Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops

Go Back   Message Board Basketball Forum - InsideHoops > InsideHoops Main Basketball Forums > NBA Forum

NBA Forum NBA Message Board - NBA Fan Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-22-2011, 10:07 PM   #16
FourthTenor
Banned
 
FourthTenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,781
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.O.A.T
Critical question...

Then why have the same eleven players won 45 of the last 60 NBA Championships?


Which eleven players? Are you counting Robert Horry and James Posey and Derrick Fisher and Dennis Rodman and Sam Cassell? Or only specific guys you think deserve more credit than others? I don't understand what you're saying about this 11 players thing. It makes no sense.

Have you ever noticed that its the same FRANCHISES that seem to always be in title contention? Even as the players come and go? You dont think there's anything to that? You think its coincidence that so many legends played in Boston? Or do you think perhaps the organizations commitment to fielding a great team made a lot of players INTO legends who otherwise would have just been good players on bad teams?

That stuff has nothing to do with a players talent. If you cant compare two players, then just shut up. Why does everyone think they have to jump into an argument just for the sake of it if theyre not even gonna say something sensible??? Is Rasheed Wallace better than Barkley cuz he's got a ring? Seriously, stop. Jason Williams is better than John Stockton?

Use your brains and your words if you have any to make a legit comparison. Don't cop whenever you WANT someone to win the argument (for instance kobe) by saying "oh, hes got rings! rings rings ringssss!!!!"
FourthTenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2011, 10:48 PM   #17
DaHeezy
NBA lottery pick
 
DaHeezy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,913
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
Championship teams are always far more about the team than any one player. Look at the Bulls records during Jordan's retirement. Still a very good team. And if it had been Pippen who retired for two years, they would almost assuredly have not won a title during those years as was the case when Jordan was out.

A couple years ago I remember the Lakers started the season without Pau Gasol and were like 15-2, and then had a mid-season stretch without Kobe and went somethin like 5-1 but won the title. Every championship team is LOADED. Ok? Period.

So tell me, if Jordan had been drafted to a crap franchise who never surrounded him with talent, then what? Say he doesnt win titles. Is he suddenly not in the conversation with Magic and Bird and Kareem and Shaq etc.? Even if he possessed all the same skills, same work ethic, same stats, same intensity etc. but never reached the summit because there were always better TEAMS in the way of his TEAM?

It is an indisputable fact that TEAMS win championships, yet practically every
brainless fool on this site applies the "Tony Korheiser Method of Anti-Analysis" and just bleet the word "rings" any time someone asks them to make a comparison. Kornheiser doesnt even watch sports any more, so he has no arguments to make. He has absolutely nothing to contribute to a discussion. So every single argument just comes down to "rings" because thats something you can just quickly quantify and if someone disputes it just say "you play to win the game" and basically make a stubborn ass of yourself while sticking to your guns.

That seems to be what people here do. I rarely see comparisons of players in terms of their games and skills and whatnot, but rather just a listing of what their teams did or didnt do?

Yeah, guess what? This is another thread where I'm calling 99% of you retarded. Enjoy.

I've actually preached this my whole time on ISH. People are so quick to defend Jordan but fail to recognize the greatness of his team and coach. Only time that it even changes is if the comparison is between the Bulls as a franchise. Very double standards.

My personal beliefs is that with all of Jordan's talents, he was fortunate enough to be in the right situation. This is not to say he isn't one of the most talented players to live, but saying that team success had more to do with Jordan than Jordan being Jordan.
DaHeezy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2011, 10:53 PM   #18
andgar923
soundcloud.com/agua-1
 
andgar923's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 18,251
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

People failing to realize that MJ joined a horrible team and MADE THE BULLS.

End of thread.
andgar923 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2011, 10:56 PM   #19
FourthTenor
Banned
 
FourthTenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,781
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by andgar923
People failing to realize that MJ joined a horrible team and MADE THE BULLS.

End of thread.


iLOL
FourthTenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2011, 10:56 PM   #20
97 bulls
NBA Superstar
 
97 bulls's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 13,985
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHeezy
I've actually preached this my whole time on ISH. People are so quick to defend Jordan but fail to recognize the greatness of his team and coach. Only time that it even changes is if the comparison is between the Bulls as a franchise. Very double standards.

My personal beliefs is that with all of Jordan's talents, he was fortunate enough to be in the right situation. This is not to say he isn't one of the most talented players to live, but saying that team success had more to do with Jordan than Jordan being Jordan.
I agree with you and fourth terror. I think we shouldn't rank players based on championships cuz then your saying that every plyer has been in the same situation and some succeeded while others failed.

But the main reason that championships are important is cuz its sexy, just like scoring. It doesn't take must knowledge. Just look at the best pllayer on the best team and crown them. I think its an elemetary way of thinking and should be treated as such.
97 bulls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2011, 10:57 PM   #21
andgar923
soundcloud.com/agua-1
 
andgar923's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 18,251
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
iLOL

Facts are funny to you?
andgar923 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-22-2011, 11:08 PM   #22
DaHeezy
NBA lottery pick
 
DaHeezy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,913
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 bulls
I agree with you and fourth terror. I think we shouldn't rank players based on championships cuz then your saying that every plyer has been in the same situation and some succeeded while others failed.
But the main reason that championships are important is cuz its sexy, just like scoring. It doesn't take must knowledge. Just look at the best pllayer on the best team and crown them. I think its an elemetary way of thinking and should be treated as such.

Bingo.

We can't clearly define success unless EVERY player ranked had the exact same situation and environment. Jordan did win those championships for the Bulls just the same way the Bulls won it for Jordan.
This is one of the reasons I state the case of Magic being the greatest player.
DaHeezy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 12:53 AM   #23
KG215
NBA Superstar
 
KG215's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 14,115
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHeezy
Bingo.

We can't clearly define success unless EVERY player ranked had the exact same situation and environment. Jordan did win those championships for the Bulls just the same way the Bulls won it for Jordan.
This is one of the reasons I state the case of Magic being the greatest player.

First, let me state that I don't think you're completely wrong (except about Magic being the GOAT). However, you have to have a way to define a player's success and impact while in the NBA. You can create the "every player on a level playing field" environment by ignoring championships, but what is the main goal in the NBA and, for that matter, any other team sport? Winning championships, correct? So, why ignore that when ranking players for historical purposes?

No, one single player doesn't win a championship, but there is absolutely no denying that there are a very elite few players in NBA history that had a greater impact on their teams winning multiple championships. You can go through every dynasty - or even a team like the Pistons who won back-to-back titles - and find a common denominator; every single one of them had 2 or 3 players that played a bigger role in those championships than anyone else. That's not a coincidence. It's not a coincidence that the Bulls were, more or less, a cellar dweller after the Jordan-Pippen-Rodman era was dismantled. Same for the Lakers in the 90's after "Showtime" came to an end. Or the 60's and 80's Celtics after their core was gone. Yes, the team won those championships and, yes, guys like Russell, Magic, Bird, and Jordan had help. However, it's also not a coincidence that the greatest team dynasties in NBA history coincided with those mentioned players and their respective primes.

That leads me to ask you this: if you don't consider Jordan the greatest player because you don't like to put much weight in the number of championships a player won, then why do you consider Magic the greatest player ever? Had he not won five championships and three finals MVP's, would his statistical resume be that much more impressive than anyone else? I know Magic is the quintessential point guard. He did everything. At 6'9" he could pass, rebound, and score. But, ignoring all postseason success, what separates him from Jordan? Sure, Magic was the superior rebounder and passer, but he doesn't even sniff Jordan as a perimeter defender. Is Michael Jordan not the greatest two-way perimeter player in NBA history? Isn't basketball about both ends of the floor? Have we ever seen a guard score as often and as efficiently on offense, while also playing elite defense, the way we saw Michael Jordan do?

In the end, though, I don't understand how some people can and will almost completely ignore championships when determining a player's place in NBA history.

Last edited by KG215 : 05-23-2011 at 12:57 AM.
KG215 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 01:48 AM   #24
G.O.A.T
Scott Hastings Fan
 
G.O.A.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 5,592
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
Which eleven players?

The 11 greatest in NBA history. Jordan, Russell, Mikan, Wilt, Kareem, Magic, Bird, Shaq, Duncan, Kobe and Hakeem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
Are you counting Robert Horry and James Posey and Derrick Fisher and Dennis Rodman and Sam Cassell?

Those guys combined have only been on 15, not 40. A huge difference. Even if you add Sam Jones, Bob Dandridge, Dennis Johnson etc. All the guys who were role to supporting players on great teams, they don't come close to the superstars listed in my 11.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
Or only specific guys you think deserve more credit than others?

Yes. MVP's and team leaders. You don't think they are the most important guys on the team?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
I don't understand what you're saying about this 11 players thing. It makes no sense.

It means that even though the supporting casts for those guys were different from year to year, their teams kept winning and contending for titles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
Have you ever noticed that its the same FRANCHISES that seem to always be in title contention?

Yes, but only when they've had one of those 11 players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
Even as the players come and go? You dont think there's anything to that?

Yes I do. I just understand it's the stars that make the difference, not the role players or the franchise.

Boston titles during Russell's and Birds 26 years = 14.

Boston titles during other 40 years of existence = 3.

Laker titles during years 26 years with Mikan or Kareem and Magic or Kobe and Shaq = 13

Laker titles during other 40 years of existence = 3

Rockets titles with Hakeem = 2

Rockets titles without = 0

Spurs titles in Duncan's 15 years = 4

Spurs titles in other 30 years of existence = 0

Bulls titles in Jordan's 13 years = 6

Bulls titles in other 37 years of existence = 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
You think its coincidence that so many legends played in Boston? Or do you think perhaps the organizations commitment to fielding a great team made a lot of players INTO legends who otherwise would have just been good players on bad teams?

No I think winning titles makes you a legend and I think Bird and Russell give you a better chance to win titles than just about anyone ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
That stuff has nothing to do with a players talent. If you cant compare two players, then just shut up. Why does everyone think they have to jump into an argument just for the sake of it if theyre not even gonna say something sensible???

Don't ask me, you're the one who just said winning titles has nothing to do with a players talent. That's the least sensible comment anyone could ever make regarding basketball.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
Is Rasheed Wallace better than Barkley cuz he's got a ring? Seriously, stop. Jason Williams is better than John Stockton?

What you're not understanding is that those guys didn't have the same role. Had Rasheed or Jason Williams led a team to the title as the teams best player, then yes they'd have a very strong argument over those other guys.


Look, I just asked you a question. If you can't answer it, you need to rethink your hypothesis.

The 11 players that I believe are the greatest 11 ever have won 75% of the NBA titles (as their teams best player) since the BAA/NBL merger.

My opinion is that this happens because having a truly great player makes it easier for other guys to play roles that suit their strengths. The great players aren't necessarily the ones who are the best at one skill or another. Or who have the greatest combined skill set. Rather the truly great players are the ones who can identify and supply exactly what their team needs on any given night for them to get a victory.

Just my take.
G.O.A.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 02:20 AM   #25
FourthTenor
Banned
 
FourthTenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,781
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.O.A.T
Had Rasheed or Jason Williams led a team to the title as the teams best player, then yes they'd have a very strong argument over those other guys.


I'm sorry, who makes the distinction as to who the best player is? You think someone on the Pistons was definitively more important than Rasheed?

I'm sorry, what exactly was Kobe Bryant winning as the "lead dog" between Shaq and Pau's Laker tenures? He wasn't winning jack. So you're telling me if Memphis decides to trade Pau elsewhere and the Lakers dont win any more titles, that changes the kind of player Kobe was? And if Kobe wasn't winning anything before Pau shows up, who decides that he gets to be the "best player"? Some guy with an agenda? Last I checked, the formula for the Lakers championship success was dumping it into their "twin tower" advantage during the playoffs and everyone except Kobe sackriders was acknowledging that.

Let me get this straight. Because you're saying Kobe won titles as the "most important player" so then why was he not winning them for 4 straight years before Pau showed up? I mean if thats what its about, just the best player, then what does it matter who his teammates were?

Oh? It DOES matter ENORMOUSLY who his teammates were? And there's a huge gap in how consistently organizations acquire and retain good players?

Dude, your argument is an embarrassment. Not trying to be insulting, I'm just saying the logic is AWFUL.

Kobe's skillset and basketball ability doesnt change a LICK whether Pau gets traded their or not. But because Pau just HAPPENED to be traded there it ended up affecting how you compare Kobe to other basketball players? That's senseless. It's dumb. It's garbage.

I only picked out that one line because I don't wanna go on for ever bit by bit, but the whole was just drivel. You SHOULD be better than that. Unless you have an agenda.
FourthTenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 02:27 AM   #26
G.O.A.T
Scott Hastings Fan
 
G.O.A.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Metro Detroit
Posts: 5,592
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
I'm sorry, who makes the distinction as to who the best player is? You think someone on the Pistons was definitively more important than Rasheed?

I'm sorry, what exactly was Kobe Bryant winning as the "lead dog" between Shaq and Pau's Laker tenures? He wasn't winning jack. So you're telling me if Memphis decides to trade Pau elsewhere and the Lakers dont win any more titles, that changes the kind of player Kobe was? And if Kobe wasn't winning anything before Pau shows up, who decides that he gets to be the "best player"? Some guy with an agenda? Last I checked, the formula for the Lakers championship success was dumping it into their "twin tower" advantage during the playoffs and everyone except Kobe sackriders was acknowledging that.

Let me get this straight. Because you're saying Kobe won titles as the "most important player" so then why was he not winning them for 4 straight years before Pau showed up? I mean if thats what its about, just the best player, then what does it matter who his teammates were?

Oh? It DOES matter ENORMOUSLY who his teammates were? And there's a huge gap in how consistently organizations acquire and retain good players?

Dude, your argument is an embarrassment. Not trying to be insulting, I'm just saying the logic is AWFUL.

Kobe's skillset and basketball ability doesnt change a LICK whether Pau gets traded their or not. But because Pau just HAPPENED to be traded there it ended up affecting how you compare Kobe to other basketball players? That's senseless. It's dumb. It's garbage.

I only picked out that one line because I don't wanna go on for ever bit by bit, but the whole was just drivel. You SHOULD be better than that. Unless you have an agenda.

You just can't hang. I'll let everyone else handle this. It's not a big deal, but you're just not that smart. I don't have the energy to talk to you. I know you'll never give a response that's anything but disappointing. I have to put you on ignore.
G.O.A.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 02:36 AM   #27
FourthTenor
Banned
 
FourthTenor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,781
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.O.A.T
You just can't hang. I'll let everyone else handle this. It's not a big deal, but you're just not that smart. I don't have the energy to talk to you. I know you'll never give a response that's anything but disappointing. I have to put you on ignore.


You came.
You saw.
You were retarded.
FourthTenor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 07:45 AM   #28
BigBalla44
I don't get picked last at the park anymore
 
BigBalla44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 223
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FourthTenor
You came.
You saw.
You were retarded.

OP is a *******.
BigBalla44 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 07:51 AM   #29
Nobler
The Noble
 
Nobler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 535
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Sergio tryin to step to GOAT GTFO trash ass *****
Nobler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2011, 07:58 AM   #30
DMAVS41
NBA Legend and Hall of Famer
 
DMAVS41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 29,662
Default Re: If Michael Jordan played for the Nuggets or Hornets he'd have no titles... then what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by G.O.A.T
Critical question...

Then why have the same eleven players won 45 of the last 60 NBA Championships?

The problem with some of those players is that you can't ignore the circumstances they were in.

Shaq and Kobe played together for 8 years.

Kareem and Magic won 5 titles together

So just right there 4 of your 11 best players of all time played significant time together.

Not to mention the loaded rosters of Russell's and Bird's celtics.

Its a combination of everything. Some players have been much more fortunate than others. You have to account for that. You really think Hakeem only has two titles if he played 8 years with Kobe and a few years with Wade? Of course not.

And if you put MJ on the teams that Allen Iverson had he probably has 1 title at most.

Take Lebron his first 7 years. You really think thats a fair comparison to Kobe's first 7 years in terms of ability to win?

Its all about circumstances and how you do given those circumstances. Which is why after 2 or 3 titles people will rank Lebron over Kobe.

We all know the truth. All of the players you mentioned had all time great help. Really the only guys that didn't were Duncan and Hakeem. All of those other players were definitely great, but were fortunate enough to play on some of the most loaded teams of all time.

Its not random. The best teams usually win in the NBA. Jordan didn't get magically better in year 7. Hakeem didn't get magically better in year 10. Shaq didn't get magically better in year 8. Their teams all improved around them.

And if Lebron/Wade win it this year? They didn't just magically get better. Their team did.

Not sure why this is so lost on people. Its been a constant throughout NBA history.
DMAVS41 is online now   Reply With Quote
This NBA Basketball News Website Sponsored by:


Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46 PM.






NBA BASKETBALL FORUM KEY LINKS:

NBA Basketball

NBA Rumors

Basketball Blog

NBA Videos

Search Site

FOLLOW US
Twitter
Facebook
Instagram
YouTube
















Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. Terms of Use/Service | Privacy Policy