LeBron > Jordan GOAT Super AIDS Containment, solved #22999 post by Matt R. (addendum #23174)
Very impressed with the minute sequence where LeBron clearly lost the ball headed to the rim, heat got the ball anyway and scored, then he elbows his defender in the chin, drawing a defensive foul and stern talking to from the official and hitting a 3.
It's these ref assisted 5 point swings in close games that truly bring out the best in great players.
Link to post of why Elon Musk is the true GOAT: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
The thread that will go on for years..........
vs.
Serbia, France and Germany would all go undefeated vs the non-US 1992 teams and would stomp them off the court. Teams are much better now.
Do you think that we're barely better than Serbia and France as the final scores indicate??... Don't we have massive talent advantages over these teams?..
It's bball 101 that when a massive talent advantage barely wins or loses, it's due to inferior brand of ball, and we played bron-ball... So bron-ball is the inferior brand in question that caused our margin of victory to fall short of our talent advantage.
The US was simply not impressive in these Olympics by virtue of almost losing to teams that we should be destroying.. So there's no reason to praise Lebron for these Olympics - his brand nearly caused loss and caused the team to underperform it's talent.. And he was saved by Curry just like he was saved by Boobie, Ray Allen or Kyrie.. Lebron is not a "closer" by virtue of being saved by many teammates, or poor efficiency on game-winners, and nothing in the Finals (0-7).
Most of the 61 to 9 gap in NBA players is due to scouting - there was none back then, and even the best Euros took 5 years to get over here - the rest stayed over there.. Furthermore, a lot of the 61 players are borderline guys that had a cup of team in the NBA - these guys don't compare to decorated international champions who simply never came over here due to lack of scouting or logistics at the time (war)..
Btw, Croatia had 3 HOF's (Petrovic, Radja, Kukoc) and 2 more NBA players (Zan Tabak and Vrankovic), so that's 5 NBA guys, which is superior to most of the teams in these Olympics.. Meanwhile Lithuania had frieking Sabonis and Sarunas Marciulionis - complete BOSSES in the nba - these guys would be better than a lot of the teams in these Olympics.
They're a little better but not MUCH better - South Sudan, Serbia and France are not almost better than us as the games indicated.. We should've still destroyed everyone because we vastly outmatched everyone..
And again, the lack of scouting and logistical issues in getting players over here accounts for the 61 to 9 gap - it's ridiculously overstated.
Ultimately, do you guys know how to NOT believe stuff you see on TV?... I'm truly wondering if you guys are capable of that.... You guys should learn that guys like Cowherd, Nick Wright, etc - these guys don't know what they're talking about - you have to test their narratives by checking the facts - you can't just regurgitate what they say unless you want to be wrong.
.
[QUOTE=newtohoops]MJ couldn't make a shot in the 92' Olympics despite playing against tv repairmen and baggage claim attendants :([/QUOTE]
Jordan had to fit in.. He knew that his team would barely win games if he dominated the ball so that he could get down-hill and high efficiency..
The goal for every basketball team is to get easy scores as much as possible, but the reality is that tough possessions make up a big part of total possessions for any team... But when you have a guy like MJ or Curry, there's no such thing as a tough possession.. Part of the reason that the 92' Dream Team or the 90's Bulls looked like they had great chemistry is because they still looked great on the tough possessions by having a seamless closer like MJ or Curry to make even the toughest possessions look mostly good.
That's the role that MJ and Curry play on every team that they're on, and most fans don't realize that you can control games more by CLOSING the most possessions possible as opposed to initiating the most possessions (and then letting TEAMMATES bail you out).. So people just look at the game opposite of reality.. It's all about closing - this is true in life generally.
[QUOTE=newtohoops]MJ couldn't make a shot in the 92' Olympics despite playing against tv repairmen and baggage claim attendants :([/QUOTE]
45% isn't bad and this should make you re-think how important shooting efficiency is in certain situations, and compared to actual possessions lost like turnovers.. Lebron barely won by averaging 4 times as many turnovers as Jordan did, while Jordan's 45% still achieved massive blowout - so maybe massive turnovers mean more than 45% shooting...
And Jeff Van Gundy said that Jordan's attraction of double-teams and defensive attention as a perimeter player reduces an opponent's defensive rebounding capability - this makes obvious sense - so Jordan's misses yield 2nd possessions that drained defenses, thereby leaving them less capacity for offense, aka Jordan was such a great scorer that his misses were infact good... His jumpshooting style and subsequent ball movement further wore down defenses.. Jordan simply wore out opponents, thereby lowering his own team's defensive requirements.. It's called winning the attrition battle - the best defense is a good offense - a tenet of all competition.
Otoh, Lebron's ball-dominance lets a defense rest, so they have more capacity for offense and more capacity to "get hot"... The story of Lebron's career is teams being fresh as a daisy and getting hot against the plodding bron-ball, such as South Sudan getting red-hot, or 2004 Puerto Rico, 14' Spurs, or 09' Magic.. And many more... The 23' Nuggets... 11' Mavs... Everyone goes off versus bron-ball...
So again, Jordan's onslaught wears out opponents and wins the attrition battle, while lebron's turnovers kill his own team's momentum and lose entire possessions, while his ball-dominance lets defenses rest so they can eventually get hot.
Trying to blame 2004 on Lebron is impressive even for you, he was 19. That was the worst constructed roster in basketball history.
Can we move on from the 1992 Olympics team.
Was it mentioned how many garbage non USA nba there were?
The 1992 shat on people because of that and because all the non CL were considered the absolute best players. Hakeem was missing but who else? **** IT.
Shai Jokic Luka Wemby Giannis all play for different countries.
Competition is ridiculously more stacked now OBVIOUSLY.
Anymore 1992 talk and I shut down the forum.
Can we move on from the 1992 Olympics team.
Was it mentioned how many garbage non USA nba there were?
The 1992 shat on people because of that and because all the non CL were considered the absolute best players. Hakeem was missing but who else? **** IT.
Shai Jokic Luka Wemby Giannis all play for different countries.
Competition is ridiculously more stacked now OBVIOUSLY.
Anymore 1992 talk and I shut down the forum.
The 1996 Bulls lot to the 18-49 Raptors.
With the massive talent gap between the 1996 Bulls and the Raptors, it must mean that the reason for the loss is the Bulls played a poor brand of basketball. It's bball 101 that when a massive talent advantage barely wins or loses, it's due to inferior brand of ball, and the Bulls played jordan-ball... So jordan-ball is the inferior brand in question that caused the loss to fall short of the Bulls talent advantage.
Also these Olympics giving further proof the 17 Warriors would wipe the floor with the 96 Bulls with 1996 rules.
Steph/Klay/KD would murder that shorter 3 point line.
17 Warriors would 1992 Dream Team them.
Fun fact. If everyone of LeBron's TOs were airballs instead he still would have had a higher shooting percentage than 1992 MJ.
More solid evidence pointing to MJ being the GOAT
Also these Olympics giving further proof the 17 Warriors would wipe the floor with the 96 Bulls with 1996 rules.
Steph/Klay/KD would murder that shorter 3 point line.
17 Warriors would 1992 Dream Team them.
yeah its true reggie miller and mullin are such bad 3 pts shooter for the pacers o0....
when they play in the playoffs its true mullin had a bad series in shooting 3 (.250%) but he got compensate by
miller with .436% 3s
jackson with .474% 3s
yeah bulls cant win vs team shooting 3s.
and that was in 1998 not 1996 team...
And warrior were so strong they almost lost vs harden/paul in houston.
thx the god for them paul got injured the last 2 games...
Marbury knows the game
Trying to blame 2004 on Lebron is impressive even for you, he was 19. That was the worst constructed roster in basketball history.
Lebron"s losses with "help", aka all-star teammates, Dream Teams, etc:
* 2004 - Dream Team
* 2005 - 1 all-star teammate
* 2006 - Dream Team
* 2009 - 1 all-star teammate
* 2010 - Year 7 organic juggernaut & league favorite
* 2011 - 2 all-star teammates
* 2014 - 2 all-star teammates
* 2017 - 2 all-star teammate
* 21-24' - AD + 5 league-organized roster overhauls
Otoh, MJ was unbeatable the instant he got 1 all-star and was undefeated in 2 Olympics.
So it's a massive pattern of Lebron mostly losing with help, and MJ mostly winning.
It's due to Lebron's lack of expert skill and the resulting reliance on ball-dominance, which yields a weaker brand of ball that routinely underachievers a team's favored talent.
.
Fun fact. If everyone of LeBron's TOs were airballs instead he still would have had a higher shooting percentage than 1992 MJ.
Fun fact - turnovers destroy a team's offensive efficiency, not missed shots
4 turnovers in 24 minutes is 6 per 36.. He was literally a 6-7 turnover player by NBA standards of minutes.
That's debilitating for a team and it's the same reason Lebron lost the 09' ECF as a -700 favorite - he had 7 turnovers in the 4th of Game 4 and 12 turnovers per 48 minutes of clutch-time in that series overall.. It's impossible for a team to win if the primary ball-handler turns into a 12-turnover per game player when it matters.
Again, the only reason the games were close and the margin of victory didn't match our huge talent advantage was Lebron's ridiculous brand of high-turnover basketball - only Curry's goatness saved Lebron from mostly losing with help as he normally does.
yeah its true reggie miller and mullin are such bad 3 pts shooter for the pacers o0....
when they play in the playoffs its true mullin had a bad series in shooting 3 (.250%) but he got compensate by
miller with .436% 3s
jackson with .474% 3s
yeah bulls cant win vs team shooting 3s.
and that was in 1998 not 1996 team...
And warrior were so strong they almost lost vs harden/paul in houston.
thx the god for them paul got injured the last 2 games...
Last time I checked the 17 Warriors team lost 1 playoff game. When they were already up 3-0.
Also, comparing Miller and old Mullin to prime Steph, KD and Klay is pretty lol.
Last time I checked the 17 Warriors team lost 1 playoff game. When they were already up 3-0.
Also, comparing Miller and old Mullin to prime Steph, KD and Klay is pretty lol.
Well it’s ok if u believe 2018 team warriors was not as good in 2018 .
I don’t know why but it’s ok .
Why would age be relevant in shooting 3s ?
Mullins was 34 and played 3 more seasons after w shrug .
The point is the « old » 1998 bulls were able to beat 3s point shooter teams so I don’t see why they couldn’t in1996 .
FWIW , I can’t see the bulls being a worst team then Houston 2018 .
.
1997 1st Roundhttps://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1997-nba-eastern-conference-first-round-bullets-vs-bulls.html......... 18.3 on 73.4 TSBasketball-Reference.com1997 NBA Eastern Conference First Round - Bullets vs. Bulls | Basketball-Reference.comhttps://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1997-nba-eastern-conference-first-round-bullets-vs-bulls.html....... 16.7 on 48.9 TSBasketball-Reference.com1997 NBA Eastern Conference First Round - Bullets vs. Bulls | Basketball-Reference.com
Pippen was outplayed by 3 Washington forwards in the 97' 1st Round.
The 1996 Bulls lot to the 18-49 Raptors.
With the massive talent gap between the 1996 Bulls and the Raptors
His prime was cut short, but Tracy Murray was a great shooter that annihilated Pippen in the 97' 1st Round, so he wasn't a slouch the prior year as a Raptor, and was easily better than a 7 ppg fossil like Ron Harper.
Meanwhile, goat defender Alvin Robertson and all-defender Doug Christie aren't far off on either side of the ball to all-time bricklayers like Pippen/Rodman.
And Oliver Miller would've been the best center that MJ ever had BY FAR - he was always regarded as one of the best shot-blockers, enormous wing-span, and best-kept secrets in the league..
So the Raptors' cast wasn't far off from the 2nd three-peat Bulls, who even a fraud-tank for Lebron like "Thinking Basketball" concedes was garbage.. Just look at the playoff numbers for each year of the 2nd three-peat and let me know when you stop laughing.
The 1996 Bulls lot to the 18-49 Raptors.
With the massive talent gap between the 1996 Bulls and the Raptors
even without reading the quick layman's history above, it's obvious that the talent gap between the casts of the Bulls/Raptors and Serbia/Team USA aren't comparable.
There's nothing great about what Lebron does... Since when is 6 turnovers per 36 been even sufferable, let alone "great"?
So don't call Lebron "great" in these Olympics because catering to this horrible caliber and style is why the margin of victory was nowhere near our massive talent advantage.
And Lebron's path isn't "great", since he was coddled upon being discovered at 10 years old and given generational wealth before he took a single NBA dribble to alleviate all pressure... Then he was allowed to hand-pick opposing franchise players to form super-teams, such as hand-picking the unprecedented help of 6 straight preseason favorites (11-16'), and then hand-picking AD to lift a lottery team to champion...
Yet he still mostly lost, regardless of cast!! Imagine perennially-favored talent mostly losing - that's how much his worst-ever brand of ball and chemistry underperforms favored talent..
His high-scoring ball-domination imposes spot-up roles that prevented young player development and elite chemistry for 21 years, which prevented a great-performing cast, aka great team.. He simply never learned how to win (elite chemistry), and only learned to team-hop (talent-based winning.. all-star team strategy)..
So no, there's nothing about Lebron's colluding, team-hopping, media-planting, propagandizing, goat-losing and duping that is 'great'.
.
So Jordan is #1
LeBron is #11.
No need to discuss even further Fallguy. You’ve convinced everyone.
You can retire now.
People see through someone that drastically failed to win their conference a couple times when expected, so they put the top 3 players in the conference on 1 team to manufacture a 'streak' of Finals.
Jokic could never get away with teaming up with SGA and KAT to make a bunch of Finals.. Or maybe he could, but this is why only winning the Finals matters, in order to show that a team won the whole league instead of being the 4th or 5th-best team that was luckily in the right conference.
So if winning matters, then 11th is fine - a decades-worth of Finals runs confirms that Lebron-ball (high-scoring ball-domination) cannot compete on the championship level.. Accordingly, Lebron isn't capable of having unbeatable teams and infact mostly loses with every cast that is put around him.
But again, if we're ignoring winning and essentially beginning a double-standard of rewarding the previously-eschewed 'Iverson-ball', aka losing, high-turnover ball-domination.... Sure Lebron has better efficiency but the other aspects of 1 or 2-man basketball being now favored over 5-man basketball is the point... You guys always say "3 better than 2" but '5-man better than 1 or 2-man".
.
No need to discuss even further Fallguy. You’ve convinced everyone.
You can retire now.
The goal for every basketball team is to get easy scores as much as possible, but the reality is that tough possessions make up a big part of total possessions for any team... But when you have a guy like MJ or Curry, there's no such thing as a tough possession.. Part of the reason that the 92' Dream Team or the 90's Bulls looked like they had great chemistry is because they still looked great on the tough possessions by having a seamless closer like MJ or Curry to make even the toughest possessions look mostly good.
That's the role that MJ and Curry play on every team that they're on, and most fans don't realize that you can control games more by CLOSING the most possessions possible as opposed to initiating the most possessions (and then letting TEAMMATES bail you out).. So people just look at the game opposite of reality.. It's all about closing - this is true in life generally.
Well it’s ok if u believe 2018 team warriors was not as good in 2018 .
I don’t know why but it’s ok .
Why would age be relevant in shooting 3s ?
Mullins was 34 and played 3 more seasons after w shrug .
The point is the « old » 1998 bulls were able to beat 3s point shooter teams so I don’t see why they couldn’t in1996 .
FWIW , I can’t see the bulls being a worst team then Houston 2018 .
Mullin scored 11 ppg that year and played 110 more games after that year averaging 7ppg. He was cooked.
Indy shot 12 3s per game. Warriors shot 31.
And the Warriors get to shoot from 22 feet. Juicy.
Funny that fallguy complains about turnovers when they are LeBron's, but not when they are Curry's/Warriors.
Warriors are all time bad with TOs.
