LeBron > Jordan GOAT Super AIDS Containment, solved #22999 post by Matt R. (addendum #23174)
Very impressed with the minute sequence where LeBron clearly lost the ball headed to the rim, heat got the ball anyway and scored, then he elbows his defender in the chin, drawing a defensive foul and stern talking to from the official and hitting a 3.
It's these ref assisted 5 point swings in close games that truly bring out the best in great players.
Link to post of why Elon Musk is the true GOAT: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...
The thread that will go on for years..........
vs.
Basketball fit matters. LeBron's fit with Wade was notoriously piss poor and not that great with Bosh. Lebron going inside/outside with someone like Pau would've been a great fit.
You're either being incredibly disingenuous or don't understand basketball at its very core. Heck, or both.
Bad fits = skill deficit
KD fits with spotty shooters like Westbrook or Wade because he can provide the spacing they need, while Lebron cannot.. KD would've like a glove and produced goat team ceilings with Wade/Bosh just like he did with Curry/Klay..
Otoh, Lebron lacks the expert jumpshooting skill to play off teammates or have a high assisted rate, and the resulting bad fits represent this skill deficit.
Lebron mostly lost with Love, Bosh, and AD because he lacks the expert jumpshooting skill to play inside-out... He reduces bigs to PNR spot-up roles instead, so he can't win with Pau.
Ultimately, high-scoring ball-dominators like Luka, Lebron, Westbrook, Hardenand SGA reduce everyone to spot-up roles and this weak teammate elevation or chemistry requires more talent/help.. It's bball 101 that weak chemistry requires more help and has low team ceilings/Finals records, which are the hallmarks of a high-scoring ball-dominator's career.
LeBron repeatedly had better shooting than your #2 OAT Kobe though. Your whole argument has more holes in it than a block of Swiss Cheese.
LeBron repeatedly had better shooting than your #2 OAT Kobe though. Your whole argument has more holes in it than a block of Swiss Cheese.
It isn't just 3-point percentage - it's sheer jumpshooting volume, which affects the percentage of field goals that are assisted, aka assisted rate (off-ball) - these skills are required to play off bigs and ball-handlers that need spacing, or to execute formats like inside-out.
Unfortunately, unlike Curry, MJ, KD or Kobe, Lebron's field goals are mostly unassisted driving shots at the rim - this cannot fit with inside-out bigs like Shaq or Pau and reduces them to PNR spot-up roles instead, like we saw with Love, Bosh and AD..
Ultimately, teammates don't get developed or elevated in bron-ball PNR spamming, so the team has lower team ceilings that includes weaker regular season or Finals records, and also underachieving favored talent 9 times (losses with Dream Teams, preseason favorites, or homecourt).. The 24' Olympics was also a great example of bron-ball underachieving favored talent.. The US nearly lost based on Lebron's 5 turnovers per 24 minutes, which is like 6-7 per game with NBA minutes.. So the media lied about his performance but got away with it when Curry added another bailout to Lebron's career.
LeBron had 8 Game 7s (out of 54 series). Kobe 5 (43 series).
Not exactly a huge ratio difference.
Aside from 2006, 2013 and 2020, Lebron either personally wet the bed or his team underachieved every other year... Underachievement includes losing as the series favorite, preseason favorite, or falling to from preseason favorite to underdog.
Otoh, Kobe's teams mostly met expectation and he produced better teams due to goat scoring diversity that fit with any teammate or system.. Coaches had maximum strategic capacity with Kobe, while Lebron is uncoachable and has a coaching CAROUSEL..
Lebron is a GM's worst nightmare by virtue of needing star scoring help, coaching carousel, and simply needing more help in general due to weaker chemistry and the reduction of teammates..
Lebron is really nothing compared to Kobe and probably has zero rings without teaming up with opponents - he never learned the chemistry to win with what he had, so he never learned how to win and therefore is inferior to Kobe.. In a vacuum, organic winners must learn how to win (chemistry) and therefore are superior to talent-based winners that never learned how to foster great chemistry like Lebron (all-star team strategy).
Nah if Pau Gasol played for the Cavs then they definitely ship.
Wasn't Pau's peak defense as a Laker?
Aside from 2006, 2013 and 2020, Lebron either personally wet the bed or his team underachieved every other year... Underachievement includes losing as the series favorite, preseason favorite, or falling to from preseason favorite to underdog.
Otoh, Kobe's teams mostly met expectation and he produced better teams due to goat scoring diversity that fit with any teammate or system.. Coaches had maximum strategic capacity with Kobe, while Lebron is uncoachable and has a coaching CAROUSEL..
Lebron is
So, basically LeBron was so good that unless he shipped he underachieved. You're actually complimenting him.
Also if you don't think Kobe only getting 3 with Shaq isn't underachieving, I'm not sure what to say (if you think Kobe is better than LeBron).
Kobe was with Shaw for 8 years and didn't ship in 5. Total bum.
Imagine the 2nd GOAT, playing along side the player that has a peak that's arguably the GOAT. How did they not win 65 games each year and sweep their way to chip after chip?
2008
JAMISON........ #14 for MVP...... 2x all-star
PAU................. nothing............. 1x all-star
Jamison was considered better than Pau and Zydrunas wasn't far behind either.. If Kobe had won with Jamison, Zydrunas and Mo like he did with Pau, then they would be elevated historically like Pau was - Jamison would've started making All-NBA like Pau did... On the flipside, if Pau never joined Kobe, then he would be viewed historically like Jamison and not too far ahead of Zydrunas.
But unfortunately, Lebron wasn't good enough to elevate 1x all-stars like MJ and Kobe did.. Again, this is due to skillset - Lebron's high-scoring ball-dominance imposes spot-up roles that prevents development and chemistry, while Kobe's expert jumpshooting skill and goat scoring diversity fit with everyone and allowed greater strategy/coaching - he got the MOST out of everyone, while Lebron routinely reduces guys and needs more help.
The remarkable thing is that Lebron COULD HAVE WON in cleveland the first time... He was on pace with an organic juggernaut and league favorite by Year 7 just like Jokic, Curry and MJ... The difference is that he gave up on learning to win with normal teams of 1 franchise player and opted for super-teams of 3 franchise players - he gave up on learning the chemistry required to win with what he had, and opted for talent-based winning (all-star team strategy).. Accordingly, he never learned how to win (chemistry) and only learned how to team-up (talent-based winning).. It's a shame because there was a 1-star organic chip up for grabs in 2011 that Dirk grabbed, but the Cavs would've had the long-standing chemistry and reputed defense to easily DESTROY the Mavs..
So, basically LeBron was so good that unless he shipped he underachieved. You're actually complimenting him.
Also if you don't think Kobe only getting 3 with Shaq isn't underachieving, I'm not sure what to say (if you think Kobe is better than LeBron).
No, he underachieves when he personally wets the bed (07', 08', 10', 11'), gets upset (09-11'), or underperforms favored talent/favored rosters, such as losing with the preseason favorite - losing with the on-paper favorite (preseason favorite) is the definition of underperforming favored rosters and Lebron did this a lot.. He was also lottery with an all-star (05') or in his prime (19')... He also had close calls or lost every Olympics and World Games - the margin of victory or dominance never lived up to the massive talent advantage.. Furthermore, I don't think anyone expected that Lebron-led teams wouldn't be competitive on the championship level (lottery record on the championship level), nor did anyone think he would give up after Year 7 and team-up with opponents.. Accordingly, underachieving expectation is what Lebron DOES.
Imagine the 2nd GOAT, playing along side the player that has a peak that's arguably the GOAT. How did they not win 65 games each year and sweep their way to chip after chip?
You never responded to the obvious fact that Shaq isn't a PNR player, while Lebron's low assisted rate and low jumpshooting volume isn't conducive for the inside-out game that Shaq and Pau need.. Shaq needs the inside to himself and a jumpshooter to play off him, which obviously isn't Lebron.
So you kept saying that Lebron/Shaq would dominate even though bball 101 says they don't fit.. People ignored the obvious bball 101 with Westbrick and it was a comical and embarrassing fit with Lebron..
In addition to the obvious horrific fit, didn't you see Lebron win a pathetic 50 games with Kyrie/Love in 2017?.. Didn't you see Lebron get destroyed with Wade/Bosh?... So where do you get this notion of "65 wins every year and complete dominance with Shaq"???... It's absurd - Lebron barely wins 50 with AD or Big 3 super-teams, so he can't "win 65 every year" with anyone.
It would be different if he had 4 straight 60 win seasons, or even CONSECUTIVE seasons with Wade/Bosh or Kyrie/Love, but instead he won 60 games only once in 7 seasons with 2 all-star teammates (11-17')..
Accordingly, history shows that he would underwhelm and underachieve with Shaq just like he did with everyone else.. it's what the simpleton bron-ball skillset DOES (high-scoring ball-domination)..
Kobe's skillset allowed higher team ceilings (3-peat), or winning with less (a 2nd option that was worse than Love or Bosh).
That's why he's better than Lebron (higher team ceiling and winning with less).. We know it's skillset based, since his goat scoring diversity fit with every teammate and system, while Lebron imposes spot-up roles and reduces teammates (many bad fits).
Furthermore , the overall historical results are based on skillset - expert jumpshooters and fundamental bigs produce "unbeatable teams" that mostly win for stretches like Curry winning 3 in 4 years, or Duncan winning 3 in 5, or MJ winning 6 in 7... Otoh, high-scoring ball-dominators cannot produce unbeatable teams and mostly lose regardless of cast, while competing poorly on the championship level... High-scoring ball-dominators simply produce weaker chemistry and weaker teams.
You never responded to the obvious fact that Shaq isn't a PNR player, while Lebron's low assisted rate and low jumpshooting volume isn't conducive for the inside-out game that Shaq and Pau need.. Shaq needs the inside to himself and a jumpshooter to play off him, which obviously isn't Lebron.
So you kept saying that Lebron/Shaq would dominate even though bball 101 says they don't fit.. People ignored the obvious bball 101 with Westbrick and it was a comical and embarrassing fit with Lebron..
In ad
My post was about Kobe, who you think is the 2nd GOAT. But you raise good points that the fact they didn't win lots shows he probably isn't the second GOAT.
FG - What do you think about Kobe being terrible in Game 7s?
My post was about Kobe, who you think is the 2nd GOAT. But you raise good points that the fact they didn't win lots shows he probably isn't the second GOAT.
Kobe won 3 chips in 3 years, while Curry won 3 in 4, or Duncan won 3 in 5.
Accordingly, expert jumpshooters and fundamental bigs are capable of producing great chemistry and "unbeatable teams" that mostly win for stretches, while high-scoring ball-dominators like Lebron and Luka cannot produce unbeatable teams and mostly lose each year regardless of cast.. Their teams and brand of ball also competes very poorly on the championship level and routinely underperforms favored rosters.
Sample size is the #1 reason, as opposed to bigger samples like a 22-33 record on the championship level (aka bron-ball competes at a lottery-caliber on the championship level)..
But in addition to sample size, there's also the "kitchen sink" effect - Kobe commanded double teams, while Lebron never has because 1) teams are happy to let him dominate the ball, and 2) penetrators are met at the rim with multiple defenders, so the only guys that truly require doubles are jumpshooters that are getting "hot", aka Curry, MJ, Kobe... It's routine for these guys to single-handedly change a tie score into an 8 or 10 point lead with a personal run of jumpers - hence the "kitchen sink" effect that they face in the halfcourt with multiple defenders hawking them at all times.. The "kitchen sink" effect that expert jumpshooters cause allows them to control defenses at a superior level than a mostly-driving-Lebron, who likes to dominate the ball and rarely "gets hot" with the jumper.
But now that the "kitchen sink" effect of Kobe's Game 7's has been addresed, let's get back to sample size - Kobe's sample of Game 7's is small, whereas 22-33 in the Finals for Lebron (-86 plus-minus) is a meaningful sample size... We all know that losing or inferior basketball yields negative plus/minus for the executors of the inferior brand - that's what is reflected in a worst-ever Finals record and -86... When Lebron loses a playoff series, it's nearly always by massive margin because this reflects the inferior brand getting it's doors blown off or beat repeatedly by the superior brand.. Bron-ball simply competes poorly on the championship level - the worst-ever infact - facing a Lebron team offers the best chance to win a Finals.
Fallguy,
Citation on the -86 plus/minus for LeBron? That’s like…. Shockingly bad.
Is the 22-33 his finals record?
Jordan was smart enough to lose before the finals when his team would've been outclassed and those losses don't count.
Jordan was smart enough to lose before the finals when his team would've been outclassed and those losses don't count.
In 1989 and ‘90 the Bulls easily performed the best against the Pistons among anyone the Pistons played in the playoffs. If the Bulls got to the finals they probably would have won. The year before that Pippen and Grant were 22 year old rookies. The year before that the Bulls second best player was probably Dave Corzine.
Did Jordan have a -86 plus/minus in critical playoff games (finals or otherwise)?
Jordan was smart enough to lose before the finals when his team would've been outclassed and those losses don't count.
Lebron has more losses before the Finals then MJ
Furthermore, Lebron's pre-Finals losses include 2 losses with all-star teammates and another loss with homecourt.. He was also lottery in his prime in 2019.
Ultimately, unlike Jordan being thrown into the playoffs right away as a rookie, Lebron had 3 years to develop a favored high seed before entering his first playoffs in 06'.
Jordan was smart enough to lose before the finals when his team would've been outclassed and those losses don't count.
MJ would obviously 3-peat with an all-star center, HOF coach and an acquisition that was better than 1990 Pippen on both sides of the ball:
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
Accordingly, the 06' and 07' Cavs had a better cast on both sides of the ball than the 1990 Bulls (4th-ranked defense vs 19th for Bulls), but were swept by the Spurs, while the Bulls nearly beat the Bad Boys.
.
