Err, earth to vert48 -- clearly I'm aware that it's not a "fact" that Chicago would have beaten LA had they met up again in the Finals. I was using it to express an extremely high degree of probability. In taking issue with that, I assumed you were taking issue with the idea that there is a very high probability that Chicago would have beat LA again. If you don't think that I know what the word "fact" means, then you must not have read many of my posts.
If you are aware that it is not a fact, then why the hell are you arguing it is? It is easy to make all the arguments for why the Bulls would have won in any finals rematch with the Lakers, but no one has any idea what the Lakers would have done if Magic had played for another 3-4 years.
Maybe the Lakers would have made a blockbuster trade in order to compete with the Bulls. When the Lakers and Celtics were going back and forth in the 80's, they changed their teams each year in order to compete with each other. Is it a fact that they would not have done this, or is it just your opinion?
If you are aware that it is not a fact, then why the hell are you arguing it is? It is easy to make all the arguments for why the Bulls would have won in any finals rematch with the Lakers, but no one has any idea what the Lakers would have done if Magic had played for another 3-4 years.
Maybe the Lakers would have made a blockbuster trade in order to compete with the Bulls. When the Lakers and Celtics were going back and forth in the 80's, they changed their teams each year in order to compete with each other. Is it a fact that they would not have done this, or is it just your opinion?
Short of a Magic-led Lakers team acquiring a Barkley, DRob, or Dream, I don't think there's any way they could have beat Chicago. But you're right in that I don't know with certainty that that wouldn't have happened.
Short of a Magic-led Lakers team acquiring a Barkley, DRob, or Dream, I don't think there's any way they could have beat Chicago. But you're right in that I don't know with certainty that that wouldn't have happened.
Short of a Magic-led Lakers team acquiring a Barkley, DRob, or Dream, I don't think there's any way they could have beat Chicago. But you're right in that I don't know with certainty that that wouldn't have happened.
I agree that it would probably have taken 1 of those 3 to get it done.
I don't think its fair to compare football because there is no such thing as the GOAT NFL player. Each and every position is so different and vital, they deserve their own GOAT and if thats the case Jerry Rice is by far the greatest reciever ever.
I don't think its fair to compare football because there is no such thing as the GOAT NFL player. Each and every position is so different and vital, they deserve their own GOAT and if thats the case Jerry Rice is by far the greatest reciever ever.
Also highly depends on what you consider makes up a GOAT.
If marketability, overall influence is considered, MJ takes the cake.
Basketball alone, he is the greatest but not by much. You can make a case for Russell, wilt, magic & kareem.
Hockey - Gretzky
Tennis - Federer is obviously taking it eventually and He was the last man to beat Sampras on a surface where Sampras was practically invincible. Sampras was at his peak and Federer was nothing but a start up at the time.
Boxing - again if marketability and infuence is included, Ali is it. If not, cases can be made.
Football - Pele hands down.
Womens tennis - I think Steffi Graf would be the greatest singles player of all time. Martina and the others can make a case if doubles success is included.
Thanks. I cant wait for the mega fight against DLH on May 5th. Although I was hoping Floyd can fight Shane Mosley first. That would be an awesome fight before the DLH showdown.
all you people getting on him about Gretzky being the undeniable GOAT are DEAD WRONG. Y'all must be Americans, or just stupid hockey fans. Mario Lemiuex has a strong case as the GOAT and if his career was not ended short due to injuries he may have surpassed Gretzky.
but his career was cut short and he did not surpass gretsky so he can't even be in the conversation....
This reply is to those who thinks Ali is the GOAT in Boxing.
Boxing is divided in weight classes. Most casual fans only look at the heavyweights because they provide the most knockouts. Some elite fighters in the lower weight classes will never fight against a heavyweight. Thus a mythical standard of ranking who's the best in boxing was created, called the Pound for Pound (P4P).
Right now Floyd Mayweather sit on top of the P4P list dispite him fighting at 140lbs.
So in determing who's the GOAT, you would have to say, who is the best P4P fighter of all time.
The answer to that would be Sugar Ray Robinson, not Ali.
