Shaq Nearly CHOKE-SLAMS A Lebron Stan on National Television Defending Kobe & MJ

[sdot_thadon]

Even Max was laughing at the Simon alt and he's a Lebron fan.

[QUOTE=Shaq]
O

[sdot_thadon]

Nice breakdown sdot!

For me I'll always go with the defensively dominant team over the offensive one because that's a more reliable style of play specially in a 7 game series. In a one off game everything goes out the window.

At the end of the day, I just don't bet against MJ. The guy was a psychopathic competitor in a way the modern AAU buddy buddy millennial NBA just cannot comprehend or be able to deal with.

I get it. At the end of the day these debates are fun but guys really need to understand what level of talent we're discussing before they throw around this team will kill that team etc.

[NBAGOAT]

It’s s shame 86 Celtics have dropped out of discussion. I like others do not like how they matchup vs gs. Don’t have a small ball lineup like bulls and only one strong perimeter defender in dj. Likely would be forced to go with mchale on Durant and idk about that and klays got a height edge on ainge. Granted Mchale is a super tough cover, gs will have to double a lot and/or play big.

86 Celtics are dominant for their era however 67 wins while coasting a little. Matchup vs 96 bulls is super interesting however.

[3ball]

Didn't everyone say the 16' Warriors without KD would beat the Bulls?

But now that the KD-less Warriors lost to Kawhi/Lebron and are 8-10 in the Finals without KD (1-2 series record overall), we see it's a joke - the Bulls would obviously destroy the KD-less Warriors

So now those same people that were wrong about the 16' Warriors are saying the KD-Warriors would beat the Bulls???... ... Sorry, you have no credibility..

And here's an indication that the Bulls were a stronger team than the Durant-Warriors - the Bulls weren't tested (taken 7 games) until the 3rd leg of the 3-peat (98' ECF), while KD's much younger Warriors were tested on their 2nd leg (18' WCF), and broke down during the 3rd leg (19' playoffs).. They simply weren't as dominant or physically-capable as the Bulls..

Also how did this thread go from MJ/lebron debate to KD-warriors vs Bulls?..

Getting back on topic - Lebron's Big 3's lost by record amount to Durant's Warrior, whereas we're pretty sure mj's Bulls from 90-98' wouldn't do that.. Heck, Jordan's 8-seed bulls in 86' didn't lose by that much to the 5 HOF Celtics, so I'm pretty sure his high seeds would outperform Lebron's too.. MJ was just better, so his teams outperformed lebron's regardless of cast or seeding and won 6 rings to lebron's 3

[1987_Lakers]

It’s s shame 86 Celtics have dropped out of discussion. I like others do not like how they matchup vs gs. Don’t have a small ball lineup like bulls and only one strong perimeter defender in dj. Likely would be forced to go with mchale on Durant and idk about that and klays got a height edge on ainge. Granted Mchale is a super tough cover, gs will have to double a lot and/or play big.

86 Celtics are dominant for their era however 67 wins while coasting a little. Matchup vs 96 bulls is super interesting however.

I wouldn't say they dropped out of the discussion. Before the Warriors came along, the casuals had the '96 Bulls as the GOAT team, but the hardcore fans from what I observed on realgm and even ISH from 2009-2015 had the '86 Celtics #1.

Realgm back in 2009 I believe did GOAT team tournament, the '86 Celtics came out on top, defeating the '96 Bulls in the semifinals. You can find countless '86 Celtics vs '96 Bulls topics on ISH from that era and it seemed like most people favored the '86 Celtics as well.

But I agree that the '96 Bulls matchup better vs the Warriors than the Celtics did.

[NBAGOAT]

I wouldn't say they dropped out of the discussion. Before the Warriors came along, the casuals had the '96 Bulls as the GOAT team, but the hardcore fans from what I observed on realgm and even ISH from 2011-2014 had the '86 Celtics #1.

Realgm back in 2009 I believe did GOAT team tournament, the '86 Celtics came out on top, defeating the '96 Bulls in the semifinals. You can find countless '86 Celtics vs '96 Bulls topics on ISH from that era and it seemed like most people favored the '86 Celtics as well.

But I agree that the '96 Bulls matchup better vs the Warriors than the Celtics did.

Well it

[1987_Lakers]

[QUOTE=NBAGOAT]Well it

[andgar923]

The funny thing is, the people who usually think the Bulls are better are the posters who have a rep of being a MJ stan like yourself or TheMan, or the posters who are still stuck in the 80's-90's like Showtime80'.

I already spilled out the Bulls weaknesses, they lack shooting, they don't have a low-post presence from their bigs, and they lack an offensive firepower to keep up with the Warriors. All the strengths you named for the Bulls like versatile players, role player who knew their role, free flowing offense, experienced and high IQ, those are the same strengths the Warriors have.

Saying the Warriors rely on 3's too often and their offense is average if the 3's are not falling....well that is a laughable statement. Why wouldn't you rely on 3's if you have two of the greatest shooters ever in Curry and Klay? And let's not forget they have one of the greatest mid-range players of all time in Kevin Durant, who can basically shoot over people from 20 feet and drop 30-35 on you on a consistent basis. Here is a little fact for you, the 2017 Warriors were #5 in the league in 2 point shots made and #1 in 2pt%. They obviously don't rely on the 3 point shot like the Rockets do and with Durant, they are lethal from 3 and 2.

One thing is for sure, the Bulls would be in total shock if they played the Warriors. The Bulls never played a team who shoots and makes as many 3's as the Warriors do, nor they have ever played a team who sets as many screens. The Warriors are a revolutionary team, while the Bulls are a generic outdated team who are easy to figure out.

Add this to one of the most idiotic posts ever posted.

[Mr Feeny]

Add this to one of the most idiotic posts ever posted.

He started watching basketball around the time.that Shaq joined the lakers. He literally hasn't watched a second of the 90s Bulls. So you should understand why he's out of his depth.

He can compare the Warriors against any team SINCE Shaqs lakers because that's when he started watching. And he's right. That warriors team would sweep the 2000-2002 lakers, as would Lebron's Cavs of 2016.

[1987_Lakers]

Add this to one of the most idiotic posts ever posted.

Oh, the classic "I don't know how to counter-argue this post so I'm just gonna call it idiotic".

[sdot_thadon]

Oh, the classic "I don't know how to counter-argue this post so I'm just gonna call it idiotic".

He got triggered. It was a decent post until the last line about then being outdated. Instant anger from Mj fans.