Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 280 of 496 FirstFirst ... 180230270278279280281282290330380 ... LastLast
Results 4,186 to 4,200 of 7433
  1. #4186
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,561
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    Below is one current players take on the shape of the earth

    “Can you openly admit that you know the Earth is constitutionally round?”


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It have a reason that player is in the minority.

    Back in the day you put a loud muffler on a car it made alot of noise. To many that equal a fast car 400hp 14sec Today you got Dyno test that will measure your gain horsepower and not rely on the eye test. 707hp 3sec. Eye test is not accurate. ten people looking get 10 different results.

  2. #4187
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    48,763
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    It have a reason that player is in the minority.

    Back in the day you put a loud muffler on a car it made alot of noise. To many that equal a fast car 400hp 14sec Today you got Dyno test that will measure your gain horsepower and not rely on the eye test. 707hp 3sec. Eye test is not accurate. ten people looking get 10 different results.
    Neat


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  3. #4188
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    I know its not i said from earlier every great player can make a claim. How can you grade a pg with a center? how can you grade by era? You cant use wins since its so much at play. I have no issue with anyone list unless it display bias, hate, etc.

    everyone have a different take on what it takes to be the best but you at least got to be in the ball park base on the information you do have.
    That's a very good point, which is exactly why I insist that you need to watch these players before forming an opinion. You cannot say that Dwight Howard was a better center than Nate Thurmond just because a spreadsheet you adjusted some years ago says so, without reading into it.

    As for different positions, it's a fair point which I agree with, which is why I typically "rank" in tiers and not in number order, but since everyone here is fascinating with the 1,2, 3s, I followed suit.

    Bias occurs when you speak without having any visual idea of what you're talking about.

    I mean Valade is a perfect example here. He hasn't got the visual idea of the situation, he wants me to break it with words, without the understanding that everything is compounding. I shouldn't need to spill all the details of what is going on. If I mention something it doesn't mean that another 10 things that I have in my mind as vivid images are not also occurring. If I have to start explaining why handchecking, free lanes to the basket and easy foul calls have a bearing to the freaking box score and how it affects the numbers, then I'll need a 2 hour video tutorial for people like Valade who need basketball to be quantified in order to "understand" it. If you know basketball, you don't need a lenghty explanation for all this, you just know what the effects are. Why do you think guys like Shaq mock this era when the comparison is made?

  4. #4189
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    18,561
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    He had good players with him. Not elite, but good. You don't always need elite players around you. A team is what makes a player look great, not the coach itself and not the player himself.

    His coaches weren't crap, but obviously not HoF great.
    I mean Mike Brown was under Popovich and had a crucial part in those Spurs teams, including winning a championship, he also had the same role in Indiana with Reggie Miller's last run, another very solid group of players and then ended up coaching Lebron and he was one of the reasons why the Cavs made it to the 2007 Finals and why they were competititve till the end.

    Some veteran late 90s- early 2000s players such as Donyell Marshall were also good enough rotation players that Lebron played with, but you've never heard of him because he never won a ring. If you ask Stockton and Karl Malone they'll probably going to tell you that he was arguably a top 5 teammate they had at Utah. Not a spectacular player by any means, but he was a solid player, just like most others. If he were at Los Angeles or San Antonio, you'd know the name and appreciate him more because he'd have more exposure and rings.

    But rings isn't what makes players great. Most players are on the same level, with the exception of stars. You cannot say that Lebron played with scrubs and that he did all those Cavs runs by himself, that Ilgauskas, Varejao, Mo Williams and others were crap because it was all Lebron and then cry that Lebron didn't have any help. There porbably isn't a team that makes it to the NBA Finals if it doesn't deserve it. You can argue a couple of games in a series, like for example the Iverson 76ers vs the Pacers in 1999 who were swept, but they could have just as won at least three of those four games (reminder that the scores were: 94-90, 85-82, 97-86, 89-86). It's a marginal difference usually.

    The main obstacle in talking up Lebron's case is that he failed to reach the Finals more than once with the Cavs, having usually one of the best teams in the East, especially while missing out when being the 1st seed twice in a row. That pressure made him leave and made him consider the unthinkable.
    He abandoned his team, a two year running #1 seed and joined the player everyone was saying was going to be his main MVP award competitor over the next few years, with Kobe having a last go and guys like Rose, Durant and Howard competing also, but the consensus was that the triad was Lebron, Kobe and Wade.
    So the whole argument based on rings when it comes to Lebron is weak, yet that's become the only narrative now apart from the stat padding. He bailed and did what people do when they're 33 when he was at his peak!!

    It's one thing to say that the Celtics of the 80s were stacked but they had to beat a stacked Lakers 80s team, and it's another to have a staked Miami team collapse against an aging Mavs team, barely beat an aging Spurs team due to a tactical error by Pop and the best 3pt shot in NBA Finals history by Ray Allen, right after a missed Lebron attempt from three and then ironically losing to that same aging team, a year later... After that, moving back to Cleveland in the weakest East ever he had 4 easy runs to the Finals and only won once and that was because he cried to the media that Draymond Green said a bad word to him lol. And people think this guy could take 90s trash talking and beating

    If you think you had to wait for the 2014 Lakers to see this, then you obviously weren't paying attention or didn't know what was going on in 2004. And Phil Jackson was the coach, someone highly revered in the NBA community for being able to win in these situation. Shaq, Kobe, Payton, Karl Malone (40 or not)... Lost 4-1 to the Pistons.

    Team building is not about having one coach and a couple of stars. It's an entire process. This new documentary portraying Jerry Krause amongst others should be an eye opener to those who have no real idea of how teams are managed, but apart from hating on him most people won't even realize what the whole situation was about. Lebron had been incompatible with a team building process and he never requested a trade. Had he requested a trade in 2009 or 2010, his frustration could have been explained and excused. He was part of trade offers by other teams, but he never asked for one. Leaving a team that you publicly had shown affection for and never openly wanted to leave makes you a culprit if you leave one good morning. He wouldn't have gone to all these teams to make them do pitches for the fun of it since he had already made his mind for at least weeks that he'd join Wade with Bosh in Miami.

    You can argue that the Cavs could have done better, but they did well enough as Lebron's team was the top seed 2 years running before he left. The problem with the Cavs was that they allowed Lebron to be bigger than the organization. Something that Michael Jordan himself didn't do. He didn't decide who the coach was going to be, he didn't decide who his teammates were going to be, he didn't decide what plays they'd call, he didn't get to be anything more than a basketball player. He only got really pissed when they dissed his coach. But his answer was to retire, not to join the Knicks along with Gary Payton...
    Point is it had better teams out there.

    Yes the Mike brown that Kobe quit on.

    Donyell Marshall are you serious. what a great running mate. Pippen felt disrespected by that statement.

    He got 3 rings right? Maybe is Spurs were not the better team he might have won sooner or if Cavs were not injured he would of won again with Cavs.

    Your not building a good case. How many times did Horry, Artest, Fisher, etc saved Kobe? What yu still think its 1 vs 13.

    Your focus on his negatives then focus on the positives from others. I can build a negative story for a number of players including MJ.

    So we did a circle to poit out Lebron needed a Coach or team that knew how rather than looking at him to save them and fill pockets with cash?
    Last edited by ldawg; 05-16-2020 at 11:01 AM.

  5. #4190
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    I'm not building a negative story, I'm just playing down the positives because they are overblown by exaggeration as if Lebron did everything by himself in Cleveland and that Wade and Bosh or the rest of the guys were irrelevant. Heck, even Haslem and Chalmers were solid players in Miami for them, but replace them with two of the Cavs guys he had and the results are probably the same. You wouldn't be saying "but he didn't have Haslem and Chalmers".

    At the end of the day, for historical purposes of legacy, these role players are irrelevant. Not by me, but by history. Nobody really knows Buechler, Wennington and these other guys from the Bulls teams. They are both replaceable and forgettable. If you ask 99% of fans that weren't watching back in the 90s, they'd be surprised to see that these guys won 3 rings and that they were part of this dynasty. I forgot all about Buechler myself until I saw him in that first episode of the Last Dance. Decent player of course, but not one worthy of note. There were 100 like him in the league.
    Going up to Steve Kerr, again, a good guard that could pass, shoot and be a decent playmaker but he was replaceable. The Bulls' timeline doesn't change without Kerr, there were at least 20 other non-star guards in the league that could pull the same role with the same results more or less.

    The point is that while depth is important and I advocate for deep benches as I have a strong European influence in basketball where you can go 12 man deep every night, the talent pool does not limit teams from forming solid rosters and contenders. The Chicago Bulls weren't a super team, not in 1991-93, not in 1996-98. They had some great players, but so did other teams.
    Same for the 60s and 80s and 2000s. In the 2010s, you did not have to taem up Lebron with Wade and Bosh in order to get to the Finals. You could have built a team around either of the three (or others) and have a contender. But they decided to eliminate the competition. That's what the moral of this tale is. You can call it a genius loophole, I call it cowardness and testament of lack of character. And since it's "Lebron's team", not my words, he gets the most blame for this.

    The only other guy in a sort of similar situation was Shaq, but he had pretty much told everyone he was leaving Orlando and he didn't form some superteam, he left to get paid. The fact that a 17 year old Kobe was there was not in his mind and he didn't form no superteam with 2 other top stars.

    Just to give you an idea, the 1996 free agency included:
    Michael Jordan
    Shaquille O'Neal
    Reggie Miller
    Charles Barkley
    Tim Hardaway
    Dikembe Mutombo
    Alonzo Mourning
    Allan Houston
    Horace Grant
    Juwan Howard
    Dale Davis
    Kenny Anderson
    (Magic Johnson)

    He didn't ask any of these guys to come join him, he didn't ask the Lakers to persuade Magic to stay one more season which he could easily do and be even better than his cameo 1996 appearance, but you can argue that he left because he felt that he couldn't win in Orlando with the re-emergence of Chicago and that he was 'chased away' by Jordan. Yet he still wanted to do it his way. He didn't join a team of champions but a team of yesteryears. He joined a team with no MVP candidates and Kobe was a 17 year old nobody, benched by Eddie Jones.

    This is the closest situation close to Lebron I can think of. Which other NBA star left his top seed or Conference Final team in free agency during his prime when all they needed was "a little help" to win the Championship? Most of them leave bad situations, if they can, but both the Cavs and the Magic were in great positions. But the direction these stars took was completely different. Am I painting a negative picture for Lebron here and a positive for Shaq? It's actually a negative for both, but it does look a lot worse for Lebron, doesn't it? Well, that's because it is, not because I have any bias for reporting what happened, just like the morning weather dude doesn't cause rain at night just because he said it's gonna rain.

  6. #4191
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    48,763
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    LOL. yall stuck in time i cant control that. some people get stuck in their ways. Its an old saying you cant teach an old dog new tricks.
    You missed when I said you were both wrong


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  7. #4192
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    34,576
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Let's ignore guys like Ben Wallace, Shaquille O'Neal, Antwan Jamison or even guys like Szczerbiak or Anthony Parker who had intense championship exposure in Europe at a time when the best teams could look the NBA teams in the eye, someone like Varejao who had international exposure as well as Euroleague championship being part of one of the best teams ever (Barcelona 2003), replacing Pau Gasol of all people, or veterans like Eric Snow and Joe Smith.

    The roster looks poor now because they didn't win. They didn't win because other teams were better. **** happens. This is the NBA, there are good teams, there are great teams. Great players don't always play for great teams. Great players sometimes play on great teams that don't have that many other great players on them. There's no formula here, stop looking for one.

    Orlando after Dwight Howard had some decent core around him (Rashard Lewis, Jameer Nelson, Turkoglu, Pietrus, Courtney Lee and young guns in Redick and Gortat who didn't have much of a role).
    If any of those guys were in Cleveland during the 2005-2010 period you'd be still saying that Lebron had no help. You'd only consider 'help' someone like Howard. So it's hypocritical to talk about the 11th and 12th players when you don't do that to teams that beat the Cavs such as Tony Battie, Brian Cook and Tyronne Lue. Even with Dwight Howard, Lebron couldn't have won.

    The reason why the Cavs lost to the Magic was because they were the inferior team. The Magic were an actual basketball team, very well drilled, with defined roles. Lebron was always selfish, despite his best tool being his passing, so his teams suffered from that. No one argues he wasn't great, but he wasn't as great as others. It's very simple really.

    It's also laughable seeing the competition Lebron faced in the Playoffs with the exception of the 2008 season. Nobody said it was imperative that he had to win a championship within his first few years, the pressure was added by Wade's 2006 MVP campaign and the loss in the World Championship from Greece. Everyone was skeptical about everyone back then, so the rings had to "prove" that these guys weren't bums. Well, their course of action didn't really help them and Kobe coming to save their *** in the 2008 Olympics just added insult to injury. Lebron could have won a ring eventually had he worked properly for it, it was bound to happen. But the way he did it just ruins his legacy and he never was anywhere near in talent to other greats so that wasn't the way in anyway. This guy wasn't no Penny, Tmac or Grant Hill, he just survived and lasted more.
    So your example to show that LeBron had enough support to win it all is Orlando, another team that didn’t win it all?

    And I specifically said that Orlando team is the only won that had similar talent to Cleveland.

    As for laughable the competition he faced in the playoffs. Again, you don’t say things like that for Magic despite the fact he literally played a team with a losing record in the WCF in the 80’s.


    And you still didn’t answer my question. Tell me which of the Pistons, Celtics, Spurs, or Lakers had a worse supporting cast than him? I think we both know why you haven’t answered...

  8. #4193
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    26,180
    Quote Originally Posted by ldawg View Post
    Point is it had better teams out there.

    Yes the Mike brown that Kobe quit on.

    Donyell Marshall are you serious. what a great running mate. Pippen felt disrespected by that statement.

    He got 3 rings right? Maybe is Spurs were not the better team he might have won sooner or if Cavs were not injured he would of won again with Cavs.

    Your not building a good case. How many times did Horry, Artest, Fisher, etc saved Kobe? What yu still think its 1 vs 13.

    Your focus on his negatives then focus on the positives from others. I can build a negative story for a number of players including MJ.

    So we did a circle to poit out Lebron needed a Coach or team that knew how rather than looking at him to save them and fill pockets with cash?
    Donyell Marshall is a seriously underrated player and would look so good in the modern NBA. could get 15 rebounds and 3 blocks on a given night and hit 7 3's the next. Loved him on the Raptors.



    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    Quote Originally Posted by nycericanguy View Post
    well unfortunately it looks like you were right about Bargs...

    but hopefully we can use his expiring, if not at least we unloaded Novak's deal...

  9. #4194
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    34,576
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    That's a very good point, which is exactly why I insist that you need to watch these players before forming an opinion. You cannot say that Dwight Howard was a better center than Nate Thurmond just because a spreadsheet you adjusted some years ago says so, without reading into it.

    As for different positions, it's a fair point which I agree with, which is why I typically "rank" in tiers and not in number order, but since everyone here is fascinating with the 1,2, 3s, I followed suit.

    Bias occurs when you speak without having any visual idea of what you're talking about.

    I mean Valade is a perfect example here. He hasn't got the visual idea of the situation, he wants me to break it with words, without the understanding that everything is compounding. I shouldn't need to spill all the details of what is going on. If I mention something it doesn't mean that another 10 things that I have in my mind as vivid images are not also occurring. If I have to start explaining why handchecking, free lanes to the basket and easy foul calls have a bearing to the freaking box score and how it affects the numbers, then I'll need a 2 hour video tutorial for people like Valade who need basketball to be quantified in order to "understand" it. If you know basketball, you don't need a lenghty explanation for all this, you just know what the effects are. Why do you think guys like Shaq mock this era when the comparison is made?
    Oh, I definitely understand everything you're saying. The problem is you act like your some wise basketball master handing down knowledge, when in reality you don't know what you're talking about.

    You are a bitter old man filled with hate towards LeBron. It's why everything you say is to make LeBron look as bad as possible.

    Earlier you said his teams in Cleveland were superior and then in a post below this you admit he needed "a little help" to win the championship. If you agree he probably needed more help to win a title in Cleveland, why did you just spend the better part of a week arguing why it's so bad he didn't win one in Cleveland?

    As for Shaq talking crap about this era. That's pretty much expected. All former players talk about how much better their era was than the current generation. It happens so much it's literally a cliché.

    As for Shaq's opinion, here are some of his comments on LeBron:

    “However, Penny was a young Magic Johnson and I was a young Kareem. Kobe was a young Michael Jordan before he became Michael Jordan. And LeBron is both of them combined."

    “He plays the right way,” Shaq said of Leonard. “When a call doesn’t go his way, he never makes a face. He never complains. He’s not a guy who’s very flamboyant. He’s not gonna do a lot of things. He’s got an old school/new school game — just one or two dribbles and he gets to his spot."

    Shaq was quite happy to play with LeBron. Mainly because James was a great leader and did the heavy lifting as he told Bleacher Report's Ethan Skolnick. "It was the first time I didn't have to do anything."

    "He's a mixture of Michael [Jordan], Shaq and Magic [Johnson]," O'Neal said, per Cleveland.com's Joe Vardon. "Shaq, because he's bigger and stronger than everybody. Michael because he can score whenever he feels like it. And Magic because he does a great job getting everybody else involved. He's been like that his whole career. Even in high school. I knew he was a special guy in high school."


    So even if you want to listen to Shaq talk about how weak the era is, he still thinks LeBron is far better than you are saying he is. But let me guess, suddenly Shaq's opinion is no longer as relevant?

  10. #4195
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    And you still didn’t answer my question. Tell me which of the Pistons, Celtics, Spurs, or Lakers had a worse supporting cast than him? I think we both know why you haven’t answered...
    A supporting cast of who? The teams? Dude, make proper questions if you want answers, otherwise I'll just laugh behind my screen and only show it once every ten times.

    Lebron = a team by himself and he compares with Spurs, Pistons, Lakers, Celtics etc?

    Now seriously, the Cleveland roster does not look great, but the team was not as bad you make it out to be.
    The Spurs had a nice roster centered around Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili, with Tony Parker taking a bigger role later on (post 2010). If Lebron had the rest of those players, he probably doesn't win anything. Are you trying to tell me that Fabricio Oberto, Matt Bonner, Marvin Ely, Eric Williams, a 37 year old Robert Horry, a 34 year old Finley, a 36 year old Brent Barry and a 36 year old Bruce Bowen was such a great supporting cast that made all the difference in 2007? It was a good team, glued around three players, but the rest of them ticked because the main cast plus the coach made it tick. Put the San Antonio roster with the exception of Duncan and Manu in Cleveland with Lebron with Ilgauskas. You still fall short. The problem was Lebron, not his supporting cast.

    Duncan had some core players next to him but they became stars next to him (speaking of Parker and Leonard as Manu was already an international superstar, but in 2002 he was on par with someone lke Toni Kukoc, not Drazen Petrovic or Luka Doncic now)

    The Pistons? A supporting cast? Supporting cast of whom? Billups? Hamilton? Is that our core duo that gets a supporting cast? So they got who? A declining Rasheed Wallace? Sure, I loved the guy but ask the Cavs back in 2007 if they'd trade Z with him. I guess a veteran Chris Webber in his final full NBA season would seem as an appealing player to you, but you're going to dismiss Shaq as a legitimate 'supporting cast option', so who are we kidding here? Antonio McDyess with no knees? A 37 year old Dale Davis? 36 year old Lindsey Hunter?
    That Pistons team was basically Billups, Hamilton and Tayshaun Prince, with Sheed being able to show up every once in a while. The rest were old players that had a great name some years back and the other guys would be guys you'd be mentioning here as crap teammates for Lebron, such as Amir Johnson, Nazr Mohammed, Roland Murray and Carlos Delfino.

    Is this a roster that Lebron was envious of? Sure, I guess he'd love to play with these guys and learn about their time when they were grat, but that's not really how the idea of comparing rosters works. Would Lebron's team be better if he had all those veterans? Detroit was a like an institution of basketball where respect and order was celebrated, so a team with "no superstar" was a great place for veterans to be able to do their best. And apart from Sheed, no one else really would have had any real effect.

    Also, if Ilgauskas was such a slouch, why did Lebron invite him to join the Miami Heat as their starting center when the Big Three formed?

    You keep mentioning this W-L record of the 80s, yet you remain ignorant of the dynamics of 80s basketball. Please, unless you can back up it with real talk, don't mention it again because it's getting ridiculous.
    Just an fyi, the 1981 championship boasted a 40-42 Rockets team that took the Celtics to 6 games and they had Moses Malone, Calvin Murphy, Mike Dunleavy (Senior) and Robert Reid who was a solid player but left basketball for a year and he wasn't the same when he returned, so you'll know check your spreadsheet and suggest that he sucked or something.
    That Rockets team would have been an ECF contender throughout the 2010s and would definitely not be floating around a .500 record. Only genuine issue you have with this statement is that you have no ****ing of what that Rockets team was like...

  11. #4196
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    34,576
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    Donyell Marshall is a seriously underrated player and would look so good in the modern NBA. could get 15 rebounds and 3 blocks on a given night and hit 7 3's the next. Loved him on the Raptors.
    Donyell Marshall was definitely a good player back in the day. But he was 32 when he joined the Cavs and was only with them for 2 seasons (and out of the league at 35).

    But NYKalltheway is trying to use Donyell Marshall as an example of why LeBron's teams were as talented as the Pistons, Celtics Big 3, the Spurs and Lakers during that time. As good as Donyell was... just no.

  12. #4197
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Oh, I definitely understand everything you're saying. The problem is you act like your some wise basketball master handing down knowledge, when in reality you don't know what you're talking about.

    You are a bitter old man filled with hate towards LeBron. It's why everything you say is to make LeBron look as bad as possible.

    Earlier you said his teams in Cleveland were superior and then in a post below this you admit he needed "a little help" to win the championship. If you agree he probably needed more help to win a title in Cleveland, why did you just spend the better part of a week arguing why it's so bad he didn't win one in Cleveland?

    As for Shaq talking crap about this era. That's pretty much expected. All former players talk about how much better their era was than the current generation. It happens so much it's literally a cliché.

    As for Shaq's opinion, here are some of his comments on LeBron:

    “However, Penny was a young Magic Johnson and I was a young Kareem. Kobe was a young Michael Jordan before he became Michael Jordan. And LeBron is both of them combined."

    “He plays the right way,” Shaq said of Leonard. “When a call doesn’t go his way, he never makes a face. He never complains. He’s not a guy who’s very flamboyant. He’s not gonna do a lot of things. He’s got an old school/new school game — just one or two dribbles and he gets to his spot."

    Shaq was quite happy to play with LeBron. Mainly because James was a great leader and did the heavy lifting as he told Bleacher Report's Ethan Skolnick. "It was the first time I didn't have to do anything."

    "He's a mixture of Michael [Jordan], Shaq and Magic [Johnson]," O'Neal said, per Cleveland.com's Joe Vardon. "Shaq, because he's bigger and stronger than everybody. Michael because he can score whenever he feels like it. And Magic because he does a great job getting everybody else involved. He's been like that his whole career. Even in high school. I knew he was a special guy in high school."


    So even if you want to listen to Shaq talk about how weak the era is, he still thinks LeBron is far better than you are saying he is. But let me guess, suddenly Shaq's opinion is no longer as relevant?
    Stop twisting every argument and statement made to what you want it to be. Stop forcing people to be trapped in your simple way of thinking and eliminating that not everything is said as a direct reply to what you say. It's not about you, just read and figure out what is written and why.

    I didn't say that Lebron should have won in Cleveland.

    You said he playde for a crap team, I said that the team wasn't as crap as you made it out to be.

    You said that RELATIVE TO COMPETITION, to name you players that got drafted by teams in WORSE SITUATIONS. I did and then you managed to make a fool out of yourself by pretending the argument was whether those teams, as face value, were better or not than Cleveland, as if your main objection with me wasn't that I said that older teams were in fact better and more stacked. Of course the 1960 Lakers were bloody better than the Cleveland Cavs of the mid 2000s. But they weren't better than their direct competition. In 1958 they were further away from the top teams than the Cavs were from the top teams by 2004. Wade's Miami proves this. All you needed was an overweight 33 year old Shaq. The Lakers added Jerry West to Elgin Baylor and they still couldn't be considered the best team in the league. You get what this means or do I have to waste more bandwidth explaining things that elemtary kids would catch?

    Anyhow, one last ditch attempt. It means that the competition was more rigid in the past and you needed more than one big change to shake the foundations of the league. Since the 90s and on, all you needed was one big move. Move Kobe to Chicago and boom, Chicago is a contender. Move Shaq to Miami and boom, Miami is a contender. Give Kobe a Pau Gasol (a barely top 10 PF in the league) and boom, the Lakers are a contender.

    Yes, the Cavs did not manage to do this for Lebron but the Cavs were in a prime position already in a weaker Conference, while the Lakers were barely a playoff team. There's an ocean of difference here. Teams that are doing well are reluctant of reshuffling things. Did they feel like the needed to improve upon a #1 seed team? What if they had failed? But even assuming they did pull the trigger, getting Pau Gasol for themselves for example would have been futile. He wouldn't have made the necessary difference but he'd just replace Big Z. So what kind of player did they need? Was Lebron willing to share the ball?

    Anyhow, here's an old read from Basketball-Reference, which I'm sure you would have found delightful if it didn't show that you were wrong about the 2009 and 2010 Cavs:
    https://www.basketball-reference.com...d7.html?p=6959

    And it also indirectly shows that the East was noticeably weaker than the West, something we already know.

  13. #4198
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    34,576
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    A supporting cast of who? The teams? Dude, make proper questions if you want answers, otherwise I'll just laugh behind my screen and only show it once every ten times.

    Lebron = a team by himself and he compares with Spurs, Pistons, Lakers, Celtics etc?

    Now seriously, the Cleveland roster does not look great, but the team was not as bad you make it out to be.
    The Spurs had a nice roster centered around Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili, with Tony Parker taking a bigger role later on (post 2010). If Lebron had the rest of those players, he probably doesn't win anything. Are you trying to tell me that Fabricio Oberto, Matt Bonner, Marvin Ely, Eric Williams, a 37 year old Robert Horry, a 34 year old Finley, a 36 year old Brent Barry and a 36 year old Bruce Bowen was such a great supporting cast that made all the difference in 2007? It was a good team, glued around three players, but the rest of them ticked because the main cast plus the coach made it tick. Put the San Antonio roster with the exception of Duncan and Manu in Cleveland with Lebron with Ilgauskas. You still fall short. The problem was Lebron, not his supporting cast.

    Duncan had some core players next to him but they became stars next to him (speaking of Parker and Leonard as Manu was already an international superstar, but in 2002 he was on par with someone lke Toni Kukoc, not Drazen Petrovic or Luka Doncic now)

    The Pistons? A supporting cast? Supporting cast of whom? Billups? Hamilton? Is that our core duo that gets a supporting cast? So they got who? A declining Rasheed Wallace? Sure, I loved the guy but ask the Cavs back in 2007 if they'd trade Z with him. I guess a veteran Chris Webber in his final full NBA season would seem as an appealing player to you, but you're going to dismiss Shaq as a legitimate 'supporting cast option', so who are we kidding here? Antonio McDyess with no knees? A 37 year old Dale Davis? 36 year old Lindsey Hunter?
    That Pistons team was basically Billups, Hamilton and Tayshaun Prince, with Sheed being able to show up every once in a while. The rest were old players that had a great name some years back and the other guys would be guys you'd be mentioning here as crap teammates for Lebron, such as Amir Johnson, Nazr Mohammed, Roland Murray and Carlos Delfino.

    Is this a roster that Lebron was envious of? Sure, I guess he'd love to play with these guys and learn about their time when they were grat, but that's not really how the idea of comparing rosters works. Would Lebron's team be better if he had all those veterans? Detroit was a like an institution of basketball where respect and order was celebrated, so a team with "no superstar" was a great place for veterans to be able to do their best. And apart from Sheed, no one else really would have had any real effect.

    Also, if Ilgauskas was such a slouch, why did Lebron invite him to join the Miami Heat as their starting center when the Big Three formed?

    You keep mentioning this W-L record of the 80s, yet you remain ignorant of the dynamics of 80s basketball. Please, unless you can back up it with real talk, don't mention it again because it's getting ridiculous.
    Just an fyi, the 1981 championship boasted a 40-42 Rockets team that took the Celtics to 6 games and they had Moses Malone, Calvin Murphy, Mike Dunleavy (Senior) and Robert Reid who was a solid player but left basketball for a year and he wasn't the same when he returned, so you'll know check your spreadsheet and suggest that he sucked or something.
    That Rockets team would have been an ECF contender throughout the 2010s and would definitely not be floating around a .500 record. Only genuine issue you have with this statement is that you have no ****ing of what that Rockets team was like...
    You hate LeBron so much now you're trying to do 2 for 2 player swaps to justify how bad it was?

    Why are you trying to swap both Duncan and Manu for LeBron and Big Z? First, Manu is better than Big Z so that just helps my point.

    Second, if you swapped Duncan and LeBron, LeBron most certainly wins a ring or two in San Antonio.

    Parker, Manu, LeBron with Popovich and a surrounding roster of accomplished vets? Yeah, at the very least that's a lot better than what he had in Cleveland.

    As for the Pistons, we were talking about the teams that beat LeBron in the playoffs. The only Pistons team that beat him was their big 5 lineup of: Billups, Hamilton, Prince, Sheed, Big Ben. Sheed was 31 at the time, so no he was not breaking down. The teams you're referencing for Detroit, I agree, weren't that great. That's also why LeBron beat them twice in the playoffs.

    Which again, I think the reason you didn't use that 2006 team is because you agree it was far more talented top to bottom than the Cavs.

    As for the 81 Rockets.

    First, their championship appearance was definitely a fluke as they never made it to even the WCF in any of the other seasons they were a team.

    Second, they faced the Lakers in the 1st round in a best of 3 series with Magic coming off an injury which even the coach at the time said divided the team. You already knew that

    Third, they would have been an ECF contender in the same way LeBron's team was: a superstar that doesn't have a good enough team to win it all.

    Fourth, and this is where your hypocrisy shows. Earlier you said that back in the day, it took multiple superstars to contend. Yet here is a team with literally 1 superstar going all the way to the Finals and pushing the Celtics to 6 games. So, were they genuine contenders or not? If so, I guess we can talk about the help other superstars had without saying they needed them because the league was so stacked.


    But that isn't even that big a concern to me. In fact, I actually know the Rockets teams your talking about. I know them better than you. You forgot Rudy Tomjanovich by the way. Were they good players? Certainly. Are they so vastly more talented and superior to players from today? Certainly not.

    But I'm sure you're about to talk about how Robert Reid is better than LeBron James.

  14. #4199
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    GMT +2
    Posts
    13,851
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Donyell Marshall was definitely a good player back in the day. But he was 32 when he joined the Cavs and was only with them for 2 seasons (and out of the league at 35).

    But NYKalltheway is trying to use Donyell Marshall as an example of why LeBron's teams were as talented as the Pistons, Celtics Big 3, the Spurs and Lakers during that time. As good as Donyell was... just no.
    Aaaaaaaand I never said that. Stop making a fool out of yourself by putting words I didn't say appear as they came from me.

    You were the one who said that his team was bad, not me. I just mentioned some of his teammates. Had Marshall played for the Pistons or Celtics you'd be saying look at who these guys have from the bench while Lebron has Hickson and Gibson...


    P.S:
    Oscar Robertson aged 32 in the 70s = great addition that means that a sophomore has had an amazing team early on.
    A random NBA player aged 32 in the 00s = who cares, he's too old anyway...

    Well done for consistency

  15. #4200
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    34,576
    Quote Originally Posted by NYKalltheway View Post
    Stop twisting every argument and statement made to what you want it to be. Stop forcing people to be trapped in your simple way of thinking and eliminating that not everything is said as a direct reply to what you say. It's not about you, just read and figure out what is written and why.

    I didn't say that Lebron should have won in Cleveland.

    You said he playde for a crap team, I said that the team wasn't as crap as you made it out to be.


    You said that RELATIVE TO COMPETITION, to name you players that got drafted by teams in WORSE SITUATIONS. I did and then you managed to make a fool out of yourself by pretending the argument was whether those teams, as face value, were better or not than Cleveland, as if your main objection with me wasn't that I said that older teams were in fact better and more stacked. Of course the 1960 Lakers were bloody better than the Cleveland Cavs of the mid 2000s. But they weren't better than their direct competition. In 1958 they were further away from the top teams than the Cavs were from the top teams by 2004. Wade's Miami proves this. All you needed was an overweight 33 year old Shaq. The Lakers added Jerry West to Elgin Baylor and they still couldn't be considered the best team in the league. You get what this means or do I have to waste more bandwidth explaining things that elemtary kids would catch?

    Anyhow, one last ditch attempt. It means that the competition was more rigid in the past and you needed more than one big change to shake the foundations of the league. Since the 90s and on, all you needed was one big move. Move Kobe to Chicago and boom, Chicago is a contender. Move Shaq to Miami and boom, Miami is a contender. Give Kobe a Pau Gasol (a barely top 10 PF in the league) and boom, the Lakers are a contender.

    Yes, the Cavs did not manage to do this for Lebron but the Cavs were in a prime position already in a weaker Conference, while the Lakers were barely a playoff team. There's an ocean of difference here. Teams that are doing well are reluctant of reshuffling things. Did they feel like the needed to improve upon a #1 seed team? What if they had failed? But even assuming they did pull the trigger, getting Pau Gasol for themselves for example would have been futile. He wouldn't have made the necessary difference but he'd just replace Big Z. So what kind of player did they need? Was Lebron willing to share the ball?

    Anyhow, here's an old read from Basketball-Reference, which I'm sure you would have found delightful if it didn't show that you were wrong about the 2009 and 2010 Cavs:
    https://www.basketball-reference.com...d7.html?p=6959

    And it also indirectly shows that the East was noticeably weaker than the West, something we already know.
    First Bolded: I never said they were crap, I said they were not nearly as talented as their competition. In historical terms, they are not a very good supporting cast. At the time they were decent, but still not nearly as good as the teams that beat them (with the exception of Orlando).

    Second Bolded: No, I kept it relative to competition. You laughed it off. But we'll get to that in the third bolded.

    Third Bolded: You're still trying to lie and claim you were only talking about the 1958 Lakers sans Baylor (who I have never refuted were worse relative to the league than the Cavs by the way). You clearly said the 1962 Lakers were worse relative to the rest of the league than the Cavs were the year before they got LeBron. The Baylor Lakers team was definitely not good, but they were certainly better relative to the league than LeBron's Cavs were. You get what this means or do I have to waste more bandwidth explaining things that elementary kids would catch?

    Fourth Bolded: They were in a prime position only if you remove context (as you love to do anytime it helps LeBron). The context being, what made you think the Cavs front office was good enough to take advantage of their positioning? This is a front office that because of their incompetence let Carlos Boozer leave and signed Larry Hughes to a massive contract (which everyone was saying was an overpay at the time as well). It's not like they'd shown the propensity to be able to make the kind of move you're talking about needing to make to compete.

    Fifth Bolded: As for the article you're referencing. You've been spending this whole time talking about how we can't use W/L records at face value, particularly if they're in different conferences. That article uses W/L records to determine the probability the Cavs should have won

    The article is basically saying "Because the Cavs had the best record in the league, they were favorites to win". And that's your evidence? As you point out, the East was far weaker than the West (which was true in reverse for the 80's and Magic but that's never a point against him), so of course the top team from the East was going to feast on the worse conference.

    But if Cleveland should have won in 2009 and 2010, somebody really should have told Las Vegas, because the preseason odds for the Cavs in 2009 were tied for 4th behind the Lakers, Spurs and Celtics, and were 2nd behind the Lakers in 2010.

    So go ahead and tell me which of the 2009 Lakers, 2009 Spurs, 2009 Celtics, and 2010 Lakers he should have beaten.


    But this goes back to my point about your hypocrisy. You will do or say anything to make LeBron look bad. First it was don't use W/L records when it makes him look good and now that it makes him look bad, well now we can use W/L records to simulate probabilities.

    I'd have more respect for you if you just admitted you hate LeBron at this point. We all already know it. There's no more point lying to everyone.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •