LeBron > Jordan GOAT Super AIDS Containment, solved #22999 post by Matt R. (addendum #23174)

Ok, so would it be safe to say that a team’s offensive strategy, and a player’s role within that offense, can change a player’s assisted fg%?

You did say you’ve played organized basketball before, right? Has your role within an offense ever changed from one year or team to the next? If not, have you ever seen it happen before?

Ok, how do you know that?

Have you, or have you ever seen, a player’s role within an offense change from one season to the next or if they play on a different team?

Why did the highly assisted jump shooter Kobe Bryant go 34-48 in 2004-05? (Did perhaps anything change around him? Did his circumstances change?)

Also, you never answered my question: are there any other skill sets or roles besides off ball jump shooting that contribute to title equity?

Did you ever take that math education bet with Tien? I would be happy to send my college transcript to a neutral arbiter. I’d even call my university’s registrar office and pay to have it mailed because it would amuse me. Your call, of course.

The entirety of history

Luka, Lebron, Harden, Westbrook - all the high-scoring ball-dominators - they never ran a high ball movement system

Even if a ball movement coach is hired, he must scuttle away his ball movement philosophies because Harden, Luka and Lebron can't play off-ball as the team leaders... So every coach is forced to put the ball in their hands, even if they prefer to run ball movement.

Because everyone needs help, but jumpshooters and bigs simply need LESS help, due to their superior chemistry and ball movement,.. Kobe's superior chemistry is why he could win with less talent, such as a sidekick that is worse than Love or Bosh.. So it's clear as day

Were you ever in a Master's program for business or any math-related field and score better than nearly 4 of 5 people that took the GMAT?

If so, then great - you got me, which would be another example of how math nerds struggle with high-level understanding of certain things, like the qualitative aspects that I've discussed, aka "ball-dominance, spot-up roles, chemistry", etc

The greatest players in the world don't have their role change... Shaq isn't going to stop posting up, just like Luka, Harden or Lebron aren't going to stop dominating the ball, while Curry, Kobe and MJ aren't going to stop taking a ton of jumpers and playing off-ball.. That's just how all these guys play and some of these skillsets produce better chemistry and affect teammates differently than others.

Even if a ball movement coach is hired, he must scuttle away his ball movement philosophies because Harden, Luka and Lebron can't play off-ball as the team leaders... Every coach is forced to put the ball in their hands, even if they prefer to run ball movement.. Look at the king of ball movement - Steve Kerr - he was forced to run bron-ball in the Olympics and the weaker brand of ball underachieved our massive talent edge by nearly losing and getting dominated at times, while also needing Curry to save us.. Lebron was horrible in the Olympics by virtue of 5 turnovers per 24 minutes and a ball-dominant brand that froze out so many guys like Tatum and even Curry for a while.

Btw, the reality is that Phil is just a lucky SOB - he had no clue whether Jordan was suited for the triangle because he thought Jordan would stop being scoring champ - he wasn't really aware that he'd lucked into a player whose skillset could perfectly execute his offense and do so while still carrying the biggest scoring burden.

You keep bringing this up and don't understand LeBron's results in those years as preseason favourite were actually good.

Anyway I asked you to do this exercise, but of course you didn't. So I did it for you.

If you had bet $1M on LeBron's team when he was on the out-right preseason favourites you would be $3.3M better off

2021 - Lose $1M
2016 - Make $2.8M
2015 - Lose $1M
2014 - Lose $1M
2013 - Make $2.25M
2012 - Make $2.25M
2011 - Lose $1M
Total - Make $3.3M

Now if you did the same for Kobe you would be $2.2M better off.

2010 - Make $2.25M
2004 - Lose $1M
2003 - Lose $1M
2002 - Make $2M
2001 - Make $1.8M
1999 - Lose $1M
Total - Make $2.05M

Both good results, but LeBron out-preformed Kobe.... again.

You should probably take this off your rotation of ****-posts. It just makes Kobe look bad.

I also find it funny that FG thinks that if 19 year old LeBron got drafted to the Lakers instead of Kobe he wouldn't play as directed by Phil Jackson and Shaq.

I mean Phil Jackson got Michael Jordan (the most stubborn man in basketball who had MVPs/scoring titles etc to his name at the time) to change the way he played, yet somehow couldn't get a high school kid to do the same.

Minimum 4 chips if he had played for the Lakers instead of Kobe. Minimum.

LeBron came into the league pass first. He would've been more than happy to feed Shaq and wouldn't clash with him, instead taking on a little brother type role.

Your argument is a deflection from the reality that Lebron is the only guy that has MANY YEARS of underachieving expectation by falling to underdog or losing.

Kobe has the occasional underachievement, but only Lebron has many years of underperforming expectation by falling to underdog or losing.. This includes 6 straight years from 2011 to 2016, and then again in 2021.

The reason Lebron underperforms favored rosters far more often than Kobe is because Lebron's skillset of high-scoring ball-dominance imposes spot-up roles, weak chemistry, and weak strategic capacity/coaching... Weak chemistry and brand of ball underperforms favored talent - that's how the game works.
.

2 perennial losers with history of weak chemistry and 1-dimensional skillsets THAT DON'T FIT will not win anything more than a one-off.

You guys are just disregarding skillsets and thinking that 2 talented players will automatically win.. It's amazing that you think this despite 21 years of evidence to the contrary.. By now you should know that sparkling team-ups lose their luster quickly if it's a bad fit (skill deficit).

Unfortunately, this situation shows a skill deficit on both sides because Shaq isn't the PNR big that Lebron's needs, while Lebron lacks the jumpshooting volume & efficiency to play off an "in-out" big like Shaq.

But even without considering this fundamental clash and bad fit, we can just look at the historical timeline to see how Shaq would lose with 21 and 22-year Lebron... Lebron was still 2nd Team All-NBA in 2007, while Shaq was swept and blown away with 1st Team All-NBA teammates in 95' and 96' (Penny) - Shaq was also swept with 3 all-star teammates in 98' and swept for 6 straight years (94-99').

Accordingly, it's absurd to think that a perennial loser with a one-dimensional skillset can win with another perennial loser that has a one-dimensional skillset, especially when these skillsets don't fit !!!!!!... Let that sink in - it's impossible to win more than a one-off with 2 perennially-losing and 1-dimensional skillsets that don't fit - this is intuitive... And when we look at Lebron's career, we see one-offs - 1 for 6 with AD so far, and 1 for 4 with Love or Wade (except the Allen miracle)..

So just to summarize - Lebron is 1 for 6 with AD, and 1 for 4 with Love/Kyrie or Wade/Bosh, yet you think he would win FOUR chips with a perennial loser like Shaq?.. That's completely looney tunes.. Hey guys, did you know that Kamala can still win the election?? If you just send me a few million, I can make it happen.........

Your argument has devolved into "anyone can play any way they want to... Damian Lillard could post like Shaq if the coach wanted him to"

That isn't how the game works guys.. I know you guys were cut from the team and never played, but skillsets are a real thing - guys can't just play however they want.. KJ can't switch places with Barkley and start playing PF, just like Luka or Lebron can't switch places with Klay or MJ and start running off screens as an off-guard.

And Phil didn't change the way Jordan played - Jordan played off-guard alongside every coach that he ever had.. Phil is just lucky that he lucked into a player that could make his offense work, instead of failing like it did everywhere else..

Phil is lucky that MJ wasn't Lebron, since Lebron got Blatt fired for trying to run a ball movement offense, and since every coach is eventually forced to put the ball in Lebron's hands - look at JJ Redick - he started off with good intentions but now the ball is back in Lebron's hands and the team is losing again.... Lebron simply MUST dominate the ball because he has no other elite skills, and accordingly, these Lakers will continue to underperform their roster's considerable talent.

But it's all good fellas - keep watching TV and thinking dumb sh*t like Shawn Bradley has goat potential..... OOPS..... I mean Wemby..

Why doesn't Curry ever "need more help"?

How come he can generate tremendous chemistry with Klay, Hield or Wiggins and therefore not need help, while Lebron always has these needy teams that need more help?

These should be very easy questions to answer... As a player with abnormal ball-domination for his position and as a high-scoring ball-dominator, Lebron's skillset has a lot of unassisted buckets that leave teammates standing around in spot-up roles - these spot-up roles don't develop teammates and produce weaker chemistry, thereby needing more help/talent.. That's why Curry can dominate the league with just Buddy Heild, while Lebron barely wins 50 games with peak Kyrie, Love and a bevy of experienced vets.

Who knew that Buddy could've replaced Klay and been called an all-timer instead of Klay...

Buddy Hield confirms that Klay/Pippen are replaceable and carried, while Wiggins already proved it in 2022.

A guy like Pippen never played above a prime Larry Nance or Iguoudala caliber, but the winning spotlight inflated him to all-time status and media accolade.. And now we see that Buddy Hield is better than Klay in this system, and could've won in Curry's heyday just like Klay did.

Great chemistry & system allows secondary players like Klay, Buddy, Wiggins and Pippen to play well, otherwise they're nobodies in the annals of history - winning sidekicks are the most overrated players in history by virtue of getting inflated by the winning spotlight..

Of course, a great system is only possible if the 1st option has a skillset that allows great ball movement and system - a ball-dominator like Luka, Lebron or Harden simply don't allow ball movement systems to be run, while goat jumpshooters like Curry or MJ do... Buddy would NEVER be enough help for Luka or Lebron, but it's enough for Curry because Curry's skillset emits great CHEMISTRY

All I did was prove one of your statements wrong.

And once again proved you don't treat Kobe on the same scale as LeBron.

We're 8 games into a season and FG already crowning the Warrior champs. You know they started the season 6-2 last year and then proceeded to miss the playoffs. I'm guessing Steph won't get judged on the same scale as LeBron again.

Steph is 2 of 12 in winning chips when not playing with another Top 15 player. He lost in the playoffs after winning 73 games and barely won in the WCF and needed Klay to save him in order to do so.

But as above, it isn't important because these would only be negative if it had of happened to LeBron.

As you can see, the unfolding results CONTINUE to support all my narratives - the latest unfolding results show that Klay was replaceable, just like Pippen was... Pippen never played above a Larry Nance level, but the winning spotlight inflated him to all-time status and media accolade.

There's no refuting that Lebron lost more with favored rosters:

Losses with Preseason Favorite

LEBRON........... 4
KOBE................ 2


Losses with homecourt

LEBRON.......... 3
KOBE............... 2


Losses with All-Star Teammate

LEBRON.......... 4
KOBE............... 2


Losses with 2 All-Star Teammates

LEBRON......... 3
KOBE.............. 0

* 21 years or older

Lebron underachieves favored talent more than Kobe because Lebron's skillset of high-scoring ball-dominance has high volume of unassisted buckets that leave teammates standing around in spot-up roles and therefore produces weak chemistry/ball movement.

And Lebron is 0 for 8, so what's your point???

And Lebron is only 4 for 14 when he has a top 15 player, while Curry is 2 for 3.

So Curry wins on every level - he won twice without a top 15 player (Lebron never did), and he mostly wins when he has a top 15 guy (Lebron mostly loses and is 4 for 14).

Furthermore, Curry proved that he could win with 1st-time all-stars like Klay, Wiggins and maybe Buddy, while Lebron couldn't win with all-stars like Mo, Zydrunas, Jamison and coveted acquisitions like Hughes - he needed franchise players at sidekick like Wade, Kyrie or AD, yet still mostly lost.

Ultimately, Curry's skillset produces superior chemistry to win with less and produce the best teams, while Lebron's skillset produces bad chemistry and perennial losers with every cast.

The point is that why doesn't Curry or Jokic ever "need more help"?

How come they can generate tremendous chemistry with weak teammates like Klay, Hield, Murray or Wiggins and therefore not need help, while Lebron always has these needy teams that need more help?

When did Lebron win with lesser guys at sidekick like Murray, Klay, Wiggins or Heild?.. Why did Lebron need so much more than that, such as franchise guys at sidekick and 3rd option?

These should be very easy questions to answer... Unlike Curry, Jokic, or MJ, players with abnormal ball-domination for their position, or high-scoring ball-dominators like Lebron have a lot of unassisted buckets that leave teammates standing around in spot-up roles - these spot-up roles don't develop teammates and produce weaker chemistry, thereby needing more help/talent.. That's why Curry can dominate the league with just Buddy Heild, while Lebron barely wins 50 games with peak Kyrie, Love and a bevy of experienced vets.

fallguy

Also fallguy

Also, you never answered my question: are there any other skill sets or roles besides off ball jump shooting that contribute to title equity?