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

Lebron isn't top 10 because his skillset of unassisted scoring/primary ball-handling/live-dribbling at high scoring levels, aka "ball-domination" turns everyone into spot-up shooter, thereby preventing elite roster construction and the best team ceilings/Finals records.

This is the most legitimate reason to put Lebron and all ball-dominators outside the top 10.. Their imposition of spot-up roles produces a long list of bad fits, weak chemistry and low assist teams, so it's harder to win (need more help), and they aren't capable of the best basketball, such as dynasties or dominant champions (0 for 12).. The linked stats that confirm these facts were provided in the thread cliffs.

I wasn’t asking you, I was asking Montrealcorp.

Montrealcorp, do you believe the coach, the scheme/system, and the role a player has in that system impacts how he plays? Do you think if a player has an assisted fg% above 40% for nearly half of the games in his career, he is “capable” of having an assisted fg% above 40%? Lastly, if a player’s role in a given offensive system changes, or the system changes, could that impact the rate at which he is assisted?

Remember, these are questions for Montrealcorp. As a mental illness check, let’s see if fallguy is capable of not replying.

Montrealcorp,
Here is another poster arguing that coach and system matter. This is of course true. I am wondering if you agree as well, that coach and system matters and impacts the role a player has in an offense.

I too, would like to hear what other Jordan fans think, but lets not badger anyone about it, smh, lol

Jason Kidd is not going to put AD in Luka's spot to dominate the ball, so a player's true position or skillset determines how they play... Lebron's position has been primary ballhandler since he was 10 years old.

Anyone with career assisted rates below 40% is a primary ballhandler, and this average normally results from primary ball-handlers having a couple seasons in the mid-40's at the beginning or end of their careers, but otherwise spending their primes in the 20-40% range - i.e. Lebron was between 29-41% from 06' to 21' (36% average) - only primary ballhandlers have these ranges - only primary ball-handlers peak around 40% in their prime and are generally much lower, hence the career average being under 40%.

Unlike wing players that occasionally become primary ball-handlers, primary ballhandlers never change their role, which is why Lebron has been the primary ballhandler for 22 years and dozens of coaches...

Furthermore, high-scoring primary ballhandlers, aka "ball-dominators" handcuff the coach into a ball-dominant offense due to their skillset of unassisted buckets, or kickout to shooters - this scoring format of ball-dominators IS an offense, thereby precluding more sophisticated and better offenses.

.

I argued that Kidd is free from Luka-ball - Luka's game obviously dictated that Kidd run ball-domination and "Luka-ball", but now Kidd can run a real offense with a highly-assisted 1st option like AD.. However, it must still be a viable system with sufficient brand of ball to overcome the Lakers' talent advantage (should they meet in the playoffs).

No, regardless any stats u can find .

Yes .
FWIW I believe mj not being stuck in the triangle would end up having higher stats but Less championship and if Lebron would of actually played a coach system and not the Lebron system , he would had lesser stats but more championships .

Could Tim Duncan had higher stats outside the spurs but less championships ?
I believe so.

Why hasn't Lebron played in a coach system despite 22 years and dozens of coaches?

Why did he play the lebron system for 22 years if he was capable of playing something else and winning more?

Montrealcorp,
Excellent answers and I agree 100% with everything you said.

Let’s not badger anyone else about it smh lol.

To answer your questions above, it’s because LeBron James never had Phil Jackson, Gregg Popovich, Steve Kerr, or an equivalent as coach.

It’s fine to have Jordan as 1a and LeBron as 2 or 1b. But you come off as a complete dumbass to everyone when you rank LeBron 12, reverse engineer some nonsense about assisted fg%, and claim LeBron’s (or anyone’s) role in an offense is not impacted by coach and the scheme that coach implements.

Now that we have proven that no one in the world agrees with you fallguy, you may finally rest.

1) Kobe averaged 35.4 ppg in 2006 with Phil's triangle, and this is what 87' Jordan would've done but Phil simply arrived on a more developed Bulls team, whereas he coached Kobe at the beginning of Kobe's career as 1st option when he had no help.

2) MJ was never going to average 37 every year, so any decline was the natural progression of every player's career, but he actually averaged more in the triangle than before - it's a complete myth that he averaged less in the triangle:

89' MJ before triangle....... 32.5
90' MJ with triangle........... 33.6
93' MJ with triangle........... 32.6

3) A complete myth that MJ's scoring went down in the triangle (see per 100 possession stats at bottom):

Regular Season

85-89' MJ........ 32.6... 6.2... 5.9... 51.3%
90-93' MJ........ 31.9... 6.5... 5.9... 51.9%


Playoffs

85-89' MJ........ 35.4... 6.8... 6.6... 2.4... 1.1... 50.1%
90-93' MJ........ 34.3... 6.6... 6.6... 2.3... 0.9... 50.1%


Finals

91-93' MJ........ 36.3... 6.6... 7.9... 52.6%



PER 100 POSSESSIONS

Regular Season

85-89' MJ........ 41.5... 7.8... 7.5... 51.9%
90-93' MJ........ 42.0... 8.5... 7.7... 51.9%


Playoffs

85-89' MJ........ 42.9... 8.1... 8.1... 50.1%
90-93' MJ........ 44.4... 8.5... 8.6... 50.1%

Jordan played point guard for part of the season in ‘88-89. That is why his shot attempts were down and his assists went up. It’s incredibly dishonest to cherry pick that single data point to show his scoring “went down” before Phil Jackson and Tex Winter implemented the triangle. He averaged 35 and 37 ppg the two years before that, which is what matters. His volume absolutely went down playing in the triangle offense, as anyone who knows anything about those Bulls teams would tell you. Fallguy gonna fallguy though and we all know you’re going to lie and obfuscate for the next 500 posts about this.

Montrealcorp, just like everyone else, is orders of magnitude smarter than you and knows ball way better than you, which is why he doesn’t buy into your bullshit either. He’s also a very chill dude so you need to simmer down.

Montreal is a casual fan that doesn't read or comprehend my posts, otherwise he would agree because it's the historical and statistical record.

History shows that coaches are at the mercy of a high-scoring 1st option's skillset.. It's nice to have the high-scorer, but you better hope they aren't a dumb ball-dominator like Luka or Lebron because then the coach is handcuffed into a ball-dominant brand with low team assist rankings over time and zero chance at the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champion).. This is the historical record, so you can huff and a puff, but you can't blow this house down.

Furthermore, many people think that Lebron is outside the top 10, including many people in the robust anti-Lebron ecosystem on social media.. A huge chunk of the basketball public understands that he has a luka-ball skillset, which has toxic chemistry and reduces everyone to spot-up shooter, thereby requiring more help on a perpetual basis.. In summary, he's chronic loser and choker, as shown in the publicly-available historical record.

Finally, Steve Kerr sucks as coach and most people think this, while the previous post proved that all the mythology surrounding Phil is false - MJ's scoring went up in the triangle on per possession basis and basically remained the same on a per game basis, and higher if we include the Finals - so all the crap that has been spewed about Phil is false... People misperceive and don't understand his impact on the Bulls, as shown in the previous post, and as I've stated all along.. History shows that MJ built the Bulls to the 2nd-best team by the end of the 89' Playoffs before Phil arrived, so Phil simply inherited the steepest trajectory in the league and impending dynasty after MJ did all the heavy lifting.

Kobe averaged 35 ppg in the triangle in 2006, which is what MJ would've done if Phil arrived on an undeveloped team like he did with Kobe, where Kobe had to carry the scoring load more.

This is bball 101, but you guys don't seem to be able to think past the surface or what you hear on TV.. You're really bad at context, so I'm happy to fill that in for you with linked stats and facts.

It's a complete myth that MJ's scoring went down in the triangle:

PER 100 POSSESSIONS

Regular Season

85-89' MJ........ 41.5... 7.8... 7.5... 51.9%
90-93' MJ........ 42.0... 8.5... 7.7... 51.9%


Playoffs

85-89' MJ........ 42.9... 8.1... 8.1... 50.1%
90-93' MJ........ 44.4... 8.5... 8.6... 50.1%




PER GAME

Regular Season

85-89' MJ........ 32.6... 6.2... 5.9... 51.3%
90-93' MJ........ 31.9... 6.5... 5.9... 51.9%


Playoffs

85-89' MJ........ 35.4... 6.8... 6.6... 2.4... 1.1... 50.1%
90-93' MJ........ 34.3... 6.6... 6.6... 2.3... 0.9... 50.1%


Finals

91-93' MJ........ 36.3... 6.6... 7.9... 52.6%

MJ's scoring went up in the triangle on per possession basis, while remaining basically the same on a per game basis, and higher if we include the Finals.. So all the crap that has been spewed about Phil is false and people misperceive his impact.. History shows that MJ built the Bulls to the 2nd-best team in the league by the end of the 89' Playoffs (before Phil arrived), so Phil simply inherited the steepest trajectory in the league and impending dynasty after MJ did all the heavy lifting.

Again, Phil didn't know about assisted rate, so he didn't realize that the majority of MJ's buckets were already assisted and therefore his scoring wouldn't decline in the triangle - Phil said that MJ wouldn't be scoring champ anymore but MJ was scoring champ 7 of 7 times in the triangle.. Today's fan and media are equally-clueless about assisted rate, so they foolishly hop on the latest ball-dominator's bandwagon and then make excuses when they need more help or can't produce a great team.

If you think what I'm saying about Phil is BS, then why else would Phil and Tex be so wrong about MJ's fit in the triangle - they were so confident that they told MJ to his face "you won't be scoring champ in the triangle", and then he went 7 for 7 as scoring champ in the triangle.. How could they be so wrong??.. What information or statistic didn't exist back then that would've allowed them to see the light about MJ's game and how it might fit into the triangle?

FGA Regular Season

85-89' Jordan.... 23.3
90-93' Jordan.... 23.7


FGA Playoffs

85-89' Jordan.... 24.5
90-93' Jordan.... 25.8

linked stats in previous post above

MJ's volume went up in the triangle, and his scoring went up on per possession basis, while remaining basically the same on a per game basis (and higher if we include the Finals).

So all the crap that has been spewed about Phil is false and people misperceive his impact.. History shows that MJ built the Bulls to the 2nd-best team in the league by the end of the 89' Playoffs (before Phil arrived), so Phil simply inherited the steepest trajectory in the league and impending dynasty after MJ did all the heavy lifting.

Lebron has 4 title with 4 mvp title . (He should won it in 2015 too, we saw how mj did cs strong team with no back up …like Lebron ) .
What other players are even near that and not being top 10 ?
It’s not serious ….

He put the top 3 PER's in the league on 1 team and went 2/4 with record loss and goat choke - there was a lot of talk about how well Nash would fit with Wade/Bosh and win at least 3 chips, so 100+ guys do better than 2/4..

Then he went 1/4 with Love or AD - again, 100 guys could do better than this... Now he will lose and need more help with Luka....

Ultimately, 4 chips in 22 years with all the help he had is horrific and cannot be anywhere near the best basketball we've ever seen - he was a perennial loser with every team and has a lottery record on the championship level regardless of cast.

Only 1 sixty-win season from 11' to 17' caused fall from preseason favorite to underdog every year, yet people complain about being Finals underdog (despite starting as the favorite) - it's a misperception... 2 all-star teammates yet he can't win 60 to maintain favorite status - his bad brand underachieves favored roster

The unprecedented help of 6 straight preseason favorites and a sidekick outplaying the MVP required another unprecedented advantage to overcome it (KD's Warriors)... Lebron's unprecedented advantage lasted twice as long (11-16' vs 17-19')... The media just pretends that Lebron's teams were normal and Durant came along and stacked the deck, but Durant was just responding to a stacked deck.

I'm not saying Nash is better than Lebron - I'm demonstrating that a ton of guys would've won more chips in Lebron's shoes, which means he's nowhere near goat.. Again, many people pointed out how great Nash would fit with Wade/Bosh and how they would easily win 3-4 chips.. This is just one example of dozens (hundreds?).

It's a complete myth that MJ's volume or scoring went down in the triangle:

PER 100 POSSESSIONS

Regular Season

85-89' MJ........ 41.5 pts... 29.5 FGA
90-93' MJ........ 42.0 pts... 31.1 FGA


Playoffs

85-89' MJ........ 42.9 pts... 29.7 FGA
90-93' MJ........ 44.4 pts... 33.4 FGA




PER GAME

Regular Season

85-89' MJ........ 32.6 PPG and 23.3 FGA
90-93' MJ........ 31.9 PPG and 23.7 FGA


Playoffs

85-89' MJ........ 35.4 PPG and 24.5 FGA
90-93' MJ........ 34.3 PPG and 25.8 FGA


Finals

91-93' MJ........ 36.3 PPG and 27.4 FGA

MJ's scoring went up in the triangle on per possession basis, while remaining basically the same on a per game basis, and higher if we include the Finals.. So all the crap that has been spewed about Phil is false and people misperceive his impact.. History shows that MJ built the Bulls to the 2nd-best team in the league by the end of the 89' Playoffs (before Phil arrived), so Phil simply inherited the steepest trajectory in the league and impending dynasty after MJ did all the heavy lifting.

Again, Phil didn't know about assisted rate, so he didn't realize that the majority of MJ's buckets were already assisted and therefore his scoring wouldn't decline in the triangle - Phil said that MJ wouldn't be scoring champ anymore but MJ was scoring champ 7 of 7 times in the triangle.. Today's fan and media are equally-clueless about assisted rate, so they foolishly hop on the latest ball-dominator's bandwagon and then make excuses when they need more help or can't produce a great team

Because mj was the goat ?

FWIW mj agreed with Phil he would score a bit less in the triangle but was fine with it because he could still dominate in scoring .
Start at 2m10

To maintain mj wouldn’t score more outside the triangle is false .
That’s just what happened statistically.

The overall averages show that Jordan averaged the same PPG in the triangle, or higher if we include the Finals or adjust for pace.

So the overall averages tell the story, but even if you want to cherry-pick the 87' and 88' regular seasons, I can cherry-pick the 93' Finals, or the 92' and 93' Playoffs overall... He averaged 41 to 3-peat and 36 to repeat, so why say that he averaged more outside the triangle??.. This is false based on the overall averages or cherry-picking... It's a lie that you were told by TV.

And again, Kobe averaged 35.4 in the triangle in 2006, so 87' Jordan would've done the same thing but Phil arrived on a developed Bulls squad that didn't need 35 in the regular season - 33 was enough and 36 in the 91-93' Finals (41 to 3-peat), or 35 in the 92' and 93' Playoffs overall.
.

But Phil knew that already from being the assistant coach during MJ's ascension from 87-89', so how did Phil underestimate MJ so severely and think he would go 0-7 as scoring champ in the triangle instead of 7 for 7??.. What skill allowed MJ to defy Phil's expectations so drastically?

The term "assisted rate" didn't exist back then, so it's not like Phil would be thinking about that, but we know it's the key to any perimeter scorer fitting in the triangle.. The triangle requires assisted scoring from all 5 players and has no primary ball-handler role or low-assisted players..

Phil's perception of Jordan's ball-dominance was likely influenced by Jordan's point guard stint in 89'.. So Phil thought he would take the ball out of Jordan's hands without realizing that he was usually off-ball already and had a lot of buckets off of teammates' passes ("assisted"), before Doug moved him to point guard.

Recent Thread Cliffs

Per 100 possession data from the regular season and playoffs confirms that Jordan scored at a higher rate in the triangle from 90-93' than outside the triangle from 85-89'.. He also scored the same per game or within 1 point despite the slower pace of the triangle, and had higher volume (FGA and usage).

So the overall numbers show that Jordan scored more in the triangle with higher volume, while cherry-picking shows he scored more as well, such as his 41 ppg to 3-peat, or 36 in the 91-93' Finals, or 35 in the 92' and 93' Playoffs overall..

Of course Kobe averaged 35.4 in the triangle in 06', so 88' Jordan would've done the same thing but Phil arrived on a developed Bulls squad that didn't need 35 from MJ anymore - 33 was enough and 36 in the 91-93' Finals (41 to 3-peat), or 35 in the 92' and 93' Playoffs overall.. His scoring and volume was simply higher in the triangle, which means Phil's triangle was BS and simply carried by MJ.

Recent thread cliffs

Phil's triangle was BS since MJ scored at a higher rate in the triangle, with higher FGA and usage.. So Phil is a fraud and so is the triangle because they were just carried by MJ.. The real reason the Bulls won was because MJ's cast had developed, so the triangle didn't need 35 in the regular season like it did from Kobe on his undeveloped squad in 06'...

We also learned that Luka and Lebron hilariously tried to play off-ball in the last game against Utah with 100% assisted rate.. Unfortunately, they're so bad off-ball that they couldn't generate sufficient shot-volume to keep up with the worst team in the West.. So the unfolding events continue to prove me right that - Luka and Lebron cannot play off-ball by virtue of their horrific fit.. But we already knew this with Westbrook/Lebron debacle, or Love, Ingram, Hughes and many more.

It's officially a false narrative that the triangle reduced MJ's burden, because the triangle increased his scoring rate, FGA, and usage when we compare 85-89' to 90-93'... His Finals scoring was also the highest ppg of his career... So MJ had a greater burden in the triangle than out of it based on scoring rate, FGA, usage, and Finals scoring.. Essentially, the triangle was BS and MJ carried it.. MJ had already developed a lottery roster to the 2nd best team in the league by the end of the 89' Playoffs (before Phil arrived).. So Phil simply inherited the steepest trajectory in the league, an impending dynasty, and guys entering their prime.