Fun Lebron James stat.

He's played more career play-off games than Joel Embiid has played regular season games.

Okay, I know I said I wasn't going to do this, but here I go.

This is what I mean by cherry-picking.

Less than 48 hours ago you used BPM in a way to prove that Toni=Wade.

Yet, you didn't for Reggie (BPM has Reggie 47 all time, a more reasonable - though I think still too high - location for Reggie on all time lists).

Anyway I promise I won't engage again. Best for both of us I think

This is an example of you simply not understanding basketball stats. BPM is a decent stat if you want to compare two players over specific time periods. Of course Wade's career >>>> Kukoc's career, but it doesn't matter how good Wade was in 2006 and 2009 for the purposes of Lebron's Finals runs with Wade. But BPM or any rate stat for that matter isn't a good measure of career value (which is the relevant metric, given that we're talking about how draft picks turned out) because it penalizes players with long careers and overrates players who either didn't hit or didn't fully play out the decline phase of their career. I haven't even looked but I'm sure whatever ranking you have is going to have far too many mediocre active players in the ranking. The cumulative value version of BPM is VORP, so if I wanted to be consistent, I would've used VORP. Reggie Miller ranks 22nd in career VORP. I mean come on, it's okay to admit that you were wrong.

Why is 47th a more reasonable spot for Reggie Miller than 30th? And why is it too high? Given your, uhm, performance, in this thread, I'm somewhat skeptical that you have the background knowledge to make this assessment but I'd be interested in hearing your take regardless. Keep in mind, this doesn't really matter for the purposes of what was being discussed - a draft class that produced David Robinson, Scottie Pippen and Reggie Miller is a strong class regardless of their precise ranking.

Fwiw candybar, if you get Reggie Miller top 30 all time with the stats you use to form a conclusion , maybe just maybe at one point you might reconsider the validity of your stats or consider something is incomplete in the data you uses...

But than again I’m not surprise when someone like yourself claims that , being surrounded by greatness shouldn’t make you better in the long run .

Bulls fans used to make excuses for Pippen and talk him up at every opportunity. Now they trash him relentlessly because they think it makes Jordan sound better haha I love it

I'm just quoting someone else's research - I don't have the time or inclination to try to figure out whether Reggie Miller is the 32nd best player in history or 48th best, it really doesn't matter to me. Reggie Miller being an all-time great shouldn't be a controversial take (and the precise ranking is irrelevant given the context). It's mind-boggling to me someone who unironically quotes PPG all the time as a shorthand for players' value is lecturing about the validity of stats however.

You're already surrounded by greatness when you make the NBA. I mean, there are no non-great players in the NBA and you're one of the great players when you're there. And if you're good enough to be considered one of the top prospects, you can find mentorship from top players when they are on the same team or not. Either way, this is a tautology that has no bearing on the GOAT debate. If great players make people around them better, then Lebron, who's one of the best players ever, must've had similar impact on others and if both MJ and Lebron made others around them better. So how is this useful in distinguishing between the two?

The funny thing is that your the one claiming no one but you know how to read stats and evaluate defense value all over , non stopping cherry picking stats to make a point and then you end up saying it doesn’t really matter where the stats end up resulting in ranking ....
It ain’t about lecturing , it’s about common sense of how far some stats you uses makes crazy conclusions ....
And it wasn’t 32 to 48 , it was inside top 30 , like between 21-30 .
If you think players in the top 25 is not much different than top 50 it’s fine .
But maybe it does makes a difference for others .


Anyway , The point was again , you claiming Jordan hindered pippen than help him when it’s clear it ain’t so .

If that was true , no way in hell pippen would of been chosen 5th but clearly spot number 2 .

Anyone with talents and the will to succeed will always do better when having the chance to practice with the best than practice with comparable skills.

Pippen merits all the work he puts in but clearly mj help a lot because no one ever thought pippen when drafted would end up hof and not being chosen earlier when you see the others players ....

I mean seriously, Kenny smith was chosen 6th ....
Miller , grant , all higher than smith lol ...

Clearly the talents pool was blurry in all picks except the number 1 david Robinson .

What on earth are you talking about? I don't personally have Reggie Miller ranked at all and haven't used any stats to come up with this ranking. I said *Backpicks* (i.e. Ben Taylor) has all these players (David Robinson, Scottie Pippen and Reggie Miller) in the top 30. He has Reggie Miller exactly as the 30th most valuable player in history (for winning championships). I mean feel free to refute his analysis (https://backpicks.com/2018/01/18/bac...reggie-miller/) but if you think that's crazy, that's almost certainly due to you not having the background knowledge to understand this.

Again, this is irrelevant nonsense and no one has demonstrated this effect anyway. We know for instance that players are more likely to make the pros if they are older than their peers, which means players do better when they are grouped with younger, worse players, than when they are grouped with older, better players (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_age_effect).

https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/m...-relationship/

Kobe about mj :
“ . I don't get five championships here without him because he guided me so much and gave me so much great advice."

But without mj pippen would of been the super stars he became ?
Yeah right .

Pippen came in the league at 22 and took a lot of years to be the pippen we know of .

Pippen by himself would emerge like that at 25 from nowhere without mj ?
Please .....

Coincidence he became an amazing defender while practicing with a goat scoring machine ?

W.e.....

This is exactly what I meant. As a young potential star in the game, you have access to incredibly high quality mentorship from all-time greats anyway. Kobe was able to get advice from an all-time great player who's seen it all and almost certainly didn't need, for his development, a slightly older and insecure star player on the same team that's also competing with you for shot volume (though he got that too anyway). I mean MJ was 24 when Pippen joined the team as a 22-year old - he was kind of figuring his own way around the league - he wasn't some kind of a fatherly mentor figure.

I mean I guess by this logic, we should really credit James Worthy for MJ's development - he was MJ's senpai in college.

Yeah sure if that makes sense too you which obviously it should not .

https://youtu.be/1lxoedv99QQ

“ I was better than michael Jordan for about 3 weeks” - james worthy at UNC .

Pippen was a modern hoops player playing in the 90s.

Jordan now would be Kawhi, provided he improved his handles.

Creating open shots is part evidence of a good system part evidence of a high bball iq

I love the logic of responding to mjs handles not all that great with pippens handles were bad ....

Damn few players back then had handles like everyone has now. Only true pgs like gp, Stockton, Iverson.

Isaiah always said just take MJ left.

That's either James Worthy being humble or just going along with a reporter that's writing a fluff piece. MJ as a freshman was definitely not better than James Worthy, who was the best player in the NCAA tournament and the second best player in college overall. James Worthy was a #1 draft pick after that season. MJ spent two more years in college and went 3rd. James Worthy was the Consensus 1st team All-America (1st team on 3/4, 2nd team on 1/4). MJ didn't even make the third team and was likely the team's 3rd best player (after James Worthy and Sam Perkins).

Either way, you don't have to be a better player than someone to be a mentor - obviously someone that just came out of high school is going to need some guidance, regardless of how good they are at basketball.

It's bizarre to me the way MJ-stans are just making stuff up in an incoherent way. A 22-year old Pippen couldn't have possibly made it on his own, totally need the fatherly guidance of a 24-year old MJ. A 18-year old MJ though? He was better than everyone, didn't need anyone's help.

Lol it is you changing your narrative every paragraph ....

All I said was without mj , pippen probably would never be a hof , but rather a good role player like Horace grant .....

And yeah , you don’t get great 27 at a mvp level , when entering the league at 22 at the level pippen came , and by magic you become great .

It’s clear the work he put with mj were immense ( and probably at some point help Jordan as well anyway ...) .

if anyone is keeping a list of the top x idiotic statements well, this one should def make the list. not quite on the level of anything about Larry Hughes but pretty up there.

And you're making stuff up. Again, it's like saying that maybe without James Worthy, MJ becomes just an all-star level player instead of an all-time great player. I mean even MJ says that the NCAA championship game is what made him who he is and they don't get there without James Worthy (and in fact MJ never gets there again after James Worthy leaves). What is even the point of this speculation? How does this help evaluate MJ's career as a player? If we're trying to evaluate his impact on player development and stuff, should we incorporate his failures as a GM and an owner in evaluating his legacy as a player?

It's far more likely that Pippen and Horace Grant learned to become role players early in their careers because that was how you fit into a team that was expecting to contend and looking at everyone else as role players to complement MJ. Pippen later developed the skills to be a star player anyway and Horace likely had the impact of a star player at his peak, but never quite put up star numbers statistically because of the way he learned to play.

Did Pippen come in at a low level or was he just put in a situation where he couldn't take enough shots to develop as a scorer in the NBA?

Pippen's final year college stats per game:
23.6/10.0/4.3, .592 FG%

MJ's final year college stats per game
19.6/5.3/2.1 .551 FG%

For that matter, Horace Grant final year college stats per game

21.0/9.6/2.0 .656 FG%

I mean this is common knowledge among any serious sports fans but there's a natural conflict between doing what it takes to win and maximizing player development. If you're trying to win, you don't want someone working on a particular skill to try to do that in a game, but if you're trying to maximize player development, you want players to feel free to try out new things. So young players that are working on a lot of different things at the same time, often benefit from not being put in a situation where they have to maximize win equity. And having someone like MJ who is already unhappy about you taking the ball away from him just adds to the pressure - the coach wants you to not to try to do things you're not yet good at and the team's best player wants you to just pass him the ball, what are you then going to do?

First off no need father figure , big brother figure is enough .
Second it’s clear pippen did not have the mentality of Jordan ( not many have anyway ) .
Third mj even just 2 years more , was already a super stars , maybe the best player in the league already .



And again , I don’t lose too much time with your fallacy but that is how a conversation goes with you ......


Seriously.....

You went from pure certainty 30 all time great to
it’s not even my ranking and it’s about championship wins ...

Did you really go through all that and missed that I specifically pointed out that I was using the Backpicks ranking in the very first post? Also, what on earth is "pure certainty" doing in that sentence? How do you mischaracterize someone else's post that badly? How bad do you need to be at basic communication to think that nitpicking whether Reggie Miller is a top-30 or a top-50 player or for that matter how strongly I feel about this ranking or not is even relevant at all here?

Do you not understand what this means? I mean you have to pick some criteria if you're going to rank players and this is about as coherent as it gets:

https://backpicks.com/2017/12/11/the...n-nba-history/

Also, I have no idea why you chose to bold what you bolded or what you're trying to say at all. I think you're trying to say it's inconsistent for me to state that I don't personally have Reggie Miller ranked, but to state some facts such as Reggie Miller is 22nd in VORP and Ben Taylor ranked Reggie Miller 30th in his all-time ranking, but no that's not a contradiction and it really boggles my mind how hard you're trying to win internet debates on a technicality and how bad you're at it.

It's intellectually honest for me to say my knowledge of basketball simply doesn't extend far enough nor have I thought deeply enough about the topic to have a personal ranking that lets me compare John Havlicek, Bob Pettit, Paul Pierce and Reggie Miller against one another. That doesn't mean I can't use a shorthand to describe Reggie Miller as a top-30 player, especially when I specifically quoted a source. It really boggles my mind that I even have to explain any of this.

thats all these guys do. when I said that Lebron creates great shots "at will". he took it that I meant that Lebron himself creates great shots for himself (not including his team) every single time.

not really worth debating these clowns. just lol at them and pick out the best comments.

Lebron faced similar competition with at 2 perennial all stars and freakin fail and mj had almost nothing beside 1990 and look how the team failed him in game 7 .....

1990 mj : : 31pts 9 ass 8 rbn 13/27 fg

Pippen ( first year all star ) : 2 pts 2 ass 4 rbn 3/17 fg !
Horace Grant : 10 pts 1 ass 14 rbn. 1/10 fg !
Armstrong : 2 pts 0 ass 1 rbn 1/8 fg!
Hodges : 8 pts 2 ass 3 rbn. 3/13 fg !
Cartwright. : 6 pts 1 ass 5 rbn. 3/9 fg!

Mj had more fg than all of them Combine with 50% less attempt ffs !
The 5 next players to mj did 11/57 shooting ( 19% shooting lol for almost the entire team ).
I can’t even imagine how the hell MJ got 9 assist ..

And you call this not carrying his team vs 3 all stars / futur HoF ?

Wtf are you talking about .....

That was another ring there ( piston won 4-1 the final) where mj took the blame for his team totalling collapsing on him .....

Yeah pippen was always great and mj could never won without him ???
Meh pippen cost a ring there ....grant as well .

Your totally insane if you think MJ was not the soul of this team .

And I keep hearing ha Lebron failed because his team let him down or face too tough competition lol ...