Shaq destroyed the NBA early 2000 because he had top 3 player in the league Kobe Bryant (top 10 all time talent) next to him. That Kobe didn't exist from 1997-1999.


Jordan never had to face a team like this in the 90s:

Team------------- Year------G---- W----L------ W–L% Finish Result
San Antonio 2000–01 82 58 24 .707 1st in Midwest Lost in Conference Finals
San Antonio 2001–02 82 58 24 .707 1st in Midwest Lost in Conference Semifinals
San Antonio 2002–03 82 60 22 .732 1st in Midwest Won NBA Championship
San Antonio 2003–04 82 57 25 .695 2nd in Midwest Lost in Conference Semifinals
San Antonio 2004–05 82 59 23 .720 1st in Southwest Won NBA Championship
San Antonio 2005–06 82 63 19 .768 1st in Southwest Lost in Conference Semifinals
San Antonio 2006–07 82 58 24 .707 2nd in Southwest Won NBA Championship
San Antonio 2007–08 82 56 26 .683 2nd in Southwest Lost in Conference Finals


Made the finals 4 out of 9 years while having to battle prime Shaq.

You co-opt Montreal Corp and 3ball who both make terrible arguments.


3ball turned into an Uncle Tom and Montreal Corp is barely legible in his writing. Great bunch of scholars on your team.

Actually I made it on purpose lol ....



You bring up okc in 2011 right ???
Harden was 12 ppg , second season , bragging the mavs beating them were awesome ...
Russel was just starting to emerge as well .first year all star in 2011 , exactly like kobe .
A 55 win team . 2 all stars .

Laker in 1998 shaq /kobe was a freakn 61 win team .
They had 4 all star that year !
The jazz Spey them .

The year after , Spurs wins freakn title .
So you think in 2 month during summer what happened if you think they sucked ?
Duncan in his first year was an all star ....
He was already a freakn 21 ppg/11 rbn /2 assist ffs with a great coach ( in case an idiot bring up Phil Jackson factor ) .
A 56 win team .
The jazz crush them 4-1

Claiming the mav would be in the best in the 1990 is non sense .
Jason Kidd played during that era dam it .
Is Jason kid better at 38 or 25 ?


Every dam reason you speak about weak teams during Jordan era were present during Lebron era ....

Get real , the loss of Lebron vs mav was a freakn joke !

Ps: and that monster team in 2004 lost !

Listen ... I’m not the one claiming the players in the 1990 sucked , you are ....

FYI , I always claim Duncan had a much tougher career than Lebron .
There is a reason Lebron get swept often in the finals , he was playing in a freakn joke conference for a decade .
Infinitely worst than MJ .

It’s you guys that keep bringing up the 2005/15 players are much better than mj time while a lot of them were playing in the 1990s already ....
It make no sense at all

And btw , Jordan did faced incredible strong team , wtf your talking about , he lost vs them even when mj was the best player around
It was called the 80s .
But since a lot of you think players in a higher decade are always better .
Magic, bird and kareem must of been terrible in today’s game and probably in the 1990 and early 2000 ...

this makes no sense. and if it is common that female citizens of the richest country in the history of mankind need to turn tricks to get by then there is clearly a problem with our society.

regardless, you are making **** up as usual. Lebron sure as **** doesnt advertise the things his mom did. nor does he get into details of his childhood. it is sugarcoated, glossed over, and euphemistic. thats bc our society does not accept such actions despite making it necessary for millions of people to engage in them to survive.

lebron got swept in the finals bc he dragged sasha pavlovic, boobie gibson, and drew gooden to the finals. those were the top 4 in minutes played. Mo Willaims wasnt on the team yet. and Varejao was not in his prime.

that was an all time great performance to drag those scrubs to the finals. twog uses selective stats to try to show that those players were at all competent when they were clearly worse than replacement level.

Ah wittle TienTien. You seem to have forgotten the context of the discussion of which your tiny TienTien mind is arguing. And your feathers are already ruffled. This does not bode well for u.

Remember, the claim was that the 90’s was awful and the 2000 and 2010’s were ultra elite. Not that the Lakers or any one specific player was good/bad in one specific year like 1998. You seem to have tripped over yourself and booped your nose on your LeStrawMan.

You see TienTien. Since players like Duncan, Shaq, Kobe, Kidd, and various others (there are a lot of others, since there is obviously a lot of overlap in players between 1999 and 2000 lmao) played across both decades, and quite literally NONE of them dominated the 90’s (the terrible era) (well um, because Jordan did haha) but did extremely well and put up hall of fame careers in the 00’s (the ultra elite bron bron era) that immediately refutes with extreme prejudice that the 90’s sucked in terms of basketball talent and the 00’s was some kind of golden era because the sweet succulence of LeBron’s aura fueled the fire of a thousand LeBron stans.

Sorry TienTien. Did not mean to dismantle ur strawman so easily. Plz to be applying the full force of ur IQ to understanding the actual argument thank u lol.

Just so we’re clear, you are both kinda right.

LeBron got swept by the Spurs that year because, in part, his support was trash in 2007. But he also MADE THE FINALS that year in the first place because the East was completely terrible. The best player LeBron went up against in that playoff run in the East was probably Antawn Jamison.

I.e. it’s quite a bit easier to drag a terrible team to the finals when your competition consists of past his prime Rasheed Wallace, 34 year old Jason Kidd, and Antonio Daniels. (Related: lol you guys keep saying the 90’s and Hakeem Olajuwon sucked but the 2007 NBA that LeBron “dominated” by getting swept in the finals had these players in the East. No wait really lololol.)

Wait what lol. Olajuwon was obviously at his peak in ‘93 and ‘94. What are you talking about?

I don’t understand what you’re saying about something being “a point in favor” about how tough and competitive the league was. Someone was saying the ‘94 Rockets were terrible. That was obviously super wrong and I showed that. I didn’t say anything about the non-Rockets in 1994.

Wait, wat? Antawn Jamison had a 1.3 BPM that year. He wasn’t even the best player on his own team (Arenas had a 4.7 BPM and averaged 28/5/6). LeBron also faced Kidd, Vince Carter, Billups, Rasheed, Ben Wallace, Hamilton…hell, even the old version of Chris Webber was better than Jamison.

I’m not sure why Kidd’s age 33 season is somehow trying be used against him. He’s a Hall of Famer and one of the GOAT PGs with a game that aged well. He had very good numbers that year. Elite players crush at age 33 routinely…MJ, LeBron, Chris Paul, Curry etc.

Why was Olajuwon "at his peak" in 1994 but Dirk "still good but def not peak" in 2011 when they're like one year difference in age? Because he won the MVP? But the whole claim is that he managed to win the title with not much help because the league was very soft. That he also won the MVP at roughly an age where in the very same post that you're all but dismissing Dirk is a obviously a big data point in favour of a soft league.

Players have different aging curves. I’m not looking at age. I’m looking at productivity. (Side note: looking at actual productivity and career success rather than eye test and biased personal subjective opinion is why I think Jordan > LeBron as well.)

Olajuwon was quite clearly at his best around ‘93 and ‘94. Dirk was at his best around ‘05 to ‘07 with a bit of a drop off after that (but still quite good; which I specifically said). After ‘11, the year he and 38 year old Jason Kidd beat LeBron’s superteam, the drop off was more pronounced.

The “whole claim” was not that the Rockets won in ‘94 because the league was soft. The “whole claim” was that the ‘94 Rockets were bad (Edit: specifically that they were a “garbage team”). Seriously, go back and read the post.

Sigh. Arenas didn’t even play in that series.

I’m not talking about regular season stats/“best player”. I’m talking about who LeBron played in the actual playoffs, since we’re talking about LeBron making the finals with scrubs. Antawn was quite clearly one of the best, if not the best, performances he went up against in all of his Eastern playoff series that year.

Relative to most championship team supporting casts, this team is garbage. Hakeem was a one man team that won that championship. Their number 2 scorer in the playoffs was Maxwell, who shot .376 from the field.

Hakeem led his team in all of points/rebounds/assists/blocks/steals in the playoffs. His cast was complete garbage and he did a bigger carry job than Jordan ever did.

Robert Horry 9.9 ppg/5.4 rpg/2.9 apg
Otis Thorpe (a Dennis Rodman type at best)
Vernon Maxwell 39% fg shooter
Kenny Smith 11.6 ppg/4.6apg/1.8 rpg
Mario Elie 9ppg/3apg/3rpg?
Sam Cassell 6.7 ppg/2.9apg/2.0 rpg


Put Toni Kukoc on that team and he becomes the 2nd option.

All time great performance beating 2 .500 team of 41 wins and a 53 win teams while being a 50 win team himself ?
Yup amazing...o0



If Lebron had to face celtics and pistons of the 80 , he would never pass the first round .
And lebron got swept in the final for a reason , he face a real good team .
It isn’t about being great , it’s about being lucky to be in a trash conference to reach a final ....

Thx proving my point.

Lebron is amazing for beating that in 07 with a 50 win team but get no knock down not reaching the final with a 66 win team in 2009 ?
Makes perfect sense ....

Victor keep saying Jordan had weak final Opponent to drag down his accomplishments but look how quick victor is to praise Lebron accomplishments vs trash in his own conference ...


Get real ffs ...
This is exactly why winning a final and reaching a final has 2 totally different meaning .

Mj dominate the league , Lebron dominate the east ...

Ps: to be clear , it’s good what Lebron did regardless but stop comparing this as if it’s as great as winning a title ...

It’s not really relevant to anything but Jamison wasn’t even a top 5 player in the that regular season, the playoffs, or historically speaking from a quality standpoint. The guy was barely a positive player for his career. He peaked as like an average starter. No need to make it one way when it’s the other. In what universe is Antawn Jamison better than those guys? Kidd, Billups, and Carter are Hall of Famers who made the all star team in 2007 and had far better stats than Jamison. The Pistons team alone had 4-5 guys > Jamison (career and that season)

In 2011:
Durant was 1st team all-nba
Westbrook was 2nd team all-nba

In 2012:
Durant was 1st team all-nba
Westbrook was 2nd team all-nba
Ibaka was 1st team all defense and 2nd in DPOY voting.
Harden was 6th man of the year.

Arguing with you is having to go back into history and teach you what actually happened in certain years.

It's a waste of time.

All that Matt R. full force IQ and he forgets to use it to remember what happened in NBA history! Thankfully you have Tien to lecture you.

Kobe was a 18 year old rookie in the 97. Kobe not being able to dominate at 18 years old is because of era right? Not because he is actually 18 years old straight out of high school. Lol Matt R.
Duncan was a rookie in the 98 and won in 1999. Duncan not winning in 1998 was because of Jordan, except Duncan was literally just a rookie, and Duncan didn't even face Jordan. Lol Matt R.

Shaq beat Jordan in 1995. So how did Jordan stop Shaq from advancing to the finals in 1995? You said this:
Looks like you are wrong again.


You wrote up a few paragraphs feeling all good about yourself and it turns out to be another Matt R. total limp flop. Time for you to join 3ball in the loonie bin.

Tim Duncan was unable to dominate in the 90s according to Matt R and only dominated in the 2000s. Let's look at his career a little closer.

Oh look! He never spent much time in the 90s! How can this be? But wait there's more! Matt R. says Tim Duncan could not dominate in the 90s literally because of the 1 year bolded below!

Year Team GP GS MPG FG% 3P% FT% RPG APG SPG BPG PPG
1997–98 San Antonio 82* 82* 39.1 .549 .000 .662 11.9 2.7 .7 2.5 21.1
1998–99† San Antonio 50* 50* 39.3 .495 .143 .690 11.4 2.4 .9 2.5 21.7
1999–00 San Antonio 74 74 38.9 .490 .091 .761 12.4 3.2 .9 2.2 23.2
2000–01 San Antonio 82 82* 38.7 .499 .259 .618 12.2 3.0 .9 2.3 22.2
2001–02 San Antonio 82 82 40.6 .508 .100 .799 12.7 3.7 .7 2.5 25.5
2002–03† San Antonio 81 81 39.3 .513 .273 .710 12.9 3.9 .7 2.9 23.3
2003–04 San Antonio 69 68 36.6 .501 .167 .599 12.4 3.1 .9 2.7 22.3
2004–05† San Antonio 66 66 33.4 .496 .333 .670 11.1 2.7 .7 2.6 20.3
2005–06 San Antonio 80 80 34.8 .484 .400 .629 11.0 3.2 .9 2.0 18.6
2006–07† San Antonio 80 80 34.1 .546 .111 .637 10.6 3.4 .8 2.4 20.0
2007–08 San Antonio 78 78 34.0 .497 .000 .730 11.3 2.8 .7 1.9 19.3
2008–09 San Antonio 75 75 33.6 .504 .000 .692 10.7 3.5 .5 1.7 19.3


Oh no! That was because of Jordan! The cobwebs are starting to grow in Matt R.'s head and I have to spend 90% of the argument opening up a history book.

Your stupidest post ever. No one chooses his parents.

Why you add okc 2012 ?
We are talking about how the mavs were awesome and would dominate the 90 because they beat 2011 okc from your POV ....

Which as you showed had not much compare to the “trash” lakers of :
4 all stars :
Shaq a monster.
Kobe all star that year
Eddie Jones all star and all defensive second team
Nick van excel an all star that year
A 61 win team .
I mean seriously, the lakers that year Crush 4-1 the supersonic , a 61 team too ffs .

Now 3 all star plus shaq might seem weak to you but still they got swept by the even “weaker” jazz ...
And the jazz beat through Hakeem ,drexler, Barkley ...
And they crush 4-1 the Spurs with Robinson/Duncan both all star that year !
(the nba champion of the following year fwiw)

Wtf the mavs got over those teams in the 90s? and even 2011 okc ?
Dirk/Jason terry 33 years old (not even been once an all star or anything else) / Kidd at 37 years old ?
being a top team in the 90 is spewing nonsense .
That was just 1 year , disregarding the east .....
The nba was very talented in the 90

Lebron was just terrible with a stack team , get real ...

So what rookie or not ?
What magic did in his rookie year ?

When u speak of player like Jordan , magic, bird, Duncan in their early 20s, they were already great regardless being rookie or not .
Yeah that help not being 18 as a rookie from high school .


When I compare the road and era Duncan had to go through (like mj in the 80) to succeed and winning championship
(not just focusing on the finals )
and than I hear Lebron was less successful because he faced SOME years tougher opponents in the finals and so had a tougher career to succeed....
Im like wtf are you talking about ...
Lebron had it like 5 time easier globally over Duncan and Jordan and on top of that , Lebron had the luxury to have the teammates he wanted it in a trash conference and still failed in spot he shouldn’t have !!!

MontrealCorp, you can't even follow along. There is some serious imbalance between your ears. You don't understand english conversations.

Matt R. said Duncan couldn't dominate in the 90s because of Jordan -> Duncan was a rookie in 1998 and won in 1999 -> So that Matt R. statement was completely false.

That's all there is to it.

Marion and Chandler were no slouches.

I think his point , well mine for sure , a lot here as the habit of thinking the players in 90s sucked , explaining why Jordan dominate ....

Jason Kidd , Kevin garnet, Duncan , Shaq , etc . were already good enough to be all stars and did played against Jordan .
They all succeed at very high level in the 2000 and beyond .


So the concept of the 90 of being weak is garbage .
Cause lot of players overlap those decades.
It is not a 5/10 year span that would prevent a player like the all time great
To dominate in a following decade...

The point being made is that , MJ was the best and it was not even close in the 90 , and it was not because of lack of talents .