Remember, Jordan never beat a superteam

[light]

How ever did they manage to beat Terry Porter and Buck Williams or John Starks and Anthony Mason?

Phew! The 90's were tough.

[Baller789]

They had been to 2 straight Finals and won one and only lost one of them because LeBron had the greatest play off series of all time.

Yes they damn were a dynasty before KD joined them.

They were already a dynasty because they made 2 straight finals and won 1?

By your logic every team that made the finals and won at least one is a "dynasty".

Oh how standards have fallen.

[dankok8]

Who beat a superteam without a superteam of their own? Surely you don't count the 2016 Finals when the Cavs 2nd option totally outplayed the Warriors 1st option. GS were a superteam in the regular season but they played nothing like it in the playoffs.

[Axe]

They had been to 2 straight Finals and won one and only lost one of them because LeBron had the greatest play off series of all time.

Yes they damn were a dynasty before KD joined them.

2011 and 2012 miami heat are?

[Axe]

Who beat a superteam without a superteam of their own? Surely you don't count the 2016 Finals when the Cavs 2nd option totally outplayed the Warriors 1st option. GS were a superteam in the regular season but they played nothing like it in the playoffs.

A gsw team that came back from a 1-3 deficit in the conference finals, only to blow a 3-1 lead in the finals.

History is so weird when you think of it.

[dankok8]

A gsw team that came back from a 1-3 deficit in the conference finals, only to blow a 3-1 lead in the finals.

History is so weird when you think of it.

Coming back from a 3-1 lead makes for a nice narrative but at the end it's a series win. Golden State played nothing like a superteam in those playoffs. That's the bottom line. Unless we are gonna say that OKC and Cleveland were also superteams in which case who cares... The 2016 Cavs didn't have inferior talent to the 2016 Warriors. And they were preseason favorites to win the title.

[TheGoatest]

Unanimous MVP/scoring leader
All-defensive 1st teamer/All-NBA 2nd teamer
All-NBA 3rd teamer

on a record 73 win team?

Not a superteam? LeBron haters getting too desparate

[Axe]

Coming back from a 3-1 lead makes for a nice narrative but at the end it's a series win. Golden State played nothing like a superteam in those playoffs. That's the bottom line. Unless we are gonna say that OKC and Cleveland were also superteams in which case who cares... The 2016 Cavs didn't have inferior talent to the 2016 Warriors. And they were preseason favorites to win the title.

They used and burned all that energy for their 73-win campaign

And ty lue was a very lucky man to have coached lebron; otherwise, he'd be worthless tbh. His record in cleveland without him pretty much tells about that.

[TheGoatest]

LeBron haters must be confusing the 73-win Warriors with the 2007 67-win Mavericks, who lost in the first round like their hero MJ did 3 times. THEY were a regular season-only team. The 2016 Warriors made the finals. But if the 2016 Warriors weren't a super team because of their record in the playoffs, I'm just curious what the LeBron haters have to say about the 2013 Spurs, who had a 12-2 playoff record before the 2013 finals?

If the 2016 Warriors were only a regular season team, then the 2013 Spurs were the complete opposite:

Tim Duncan load-managed 13 games
Tony Parker load-managed 16 games
Manu Ginobili load-managed 22 games
Kawhi Leonard load-managed 24 games

And despite this they still won 58 games that season. They were saving themselves for the playoffs completely, and Finals MVP LeBron still beat them in an all-time great game 7 performance.

You can't have it both ways. Whether you focus on the regular season (2016 Warriors), or the playoffs (2013 Spurs), LeBron beat a super team. But in reality, they're both super teams. Along with the 2012 Thunder:

Durant - All-NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP voting, leading scorer
Westbrook - All-NBA 2nd team
Harden - 6th man of the year, averaged 26 ppg next season as the 1st option
Ibaka - All-defensive 1st team, handful of votes away from DPOY

LeBron beat 3 certified super teams. Jordan didn't beat a single one. The closest one was the '96 Sonics, but they were still clearly worse than whichever team you consider the worst between 2012 Thunder, 2013 Spurs and 2016 Warriors.

[Axe]

LeBron haters must be confusing the 73-win Warriors with the 2007 67-win Mavericks, who lost in the first round like their hero MJ did 3 times.

So anyone who dislikes or hates bran is already dubbed a baldan stan? Why?

But if the 2016 Warriors weren't a super team because of their record in the playoffs, I'm just curious what the LeBron haters have to say about the 2013 Spurs, who had a 12-2 playoff record before the 2013 finals?

I'm not one of those who think that the 2016 warriors aren't a super-team especially when they broke a lot of league records during that season but if people were to use your logic about the 2013 spurs, then the 2017 cavs should also be considered a super-team even if they only had 51 wins in the rs because they went 12-1 in the postseason before their third rematch against gs while winning a chip in the preceding year and making the finals three-straight times already.

If the 2016 Warriors were only a regular season team, then the 2013 Spurs were the complete opposite:

Tim Duncan load-managed 13 games
Tony Parker load-managed 16 games
Manu Ginobili load-managed 22 games
Kawhi Leonard load-managed 24 games

And despite this they still won 58 games that season. They were saving themselves for the playoffs completely, and Finals MVP LeBron still beat them in an all-time great game 7 performance.

You don't act like coach pop is a good coach, do you? They have a roster of postseason veterans but they still took that massive favorite heat team to seven games before bowing out. Also, some kudos should be given to ray allen and chris bosh in game six of that series. Their clutch efforts allowed the heat to stay alive for a game seven.

Meanwhile, the warriors were heavily expected to win the title that year because they had an exceptional season. But they obviously didn't live up to it when it completely mattered the most.

You can't have it both ways. Whether you focus on the regular season (2016 Warriors), or the playoffs (2013 Spurs), LeBron beat a super team. But in reality, they're both super teams. Along with the 2012 Thunder:

Durant - All-NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP voting, leading scorer
Westbrook - All-NBA 2nd team
Harden - 6th man of the year, averaged 26 ppg next season as the 1st option
Ibaka - All-defensive 1st team, handful of votes away from DPOY

That team looked very good on-paper but were they really a super-team? They never even made b2b finals trips nor had any consecutive top seeds in the west. Also they only had one western title since their relocation to okc more than a decade ago and don't forget that season was shortened to 66 games due to lockout too.

LeBron beat 3 certified super teams. Jordan didn't beat a single one. The closest one was the '96 Sonics, but they were still clearly worse than whichever team you consider the worst between 2012 Thunder, 2013 Spurs and 2016 Warriors.

By that logic, this is like saying the celtics dynasty from the 60s have weak rings because they dominated a lot during their time. Or shaq's lakers have worthless rings because they three-peated once. Btw, how are you supposed to beat a super-team if you're one of them?

[TheGoatest]

I'm not one of those who think that the 2016 warriors aren't a super-team especially when they broke a lot of league records during that season but if people were to use your logic about the 2013 spurs, then the 2017 cavs should also be considered a super-team even if they only had 51 wins in the rs because they went 12-1 in the postseason before their third rematch against gs while winning a chip in the preceding year and making the finals three-straight times already.

I'm not using the Spurs 12-2 record as any proof as whether to they were a super team or not, I just love pointing out the hypocrisy in how the haters say the 2016 Warriors were a "regular season only" team (even though they made the finals), whereas the 2013 Spurs were dominant in the playoffs. So which counts when it comes to determining a super team - the regular season or the playoffs? Can't have it both ways. Even though the 2013 Spurs and the 2016 Warriors were great in both the regular season and the playoffs.

Yes, LeBron really needed Bosh's and Ray Allen's 0 points combined in 49 minutes of game 7 to win the championship.
If you're going to point out what happened in game 6, then well, LeBron hit a clutch 3 pointer before Ray Allen's 3 pointer.

You don't act like coach pop is a good coach, do you? They have a roster of postseason veterans but they still took that massive favorite heat team to seven games before bowing out. Also, some kudos should be given to ray allen and chris bosh in game six of that series. Their clutch efforts allowed the heat to stay alive for a game seven.

Holy shit, you're right. I forgot to add Pop.

So LeBron went against:

Duncan
Parker
Manu
Kawhi
and an all-time great coach in Pop

And still beat this super team in an all-time great game 7 performance while lifting the Finals MVP trophy.

Meanwhile, the warriors were heavily expected to win the title that year because they had an exceptional season. But they obviously didn't live up to it when it completely mattered the most.

Their only obstacle in the playoffs were the Durant-Wesbtrook Thunder. Who were a near-super team themselves. And the Warriors did end up beating them.

And It's not that the Warriors didn't live up to it, it's that this happened:



LeBron had to do something that has never happened not just any finals series, but any playoff series ever to just barely beat the 73-win Warriors in 7. Think about it, even all those random 3-0 first round sweeps that lasted only 3 games in the 80s and 90s never had a player lead both teams in all categories, yet LeBron did it in a finals series that lasted 7 games.

That team looked very good on-paper but were they really a super-team?

Yes. Really.

They never even made b2b finals trips nor had any consecutive top seeds in the west. Also they only had one western title since their relocation to okc more than a decade ago and don't forget that season was shortened to 66 games due to lockout too.

They didn't make more finals because they let go of Harden left after they lost. So we'll never know how good they would've been, all we know is that this is how good they were their last season together:

Durant - All-NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP voting, leading scorer
Westbrook - All-NBA 2nd team
Harden - 6th man of the year, averaged 26 ppg next season as the 1st option
Ibaka - All-defensive 1st team, handful of votes away from DPOY

Don't forget, that 66-game season still had a full, 16-game playoffs following it. Unlike the Jordan-era 15-game playoffs, or the pre-1980s eras 8 game playoffs.

And what do you know, we have another "can't have it both ways" situation here: You mentioned that the Heat were the favorites in the 2013 finals. But the Thunder were the favorites in the 2012 finals. So if the 2013 Spurs not being the favorites doesn't make them a super team, then what exactly does the 2012's Thunder status as the favorites over the monster, ultra super team trio of LeBron-Wade-Bosh make them?

[Axe]

I'm not using the Spurs 12-2 record as any proof as whether to they were a super team or not, I just love pointing out the hypocrisy in how the haters say the 2016 Warriors were a "regular season only" team (even though they made the finals), whereas the 2013 Spurs were dominant in the playoffs. So which counts when it comes to determining a super team - the regular season or the playoffs? Can't have it both ways. Even though the 2013 Spurs and the 2016 Warriors were great in both the regular season and the playoffs.

They were both great teams either way but tbh, there are lots of other conference champions with similar runs as well before reaching and falling in the finals. The warriors, in particular, were already a dynasty in the making before the 2016 finals ended.

Yes, LeBron really needed Bosh's and Ray Allen's 0 points combined in 49 minutes of game 7 to win the championship.
If you're going to point out what happened in game 6, then well, LeBron hit a clutch 3 pointer before Ray Allen's 3 pointer.

Is your reaction with banal sarcasm really that necessary in an attempt to deflect the point i made earlier?

Lebron performed greatly, yes, but aside from ray allen's three i was also talking about bosh's key block against danny green's three that would have sent that game into another overtime. You didn't need to bring up some of their shortcomings just to show that he did all the carrying for them. They had some crucial contributions at least.

Holy shit, you're right. I forgot to add Pop.

So LeBron went against:

Duncan
Parker
Manu
Kawhi
and an all-time great coach in Pop

And still beat this super team in an all-time great game 7 performance while lifting the Finals MVP trophy.

The very same team that swept the cavs in '07 sans kawhi. What do you expect?

Their only obstacle in the playoffs were the Durant-Wesbtrook Thunder. Who were a near-super team themselves. And the Warriors did end up beating them.

And It's not that the Warriors didn't live up to it, it's that this happened:



LeBron had to do something that has never happened not just any finals series, but any playoff series ever to just barely beat the 73-win Warriors in 7. Think about it, even all those random 3-0 first round sweeps that lasted only 3 games in the 80s and 90s never had a player lead both teams in all categories, yet LeBron did it in a finals series that lasted 7 games.

Obviously, that's the most spectacular performance lebron ever had in the postseason. Only the warriors took them to seven games (after they almost got ripped by okc) that year but dub stans and his haters will just whine then point out about how dray went missing in g5 after he got suspended for flagrant foul and then curry's injury, which i don't know if it's true. But anyway, i don't care about that since i still cherish that moment they beat them.

However, since he was leading a party to the finals filled with bunch of scrubs not named love and irving, of course lebron will come out to be prominent as usual because he was the finals veteran there. Like i said, even lue as their head coach was a scrub and it's given that the disparity between him and most of his teammates is just great. He didn't have a teammate there as useful or good back then like ad is right now. So he had to shoulder most of the load.

They didn't make more finals because they let go of Harden left after they lost. So we'll never know how good they would've been, all we know is that this is how good they were their last season together:

Durant - All-NBA 1st team, 2nd in MVP voting, leading scorer
Westbrook - All-NBA 2nd team
Harden - 6th man of the year, averaged 26 ppg next season as the 1st option
Ibaka - All-defensive 1st team, handful of votes away from DPOY

We may never know but regardless, in okc's first season without harden still saw them win 60 games in the rs. Unfortunately, westbrook went out in the first round against his rockets so their postseason just ended prematurely against the grizzlies in the wcsf.

Don't forget, that 66-game season still had a full, 16-game playoffs following it. Unlike the Jordan-era 15-game playoffs, or the pre-1980s eras 8 game playoffs.

So titles obtained under the past playoff formats wouldn't count just for that reason alone? Talk about some spoiled double standards, dude.

[Axe]

And what do you know, we have another "can't have it both ways" situation here: You mentioned that the Heat were the favorites in the 2013 finals. But the Thunder were the favorites in the 2012 finals. So if the 2013 Spurs not being the favorites doesn't make them a super team, then what exactly does the 2012's Thunder status as the favorites over the monster, ultra super team trio of LeBron-Wade-Bosh make them?

You mean the thunder were the favorites when they faced there because the whole league saw the heat triumvirate lose against dirk or jason terry-led mavs in the trio's first year together?

[Hey Yo]

Neither were super teams. Okc were puppies and never won shit. Warriors were great but I'd hardly call steph, klay and dray a super team. They were very good and just played smarter than everyone else.

They kicked veteran ass with a record of 12-3 to get to the Finals.

Are you suggesting that the West was overrated? OKC had no business being in the Finals with their 2 All-NBA players (3x reigning scoring champ), 6MOY and runner up DPOY who also was All-Defensive first team? They sucked and just got lucky? Is that what you're saying??

[8Ball]

LeBron beating a 73 win team really rankles the Jordanites.

- 73>72 so the best regular season team of all time is no longer a Jordan team.

- Then LeBron goes God mode in game 5 6 7 against a team better than Jordan's 96 Bulls.

That's the bottom line. Those 2 facts hurt Jordanites the most. That's why they keep whining about how 2016 Warriors weren't a super team.

Other facts Jordanites don't like:

LeBron beat a team with 3 All NBA players in 2016. First time ever a team had 3 all nba players.

Curry was unanimous mvp and LeBron rekt him and made him look small.