GOAT NBA Discussion: Biggest fraud poster: fallguy. Super AIDS Containment thread

Anyone that watched the NBA in the 90's knows that Salley is a massive liar - literally an obsessive compulsive liar.. That's his thing - he makes up stuff to stay relevant - it's his schtick and it's his thing.

His opinion is like asking Nick Wright or Sam Smith - aka meaningless, albeit more entertaining (because Salley is a funny guy and was actually a stand-up comedian at one point)

Indeed, Lebron can't play in a system or elevate teammates like Swaggy because his ball-dominant skillset reduces everyone to spot-up role.

The value of systems like the Bulls, Spurs or Warriors is the superior chemistry, which allows winning with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player.

Otoh, Lebron's skillset prevents great ball movement and chemistry, so he can't win with normal rosters and must form "super-teams" of multiple franchise players.. And yet his chemistry is worst-ever (turns everyone into spot-up shooter), so he can't produce great teams regardless of roster and has a lottery record against Finals teams.

It's easy to forget the statistical record that Lebron lowers everyone's assists and produces low assist teams - this matters because every series loss of Lebron's playoff career shows deficits in team assists.. So we know that inferior ball movement is his Achilles heel (weak spot), since it's literally the catalyst in every loss.

I've never commented on whether Rodman was good or bad in that series - I simply stated the obvious fact that the Bulls would've won without him, and they won titles with 3 different role players starting at PF.

Kukoc was the starter in the 98' Playoffs, and the Bulls basically won without Rodman in the 97' Playoffs (4/8 on 37%).. And of course the Bulls won from 91-93' without Rodman..

So I'm just pointing out that guys like George Karl are trying to stay relevant or simply hating on MJ - it's like Tom Thibodeaux saying 20 years from now that Chris Bosh was actually the MVP of the 11' ECF because his PNR defense was ground-breaking - this is actually MUCH closer to the truth then a bad coach saying "it was really Rodman that beat us", or players saying that 30 years later to stay relevant.

And Lebron could never win with a non-scorer like Rodman getting major minutes - Lebron has a lottery record while going 5 on 5 in the Finals, so he could never win playing 4 on 5 for major minutes like MJ did.. He can't carry the scoring load like MJ, and he can't produce the goat chemistry required to win with less talent, aka 4 on 5.. He also reduces teammates PPG, APG and RPG, so guys like Love or Rodman can't go off and get super-high RPG - they see lower RPG alongside Lebron.

You claim that I say "Jordan good. Lebron bad"... But my arguments simply prove that Lebron is overrated.. Since you can't refute the arguments, so you change them to "FG said Lebron is bad . That's wrong, which means he's wrong".. But that was never the issue.. No one is saying Lebron is bad .. He's simply nowhere near Jordan or #2, and he's closer to borderline top 10.. So when I say that Lebron's skills amount to simpleton "downhill" ball-dominance that reduces teammates to corner dudes - this doesn't mean he's "bad" - it's simply a knock on him compared to the top guys like MJ, Duncan, Kobe and Curry.. Again, it doesn't mean he's "bad" like you said, since he can be worse than those guys and still be considered a great talent and all-time player.

FGs next 3 posts...

.
.
Here's a snippet of a closed-door practice while learning the triangle:

TEX WINTER: Okay run it from the top - center opposite - let's go

(3 seconds into the play)

TEX: Okay stop... You can't look to make that pass right away son - remember the footwork - turn, look, pivot

PLAYER A: Every time??

TEX: Everytime.. The footwork allows the cutter time to make the cut

(4 seconds into the next play)

TEX: Okay stop.......

^^^ this over and over until it's like breathing

The problem is that the nearly 100-year old triangle is so difficult for players that the pure triangle is virtually never used and never won in the NBA, aside from MJ and Kobe (the GOATS)

Ultimately, the offense is only good in theory - in reality, the easy looks that role players get creates a team of low-level role players and the most top-heavy offense of all-time - i.e. goat burdens from the 1st option are required to win

and since these goat burdens require minimal dribbles, goat skill is required (MJ, Kobe), aka guards that can dominate the post and drop 50 off screens or tough jumpers - these jumpers are meticulously-acquired via triangle-friendly footwork.. That's what the triangle requires, so it only works in theory unless you have the goats.

I use statements from individual players or coaches as supplements to a primary argument.. i.e. Jordan and Kobe's discipline was needed for the triangle, and also their jumpshooting volume/efficiency/eye test - Melo's comments supplemented these primary arguments, and are repeated by everyone - it's the consensus and statistical record.

Otoh, you have no primary argument/counter-argument - you're simply using an individual's statement as THE argument to refute an established consensus of stats, facts and testimony (that MJ was FMVP).

So that's night and day

And we've already established that Jordan's 96' Finals > Lebron's 13' Finals... i.e. Lebron had lower TS and also choked for 6 games, aka 23 on 43%, or certainly the first 3 games with 16 on 39% - this deficit required teammate bailout, and the Heat didn't win with Lebron on the floor in the series (zero plus-minus).

Ultimately , you can't refute that Lebron is a perennially-losing ball-dominator that never learned the best brand of ball - he has a lottery record against the Spurs, Warriors and Nuggets, while never beating the Mavs, Magic or Wolves - he lost to all 3 as the favorite

No, Gervin is like 2010 Shaq, 2009 Ben Wallace, Rose or Drummond, who were presumably fossils and past their prime when they played with Lebron.

Lebron played with Kobe, Magic, Duncan, Iverson, Senguin and McHale comparisons, aka Wade, Luka, AD, Kyrie, Bosh, and Love, respectively..

Meanwhile, MJ played with Shawn Marion or Iguodala (Pippen), aka secondary producer and not the franchise players that Lebron's weaker chemistry and dominance needs

.
Thread Cliffs

Lebron's ball-dominant skillset of imposing spot-up roles lacks the chemistry to win with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player, thereby needing "super-team" formation - i.e. franchise players at 2nd and 3rd option - he needs a "big 3" super-team to win as the 1st option/leading scorer.

But regardless of roster, Lebron's bad chemistry has a lottery record against the Spurs, Warriors, Nuggets and all Finals teams in general, while having futility and upset loss against the Mavs, Magic and TWolves.

Now that is damn funny fidstar !

To be fair, everything he posts is funny.

You guys are a joke. Refuted nothing. Fell for a fraud

.
.
"DOMINANT CHAMPIONS" THAT AVERAGED 1 LOSS PER ROUND OR LESS (4 LOSSES MAX) AND THE 1ST OPTION FOR THAT RUN:

1. 2017 Warriors (16-1)......... DURANT

2. 2001 Lakers (15-1)............. SHAQ

3. 1999 Spurs (15-2)............... DUNCAN

4. 2024 Celtics (16-3)............. TATUM

5. 2023 Nuggets (16-4).......... JOKIC

6. 2007 Spurs (16-4)............... DUNCAN

7. 2002 Lakers (15-4).............. SHAQ

8. 1997 Bulls (15-4).................. JORDAN

"DYNASTIES" THAT MOSTLY WON FOR A MATERIAL STRETCH OF 5+ YEARS (I.E. 3 IN 5) AND THEIR 1ST OPTION:

1. Chicago Bulls....................... JORDAN

2. San Antonio Spurs.............. DUNCAN

3. Los Angeles Lakers............. SHAQ

4. Golden State Warriors........ CURRY

Since possession-tracking began in 1997, bigs or jumpshooters were required at 1st option for 8 of 8 "dominant champions" that averaged 1 loss or less per round for their title run (4 losses max), and 4 of 4 "dynasties" that mostly won for a material stretch of 5 years (i.e. 3 in 5)..

So that's 12 of 12 instances of dynasties or dominant champions (the best basketball) where ball-dominators were NOT the 1st option in favor of bigs or jumpshooters.. Since the best bigs and jumpshooters produce the best basketball, they're superior to the best ball-dominators, which easily puts guys like Lebron and Oscar out of the top 10 for anyone that doesn't want them to be there - i.e. since primary ball-handlers cannot be 1st option for the best basketball, they're inferior to the best of other skillsets that can.

The issue is that high-scoring ball-dominators like Luka, Lebron or Harden score large amounts without being assisted by teammates (low assisted rates), so they have a large volume of unassisted buckets that leaves teammates standing in spot-up roles with lower APG... Lower assists from teammates produces low TEAM assists - this matters for Lebron, since every series loss of his playoff career shows deficits in team assists - it's the catalyst in every loss (his weakness).

50 wins with Luka as a teammate = BAD

Yet the dumb media said 50 wins was "a good season", instead of a big disappointment.

This is just a simple example of the fraud.

Another one is the media saying "b-b-but Lebron is always the Finals underdog", even though the historical record tells the story - he craps the bed in the regular season by barely winning 50 games with the preseason favorite, thereby falling to underdog.

Ultimately, media opinion and accolades aren't needed to make the case for 1 player over another, since we can objectively evaluate who did better with the help they had.. For example, it's obvious that producing a dynasty or 70 wins with a secondary producer like Klay is vastly superior to barely winning 50 with 2 franchise player teammates (big 3).. Or we can see that winning 2 titles with a weaker player than Bosh or Love at 2nd option (Pau) is better than Lebron winning with those guys at 3rd option.. These are objective facts, so there's no need for media opinion to enter any hoops debate...

And we can use bigger samples, such as the entire history of high-scoring primary ballhandlers (ball-dominators).. aka prior to this season, they never won with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player (organically).. Only bigs and jumpshooters won organically, which makes them superior skillsets by virtue of needing less help to win.. Furthermore, bigs and jumpshooters (highly-assisted players) are required to be the 1st option for dynasties and dominant title runs (the best basketball) - aka primary ballhandlers can't be 1st option for the best basketball (dynasty or dominant title run).

7.5 and 14.7 RPG while letting your man go off and take FMVP votes from Jordan (Kemp) isn't "great"... It's "good" or very solid ", but not "great ".. It's like Mosgov or Tristan in the 15' Finals, or Tristan in the 16' Finals, or Allen in the 13' Finals, or something of that caliber - every contender has a good rebounder/defender, and they normally average a multiple of Rodman's scoring.

George Karl simply hated Jordan and they had a rivalry, hence the famous "George Karl revenge game" that was widely reported in the mainstream media during a 97' regular season matchup (MJ dropped 45) - Karl simply loved talking sh*t about MJ (here)

And prior to this post, I've never commented on whether Rodman was good or bad in that series - I simply stated the obvious fact that the Bulls would've won without him, and they won titles with 3 different role players starting at PF.

Kukoc was the starter in the 98' Playoffs, and the Bulls basically won without Rodman in the 97' Playoffs, aka 4/8 on 37% - Jordan was forced to co-lead the rebounding with 8 RPG... And of course the Bulls won from 91-93' without Rodman..

And Lebron could never win with a non-scorer like Rodman getting major minutes - ultimately, karl and kemp's comments reflect "Jordan fatigue" and are one-offs amongst a sea of opposite consensus, or the outright obvious (the Sonics' top 3 guys outplayed Pippen and his 42% TS, yet MJ still won with this crap).

more about Rodman's FG% is needed it's groundbreaking stuff.

.
FINALS

15' Mosgov........ 11.8 gmsc..... 14/8 on 55%... 1.5 bpg
15' Tristan.......... 11.2 gmsc... 10/13 on 50%... 1.0 bpg
16' Tristan.......... 11.0 gmsc... 10/10 on 64%... 0.9 bpg
96' Rodman....... 10.2 gmsc......7/15 on 49%... 0.2 bpg*

* considered "great" by Jordan haters and Lebron fans, mostly due to Jordan fatigue

In addition to his "Mosgov-level" in the 96' Playoffs, the non-scorer Rodman only averaged 8 rebounds in the 97' playoffs and wasn't the starter in the 98' Playoffs (beaten by Kukoc).. He was a fossil and worse than 2010 Shaq or 09' Ben Wallace

As mj being my goat uncontested , I never thought I would find an individual forcing me to defend nonsense about LeBron , then I met FG ….

Basketball Skills Review for Lebron

* Primary ballhandler ability - elite

* Slashing/attacking paint - elite

* Off-guard skills (off-ball/off-screens) - below average

* Jumpshooting (mid-range/three) - below average

* FT's, clutch efficiency - below-average

* Big man skills (post, roll man, blocks, oreb) - below-average

* Bag/skills - below-average

Lebron has primary ballhandler skillset and isn't elite at anything else... As a ball-dominant-style player that can't play well off teammates (similar to Luka or Westbrook), Lebron's skills are inherently inferior to other skillsets that win more with less (bigs, jumpshooters, aka off-ball players).

You can't refute the facts and clearly fell for a fraud, so you call it "crazy" and remain in denial.

But regardless of your denial, the numbers remain, i.e. 50 wins with Luka is BAD... Upsets are BAD, especially in the first round.. Lebron lost in the 1st Round to Booker, Ant and Jokic - he was the favorite every time based on media/fan predictions or Vegas odds..

Accordingly, history shows that when Lebron doesn't stack the deck, he was a perennial loser.. Just imagine if he didn't team up with opposing franchise players and put the top 3 players in the East on 1 team (or get AD) - he would've lost for 23 years straight.

.
.
6 facts we know based on large sample sizes:

1) Before the 2025 season, high-scoring primary ballhandlers (ball-dominators ) had never won with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player

2) Ball-dominators increase teammates' assisted buckets (spot-up role), which craters their assists and produces low assist teams over time.. Lowering teammates' assists and having inferior ball movement is Lebron's weakness, since every series loss of his playoff career shows deficits in team assists - it's the catalyst in every loss.

3) Primary ballhandlers have never been the 1st option for dynasties (3 chips in 5 years) or dominant title runs (1 loss per round average, 4 losses max), aka the best basketball.. The 1st option was always a big or great jumpshooter (aka Duncan, MJ, Curry, etc)

4) Lebron can't have winning records with any type of good roster, such as preseason favorites (4-4), all-star teammates (4-7), Finals teams (4-6), and 1 or 2 seeds (4-5).. It's due to the bad chemistry (see #2 above)

5) Lebron produced weaker teams than the Kobe/Pau Lakers despite having 3rd options that were considered equal or better than Pau in 2008, such as Jamison, Bosh or Love.

6) Lebron underperforms roster talent and expectation compared to his peers... Specifically, based on preseason odds, a bettor that puts $100 on Lebron's teams in the preseason for 22 seasons (to win the title) would lose $630, but win $700-3000 if they bet on Duncan, Curry or MJ's teams.. Again, the reason for Lebron's underperformance is due to the inherently weak chemistry of his high-scoring primary ballhandler skillset ("ball-dominator"), as explained in #2 above.

.
.
John Salley: "Pippen needed to be open"
.
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/YEGFallBk0Q

Pippen was mostly a dunker that couldn't fadeaway or create his own shot in the halfcourt - he never played above an Igoudala caliber, but the winning spotlight inflated him to all-time status and media accolade.. This is true of most career 2nd options - they need titles to make All-NBA, aka Klay, Pippen, Pau, Parker, Manu, etc

John Salley also said...

Thoughts?

This shouldn't be considered "help":

CAREER FINALS

Jordan..... 34 ppg... 6.0 apg... 2.8 TO.. 48%
Pippen.... 19 ppg... 5.9 apg... 3.3 TO.. 42%

CAREER PLAYOFFS WITH BULLS

Jordan..... 33 ppg... 5.7 apg... 3.1 TO.. 49%
Pippen.... 18 ppg... 5.3 apg... 2.9 TO.. 45%

^^^ that's a carry-job by every definition of what a carry-job is

If a team needs 41 PPG from the 1st option to win, this confirms a horrific cast and 1-man team... The 93' Suns/Bulls averaged exactly 106.7 ppg and 113.0 ortg in the Finals, so all of Jordan's 41 was needed.. Pippen was at 46 TS and couldn't handle additional load (0% from three)

It's easy to make any player look good if you just make up a bunch of false stuff about them...

aka 1) Magic lauded Pippen (literally never).. 2) Pippen had the long ball (stahp it - the link shows Pippen telling Rachel Nichols that he can't shoot threes and that's why he didn't fit with Hakeem - Pippen was literally a historic bricklayer).. 3) Pippen was like Stockton (gtfo - Pippen was a low assist playmaker that averaged less assists than everyone, i.e. other 90's sidekicks, Lebron's sidekicks, MJ himself).

Ultimately, the comments I posted were off-the-cuff - Salley literally interrupted himself to add a small detail (a sign of honesty).. And John Salley is like Nick Wright (a top MJ hater), which is what makes the slip-up so meaningful.

Otoh, you posted scripted political speak of lies that MJ haters/Klutch has mastered about Pippen.. Without the sidekick chips (6), he would be looked at like Larry Nance, and that's being very generous.

Ultimately, we know Salley is a buffoon because of the absurdity of saying Pippen was more important than Jordan - it's FAR more truthful to say that Mo Williams' spacing was the key for LeDrive increasing from 45 to 66 wins.. Lebron needed the East all-star center and a 22/6/5 acquisition to win 50 games in 06', while MJ won 50 games with nothing in 88'

oh wow, salley said open twice - "pippen has to be OPEN open", aka wide the f open

https://m.youtube.com/shorts/YEGFallBk0Q

this slip-up and admission that pippen wasn't a threat contradicts the paid Klutch propaganda that Salley spouts at other times

lol. You are the most basic of AI.

Aside from all-time floor generals (aka Kidd, CP3, etc) and the occasional shot-blocking center (Wallace, Dikembe, etc), history shows that career 2nd options and secondary producers need to win titles to start making All-NBA (Klay, Pippen, Pau, Parker, Manu, Dumars, Jalen Williams, Worthy), or significant winning spotlight like 60 wins (Schrempf, Jalen Williams, Klay, etc), and they never make All-NBA with losing teams or even borderline .500 teams like dominant 1st options often do (MJ, Lebron, Love, Bosh, KAT, etc).

Since 2nd options need winning spotlight to get media accolade, guys like Klay, Pippen, and Pau are the most overrated group of players in history, followed by high-scoring primary ballhandlers (ball-dominators) like Luka, Lebron, Westbrook, Harden, Trae, etc. (the skillset that imposes spot-up roles, weak chemistry & weaker teams).