]
keep reaching! :lol
[QUOTE=theman93;14646836]Why do I care how 2 other posters are applying the term dynasty? It's irrelevant. The point being is that Jordan facing the 80's Celtics and 80/90's Pistons is a significantly harder challenge than facing the 90's Knicks.[/QUOTE]
Probably. But that doesn't explain why jordan never had any winning seasons until pippen started playing for the bulls.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14646830]I guess the Showtime Lakers weren't a great team since they didn't 3 peat.
Or Bird's Celtics since they never won back to back
Low Iq confirmed.[/QUOTE]
The Three-Peat requirement for a dynasty is not my definition, Axe is the one throwing it out there. My definition is at least back-to-back titles.
Yes, Boston never won back-to-back but neither did San Antonio. The Lakers and Pistons are dynasties.
[QUOTE=Axe;14646831]Retarded logic lmao. For you, that seems worse than jordan's ringless opponents in the finals.[/QUOTE]
Are the Spurs a dynasty?
The Bulls opponents are ringless because they kept them ringless. Unlike Lebron where teams won alot against him.
[QUOTE=RogueBorg;14646840]The Three-Peat requirement for a dynasty is not my definition, Axe is the one throwing it out there. My definition is at least back-to-back titles.
Yes, Boston never won back-to-back but neither did San Antonio. The Lakers and Pistons are dynasties.[/QUOTE]
I don't believe that shit either. The purpose was to show that one of your fellow lebron haters think a 'three-peat' is necessary for teams to become a dynasty. You really are a dumbass.
[QUOTE=RogueBorg;14646841]Are the Spurs a dynasty?
The Bulls opponents are ringless because they kept them ringless. Unlike Lebron where teams won alot against him.[/QUOTE]
Yet they have a higher srs than any of the teams jordan beat in the finals lmao.
[QUOTE=Axe;14646842]The purpose was to show that one of your fellow lebron haters think a 'three-peat' is necessary for teams to become a dynasty. You really are a dumbass.[/QUOTE]
Try to follow along.
TheMan93 was making the argument that the Celtics and Pistons were dynasties, he said to you [B][I]"Were the mid 90's Knicks a dynasty that Pippen ran in to? Or was Bird's Celtics and the Bad Boy Pistons a dynasty that MJ ran in to?"[/I][/B]
Your response to him in post #219 was [B][I]"But those aren't dynasties coach. Since someone said 'dynasties' have to 'three-peat' first."[/I][/B]
You said they aren't dynasties [B][I]"But those aren't dynasties coach.[/I][/B]
Go back and read post #219.
And then i said someone else mentioned it. Lol all of a sudden you're so fixated into it. :roll:
Try going btt, you buffoon.
[QUOTE=Axe;14646838]Probably. But that doesn't explain why jordan never had any winning seasons until pippen started playing for the bulls.[/QUOTE]
No, not probably. 100% definitely.
If you want to believe a bench player putting up 8/4 on bad efficiency was the reason the Bulls made the playoffs, that's fine you can believe whatever you want. It just shows you're low IQ. No objective person believes that though.
[QUOTE=theman93;14646866]If you want to believe a bench player putting up 8/4 on bad efficiency was the reason the Bulls made the playoffs, that's fine you can believe whatever you want. It just shows you're low IQ. No objective person believes that though.[/QUOTE]
Lmao you're the only one here trying to imply that.
[QUOTE=Axe;14646854]And then i said someone else mentioned it. Lol all of a sudden you're so fixated into it. :roll:
Try going btt, you buffoon.[/QUOTE]
Why are you bringing someone else's opinion in to it? It's irrelevant and a deflection when your debate is with me and not them.
[QUOTE=Axe;14646868]Lmao you're the only one here trying to imply that.[/QUOTE]
I've never implied that, actually.
[QUOTE=theman93;14646869]Why are you bringing someone else's opinion in to it? It's irrelevant and a deflection when your debate is with me and not them.[/QUOTE]
Just trying to see if you'd agree with them or not.
This thread is a backfire. It goes to show that even a washed up Jordan with a worse supporting cast is still technically the better basketball player over a 37 year old Lebron on a "title" contending team.
Good job Bronsexuals, you lose again.
[QUOTE=TheGoatest;14646215]What all-time greats who played at age 37+ is Wizards jordon NOT worse than?
LeBron
Kareem
Karl Malone
Tim Duncan
are/were all clearly better.[/QUOTE]
After injuries of course. We all knew that silly
[QUOTE=outofstomach;14646740]can someone please explain this? im actually reading every post and it’s amazing how every lebron stan is avoiding this point :lol[/QUOTE]
They can't explain it. They know very well that 2022 was embarrassing for LeBron given that his team were the favorites to win the title coming into the season. A team with a LeBron-Westbrook-AD trio and role players like Monk, Melo, and Howard absolutely underachieved.
[QUOTE=RogueBorg;14646840]The Three-Peat requirement for a dynasty is not my definition, Axe is the one throwing it out there. My definition is at least back-to-back titles.
Yes, Boston never won back-to-back but neither did San Antonio. The Lakers and Pistons are dynasties.[/QUOTE]
I've never met anyone who thinks those back to back Detroit title teams were better than Bird's Celtics in their prime. But do you.
PoopsNY still pretending he’s remotely objective is hilarious. He’s just a more intelligent non obsessed 3ball.
[QUOTE=RRR3;14646642]I'm struggling to see how Dwight Howard doesn't suck if White sucks lol. Dwight put up 7/8 on a TS% 3.8% above league average the season before he played with LeBron last year. White Put up 5/6 on a TS% 3.2% above league average but his usage percentage was 4.1% lower. His efficiency then went up a lot with LeBron, which I think we can safely credit in some part to LeBron's passing. They are both backup centers who are there to dunk and block shots and aren't good enough to play big minutes. You are also ignoring my point that the Lakers with LeBron and AD were consistently the best team in the league when healthy until this past year. Do you think it was their fault that changed or something else?
If 80s MJ is better than 09 LeBron, his results with a similar supporting cast would have proven it by your logic. :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]
Not sure what gives you this impression. Were you watching the league in 2002? White was an absolute scrub who had no potential.
White w/MJ '02: 5.5 PPG | 6.4 Rebs | 55% FG%
White w/o MJ '02: 4.9 PPG 5.5 Reb | 49% FG%
What about Howard?
Howard w/LeBron '22: 5.3 PPG | 5.7 Rebs | 59% FG%
Howard w/o LeBron '22: 7.6 PPG | 6.3 Rebs | 64% FG%
Just because the overall stats were similar doesn't mean the two players were similar in caliber or what they brought to the table.
You're not wrong that the Lakers were the best team with AD and LeBron when healthy in 2020 for example. Dynamics changed though and context matters, which you've proven in this instance. I'm just unsure why that matters more than say MJ joining an entirely new team, with a worst cast, and also being three years removed from the league.
Those factors tilt the scales a bit when adjusting for conference. Tbh, I can't lie, I don't know what the hell happened with LAL last year and it's pretty mind boggling. But it's a negative in LeBron's scale simply because that team, on paper, and prior to the season starting was expected to win it all.
You have people on this thread acting like LeBron was significantly better. I don't see how that's justifiable given the results and higher quality of casts. Washington's cast was horrible. The Laker's cast was decent. There's no way around that.
[QUOTE=RRR3;14646933]PoopsNY still pretending he’s remotely objective is hilarious. He’s just a more intelligent non obsessed 3ball.[/QUOTE]
Sorry that you can't handle disagreement or logic. You're the one out here trying to tilt the argument in favor of LeBron by somehow saying the two casts were equal. This is hilarious. And I'm the one who isn't being objective? Get a brain you moron.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14646756]We don't play what ifs. Fact is the Wizards didn't make the playoffs and MJ's Wizards years are largely looked as a stain on his legacy.
Deal with it.
You same guys also ignoring '09 & '10 LeBron won more games than '88 & '89 MJ despite having similar casts, why is that? Why couldn't MJ elevate his teammates back then like LeBron did?[/QUOTE]
Similar casts? lol, whut? Keep in mind, you're using '88 as if having rookie Pippen and rookie Grant somehow makes for great cast. That's pretty outlandish and you know it.
[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;14646932]I've never met anyone who thinks those back to back Detroit title teams were better than Bird's Celtics in their prime. But do you.[/QUOTE]
Yeah bro not even close........even though the Pistons beat the #1 seed Celtics in '88 with the Celtics having homecourt advantage and McHale putting up 27/7 and Bird putting up 20/12/6/3/2. And that was before they were even a title team. They were 3 points away from 3-peating.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14646943]Similar casts? lol, whut? Keep in mind, you're using '88 as if having rookie Pippen and rookie Grant somehow makes for great cast. That's pretty outlandish and you know it.[/QUOTE]
Who the **** did LeBron have in 09 lmao? Role players.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14646940]Not sure what gives you this impression. Were you watching the league in 2002? White was an absolute scrub who had no potential.
White w/MJ '02: 5.5 PPG | 6.4 Rebs | 55% FG%
White w/o MJ '02: 4.9 PPG 5.5 Reb | 49% FG%
What about Howard?
Howard w/LeBron '22: 5.3 PPG | 5.7 Rebs | 59% FG%
Howard w/o LeBron '22: 7.6 PPG | 6.3 Rebs | 64% FG%
Just because the overall stats were similar doesn't mean the two players were similar in caliber or what they brought to the table.
You're not wrong that the Lakers were the best team with AD and LeBron when healthy in 2020 for example. Dynamics changed though and context matters, which you've proven in this instance. I'm just unsure why that matters more than say MJ joining an entirely new team, with a worst cast, and also being three years removed from the league.
Those factors tilt the scales a bit when adjusting for conference. Tbh, I can't lie, I don't know what the hell happened with LAL last year and it's pretty mind boggling. But it's a negative in LeBron's scale simply because that team, on paper, and prior to the season starting was expected to win it all.
You have people on this thread acting like LeBron was significantly better. I don't see how that's justifiable given the results and higher quality of casts. Washington's cast was horrible. The Laker's cast was decent. There's no way around that.[/QUOTE]
No one has ever been held to these standards at LeBron’s age. People were happy when Kobe hit a shot when he was 37. I’m sorry LeBron isn’t immortal and can’t impact a team the same way forever like you think he should be able to
[QUOTE=RRR3;14646948]No one has ever been held to these standards at LeBron’s age. People were happy when Kobe hit a shot when he was 37.[/QUOTE]
Lol you don't get it both ways. If he's still credited for being great because he has the best longevity of all-time, then making the play-in over the measley 34 win Spurs who traded away Derrick White in the middle of the season is a completely reasonable standard to hold him to. Anything less is laughable.
[QUOTE=RRR3;14646947]Who the **** did LeBron have in 09 lmao? Role players.[/QUOTE]
Compared to MJ? Mo Williams was an All-Star. He also had Ilgauskas, a former 2 time All-Star.
CLE w/Ilgauskas '09: 55-10 | .846% (69 win pace)
CLE w/o Ilgauskas '09: 11-6 | .647% (53 win pace)
You can say MJ had Oakley, i'll give you that. But Oakley alone doesn't offset Mo Williams, Zydrunas, Varajeo, and West.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14646940]Not sure what gives you this impression. [B]Were you watching the league in 2002?[/B] White was an absolute scrub who had no potential.
White w/MJ '02: 5.5 PPG | 6.4 Rebs | 55% FG%
White w/o MJ '02: 4.9 PPG 5.5 Reb | 49% FG%
What about Howard?
Howard w/LeBron '22: 5.3 PPG | 5.7 Rebs | 59% FG%
Howard w/o LeBron '22: 7.6 PPG | 6.3 Rebs | 64% FG%
Just because the overall stats were similar doesn't mean the two players were similar in caliber or what they brought to the table.
You're not wrong that the Lakers were the best team with AD and LeBron when healthy in 2020 for example. Dynamics changed though and context matters, which you've proven in this instance. I'm just unsure why that matters more than say MJ joining an entirely new team, with a worst cast, and also being three years removed from the league.
Those factors tilt the scales a bit when adjusting for conference. Tbh, I can't lie, I don't know what the hell happened with LAL last year and it's pretty mind boggling. But it's a negative in LeBron's scale simply because that team, on paper, and prior to the season starting was expected to win it all.
You have people on this thread acting like LeBron was significantly better. I don't see how that's justifiable given the results and higher quality of casts. Washington's cast was horrible. The Laker's cast was decent. There's no way around that.[/QUOTE]
No, he wasn't. He didn't start seriously watching the NBA until 2011 by his own admission. It's obvious too with how he's trying to prop up the likes of Chris Whitney and Jahidi freaking White lmao. Certified scrubs as everyone knew who actually watched those guys.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14646943]Similar casts? lol, whut? Keep in mind, you're using '88 as if having rookie Pippen and rookie Grant somehow makes for great cast. That's pretty outlandish and you know it.[/QUOTE]
Yeah similar casts bro with rookie Grant and Pippen starting a combined 6 of 160 games :roll:
[QUOTE=RRR3;14646948]No one has ever been held to these standards at LeBron’s age. People were happy when Kobe hit a shot when he was 37. I’m sorry LeBron isn’t immortal and can’t impact a team the same way forever like you think he should be able to[/QUOTE]
I don't think it was a matter of standards based on age. I think being champions in 2020 and then the combination of AD-Melo-LeBron-Westbrook-Howard together with other smaller role players is something that was fair.
If one thing is for sure, even if you said that favoring them to win the title was absurd, I don't think you or anyone else would have said they wouldn't have even made the play-in. And that's even with injuries. It's just not something that any reasonable fan would have expected.
[QUOTE=theman93;14646964]No, he wasn't. He didn't start seriously watching the NBA until 2011 by his own admission. It's obvious too with how he's trying to prop up the likes of Chris Whitney and Jahidi freaking White lmao. Certified scrubs as everyone knew who actually watched those guys.
Yeah similar casts bro with rookie Grant and Pippen starting a combined 6 of 160 games :roll:[/QUOTE]
Ahh okay. If he started watching the league in the 2010s, then it makes sense as to why he would rely on statistics alone. No one who watched Jahidi White would say they would take him over Dwight Howard. And no one would certainly choose a combination of Rip, White, Laettner, Whitney, and Jones over guys like AD, Westbrook, Melo, Monk, and Howard.
It's just not even remotely close. And even if we adjust for conferences, which is fair, I don't think it offsets the difference in casts, the fact that MJ and LeBron were nearly 2 years apart, and that MJ was out of the league for three years.
2022 is a bigger stain on LeBron's career than MJ's stint with the Wizards. No one really expected anything from those Wizards teams.
I like how posters here compare stats and come to the conclusion that both players are equal while also ignoring all of the other components that make up a basketball player.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14646976]Ahh okay. If he started watching the league in the 2010s, then it makes sense as to why he would rely on statistics alone. No one who watched Jahidi White would say they would take him over Dwight Howard. And no one would certainly choose a combination of Rip, White, Laettner, Whitney, and Jones over guys like AD, Westbrook, Melo, Monk, and Howard.
It's just not even remotely close. And even if we adjust for conferences, which is fair, I don't think it offsets the difference in casts, the fact that MJ and LeBron were nearly 2 years apart, and that MJ was out of the league for three years.
2022 is a bigger stain on LeBron's career than MJ's stint with the Wizards. No one really expected anything from those Wizards teams.[/QUOTE]
And here's the kicker. Even if you did want to take Jordan's '02 supporting cast over Lebrons '22 supporting cast, Lebron being the supposed significantly superior player should be what put his team way over the top compared to Jordan's. But it didn't.
Regarding the conferences, and I've already made this point repeatedly which no one wanted to touch, the 2022 Western Conference teams only averaged 1.4 more wins than the 2002 Eastern Conference teams. And that's with their admission that the early '00 East was the weakest it ever was.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14646960]Compared to MJ? Mo Williams was an All-Star. He also had Ilgauskas, a former 2 time All-Star.
CLE w/Ilgauskas '09: 55-10 | .846% (69 win pace)
CLE w/o Ilgauskas '09: 11-6 | .647% (53 win pace)
You can say MJ had Oakley, i'll give you that. But Oakley alone doesn't offset Mo Williams, Zydrunas, Varajeo, and West.[/QUOTE]
Who cares that he had Oakley? They traded Oakley because they liked Horace better. Oakley nor Horace were all stars like a couple of those guys mentioned
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14646973]I don't think it was a matter of standards based on age. I think being champions in 2020 and then the combination of AD-Melo-LeBron-Westbrook-Howard together with other smaller role players is something that was fair.
If one thing is for sure, even if you said that favoring them to win the title was absurd, I don't think you or anyone else would have said they wouldn't have even made the play-in. And that's even with injuries. It's just not something that any reasonable fan would have expected.[/QUOTE]
I thought it was laughable that the so called experts thought the Lakers were a favorite. But I certainly didn't think they'd be as bad as they were
[QUOTE=FilmyCogTurner;14646977]I like how posters here compare stats and come to the conclusion that both players are equal while also ignoring all of the other components that make up a basketball player.[/QUOTE]
I like how they try to tell you how things were in the 80's and 90's when they weren't even around yet :facepalm