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

55% with low turnovers, great ball movement and teammate development/elevation/chemistry > 61% with turnover machine, worst chemistry in history and crappy team that needs more help

I can't tell if you're just playing dumb at this point or merely delusional and fooled by the fraud to that extent

Lebron never persevered with aging or young rosters like MJ, Kobe, Curry or Duncan did - they won with young or fossil casts while Lebron RAN like a scared chicken to prime, stacked rosters every time the waters got a little rough.. Others persevered, and he ran.

He ran because he isn't capable of producing great teams that mostly win and infact mostly loses with every cast that he ever had.. The Cavs, Heat and Lakers each won 1 chip in 4 years, except the Allen miracle, so none of them were great teams that mostly won over a 5-year stretch like the teams of expert jumpshooters (Curry, MJ, Kobe), or fundamental bigs (Duncan, Kareem).

This is true of ALL high-scoring ball-dominators - they impose spot-up roles and weak chemistry, so they can't produce great teams like other skillsets

Unfortunately, unlike Curry, MJ or Jokic, Lebron never learned the chemistry needed to win with "normal" casts of 1 franchise player, so he obtained better casts of 3 franchise players (super-team).. He simply never learned how to win (organic) and only learned to team-hop (talent-based winning, all-star team strategy)..

High-scoring ball-dominators have no choice but to pursue a talent-based approach since they cannot produce great chemistry by virtue of imposing spot-up roles.

Earlier you also said it would be delusional to think LeBron would have a stretch of “mostly winning” (defined by you, repeatedly, as 3 championships in 5 or fewer years) if he teamed up with prime Shaq.

Can you elaborate on that, since you now know LeBron has, in fact, won 3 championships in 5 years during the 2012 to 2016 stretch of his career? Do you think LeBron James may have done pretty well with prime Shaq or do you still think they would struggle?

Having a stretch of mostly winning with a single teammate like Shaq requires having a great team that mostly wins for a stretch, which Lebron never had - Lebron won 1 chip in 5 years with AD and mostly lost like this with every cast because his skillset produces the worst-ever chemistry with every cast... Worst-ever chemistry is why Lebron has underachieved favored talent 7 times, such as losing with homecourt or the preseason favorite (favored rosters).

What are you saying fallguy?

LeBron could not “mostly win” even with a stacked roster (like prime Shaq) since he is ball dominant?

Or, are you saying that LeBron needs a stacked roster to win? Say, with someone like prime Shaq, when he played with Kobe the expert jump shooter, where he won 3 of his titles.

These are two different claims. You must have misspoke somewhere.

Let's get some perspective.. Aside from Jordan, there's never been a player that was an "automatic title" if you paired him with an all-star, and Shaq is the FURTHEST THING from automatic - do you realize that Shaq was swept from the playoffs for the first 7 years of his career?... He was swept 4 times with Penny, who was 1st team All-NBA, and then he was swept with 4-all-star teams in the late 90's (97-99').

In addition to having a history of catastrophic losses, Shaq certainly isn't the PNR big that "bron-ball" requires.. Accordingly, it's absurd to think that Shaq is going to win with a spotty-shooting, ball-dominator that lacks the jumpshooting volume to fit with "in-out" bigs like Shaq, Love or Jamison.. It's simply pretty ridiculous to think that 2 losing brands like Shaq and Bron colliding would be a "lock" to win - history shows that only the goat scoring diversity and expert jumpshooting skill of Kobe could effectively play off Shaq and then repeat with a Bosh-level sidekick like Pau.

So again, history shows that Lebron cannot produce great teams that mostly win, regardless of cast - I doubt he could even win the gold medal 3 in 5 times at this point, especially averaging 7 turnovers per 40 minutes - Curry can't save the team from this trash EVERY time, smh.

Maybe I can describe it this way - if there was a player that averaged 40/15/17, his team would "need more help" - that's what the media would say because everyone on the team would be a spot-up shooter... This should make sense and sound familiar, because this is what you've witnessed for the last 21 years, except the numbers are closer to 30/10/10..... Since teammates are always reduced to spot-up role, ALL CASTS turn to mush...

i guess because its not the same team it doesnt count for him.
tho he obv won 3 in 5.

im guessing for him he ask do lebron win a title if he stay in the heat post 2014 ?

I don’t know if LeBron James wins a title with the Heat if he stays past 2014. This is called “moving the goalposts”. I think Jordan > LeBron but this kind of lying and dishonesty just makes one side of a debate look bad so I find it annoying.

Kareem switched teams from the Bucks to the Lakers. Do his titles with the Lakers not count?

The Bulls were an entirely different team from their first 3 peat to their second 3 peat. The only players that were the same on both teams were Jordan and Pippen. Does the second 3 peat not count since they didn’t do it with the same players?

The 3 peat Shaq Lakers were not the same team as the repeat Pau Lakers. Do the repeat titles with Pau not count because the team was different?

Why do LeBron’s titles and 3 rings in 5 years not count because some of the players were different, but it doesn’t matter for anyone else?

Some logic and rationality would be great here. If you have facts on your side you should be able to answer simple questions.

.
HARVEY GRANT (Horace's brother)

Starting his career as a reserve in 1988-89, Grant had worked his way into a starting role and an 18 PPG scoring average by 1990. At 6’8, he was the height of contemporary power forwards, but he had the ball-handling, shooting, and lithe movement of a small forward. That combination gave him an advantage whenever he stepped out to the wing.

https://www.blazersedge.com/2024/8/29/24231529/harvey-grant-nba-career-portland-trail-blazers-stats-washington-bullets-wizards-jerami

Blazer's Edge

Forgotten Trail Blazers: Harvey Grant

Harvey was one of the first "stretch 4's", but his skill went unnoticed on a losing team in Washington.

Otoh, 6 chips got Pippen's "point forward" skills noticed in spite of original point forwards like Paul Pressey, Bird, Schrempf or Rodney McCray, and also the new point forwards with a "bag" like Grant Hill or Penny.

So Pippen would've been ignored on a losing team just like Harvey Grant, but the winning spotlight got him noticed.. The winning spotlight is a powerful thing that elevated many carried sidekicks to all-time status and media accolade.. Heck, Harvey was better than his twin brother Horace, but the winning spotlight made Horace a household name, while his superior brother was completely unknown - a nobody (despite having a ground-breaking stretch 4 skillset).
.

Were the Cavs a great team or dynasty that won a bunch of titles?

No, they won 1 chip in 4 years and were not considered a great team.

Ditto the Heat and Lakers

Accordingly, since Lebron had many chances to develop a dominant dynasty but never did, he isn't capable of producing great teams and can only produce much weaker teams that mostly lose every year - this is true of ALL high-scoring ball-dominators in the NBA's 75-year history, so it's a big sample..

So why play games and pretend you don't understand the point being made? Isn't that immature and prove you're wrong?.. It's better to accept the historical record that high-scoring ball-dominators cannot produce great teams and never did in 75 years, while other skillsets routinely did and are therefore superior, i.e. the best bigs or jumpshooters are better than the best ball-dominators, so ball-dominators cannot rank higher than about 15th all-time.. (high-scoring ball-dominators)

You are, somehow, conflating the ability to construct a roster that leads to a single team becoming a dynasty, with ball-dominant vs. off-ball skillsets. I promise you that part of the reason Kobe Bryant won 3 straight and James Harden (for example) did not, is because Kobe Bryant got to play with prime Shaquille O’Neal. It’s not just because Kobe took jump shots.

To answer your question, no I would not consider the Cavs a dynasty. Nor the Heat.

But I also would not consider Kareem’s Bucks a dynasty, nor Steph’s Warriors without Durant (see how team construction matters? With Durant they were an all time great), nor Jokic’s Nuggets. Yet you somehow include these players as “creating” unbeatable dynasties. Are you sure the GM, coach, and other players didn’t impact that at all? Why does Jokic only need one ring to be credited with “building” (lol) one of these unbeatable dynasties you speak of?

Why are you grouping individual players and saying they created “unbeatable dynasties”, yet LeBron objectively won more than some of them?

Do you think it’s possible you might just be wrong? — maybe dynasties depend on roster construction and coaching too, and ball dominant players can be good with the right team?

Sone misperception itt

Nonsense

From 2011-2016, Lebron's teams were the only teams in the league with 3 franchise players, while every other team had 1 franchise player ,(including Curry's)... A franchise player is an elite producer that was asked to build a lottery team from scratch.

That's why Lebron's teams were the preseason favorite for an unprecedented 6 straight years from 11-16'..

Kyrie destroyed Curry, let alone Klay, and Love was considered far better than Klay before joining Lebron..

Only the"bron-ball"skillset killed Love's production capacity, which caused the TEAM to drastically underachieve.. Those Cavs should've won 60-70 games and been a dominant dynasty, but instead they barely won 50 games every year and fell from preseason favorite to underdog.. That's what high-scoring ball-dominators do - their weak chemistry underachieves favored talent, such as Lebron losing 7 times with the preseason favorite or homecourt.

Roster construction and coaching depends on the skillset of the #1 option

That's the ENTIRE point being made - certain skillsets produce better chemistry, fits/rosters, and strategic capacity/coaching, thereby yielding better teams.

Specifically, high-scoring ball-dominators hurt roster construction and development by reducing everyone to spot-up roles.. Meanwhile, the coach is handcuffed by having to run a ball-dominant offense where 1 guy makes all the plays, instead of a ball movement offense where everyone is getting off and the team has high assists - since the coach can't run an offense that produces great chemistry, additional talent isn't needed and that's always the story for a high-scoring ball-dominator (more help pleeease).

Unlike expert jumpshooters or fundamental bigs, high-scoring ball-dominators cannot develop the chemistry to win with what they have and must pursue a talent-based approach (all-star team strategy, team-hopping)... They cannot develop the chemistry because their skillset imposes spot-up roles... (decrease teammates' assists and increase their assisted rate)

Interesting, so you think the reason James Harden did not play with prime Shaq (or an equivalently good player) was because he was not an off-ball jump shooter? It’s not because…. Houston’s GM did not acquire Shaq (or equivalent)? Roster construction was Harden’s fault?

You're misunderstanding.

Chemistry is bad with Harden, Lebron or ANY roster of a high-scoring ball-dominator because their skillset imposes spot-up roles.

So GM's can get great players like AD, Wade, Shaq or even Big 3's to play with Lebron or Harden, but the fit and quality of basketball will never be elite.. High-scoring ball-dominators impose spot-up roles and have bad chemistry regardless of cast, so their teams will always underperform and mostly lose with every cast..

Only the 2nd goat had sufficient scoring diversity, jumpshooting volume and assisted rate to play off Shaq and allow him to have unbeatable teams instead of perennial losers and sweeps.

.
Thread Cliffs

Skillsets that produce great chemistry and great teams will provide better long-run title equity than skillsets that cannot produce great teams.

In the annals of NBA history, one skillset has proven incapable of having great teams, and that's high-scoring ball-dominators.. Accordingly, the best high-scoring ball-dominators rank behind the best of other skillsets in the all-time rankings, which means the best ball-dominator cannot be higher than about 15th all-time.

I find it interesting how chemistry has to be necessarily bad with LeBron or Harden, yet LeBron managed to win 3 titles in 5 years. The same ratio as Duncan in a 5 year window. Yet one is “mostly winning” and the other is “mostly losing”. And that Harden’s bad team chemistry led to some of the most successful offenses in NBA history.

I’d say that if their team chemistry was that poor and caused them to underperform, they must have been mega-elite (even underrated) individually. Imagine how good Harden would have been with prime Shaq if he almost took out the Durant+Steph Golden State Warriors without him?

Thread cliffs: /propsfeetupondeskgif

No, but seriously, your logic is terrible. Off-ball skill is important but it doesn’t make LeBron bad. He legitimately won 3 titles in 5 years like Duncan, I swear.

Hey I’m Just trying to rationalize his thoughts , not mine 😀

It's literally a statistical fact over unlimited sample size.

Specifically, high-scoring ball-dominators like Tiny, Oscar, Lebron, Harden, SGA, Luka, and Westbrook decrease their teammates' assists (playmaking), and increase their assisted rates (play-finishing), so it's statistical fact that teammates are reduced to spot-up roles ("corner dudes" according to NBA-player vernacular).

The lower assists from teammates yields low TEAM assists and a brand that competes at a lottery caliber on the championship level (22-33 Finals record and -86 plus/minus).. Low team assists, weak fits and bad Finals record are hallmarks of high-scoring ball-dominators - these factors prevent great teams that can mostly win over a 5-year stretch, and instead produces weaker teams that mostly lose every year.

Not with the same team - Lebron won 1 ring in 4 years with the Cavs, Lakers and Heat (except the Allen miracle), so he mostly lost with every team and never produced dynasties that mostly won over a 5-year stretch like Duncan, Curry, MJ, Kobe, or Kareem.

High-scoring ball-dominators like Lebron simply cannot produce great teams, and therefore provide lower long-run title equity than other skillsets that produce great teams.

The predictable offenses of high-scoring ball-dominators like Harden and Lebron do poorly in "adjustment basketball" (playoffs) as evidenced by them always getting shut down at some point by a ball movement team:

2018 WCF - Rockets vs Warriors

As you can see, high-scoring ball-domination doesn't work well and gets locked down in "adjustment" basketball against the better teams.. Ball movement teams win the "attrition battle" because their zippy ball movement and high team assists wears down defenses, thus leaving them less capacity for offense as the game or series wears on.. Indeed, the best defense is a great offense - a tenet of all competition - it's better to face worn down opponents than fresh ones.

Unfortunately, bron-ball or harden-ball doesn't follow this tenet because their ball-domination lets a defense rest, so opponents have more capacity for offense - the story is always how opponents "got hot" on bron-ball - it's because they get to rest on defense.. that's why the nuggets, warriors, spurs, mavs or magic all "got hot".. it wasn't some random coincidence - bron-ball simply loses the attrition battle vs ball-movement by not applying as much pressure as it faces.

Shaq was swept and destroyed with Penny for 3 straight years and by 3 different teams - Penny was 1st team All-NBA like Harden and probably a better player overall, while the Magic were stacked at other positions and a better team than Harden ever had.

So there's no reason to believe that Harden would win with Shaq, since Shaq mostly lost with Penny, Wade and Lebron.

Secondly, many people don't realize that it's quite possible for teams to "rope-a-dope", energy-manage and take it easy in a series just like a boxer lets an opponent hang around or manages a fight... So there's no such thing as "nearly took out" unless the series came down to a single possession like 2 of Lebron's titles..

btw, the fact that 2 of Lebron's titles could've gone the other way based on 1 possession and a single bounce of a ball might be the best clear-cut proof that he's likely overrated, by a lot, and my "theories" are actually facts/historical record - it's historical fact that high-scoring ball-dominators like Tiny, Oscar, Lebron, Luka, SGA, Westbrook, and Harden never produced great teams that mostly won for stretches, and instead produced weaker teams mostly lost every year.. This stuff is fact, and if Bosh hadn't tapped the ball in the perfect direction, then this stuff would be common knowledge and the mainstream standard.
.

I've been skimming over the last couple hundred posts, and fallguy has referenced "Allen's Miracle" a dozen separate times. This "miracle" in question is when Chris Bosh grabbed an offensive rebound and passed it to Ray Allen, who hit a corner three. I can see why such a strong term as "miracle" keeps getting used. Those guys had NEVER done those things before THAT GAME.

...by the way, that "miracle" shot only TIED the game, with the Spurs getting the ball back with like 6 seconds. God is so weird in how he distributes his miracles...

...and fallguy and I make an almost identically-timed post where he once again brings up this dubious miracle

I'm watching the replay of this play; JVG mentions Duncan was on the bench for this defensive possession, which spurred (no pun intended) the memory that, for a day or two after the game ended, a ton of discussion was about how could you possibly not bring Duncan back for the play!? Maybe it's Gregg Popovich and not Ray who deserves the credit for LeFraud's ring this time, eh?

Can you link this data and the statistical analysis?

I believe you that ball dominant offenses have less team assists on average, but I’d like to see the statistics and unlimited sample size.

If Harden’s teammates’ assists were so terrible it’s pretty amazing that he was able to lead some of the greatest offenses in NBA history and almost beat the Steph+Durant Warriors, taking them to 7 games, with an injured Chris Paul who didn’t play at all in 2 games. Just imagine how good Harden’s legacy would be if he got to play with Shaq and a Phil Jackson coached triangle offense. He must have been amazing individually to make up for the lack of teammate contributions.

I also don’t think you meant to type that the Warriors let them get to 7 games to save energy, so I’m just going to assume that was a typo or you were joking.

If Allen misses the shot, the Heat lose and Lebron would correctly never be a part of any goat debate... But instead, the less likely event occurred, and Lebron has been overrated ever since.

Amazingly, Lebron won a 2nd series by 1 possession as well in 2016, which further enhances the point that he's a lucky and therefore overrated.. Again, the fact that half his rings could've gone the other way based on 1 possession might be the best tangible, indisputable evidence available that he's likely overrated.

It's remarkable because Lebron's own horrific play is what necessitated the "luck" or less likely plays in both series.. He averaged 16 on 39% for the first 3 games of the 13' Finals to get a 1-2 deficit, while his 23 on 43% was insufficient through 6 games and required the Allen miracle to force Game 7 and provide 2nd life....

Then he averaged 24 ppg and 6 TO's through 4 games of the 16' Finals to get a 1-3 deficit, which required his teammate to become the only sidekick in history to outplay a current league MVP and hottest thing in the league (unprecedented help) - it wasn't really an upset based on the on-paper talent since the Lebron's team was the preseason favorite for a unprecedented 6 years in a row from 11' to 16'.. Lebron's "decision" to team-up with opposing franchise players unfairly locked-down the league until KD finally responded, but it was 6 years too late.