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

The system and coach does seem to have an impact. For example, Michael Jordan was 0 for 7 with zero titles without Phil Jackson and the triangle. Kobe Bryant was 0 for 9 with zero titles without Phil Jackson and the triangle.

But with Phil Jackson and the triangle, Michael Jordan won 6 rings and was 6 for 8 (75% championship rate). Kobe Bryant won 5 rings and was 5 for 11 (45.45% championship rate).

There does seem to be a pattern here but it’s difficult to parse. I wonder what may be going on. Maybe it’s a 40% assisted field goal rate lmfao.

Phil Jackson GOAT team impact obviously.

No it is only to Jordan, and how you have posted a dozen times about the cherry picked games where he had 3+ attempts when he routinely had majority of games with 0-2 attempts throughout his career. Even in the 2 seasons without the short line he still had 25%+ of his games with 0-2 attempts he never was a 3pt shooter

The game has obviously evolved and 3pt shooting is vastly superior to Jordan's midrange based game so you have to go through all these convoluted steps to pretend he was actually a good 3pt shooter

You always start with a conclusion and then adjust and cherry pick into as tiny of a sample that might sort of back up your claim, and then just pretend everything else didn't happen too.

^^^ It's just bad logic and revisionist history.

When Lebron barely lost in 2008, everyone said that he just needed a little more help, but when MJ barely lost in 1989, current fans say he needed Phil.. It's a clear double standard.

The Bulls had a chance to beat the 89' Pistons despite Pippen getting 9.7 on 40% and missing Game 6, so Jordan just needed a little more help, not Phil.. Again, new fans and media simply lie and revise history..

Jordan was the goat candidate that "made" 1st-timers like Phil and Pippen.. Phil inherited a team that was on the cusp of the Finals - he never built anything - he was only handed ready-made GOATS that were on the cusp.

Who cares what the 2nd-leading scorer does.. If Curry was the top dog and didn't have another massive assist target in KD, then you would have a point... But Curry wasn't the top dog - KD was, so KD was the big assist target that all dominant champions require at 1st option.

Furthermore, the rare times that Curry dips into the high 30's are the times that he's merely coming down to a normal point guard level.... 37% is normal for a starting point guard, so he doesn't lower his teammates' assist opportunity compared to playing alongside other point guards.. Otoh, frontcourt players have much higher assisted rates, so 37% is absurdly low for Lebron and craters everyone's assist opportunity compared to playing alongside normal forwards - this is why Lebron lowers everyone's assists and causes low average ranking in team assists.

Klay is an inferior offensive player to Wade, Kyrie, Bosh or Love based on every metric, so why doesn't Lebron have a #1 offense like the 15' or 16' Warriors?.. Why hasn't Lebron had a #1 offense in 22 years despite more offensive help than Bird, Jordan, Duncan, Kobe, Curry, Jokic and more??

We know why - Lebron's skillset of ball-domination kills ball movement, so it doesn't generate the great teammate fits and performance that produce juggernauts, even with guys that are better offensive players.

How would Shaq increase Kobe's assisted rate?? You're confused.. lol

You're just spouting gibberish now because you can't refute the points being made about Lebron's obvious fraud and inferiority.. You're literally lost.

You guys are saying that Steve Kerr didn't need Curry in 2015 to run the era-changing system, and Phil didn't need MJ in 1990 to run the triangle.... Anyone would've worked because it's the coaches that make the players great... Right?... Mike Malone was 39-67 as head coach in Sacramento before joining Jokic, and yet you're saying anyone can run his offense because Malone makes the player great (Malone makes Jokic great).

That's what you're saying... The amazing thing is that all these guys were 1st time coaches like Kerr, Phil, Popovich - they just lucked into coaching the most coachable players ever (the best assisted scorers ever).

If the triangle was good at winning titles, then it would've been a household name that everyone used to win chips, but no one had heard of the offense and it only won with MJ or his clone Kobe....

Ultimately, we can expand the sample beyond the triangle - every coach of a dynasty or dominant champion had the greatest jumpshooters or bigs ever at 1st option (the best highly-assisted players ever as 1st options)... Otoh, all the coaches that were afflicted with ball-dominators as 1st options produced perennial losers, the neediest teams ever, and they never the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions).

The entire point is that good shooters like Jordan shot better at higher volume - 3+ attempts is where we see Jordan never shoot poorly in a season or series.

So your theory fails in so many ways - firstly, it applies to everyone - it says that any season with an uptick in 3-point efficiency is due to the player making their first three for most of the games that year.. this is plain dumb.. So what happens if they make the first but miss the 2nd?????... Do they stop shooting again?... again, this is the dumbest take itt and you got it from Nick Wright.. Let that sink in.

Accept the reality that Jordan wasn't a low IQ player like today's players that shoot high volume with low efficiency... Anytime that he decided to shoot more threes, he always shot well in every series or season with 3+ attempts (regular line).. Since Jordan always shot well at today's volumes, we know that he would shoot well today at today's volumes.. Otoh, since Lebron never showed great off-ball skill, assisted rates above 415 in his prime, or meaningful jumpshooting volume, we know that he can't play in the triangle.

See the fact you can't see how Klay is a better offensive player to play along side Durant and Curry is basically saying you don't know anything about basketball.

O

M

G

That is hilarious.

It's absolutely clear to me now that fallguy really is just baselessly (and quite pathetically) trolling. To explicitly troll repeatedly is essentially against the rules of SE but this is the GOAT "super aids" containment thread so I guess I'll just let him keep posting and make a fool out of himself.

You know who hasn't been a number one option for a number one offense:
- Duncan
- Kobe
- Joker
- Maybe Bird - Hard to know as the stats don't exist.

You know who has:
- Luka
- Harden
- Oh yeah, LeBron James in 2013. Note that is the same amount of times for Shaq and Duncan.

You know who has been part of a team as a key member that had the best offense.
- Chris Paul
- Nash

Damn those assist percentages!

Not a single thing you wrote here is accurate.

Not every coach is exactly the same. This is why coaches get fired and other coaches get hired. Some coaches are better than others. Some coaches have better skills to coach elite offenses. Different coaches are knowledgeable about different schemes.

Doug Collins did not implement the triangle offense with Michael Jordan on the roster. Phil Jackson and Tex Winter did. It worked really well. They won 6 rings with it in Chicago and 5 in LA. Contrary to your lunatic beliefs, it did not grow out of Michael Jordan’s *******.

Coach and scheme are important. Full stop. Literally anyone that has ever played organized basketball at any level, and has fully functioning mental faculties, would agree with this statement. I’ll let you figure out on your own why you are an exception to this.

Also, I think you innocently forgot to respond to this. Based on your previous recent arguments, it kind of looks like you are saying the career average of MJ’s 3 point shooting % doesn’t give an accurate gauge of his “true” 3 point shooting abilities. So you are throwing out the games where he shot poorly. But, with LeBron, his career average assisted fg % is the only true measure of his ball dominance, even though he exceeded your threshold in 9 separate seasons, proving he was capable of exceeding 40% (9 separate times, in fact).

I am sure this is a simple misunderstanding though, because there is no way you would argue out of both sides of your mouth to benefit MJ and slander LeBron. I just refuse to believe it. But it would be great if you clarified for others.

One last thing: I think it would be pretty cool if you showed us how you mathematically determined that 40% is the threshold for “ball-dominance” and “inability to be a dominant champion and/or dynasty”. I am sure it’s not because LeBron James is approximately 1% below this threshold, so you arbitrarily chose 40% since LeBron did not quite meet it.

I’m sure it’s not that. Therefore I am quite confident you will be able to explain, in detail, the mathematical criteria you used to determine 40% is the proper threshold. If you have any detailed derivations, now would be the perfect time to share them.

Of course he stops when he can't reply with an answer. He knows he's at a dead end that he lost.

Sometimes he just spews the same garbage over and over again that has been debunked over and over and over and over again ("12 of 12" has 15 mentions on this page).

Stop the tough guy "everyone knows this stuff" nonsense... You're dead wrong.... Lebron hired his podcast buddy and fired Blatt's Princeton Offense, so he could care less about scheme and thinks that he knows the right way to go... KD and Kyrie obviously don't think the coach is that important either... I've heard players on every level dismiss coaches as a standard.

Again... You have no idea what you're talking about.. Stop repeating crap you heard from some journalism major on TV.. They're wrong, just like the "hitting the 1st three" theory of Nick Wright (the projection of a bad player that gets scared to shoot after his first miss), and now this nonsense about "anyone that played" thinks the coach and scheme are critical... This is completely false - I would estimate that between 25-50% of players on every level think coaches are a secondary factor at best and some think they don't matter at all.

The only reason Jordan valued Phil in 98' was because MJ was 35 and the Overton window hadn't been opened that someone could come along later on and use longevity as a way to produce a fake goat debate - if Jordan had known that humans could stoop this low, he would probably damn-near still be playing and on that "new juice" too.

^^^^ They're a secondary factor and Lebron had all of them anyway, but couldn't get anywhere near 6 chips, 3-peat, or 70 wins with any of his hand-picked casts, schemes, teammates, coaches or franchises..

Instead, his ball-dominant skillset of unassisted buckets imposed spot-up roles, zero teammate development, bad fits, and perennial losers with every cast...

Otoh, Jordan never got to hand-pick anything and simply won 6 chips with what he was given, which included a 1st-time nobody coach and an unknown offense, along with the worst-scoring cast of all-time (or rim protection).. His assisted skillset of expert jumpshooting and pure scoring produced superior teammate fits, strategic capacity and perennial winning with the least help.

Which isn't you or the journalism majors that you plagiarize

^^^ Lies - Lebron never produced a #1 offense in 22 seasons despite the most offensive help ever:

Otoh, Bird had a #1 offense in 1988, and all the highly-assisted 1st options that produced dynasties produced #1 offenses too, such as 97' Jordan, 95' Shaq, 15' Curry, and 12' Duncan (and also Kareem, Heinsohn), while some of the dominant champions did too, such as 24' Tatum and 17' Durant.

12 of 12 instances of dynasties or dominant champions had 1st options with above 40% career assisted rates.. That excludes Lebron, who has 38% career assisted rate, and the entire class of players below 40% (ball-dominators).

The 40% threshold was determined by looking at the data since 1997, and seeing that every high-assist point guard of 6.5 or more had a career assisted rate below 40%, with the exception of Stockton.

7 APG was chosen (6.5+) because the 6 APG level is where you start seeing elite shooting guards or combo guards like Curry, MJ, Jamal Murray, Booker, etc.

Ultimately, there are no 7 APG players outside of Stockton or Jokic that had above 40% career assisted rate.. Every other high-assist player or "ball-dominator" that you can think of like Rondo, Lebron, Luka, or Tim Hardaway, have below 40% assisted rate, so the threshold is clearly below 40% = ball-dominator and above 40% = bigs or jumpshooters.. there are no exceptions to to this rule, hence the cut-off being 40%.

The higher-assisted bigs and jumpshooters (over 40% assisted rate) were 1st option for 12 of 12 instances of the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions) since 1997, which is the data set that we're looking at this entire time.. So everything lines up and you're still struggling to find holes in this impenetrable doctrine.

Lebron's career average is 38%, so he's 3% below the threshold of "over 40%", aka 41+.

And during his prime of 2006 to 2021, he was between 29 and 41 (36% average), and barely scraped 40% twice..

Remember that in addition to the career rate of over 40%, we have the prime ranges of 40-60% that all these 1st options had as well, so Lebron's range of 29-41 doesn't qualify and puts him in the ball-dominator range.
.

Today's 3-point standard require volume... At today's volumes, Jordan always shot well.

Otoh, the dynasty or dominant champion standard only requires a career assisted rate of over 40%, which Lebron fails by a full 3 points..

So can you see why your comparison of the three-point issue and the assisted rate issue wasn't analogous?

hope that helps

(btw - again, not every 1st option with over 40% career assisted rate will produce a dynasty, but every dynasty requires over 40% from the 1st option).
.

^^^ From 2014.... Ball movement offenses only work with highly-assisted 1st options such as bigs or goat jumpshooters like Curry or MJ.

It should be noted that every team in the 90's tried and copied the triangle but failed, and every team since then has used aspects of the triangle, including Curry's Warriors and today's entire era that copied them.

Yet no one could 3-peat with it except peak Shaq/Kobe, and no one could 3-peat twice or win 70 + title with it..... and no one in history used the pure triangle offense to win except MJ and Kobe (not just aspects or borrowed concepts)..

Essentially, everyone has used the triangle on some level, but no one could win with the ball movement approach anywhere NEAR the level of MJ, who also won with the least all-star help, scoring help or rim protection ever.

lol

Wow I didn't realize that baby KD carried Westbrick to #1 offenses, while Lebron & AD had the worst team in the league and worst fit of all-time with Westbrook.

But to your point, Lebron has all these misses of goat-caliber, such as falling short of a #1 offense, or 70 wins, or 3-peat, or winning as 1st option with only 1 other star, and many other goat-level things like carrying weak help over top teams, or defeating max defensive attention (carrying scoring load in Finals).. and much more

Btw, at the ages of 22-23 years old, KD, Kobe and Amare annihilate and dominate the Spurs, while Lebron is worst-ever with 22 on 35% and 6 TO's.

.
Fidstar is making great case for KD to move up the rankings:

* #1 offenses with baby Westbrick in 2013 and Curry in 2017

* Dominated and upset the Spurs at 23 years old in 2012, while Lebron was worst-ever at the same age in 07'

* 1st option and produced "the best basketball", aka dominant champion in 2017 - ranks #1 as the most dominant playoff run ever

* His career was ruined when his organic chips with Westbrick at 23 years old was stolen by colluding veterans

* Outplayed Lebron HU 3 times

.
Stats at 22-23 years old vs Duncan's Spurs:

01' KOBE.......... 33/7/7 on 57 TS
12' KD'.............. 30/8/5 on 66 TS
05' AMARE....... 37/9/1 on 61 TS
07' LEBRON..... 22/7/7 on 42 TS

^^^ someone clearly doesn't belong

And this wasn't a one-off because Lebron averaged 26 on 35% and 6 TO's against the 08' Celtics, and then the 11' Mavs or the 10' meltdown.. These were all narrow losses despite Lebron's worst-ever caliber of play, yet people say he needed more help instead of saying he needed to improve.. Otoh, young MJ always dominated, yet they said he needed to improve instead of needing more help.