Right, it's the same game as the "but if LeBron..."

Point stands, he was 6 for 6 on the biggest stage, it definitely has merit over somebody you're compared to as the GOAT and fanboys hand waiving it away like it's pure variance is a joke

You can't really compare their careers that way. MJ would have never team hopped 3 times like a coward so he could form super teams. He actually had a shred of integrity.

And Lebron would have bolted Chicago for Houston or San Antonio or something as soon as he had the chance

Wait people are still using 6 for 6 as a non-sarcastic arguement? Lol

Dirk and Jason Kidd were both drafted in MJ's era, Dirk in 1998 and Kidd in 1994. Lebron lost to a 37 year old Kidd and a 32 year old Dirk while playing on a superteam with 3 superstars, with all 3 of them in their prime. So forgive me for having a little skepticism that Lebron would just sweep his way 8/8 through the 90s.

Haha Jordan having integrity lol wow

Sorry I didn't include the "/s". Forgot I was in the only thread on 2p2 that needed it there.

Yes, that looks to be the case, DarkOne. Of course, it is a part of a more comprehensive argument -- Jordan being superior statistically AND having better team success -- but it is indeed part of the argument.

This is clearly the intelligent thing to do. For example, if we were to put a random player on a team, and that random player leads that team to 6 championships across 8 seasons (one where that player didn't play, another only a partial season) and they went 6 for 6 in the NBA finals, the highest level of basketball that can be played on planet Earth, THEY ARE PROBABLY PRETTY GOOD.

He threatened to go to the Knicks later in his career, seriously planning to win a title with Ewing.

BUT JORDAN FANS FORGET THAT.

He threatened to go there so he could get more money out of the Bulls.

LeBron went for less money somewhere to win rings.

Exactly the same...

Who cares if either threatened to leave or ended up leaving the teams that drafted for whatever reason. Fans tripping off of player mobility is silly. Lebron had to give the first 7 years of his career to Cleveland. If Jordan didn't luck out with Chicago building well around him he would've been gone too.

What’s a more impressive career accomplishment?:

1) getting drafted by a terrible team and helping to build that team up to completely dominate the league and win 6 titles in 8 seasons?

2) getting drafted by a terrible team, making them good enough to make a bunch of finals in a row, but then recruiting 2 all pros to form a super team to win 2 rings in 4 seasons because you couldn’t win on your original team? Then changing teams again when your old team gets a bunch of young good players to win another ring, and then changing teams again when you decide they suck again?

What are you talking about ?
Building around Jordan ?
Jordan had pippen and that is it before 1994 !
And it’s freaking Jordan that build pippen , training everyday with him to make the player he became.

Why do you think pippen became a great defensive player ?
Maybe practicing with Jordan everyday helped ...

Pippen have credit because he had the will to become the player he became but don’t you go think he would of become the same player if he would of been draft by another team !

Ok yeah , bulls build a great team , after 1993 ...
That’s what ? 9 years after Jordan enter the league .

Jordan had better franchise luck than Lebron, that's pretty obvious. Cleveland had 7 years with Lebron the first go 'round and they couldn't put a team good enough to win a title around him. Lebron recognized that and left. Good for him. I don't romanticize guys staying with teams forever if it's not what's best for them. People move jobs and companies all the time. Lol at being salty when athletes who have a small finite window to be at the top of their games don't want to stay at a place forever hoping the front office figures it out. Lebron drug a god awful team to the Finals 4 years in and the franchise got complacent. 3 years later they still hadn't put a legit title winning squad around him.

Montreal, they won the title in '91 and were clearly the best team in the NBA. I don't know what the **** you are talking about. Bulls were a great team from '91 on and were on the cusp the two seasons prior. They acquired Pippen in '87. That was at the end of Jordan's 3rd season. Pippen fully developing was what put them over the top and they never looked back. I also love how you say ” he just had Pippen” as if the Goat + the eras most versatile elite wing defender with ability to get you 20+ a game isn't enough to be the core of a great team. That's two dream teamers and all time greats. Lebron had nothing close to that teammate wise the first go around in Cleveland.

LeBron is a notorious control freak when it comes to personnel and coaching decisions. I'm not sure you can attribute team/franchise level factors to "luck". If he took a step back and let everyone else do their jobs would they have built a better roster in Cleveland in his first 7 years? If he wasn't obsessed with his own stats and legacy, and took a step back could they have built a stronger overall team? Probably, if you got the right people in there.

And regardless, even if it was all "luck" that Jordan happened to have a better team built around him, his rings are still more impressive from a career accomplishment standpoint. LeBron didn't just "change teams", he recruited and formed a superteam with two other all-NBA players. And still only titled in two of the four seasons. The ship in Cleveland when they beat GS was quite impressive. But then you're comparing him to a guy who three-peated twice on his original team that was built around him.

If LeBron just "went to another team" who happened to be a contender without planning it out with Wade/Bosh and won 6 rings there it would make more sense to talk as if it's an equal accomplishment to Jordan's 6.

My inital comment was that I don't care about player movement but you obviously take it personal for whatever reason. Guys have been moving around and positioning themselves to be on better teams forever. Your premise that you can only be on a "super team" as long as you had the good fortune of being drafted into the franchise is pretty silly. Also to think that star players in the past had zero input on personnel decisions just because the sport wasn't covered as thoroughly is silly too. NBA has always had super teams or stacked teams. I guess people are calling them super teams when it seems like players orchestrated it but they are just stacked teams if it seemed to happen more organically? 90s Bulls, Early 2000 Lakers, 80s Celtics, 80s Lakers, then you have reigning MVP of the league Moses Malone forcing his way out of Houston in his prime in '82 to go to Philly who was already a contender. Of course they smash and win the title and he gets back to back league MVPs. No one cared then and no one should care now. It's just that more attention is on sports and news coverage in this 24/7 news cycle so people for whatever reason work themselves up over these narratives and ****. It's silly. My contention wasn't that Jordan's title resume isn't more impressive than LeBron's, it is. But it's not because he stayed with the same franchise. He had the good fortune of having an awesome complementary squad built around him. No reason to leave.

I think it’s also evident that neither lebron nor mj have much skill for team building. I don’t think you can credit mj with all his fortune with bulls team building after seeing what he’s done with the bobcats.

Haha. Good point

Other than how it affects overall league competitiveness and quality of games, I don't care about player movement either. But we're talking about comparing career accomplishments. A hypothetical all-star who goes on one year deals and signs with the favorite every year, while recruiting other players, and wins 10 rings would not carry the same weight as a player who won 10 rings on the team he was drafted with. You are obviously sensitive to this argument for whatever reason though, and that's fine.

No one said this. I don't understand your need to make things up. LeBron joined a "super team". Durant joined a "super team". Nothing blew up and the world is still turning.

Part of it is a competitiveness thing. If LeBron went to the Warriors then at that point who cares about the season because there's no way GS will lose nor will anyone come close. Or what if the top 12 players in the league formed a team. WHO CARES right? Well uh, people that like watching competitive basketball games care. You may not like to watch good quality competitive basketball, but other people do. So that's part of it.

But anyway, (again) no one said players didn't have input on personnel decisions back in the day either. Moses Malone was traded. He didn't collude with two other players to form a superteam. So even though he "wanted out" it's a tiny bit different.

All of those other teams you listed were great teams but they were all drafted or signed through free agency, and at no point did the top player in the league recruit a second all-nba player to join a third all-nba player and have a dance party on stage in Miami. That was kinda dumb.

I guess the difference between me and you is that your are overly worried about how the teams are formed and I'm not. Competitively to the league the "Heatles" were no different than having the 80s Lakers, 80s Celtics, 90s Bulls early 2000 Lakers, 60s Celtics etc. Stacked teams have always been and will always be part of the NBA whether it's front offices making great moves and getting lucky with timing or players being more instrumental in deciding where they wanna go and who they wanna play with.

i mean what can i add to this ...
First off the lakers was suppose to beat the bulls.
And why the hell would magically the pistons suppose to lose vs the bulls in the EC final when they have the same team prior to the year before ?


Btw the suns were a favorite ( or a tie but no way bulls were favorite) in 93 and the jazz in 98 as well.

The bulls in their first 3 peat was great because of MJ and thats it .
Pippen did his job ok ....
but pippen was not the reason the bulls won and we saw it in 1994 when pippen was even a better player by then.
I mean if the bulls were such a great team like you said, Pippen should of done better being abetter player by than right and even in 1995 when Jordan came back and still he couldnt do the job with a "weaker MJ" in that year.
Clearly you should give credit a lot more to jordan and give less to pippen.

So please stop talking like the bulls were awesome in their first 3 peat.
There was a huge difference between the first and 2 peat, clearly.
Jordan was phenomenal early 90.

bull had pippen with around 20ppg and then grant and cartwrigth lol....
Put any player instead of Jordan and no way they win 3 title, never!
Even lebron !
He freakin lost to the mavs with a MUCH better squad than the bulls in 1991-93, clearly!






Strange that i got flamed a lot saying jordan was still and all-star in his last 2 season and everyone seem to think he was bad when i think he was still all-star caliber.

Than u post your second paragraph ???
Jordan played the same position as pippen and earn as good stats at 39-40 years old than pippen had throughout his entire carrer and we all know ( i hope) Jordan was has good a defender as pippen was...

But pippen becomes "enough to be the core of a great team." but Jordan cant be ?
Prime in 1994 and jordan at 39 are like super close stats wise.

i mean nothing to be add really....

Montreal... you know you can actually check historic odds now...

http://www.sportsoddshistory.com/nba...=d&fv=&hv=&fd=

Bulls were favorite in every Finals.

How much that had to do with people loving MJ and what the real odds are is probably a good question, but they were favorites.

Yeah, Montreal is horrible with facts. Bulls were never dogs in the Finals. He's also delusional if he thinks that they weren't great until '96. Jordan's Bulls were the best team in the league in all of his 6 full seasons between 91-98.

Also Pippen 94 >>>>> Jordan @ 39. I'm not sure how you think the stats are close.

And that's not an insult to Jordan. For a 39 yo he was amazing.

Montreal's analysis of players doesn't go any further than "sort by ppg".