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

I enjoyed the whole diatribe from twog about how LeBron must be on steroids because of his legs.

Sounded like it came from someones who's never done squats in his life.

Yeah, at this point, we pretty much solved twog. MJ had plenty in his bag so it's weird to me that twog was obsessed with really simple things that MJ did well. But it makes a lot more sense if you realize that twog is taking the compliments he got from his coaches over the years (whether his physical attributes or partial ones based on his hypothetical skills, i.e. if you just did X & Y, you'd be unstoppable), realizing that they could also be applied to MJ and inventing an entire narrative around how MJ became the GOAT largely due to the traits MJ shares with him.

He was in 2001 against the Spurs and 2002 against the Kings - the "real" Finals.. Some of the best versions of Kobe.. It's like a joke watching his diverse highlights and the many looks that he gave defenses vs Ant's basic down-hill seeking of 3' and layups (not 5-man basketball)... This weaker chemistry is why Ant can't elevate an All-NBA guy like KAT, while Kobe took a 1x all-star like Pau who was in his 7th season, and made him perennial All-NBA

.
The calves are the telltale sign because most people with bird calves like Tmac, MJ, or young Lebron keep those bird calves their entire career.. Lebron is the only guy that went from bird calves to tree trunks

Add PED's = tree trunk calves:

Wowzers... #checkmycalves

It wasn't about the quads - it was about the calves and ankles - his calves went from sticks (Tmac) to tree trunks (Karl Malone).. that isn't from squats - see the comparison above.. Btw, I got this tip about calves remaining the same size from the goat himself, Ronnie Coleman

Most modern players are infact "down-hill" players that seek 3's and layups

but this isn't 5-man basketball, so it can't produce the elite chemistry required to elevate teammates and have well-performing supporting casts, aka good teams.

Ant follows this modern template, which isn't "the next MJ" because MJ was like the rare GOATS of this era like Curry or Jokic, who aren't down-hill players - they're generational offensive talents, so they yield the best chemistry that elevates teammates to great role play and therefore dynasty team performance.. This is the opposite of the typical modern "down-hill" player that "needs more help" because they can't produce the chemistry needed to elevate teammates.

carry on.. it's actually a massive media flaw where they should blame players for not elevating teammates and generating sufficient chemistry, instead of simply saying they need more help.. The media encourages players to be talent-based winners (all-star team strategy), rather than improve their skillset to produce better chemistry like Curry's teams, or Jokic and MJ's teams.. They got better to win (improved chemistry) - they didn't just "get more help" (talent-based winning)... Curry learned to win with Wiggins and Poole for goodness sake - he did this by developing great chemistry with them - he never asked for "more help"

In MJ's case, he generates goat chemistry and ball movement by being an off-ball player that can finish off-the-catch with goat power off 1 step like he's a big man, or via expert jumpshooting skill and moving off-screens.. Ant lacks all of this.. His shot-making diversity if he doesn't get all the way to the cup is literally bad compared to MJ's goat shot-making ability and diversity.

Jesus Christ get some ****ing help bro.

I have to point out that there's a major flaw in NBA media that hurts the NBA product significantly... By blaming all losses on "needing more help", today's media promotes talent-based winning (all-star team strategy), which discourages players from developing the chemistry needed to have well-performing casts.

So even though everyone thought the T-Wolves were "too much" for the Nuggets after 2 games, everyone is saying Ant needs more help now that they're losing.. However, a cursory glance at Ant highlights shows that he seeks 3's and layups via a down-hill skillset, which isn't 5-man basketball, and therefore cannot produce the chemistry needed to have a well-performing cast, aka great team..

Since the media says that Ant simply needs more help, they're effectively discouraging him from working to improve the team's chemistry.. Accordingly, Ant will probably not work to develop expert jumpshooting skill off screens or quick moves upon the catch that can foster better ball movement because the media says he simply needs more help - so he'll probably just tell management to get more help and continue to think his down-hill skillset is sufficient...

We've seen this for 21 years from Lebron - he always needs more help - it's never that his team simply needs to get better (improve chemistry).. Lebron prefers the media's talent-based approach because his skillset is inherenty suboptimal - his ball-dominant approach imposes spot-up roles that stall young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win (can't win organically).
.

FWIW comparing Jokic' game 5 performance playing against current and 4-time DPOY, vs. the established greatest playoff game performance. I'll leave it up to the reader to decide which is greater.

[code]
MP TS% eFG% 3PAr FTr ORB% DRB% TRB% AST% STL% BLK% TOV% USG% ORtg DRtg BPM
Jokic 41:06 .770 .727 .136 .409 0.0 21.5 11.5 57.3 2.6 2.2 0.0 30.6 169 104 29.0
other 42:35 .672 .648 .222 .296 6.6 14.7 11.3 56.5 4.8 7.9 3.2 35.1 147 100 23.5
[/code]

Squats build calves? Not really. Calf raises and recumbent bike yes, not standard squats. Jumping squats maybe, but that's not the same exercise as squats.

In this thread a guy who has 4 finals MVPs gets referred to as a 'perennial loser like Harden and Westbrook'

No he wasn't.

You've cheery picked two series, and one of those series Shaq averaged 30/14/2 vs Kobe's 27/6/4, while shooting more than 10% better from the field.

I think that's Lebron's Game 6 in the 2016 Finals - what makes that performance arguably the greatest has to do with the circumstances and the ultimate outcome, not sure why we're comparing a conference semi Game 5 (which wasn't an elimination game for either team) against a fairly random playoff team to that one on a purely statistical basis. I'm pretty sure Lebron's had 29+ BPM playoff games before. I'm sure a bunch of other people have had one of those as well. Also Gobert isn't some amazing 1-on-1 defender that was specifically asked to guard Jokic, his accolades have to do with his tremendous impact on the overall team defense, not sure what that has to do with anything.

This reminds of that time when people thought KD's 49-point game against the Bucks was some kind of a career-defining moment for KD in 2021 and I correctly pointed out that it's not that big of a deal unless the Nets end up winning. No one cares now.

Twog, before Phil Jackson installed the triangle and reined in MJ, was MJ lauded for being an off-ball player whose style was all about helping the team win and improve the team chemistry, or perhaps was he criticized for being a ball hog that takes too many shots in a way that makes it difficult for the rest of the team to get in rhythm?

Also, when Phil Jackson wanted MJ to play off-ball more in a system to give everyone a chance to touch the ball, was MJ's first reaction like, whoa that's great, I love playing that way, I'm all about sharing the ball and winning. Or was his reaction more like, you know what, I like it better when I have the ball in my hands.

It's not disputable that at the same age, Anthony Edwards plays much more in the flow of the offense than MJ did. MJ was extensively criticized for turning the rest of the team into "Jordanaires" that were just watching MJ do his thing because the way he played marginalized the rest of the team. This was a constant theme in how MJ was evaluated before Phil Jackson took control over the offense - that MJ was flashy and amazing individually but he doesn't get others involved enough like Magic & Bird and his actual impact was likely much lower than those that did and also lower than it would be if he lowered his usage and involved everyone else more. And they were proven right - the triangle reduced his usage and the team got better, despite MJ resisting it at first.

Meanwhile, no one could reasonably accuse Anthony Edwards of playing in a way that marginalizes the rest of the team.

Anyway, this was all over the news media at the time. So twog, were you illiterate in the 80's or did you just not follow basketball or MJ much back then?

Is there another reason why muscular men trigger you or was my earlier guess correct?

more cherry-picking bullshit

Before Phil arrived, MJ was already nearly beating the Bad Boys and only lost the 89' ECF because Pippen effectively missed Games 5 and 6.

People don't realize that Pippen's first "migraines" were in the 89' ECF, not 1990.. Phil's loss in 1990 was excused due to the "migraine", but Collins actually experienced a far worse version of Pippen in 89' and got fired.

Regarding off-ball - MJ was always off-ball, which is why Phil thought the triangle could work in the first place - he thought that MJ's game could turn the little-known triangle into a winner.. Obviously, if MJ was a Luka or Lebron-style ball-dominator, Phil would never have thought to run the triangle - it's clear that those guys wouldn't tolerate it and their skillset couldn't dominate playing that way.

And you've obviously heard the stories of people saying Jordan scored too much and that's why his teams didn't win early on, but that's the narrative that was proven wrong - he scored just as much while winning titles and it turns out that everyone grew by leaps and bounds alongside him and had great fits... But again, he was incorrectly knocked early on and had to prove everyone wrong - he was already doing this by 88', and of course the historic 89' run with upsets in every round and nearly beat the Bad Boys with no help.. The Bulls were the only team to win any games off the Pistons in the 89' Playoffs and they had a real chance to beat them if Pippen doesn't quit in Games 5 and 6 - he played 1 minute in Game 6.
.

And Lebron wasn't the 1st option in 2020, although some people would debate that, just like people debate Kobe/Shaq in 01' and 02'.

When the actual scoring of both guys is close and within a few PPG, it could go either way - both guys have stretches of being "that guy" and taking over the game.

Regardless, this kind of tag team and equal scoring loads is nowhere near MJ, who always carried the scoring load at an unprecedented GOAT level, while playing GOAT defense too.

Btw, in the 2001 and 2002 WCF, many people thought Kobe was the best player and Shaq was a big liability down the stretch - that's where 'hack-a-shaq'; was born.. I'll give Shaq 2000, but 01' and 02' were debateable - and no one cared about those Finals - they were a foregone conclusion - it didn't matter what the Lakers did.. And we know for a fact that if Kobe doesn't cheat and break Bibby's nose, the Lakers lose the 02' WCF - Kobe cheated like 8 times to win that series - Shaq wasn't willing to do that - mamba mentality won that series.

If a guy never had a stretch where his team mostly won, and only had stretches where his team mostly lost, then he's a perennial loser.

Sure it's true that Lebron hasn't lost as much as Westbrook or Harden, but the reality is that their style and prime numbers compare well to Lebron's, so the only difference is that Lebron teamed up with opposing franchise players and they didn't (at least not in their primes)..

Who can't go 2/4 with Wade and Bosh?... Who can't go 1/5 with AD or Love?..... this is not impressive for someone that everyone says is #2 all-time.. And you'll counter by bragging about Lebron putting the top 3 players in the conference on 1 team so he could guarantee Finals berth........ but all those extra manufactured chances (10 chances) and still only 4 chips?

History shows that Lebron has a lottery record on the championship level regardless of cast - that's his team ceiling - the best teams Lebron can produce are the "Pistons" of the Finals.. If we made a league that included all the Finals teams from past seasons, Lebron's teams would be the worst team in the league (worst Finals record ever - 22-33 overall).
.

Btw Fidstar, I told you there are "giveaway" games like the Nuggets tonight or the Knicks in Game 3 of 93' ECF

You've got excuses and double standards for everything.

If prime LeBron ever lost a play-off game by 45 points you would never shut up about what a huge loser he is and bring it up at every opportunity.

But because your narrative is that Jokic > LeBron you give him a pass.

Why isn't Jokic included in your list of "perennial losers"? He has one ring in nine years.

Lebron mostly won 2011-2013 or 2012-2014.

I've never cared about margin of loss in any 1 game.. Otoh, I do criticize when someone gets destroyed by a wide margin specifically because they shot 36%, or losing by record amount with 2 all-star teammates, the preseason favorite and even odds entering the series.

KAT is averaging 18/9/3 on 60 TS in this series, while playing great defense on Jokic, so how is Ant not EASILY WINNING with this help?

Ant also has the GOAT defender with Gobert, and "length" everywhere according to Lebron - this is more help than MJ ever had, yet Ant is barely beating the Nuggets.. And the Nuggets have a garbage roster outside of Jokic, so they don't compare to the teams that Jordan faced!!

So I don't mind if Ant beats the Nuggets and makes the Finals because he's obviously vastly inferior to MJ, which confirms how much MJ would dominate today's league.. Most people think he would average over 40 ppg, while Ant didn't even have a 20 PER this year.... In the current series, he's only averaging 29.7 despite his team averaging 103.5 (28.7% of team points) - that doesn't compare to MJ.

He's only 9 years in and he already won with less, aka a "normal" organic cast of 1 franchise player, while Lebron needed 3 franchise players (super-team).

My theory is that players who achieve all-time dominance (aka 30 PER) with a low hold-time style - they have the highest team ceilings/Finals records (Curry, MJ, Duncan).

I expect Jokic to join this group, especially if he actually gets some real help.

Lebron won 2 in 4 with that Miami cast - that's the BEST he's ever done with a cast, smh.. He never proved that he could mostly win for a stretch like Duncan winning 3 in 5 years, or Curry won 3 in 4, or Jordan won 6 in 7 - that's mostly winning and having dominant dynasties, while 21 years confirms that Lebron isn't capable of mostly winning with any cast or having a dynasty or 3-peat with any cast, aka objectively inferior to MJ.