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

I agree with regards to Russell, but Kareem dominated in the 80's, and I think Wilt would destroy anyone.. For example, imagine if Wemby didn't shoot threes EVER and just focused on dominating the paint - he would still be ridiculous... Accordingly, even though Wilt's physical advantage was a little different from Wemby's, it's just as formidable and easily worthy of dominating today's paint the same way Embiid or Wemby would (if they stopped chucking threes).

And an older Kareem dominated Hakeem in the 80's... His skyhook and Jordan's turnaround fadeaway are the most dominant shots or go-to moves ever...

You have a point with Russell, but he had intangibles of breaking racial barriers and the reality is that Wilt and Kareem would probably be offended if Russell wasn't ranked on their level... Furthermore, he has the resume, which is good enough for top 10 to the casual nascent fan, thereby making it easier to keep LeFraud out of the top 10.. It's simply easier to justify Lebron being outside the top 10 if Russell is in it.

Magic was usually carried by Kareem but never pays a price in all-time rankings like Kobe does..

Similar to MJ, Jokic's goat case can be made based on advanced stats alone, or an unprecedented cerebral approach to the offensive end.

However, my criteria for being the best player or the better player (if comparing two 1st options) is whether the player can dominate while playing a superior brand of team ball, and allow everyone to grow and ultimately play near capacity.. Jordan is the goat by this standard, and Jokic just has to get over the hump into multiple chip status to move up my rankings from his current #10 spot...

Btw, Kobe's roster construction was always going to be better than Jokic's because Kobe could carry the scoring burden a little better, thus leaving room to find the right "others"/defenders.

Top 10
1) LeBron
2) Kareem
3) Magic
4) Shaq
5) Wilt
6) Bird
7) Duncan
8) Russel
9) Curry
10) Jordan

LOL!!!! This has to be a joke post right? All due respect but you once wondered if i as trolling becasue i said Dumars was worthy of being spoke of with some of the greats. But then you put Jordan 10? LOL, c'mon bro. I know you don't really believe that. But you did get me to laiugh. Nice job!

Also Magic at 3 i lol. I always debate with myself whose the most over-rated basketball player of all time. Lebron or Magic? I usually say Magic. I know alot of people like him but i've never seen what many others seem to see. He had no jumper, nada, his stroke was like charles barkley's golf swing. How can you be number 3 on the goat list when you played point guard and you can't shoot?

Yes he was good on the break and an excellent passer. He did it better than Lebron, but just passing doesn't get you to number 3. At least Lebron could score. Majic just got good publicity because the media loved him for his smile and his no look passes. They fawned over him like they did Lebron, same situation. Magic had flash but flash doesn't get you 3 on the goat list.

Magic had Kareem and Worthy who were the meat and potatoes of those winning teams. He was a good/great player for what he did which was get others the ball. But to be 3 you should be able to score too. And he wasn't good at defense either.

I hate talking bad about Magic. Seems like a great guy, and he had a great career. But imo wasn't on the level of the top 10 goat list, especially not 3. Sorry magic, still a great career.

LeBron James on where the Lakers' offensive issues are coming from:

"Where are the offensive issues coming from? [We're missing] a guy who averaged 37 a game ... There's the issues right there."

I just think it is uncomfortable for a lot of people that the best player of all time could be this soft. That part I do get.

I don't really care about this stuff or LeBron legacy discourse in general but it is hard to see other great players in most of the team sports just immediately making excuses, especially after game 1. Brady played big games without Gronk with not so great results and I can't imagine him saying something like that right after.

If you watch the actual clip he elaborates significantly on this answer. I’m biased, but don’t consider it soft at all. That’s also a poor comp with Brady vs Gronk - it would be more like the Patriots playing with a terrible backup QB with Brady out and then the media asking Gronk what the offensive issues were. I think OKC opened as -3000 favorites in the series and were -15.5 in Game 1, both of which I think were the largest in NBA history. Couple that with Lebron being 41 years old (and he was prob the best player in G1), seems totally wild to classify this as soft excuse making.

Re: Jokic

Jokic at age 30:

1 ring/finals appearance, 2 conference finals appearances

Lebron at age 30:

2 rings, 6 finals appearances, 7 conference finals appearances

Again, wild for a thread that massively overweights winning rings/totles to value a guy who has delivered 1 ring and finals appearance in the prime of his career over Lebron. Just laughable, laughable stuff (but expected)

Good post! I was gonna seperate Kareem and Wilt from Russell for the reason you mentioned. That Kareem proved he could still play great into the modern era 80s. And wilt was a very agile/great athelete. So i think he may have been able to do it in the modern era 80's as well.

I'm gonna disagree with 2 points you made though...

Kareem dominated Hakeem? When did that happen? Hakeem was the best, or one of the best players in the league. This while Kareem was on the tail end of his career. How could that have been possible?

And disgaree that Jordan made his team better more than Jokic. I feel Jordan won just becasue he was great, and just got it done. People around him were lifted but imo only because the defense was all over Jordan. I could be wrong but didn't feel like Jordan was playing a better brand of team ball than Jokic. Where Jokic dominates and does make his players better. With his great passing/assists/outlet passes he gets everyone involved to played at their best.

I saw the clip, he elaborates after his lame passive aggressive response to the reporter because he realizes after he puts that out there, he has to go back into answering the question mode. Probably realizing if he does that then it won't sound as bad.

Most guys aren't going to immediately go to an injury excuse after game 1 of a series. Maybe when the series ends but after 1 game is pretty weak.

Just because the market doesn't give you much of a chance to win doesn't mean you have to sound so defeatist about it.

If the Sixers lose tonight and they ask Maxey what the offensive issue is, I got a feeling he won't be citing Embiid's injury in a similar way. Meh, it is just weak. I dunno how else to really describe it.

You can think the guy is/was great and also acknowledge he's kinda whiny.

I didn’t take it as defeatist at all…no one gave them a chance against Houston either and that was a big upset as well. I think him and the team know the task they are facing and will give maximum effort until the end. Seems like quite a nitpicky critique particularly after a loss but to each their own.

I’ll agree with this, I would not necessarily classify it as whiny though, but I sort of get what you are saying more with this example.

Swap Maxey for Lebron and Houston sweeps the Lakers though. So it’s more of it’s not really relevant big picture and definitely should not be in a GOAT debate for example. MJ had character flaws too, and they are largely handwaved away (for good reason)

Well, no one gave them a chance vs Houston because KD was expected to play. He missed pretty much the entire series. Think if you told people Reaves would comeback late series and KD would miss, they would like the Lakers chances. But that is getting into the weeds, I agree LeBron was clearly the best player in that series by a wide margin. LeBron is the best 41 year old ever, he's better than Jokic, etc etc....He just whiny.

I guess it is nitpicky? I dunno I even said usually I don't care about this type of stuff. Just something I noticed when checking UD for injury stuff today and posted it here. I do think that type of commentary after 1 game is pretty unique to LeBron though.

Snap out of it... The hypnosis ... The massive delusion that you guys don't realize you're under.

Don't you get tired of making excuses for Lebron?.. Don't you ever wonder "if this guy was so good, how come I always have to defend him losing?"

Imagine if MJ was upset in the 1st Round with Larry Bird as a teammate, or lost in the 1st Round with David Robinson as a teammate, or was lottery or swept with these guys - it would be horrifically BAD, yet that's what Lebron did for 5 straight years with Luka or AD (21-25')..

The reality is that Lebron is a lottery player, but the league gifted him AD and Luka to save him... He would be lottery again this year but Luka carried the team to the playoffs, so Lebron was gifted a playoff team that he isn't capable of otherwise having

Ultimately, Luka was always extra and unfair... Specifically, where's Jokic's Luka???... How come Jokic doesn't get AD, Luka, Wade, or a top 3 player like Lebron gets?

It was never fair to gift Lebron another top guy like that and no one else in the league gets that - everyone else is required to win with normal rosters of 1 franchise player, while Lebron gets 2 or 3 franchise players (super-teams).. Remember that Klay, Manu and Parker aren't franchise players, so Lebron had the only team with multiple franchise players and accordingly was the preseason favorite from 11' to 16'.. And we all remember when Lebron put the top 3 scorers in the East on 1 team and somehow got credit for winning the conference after that... Fortunately , the West always exposed Lebron's Eastern grift in the Finals... It's simply fraud and history books will show that

The only year Jokic had real postseason success (ring year), he had arguably the weakest path in history (beat an 8 seed, two 7 seeds, and a 4 seed) and Jamal Murray averaged 26/6/7 on 59 TS% in the playoffs. In 2016, considered Kyrie’s peak, he averaged 25/3/5 on 57 TS%. So for his lone ring, he had at worse, equivalent sidekick to Lebron in 2016 (who beat a 73 win Warriors team instead of a 44 win Heat team)

The worst loss Lebron had in the playoffs was as a -200 favorite from 2021 on. Also won multiple series as dogs including Rockets +425, one of the biggest upsets in history.

Jokic has lost as a -350 and -200 fav in the same time frame and these were his age 26-30 seasons, with one Finals appearance. Lebron made the Finals every single year from ages 26-30 and lost a grand total of one playoff series where he was a -175 favorite.

From ages 37-41, MJ was

DNP
Lottery
Lottery
DNP
DNP

Jokic will likely be similar if he even plays that long.

Lebron and Luka lost as a massive favorite last year in the 1st Round.. It's a black mark to get upset in the 1st Round with a top 5 player as a teammate.. Lebron was also one of the five biggest favorites to ever lose in the 09' and 10' Playoffs (-700 and -500 favorites).

In recent years, Lebron was lottery and 1st Round loser despite having top 5 players as teammates and preseason favorites.. That's the difference - Lebron lost a ton with help, while MJ never did (except the baseball year if you want to nitpick).

Wizards' MJ was expected to win 37 games and they met that expectation, while the Lebron/AD/Westbrook were preseason favorites but missed the play-in, or AD/Lebron were preseason favorites but lost in the 1st Round.

Imagine if Jokic, SGA, and KAT teamed up and everyone was like "wow can you believe they won the conference again"???.... Yet that's how everyone acts with Lebron's "decision" to put the top 3 players in the conference on 1 team.. It's amazing that he got credit for winning the conference after that... Fortunately, the West exposed his Eastern grift in the Finals.

Accordingly, his manufactured Finals streak means literally nothing, which is bad because his career resume is nothing without it (mostly catastrophic losses despite preseason favorites, big 3's and the best help in the league)..

Lebron's standard was to barely win 50 games with the preseason favorite, thereby falling to perennial underdog.. He simply produced underwhelming teams, regardless of cast.. This is because his ball-dominant skillset reduces everyone's assists and increases their assisted rate (turns everyone into spot-up shooter).. Not surprisingly, this weak brand of ball has a lottery record on the championship level.

It's insightful to imagine a situation where we're comparing 2 all-timers, but we have incomplete information and can only obtain career data for 1 playoff level - which round of the playoffs would you want data for?... Which round should be chosen that would be the best indicator of superiority?

Would a player's 1st Round performance be the best indicator of capability, or would their performance on the championship level be the best indicator of capability??

Obviously, the answer is the championship level - a player's performance and results on the championship level are the best indicator of a player's capability and caliber... This is why Jordan's 6/6 and goat dominance is insane.

Obviously much better to lose before the Finals than in the Finals.

You don't have LeBron in your top 10. That's laughable.

MJ won nothing in the 80s when he had competition.

Won in the 90s when he had a loaded team.

Won nothing in the 00s.

Most overrated player ever.

Replace MJ with Hakeem and you'd get a similar result. Probably win more because he wouldn't have quit on his team for 2 years.

Lebron has more losses in every round than Jordan.

And this is despite having an 8 year period of only making the Finals... And that Finals streak was manufactured by putting the top 3 players in the conference on 1 team, so his resume is a fraud.. He has no impressive accomplishment on his resume except longevity (steroids).

And the main issue is that Lebron lost a lot when he had help, while Jordan never did (unless you want to nitpick the baseball year).

Ultimately, it's objective fact that a player's performance and results on the championship level are the best indicator of a player's capability and caliber... This is why Jordan's 6/6 and goat dominance is insane.

A player can't be top 10 if they join 2 opposing franchise players but still lose most years (badly) and fail to produce a dynasty.

This is intuitive.

See the quote above of Paul Pierce re-stating common knowledge that it's suboptimal to have a point guard as the 1st option or scoring a ton.. It's obviously suboptimal to have a lot of dribbling in an offense.

This is why the primary ballhandler skillset is inherently inferior, which makes the best primary ballhandlers inferior to the best of other skillsets.

And you have yet to provide an example of someone in the 90's saying the Bulls' roster was loaded, or something to that effect... This means that you've completely fabricated something and therefore lose the debate (again).. It was common knowledge and it's easily verifiable that the Bulls had the weakest roster top to bottom of any contender.

jordan would've 3-peated with an all-star center teammate, HOF coach and this acquisition:

05' HUGHES..... 21.6 PER.. 4.3 BPM.. 0.157 WS/48.. 3.7 VORP... 22/6/5.... 1st Team All-D
90' PIPPEN....... 16.3 PER.. 1.8 BPM.. 0.087 WS/48.. 3.0 VORP... 16/6/5.... No All-D

Lebron's 2009 cast was superior to the 1990 Bulls on both sides of the ball:

09' Mo Williams........ 17.2 PER... 2.3 BPM... 3.1 VORP... 0.165 WS/48...... #3 team defense
90' Pippen.................. 16.3 PER... 1.8 BPM... 3.0 VORP... 0.087 WS/48.... #19 team defense

^^^ So Lebron started with a better team on both sides of the ball, yet MJ still beat him to titles by winning the following year in 91', while Lebron lost as the favorite for 2 more years (despite adding Jamison/Shaq to a 66-win league favorite or forming a super-team).

People forget that Lebron had a Year 6 team in 2009, so he had an organic juggernaut just like Jokic, Giannis or MJ for example.. The only difference is that Lebron gave up on his organic roster despite a 1-star organic chip being on the table in 2011 that Dirk grabbed.. Lebron's Cavs certainly would've had the organic chemistry and reputed team defense to beat those Mavs, which the Heat lacked.

It's easier to be 1 of 2 Finals-caliber teams in a top-heavy league (2 super-teams), as opposed to being 1 of many Finals-caliber teams in a PARITY league (90's).. Parity makes it tougher.... Jordan's 2-star cast was similar to most teams in the league, while Lebron enjoyed having 1 of 2 super-teams and guaranteed trips to the Finals.

6/6 is the best reason to have MJ number 1 because Finals record is a reflection of the team ceiling that a player yields.. The first time MJ got a single all-star, he immediately took the Pistons' dynasty to 7 games and didn't lose 3 straight games for 9 years (1990-1998), while winning 6 titles in 7 years during this span..

By comparison, Lebron isn't good at winning... And even if you think Jordan's career is small sample, we can add the superior win rates of Curry, Duncan, Kobe, Bird or Magic to conclude that Lebron isn't good at winning compared to most top 10 candidates.

Specifically, he's demonstrably the worst winner of any top 10 candidate based on championship frequency, regular season records, or odds - 2 decades confirms that he's incapable of a sure thing, juggernaut or perennial favorite regardless of cast.. His standard is to barely win 50 games with the preseason favorite, thereby falling to perennial underdog.. Accordingly, he produces the worst teams of any top 20 candidate.

maybe both guys are overrated and creations of Nike, something to think about

.

.
Jordan's shot attempts, usage and scoring rate increased in the triangle:

Regular Season

85-89' MJ........ 41.5 pts per 100.... 29.5 FGA per 100..... 33.8 usage
90-93' MJ........ 42.0 pts per 100.... 31.1 FGA per 100..... 33.2 usage


Playoffs

85-89' MJ........ 42.9 pts per 100.... 29.7 FGA per 100..... 35.1 usage
90-93' MJ........ 44.4 pts per 100.... 33.4 FGA per 100..... 36.1 usage


Finals

91-93' MJ........ 36.3 PPG...... 35.9 usage

^^^ So Phil didn't know what he was talking about when he said that the triangle would "spread the wealth" and Jordan wouldn't be scoring champ anymore, since Jordan was scoring champ for 7 of 7 seasons in the triangle, while his scoring rate, usage and shot attempts increased in the triangle...

So Phil was wrong and simply lucky to have the GOAT carry his top-heavy offense, which happened to be the most top-heavy offense ever, AND the most hated offense ever (the triangle).

It's easy to forget that Phil was a rookie coach in 1990, while MJ was the GOAT candidate, so MJ made Phil, not the other way around
.

Except Jordan made Nike

Just like he made Phil Jackson (see previous post)

And the triangle

And Pippen

And Kobe

So Jordan was the real deal, while Lebron is the obvious ring-chaser, team-hopper/backstabber, flopper, colluder, roider, copycat (#23), goat-choker, all-time leader in turnovers or missed shots, and the biggest loser ever on the championship level.