See , gives a non sense excuses to mj dominance that the league was weak but hey , lebron east conference was much worst while lebron teams was much better than it’s competition and he gets high praise for it while losing bs weaker teams from the west ,shrug .

And mj did beat super team ( Detroit ) and could had in 1990 if it wasn’t for pippen not finishing the game but we don’t use it with MJ , we just say what he actually accomplish.....

The double standard for lebron is ridiculous .

The difference between lebron and mj is very simple ...,
MJ dominate the league and prevent a lot of all time great to have a ring while lebron dominate the east and a lot of futur all time great did get their lunch regardless ....
That’s the difference of winning the finals and losing it !
it means it doesn’t matter where u were in the league , u dominate it .
And you see it this year for lebron , it’s obvious the West was stronger than the east , look at the finals .
Props fo lebron for his 4th ring .

Nope, this disregards D entirely in which magic was slightly above average albeit he could guard multiple positions while Lebron has been first team all d 6 times. Magic’s career is also much shorter than Lebron and Magic was thrown straight into a contender with another top 10 player all time in Kareem. Some how the team also added another number one overall pick in Worthy a few years later despite their really strong play.

Are there comparable squads in the 90s to the Spurs and Warriors? I’m asking for a friend.

Larry bird , russel and wilt .
Only players to win 3 consecutive mvp while bird did it when magic , kareem , mj played ....3 out of 5-10 best of all time .

Go to sleep

The bulls were the warrior ......
Some people think beating the man is better than being the man ....
Me I don’t think like that !

The jazz and the suns were very strong .
The jazz swept the lakers with 3-4 all stars ....
And they beat Houston with Hakeem, Drexler and Barkley 3-2.

Yeah imo jazz definitely as good as the spurs in 2013+ , Unless you think the lebron Miami were stronger than the bulls ?

The suns had the mvp surrounded by 6 players in double digit scoring in the season ..
Best team result in the nba at 62 wins .
MJ just went nuts with 41/8/6 in the final .

I'm struggling to think of anything that Magic was better than LeBron at. The only thing I can come up with is free throw shooting. Magic shot 85% for his career and was near 90% his last few seasons. Though LeBron is better at getting to the line.

LeBron is a better inside scorer, outside scorer, lockdown defender, team defender, with superior strength and athleticism. Their court vision and offensive IQ are on the same level. Magic averaged more assists per game because he scored a lot less.

Bird might be the most underrated star. Would be a monster now with current rules. The closest spiritually to Lebron.

What the holy hell happened to this thread.

candybar,
Could you elaborate a bit on this? You seem to be saying LeBron is so incredibly good he's basically better, or equal, to all of the other greatest players of all time at the individual things each of them is best at. He is so, so good he can pick and choose what to do in a given game on a given play, and he is or would be the best ever at it. As good of a scorer as MJ if he passed less. As good of a passer as Magic if he scored less, etc.

If this is true, then why has LeBron only won 3 rings in 16 seasons (likely 4 in 17 seasons after a weird pandemic season), and why aren't his advanced metrics light years ahead of even the second best player of all time? Shouldn't this narrative that LeBron is the GOAT in all aspects of all things be picked up somewhere in statistics or wins?

Coming back to this because it's so much fun:

Tien, I specifically said in the post you are replying to that some of those results were due to injuries. Could you please read? The point was that if that Thunder squad was as all-time elite as you say they are, they would have shown results at some point in those 4 years to show that. Their results indicate they were good but not great. Which is what I've been saying. (This is where you pretend I'm saying they are terrible).

When is the last time you played basketball? I feel like you might watch it a decent amount, but the way you think about the game indicates you probably haven't played it much. You seem like the type to sit on the couch a lot, eat doritos and ice cream, and talk about how much you know about sports.

They weren't an all-time team (and I think of "all-time" as one of the greatest teams ever) because they weren't an all-time team. They had the greatest regular season ever. But then they got taken to 7 games in the WCF and finals. They were the same squad as the previous year yet weren't as dominant. They were clearly running way above expectation with 73 wins. REALLY GOOD yes. "All-time great"? No and only a LeBron superfan who is trying to prop up his legacy would make that argument. If they were all-time great then they would have done much, much better in the playoffs when the competition is more intense.

Yeah that Spurs team was good, like I said, but the Thunder posed a huge matchup problem for them given their athleticism advantage.

Two. And the 2016 Cavs had three. So what? That Thunder team still never performed at an all-time elite level like you're claiming.

You seriously can't read and I legit think you have a mental illness. I never said that team was old. I said Duncan was (the core of all those Spurs rings). He was 40. Kawhi and LaMarcus are not aliases for Tim ****ing Duncan you clown.

What, did you load that series from 2016 on your Xbox NBA 2k doritos simulator to refresh your memory? I clearly remember way more about that series than you do. Read summaries of the series if you need a refresher, idiot.


Guys, guys. Tien WATCHES BASKETBALL.

No. If they were an all-time great team they wouldn't have lost 9 games in the playoffs. Or they at least would have won the championship. They did neither. They were a really good team that ran way above expectation with 73 wins.

Yes. Now read about probability and variance, please. Apply your knowledge to this. Then realize I won and slank away with your tub of ice cream.

Yep. Really good but not all-time great. Like I said.

Yep yep. Really good. Completely inline with what I've been saying.

Yep. Really good.

Yep. Really good.

Yes. Unfortunately he was injured pretty bad and hobbled in the playoffs. Which is why his advanced stats dropped waaaay off and he missed a bunch of games. That may be why they lost 9 games in the playoffs and got taken to 7 games in the WCF, and lost in the finals, actually. (Like I've been saying)

His performance was up there, that's for sure. A bit below MJ tier but still really high. Kyrie's performance as a second option was pretty ridiculous for a second option though. Good thing LeBron had all that help.

And turnovers. Yes he's super versatile and one of the greatest 3 or 4 ever, so you'd expect him to be great in all those categories. Just a bit below MJ overall though, as evidenced by their peak stats and # of championships won (in general, and above expectation). It was an amazing performance though, like I've been saying.

The CLEVELAND CAVELIERS won being down 3-1. NOT LEBRON JAMES YOU KNOB.

And it's not the greatest finals performance ever. For example, in 1993 Jordan put up 41/8.5/6.3/1.7.

In that one series he outscored LeBron by double digits per game, on average. On waaaaaay lower turnover% (6.8% for Jordan vs. 14.4% for LeBron). In terms of individual performances, that '93 finals by Jordan trounces LeBron in 2016.

This was a good discussion though Tien and I'd like to thank you for that. Remember, there is no need to cry, however. There are ways to improve your reasoning ability if you so desire (feel free to PM me).

The Detroit Pistons that MJ beat was a corpse of a super team that went 50-32 and had the 9th best record in the league. After losing that playoff series, they never won another playoff series.

+1
With the 3point fashion today ...
He would be crazy good .

Kob, AI, Isiah, Westbrook are overrated by casual fan. Jordan is properly rated by casual fans.

So now your argument has become that Jordan never had the benefit of a one in a century global pandemic. Do you even think about what you're writing lol

It’s funny how 1 year changed a team that was the only one winning vs Celtic and lakers goat team and the bulls , next year they beat the bulls in 7 games to win a second title (due to terrible team performance from bulls but not MJ ) and couple months later they suck ..

Already in 90 the bulls should of won with only a below than normal performance from any other player for MJ but they ALL sucked ....

Anyway , keep trashing great team and praised on amazing team With 37 years old leader ....

I already addressed this - MJ has zero finals appearance without Phil Jackson. Shaq had 7 MVP-level seasons without Phil Jackson and didn't come close to a title (being swept in the Finals once was the best he managed), while each of 3 MVP-level seasons with Phil Jackson resulted in a title. It's a team game and it turns out being the best team out of 30 teams in any given season is very difficult and requires a lot of other things to go right. Lebron is the only player in the history of the game that's even been able to consistently contend regardless of who was coaching and who else was on the team. He took 5 different head coaches to the NBA finals. He's taken 4 completely different teams with 4 different head coaches to the #1 seed. None of these coaches has won a title except with Lebron. Out of the 5 head coaches he brought to the Finals, 3 of them (Mike Brown, David Blatt, Ty Lue) literally have never any kind of head coaching success in the NBA except with Lebron.

I mean, "if he's so good, why hasn't he won more championships" is a transparently awful argument that you can only make earnestly if you're mentally challenged. This isn't tennis - it's a team sport. You could be the best player in the league and not be part of the best team in the league. In fact, this would be quite statistically unlikely. MJ in his highest scoring season, led the team to a 40-42 record. I suppose one could've made an argument that MJ was not a top-10 player in the game at the time (if he's a top 10 player, how come his team isn't even in the top 10) but that would've been disingenuous. He was likely at least a top-5 player by this point, probably top-3.

Again, it's not like we don't have a record of this - they did suck and this was known before they played the Bulls in the playoffs. Michael Jordan didn't personally bully them into having a 50-32 record. They didn't just go from the title to playing the Bulls in the next year's playoffs. There were many games of basketball that were played that showed that this wasn't a great basketball team anymore. Certainly not a super team. They really had that mediocre record all on their own, playing against many different teams. And it's not like they were unlucky - their pythagorean was the same and their SRS was even worse than their point differential. This was not a very good team. Maybe 3 straight years of finals appearances and physical play finally got to them. Who knows. But this was a known fact - no one thought, when the Bulls played the Pistons, oh wow, MJ is taking on a super team. The Bulls were considered the better team and people that were picking the Pistons to win likely did so because they didn't think much of MJ and though the Pistons had his number.

If LeBron beats the 73 win team, it can't be considered an All-time Great team because no championship.

If LeBron loses to a 73 win team, it would have been considered an All-time Great Team because championship.

LeBron could have never beaten any all time great teams because if he beats them, they are not all time. Only if he loses to them, they are all time great.


"The greatest catch of them all, catch-22"

- Matt R. 2020

Damn 3Ball, you were pretty smart 7 years ago.

What happened?


Reading first page of this thread so amazing. The smart posters knew 7 years ago.

That is why I speak about how even in 1990 mj took them to 7 game and he lost because his entire tram was terrible .... terrible in that7 game and don’t tell me the piston in 90 sucked .....
59 wins with lot of all stars

Strangely enough when mj left in 94 what happened if if it’s all about Jackson and not MJ ?
Look at what happened the year MJ came back .....
Bulls were barely a .500 team and just a 60-70% strength (?) MJ he dramatically change the rest of the season and they couldn’t pass to the final still .
It took the return of real MJ full strength to make the bulls win ...

Are u really telling us early 2000 lakers would never win with any other coach ?
Please ...

Well again ...and not surprise your in lebron camp I suppose !

to be considered all time great team , like players imo , you actually need to have the results for backing it up , not just based on “if’s” AND the year after , warriors got way better and destroyed everything in their path !
That was an all time great team with durant , clearly .... even with less win in reg season , than 2016 warriors .

That’s the point, if you don’t go with actual result guys like wilt is the goat .

Super analysis. It neglects the psychological factor ... which is real. Of course not every player has the same mentality about winning. That's real. If Russell and Jordan are a 100 on scale of 1-100 on this, what is LeBron? Late game assertiveness and FT %, also.

They were really really good. They went 55-27 in the regular season, as opposed to 57-25 with MJ the season before. They outscored, but barely lost to the really good Knicks team, a preseason championship favorite that were probably a top-2 team in the league at worst, in 7 games, who in turn outscored, but barely lost to the Rockets team in 7 games in the Finals. They weren't expected to contend (looks like the betting market overrated MJ's impact) but in the end, they were one of a handful of teams that could win it all. And this is despite the Bulls not replacing MJ with any good player - they basically took a chance on a few Euroleague players. The Heat, after losing Lebron, brought in Deng (an all-star two seasons prior), Dragic (all-NBA 3rd team the previous season) and got some great minutes out of Whiteside. And this was enough to go 37-45. And this was the best any post-Lebron team managed - the other two went straight to lottery.

The point here isn't that MJ is a replacement-level player and makes no difference whatsoever and Phil Jackson automatically turns every team into a championship team. The point is that Phil Jackson has an unbelievable track record even without MJ. MJ does not have any sort of track record without Phil Jackson. Phil Jackson coached 12 seasons in the NBA without MJ and won 5 titles. If the Bulls never put together a great team with Pippen, Phil Jackson, etc, he probably gets remembered as a Wilt-like scoring savant that couldn't elevate others and just didn't have what it takes to win. But it's the exact same player.

The comparison here is with Lebron, who's been able to carry all kinds of garbage squads and random coaches to the Finals. Being able to win with a team that was a championship contender without you, that's still great, but not quite GOAT-level great. That's what Kawhi does. Top-5 players should generally be able to do that, as long as the fit isn't terrible. MJ was a bit more consistent and his teams didn't merely win, but were more dominant at times, so that lifts him above the likes of mere Kawhis and KDs, but it just does not compare in any way to Lebron.

And this is consistent with any reasonable analysis of MJ as a player. He brings enough to the table that you'd expect him to be an all-time great. But Lebron is just better at so many more things. So you'd expect Lebron to contribute more to winning. And he does.

Of course Bron gonna be first 40K/10K/10K player. Fairly historic. If he goes down on the blocks and plays Karl Malone in a couple years, he might do a Jabbar type longevity and blow everybody away statistically.