Here's why ball-dominance sucks & why it matters when guys have ball-dominnt skillset

by NOT having ball-dominant skillsets, guys like Curry, Duncan, Kobe and MJ allowed higher levels of team offense/chemistry, which required less talent to win - i.e. [I]secondary producers[/I] at sidekick like Klay, Parker and Pippen instead of [I]franchise guys[/I] at 2nd and 3rd option like Wade, AD, Luka, Kyrie, Bosh and Love

Lebron's ball-dominant skillset needed [U]6 different franchise players[/U] that had their own team - this is the most help ever and it produced more preseason favorites than anyone ever had (8).. However, the lower levels of team offense had non-winning records with every type of good roster, such as 4-4 with preseason favorites, 4-6 with Finals teams, 4-5 with 1 or 2 seeds, and 4-8 with all-star teammates

Btw, ball-dominance = high-scoring primary ballhandlers like Luka, Lebron, Harden, Westbrook, etc, aka losers

Teams lack capacity to add talent if they build around a secondary producer like Klay or Pippen, since any decent scorer might supplant them as 1st option - this is why secondary producers like Klay, Middleton or Pippen aren't considered franchise players - it's only the dominant elite producers that are considered franchise players.. The only exceptions are all-time floor generals like Kidd, Magic, etc.. Ultimately, Lebron's ball-dominance produces lower levels of chemistry and team offense, so he needs more sheer talent, sivch as franchise players at 2nd and 3rd option - this contrasts with non-ball-dominators that have better chemistry and therefore can win with secondary producers at sidekick.. Ultimately, a ball-dominant 1st option never produced the best basketball, aka dynasty (3 in 5) or dominant title run (1 loss average per round, 4 losses max)

.
[B]Reggie Miller and Pippen faced the same opponent in the playoffs 6 times....
.[/B]
R Miller vs. 90' Pistons..... 20.7 on 57%... 17.9 usage
Pippen. vs. 90' Pistons..... 16.6 on 43%... 20.4 usage

R Miller vs 93' Knicks....... 31.5 on 53%... 27.5 usage
Pippen. vs 93' Knicks....... 22.5 on 51%... 28.4 usage

R Miller vs 94' Knicks....... 24.7 on 44%... 30.1 usage
Pippen. vs 94' Knicks....... 21.7 on 41%... 31.7 usage

R Miller vs 95' Magic........ 25.9 on 52%... 26.2 usage
Pippen. vs 95' Magic........ 19.0 on 42%... 23.1 usage

R Miller vs 00' Lakers....... 24.3 on 41%... 25.0 usage
Pippen. vs 00' Lakers....... 15.1 on 43%... 19.5 usage
Pippen. vs 99' Lakers....... 18.3 on 33%... 23.5 usage

R Miller 98' ECF............... 17.4 on 41%... 21.1 usage
Pippen. 98' ECF............... 16.6 on 39%... 26.0 usage

No question that Lebron's had the most help of any star in the history of the sport.

But I'm curious about how you classify SGA. Do you put him in the same category of ball dominators as Luka and Harden?

[QUOTE=Full Court;15041940]But I'm curious about how you classify SGA. Do you put him in the same category of ball dominators as Luka and Harden?[/QUOTE]

He doesn't like SGA, puts him in the same category as those other ball-dominant players. Then again, I don't know why you want his opinion on current players when 3ball has stated he hasn't watched an NBA game in 20 years.

[IMG]https://c.tenor.com/PLCroit80ccAAAAd/tenor.gif[/IMG]

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15041947]He doesn't like SGA, puts him in the same category as those other ball-dominant players. Then again, [B]I don't know why you want his opinion on current players [/B]when 3ball has stated he hasn't watched an NBA game in 20 years.[/QUOTE]

He's a good analyst and has keen insight into the game. His takes are much more intelligent than, say, yours.

[QUOTE=Full Court;15041940]No question that Lebron's had the most help of any star in the history of the sport.

But I'm curious about how you classify SGA. Do you put him in the same category of ball dominators as Luka and Harden?[/QUOTE]


I consider a 23-year old that dropped 40 points in the seminal game of the Finals (Jalen Williams) to be a franchise player... Show me where Pippen or Klay did that - Jalen is a takeover guy that can produce elite stats... Ultimately, unlike MJ, Duncan and Curry, ball-dominators can't win with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player.. Again, this is because of the weaker chemistry of their ball-dominant skillset.. Heck, the heavily favored Thunder almost lost to bums in the Finals - they almost lost to the "weak east".. Remember that Shaq or Duncan used to SWEEP the weak East

Yeah, Klay only dropped 40 to save the Warriors season once, not the Finals though so it doesn't really count.

I also love that this is now the criteria when his 2nd & 3rd ranked players (Kobe & Bird) dropped 40 in the Finals one time combined :lol

[B]Hornacek destroys Klay:[/B]
.

[indent][U]Regular Season[/U]

[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hornaje01.html]Hornacek[/url]..... 17.7 PER.. 2.9 bpm.. 0.153 ws/48.. 42.1 vorp.. 15/3/5 on 58.2 ts
[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thompkl01.html]Klay[/url]............... 16.4 PER.. 0.7 bpm.. 0.110 ws/48.. 14.4 vorp.. 19/3/2 on 57.5 ts


[U]Playoffs[/U]

[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hornaje01.html]Hornacek[/url]..... 16.5 PER.. 3.1 bpm.. 0.145 ws/48.. 14.1 vorp.. 15/4/4 on 57.5 ts
[url=https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thompkl01.html]Klay[/url]............... 14.4 PER.. 0.7 bpm.. 0.091 ws/48.... 3.1 vorp.. 19/3/2 on 56.0 ts[/indent]



[B]09' Mo outproduced 16' Klay:[/B]


[Indent]09' MO......... 2.3 BPM... 0.165 WS.48... 3.1 VORP... 17.2 PER
16' KLAY...... 1.8 BPM... 0.144 WS/48... 2.5 VORP... 18.6 PER[/indent]


^^^ Dwight beat the 1-man Cavs just like Lebron beat the 1-man Warriors, or Baron Davis beat the 1-man Mavs in 07'.. It happens.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15041955]Yeah, Klay only dropped 40 to save the Warriors season once, not the Finals though so it doesn't really count.

I also love that this is now the criteria when his 2nd & 3rd ranked players (Kobe & Bird) dropped 40 in the Finals one time combined :lol[/QUOTE]


Klay isn't a dominant player like Jalen Williams.

There's no comparison

Klay is a far lower producer than Hornacek (see previous post).. In short, Klay is a carried bum and vastly overrated/inflated by the winning spotlight

[QUOTE=3ba11;15041960]Klay isn't a dominant player like Jalen Williams.

There's no comparison

Klay is a far lower producer than Hornacek (see previous post).. In short, Klay is a carried bum and vastly overrated/inflated by the winning spotlight[/QUOTE]

Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two.

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;15041965]Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two.[/QUOTE]


Yeah but now you're talking about 1st options, whose skillsets dictate brand of ball, fits and team chemistry... Accordingly, a simple stat comparison isn't accurate like it usually is for 2nd options.

Specifically, Lebron achieves higher PER by having lower levels of team offense, chemistry, fits, and teammate elevation.. Similar to Luka, LeDrive's skillset turns everyone into spot-up shooter, so teammates don't develop or play to capacity alongside him - this stuff matters because it (turning everyone into spot-up shooter/weaker chemistry) explains why Lebron underachieves roster talent compared to his peers, i.e. non-winning records with all types of good rosters (4-4 with preseason favorites, 4-6 with Finals teams, 4-5 with 1 or 2 seeds, and 4-8 with all-star teammates)

Furthermore, LeDrive's PER has phenomenal spacing needs - he can't shoot over packed paints like Kobe, MJ or Curry... Lebron actually needs an all-star level spacer like Mo or Ray Allen to win 60 and MVP... Ultimately, Lebron's PER imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win (can't win organically)

I can go on... Excessive ball-dominance can't beat top teams, so Lebron can't carry the scoring load on the championship level.. An inability to carry the scoring load means he can't defeat max defensive attention - he needs equal scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention.. Carrying the "star" category of scoring MATTERS because it requires less stars, thus allowing the GM to find the right defenders/others, aka elite roster construction.. So Lebron's PER prevents elite roster construction (in addition to weaker chemistry, fits, brand of ball, etc)

[QUOTE=3ba11;15041966]Yeah but now you're talking about 1st options, whose skillsets dictate brand of ball, fits and team chemistry... Accordingly, a simple stat comparison isn't accurate like it usually is for 2nd options.

Specifically, Lebron achieves higher PER by having lower levels of team offense, chemistry, fits, and teammate elevation.. Similar to Luka, LeDrive's skillset turns everyone into spot-up shooter, so teammates don't develop or play to capacity alongside him - this stuff matters because it (turning everyone into spot-up shooter/weaker chemistry) explains why Lebron underachieves roster talent compared to his peers, i.e. non-winning records with all types of good rosters (4-4 with preseason favorites, 4-6 with Finals teams, 4-5 with 1 or 2 seeds, and 4-8 with all-star teammates)

Furthermore, LeDrive's PER has phenomenal spacing needs - he can't shoot over packed paints like Kobe, MJ or Curry... Lebron actually needs an all-star level spacer like Mo or Ray Allen to win 60 and MVP... Ultimately, Lebron's PER imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win (can't win organically)

I can go on... Excessive ball-dominance can't beat top teams, so Lebron can't carry the scoring load on the championship level.. An inability to carry the scoring load means he can't defeat max defensive attention - he needs equal scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention.. Carrying the "star" category of scoring MATTERS because it requires less stars, thus allowing the GM to find the right defenders/others, aka elite roster construction.. So Lebron's PER prevents elite roster construction (in addition to weaker chemistry, fits, brand of ball, etc)[/QUOTE]

No need to read whatever you typed. Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two. Move on.

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;15041975]No need to read whatever you typed. Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two. Move on.[/QUOTE]

But now you're talking about 1st options, whose skillsets dictate brand of ball, fits and team chemistry... Accordingly, a simple stat comparison isn't accurate like it usually is for 2nd options.

Specifically, Lebron achieves higher PER by having lower levels of team offense, chemistry, fits, and teammate elevation.. Similar to Luka, LeDrive's skillset turns everyone into spot-up shooter, so teammates don't develop or play to capacity alongside him - this stuff matters because it (turning everyone into spot-up shooter/weaker chemistry) explains why Lebron underachieves roster talent compared to his peers, i.e. non-winning records with all types of good rosters (4-4 with preseason favorites, 4-6 with Finals teams, 4-5 with 1 or 2 seeds, and 4-8 with all-star teammates)

Furthermore, LeDrive's PER has phenomenal spacing needs - he can't shoot over packed paints like Kobe, MJ or Curry... Lebron actually needs an all-star level spacer like Mo or Ray Allen to win 60 and MVP... Ultimately, Lebron's PER imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win (can't win organically)

I can go on... Excessive ball-dominance can't beat top teams, so Lebron can't carry the scoring load on the championship level.. An inability to carry the scoring load means he can't defeat max defensive attention - he needs equal scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention.. Carrying the "star" category of scoring MATTERS because it requires less stars, thus allowing the GM to find the right defenders/others, aka elite roster construction.. So Lebron's PER prevents elite roster construction (in addition to weaker chemistry, fits, brand of ball, etc)

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15041952][IMG]https://c.tenor.com/PLCroit80ccAAAAd/tenor.gif[/IMG][/QUOTE]

:lol

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;15041965]Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two.[/QUOTE]


the thread title and OP explains why stats don't matter

especially with Lebron and dumb ball-dominators like him (Luka, Harden Westbrook, Trae, etc)

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;15041975]No need to read whatever you typed. Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two. Move on.[/QUOTE]

Kobe produced 5 championships and elevated his teammates and had great individual series so I'm not sure what the hell you're even on about. If Lebron really was that much better he'd have had more success with all the good teammates and the longevity he's had, but that's not the case because individual stats alone do not win championships. That's not even to mention the difference in eras and when their primes briefly overlapped Lebron was putting up numbers on the Cavs and flamed out of the Playoffs every year and when he went to Miami he wasn't putting up crazy numbers either until the league got smaller and things opened up more for him with the extra spacing. Kobe thrived in the era of bad spacing and slow pace.

.
Thread Cliffs

30 PER ball-dominator < 25 PER off-ball player

The reason is because the 25 PER promotes better brand of ball, chemistry and WINNING

if there's nothing inherently wrong with a high-scoring, primary ballhandler's skillset (ball-dominator skillset), then why hasn't a primary ballhandler been the leading scorer/1st option for the best baskeball, aka dynasty (3 in 5) or dominant title run (4 losses max/1 loss average per round)???

Since the play-by-play era began, all the 1st options for dynasties or dominant title runs were off-ball players/highly-assisted players like bigs or jumpshooters... Specifically - MJ, Curry, Duncan and Shaq were the 1st options for the 4 dynasties - so these guys are either bigs or jumpshooters - no primary ballhandlers.. Meanwhile, the dominant title runs entailed more bigs and jumpshooters, aka Jokic, Tatum, Durant, MJ, Duncan, Shaq... Ultimately, primary ballhandlers are 0 for 12 in being the 1st option for the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions).

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15041955]Yeah, Klay only dropped 40 to save the Warriors season once, not the Finals though so it doesn't really count.

I also love that this is now the criteria when his 2nd & 3rd ranked players (Kobe & Bird) dropped 40 in the Finals one time combined :lol[/QUOTE]

So.what happens to the narrative when your 3rd or 4th option (Kukoc) drops 30 in the finals in a similar scenario? The rich get richer?

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;15042001]So.what happens to the narrative when your 3rd or 4th option (Kukoc) drops 30 in the finals in a similar scenario? The rich get richer?[/QUOTE]


If a secondary producer like Klay or Pippen is the franchise player, the team lacks capacity to add talent, since any decent scorer might supplant them as 1st option... That's why secondary producers like Middleton, Klay and Pippen aren't considered franchise players..

[I]Otoh, Jalen Williams is a dominant enough producer to add good talent beneath him, so he's a franchise player that can be built around.
[/I]
Hope that helps...Jalen Williams is a dominant elite producer, while Klay, Pippen and Kukoc aren't.. There's no comparison

[QUOTE=3ba11;15042013]If a secondary producer like Klay or Pippen is the franchise player, the team lacks capacity to add talent, since any decent scorer might supplant them as 1st option... That's why secondary producers like Middleton, Klay and Pippen aren't considered franchise players..

[I]Otoh, Jalen Williams is a dominant enough producer to add good talent beneath him, so he's a franchise player that can be built around.
[/I]
Hope that helps...Jalen Williams is a dominant elite producer, while Klay, Pippen and Kukoc aren't.. There's no comparison[/QUOTE]

I seriously hope you get a laugh out of the dumb shit you post, i know for a fact you dont even believe half of it yourself.....

To actually answer your OP: Here's what makes ball dominance as great as any other style of play. It allows high ceilings for teams that aren't deep with talented players. It allows a single diversely talented player to mask multiple weaknesses in a roster. What lts not? Its not enough to overcome deep talented teams, multi star teams with a ome man show. That doesn't work for any style of play to be honest. The place where youre wrong time and time again is ball dominance was successful to an extent before any big 3 was made. The Celtics [B][I]NEEDED[/I][/B] every bit of their big 3 to survive a single [B]young[/B] Lebron in Cleveland. And yeah let's talk about LeBron, because it's always about him anyway. Ball dominance wasnt ever the reason Lebrons teams came up short. Not even once. They lost because redundancy, injuries, facing the most stacked team ever and Lebron underperforming in 2011. What series did they lose because of ball dominance? Kobes lost a finals in more of that manner than anyone. Westbrook has NEVER lost due to ball dominance, he lost becuase of shit decision making if anything. Harden never lost because of ball dominance, he lost because he couldn't show up for the biggest games the same way he did for the rest(and his team missed 1,347 3 pointers in a row that one game.) And Luka didn't lose the finals because of ball dominance, he lost becuase supposedly he wasn't 100% and imo because Jaylen Brown was in his ass like toilet paper. You cant watch actual basketball and have some of these takes you puke out here

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;15042017]I seriously hope you get a laugh out of the dumb shit you post, i know for a fact you dont even believe half of it yourself.....

To actually answer your OP: Here's what makes ball dominance as great as any other style of play. It allows high ceilings for teams that aren't deep with talented players. It allows a single diversely talented player to mask multiple weaknesses in a roster. What lts not? Its not enough to overcome deep talented teams, multi star teams with a ome man show. That doesn't work for any style of play to be honest. The place where youre wrong time and time again is ball dominance was successful to an extent before any big 3 was made. The Celtics [B][I]NEEDED[/I][/B] every bit of their big 3 to survive a single [B]young[/B] Lebron in Cleveland. And yeah let's talk about LeBron, because it's always about him anyway. Ball dominance wasnt ever the reason Lebrons teams came up short. Not even once. They lost because redundancy, injuries, facing the most stacked team ever and Lebron underperforming in 2011. What series did they lose because of ball dominance? Kobes lost a finals in more of that manner than anyone. Westbrook has NEVER lost due to ball dominance, he lost becuase of shit decision making if anything. Harden never lost because of ball dominance, he lost because he couldn't show up for the biggest games the same way he did for the rest(and his team missed 1,347 3 pointers in a row that one game.) And Luka didn't lose the finals because of ball dominance, he lost becuase supposedly he wasn't 100% and imo because Jaylen Brown was in his ass like toilet paper. You cant watch actual basketball and have some of these takes you puke out here[/QUOTE]



[img]https://c.tenor.com/PLCroit80ccAAAAd/tenor.gif[/img]


no seriously, when you say "high" team ceilings, I interpret that to mean championship and even dynasty, so Lebron's track record from 07-11' of getting swept, locked up or upset each year doesn't qualify as a high team ceiling... Among great players like Hakeem, Shaq, MJ, Ewing, Dominique, Lebron, Dirk, etc, the STANDARD is to have good to great records as "1-man teams" before flaming out in the playoffs - Lebron did this every year from 04' to 10', and no one views the 07' Finals run as all-time impressive because of the all-time easy road to the Finals.. The JV eastern comp was validated when Lebron played worse than anyone ever has against the varsity conference in the Finals - no one ever shot 35% with 6 TO's per game in ANY series, let alone the Finals - it's the worst combination of chucking and ball control that the game has ever seen.. Again, this isn't considered a "high" team ceiling.. Ultimately, dragging around crappy teams to reasonable heights is simply the expectation and the standard for truly great players - Lebron never separated himself from other greats in his ability to do this, especially since the Cavs only won 45 games in Year 5 (08') before getting a 2nd all-star teammate in 09' - this all-star provided the spacing to open up LeStiffArm's game, which already benefitted from a modern-style, pick-n-pop, all-star big man.

Furthermore, the Cavs proved they were a good cast in 2008 by nearly beating the "big 3" Celtics despite Lebron once again playing worse than anyone ever has, i.e. 35% and 5 TO's this time.. The reality is that the all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas were gifted 3 years to develop a favored high seed before entering their first playoffs in 06' - this development included the addition of a 22/5/5 all-defender and a future HOF coach.. Lebron's high seeded status from this first playoffs is why he never had a low seed until 2021 and 2024 (1st Round exits).. In contrast to Lebron enjoying veteran high seeds in his first playoffs, MJ had rookie 8 seeds from Year 1 - he didn't get 3 healthy seasons like Lebron to develop a high seed until 1988, when he won 50 games and made the 2nd Round like the 06 Cavs.. The difference is that Jordan had no all-star help or good teammates to win 50+ games, while Lebron needed an all-star center and all-defensive backcourt (Snow, Hughes), and then he added additional all-stars in 09' and 10'.

Btw, Lebron lost via ball-dominance in 2014 because that's when the Spurs had developed a vastly superior brand of ball, i.e. if a team loses to a vastly superior brand of ball, then they lost due to brand of ball - it's pretty simple - and therefore, Lebron's ball-dominance can be blamed.. Understand that Lebron's ball-dominance makes it impossible for any team with to develop the best brand of ball (the best ball movement).. Otoh, off-ball skillsets like Duncan, MJ, Curry or Kobe can develop and execute the best ball movement, so they had all the dynasties and high team ceilings with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player.. Ultimately, any time that Lebron lost despite not having an inferior roster, it's due to brand of ball inferiority - i.e. 09' Magic, 11' Mavs, 14' Spurs, 25' Wolves.

And finally, the main reason that ball-dominators like Westbrook and Harden shoot poorly or turnover the ball is specifically BECAUSE they're employing a bad brand of ball.. We see it with Lebron too, who is #1 all-time in TO's and has weak clutch-time or GW efficiency.

[QUOTE=3ba11;15042031]no seriously, when you say "high" team ceilings, I interpret that to mean championship and even dynasty, so Lebron's track record from 07-11' of getting swept, locked up or upset each year doesn't qualify as a high team ceiling... Among great players like Hakeem, Shaq, MJ, Ewing, Dominique, Lebron, Dirk, etc, the STANDARD is to have good to great records as "1-man teams" before flaming out in the playoffs - Lebron did this every year from 04' to 10', and no one views the 07' Finals run as all-time impressive because of the all-time easy road to the Finals.. The JV eastern comp was validated when Lebron played worse than anyone ever has against the varsity conference in the Finals - no one ever shot 35% with 6 TO's per game in ANY series, let alone the Finals - it's the worst combination of chucking and ball control that the game has ever seen.. Again, this isn't considered a "high" team ceiling.. Ultimately, dragging around crappy teams to reasonable heights is simply the expectation and the standard for truly great players - Lebron never separated himself from other greats in his ability to do this, especially since the Cavs only won 45 games in Year 5 (08') before getting a 2nd all-star teammate in 09' - this all-star provided the spacing to open up LeStiffArm's game, which already benefitted from a modern-style, pick-n-pop, all-star big man.

Furthermore, the Cavs proved they were a good cast in 2008 by nearly beating the "big 3" Celtics despite Lebron once again playing worse than anyone ever has, i.e. 35% and 5 TO's this time.. The reality is that the all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas were gifted 3 years to develop a favored high seed before entering their first playoffs in 06' - this development included the addition of a 22/5/5 all-defender and a future HOF coach.. Lebron's high seeded status from this first playoffs is why he never had a low seed until 2021 and 2024 (1st Round exits).. In contrast to Lebron enjoying veteran high seeds in his first playoffs, MJ had rookie 8 seeds from Year 1 - he didn't get 3 healthy seasons like Lebron to develop a high seed until 1988, when he won 50 games and made the 2nd Round like the 06 Cavs.. The difference is that Jordan had no all-star help or good teammates to win 50+ games, while Lebron needed an all-star center and all-defensive backcourt (Snow, Hughes), and then he added additional all-stars in 09' and 10'.

Btw, Lebron lost via ball-dominance in 2014 because that's when the Spurs had developed a vastly superior brand of ball, i.e. if a team loses to a vastly superior brand of ball, then they lost due to brand of ball - it's pretty simple - and therefore, Lebron's ball-dominance can be blamed.. Understand that Lebron's ball-dominance makes it impossible for any team with to develop the best brand of ball (the best ball movement).. Otoh, off-ball skillsets like Duncan, MJ, Curry or Kobe can develop and execute the best ball movement, so they had all the dynasties and high team ceilings with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player.. Ultimately, any time that Lebron lost despite not having an inferior roster, it's due to brand of ball inferiority - i.e. 09' Magic, 11' Mavs, 14' Spurs, 25' Wolves.

And finally, the main reason that ball-dominators like Westbrook and Harden shoot poorly or turnover the ball is specifically BECAUSE they're employing a bad brand of ball.. We see it with Lebron too, who is #1 all-time in TO's and has weak clutch-time or GW efficiency.[/QUOTE]

[IMG]https://c.tenor.com/PLCroit80ccAAAAd/tenor.gif[/IMG]

1-9

[QUOTE=1987_Lakers;15042033][IMG]https://c.tenor.com/PLCroit80ccAAAAd/tenor.gif[/IMG]

1-9[/QUOTE]



[Indent][U]2008 ECSF [/U]

LEBRON...... 26 on 35% with 5 TO's per game[/indent]


^^^ if Jordan did that to lose a 7 game series, it would be considered a massive choke

Lebron's bed-wetting is the biggest reason the Cavs lost that series - the Cavs went 7 games IN SPITE of Lebron's bed-wetting and worst ever chucking/turnovers

Lebron also choked in the 10' ECSF, 11' Finals, 13' Finals (saved by teammates again), and 21-25' Playoffs (ridiculous losses each year - he lost in the 1st Round with both Luka and AD - that's pathetic)

[QUOTE=3ba11;15041991]the thread title and OP explains why stats don't matter

especially with Lebron and dumb ball-dominators like him (Luka, Harden Westbrook, Trae, etc)[/QUOTE]

Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two. Move on.

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;15042164]Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two. Move on.[/QUOTE]


Lebron's skillset is a stat-padding, teammate and chemistry-limiting loser compared to Kobe's goat winning. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two. That's why everyone other than Klutch Sports propaganda victims thinks Kobe is easily better. Move on.

[QUOTE=3ba11;15042031][img]https://c.tenor.com/PLCroit80ccAAAAd/tenor.gif[/img]


no seriously, when you say "high" team ceilings, I interpret that to mean championship and even dynasty, so Lebron's track record from 07-11' of getting swept, locked up or upset each year doesn't qualify as a high team ceiling... Among great players like Hakeem, Shaq, MJ, Ewing, Dominique, Lebron, Dirk, etc, the STANDARD is to have good to great records as "1-man teams" before flaming out in the playoffs - Lebron did this every year from 04' to 10', and no one views the 07' Finals run as all-time impressive because of the all-time easy road to the Finals.. The JV eastern comp was validated when Lebron played worse than anyone ever has against the varsity conference in the Finals - no one ever shot 35% with 6 TO's per game in ANY series, let alone the Finals - it's the worst combination of chucking and ball control that the game has ever seen.. Again, this isn't considered a "high" team ceiling.. Ultimately, dragging around crappy teams to reasonable heights is simply the expectation and the standard for truly great players - Lebron never separated himself from other greats in his ability to do this, especially since the Cavs only won 45 games in Year 5 (08') before getting a 2nd all-star teammate in 09' - this all-star provided the spacing to open up LeStiffArm's game, which already benefitted from a modern-style, pick-n-pop, all-star big man.

Furthermore, the Cavs proved they were a good cast in 2008 by nearly beating the "big 3" Celtics despite Lebron once again playing worse than anyone ever has, i.e. 35% and 5 TO's this time.. The reality is that the all-star duo of Lebron/Zydrunas were gifted 3 years to develop a favored high seed before entering their first playoffs in 06' - this development included the addition of a 22/5/5 all-defender and a future HOF coach.. Lebron's high seeded status from this first playoffs is why he never had a low seed until 2021 and 2024 (1st Round exits).. In contrast to Lebron enjoying veteran high seeds in his first playoffs, MJ had rookie 8 seeds from Year 1 - he didn't get 3 healthy seasons like Lebron to develop a high seed until 1988, when he won 50 games and made the 2nd Round like the 06 Cavs.. The difference is that Jordan had no all-star help or good teammates to win 50+ games, while Lebron needed an all-star center and all-defensive backcourt (Snow, Hughes), and then he added additional all-stars in 09' and 10'.

Btw, Lebron lost via ball-dominance in 2014 because that's when the Spurs had developed a vastly superior brand of ball, i.e. if a team loses to a vastly superior brand of ball, then they lost due to brand of ball - it's pretty simple - and therefore, Lebron's ball-dominance can be blamed.. Understand that Lebron's ball-dominance makes it impossible for any team with to develop the best brand of ball (the best ball movement).. Otoh, off-ball skillsets like Duncan, MJ, Curry or Kobe can develop and execute the best ball movement, so they had all the dynasties and high team ceilings with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player.. Ultimately, any time that Lebron lost despite not having an inferior roster, it's due to brand of ball inferiority - i.e. 09' Magic, 11' Mavs, 14' Spurs, 25' Wolves.

And finally, the main reason that ball-dominators like Westbrook and Harden shoot poorly or turnover the ball is specifically BECAUSE they're employing a bad brand of ball.. We see it with Lebron too, who is #1 all-time in TO's and has weak clutch-time or GW efficiency.[/QUOTE]

Way to quote me AND duck the smoke at the same time.:oldlol: These types of responses are akin to making a business decision to stay off a poster. It'd be nice if you could actually debate stuff you reply to. Btw Mj had several Lotto picks and iirc a few just outside of the lotto in those 1st few years to start his career until he got the big one. You keep doing these apples to bananas comparisons, you cant really have committed to spiraling over a player for damn near a decade and a half solid?

[QUOTE=StrongLurk;15042164]Kobe is a far lower producer than Lebron. Simple fact. Not worth comparing the two. Move on.[/QUOTE]

Far lower because Lebron put up higher numbers in the 2010s vs worse defenses? lol

What did Lebron do during Kobe's prime, flame out vs. teams that Kobe beat because he was just stuffing the stat sheet like Harden in Houston. Kobe still takes shit for one bad shooting game against the 2010 Celtics, but Lebron flamed out with b2b2b dogshit games to go from up 2 - 1 with HCA to getting eliminated in that ECSF shooting 34% with 6 turnovers a game in those 3 losses, and we're supposed to take Lebron fans seriously?

KB faced the best defenses and beat the most 50+ win teams in POs in NBA history, played within a team structure where he sacrificed his all-around numbers to play in the triangle in one of the slowest eras in league history and produced more championships than your favorite player while playing vs the toughest competition.