Quote:
Originally Posted by SABR42
Because all of your narratives are demonstrably false.
By your own criteria Jordan is 6/10 with with Pippen not 6/6
By definition, 6/10 is winning the majority of the years, aka "mostly" winning
Furthermore, there's a stretch of 6 rings in 7 years, which would constitute "mostly winning" as well and it would fit this definition better than anyone in the modern era.
So Jordan was "mostly winning" with Pippen (either 6/10 or 6/7), while Lebron is mostly losing with AD, Love or Wade (1/4 or 2/4 w/ Allen's save)
Why isn't it completely viable to say that Lebron had an organic juggernaut in Year 7 with a 1-time all-star just like Giannis, Jokic, Curry and MJ did, and the only difference is that Lebron gave up and started teaming up with opposing franchise players thereafter instead of sticking it out like his peers.. Since he became a talent-based winner that always used talent as the excuse for losing (not enough help), he never learned how to win, aka chemistry, organic.... why isn't this completely viable based on the historical record of Lebron and peers of similar caliber?.. And it fits with the eye-test - Lebron has bad fits and weak chemistry all the time (bron-ball, a version of luka-ball).
Quote:
Originally Posted by SABR42
Because all of your narratives are demonstrably false.
Except you didn't demonstrate them to be false, in part because their statistical fact - MJ mostly won with Pippen whether we say 6 of 10 years or the 6 in 7 year stretch, while Lebron mostly loses regardless of cast... this isn't a "narrative" - it's the historical and statistical record.