PDA

View Full Version : Replace Lebron with Jordan. Are today's Cavs worse?



Pages : [1] 2

IKnowHoops
05-17-2017, 11:33 PM
Am I the only person that believes taking Bron off the Cavs and putting Jordan on, makes the Cavs a worse team?

lol, please
05-17-2017, 11:42 PM
Jordan would be way more impactful.

Here we go with another one of IKH's delusional threads where he tries to tell everyone Lebron is better than Jordan again....he isn't even better than Curry.

Jeffy25
05-17-2017, 11:44 PM
I think this team fits Bron better than it would Jordan, but Jordan would still keep the team as good as it would be with Bron.

FOXHOUND
05-17-2017, 11:46 PM
Yes, you probably are. They would be a completely different team. For example, Kevin Love wouldn't be relegated to being a glorified spot up shooter on most nights. Jordan was an amazing passer himself, there was nothing the man couldn't do. In the 91 Finals, he averaged 11 assists per game just because he was playing Magic and wanted to show him and everyone that he could.

In 88-89, Doug Collins last season, he put Jordan at PG towards the end of the season and he had a stretch of 10 triple doubles in 11 games with averages of 33.9 pts, 10.8 reb, 11.4 asts. He averaged 32.5, 8.0 and 8.0 for that season overall.

Quinnsanity
05-17-2017, 11:48 PM
I believe it too, but it's a fit thing. Put LeBron on those championship Bulls teams and they get worse too. He'd be redundant with Pippen there. Those two are so good that it's really a matter of fit. For fun, I'll go through each historic dynasty that they weren't on and pick which one would fit better:

60's Celtics: LeBron. Boston had Sam Jones and Hondo for most of the run, so they really didn't need a wing who was going to score. But stick LeBron at power forward for those teams and he and Russell would totally dominate defensively and on the boards, the outlet passing would be MIND BOGGLING and of course, athletically LeBron would've just destroyed that league (MJ would've too, but not to the same degree).

'80s Lakers: MJ. Between Magic and Worthy you basically have an amalgam of LeBron's skill set. Jordan could've basically done for them on defense what Coop did, but also specialized more as a three-point shooter to complement Kareem's game (he was the focal point of their half court offense much more so than Magic was), and the idea of MJ and Magic in transition together is insane.

'80s Celtics: MJ. I can't think of two scorers that complement each other better than MJ and Bird. DJ and MJ's defense in the backcourt would've destroyed everyone. The Celtics had so much size that they'd either have to cut into McHale/Parish's minutes to fit in LeBron or play Bird at shooting guard, neither is ideal.

'00s Lakers: LeBron. They had someone much closer to MJ in Kobe anyway.

'00s Spurs: MJ for the earlier teams, LeBron for the later ones. Their offense was far less sophisticated in the early parts of the dynasty and didn't really rely on the intricate passing the later teams did. Therefore you just take MJ and let him score 30 every night for you. But once the later teams were playing that European style, LeBron's passing becomes a necessity.

goingfor28
05-17-2017, 11:52 PM
Jordan would be way more impactful.

Here we go with another one of IKH's delusional threads where he tries to tell everyone Lebron is better than Jordan again....he isn't even better than Curry.
He's better than Curry...by a lot.

And you probably shouldn't comment on threads anyone else makes. Have you seen yours?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

WaDe03
05-17-2017, 11:57 PM
Jordan would be way more impactful.

Here we go with another one of IKH's delusional threads where he tries to tell everyone Lebron is better than Jordan again....he isn't even better than Curry.

LeBron is way better than Curry. LeBron is the only player on Jordan's level, this isn't a bad thread.

valade16
05-18-2017, 12:03 AM
I think they're better with MJ. Specifically what is LeBron doing that MJ couldn't do the Cavs need him to?

WaDe03
05-18-2017, 12:05 AM
I'm honestly starting to feel like LeBron is the GOAT.

Bostonjorge
05-18-2017, 12:24 AM
Are we still pretending this Cavs team is not one of the loadest teams in history?

Jordan with this Super Cavs team would be Great. Durant in GS would be looked at differently going up against Jordan's Cavs. Durant to GS would be the leagues answer to that Cavs team.

IKnowHoops
05-18-2017, 12:28 AM
I think they're better with MJ. Specifically what is LeBron doing that MJ couldn't do the Cavs need him to?

Play PF, bang with bigs, pass first shoot second. Play every position whenever needed. Make sure Korver gets 8 open 3 looks per game.

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 12:38 AM
I think they're better with MJ. Specifically what is LeBron doing that MJ couldn't do the Cavs need him to?

Defend any and everything come the finals? Jordan was nowhere near the defender he was made out to be... 2 different teams... I think the cavs would be worse with jordan but I also think the bulls would be worse with lebron to a point.. Its an interesting debate... this lebron right now is playing at an insane level on both ends of the floor... Also Jordan would not have been able to flat out bully the celtics like lebron did tonight in the paint.

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 12:39 AM
Play PF, bang with bigs, pass first shoot second. Play every position whenever needed. Make sure Korver gets 8 open 3 looks per game.

pretty much this in a nutshell. Not sure how this can even be argued... lebron bullied the celtics tonight in the paint... that isnt jordans game.

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 12:39 AM
its really splitting hairs though... they are the 2 goats for a reason

IKnowHoops
05-18-2017, 12:40 AM
Are we still pretending this Cavs team is not one of the loadest teams in history?

Jordan with this Super Cavs team would be Great. Durant in GS would be looked at differently going up against Jordan's Cavs. Durant to GS would be the leagues answer to that Cavs team.

Loaded with him, but loose without him mostly.

BKLYNpigeon
05-18-2017, 12:40 AM
I'm honestly starting to feel like LeBron is the GOAT.

If lebron wins it all this year, he will be in the conversation.

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 12:45 AM
I still think their a far cry from the warriors but this lebron looks 21 years old lol... its insane.

Gibby23
05-18-2017, 12:59 AM
Defend any and everything come the finals? Jordan was nowhere near the defender he was made out to be... 2 different teams... I think the cavs would be worse with jordan but I also think the bulls would be worse with lebron to a point.. Its an interesting debate... this lebron right now is playing at an insane level on both ends of the floor... Also Jordan would not have been able to flat out bully the celtics like lebron did tonight in the paint.

Jordans defensive film, stats, and metrics say he was a great defender. Carry on though.

Jeffy25
05-18-2017, 01:01 AM
Are we still pretending this Cavs team is not one of the loadest teams in history?

Jordan with this Super Cavs team would be Great. Durant in GS would be looked at differently going up against Jordan's Cavs. Durant to GS would be the leagues answer to that Cavs team.

It's loaded with Kyrie and Love?

Seriously?

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 01:07 AM
Jordans defensive film, stats, and metrics say he was a great defender. Carry on though.

yea and I am sure he could guard almost every position like lebron and lebron had the benefit of some of the best defenders in the history of the sport like the bulls did? Lebron never had a team as great as any of those champion bulls teams esp on defense. Jordan was a good defender but lebron actually deserved the Defensive player of the year award at least twice... Jordan got his via his name.

Something to read....


Give LeBron the capability to handcheck, hold, push, and shove the way MJ could all game and he's basically impossible to score on


LeBron, and I'm not even being overly swayed by how amazing LeBron played defensively in this series. I've said for quite a while now that while Jordan is most likely a top 3 defender of all time at the guard position, his impact on that end doesn't compare to that of a ridiculously versatile forward like LeBron, who can switch onto basically any player in the league, play the passing lanes, lock down guys 1-on-1, dominate the boards, and serve as a rim protector. If you look at the numbers for every team he's ever been on after his first couple years in the league, his teams' defenses have tended to be absolute garbage without him on the floor.

Compare that to Jordan, whose teams' defenses have actually fared very well without him...

1993 Bulls (with Jordan and Pippen): 106.1 DRTG (-1.9 to Avg.)
1994 Bulls (with Pippen): 102.7 DRTG (-3.3 to Avg.)
1995 Bulls (with Pippen and Jordan for 17 games): 104.3 DRTG (-4.0 to Avg.)
1996 Bulls (with Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman): 101.8 DRTG (-5.8 to Avg.)

Sure, it's a roughly constructed overlook of 4 seasons of team defense, especially since there are other players involved, but I'm led to believe that Pippen and Rodman were significantly more impactful defenders than Jordan was, helped by their positional advantages on that end. I think when evaluating defenders, people pay way too much attention to man-to-man defense (explaining why guys like Kobe can make 12 defensive teams), rather than considering all the other aspects that go into it. Jordan was better than LeBron at locking up individual players (on the perimeter for that matter), but I'd give James the advantage in basically every other area. It's just so much harder for guards to have the kind of defensive potential presented by forwards and centers, who aren't really only assigned with the task of defending the single guy they're matched up against, like most guards are. Personally, when looking at impact, I wouldn't rank the best defensive guard of all time ahead of the typical good defensive center in today's league.

In summary, LeBron, and I think it's a fairly sizable margin.

aman_13
05-18-2017, 01:08 AM
Defend any and everything come the finals? Jordan was nowhere near the defender he was made out to be... 2 different teams... I think the cavs would be worse with jordan but I also think the bulls would be worse with lebron to a point.. Its an interesting debate... this lebron right now is playing at an insane level on both ends of the floor... Also Jordan would not have been able to flat out bully the celtics like lebron did tonight in the paint.

Which Jordan are we talking about? In this small ball era with no hand checking, he would be just as dominate.

valade16
05-18-2017, 01:15 AM
Play PF, bang with bigs, pass first shoot second. Play every position whenever needed. Make sure Korver gets 8 open 3 looks per game.

The Cavs starters are Love and Thompson, he's not playing much PF and more importantly what bigs is he banging with? Horford? No. Olynyk? No. He isn't banging against anyone and he certainly isn't playing every position. MJ had no problem ensuring guys like Kerr got open 3's, he is the all-time 3pt % leader...


Defend any and everything come the finals? Jordan was nowhere near the defender he was made out to be... 2 different teams... I think the cavs would be worse with jordan but I also think the bulls would be worse with lebron to a point.. Its an interesting debate... this lebron right now is playing at an insane level on both ends of the floor... Also Jordan would not have been able to flat out bully the celtics like lebron did tonight in the paint.

Jordan not as good a defender as he's made out? Somebody didn't watch Jordan lol. LeBron is playing very well for sure, but statistically MJ was better in the playoffs from 1988-1993 straight.

If anyone thinks LeBron is playing PG and C banging and guarding tough PFs while playing GOAT defense... is clearly more infatuated with the legend LeBron than the reality LeBron.

Who would the Cavs need MJ to guard that he wouldn't be able to? Answer: no one. MJ would be better on defense against IT and he could guard Bradley, Smart and Crowder with ease.

Gibby23
05-18-2017, 01:16 AM
yea and I am sure he could guard almost every position like lebron and lebron had the benefit of some of the best defenders in the history of the sport like the bulls did? Lebron never had a team as great as any of those champion bulls teams esp on defense. Jordan was a good defender but lebron actually deserved the Defensive player of the year award at least twice... Jordan got his via his name.

Something to read....


Give LeBron the capability to handcheck, hold, push, and shove the way MJ could all game and he's basically impossible to score on


LeBron, and I'm not even being overly swayed by how amazing LeBron played defensively in this series. I've said for quite a while now that while Jordan is most likely a top 3 defender of all time at the guard position, his impact on that end doesn't compare to that of a ridiculously versatile forward like LeBron, who can switch onto basically any player in the league, play the passing lanes, lock down guys 1-on-1, dominate the boards, and serve as a rim protector. If you look at the numbers for every team he's ever been on after his first couple years in the league, his teams' defenses have tended to be absolute garbage without him on the floor.

Compare that to Jordan, whose teams' defenses have actually fared very well without him...

1993 Bulls (with Jordan and Pippen): 106.1 DRTG (-1.9 to Avg.)
1994 Bulls (with Pippen): 102.7 DRTG (-3.3 to Avg.)
1995 Bulls (with Pippen and Jordan for 17 games): 104.3 DRTG (-4.0 to Avg.)
1996 Bulls (with Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman): 101.8 DRTG (-5.8 to Avg.)

Sure, it's a roughly constructed overlook of 4 seasons of team defense, especially since there are other players involved, but I'm led to believe that Pippen and Rodman were significantly more impactful defenders than Jordan was, helped by their positional advantages on that end. I think when evaluating defenders, people pay way too much attention to man-to-man defense (explaining why guys like Kobe can make 12 defensive teams), rather than considering all the other aspects that go into it. Jordan was better than LeBron at locking up individual players (on the perimeter for that matter), but I'd give James the advantage in basically every other area. It's just so much harder for guards to have the kind of defensive potential presented by forwards and centers, who aren't really only assigned with the task of defending the single guy they're matched up against, like most guards are. Personally, when looking at impact, I wouldn't rank the best defensive guard of all time ahead of the typical good defensive center in today's league.

In summary, LeBron, and I think it's a fairly sizable margin.

One man's opinion isn't the end all be all. Saying give LeBron a hand check. Lol. Give MJ all of the offensive advantages of today. You have to judge players with the rules they played under. Fact is nobody knows how they would do with certain rules, just pure speculation.

FOXHOUND
05-18-2017, 01:21 AM
Defend any and everything come the finals? Jordan was nowhere near the defender he was made out to be... 2 different teams... I think the cavs would be worse with jordan but I also think the bulls would be worse with lebron to a point.. Its an interesting debate... this lebron right now is playing at an insane level on both ends of the floor... Also Jordan would not have been able to flat out bully the celtics like lebron did tonight in the paint.

My heart...

:faint:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4gigN2zMU4

Take 10 minutes to reacquaint yourself with a taste of Michael Jordan on defense.

valade16
05-18-2017, 01:23 AM
It's loaded with Kyrie and Love?

Seriously?

The Cavs have a loaded team after the acquisitions of Deron and Korver. The Warriors have redefined loaded teams but the Cavs are in any normal time period stacked.

Here are the 3pt% of their role players not the playoffs:

Deron 60%
Frye 55%
Jefferson 50%
Korver 48%
Smith 44%
Shumpert 40%

That is nuts. Here are their TS%'s:

Frye 81%
Deron 79%
Korver 72%
Smith 62%
Shumpert 56%

Frye has a .300 WS/48 and a BPM of 7.7. Deron Williams .200 WS/48 and 3.1 BPM. Korver 4.3 BPM.

The reason this team is undefeated despite Kyrie's bad shooting and until this game Love's 14 PPG is because it has crazy depth.

Bostonjorge
05-18-2017, 01:23 AM
It's loaded with Kyrie and Love?

Seriously?

You give Jordan those 2 and he has a advantage over all these east teams that the Cavs have beat and are playing. Your also giving Jordan the best rebounding and shooting team. Your also giving Jordan a great Defensive team. You give Jordan the Cavs and your giving him a loaded team.

LA_Raiders
05-18-2017, 01:25 AM
No way, please. Too many young folks or short term memory folks around here.

Put LeBron in Jordan's Bulls and he wins ****. He needs 3 solid all starts to win.

FOXHOUND
05-18-2017, 01:26 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Esc0Ak9Jb90

It's Michael Jordan! lol

I saw LeBron have Al Horford trapped in the corner tonight, only to let him blow by him for an easy dunk in the first quarter. LeBron doesn't have the intensity and consistent focus that Jordan had on D. There's a reason why LeBron has only made 6 All-Defensive teams (five 1st team).

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 01:27 AM
No way, please. Too many young folks or short term memory folks around here.

Put LeBron in Jordan's Bulls and he wins ****. He needs 3 solid all starts to win.

had less talent than the bulls=beat a team better than jordan ever did.

valade16
05-18-2017, 01:27 AM
One man's opinion isn't the end all be all. Saying give LeBron a hand check. Lol. Give MJ all of the offensive advantages of today. You have to judge players with the rules they played under. Fact is nobody knows how they would do with certain rules, just pure speculation.

I think the more laughable notion is MJ not playing passing lanes. He was phenomenal at it and certainly caused more turnovers at way than LeBron.

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 01:28 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Esc0Ak9Jb90

It's Michael Jordan! lol

I saw LeBron have Al Horford trapped in the corner tonight, only to let him blow by him for an easy dunk in the first quarter. LeBron doesn't have the intensity and consistent focus that Jordan had on D. There's a reason why LeBron has only made 6 All-Defensive teams (five 1st team).

all defensive teams? :laugh:

man

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 01:28 AM
I think the more laughable notion is MJ not playing passing lanes. He was phenomenal at it and certainly caused more turnovers at way than LeBron.

yet their defense was just as good without jordan... Why? Not hard to defend when your team is littered with some of the best defenders in basketball.

valade16
05-18-2017, 01:29 AM
had less talent than the bulls=beat a team better than jordan ever did.

And had as much talent as the Bulls and lost to a worse team than Jordan ever did.

More-Than-Most
05-18-2017, 01:32 AM
And had as much talent as the Bulls and lost to a worse team than Jordan ever did.

yup he choked 100 percent.... its the only reason he isnt better than jordan all time yet.

valade16
05-18-2017, 01:34 AM
yet their defense was just as good without jordan... Why? Not hard to defend when your team is littered with some of the best defenders in basketball.

Because Phil changed his game plan to be more defensively focused to combat their offense falling off a cliff without Jordan (112.9 to 106.1 without him the 109.5 when he came back partly and 115.2 when he came back fully).

This is the same argument of Curry vs Westy. Curry is better than Westy even if he's not more valuable to his team.

LeBron is more valuable to the Cavs defensively not because he's better, but because the rest of the Cavs are worse than the rest of the Bulls defensively. If they switched teams MJ would instantly be more valuable to the Cavs defensively than Bron to the Bulls so the point is fairly insignificant.

FOXHOUND
05-18-2017, 01:40 AM
all defensive teams? :laugh:

man

Yes, I'm sure you think that coaches haven't voted for LeBron more often on some conspiracy. He's obviously hated by coaches and around the NBA, right? :laugh2:

Look at all of the times Jordan punked Malone in the post in their two NBA Finals meetings alone in that video and tell me again how Jordan couldn't play against the PF's of the 2016-17 Boston Celtics. :laugh2:

Bostonjorge
05-18-2017, 01:43 AM
yup he choked 100 percent.... its the only reason he isnt better than jordan all time yet.

James on help defense is great with his shot blocking away and more importantly at the rim.

James on help defense can switch onto today's PF and C and defend the post and even deny the pass to the big man.

No great ball handler can just keep backing him down the whole game the way Magic would against Jordan. To big and strong.

On Defense I give James this over Jordan.

goingfor28
05-18-2017, 01:45 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Esc0Ak9Jb90

It's Michael Jordan! lol

I saw LeBron have Al Horford trapped in the corner tonight, only to let him blow by him for an easy dunk in the first quarter. LeBron doesn't have the intensity and consistent focus that Jordan had on D. There's a reason why LeBron has only made 6 All-Defensive teams (five 1st team).
All defensive teams as an argument. Lol.
Derek Jeter had 5 or 6 gold gloves. He must've been the GOAT defensive SS ever.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

valade16
05-18-2017, 01:46 AM
Yes, I'm sure you think that coaches haven't voted for LeBron more often on some conspiracy. He's obviously hated by coaches and around the NBA, right? :laugh2:

Look at all of the times Jordan punked Malone in the post in their two NBA Finals meetings alone in that video and tell me again how Jordan couldn't play against the PF's of the 2016-17 Boston Celtics. :laugh2:

MJ stole the ball from Karl Malone in the post, repeatedly blocked Ewing and outrebounded Zo head to head... but he'd get eh led by Kelly Olynyk LOL.

It's absurd. Al Horford certainly ain't banging nobody either. His 7 rebounds ain't punishing Jordan :laugh2:

valade16
05-18-2017, 01:49 AM
James on help defense is great with his shot blocking away and more importantly at the rim.

James on help defense can switch onto today's PF and C and defend the post and even deny the pass to the big man.

No great ball handler can just keep backing him down the whole game the way Magic would against Jordan. To big and strong.

On Defense I give James this over Jordan.

You mean the 91 Finals when Magic scored 18 PPG on 43% FG and lost to the Bulls 4-1? Seems like he showed MJ LOL

da ThRONe
05-19-2017, 09:52 AM
Are we still pretending this Cavs team is not one of the loadest teams in history?

Jordan with this Super Cavs team would be Great. Durant in GS would be looked at differently going up against Jordan's Cavs. Durant to GS would be the leagues answer to that Cavs team.

Individual all the players on the Cavs have accomplished very little in team success before teaming with LeBron in Cleveland. Pippen had success on his own, Rodman, Grant, all had success without Jordan. Not to say that Cavs are trash, but no key contributor had any history of winning before James.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 09:57 AM
Without putting too much thought into it, I think both teams would still be amazingly good. We would have to consider roster, rules, age, etc.

I was talking with my brother yesterday, and I do really think, LeBron is the most skilled, all around player I have ever seen. I grew up watching Jordan. He is the GOAT to me. But LeBron has clearly subplanted himself as 1B to me. He can't be stopped. And neither could Jordan.

My opinion? Sit back, and enjoy being able to watch a top 2-3 player to ever lace them up.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 10:00 AM
Are we still pretending this Cavs team is not one of the loadest teams in history?

Jordan with this Super Cavs team would be Great. Durant in GS would be looked at differently going up against Jordan's Cavs. Durant to GS would be the leagues answer to that Cavs team.

what hahahaha?

it has 1 all timer, 2 guys who are bubble all stars, and a bunch of role players who do what is asked of them. Wtf are you talking about?

pacofunk64
05-19-2017, 10:23 AM
We have got to stop the comparisons. Different type of players and different era's. Lebron is the greatest player of this era hands down. He still has a lot of game left but he shows no signs of letting up.

IMO however he will NEVER supplant Jordan as the GOAT. It's not just what Jordan did on the court but the marketing he did for the game off the court. Jordan hasn't been relevant for almost 20 years and yet his brand is still great. Had Lebron been before Jordan I would make the same argument in Lebrons case.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 10:27 AM
I think this Cavs team is worse if you swap Jordan with LeBron as the team fits perfect around LeBron and he gets the best out of them with his elite playmaking.

KingPosey
05-19-2017, 10:27 AM
yea and I am sure he could guard almost every position like lebron and lebron had the benefit of some of the best defenders in the history of the sport like the bulls did? Lebron never had a team as great as any of those champion bulls teams esp on defense. Jordan was a good defender but lebron actually deserved the Defensive player of the year award at least twice... Jordan got his via his name.

Something to read....


Give LeBron the capability to handcheck, hold, push, and shove the way MJ could all game and he's basically impossible to score on


LeBron, and I'm not even being overly swayed by how amazing LeBron played defensively in this series. I've said for quite a while now that while Jordan is most likely a top 3 defender of all time at the guard position, his impact on that end doesn't compare to that of a ridiculously versatile forward like LeBron, who can switch onto basically any player in the league, play the passing lanes, lock down guys 1-on-1, dominate the boards, and serve as a rim protector. If you look at the numbers for every team he's ever been on after his first couple years in the league, his teams' defenses have tended to be absolute garbage without him on the floor.

Compare that to Jordan, whose teams' defenses have actually fared very well without him...

1993 Bulls (with Jordan and Pippen): 106.1 DRTG (-1.9 to Avg.)
1994 Bulls (with Pippen): 102.7 DRTG (-3.3 to Avg.)
1995 Bulls (with Pippen and Jordan for 17 games): 104.3 DRTG (-4.0 to Avg.)
1996 Bulls (with Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman): 101.8 DRTG (-5.8 to Avg.)

Sure, it's a roughly constructed overlook of 4 seasons of team defense, especially since there are other players involved, but I'm led to believe that Pippen and Rodman were significantly more impactful defenders than Jordan was, helped by their positional advantages on that end. I think when evaluating defenders, people pay way too much attention to man-to-man defense (explaining why guys like Kobe can make 12 defensive teams), rather than considering all the other aspects that go into it. Jordan was better than LeBron at locking up individual players (on the perimeter for that matter), but I'd give James the advantage in basically every other area. It's just so much harder for guards to have the kind of defensive potential presented by forwards and centers, who aren't really only assigned with the task of defending the single guy they're matched up against, like most guards are. Personally, when looking at impact, I wouldn't rank the best defensive guard of all time ahead of the typical good defensive center in today's league.

In summary, LeBron, and I think it's a fairly sizable margin.

I'm so tired of this fašade that Lebron can guard 1-5 at an elite level. He can make a couple switches and guard under sized stretch bigs.!hed get ****ing smoked like anyone else if he had to actually do it for more than a moment. It's such a scam.

But I'm not denying how good he is just that that narrative is ******** and always has been.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 10:27 AM
We have got to stop the comparisons. Different type of players and different era's. Lebron is the greatest player of this era hands down. He still has a lot of game left but he shows no signs of letting up.

IMO however he will NEVER supplant Jordan as the GOAT. It's not just what Jordan did on the court but the marketing he did for the game off the court. Jordan hasn't been relevant for almost 20 years and yet his brand is still great. Had Lebron been before Jordan I would make the same argument in Lebrons case.

I don't think anything off court should factor in. Hell Magic/Bird helped save the NBA from going away. Doesn't help their rankings. Jordan happened to play in the time period where media was becoming more world wide, many countries were experiencing a revolution of freedom (China was opening up again after being so closed, so long), and by the time LeBron came around, the internet was already linking everything together.

I will say, I think Jordan would be hurt in this time period of twitter, instagram, etc. His mouthing off about management, punching Kerr in the face, and gambling would get him crushed PR wise.

But yeah, I do agree with your first point. They are different. But we can't help but compare the greatest in sports against each other. We are humans.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 10:28 AM
I'm so tired of this faced that Lebron can guard 1-5 at an elite level. He can make a couple switches and guard under sized stretch bigs.!hed get ****ing smoked like anyone else if he had to actually do it for more than a moment. It's such a scam.

But I'm not denying how good he is just that that narrative is ******** and always has been.

nobody can guard 1-5 effectively haha. I never got it either.

Yanks All Day
05-19-2017, 10:33 AM
As many have said, yes the Cavs are worse. But that's because Cleveland is built for LeBron. They built an entire bench on the premise it would be LeBron plus 4 shooters. It's entirely about LeBron James on the Cavs. If Jordan was the focal point, they would build the team around Jordan.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 10:38 AM
As many have said, yes the Cavs are worse. But that's because Cleveland is built for LeBron. They built an entire bench on the premise it would be LeBron plus 4 shooters. It's entirely about LeBron James on the Cavs. If Jordan was the focal point, they would build the team around Jordan.

yeah, but the Bulls always had floor stretchers to open up space for Jordan. Armstrong (he made a ****ing all star team), Kerr, Paxon, etc. While teams back then didn't utilize the 3 like they do now (due to zone), the Jordan Bulls still employed such players to space the floor. You telling me LeBron wouldn't be feeding those guys open bombs?

Again, it goes to all sorts of factors too. No zone? How on earth you keeping LeBron from living at the rim. No hand check? How on earth you keeping Jordan from clearing space to get easy looks?

Fact is, both teams would still rock. Guys like Jordan/LeBron, would dominate any era, anywhere, anytime.

Yanks All Day
05-19-2017, 10:49 AM
yeah, but the Bulls always had floor stretchers to open up space for Jordan. Armstrong (he made a ****ing all star team), Kerr, Paxon, etc. While teams back then didn't utilize the 3 like they do now (due to zone), the Jordan Bulls still employed such players to space the floor. You telling me LeBron wouldn't be feeding those guys open bombs?

Again, it goes to all sorts of factors too. No zone? How on earth you keeping LeBron from living at the rim. No hand check? How on earth you keeping Jordan from clearing space to get easy looks?

Fact is, both teams would still rock. Guys like Jordan/LeBron, would dominate any era, anywhere, anytime.

Oh, no. Maybe I wasn't clear. I think LeBron makes the Bulls just as good (or better) instantly. I also think Jordan takes longer to get the Cavs to where they are now. I personally believe LeBron is a more versatile player than Jordan. MJ has the better legacy, but I think LBJ fits seamlessly into any team in the history of basketball. Put it this way: I think LeBron on the Bulls has a much shorter adjustment period on the path to being just as good than if you put Jordan on the Cavs right now. LeBron just has that kind of game. But realistically, you put either one of them on a good team and you have a contender. I just happen to believe LeBron is the most versatile player in the history of basketball and he'd have an easier time than Jordan would with that kind of swap.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 12:55 PM
What would a team that is "built" around Jordan look like? Nearly every superstar has shooters out there. Some people just have difficulty grasping that LeBron is playing at a level that Jordan was playing at. I'm not sure where the confusion is coming from but does anyone here think LeBron loses with Pippen against Barkley? Or LeBron and Pippen vs Kemp+GP? I think Bulls are 6-0 with LeBron. 5-1 at worse.

IKnowHoops
05-19-2017, 01:06 PM
What would a team that is "built" around Jordan look like? Nearly every superstar has shooters out there. Some people just have difficulty grasping that LeBron is playing at a level that Jordan was playing at. I'm not sure where the confusion is coming from but does anyone here think LeBron loses with Pippen against Barkley? Or LeBron and Pippen vs Kemp+GP? I think Bulls are 6-0 with LeBron. 5-1 at worse.

Lol, 6-0. Great coaching, depth, defense, 3pt shooting and rebounding? Bron has never had a team that had all of those things. Then add Bron to that? 10-0

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 01:11 PM
I think everyone just needs to accept the fact that LeBron is going to be the GOAT when it's all said and done.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 01:18 PM
Lol, 6-0. Great coaching, depth, defense, 3pt shooting and rebounding? Bron has never had a team that had all of those things. Then add Bron to that? 10-0

People really think LeBron+Pippen+Rodman wouldn't absolutely destroy a team defensively.. The amount of matchup nightmare scenarios you can create would be insane. Look at TT.. Rodman is 10x that as a rebounder/defender. Look at Pippen. Wasn't he the guy who in their SIX RINGS together, had more rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks than Jordan in the playoffs? Could you imagine if it was flipped and Kyrie led LeBron with those same statistical categories? This notion that Jordan could win and win because he was 6-0 makes no sense.

Yanks All Day
05-19-2017, 01:39 PM
People really think LeBron+Pippen+Rodman wouldn't absolutely destroy a team defensively.. The amount of matchup nightmare scenarios you can create would be insane. Look at TT.. Rodman is 10x that as a rebounder/defender. Look at Pippen. Wasn't he the guy who in their SIX RINGS together, had more rebounds, assists, steals, and blocks than Jordan in the playoffs? Could you imagine if it was flipped and Kyrie led LeBron with those same statistical categories? This notion that Jordan could win and win because he was 6-0 makes no sense.

I think the unfortunate situation is that we've romanticized Michael Jordan's career even beyond the G.O.A.T. status that he currently has. If you let many people tell it, Jordan played only 6 years, won 6 rings, scored or assisted on every point, grabbed every rebound, and always defended the best player on the opposing team. Essentially, the Bulls teams were just along for the ride with Jordan as his rise to the G.O.A.T. was a formality.

In reality, Michael Jordan is the most accomplished basketball player ever. He's the G.O.A.T. right now for sure. He earned the spot he has because he has the best overall career. But somewhere along the way, through the mythology of Jordan, the shoes, and a general denial of LeBron's ascension to the potential G.O.A.T. spot, we're almost making up how good Jordan was.

The reality is that LeBron James is bigger, stronger, faster, a better passer, better ball handler, better rebounder, better long-distance shooter, more versatile defender, and has had a longer career of sustained greatness than MJ at only 32 years old. No one has ever done more with less than LeBron has. Off-court, it's no comparison either (though that doesn't matter as much to me.) I'm not denying that LeBron isn't on MJ's G.O.A.T. status yet, but it's almost like we're making up just how good Jordan was in order to avoid the inevitable debate. LeBron is right there. Put him on those Bulls and they win every title for a decade.

KingPosey
05-19-2017, 01:52 PM
I think the unfortunate situation is that we've romanticized Michael Jordan's career even beyond the G.O.A.T. status that he currently has. If you let many people tell it, Jordan played only 6 years, won 6 rings, scored or assisted on every point, grabbed every rebound, and always defended the best player on the opposing team. Essentially, the Bulls teams were just along for the ride with Jordan as his rise to the G.O.A.T. was a formality.

In reality, Michael Jordan is the most accomplished basketball player ever. He's the G.O.A.T. right now for sure. He earned the spot he has because he has the best overall career. But somewhere along the way, through the mythology of Jordan, the shoes, and a general denial of LeBron's ascension to the potential G.O.A.T. spot, we're almost making up how good Jordan was.

The reality is that LeBron James is bigger, stronger, faster, a better passer, better ball handler, better rebounder, better long-distance shooter, more versatile defender, and has had a longer career of sustained greatness than MJ at only 32 years old. No one has ever done more with less than LeBron has. Off-court, it's no comparison either (though that doesn't matter as much to me.) I'm not denying that LeBron isn't on MJ's G.O.A.T. status yet, but it's almost like we're making up just how good Jordan was in order to avoid the inevitable debate. LeBron is right there. Put him on those Bulls and they win every title for a decade.

I don't want to argue every point but Lebron is not a better ball handler. Lebron can take the ball downhill and blow by you but that's it. He's amazing, again, but his ball handling isn't special

valade16
05-19-2017, 01:59 PM
I wonder if this is how old timers felt when people said MJ was GOAT over Kareem or Wilt. I guess the greats of yesteryear are always inevitably forgotten or diminished.

Regardless, the disrespect to MJ is pretty funny. The Cavs would be just as good and just as dominant with MJ as LeBron.

valade16
05-19-2017, 02:04 PM
LeBron on the Bulls would go 10-0

Maybe so.

But MJ on the Heat would've gone 4-0 as well.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:06 PM
LeBron on the Bulls would go 10-0

Maybe so.

But MJ on the Heat would've gone 4-0 as well.

2014 Spurs beat the Heat with or without MJ. Wade+Bosh were total duds in that series. Wade was outperformed by Manu and Bosh got destroyed by Timmy D. There's just not enough individual greatness that can overcome that. Spurs were just on a roll that Finals. The ball movement was unimaginably scary good. 3-1 would be a fair assessment. No excuse for LeBron losing to the Mavs. He should have four rings by now...

valade16
05-19-2017, 02:13 PM
2014 Spurs beat the Heat with or without MJ. Wade+Bosh were total duds in that series. Wade was outperformed by Manu and Bosh got destroyed by Timmy D. There's just not enough individual greatness that can overcome that. Spurs were just on a roll that Finals. The ball movement was unimaginably scary good. 3-1 would be a fair assessment. No excuse for LeBron losing to the Mavs. He should have four rings by now...

Oh, if we're going with fair assessments we need to seriously rethink the whole 10-0 thing because that ain't happening.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 02:15 PM
Yep Wade and LeBron should have 4 rings and Wade should have 2 Finals MVPs.

As for LeBron vs Jordan, right now it's probably Jordan but when it's all said and done LeBron will be the GOAT.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 02:16 PM
Oh, if we're going with fair assessments we need to seriously rethink the whole 10-0 thing because that ain't happening.

Yea that definitely isn't happening lol. That's a ridiculous statement.

valade16
05-19-2017, 02:17 PM
Yep Wade and LeBron should have 4 rings and Wade should have 2 Finals MVPs.

As for LeBron vs Jordan, right now it's probably Jordan but when it's all said and done LeBron will be the GOAT.

LeBron will have to do it by longevity (which doesn't really work for Kareem), because barring a truly GOAT cementing win vs the Warriors, he won't be winning anymore titles. Difficult for me to see LeBron with 3 rings ever topping MJ with 6 in most people's minds.

Again, if he can somehow slay this Warriors team it's a whole different discussion.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:19 PM
Oh, if we're going with fair assessments we need to seriously rethink the whole 10-0 thing because that ain't happening.

I never said 10-0 but you've gotta be kidding me if you think Jordan would've done anything different in 2014. Heat were getting pummeled by 20-30 points. Game 1, LeBron has cramps. They are up 7. He can't play any longer and Heat get outscored by 22 points without LeBron in the fourth. Unless you're suggesting Jordan provides you a 60+ PPG performance, then there is no way Jordan beats that team. The 10-0 thing, Idk where that is coming from but it's entirely possible for LeBron to go 6-0 with those Bulls teams. Bulls had three HOF'ers. Some teams had one max. I'm not sure why Jordan is portrayed as the underdog.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:21 PM
LeBron will have to do it by longevity (which doesn't really work for Kareem), because barring a truly GOAT cementing win vs the Warriors, he won't be winning anymore titles. Difficult for me to see LeBron with 3 rings ever topping MJ with 6 in most people's minds.

Again, if he can somehow slay this Warriors team it's a whole different discussion.

Microscopic level, difficult seeing how Jordan wins more rings at age 32 against this Warriors team, too. Not every ring is the same. Beating the Mavs in 2011 is NOT the same as beating the Warriors in 2016. We're dealing with an entirely different level of competition here. LeBron's 2016 ring far surpasses any ring Jordan won.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 02:24 PM
Did Jordan beat any teams better than last years Warriors or the 2013 Spurs to win a title?

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 02:27 PM
I wonder if this is how old timers felt when people said MJ was GOAT over Kareem or Wilt. I guess the greats of yesteryear are always inevitably forgotten or diminished.

Regardless, the disrespect to MJ is pretty funny. The Cavs would be just as good and just as dominant with MJ as LeBron.

I grew up with MJ. To me, he is the GOAT. Can LeBron catch him? Maybe, but everything has to go right.

My whole thing is, each team would still be great. Arguing the differences is fine, but there are so many factors to consider.

LeBron is the best player since Jordan. He is maybe the best all around player I have ever seen, though Jordan just took your soul with his scoring, and pit bull defense. So in reality, can't go wrong with either. They are the 2 guys I start with for any roster I can come up with.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:27 PM
Did Jordan beat any teams better than last years Warriors or the 2013 Spurs to win a title?

The Bulls toughest Finals competition those years were the Seattle Sonics team IMO. Outside of the Mavericks team, I like OKC, Spurs, Spurs, Warriors, and Warriors over that Sonics team.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 02:28 PM
LeBron will have to do it by longevity (which doesn't really work for Kareem), because barring a truly GOAT cementing win vs the Warriors, he won't be winning anymore titles. Difficult for me to see LeBron with 3 rings ever topping MJ with 6 in most people's minds.

Again, if he can somehow slay this Warriors team it's a whole different discussion.

KAJ is my #3 guy. Look at the 70's....Kareem literally owned the entire decade haha

IKnowHoops
05-19-2017, 02:29 PM
I think the unfortunate situation is that we've romanticized Michael Jordan's career even beyond the G.O.A.T. status that he currently has. If you let many people tell it, Jordan played only 6 years, won 6 rings, scored or assisted on every point, grabbed every rebound, and always defended the best player on the opposing team. Essentially, the Bulls teams were just along for the ride with Jordan as his rise to the G.O.A.T. was a formality.

In reality, Michael Jordan is the most accomplished basketball player ever. He's the G.O.A.T. right now for sure. He earned the spot he has because he has the best overall career. But somewhere along the way, through the mythology of Jordan, the shoes, and a general denial of LeBron's ascension to the potential G.O.A.T. spot, we're almost making up how good Jordan was.

The reality is that LeBron James is bigger, stronger, faster, a better passer, better ball handler, better rebounder, better long-distance shooter, more versatile defender, and has had a longer career of sustained greatness than MJ at only 32 years old. No one has ever done more with less than LeBron has. Off-court, it's no comparison either (though that doesn't matter as much to me.) I'm not denying that LeBron isn't on MJ's G.O.A.T. status yet, but it's almost like we're making up just how good Jordan was in order to avoid the inevitable debate. LeBron is right there. Put him on those Bulls and they win every title for a decade.

Let the doors of the church be opened.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 02:30 PM
The Bulls toughest Finals competition those years were the Seattle Sonics team IMO. Outside of the Mavericks team, I like OKC, Spurs, Spurs, Warriors, and Warriors over that Sonics team.

I agree, LeBron has faced tougher challenges in the finals. He only underperformed in 2011 imo.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 02:30 PM
KAJ is my #3 guy. Look at the 70's....Kareem literally owned the entire decade haha

KAJ is also my #3 behind Jordan and LeBron. He's got the numbers and accolades to back it up.

IKnowHoops
05-19-2017, 02:34 PM
LeBron will have to do it by longevity (which doesn't really work for Kareem), because barring a truly GOAT cementing win vs the Warriors, he won't be winning anymore titles. Difficult for me to see LeBron with 3 rings ever topping MJ with 6 in most people's minds.

Again, if he can somehow slay this Warriors team it's a whole different discussion.

Prepare yourself for "a whole different discussion"

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:35 PM
I spoke to my coworker regarding Jordan's competition. I'm seriously confused. This guy effectively became the GOAT as soon as the Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons became watered down seniors. How different would this be if Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons were at their prime going up against Jordan's Bulls? 6-0? Yeah, no way. I mean, we're talking about Reggie Miller as one of the best SG's out there. Reggie was basically Klay Thompson with more toughness and athleticism. It's crazy we have to overstate how great Reggie is just to make Jordan sound like he beat a prime Bird. LeBron's going up against an all-time great Warriors team that will seriously be up there in terms of the greatest dynasties. He's not going to be the favorite to beat them - nor should he be. It wasn't long ago KD was 2nd to only LeBron. It was just last year Curry put up one of the best season's we've ever seen. That's what Lebron has to play against. Poor MJ. Had to go through the great utah Jazz...

IKnowHoops
05-19-2017, 02:38 PM
KAJ is also my #3 behind Jordan and LeBron. He's got the numbers and accolades to back it up.

I got Shaq

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 02:39 PM
I spoke to my coworker regarding Jordan's competition. I'm seriously confused. This guy effectively became the GOAT as soon as the Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons became watered down seniors. How different would this be if Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons were at their prime going up against Jordan's Bulls? 6-0? Yeah, no way. I mean, we're talking about Reggie Miller as one of the best SG's out there. Reggie was basically Klay Thompson with more toughness and athleticism. It's crazy we have to overstate how great Reggie is just to make Jordan sound like he beat a prime Bird.


to be fair, Reggie had some of his greatest moments at MSG, which means media, and especially Knicks fans, overrate the living **** out of him.

He was exactly Klay with the ability to get to the line. Excellent player, but by no means a superstar. Hell, he made what, 3 all NBA teams (3rd teams) in his entire career.

valade16
05-19-2017, 02:39 PM
Prepare yourself for "a whole different discussion"

:laugh2:

I would love nothing more than to see that, trust me.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 02:41 PM
:laugh2:

I would love nothing more than to see that, trust me.

Durant might see if he can sign with the 96' Bulls if that happens

IKnowHoops
05-19-2017, 02:43 PM
Jordan was amazing

RowBTrice
05-19-2017, 02:48 PM
Jordan would not of needed BOTH Kyrie and Love to win a championship

Bostonjorge
05-19-2017, 02:51 PM
Giving Jordan the Cavs is giving him the rebounding, shooting, bench and Star power advantages over Pacers, Raptors and Celtics. If Jordan had all these advantages and Jordan swept the Pacers and Raptors then beat down the Celtics in game one, does that make Jordan more Jordaness? Of course not. It would be a joke. It would even take away for his greatness by stacking all the advantages in his favor. Everyone would be cheering the underdog GS led by Durant.

It's just that time of year again when James takes down teams in the east that are forgotten and shoved in the pile of worst teams in playoff history.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:51 PM
Jordan would not of needed BOTH Kyrie and Love to win a championship

https://i.gyazo.com/6246c71f63c093c785ab17d9f0e1c606.png

Kevin Love for ya in the Finals. Jordan would have needed Kyrie. stop it.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:52 PM
Giving Jordan the Cavs is giving him the rebounding, shooting, bench and Star power advantages over Pacers, Raptors and Celtics. If Jordan had all these advantages and Jordan swept the Pacers and Raptors then beat down the Celtics in game one, does that make Jordan more Jordaness? Of course not. It would be a joke. It would even take away for his greatness by stacking all the advantages in his favor. Everyone would be cheering the underdog GS led by Durant.

It's just that time of year again when James takes down teams in the east that are forgotten and shoved in the pile of worst teams in playoff history.

So which team does LeBron+Pippen+Rodman lose to again?

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 02:52 PM
Jordan would not of needed BOTH Kyrie and Love to win a championship

no, he needed a player better than both by a landslide actually.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 02:52 PM
Jordan would not of needed BOTH Kyrie and Love to win a championship

Based on what?

valade16
05-19-2017, 02:54 PM
Microscopic level, difficult seeing how Jordan wins more rings at age 32 against this Warriors team, too. Not every ring is the same. Beating the Mavs in 2011 is NOT the same as beating the Warriors in 2016. We're dealing with an entirely different level of competition here. LeBron's 2016 ring far surpasses any ring Jordan won.


Did Jordan beat any teams better than last years Warriors or the 2013 Spurs to win a title?

Last year's Warriors certainly not. But people seem to minimize the quality of the teams Jordan beat because they didn't win a ring when the only reason they didn't win a ring was because of Jordan.

The Spurs SRS in 2013 was 6.67

Lakers SRS in 1991 was 6.73
Blazers SRS in 1992 was 6.94
Suns SRS in 1993 was 6.27
Sonics SRS in 1996 was 7.40
Jazz SRS in 1997 was 7.97

So yeah literally every team he faced in the Finals could be compared to the 2013 Spurs.

The 2013 Spurs went 58-24 in the RS and 12-2 in the playoffs before the Finals

The 91 Lakers went 58-24 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 92 Blazers went 57-25 in the RS and 11-4 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 93 Suns went 62-20 in the RS and 11-7 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 96 Sonics went 64-18 in the RS and 11-4 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 97 Jazz went 64-18 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 98 Jazz went 62-20 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals


Jordan faced a team comparable to the Spurs every single Finals. We romanticize the Spurs for 3 reasons:

1. They're recent so we remember them better
2. They are tied to the Duncan Spurs dynasty (even though the Spurs hadn't won a title in 6 years)
3. They are a championship team because they beat Bron the next season.

If Utah or LA or Portland had managed to beat the Bulls we'd be looking at them far differently today. But they couldn't.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 02:57 PM
Last year's Warriors certainly not. But people seem to minimize the quality of the teams Jordan beat because they didn't win a ring when the only reason they didn't win a ring was because of Jordan.

The Spurs SRS in 2013 was 6.67

Lakers SRS in 1991 was 6.73
Blazers SRS in 1992 was 6.94
Suns SRS in 1993 was 6.27
Sonics SRS in 1996 was 7.40
Jazz SRS in 1997 was 7.97

So yeah literally every team he faced in the Finals could be compared to the 2013 Spurs.

The 2013 Spurs went 58-24 in the RS and 12-2 in the playoffs before the Finals

The 91 Lakers went 58-24 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 92 Blazers went 57-25 in the RS and 11-4 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 93 Suns went 62-20 in the RS and 11-7 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 96 Sonics went 64-18 in the RS and 11-4 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 97 Jazz went 64-18 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 98 Jazz went 62-20 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals


Jordan faced a team comparable to the Spurs every single Finals. We romanticize the Spurs for 3 reasons:

1. They're recent so we remember them better
2. They are tied to the Duncan Spurs dynasty (even though the Spurs hadn't won a title in 6 years)
3. They are a championship team because they beat Bron the next season.

If Utah or LA or Portland had managed to beat the Bulls we'd be looking at them far differently today. But they couldn't.

We went over this before in the past. SRS has to be in relative terms. Compare the SRS of Jordan's teams vs those same Finals teams. Then compare the SRS of LeBron's teams vs his respective Finals teams. You'll find that Jordan's team was better, period. And the difference isn't because of LeBron vs Jordan. They were equally providing great seasons.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 03:00 PM
https://i.gyazo.com/6246c71f63c093c785ab17d9f0e1c606.png

Kevin Love for ya in the Finals. Jordan would have needed Kyrie. stop it.

Don't mind him, he pops up in anything Jordan/Pippen/Bulls related with some sort of ridiculous hot take backed by no facts or argument to try and prove his point and then disappears and you more than likely won't hear from him again.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 03:02 PM
Last year's Warriors certainly not. But people seem to minimize the quality of the teams Jordan beat because they didn't win a ring when the only reason they didn't win a ring was because of Jordan.

The Spurs SRS in 2013 was 6.67

Lakers SRS in 1991 was 6.73
Blazers SRS in 1992 was 6.94
Suns SRS in 1993 was 6.27
Sonics SRS in 1996 was 7.40
Jazz SRS in 1997 was 7.97

So yeah literally every team he faced in the Finals could be compared to the 2013 Spurs.

The 2013 Spurs went 58-24 in the RS and 12-2 in the playoffs before the Finals

The 91 Lakers went 58-24 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 92 Blazers went 57-25 in the RS and 11-4 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 93 Suns went 62-20 in the RS and 11-7 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 96 Sonics went 64-18 in the RS and 11-4 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 97 Jazz went 64-18 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 98 Jazz went 62-20 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals


Jordan faced a team comparable to the Spurs every single Finals. We romanticize the Spurs for 3 reasons:

1. They're recent so we remember them better
2. They are tied to the Duncan Spurs dynasty (even though the Spurs hadn't won a title in 6 years)
3. They are a championship team because they beat Bron the next season.

If Utah or LA or Portland had managed to beat the Bulls we'd be looking at them far differently today. But they couldn't.

without spending much time putting in effort to the evidence, 2 examples:

1- Karl Malone, in the playoffs, was a choker compared to regular season. meaning, Utah didn't play at the same level come playoffs.
2- the Spurs in 2014, starting in game 4 of round 1, would have had an SRS that blew all of those out of the water.

I am not trying to say what you posted isn't a fact, I am only saying regular season, and playoffs, are always 2 different things. Think the current Cavs. From this year, they look like a good offensive team, and pretty bad defensive team. Well, they are a team that flips the switch.

Idk, I just think it needs to be judged differently. We pick and choose our memories, luckily stats are stats, they never change, but even then, you have to look at SO many things when discussing multiple years of a players career and comparing them.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:02 PM
Just to add, Valade, do you really think SRS is a proper assessment of how great a team really is? There are way too many factors involved that it's a relatively weak ranking. People just try and rank everything these days quantitatively and it just doesn't make sense. Miami Heat's SRS for 2013-2014 was lower than their SRS for 2010-2011. They were much better in 2013-2014.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:06 PM
without spending much time putting in effort to the evidence, 2 examples:

1- Karl Malone, in the playoffs, was a choker compared to regular season. meaning, Utah didn't play at the same level come playoffs.
2- the Spurs in 2014, starting in game 4 of round 1, would have had an SRS that blew all of those out of the water.

I am not trying to say what you posted isn't a fact, I am only saying regular season, and playoffs, are always 2 different things. Think the current Cavs. From this year, they look like a good offensive team, and pretty bad defensive team. Well, they are a team that flips the switch.

Idk, I just think it needs to be judged differently. We pick and choose our memories, luckily stats are stats, they never change, but even then, you have to look at SO many things when discussing multiple years of a players career and comparing them.

Yup. SRS doesn't account for much of anything. And some stats are just out there because people are bored as hell. Kemp had a higher game score than Jordan in the 96 Finals. Anyone out here willing to say Kemp played better than Jordan?

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:07 PM
We went over this before in the past. SRS has to be in relative terms. Compare the SRS of Jordan's teams vs those same Finals teams. Then compare the SRS of LeBron's teams vs his respective Finals teams. You'll find that Jordan's team was better, period. And the difference isn't because of LeBron vs Jordan. They were equally providing great seasons.

Yes we did, which makes it odd that people are still trying to claim that the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals. They're not, as I've proved (twice now). The question was "has Jordan faced any team as good as he 2013 Spurs"? The answer is: Absolutely.

It wasn't "Did Jordan face a a team as difficult compared to his own as the 2013 Spurs to the 2013 Heat"? And even if that was the question, the answer is again yes:

The 1992 Suns has an SRS of 6.27
The 1992 Bulls had an SRS of 6.19

The Suns actually had a superior SRS and the Bulls (and Jordan) beat them. The 2013 Heat SRS was 7.03 and the Spurs was 6.67.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:11 PM
Just to add, Valade, do you really think SRS is a proper assessment of how great a team really is? There are way too many factors involved that it's a relatively weak ranking. People just try and rank everything these days quantitatively and it just doesn't make sense. Miami Heat's SRS for 2013-2014 was lower than their SRS for 2010-2011. They were much better in 2013-2014.

By itself? No. But then let's look at record, which shows all the teams Jordan faced being as good or better than those Spurs.

Simply put: there's nothing quantifiable to say the 2013 Spurs were better than any Finals team Jordan faced. You're essentially stying they were better despite anything but your opinion.

Record, stats, accomplishments, SRS, everything shows multiple teams Jordan faced were as good as the 2013 Spurs.

So whatever your opinion of SRS is, the truth is clear, it was a bad question because the answer was unequivocally yes.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:13 PM
Yes we did, which makes it odd that people are still trying to claim that the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals. They're not, as I've proved (twice now). The question was "has Jordan faced any team as good as he 2013 Spurs"? The answer is: Absolutely.

It wasn't "Did Jordan face a a team as difficult compared to his own as the 2013 Spurs to the 2013 Heat"? And even if that was the question, the answer is again yes:

The 1992 Suns has an SRS of 6.27
The 1992 Bulls had an SRS of 6.19

The Suns actually had a superior SRS and the Bulls (and Jordan) beat them. The 2013 Heat SRS was 7.03 and the Spurs was 6.67.

List all the Bulls SRS vs their Finals opposition.

So LeBron's team has only been favorites in terms of SRS 2/6 of his most recent NBA Finals.
Jordan's been huge favorites for 5/6 of his Finals.

And no, you're using SRS. That doesn't determine who the better team really is. It's a quantitative formula that involves many factors that we can't possibly accurately attribute to being a better team. I'm going to play this game a bit.

First year that came to my mind, I have no pre-data about this.

2000-2001 Lakers SRS: 3.74
2000-2001 Sixers SRS: 3.63

Are you telling me that the Sixers were nearly as good as the Lakers?

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:14 PM
without spending much time putting in effort to the evidence, 2 examples:

1- Karl Malone, in the playoffs, was a choker compared to regular season. meaning, Utah didn't play at the same level come playoffs.

2- the Spurs in 2014, starting in game 4 of round 1, would have had an SRS that blew all of those out of the water.

I am not trying to say what you posted isn't a fact, I am only saying regular season, and playoffs, are always 2 different things. Think the current Cavs. From this year, they look like a good offensive team, and pretty bad defensive team. Well, they are a team that flips the switch.

Idk, I just think it needs to be judged differently. We pick and choose our memories, luckily stats are stats, they never change, but even then, you have to look at SO many things when discussing multiple years of a players career and comparing them.

1. OK, then forget the Jazz. That still leaves 4 teams that make the answer to the question "yes"

2. I get SRS isn't the end-all-be-all, but then go to their records, their statistical dominance vs the rest of the league, their playoff record. All of those prove my point.

Like give me anything concrete, anything, to say the 2013 Spurs were better than any Finals team Jordan faced other than personal opinion.

It's a bad question because it's blatantly wrong.

Bostonjorge
05-19-2017, 03:15 PM
So which team does LeBron+Pippen+Rodman lose to again?
Lebron would win with them two. Only difference. James team defense would take a huge upgrade. Only thing is Jordan was enough offense and more importantly he was enough clutch offense. 4th quarters in big games is Jordan specialty. I seen James shy away form the big moment. Pippen is a great player but nowhere near as clutch as Irving. So James would have to not shy away and completely remove it from his game.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:17 PM
List all the Bulls SRS vs their Finals opposition.

So LeBron's team has only been favorites in terms of SRS 2/6 of his most recent NBA Finals.
Jordan's been huge favorites for 5/6 of his Finals.

And no, you're using SRS. That doesn't determine who the better team really is. It's a quantitative formula that involves many factors that we can't possibly accurately attribute to being a better team. I'm going to play this game a bit.

First year that came to my mind, I have no pre-data about this.

2000-2001 Lakers SRS: 3.74
2000-2001 Sixers SRS: 3.63

Are you telling me that the Sixers were nearly as good as the Lakers?

OK, throw out SRS and use record, I'm still right.

Do you have anything, anything besides personal opinion the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals? Because if you do, I'm all ears. If you don't then I submit "claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" and I say the 2013 Spurs were not better than any team the Bulls faced.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:17 PM
By itself? No. But then let's look at record, which shows all the teams Jordan faced being as good or better than those Spurs.

Simply put: there's nothing quantifiable to say the 2013 Spurs were better than any Finals team Jordan faced. You're essentially stying they were better despite anything but your opinion.

Record, stats, accomplishments, SRS, everything shows multiple teams Jordan faced were as good as the 2013 Spurs.

So whatever your opinion of SRS is, the truth is clear, it was a bad question because the answer was unequivocally yes.

Team 1: LeBron+Jordan+Kareem+Magic+KG

Team 2: 1996 Sonics.

Oh, yeah, they beat a team "better" than the Spurs for sure based on SRS. Too bad that's not how the game is really evaluated. League competition also matters. West is tougher in those years than they were during the Sonics year there. You're trying to use qualitative data that can be manipulated depending on how you want to use it.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:19 PM
OK, throw out SRS and use record, I'm still right.

Do you have anything, anything besides personal opinion the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals? Because if you do, I'm all ears. If you don't then I submit "claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" and I say the 2013 Spurs were not better than any team the Bulls faced.

So you're telling me the Sixers and Lakers were equally as great in 2000-2001. That's your assessment?

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 03:22 PM
1. OK, then forget the Jazz. That still leaves 4 teams that make the answer to the question "yes"

2. I get SRS isn't the end-all-be-all, but then go to their records, their statistical dominance vs the rest of the league, their playoff record. All of those prove my point.

Like give me anything concrete, anything, to say the 2013 Spurs were better than any Finals team Jordan faced other than personal opinion.

It's a bad question because it's blatantly wrong.

Oh I wasn't jumping on the assertion that LeBron beating GS beats anything Jordan did. I only meant using a teams regular season SRS as a guide to strength isn't my jam. For various reasons.

I think the 2014 Spurs team would have smacked almost any team in history. They were just textbook. But their season SRS won't tell you that. They hit a different gear early in the playoffs. Just an example

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:23 PM
OK, throw out SRS and use record, I'm still right.

Do you have anything, anything besides personal opinion the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals? Because if you do, I'm all ears. If you don't then I submit "claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" and I say the 2013 Spurs were not better than any team the Bulls faced.

How about the Spurs were just a better team because they had the better players and team with a coach that many at this point, would put above Phil Jackson? How about the fact that in the 2014 NBA Finals, had the Spurs played like that all season, they would have an SRS much higher than 6.7? How about the fact that GP is not better than Kawhi Leonard and Tim Duncan > Shawn Kemp? Or are we just going to try and use SRS as the SOLE piece of evidence. There is no definitive answer here. You can't argue, without SRS, that Jordan faced the better teams. You also neglect the fact that it has to be relative to something. Jordan's teams had a higher SRS than LeBron's teams heading to the Finals and by a wide margin over their respective Finals opponents. And it wasn't because of Jordan generating that massive difference. So you don't have much evidence, either other than a made up quantitative data that I can manipulate. If your agenda is to use SRS to determine who the better team was, then there is no point in having a discussion. Things can't be broken down numerically. 2000 Sixers were not as good as the 2000 Lakers. I'm sorry but according to you, they are equivalent teams.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:24 PM
Team 1: LeBron+Jordan+Kareem+Magic+KG

Team 2: 1996 Sonics.

Oh, yeah, they beat a team "better" than the Spurs for sure based on SRS. Too bad that's not how the game is really evaluated. League competition also matters. West is tougher in those years than they were during the Sonics year there. You're trying to use qualitative data that can be manipulated depending on how you want to use it.

You're trying to pass opinion off as fact. Not gonna buy it.

The Sonics, Lakers were every bit as good as the Spurs. The Jazz in 97 and the Blazers probably were as well.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:26 PM
You're trying to pass opinion off as fact. Not gonna buy it.

The Sonics, Lakers were every bit as good as the Spurs. The Jazz in 97 and the Blazers probably were as well.

You're trying to use SRS as the final judgement but won't admit that the Sixers were as good as the Lakers in 2000-2001 when using the same logic?

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:27 PM
So you're telling me the Sixers and Lakers were equally as great in 2000-2001. That's your assessment?

For the regular season? Yeah. Shaq was lazy and out of shape much of the year and the Lakers lost Derek Fisher for most of the season. Obviously they turned it on and went 15-1 in the playoffs and separated themselves. It's called looking at both stats and context. You have thus far done neither.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:30 PM
How about the Spurs were just a better team because they had the better players and team with a coach that many at this point, would put above Phil Jackson? How about the fact that in the 2014 NBA Finals, had the Spurs played like that all season, they would have an SRS much higher than 6.7? How about the fact that GP is not better than Kawhi Leonard and Tim Duncan > Shawn Kemp? Or are we just going to try and use SRS as the SOLE piece of evidence. There is no definitive answer here. You can't argue, without SRS, that Jordan faced the better teams. You also neglect the fact that it has to be relative to something. Jordan's teams had a higher SRS than LeBron's teams heading to the Finals and by a wide margin over their respective Finals opponents. And it wasn't because of Jordan generating that massive difference. So you don't have much evidence, either other than a made up quantitative data that I can manipulate. If your agenda is to use SRS to determine who the better team was, then there is no point in having a discussion. Things can't be broken down numerically. 2000 Sixers were not as good as the 2000 Lakers. I'm sorry but according to you, they are equivalent teams.

1st Bolded: 2013 Kawhi? 1996 Gary Payton was absolutely better. 2017 Kawhi? Kawhi was better. There's a difference...

2nd Bolded: I can and did.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:32 PM
For the regular season? Yeah. Shaq was lazy and out of shape much of the year and the Lakers lost Derek Fisher for most of the season. Obviously they turned it on and went 15-1 in the playoffs and separated themselves. It's called looking at both stats and context. You have thus far done neither.

LMAO. What context? You really thinking the Sixers had a chance against that Lakers team? C'mon, stop. Now you're so invested in your SRS nonsense that you're willing to say the Sixers were equally as good as the Lakers. I guess playing in EASIER conference has nothing to do with having a better record or SRS. This is not good for you. Stop using SRS. It's not the final judgement and far too many variables come into play. DeRozan turns into a complete scrub in the playoffs. You're not getting a 27 PPG DeRozan on 47% shooting in the playoffs. By your logic, there's no point in any debates. NBA world, there is no point in the NBA Finals. The best team is the one with the highest SRS. Speaking of SRS, the Raptors are a better team than the Cavs this season. Yup, you're right, Valade. Good solid piece of evidence.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:32 PM
You're trying to use SRS as the final judgement but won't admit that the Sixers were as good as the Lakers in 2000-2001 when using the same logic?

I already said throw SRS out.

I'll repeat: do you have anything besides your opinion the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals?

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:34 PM
LMAO. What context? You really thinking the Sixers had a chance against that Lakers team? C'mon, stop. Now you're so invested in your SRS nonsense that you're willing to say the Sixers were equally as good as the Lakers. I guess playing in EASIER conference has nothing to do with having a better record or SRS. This is not good for you. Stop using SRS. It's not the final judgement and far too many variables come into play. DeRozan turns into a complete scrub in the playoffs. You're not getting a 27 PPG DeRozan on 47% shooting in the playoffs. By your logic, there's no point in any debates. NBA world, there is no point in the NBA Finals. The best team is the one with the highest SRS. Speaking of SRS, the Raptors are a better team than the Cavs this season. Yup, you're right, Valade. Good solid piece of evidence.

I actually just said the exact opposite :laugh:

I'll repeat: do you have anything besides personal opinion the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals?

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:34 PM
1st Bolded: 2013 Kawhi? 1996 Gary Payton was absolutely better. 2017 Kawhi? Kawhi was better. There's a difference...

2nd Bolded: I can and did.

So you use SRS but won't use advanced numbers that put Kawhi and GP on the same level?

Dude, you're totally right. The Toronto Raptors this season was a better team than the Cavailers this season. They had the same record and Raptors had a higher SRS. You totally nailed the head on this one.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:35 PM
I actually just said the exact opposite :laugh:

I'll repeat: do you have anything besides personal opinion the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals?

Okay, they're not better. You're right. The Raptors this season was better than the Cavs. Thanks for establishing that. Go dig your hole out of that one. I'd love to read it.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:38 PM
So you use SRS but won't use advanced numbers that put Kawhi and GP on the same level?

Dude, you're totally right. The Toronto Raptors this season was a better team than the Cavailers this season. They had the same record and Raptors had a higher SRS. You totally nailed the head on this one.

1. I said throw SRS out.

2. What advanced numbers?

2013 Kawhi:
16.4 PER, .166 WS/48, 3.9 BPM, 2.7 VORP

1996 GP:
19.6 PER, .174 WS/48, 4.7 BPM, 5.3 VORP

Are you assuming 2013 Kawhi was as good as 2017 Kawhi (or even 2014 Kawhi)? Lol

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:39 PM
2014-2015: Hawks and Trailblazers were a better team than the Cavs.
2013-2014: Clippers, OKC, Warriors, Rockets, Blazers were better than the Heat.

Should I continue?

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:41 PM
1. I said throw SRS out.

2. What advanced numbers?

2013 Kawhi:
16.4 PER, .166 WS/48, 3.9 BPM, 2.7 VORP

1996 GP:
19.6 PER, .174 WS/48, 4.7 BPM, 5.3 VORP

Are you assuming 2013 Kawhi was as good as 2017 Kawhi (or even 2014 Kawhi)? Lol

2013-2014 Kawhi was at 19.4 PER, .193 WS/48, 3.8 VORP. But I mean, the Raptors are better than the Cavs. Are you 100% positive?

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:42 PM
2014-2015: Hawks and Trailblazers were a better team than the Cavs.
2013-2014: Clippers, OKC, Warriors, Rockets, Blazers were better than the Heat.

Should I continue?

When did you start? I already said throw SRS out.

I'll repeat: Do you have anything other than personal opinion why the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the playoffs?

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:44 PM
When did you start? I already said throw SRS out.

I'll repeat: Do you have anything other than personal opinion why the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the playoffs?

Dude, you're frickin lame at this. I'm sorry. You go on and on about SRS but then when it doesn't fit your narrative, you want to "throw it out." Okay, let's throw it out. What's your evidence that those teams Jordan faced were better than the Spurs? You seem to try and use SRS till you beat it like a bloody pulp but then throw it out like you had a tumor in your brain. That's not how it works. You wanna use SRS, use it for every argument. If not, you're just a hypocrite.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:44 PM
2013-2014 Kawhi was at 19.4 PER, .193 WS/48, 3.8 VORP. But I mean, the Raptors are better than the Cavs. Are you 100% positive?

So... NOT 2013 Kawhi?

I'm talking about the 2013 Spurs, not the 2014 Spurs. Keep up.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:46 PM
So... NOT 2013 Kawhi?

I'm talking about the 2013 Spurs, not the 2014 Spurs. Keep up.

2013 is when the season started.. are you serious? I can't tell if you're trolling. So next season is the 2018 season and not the 2017? LMAO, man, I'm done. Have a nice day.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:48 PM
Dude, you're frickin lame at this. I'm sorry. You go on and on about SRS but then when it doesn't fit your narrative, you want to "throw it out." Okay, let's throw it out. What's your evidence that those teams Jordan faced were better than the Spurs? You seem to try and use SRS till you beat it like a bloody pulp but then throw it out like you had a tumor in your brain. That's not how it works. You wanna use SRS, use it for every argument. If not, you're just a hypocrite.

Lame? I'm not the one acting like an infant having a hissy fit because I was called out on not being able to provide evidence lol.

1. The record in the RS and playoffs for many of Jordan's opponents was as good or better than the 2013 Spurs
2. The Ortg and Drtg was as good or better for many of Jordan's opponents than the 2013 Spurs

I'll repeat: do you have anything other than personal opinion that the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals?

mngopher35
05-19-2017, 03:48 PM
Long thread I might read into more later but is this idea considered off/wrong/different? I think that there is a pretty good argument that both the Bulls/Cavs were built better around the star they had. Switching them likely works fine for either guy honestly but in the end I think each does better with the star they have.

Cleveland with Kyrie as more of a scoring Guard needs a facilitator next to him imo like Lebron. On top of this Lebron adds some size/defense on the wings which will be important if we consider their opponents and matching up in todays game etc (not that Jordan can't, Lebron just fits in here better against GS imo with Durant/Green/help defense needed on top of his playmaking edge).

In the same sense Bulls had a secondary player as a point forward who would have overlapping qualities with Lebron and maybe want a scoring type next to him instead (so more Jordan). Again I think Lebron on that team is great but the fit of Jordan seems better due to the surrounding talent and their skill set/needs.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:49 PM
Post 93 by you:

"Yes we did, which makes it odd that people are still trying to claim that the 2013 Spurs were better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals. They're not, as I've proved (twice now). The question was "has Jordan faced any team as good as he 2013 Spurs"? The answer is: Absolutely.

It wasn't "Did Jordan face a a team as difficult compared to his own as the 2013 Spurs to the 2013 Heat"? And even if that was the question, the answer is again yes:

The 1992 Suns has an SRS of 6.27
The 1992 Bulls had an SRS of 6.19

The Suns actually had a superior SRS and the Bulls (and Jordan) beat them. The 2013 Heat SRS was 7.03 and the Spurs was 6.67."

But on your most recent post, 92 Suns would have an SRS of 5.68.

You're a mess, Valade. Turn on the AC, buddy.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:49 PM
2013 is when the season started.. are you serious? I can't tell if you're trolling. So next season is the 2018 season and not the 2017? LMAO, man, I'm done. Have a nice day.

You said the 2013 Spurs. Were you talking about the Spurs LeBron beat in the 2012-2013 season or the 2014 Spirs LeBron beat in the 2013-2014 season?

I'm talking about the 2013 Spurs LeBron beat.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 03:51 PM
Long thread I might read into more later but is this idea considered off/wrong/different? I think that there is a pretty good argument that both the Bulls/Cavs were built better around the star they had. Switching them likely works fine for either guy honestly but in the end I think each does better with the star they have.

Cleveland with Kyrie as more of a scoring Guard needs a facilitator next to him imo like Lebron. On top of this Lebron adds some size/defense on the wings which will be important if we consider their opponents and matching up in todays game etc (not that Jordan can't, Lebron just fits in here better against GS imo with Durant/Green/help defense needed on top of his playmaking edge).

In the same sense Bulls had a secondary player as a point forward who would have overlapping qualities with Lebron and maybe want a scoring type next to him instead (so more Jordan). Again I think Lebron on that team is great but the fit of Jordan seems better due to the surrounding talent and their skill set/needs.

yeah but what about SRS and PER mofo?

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:51 PM
You said the 2013 Spurs. Were you talking about the Spurs LeBron beat in the 2012-2013 season or the 2014 Spirs LeBron beat in the 2013-2014 season?

I'm talking about the 2013 Spurs LeBron beat.

You use 92 Suns as in 92-93 Suns in your previous example.
Now you use 13 Spurs as 2012-2013 when if we follow your above example, 13 spurs would be 2013-2014.

You're incapable of admitting you're at wrong. I refuse to keep beating around the bush when such blatant inaccuracy from you is the culprit.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 03:53 PM
there are some posters here, where I just imagine them hammering the keys when they type, wearing out keyboard, after keyboard.

Take that!

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:53 PM
yeah but what about SRS and PER mofo?

I think I found the confusion. FlashBolt keeps saying 2013 Spurs but he apparently means the 2013-2014 than beat the Heat. Generally I refer to a team by the year the season ended in, not the year it started in (for instance I consider this the 2017 season not the 2016).

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:54 PM
I think I found the confusion. FlashBolt keeps saying 2013 Spurs but he apparently means the 2013-2014 than beat the Heat. Generally I refer to a team by the year the season ended in, not the year it started in (for instance I consider this the 2017 season not the 2016).


The 1992 Suns has an SRS of 6.27
The 1992 Bulls had an SRS of 6.19

SO WHY DID YOU SAY THE 1992 SUNS HAD AN SRS OF 6.27? 92 SUNS WOULD BE 1991-1992 SUNS. PLEASE STOP CONTRADICTING YOURSELF.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:55 PM
You use 92 Suns as in 92-93 Suns in your previous example.
Now you use 13 Spurs as 2012-2013 when if we follow your above example, 13 spurs would be 2013-2014.

You're incapable of admitting you're at wrong. I refuse to keep beating around the bush when such blatant inaccuracy from you is the culprit.

Are you talking about the Spurs that lost the title or the ones that won it? Because I think we're talking about different teams.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:57 PM
I have always been talking about the Spurs that lost to the Heat in 2013, not the Spurs that beat them in 2014.

Perhaps that explains why Flashbilt has flipped out so much, we are talking about different teams.

mngopher35
05-19-2017, 03:57 PM
yeah but what about SRS and PER mofo?

I saw a couple posts and wasn't quite sure where it started or what was truly being argued lol. That's why I just gave my opinion to see if someone disagreed and maybe I would jump in at some point after catching up.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 03:58 PM
Are you talking about the Spurs that lost the title or the ones that won it? Because I think we're talking about different teams.

Let me break this down for you:

You refer to the Spurs 2013 as the 2012-2013 season.

On your previous post, you referred to the Suns 1992 as the 1992-1993 season.

You're contradicting yourself. I'm following the benchmark YOU used but apparently, you don't follow your own.

valade16
05-19-2017, 03:59 PM
The Spurs that beat the Heat in 2014 were, in the Finals, playing better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals. But what's the point? LeBron lost that series. That would be relevant had he beaten them. I certainly don't blame LeBron for losing that series nor do I hold it against him when ranking him...

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 04:00 PM
The Spurs that beat the Heat in 2014 were, in the Finals, playing better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals. But what's the point? LeBron lost that series. That would be relevant had he beaten them. I certainly don't blame LeBron for losing that series nor do I hold it against him when ranking him...

same. Just like I don't hold his loss in 2007 to the Spurs against him either.

It's that little guy hanging out there, 2011 that kills him.....

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:01 PM
I saw a couple posts and wasn't quite sure where it started or what was truly being argued lol. That's why I just gave my opinion to see if someone disagreed and maybe I would jump in at some point after catching up.

Pretty much Valade saying based on SRS, Jordan did beat the better teams. Hawkeye and I told him that SRS is not indicative of how great a team truly is. I mention that according to SRS, Raptors are a better team than the Cavs this season. Valade then proceeds to say "throw SRS out." He wants me to prove the Spurs were a better team knowing full well that you can interpret the game however you want. In my opinion, Spurs were a better coached team that during that playoff run, was unstoppable. In his opinion, they weren't. I'll accept that. I won't accept the SRS nonsense because it's silly.

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:03 PM
Last year's Warriors certainly not. But people seem to minimize the quality of the teams Jordan beat because they didn't win a ring when the only reason they didn't win a ring was because of Jordan.

The Spurs SRS in 2013 was 6.67

Lakers SRS in 1991 was 6.73
Blazers SRS in 1992 was 6.94
Suns SRS in 1993 was 6.27
Sonics SRS in 1996 was 7.40
Jazz SRS in 1997 was 7.97

The 2013 Spurs went 58-24 in the RS and 12-2 in the playoffs before the Finals

The 91 Lakers went 58-24 in the RS and 11-3 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 92 Blazers went 57-25 in the RS and 11-4 in the playoffs before the Finals
The 93 Suns went 62-20 in the RS

Jordan faced a team comparable to the Spurs every single Finals. We romanticize the Spurs for 3 reasons:

1. They're recent so we remember them better
2. They are tied to the Duncan Spurs dynasty (even though the Spurs hadn't won a title in 6 years)
3. They are a championship team because they beat Bron the next season.

If Utah or LA or Portland had managed to beat the Bulls we'd be looking at them far differently today. But they couldn't.


Let me break this down for you:

You refer to the Spurs 2013 as the 2012-2013 season.

On your previous post, you referred to the Suns 1992 as the 1992-1993 season.

You're contradicting yourself. I'm following the benchmark YOU used but apparently, you don't follow your own.

I accidentally typed 1992 Suns later on, my bad. Look at my post 87 I quoted where I clearly called them the 93 Suns multiple times and said the Spurs were romanticized because they won the title the next season.

It's pretty clear from that I was talking about the Spurs that lost to the Heat, not the one that beat them...

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:07 PM
Pretty much Valade saying based on SRS, Jordan did beat the better teams. Hawkeye and I told him that SRS is not indicative of how great a team truly is. I mention that according to SRS, Raptors are a better team than the Cavs this season. Valade then proceeds to say "throw SRS out." He wants me to prove the Spurs were a better team knowing full well that you can interpret the game however you want. In my opinion, Spurs were a better coached team that during that playoff run, was unstoppable. In his opinion, they weren't. I'll accept that. I won't accept the SRS nonsense because it's silly.

More like Valade using SRS, Record, Ortg/Drtg and you forcing on SRS while providing no statistics of your own.

And to top that off, we are talking about different teams anyway. It didn't tip you off I was talking about the earlier Spurs when I posted their record and SRS and not the championship team's? agree the 2014 Spurs were beastly in the playoffs.

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:08 PM
Just for the record the 2014 Spurs that beat the Heat in the finals had a SRS of 8.00, better than any team Jordan faced in the Finals. Just kind of funny saying you can't use SRS when judging which teams are better when SRS shows the 2014 Spurs that won were better lol.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:08 PM
I accidentally typed 1992 Suns later on, my bad. Look at my post 87 I quoted where I clearly called them the 93 Suns multiple times and said the Spurs were romanticized because they won the title the next season.

It's pretty clear from that I was talking about the Spurs that lost to the Heat, not the one that beat them...

Yeah, I can see where the confusion can happen but my point is that SRS is not a good measure. It's my opinion that the Spurs were better just like some have an opinion that Curry was better than LeBron last season. But I'm not buying that SRS dictates who the better team was. Neither will I say that the better record = better team. We've seen enough evidence that suggests otherwise.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:10 PM
More like Valade using SRS, Record, Ortg/Drtg and you forcing on SRS while providing no statistics of your own.

And to top that off, we are talking about different teams anyway. It didn't tip you off I was talking about the earlier Spurs when I posted their record and SRS and not the championship team's? agree the 2014 Spurs were beastly in the playoffs.

Unless you're willing to say for a fact that Raptors are better than the Cavs this season, I'm not sure what you're really using with those numbers. I never used SRS - you did. You're probably the only guy who I've come across who defends the importance of SRS.

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:11 PM
Yeah, I can see where the confusion can happen but my point is that SRS is not a good measure. It's my opinion that the Spurs were better just like some have an opinion that Curry was better than LeBron last season. But I'm not buying that SRS dictates who the better team was. Neither will I say that the better record = better team. We've seen enough evidence that suggests otherwise.

The 2014 Spurs were better (and SRS actually supports that)
The 2013 Spurs were not (and SRS actually supports that)

SRS shouldn't by itself be used to make a definitive statement. Neither should record. But SRS, Record, stats (such as Ortg/Drtg) together will get you closer than absolutely nothing.

mngopher35
05-19-2017, 04:13 PM
Ya it looks like there was a confusion in years. I do agree that SRS is not the only way to look at things but from what I could tell Valade was also using context and other factors too (not that you can't disagree just that there was more to it).

Do we all consider last years GS finals win the toughest for either of them? Or best opponent or whatever? Or was this just solely about the spurs being compared to them.

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:14 PM
Unless you're willing to say for a fact that Raptors are better than the Cavs this season, I'm not sure what you're really using with those numbers. I never used SRS - you did. You're probably the only guy who I've come across who defends the importance of SRS.

It's because you don't understand what stats are measuring. They aren't measuring who is better but who is playing better. Sounds the same but it's an important distinction.

The Raptors indeed played better than the Cavs for much of the regular season, and SRS reflects their level of play relative to the Cavs. The Cavs didn't play very good for much of the year and had injuries (hence their low SRS, meager record, and numerous articles wondering what is wrong with them).

Now does that mean the Raptors are the better team? Absolutely not. We all know the Cavs were hurt and coasting and they've demonstrated it in the playoffs.

i can understand your reluctance to use SRS or other stats in general if you don't understand what they're measuring...

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:16 PM
Ya it looks like there was a confusion in years. I do agree that SRS is not the only way to look at things but from what I could tell Valade was also using context and other factors too (not that you can't disagree just that there was more to it).

Do we all consider last years GS finals win the toughest for either of them? Or best opponent or whatever? Or was this just solely about the spurs being compared to them.

Last year's Warriors were off my head the best win in terms of strength of losing Finals opponent of any team ever. Maybe the Lakers or Celtics when they lost to each other in the 80's, or the 67 Celtics when they lost to Wilt.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:17 PM
It's because you don't understand what stats are measuring. They aren't measuring who is better but who is playing better. Sounds the same but it's an important distinction.

The Raptors indeed played better than the Cavs for much of the regular season, and SRS reflects their level of play relative to the Cavs. The Cavs didn't play very good for much of the year and had injuries (hence their low SRS, meager record, and numerous articles wondering what is wrong with them).

Now does that mean the Raptors are the better team? Absolutely not. We all know the Cavs were hurt and coasting and they've demonstrated it in the playoffs.

i can understand your reluctance to use SRS or other stats in general if you don't understand what they're measuring...

Oh, so you're telling me a team in the PLAYOFFS will have a different SRS compared to the regular season? You proved my point, dude. SRS isn't going to tell you who the better team really is. And all these other measures are relative to the other teams in the same season. Thereby, using these numbers are not taking into considerations any factors of the game that may cause the differences. I do understand what the stat means. I'm just waiting for you to understand that playoff Spurs = different Spurs just like playoff Cavs = different Cavs. Just like hawkeye mentioned, playoff Jazz = different Jazz.

tp13baby
05-19-2017, 04:20 PM
He's better than Curry...by a lot.

And you probably shouldn't comment on threads anyone else makes. Have you seen yours?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

I was thinking the same thing.

Durant more important than Leonard to the teams success. Most ridiculous claim of the entire NBA forum all year.

If Curry was really better than Lebron than a lot, and they won without Durant how could anyone think that above.

Back to the claim, Lebron is better than Curry. Lebron fits this team better than MJ in my opinion. GS seems to struggle more against teams with length than playing small.

Not discrediting MJ but Lebron can get to the hole better and a little better passer in my opinion. Also against one of the best teams in history you can't give up second opportunities to GS cause they will kill you. Lebron is a much better rebounder than MJ. Still think MJ is the goat so let's not get confused.

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 04:21 PM
I don't even know what an SRS is......

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:23 PM
I don't even know what an SRS is......

Let's just say that if SRS puts Toronto above Cleveland this season, and a higher SRS is supposed to correlate with being a better team, then SRS is not reliable.

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:23 PM
Oh, so you're telling me a team in the PLAYOFFS will have a different SRS compared to the regular season? You proved my point, dude. SRS isn't going to tell you who the better team really is. And all these other measures are relative to the other teams in the same season. Thereby, using these numbers are not taking into considerations any factors of the game that may cause the differences.

They are better than nothing. They measure performance. We can use that to help us determine superiority.

If we can't use any measures of performance and it's all subjective, a person saying the 2017 Nets are as good as the 86 Celtics and nobody can disprove him other than "I think that's stupid".

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:24 PM
Let's just say that if SRS puts Toronto above Cleveland this season, and a higher SRS is supposed to correlate with being a better team, then SRS is not reliable.

Again you show your ignorance of what it measures. Excluding playoffs, which team had a better regular season? The Cavs or Raptors?

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 04:25 PM
The 2014 Spurs were better (and SRS actually supports that)
The 2013 Spurs were not (and SRS actually supports that)

SRS shouldn't by itself be used to make a definitive statement. Neither should record. But SRS, Record, stats (such as Ortg/Drtg) together will get you closer than absolutely nothing.

I don't remember which poster did it, but a few years ago, HCA was crapped on by looking at SRS when teams were playing each other. meaning, instead of using HCA, whichever team has the higher SRS, was the team to bet on.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:26 PM
They are better than nothing. They measure performance. We can use that to help us determine superiority.

If we can't use any measures of performance and it's all subjective, a person saying the 2017 Nets are as good as the 86 Celtics and nobody can disprove him other than "I think that's stupid".

I wasn't under the impression that everything written on PSD has to be factually proven because quite frankly, no one can prove any of it as 100% factual. It was my opinion that the Spurs were better just because I saw a Spurs team in the playoffs that just clicked. That "click" led to a total destruction of the Heat - one in which outside of James, there wasn't much production elsewhere. I just disagreed with how you used SRS so confidently because it doesn't take into account for injuries, resting players, players coasting, etc.,

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:29 PM
I don't remember which poster did it, but a few years ago, HCA was crapped on by looking at SRS when teams were playing each other. meaning, instead of using HCA, whichever team has the higher SRS, was the team to bet on.

It seems Flashbolt just doesn't know what it measures. He's screaming "Can you believe a stat designed to measure regular season performance has a team (the Raptors) who vastly exceeded expectations and played above their talent for much of the season over a team (the Cavs) who vastly underachieved and played below their talent level for much of the season?!"

Yeah. That's totally believable lol.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:30 PM
Again you show your ignorance of what it measures. Excluding playoffs, which team had a better regular season? The Cavs or Raptors?

I actually think you're being arrogant.

1) Excluding playoffs? Oh, you mean the only thing the Cavs care about? You mean a regular season in which teams TANK on purpose? Regular season couldn't be anymore irrelevant.
2) Tell me, if all I gave you was SRS and you had to pick between the Raptors or Cavs as the better team. Let's assume you have never watched basketball but you're confident that this SRS measurement is indicative of the better team. Are you willing to gamble your life savings that the Raptors ARE a better team or that they played BETTER for the season? Why take out the playoffs? There are LEVELS to it. Just like as I mentioned before, Harden forgets how to play basketball when the playoffs come. The game intensifies with tougher strategies. Do you judge who the better team is in the regular season or playoffs?

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:31 PM
It seems Flashbolt just doesn't know what it measures. He's screaming "Can you believe a stat designed to measure regular season performance has a team (the Raptors) who vastly exceeded expectations and played above their talent for much of the season over a team (the Cavs) who vastly underachieved and played below their talent level for much of the season?!"

Yeah. That's totally believable lol.

It took you more than ten posts to realize you confused the years for the Suns debacle of 92 vs 93. Don't confuse your inability to understand your errors with me. I'm fully capable of understanding it. I'm not sure what type of act you're trying to prove to everyone on PSD but if it helps, yes, I'm wrong, Valade. You are a basketball genius. That's what you want. You know it. I'll give you it for sanity sake.

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:32 PM
I wasn't under the impression that everything written on PSD has to be factually proven because quite frankly, no one can prove any of it as 100% factual. It was my opinion that the Spurs were better just because I saw a Spurs team in the playoffs that just clicked. That "click" led to a total destruction of the Heat - one in which outside of James, there wasn't much production elsewhere. I just disagreed with how you used SRS so confidently because it doesn't take into account for injuries, resting players, players coasting, etc.,

Well you're talking about the 2014 Spurs. I think they were better because they played phenomenally. I saw them play well and their league leading SRS, league best record and top 10 Ortg/Drtg combo demonstrated they played the best throughout the regular season and barring some team vastly improving in the playoffs, they were the best team.

If you think the 2014 Spurs were the best team and everything I've used in my points says that also, isn't that proof they aren't bad indicators of performance?

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:35 PM
Well you're talking about the 2014 Spurs. I think they were better because they played phenomenally. I saw them play well and their league leading SRS, league best record and top 10 Ortg/Drtg combo demonstrated they played the best throughout the regular season and barring some team vastly improving in the playoffs, they were the best team.

If you think the 2014 Spurs were the best team and everything I've used in my points says that also, isn't that proof they aren't bad indicators of performance?

No, it proves that it's a coincidence but a coincidence is not always replicated successfully. I'm sure a team with a high SRS will most likely win the NBA Championship. But I'm also sure that the playoffs is a whole other level. Why does Pop rest his players in the regular season? Do you think these guys care? LeBron and Cavs could have gotten home court but decided to rest. I mean, what does that tell you? It tells you this: They don't care about SRS.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:38 PM
Just to add, I'm sure the Blazers SRS after they got Nurkic was higher than than any 20 game sample without Nurkic. Does that take into account for any trades made? Any injuries incurred? Any changes with OTHER teams? It doesn't. It's just a mathematical formula. I can use it in a way to make it seem as if the Raptors were better but we all know it's not true. So if you're willing to use SRS, you gotta do it for BOTH ways. Good or bad. Objectivity, right?

mngopher35
05-19-2017, 04:39 PM
SRS is like many other stats, it is a measurement of what actually happened. So when we say Lebron coasted, they had injuries, didn't look motivated etc SRS won't catch that. It doesn't mean SRS is flawed it just means that the team in question simply wasn't playing up to it's normal level (and pretty much no one would agree with that context of them being worse or whatever).

Just because it doesn't give you the exact right answer or whatever all the time doesn't mean it becomes useless. You just have to consider everything and can use it as another tool to give you the whole picture.

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:40 PM
SRS is like many other stats, it is a measurement of what actually happened. So when we say Lebron coasted, they had injuries, didn't look motivated etc SRS won't catch that. It doesn't mean SRS is flawed it just means that the team in question simply wasn't playing up to it's normal level (and pretty much no one would agree with that context of them being worse or whatever).

Just because it doesn't give you the exact right answer or whatever all the time doesn't mean it becomes useless. You just have to consider everything and can use it as another tool to give you the whole picture.

Right, but he used it in the context of PLAYOFFS as well. Which is why I disregarded it. Playoffs is a whole other level. Can we find the SRS for the playoffs? Guarantee it's much different than the regular season.

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 04:41 PM
SRS is like many other stats, it is a measurement of what actually happened. So when we say Lebron coasted, they had injuries, didn't look motivated etc SRS won't catch that. It doesn't mean SRS is flawed it just means that the team in question simply wasn't playing up to it's normal level (and pretty much no one would agree with that context of them being worse or whatever).

Just because it doesn't give you the exact right answer or whatever all the time doesn't mean it becomes useless. You just have to consider everything and can use it as another tool to give you the whole picture.

yep. It's why looking at the 2001 Lakers doesn't do them justice. Shaq's fat *** didn't even get into shape until late season, and their playoff team was insanely good. But you would never know that by flipping through SRS

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:49 PM
I actually think you're being arrogant.

1) Excluding playoffs? Oh, you mean the only thing the Cavs care about? You mean a regular season in which teams TANK on purpose? Regular season couldn't be anymore irrelevant.
2) Tell me, if all I gave you was SRS and you had to pick between the Raptors or Cavs as the better team. Let's assume you have never watched basketball but you're confident that this SRS measurement is indicative of the better team. Are you willing to gamble your life savings that the Raptors ARE a better team or that they played BETTER for the season? Why take out the playoffs? There are LEVELS to it. Just like as I mentioned before, Harden forgets how to play basketball when the playoffs come. The game intensifies with tougher strategies. Do you judge who the better team is in the regular season or playoffs?

I probably am being arrogant, but it's in part because of how ridiculous you were acting earlier. If you don't want snarky back don't be snarky to start with.

Yes, if you used only SRS (which I said not to do) you'd lose that bet. But in this case the alternative is your opinion, and I guarantee you'd win more bets using only SRS than only your opinion (and that's not a dig at your opinion, I'd lose more with my opinion too).



It took you more than ten posts to realize you confused the years for the Suns debacle of 92 vs 93. Don't confuse your inability to understand your errors with me. I'm fully capable of understanding it. I'm not sure what type of act you're trying to prove to everyone on PSD but if it helps, yes, I'm wrong, Valade. You are a basketball genius. That's what you want. You know it. I'll give you it for sanity sake.

I initially said the 93 Suns and only said the 92 Suns later by mistake. It took you from that first post until forever to realize I wasn't talking about the 2014 Spurs. Don't talk about my inability to understand when you couldn't understand either lol.

valade16
05-19-2017, 04:52 PM
yep. It's why looking at the 2001 Lakers doesn't do them justice. Shaq's fat *** didn't even get into shape until late season, and their playoff team was insanely good. But you would never know that by flipping through SRS

Which is kind of exactly what I said when he brought up the 2001 Lakers. Why people keep insisting I think SRS is the end-all-be-all or that's all I use is beyond me (not saying you do).

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 04:57 PM
Which is kind of exactly what I said when he brought up the 2001 Lakers. Why people keep insisting I think SRS is the end-all-be-all or that's all I use is beyond me (not saying you do).

So we agree that SRS doesn't prove which the better team is.. thereby we agree that it's entirely possible for the Spurs to be a better team than any other Jordan faced.. thereby we agreed since the beginning considering I stated "In my opinion" and "I like" the Spurs.

valade16
05-19-2017, 05:01 PM
So we agree that SRS doesn't prove which the better team is.. thereby we agree that it's entirely possible for the Spurs to be a better team than any other Jordan faced.. thereby we agreed since the beginning considering I stated "In my opinion" and "I like" the Spurs.

By itself no. I agree the 2014 Spurs were better than any team MJ faced in the Finals, in part because of their league leading SRS. I don't believe the 2013 Spurs were better than any team MJ faced in the Finals, in part because of their inferior SRS.

RowBTrice
05-19-2017, 05:17 PM
Don't mind him, he pops up in anything Jordan/Pippen/Bulls related with some sort of ridiculous hot take backed by no facts or argument to try and prove his point and then disappears and you more than likely won't hear from him again.

Man, I really upset you, don't I? Yes, when I see something about the Bulls, I generally check it out. Yes, I do sometimes post. No, I don't then sit around refreshing my screen to see all of the replies, and then reply to all of the replies. I don't have that much time really. Yes, I understand I don't prepare each post with 30 mins of research and then put all said research into my reply.

It is what it is, I like the Bulls, I favor Jordan over any other player, and I don't like Miami or Wade. Is that why you're mad at me? Because I don't like Miami or Wade?

There, I reappeared just for you. What else should we talk about?

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 05:19 PM
Man, I really upset you, don't I? Yes, when I see something about the Bulls, I generally check it out. Yes, I do sometimes post. No, I don't then sit around refreshing my screen to see all of the replies, and then reply to all of the replies. I don't have that much time really. Yes, I understand I don't prepare each post with 30 mins of research and then put all said research into my reply.

It is what it is, I like the Bulls, I favor Jordan over any other player, and I don't like Miami or Wade. Is that why you're mad at me? Because I don't like Miami or Wade?

There, I reappeared just for you. What else should we talk about?

How has your day been?

RowBTrice
05-19-2017, 05:22 PM
How has your day been?

Busy....work is crazy, family is crazy, not enough hours in a day guy. You done being mad at me or what? I wonder how many of my prior posts you replied similar sad crap about that I don't even know about. How often do you think about me? Just wondering....

valade16
05-19-2017, 05:43 PM
Just for kicks I looked up the best SRS seasons in history, here are the top 10 (oddly only 10 teams have ever had 10+):

1. 1971 Milwaukee Bucks (won title)
2. 1996 Chicago Bulls (won title)
3. 1972 Los Angeles Lakers (won title)
4. 2017 Golden State Warriors (pending)
5. 1972 Milwaukee Bucks (lost to #3 team on list)
6. 1997 Chicago Bulls (won title)
7. 2016 Golden State Warriors (lost to Cleveland Cavaliers)
8. 2016 San Antonio Spurs (lost to OKC in 2nd Rd)
9. 1992 Chicago Bulls (won title)
10. 2015 Golden State Warriors (won title)

6 won titles, 1 is pending (but the heavy favorite to win), 1 lost to a higher team on the list, 1 was the biggest upset in Finals history and the last one was SA losing to OKC in the 2nd Rd. Though that SA team did win more regular season games than any other SA team (67) which probably explains why their SRS is higher Han other iterations of SA (the 2007, 2014 and 2001 Spurs are all in the top 30 seasons in SRS ever).

FlashBolt
05-19-2017, 05:49 PM
Just for kicks I looked up the best SRS seasons in history, here are the top 10 (oddly only 10 teams have ever had 10+):

1. 1971 Milwaukee Bucks (won title)
2. 1996 Chicago Bulls (won title)
3. 1972 Los Angeles Lakers (won title)
4. 2017 Golden State Warriors (pending)
5. 1972 Milwaukee Bucks (lost to #3 team on list)
6. 1997 Chicago Bulls (won title)
7. 2016 Golden State Warriors (lost to Cleveland Cavaliers)
8. 2016 San Antonio Spurs (lost to OKC in 2nd Rd)
9. 1992 Chicago Bulls (won title)
10. 2015 Golden State Warriors (won title)

6 won titles, 1 is pending (but the heavy favorite to win), 1 lost to a higher team on the list, 1 was the biggest upset in Finals history and the last one was SA losing to OKC in the 2nd Rd. Though that SA team did win more regular season games than any other SA team (67) which probably explains why their SRS is higher Han other iterations of SA (the 2007, 2014 and 2001 Spurs are all in the top 30 seasons in SRS ever).

This list is scary. It's hitting me that the Warriors will probably fill up the top 8 spots here if they just hold onto their roster for five more seasons. Man.. that's insane. We also don't see the show-time Lakers or Larry's Celtics or the Bad Boy Pistons - three teams that I think deserve to be mentioned as top ten ever. But man, holy hell that Warriors team...

Hawkeye15
05-19-2017, 05:49 PM
Which is kind of exactly what I said when he brought up the 2001 Lakers. Why people keep insisting I think SRS is the end-all-be-all or that's all I use is beyond me (not saying you do).

oh yeah, just read your example. Well, slightly above average minds think alike. Cheers haha!

WaDe03
05-19-2017, 06:04 PM
Busy....work is crazy, family is crazy, not enough hours in a day guy. You done being mad at me or what? I wonder how many of my prior posts you replied similar sad crap about that I don't even know about. How often do you think about me? Just wondering....

Honestly, every day. I just wish you'd check in every now and then and let me know how everything's going.

valade16
05-19-2017, 06:18 PM
This list is scary. It's hitting me that the Warriors will probably fill up the top 8 spots here if they just hold onto their roster for five more seasons. Man.. that's insane. We also don't see the show-time Lakers or Larry's Celtics or the Bad Boy Pistons - three teams that I think deserve to be mentioned as top ten ever. But man, holy hell that Warriors team...

The 1986 Celtics are 13th so not too far off. The 87 Lakers are 23rd. The Bad Boy Pistons are not. Ear the best ever.

But if you break it down as teams in general based on peak average it'd be:

1. 71-72 Bucks
2. 96-98 Bulls
3. 72 Lakers
4. 17 Curry/KD Warriors
5. 16 Curry Warriors
6. 14-16 Spurs
7. 91-93 Bulls
8. 08 Celtics
9. 13 Thunder
10. 80's Celtics
11. 86 Bucks
12. 94-96 Sonics
13. 09 Cavs
14. 67 76ers
15. 90-92 Blazers
16. 70's Knicks
17. 00 Lakers
18. 07 Spurs
19. 80's Lakers
20. 60's Celtics

So in the top 20 you have roughly 9 of the generally considered top 10 best teams ever. So there is some variance but it's still fairly accurate with general perception.

Heediot
05-19-2017, 08:26 PM
It's funny how people think the Spurs in 2014 were unbeatable yet the next year they lost in the first round of the playoffs. Matchups matter, I'm not saying Jordan would have won or lost, but the spurs had essentially the same team the next year.

I also think LeBron would be a more beast defender if he played in Jordan's era, and Jordan would be more beast offensively in this era so it washes out. I think Jordan would adapt and become a better shooter from range and so would others in his era if they played in this era.

valade16
05-19-2017, 08:32 PM
It's funny how people think the Spurs in 2014 were unbeatable yet the next year they lost in the first round of the playoffs. Matchups matter, I'm not saying Jordan would have won or lost, but the spurs had essentially the same team the next year.

I also think LeBron would be a more beast defender if he played in Jordan's era, and Jordan would be more beast offensively in this era so it washes out. I think Jordan would adapt and become a better shooter from range and so would others in his era if they played in this era.

What's funny is Jordan's playoff 3Pt% is actually higher than LeBron's (33.2% to 32.7%).

Heediot
05-19-2017, 08:53 PM
The reality is that LeBron James is bigger, stronger, faster, a better passer, better ball handler, better rebounder, better long-distance shooter, more versatile defender, and has had a longer career of sustained greatness than MJ at only 32 years old.

A lot of that is debatable. Bigger and Stronger is the only thing that is clear cut.

lol, please
05-19-2017, 11:21 PM
Unfortunate this was unlocked...

Gibby23
05-20-2017, 12:16 AM
what hahahaha?

it has 1 all timer, 2 guys who are bubble all stars, and a bunch of role players who do what is asked of them. Wtf are you talking about?

Kyrie isn't a bubble All Star. He is legit.

goingfor28
05-20-2017, 12:26 AM
Unfortunate this was unlocked...
Unfortunate you're allowed to post...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Gibby23
05-20-2017, 12:29 AM
Unfortunate you're allowed to post...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

And you. Using baseball examples in the NBA forum. Get out of here with that ****. I see you make backhanded remarks, but you have know real understanding of the stays in basketball.

Jamiecballer
05-20-2017, 12:32 AM
I think it was like the 3rd post of this thread that nailed it. Jordan wouldn't make this team better but he's such a great solo act he probably doesn't make them worse either.

Sent from my SM-T530NU using Tapatalk

Bostonjorge
05-20-2017, 12:40 AM
It's funny how people think the Spurs in 2014 were unbeatable yet the next year they lost in the first round of the playoffs. Matchups matter, I'm not saying Jordan would have won or lost, but the spurs had essentially the same team the next year.

I also think LeBron would be a more beast defender if he played in Jordan's era, and Jordan would be more beast offensively in this era so it washes out. I think Jordan would adapt and become a better shooter from range and so would others in his era if they played in this era.

Exactly. Kobe took down the Spurs(as defending champs)and eliminated them twice. This was also prime MVP Duncan, prime finals MVP Parker and prime Ginobli. Those where the best Spurs teams we seen. When Duncan was playing like the Goat PF and a top 10 player ever.

That team who beat down the heat just completely figured out how to play James. The results was even worse then what Cavs are doing to the Celtics. Goat level players don't get figured out.

KingPosey
05-20-2017, 12:44 AM
1st Bolded: 2013 Kawhi? 1996 Gary Payton was absolutely better. 2017 Kawhi? Kawhi was better. There's a difference...

2nd Bolded: I can and did.

Ya someone doesn't know literally anything about Gary Payton apparently

goingfor28
05-20-2017, 12:48 AM
And you. Using baseball examples in the NBA forum. Get out of here with that ****. I see you make backhanded remarks, but you have know real understanding of the stays in basketball.
Know

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

IKnowHoops
05-20-2017, 12:50 AM
Unfortunate this was unlocked...

Lol. Pot meet kettle

IKnowHoops
05-20-2017, 12:53 AM
Exactly. Twice as defending champs Kobe stuck it to the Spurs and eliminated them. This was also prime MVP Duncan, prime finals MVP Parker and prime Ginobli. Those where the best Spurs teams we seen. When Duncan was playing like the Goat PF and a top 10 player ever.

That team who beat down the heat just completely figured out how to play James. The results was even worse then what Cavs are doing to the Celtics. Goat level players don't get figured out.

Pistons figuring out and shutting down Jordan says high.

Gibby23
05-20-2017, 12:56 AM
Know

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

No. You still bring garbage to the table. Lol. Just stupid un sourced and just flat out wrong remarks most of the time. You compared something in here to Jeter. Nobody gives a ****...

Bostonjorge
05-20-2017, 01:00 AM
Pistons figuring out and shutting down Jordan says high.

True I think we all forget or chose to ignore that one all the time. I know they played Jordan dirty and all that, but Rodman was getting clean blocks on high flying prime Jordan. That Rodman made Jordan look less Jordan like.

Gibby23
05-20-2017, 01:06 AM
Pistons figuring out and shutting down Jordan says high.

Pistons figured out a young Jordan or did a young Jordan figure out how to beat the Pistons and never look back?

Bostonjorge
05-20-2017, 01:12 AM
Pistons figured out a young Jordan or did a young Jordan figure out how to beat the Pistons and never look back?

Also true

goingfor28
05-20-2017, 01:22 AM
No. You still bring garbage to the table. Lol. Just stupid un sourced and just flat out wrong remarks most of the time. You compared something in here to Jeter. Nobody gives a ****...
Clearly someone cares...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Gibby23
05-20-2017, 01:30 AM
Clearly someone cares...

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
Sure. Another well thought out basketball take by someone that knows nothing.

IKnowHoops
05-20-2017, 01:45 AM
Pistons figured out a young Jordan or did a young Jordan figure out how to beat the Pistons and never look back?

Pistons got old and Then Jordan got em.

LOb0
05-20-2017, 02:14 AM
They'd of won more than 51 games with Jordan that's for damn sure.

valade16
05-20-2017, 10:13 AM
Pistons got old and Then Jordan got em.

Eh, it was more young Jordan getting older than the Pistons.

When the Pistons beat the Bulls in 1990 MJ was 25 and Pippen was 24.

When the Bulls beat the Pistons in 1991 Isiah was 29, Dumars was 27 and Rodman was 29.

Far from old.

WaDe03
05-20-2017, 11:20 AM
They'd of won more than 51 games with Jordan that's for damn sure.

They were coasting clearly. 10-0 in the playoffs and beating the dog **** out of you guys. JR Smith acting like he's sweeping the court mid game, they're just playing with teams.

FOXHOUND
05-20-2017, 05:14 PM
All defensive teams as an argument. Lol.
Derek Jeter had 5 or 6 gold gloves. He must've been the GOAT defensive SS ever.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

Except, like LeBron with his 5 1st team and 6 total, that's not a whole lot in history. Ozzie Smith has 13 Gold Gloves, fool lol. Gold Glove also comes down to one individual in each league, as opposed to 5 players and two positional spots for LeBron across the whole league in the NBA. There are 16 players in MLB history with at least 10 Gold Glove awards, let alone Jeter's 5.

LeBron's 5 1st teams tie him for 14th all-time and his 6 total teams tie him for 20th all-time. Those are nice rankings, but there's a reason why Jordan ranks t-1st and t-7th in those despite playing 13 years on the Bulls while LeBron just finished year 14 without any real chance he makes a team again.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-20-2017, 05:45 PM
The team is built to complement Lebron better. So Lebron would be better for this team.

hugepatsfan
05-20-2017, 06:05 PM
Jordan was a better conditioned athlete to play all the games and play 100% of them. CLE would have won more games. But at his peak when he's done resting Lebron is better IMO and that's really what matters.

FlashBolt
05-20-2017, 09:10 PM
Some of you keep attributing these great "Bulls" teams as if Jordan was the sole reason they were great. Jordan had some of his greatest seasons in his EARLY stages of his career. Yet, they lost and never amounted to much. 1-10 in the playoffs without Pippen isn't exactly impressive. So what changed? His team did. As Jordan got worse, his team got better. Significantly better. You had two all-time great defensive teammates that would rank above Jordan in the greatest defenders ranking. You had Phil Jackson. You had what was then, some of the better shooters coming off the bench. And who were they going up against? Teams back then were lucky to have ONE superstar. Bulls had two. Did some of you forget that Pippen was 3rd in MVP voting the year after Jordan left? Or that Pippen led the Bulls to 55 wins without Jordan? They were a great team but it wasn't just because of Jordan. The LeBron-led teams have never been historic because they aren't the right personnel. I'm not saying Love+Kyrie aren't great but I believe that there are better pairings for LeBron in the NBA - pairings that Jordan had. Dennis Rodman+Pippen, you couldn't find two players better who let Jordan shine while doing the other dirty work. Love+Kyrie, btw, would not be All-Stars if they played in the West.. so for those saying LeBron's team is stacked, okay, did they make the All-NBA team or would they be All-Stars in the West?

IKnowHoops
05-21-2017, 02:06 AM
This current version of Lebron is the greatest player that I've ever seen. I'm pretty confident in them beating GS this year.

valade16
05-21-2017, 10:53 AM
Some of you keep attributing these great "Bulls" teams as if Jordan was the sole reason they were great. Jordan had some of his greatest seasons in his EARLY stages of his career. Yet, they lost and never amounted to much. 1-10 in the playoffs without Pippen isn't exactly impressive. So what changed? His team did. As Jordan got worse, his team got better. Significantly better. You had two all-time great defensive teammates that would rank above Jordan in the greatest defenders ranking. You had Phil Jackson. You had what was then, some of the better shooters coming off the bench. And who were they going up against? Teams back then were lucky to have ONE superstar. Bulls had two. Did some of you forget that Pippen was 3rd in MVP voting the year after Jordan left? Or that Pippen led the Bulls to 55 wins without Jordan? They were a great team but it wasn't just because of Jordan. The LeBron-led teams have never been historic because they aren't the right personnel. I'm not saying Love+Kyrie aren't great but I believe that there are better pairings for LeBron in the NBA - pairings that Jordan had. Dennis Rodman+Pippen, you couldn't find two players better who let Jordan shine while doing the other dirty work. Love+Kyrie, btw, would not be All-Stars if they played in the West.. so for those saying LeBron's team is stacked, okay, did they make the All-NBA team or would they be All-Stars in the West?

This 1-9 record in the playoffs thing without Pippen needs to stop. MJ lost 3 series without Pippen.

His rookie year the Bulls lost to the Bucks (LeBron did not lead the Cavs to the playoffs his rookie year). The next 2 seasons the Bulls lost to the 86/87 Celtics, widely considered one of the greatest teams of all-time.

During these series MJ averaged:

vs. Bucks: 29.3 PPG, 5.8 RPG, 8.5 APG, 2.4 SPG, 1.0 BPG
vs Celtics 1: 43.7 PPG, 6.3 RPG, 5.7 APG, 2.3 SPG, 1.3 BPG
vs Celtics 2: 35.7 PPG, 7.0 RPG, 6.0 APG, 2.0 SPG, 2.3 BPG


Jordan was not the reason they couldn't win. If you're going to give LeBron a pass vs SA in 09 because his team sucked you have to give MJ a pass as well. In 1986 when Jordan got hurt the Bulls were 21-43 without him.

It's also worth pointing out that in 1988 Scottie Pippen was a rookie who played 20 minutes a game and averaged 7 points and the Bulls beat the Cavs and won 50 games. Pippen was hardly a key cog in their machine, he was 8th on the team in terms of minutes per game.

One Nut Kruk
05-21-2017, 02:35 PM
Nobody will ever convince me that Lebron is better than Jordan. And quite frankly, there is no way we'll ever really know.

Mr.B
05-22-2017, 01:02 AM
Defend any and everything come the finals? Jordan was nowhere near the defender he was made out to be... 2 different teams... I think the cavs would be worse with jordan but I also think the bulls would be worse with lebron to a point.. Its an interesting debate... this lebron right now is playing at an insane level on both ends of the floor... Also Jordan would not have been able to flat out bully the celtics like lebron did tonight in the paint.

You're either too young or too old to remember Jordan's defensive prowess. You don't get named 1st team all defense 9 times including a Defensive Player of the Year award by being overrated. Jordan may not have been able to guard Centers but make no mistake he was a lock down defender.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-22-2017, 01:46 AM
You're either too young or too old to remember Jordan's defensive prowess. You don't get named 1st team all defense 9 times including a Defensive Player of the Year award by being overrated. Jordan may not have been able to guard Centers but make no mistake he was a lock down defender.

There's dozens of players who have been gifted All NBA defensive teams. You'd be foolish to think he was a top 2 defender at the guard position for all those 9 years. Maybe he'd have like 5-6 but 9 is extremely excessive.

LOb0
05-22-2017, 02:38 AM
There's dozens of players who have been gifted All NBA defensive teams. You'd be foolish to think he was a top 2 defender at the guard position for all those 9 years. Maybe he'd have like 5-6 but 9 is extremely excessive.

Anyone questioning Jordan's defense in insane. He was a mad man on both ends. Kobe's late awards however....

LOb0
05-22-2017, 02:38 AM
This current version of Lebron is the greatest player that I've ever seen. I'm pretty confident in them beating GS this year.

Ill remember that.

Mr.B
05-22-2017, 10:19 AM
There's dozens of players who have been gifted All NBA defensive teams. You'd be foolish to think he was a top 2 defender at the guard position for all those 9 years. Maybe he'd have like 5-6 but 9 is extremely excessive.

Who was better at the guard position than Jordan on defense during that time then? MAYBE the Glove but that's about it.

effen5
05-22-2017, 10:53 AM
Who was better at the guard position than Jordan on defense during that time then? MAYBE the Glove but that's about it.

Exactly, compared to now where only a small of PLAYERS actually play defense.

FOXHOUND
05-22-2017, 05:09 PM
Who was better at the guard position than Jordan on defense during that time then? MAYBE the Glove but that's about it.

The Glove made 9 All-Defensive 1st teams like Jordan did, he was owning that PG spot. Jordan owned that SG spot. You had guys like Mookie Blalock, John Starks, etc. who made 2nd team, but none of those guys were on Jordan's level. Mookie was making 1st teams before Payton stole it away from him going forward. :D

The amazing thing about Jordan is he was that good. His achievements seem otherworldly because he was otherworldly lol. LeBron is a very good defender, and at his peak he was really damn good. His effort and consistency level never could touch Jordan though, and his best defense could never touch Jordan's best.

He has the "Seal" of approval... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVb5x8WIwH8

valade16
05-22-2017, 05:25 PM
The Glove made 9 All-Defensive 1st teams like Jordan did, he was owning that PG spot. Jordan owned that SG spot. You had guys like Mookie Blalock, John Starks, etc. who made 2nd team, but none of those guys were on Jordan's level. Mookie was making 1st teams before Payton stole it away from him going forward. :D

The amazing thing about Jordan is he was that good. His achievements seem otherworldly because he was otherworldly lol. LeBron is a very good defender, and at his peak he was really damn good. His effort and consistency level never could touch Jordan though, and his best defense could never touch Jordan's best.

He has the "Seal" of approval... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVb5x8WIwH8

People assume because of the myth of Jordan or how highly people talk about him they must be embellishing or exaggerating, but we're not.

For instance people are claiming MJ wasn't as good as claimed on defense because Scottie Pippen guarded the other team's best player, not MJ. Except MJ made the All-NBA Defensive 1st Team and won DPOY in 1988, Pippen's rookie year when he didn't start a single game and only played 20 MPG.

Jordan was absolutely that good on defense. Heck, the year he was injured the Bulls had the worst Defense by Drtg in the league. Next year they were 11th and the year after they were 3rd. That was pre-Pippen.

FOXHOUND
05-22-2017, 05:39 PM
People assume because of the myth of Jordan or how highly people talk about him they must be embellishing or exaggerating, but we're not.

For instance people are claiming MJ wasn't as good as claimed on defense because Scottie Pippen guarded the other team's best player, not MJ. Except MJ made the All-NBA Defensive 1st Team and won DPOY in 1988, Pippen's rookie year when he didn't start a single game and only played 20 MPG.

Jordan was absolutely that good on defense. Heck, the year he was injured the Bulls had the worst Defense by Drtg in the league. Next year they were 11th and the year after they were 3rd. That was pre-Pippen.

Yeah dude, Jordan is just unreal. Pippen too, and having both of them was unbelievably unfair lol.

I remember when I was younger with my boy Kobe. I tried really hard to bridge that gap many times. The more you look into Jordan though, the better he gets.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-22-2017, 06:59 PM
Anyone questioning Jordan's defense in insane. He was a mad man on both ends. Kobe's late awards however....

I didn't say he wasn't a great defender. I said that All-NBA teams are notorious for not rewarding the most deserving players.

Some DPOY winners weren't even on the All NBA defense first team...

GREATNESS ONE
05-22-2017, 09:08 PM
Yeah dude, Jordan is just unreal. Pippen too, and having both of them was unbelievably unfair lol.

I remember when I was younger with my boy Kobe. I tried really hard to bridge that gap many times. The more you look into Jordan though, the better he gets.

The NBA needed and guided Jordan, just like they do for Lebron.

Mr.B
05-22-2017, 10:02 PM
The Glove made 9 All-Defensive 1st teams like Jordan did, he was owning that PG spot. Jordan owned that SG spot. You had guys like Mookie Blalock, John Starks, etc. who made 2nd team, but none of those guys were on Jordan's level. Mookie was making 1st teams before Payton stole it away from him going forward. :D

The amazing thing about Jordan is he was that good. His achievements seem otherworldly because he was otherworldly lol. LeBron is a very good defender, and at his peak he was really damn good. His effort and consistency level never could touch Jordan though, and his best defense could never touch Jordan's best.

He has the "Seal" of approval... - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVb5x8WIwH8

And while doing all that in the defensive end he was still a threat to drop 50 on you any given game.

Mr.B
05-22-2017, 10:04 PM
I didn't say he wasn't a great defender. I said that All-NBA teams are notorious for not rewarding the most deserving players.

Some DPOY winners weren't even on the All NBA defense first team...

That may have been the case with some guys but definitely not Jordan. He earned and deserved every 1st team defense he was awarded.

Sly Guy
05-22-2017, 10:43 PM
Cavs benefit from LBJ being an unselfish player more than they'd benefit from Jordan's dominance. He just fits their system better, a willing passer where Kyrie wants to have the ball and drive, and a guy who's able to do just about anything he wants on the offensive end because he's such a mismatch for any cover, who's complimented with outside shooters galore through the rest of the lineup. A team so loaded with offense their defense becomes a second thought, something they work on only when they need to.

I see Jordan on the Cavs as someone who'd impose his will on his teammates far more. I think he'd be all over Kyrie to play less iso and be a better distributor, and smack Kevin Love across the face repeatedly until he played better defense. Cavs D would be better overall. Not because LBJ is a worse defender, but because Jordan would demand it of his teammates more. And as for that mid/late season slide, that would never happen on a Jordan team.

But I'm also not sure that approach would work with the softer, primadonna stars of today's NBA. So if his teammates respected him, they've be about the same, if they had issues with Jordan's hard-nosed style, he might rip the locker room apart.

But this team was built for LBJ, not for Jordan, so if you gave me the choice, I'd still take LBJ on this team

FOXHOUND
05-22-2017, 10:46 PM
The NBA needed and guided Jordan, just like they do for Lebron.

I'm not sure what this means.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-22-2017, 10:49 PM
That may have been the case with some guys but definitely not Jordan. He earned and deserved every 1st team defense he was awarded.

Makes you wonder then why he won All NBA 1st team in years when there were 2 (or more) guards ahead of him in DPOY voting.

Sly Guy
05-22-2017, 10:54 PM
Yeah dude, Jordan is just unreal. Pippen too, and having both of them was unbelievably unfair lol.

I remember when I was younger with my boy Kobe. I tried really hard to bridge that gap many times. The more you look into Jordan though, the better he gets.

the thing about Jordan is he did it during an era where you were allowed to be really physical with guys. Jordan just took abuse and still made you pay. Now, you just look like you might foul someone and the refs blow the whistle. Jordan was a madman on both ends of the floor, you could break the rules trying to stop him and it wouldn't matter. That's what makes his accomplishments so much harder to compare to today's NBA. He was a 30ppg scorer in an era when you'd see scores of 85-80.

It's also why I miss the 90's ball, I don't care if the scoring was down. I want the hard nosed play, I want power basketball (I loved watching shaq bully people down low even if I hated the lakers), I don't wanna see sissy fouls and star calls. Let the great players show their greatness. Don't gift it to them. And personally, I think it's a travesty that I'll never be able to compare LBJ to Jordan because of the huge difference in the style of play of their respective eras, because LBJ has all the makings of a guy who might challenge Jordan for GOAT.

DaBear
05-22-2017, 11:07 PM
And had as much talent as the Bulls and lost to a worse team than Jordan ever did.

/thread

FOXHOUND
05-22-2017, 11:19 PM
the thing about Jordan is he did it during an era where you were allowed to be really physical with guys. Jordan just took abuse and still made you pay. Now, you just look like you might foul someone and the refs blow the whistle. Jordan was a madman on both ends of the floor, you could break the rules trying to stop him and it wouldn't matter. That's what makes his accomplishments so much harder to compare to today's NBA. He was a 30ppg scorer in an era when you'd see scores of 85-80.

It's also why I miss the 90's ball, I don't care if the scoring was down. I want the hard nosed play, I want power basketball (I loved watching shaq bully people down low even if I hated the lakers), I don't wanna see sissy fouls and star calls. Let the great players show their greatness. Don't gift it to them. And personally, I think it's a travesty that I'll never be able to compare LBJ to Jordan because of the huge difference in the style of play of their respective eras, because LBJ has all the makings of a guy who might challenge Jordan for GOAT.

Yeah, there are definitely things I miss from back then. There a lot of things about the game now that I love too. The lack of toughness and ultra competitive nature of games is definitely what I miss the most.

GREATNESS ONE
05-22-2017, 11:41 PM
I'm not sure what this means.

I know you don't, Only some will.

IKnowHoops
05-22-2017, 11:46 PM
Makes you wonder then why he won All NBA 1st team in years when there were 2 (or more) guards ahead of him in DPOY voting.

They have nothing to say to this.

FOXHOUND
05-22-2017, 11:59 PM
Makes you wonder then why he won All NBA 1st team in years when there were 2 (or more) guards ahead of him in DPOY voting.

All-Defensive teams are voted on by the NBA coaches.

Defensive Player of the Year is voted on by the NBA media.

Different voters = different results.

Who knew?

FOXHOUND
05-23-2017, 12:00 AM
I know you don't, Only some will.

If you're implying that Jordan got/needed some sort of special assistance, then chill lol.

GREATNESS ONE
05-23-2017, 12:04 AM
If you're implying that Jordan got/needed some sort of special assistance, then chill lol.

lol Jordan was amazing but watching every one of his games, I know what I know :) we won't even scratch the surface of what I'm talking about my dude.

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:08 AM
Makes you wonder then why he won All NBA 1st team in years when there were 2 (or more) guards ahead of him in DPOY voting.

Not counting the Washington years after he won the DPOY award he only once finished below second in terms of voting among guards. All-NBA is for your total game. Anything else you want to state that is wrong?

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:11 AM
The NBA needed and guided Jordan, just like they do for Lebron.

If anything..it was Jordan who "guided" the NBA. He was bigger than it. The NBA "needed" Magic and Bird who brought the game back. Nice try.

FlashBolt
05-23-2017, 12:17 AM
People assume because of the myth of Jordan or how highly people talk about him they must be embellishing or exaggerating, but we're not.

For instance people are claiming MJ wasn't as good as claimed on defense because Scottie Pippen guarded the other team's best player, not MJ. Except MJ made the All-NBA Defensive 1st Team and won DPOY in 1988, Pippen's rookie year when he didn't start a single game and only played 20 MPG.

Jordan was absolutely that good on defense. Heck, the year he was injured the Bulls had the worst Defense by Drtg in the league. Next year they were 11th and the year after they were 3rd. That was pre-Pippen.

Hakeem deserved it that year. Anyone telling you otherwise just bought into Jordan and not the impact. I can't believe someone truly thought Jordan was the DPOY. What had happened was the voting rules were totally stupid and it allowed the votes to be split between Hakeem/Eaton and the league just loved MJ.

GREATNESS ONE
05-23-2017, 12:21 AM
If anything..it was Jordan who "guided" the NBA. He was bigger than it. The NBA "needed" Magic and Bird who brought the game back. Nice try.

Lol
Nice try saying it was one way, it was a two way street and made MJ an NBA owner. It's cool brotha, just chill and enjoy the M&M's
:)

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:21 AM
Not counting the Washington years after he won the DPOY award he only once finished below second in terms of voting among guards. All-NBA is for your total game. Anything else you want to state that is wrong?

1990, 1991, 1997.

3 years where 2 or more guards were ahead of him in DPOY voting but he still finished in the 1st All-NBA defensive team.

Good job, good effort.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:26 AM
All-Defensive teams are voted on by the NBA coaches.

Defensive Player of the Year is voted on by the NBA media.

Different voters = different results.

Who knew?

Well if Jordan deserved All 9 1st All-NBA defensive teams he made, as Mr. B claimed, are you telling me that Jordan was shafted by the media?

If that's the case, why did the NBA transition from coaching voting to the media for the All NBA defensive teams (along with all the other ones) if they mess around like that?

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:28 AM
They have nothing to say to this.

I actually don't even care. It was more food for thought. If you told me Jordan won like 6 1st teams and 3 2nd teams, it would not change my opinion one bit about his defensive abilities. I guess it just goes to show you how far people are willing to stretch to give Jordan the benefit of the doubt.

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:29 AM
1990, 1991, 1997.

3 years where 2 or more guards were ahead of him in DPOY voting but he still finished in the 1st All-NBA defensive team.

Good job, good effort.

Who were the 2 guards that finished ahead of him in 1991? Let me check your facts.

FOXHOUND
05-23-2017, 12:32 AM
lol Jordan was amazing but watching every one of his games, I know what I know :) we won't even scratch the surface of what I'm talking about my dude.

Get me woke, yo. Do you mean the media machine or what? Elaborate lol.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:32 AM
Even if you take out 1991 (he finished behind Dumars and Robertson FWIW), you end up being wrong anyway.

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:33 AM
Even if you take out 1991 (he finished behind Dumars and Robertson FWIW), you end up being wrong anyway.

Who were the 2 guards in 1997?

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:34 AM
Even if you take out 1991 (he finished behind Dumars and Robertson FWIW), you end up being wrong anyway.

Actually according to fact check.. as I thought you're wrong.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:38 AM
Actually according to fact check.. as I thought you're wrong.

1990, Dumars and Harper finished in front of him in DPOY.

1991, Dumars and Robertson finished in from of him in DPOY.

1997, Payton and Blaylock finished in from of him in DPOY.

I don't mind being wrong (it happens sometimes), but at least do the reserach first before telling me that I am.

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:38 AM
Lol
Nice try saying it was one way, it was a two way street and made MJ an NBA owner. It's cool brotha, just chill and enjoy the M&M's
:)

Not really.. as I said Jordan was bigger than the NBA. Good try... Keep your "m&m's...lol.

FOXHOUND
05-23-2017, 12:38 AM
Well if Jordan deserved All 9 1st All-NBA defensive teams he made, as Mr. B claimed, are you telling me that Jordan was shafted by the media?

If that's the case, why did the NBA transition from coaching voting to the media for the All NBA defensive teams (along with all the other ones) if they mess around like that?

No, I'm saying different voter groups = different mindsets. One does not correlate to the other.

FlashBolt
05-23-2017, 12:42 AM
1990, Dumars and Harper finished in front of him in DPOY.

1991, Dumars and Robertson finished in from of him in DPOY.

1997, Payton and Blaylock finished in from of him in DPOY.

I don't mind being wrong (it happens sometimes), but at least do the reserach first before telling me that I am.

I think the way you phrased the years confused him a bit. I look at 1991 as 1991-1992 but you use it as 1990-1991.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:43 AM
No, I'm saying different voter groups = different mindsets. One does not correlate to the other.

Both of the awards try to reward the best defensive player that year. If he's going to argue that Jordan deserved all 9 of his All NBA defense teams, it should reflect in the DPOY voting as well.

If it doesn't, either the media is shafting him or the coaches are giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:43 AM
1990, Dumars and Harper finished in front of him in DPOY.

1991, Dumars and Robertson finished in from of him in DPOY.

1997, Payton and Blaylock finished in from of him in DPOY.

I don't mind being wrong (it happens sometimes), but at least do the reserach first before telling me that I am.

1991 he finished 1st among guards in voting. 1997 he finished 3rd in voting amongst guards. Let me check 1990. Not sure where you're getting your information?

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:44 AM
I think the way you phrased the years confused him a bit. I look at 1991 as 1991-1992 but you use it as 1990-1991.

Well that's how it's listed in the NBA website. Like how this year will be 2017 DPOY.

Raps18-19 Champ
05-23-2017, 12:45 AM
1991 he finished 1st among guards in voting. 1997 he finished 3rd in voting amongst guards. Let me check 1990. Not sure where you're getting your information?

You're looking at the wrong years. Either way, I already laid it out for you, meaning you jumped the gun by posting without doing y our reserach.

FlashBolt
05-23-2017, 12:46 AM
1991 he finished 1st among guards in voting. 1997 he finished 3rd in voting amongst guards. Let me check 1990. Not sure where you're getting your information?

Technically, he's right and you're wrong. They list it at the YEAR they won it - not the year the season starts. Jordan won DPOY in 1988. That was the 1987-1988 season. So yeah, you're wrong.

Bartlee23
05-23-2017, 12:50 AM
You're looking at the wrong years. Either way, I already laid it out for you, meaning you jumped the gun by posting without doing y our reserach.

Sorry... don't have time to play games with you. If you don't think Jordan deserves every thing he's got than I don't know what to say.

FlashBolt
05-23-2017, 12:52 AM
Sorry... don't have time to play games with you. If you don't think Jordan deserves every thing he's got than I don't know what to say.

^arrogant/ignorant... won't admit he's wrong lmao.

FOXHOUND
05-23-2017, 12:53 AM
Both of the awards try to reward the best defensive player that year. If he's going to argue that Jordan deserved all 9 of his All NBA defense teams, it should reflect in the DPOY voting as well.

If it doesn't, either the media is shafting him or the coaches are giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Just because only two guards make 1st Team All-Defensive doesn't mean that there was only two guards worthy. There are times when it's close enough and there just isn't enough spots. This also happens with All-NBA teams. Just because the media felt like Alvin Robertson and Joe Dumars were the superior defender in 1991 doesn't mean it's necessarily true.

Maybe the media felt like the Bulls having both Jordan and Pippen made each less valuable overall compared to a great defender by himself, I don't know. I can't tell you why one group voted one way and the other differently.

Either way, All-Defensive teams have their merit. You should feel more sorry for the players who miss the cut for the 2nd team and as a result aren't recognized at all.

Edit: Mixing up all of the names and years lmao.