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

You said Curry was the most overrated player of all time just a few years ago?

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthr...

Carmelo Anthony was a jump shooter, why was he perennial loser?

Same with Allen Iverson, Bradley Beal, Trey Young. Explain why expert jump shooting produces perennial losers.

Jaylen Brown plays great alongside Tatum and grew into a great player, while Bosh, Brunson, or Porzingas were destroyed alongside ball-dominators like Lebron or Luka.

That's the difference - teammates play great alongside jumpshooters so the team plays great (great ball-movement).. Otoh, teammates play like trash alongside ball-dominators (reduced to spot-up roles - no ball movement), so the team is weak and loses much more.

Jumpshooters like Tatum, MJ, Curry and Pau grew guys like Klay, Pippen, Pau or Jaylen Brown into household names, while Lebron, Luka and other ball-dominators destroy teammates like Brunson, Bosh, Love or Westbrook.. What will you say when Jokic wins with Westbrook this next year, or nearly wins? How does that compare with Lebron missing the play-in with him?

Curry proved me wrong, which is why I have him ranked so high, while Lebron never proved me wrong, so I have him ranked lower.

When Curry he won with Wiggins - holy sh*t - that's GOAT......... Go youtube Nick Wright's long diatribe about how Wiggins was a career loser that would never win - no one could win with Wiggins, according to Wright... Curry's victory with Wiggins actually made me realize something that was staring me in the face the entire time - Curry fit all my criteria about off-ball and great chemistry - he fit it perfectly!!!.. Accordingly, I made him top 5 in 2021, which is LONG BEFORE anyone else had him that high.

Otoh, Lebron has never proved me wrong, which is why I'm right about him - the sample size is large enough - he's had enough chances to show that he simply cannot produce a great team and produces perennial losers instead - the neediest teams in history because ball-dominators have the neediest skillset in history - 21 years confirms this, while Luka, Westbrook, Harden and SGA provide another 50 years or so... High-scoring ball-dominators cannot produce great chemistry or teams.

From most overrated player in history in 2021 to GOAT top 5 in 2024.

The person that would create statements like that cannot be trusted with any NBA analysis, absolutely zero.

More lies

You said in 2021 he was the most overrated player ever. How can a player be most overrated ever and top 5 GOAT in the same year?

Phil Jackson said that Jordan wouldn't be scoring champion in the triangle, so averaging 30 in the triangle as the league scoring champ is GOAT..

Furthermore, winning with that offense when most guys like Carmelo couldn't even implement it shows that there's LEVELS to this.. Sure Carmelo is a great jumpshooter, but his jumpshooting isn't on the Kobe/MJ level - his entire repertoire, jumpshot, post game and quickness upon the catch is a level or 2 below MJ and Kobe - the triangle was still too arduous for Carmelo's jumpshooting and he rejected it - only GOAT jumpshooting can handle it... Btw, MJ and Kobe are the only perimeter wings in history that were treated like big men on the post and dominated the post like bigs.. This is a function of their goat footwork and goat turnaround jumper..

Furthermore, Kobe averaged 36 ppg with a 45% assisted rate - teammates were assisting him for nearly half his buckets at 36 ppg - that's GOAT.... Compare this to Harden averaging 36 with a 13% assisted rate - he was almost never off-ball.

We can also look at jumpshooting volume and efficiency - Kobe and MJ are the only guys in history to make 700 jumpers in a season and half of these were assisted - these are simply goat numbers for off-ball scoring - no wonder their teams had goat ball movement, teammate development, chemistry and winning..

Then we can look at the way people talk about their teams.. For example, everyone says the Spurs are the "smart" team that "plays the right way"... Well Jordan, Kobe and Curry had teams like this too, while Lebron, Luka and Harden never did.. It's a stark contrast.

Your thread is from earlier in the year - I made Curry top 5 on November 13th, 2021:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthr...)

that's long before anyone ever had Curry that high...

Ignore that I had Giannis and Kawhi in there - that was scrapped and changed almost immediately - the main point of those rankings was to put Curry in the top 10, which allowed me to put Lebron OUT of it.. Curry was the lynchpin to put Lebron out of the top 10, and those rankings on November 13th were my first attempts at this, and I've since fine-tuned the rankings (to perfection and irrefutability in my mind)

Notice how early in the season that I realized the Warriors were going to win with Wiggins and that Curry was therefore top 5 all-time - it was right away - I got a glimpse of them playing and saw the same dynamic nature to their offense that they had in 2015 - so I made Curry top 5 because he accomplished the same championship-caliber with proven losers like Poole and Wiggins, which means that prime Curry could win with basically anyone remotely decent.

Artest, Brad Miller and Jermaine O'Neal were all-stars after 2002 of after when Reggie was 4th option and 37 years old

Otherwise, Reggie made many deep runs and made the Finals without an all-star teammate - Schrempf was an all-star in 93' when the Pacers didn't make the Playoffs, so I guess Dale Davis is the only exception, but he was like a "Kyle Korver" all-star (1-time fluke - didn't really deserve it, etc)

It's common knowledge and widely-known that Miller had no help, yet still made many historic runs and even made the Finals - he SUPPORTS the claims and is great evidence supporting how expert jumpshooters can win with less.

Ultimately, tons of guys including Miller would win every year with Wade/Bosh, or Kyrie/Love, or AD - it's a joke that Lebron mostly lost with these guys and never produced a great team - it's the biggest fraud in history that you fell for.

From most overrated player of all time May 2021 to top 5 GOAT in 6 months?

Explain

So you’re saying Reggie Miller’s 5 all star teammates don’t count, therefore Reggie Miller never had an all-star teammate?

This feels a lot like LeBron James’ titles don’t count, therefore he didn’t win 3 titles in 5 years like Tim Duncan.

Or LeBron James’ excellent off ball game with Wade or Kyrie doesn’t count, therefore LeBron can’t adapt to an off ball play style.

Or playing with Shaq and Pau doesn’t count, therefore Kobe is the second greatest basketball player of all time because he could make jump shots, very inefficiently.

There actually aren't many high volume jumpshooters that have good efficiency - Curry, MJ, Kobe, and Dirk are among the only ones.

Iverson, Trae and Melo's efficiency isn't good and doesn't compare to Kobe, MJ and Curry...

It's important to understand that it's a thin line - jumpshooting allows great ball movement and it's goat when it's done with good efficiency and assisted by teammates, but it becomes cancerous below a certain efficiency level and when it's extended 1-on-1 forays that we see from Iverson, Trae or Melo... Basically, these guys' fundamentals are complete dogsh*t compared to Kobe, MJ or Curry.

Remember Lebron's Cavs teams from 2004-2010?

Before Reggie Miller was 37 years old, he had less all-star help than that, yet he had more deep runs including a Finals run.. Specifically, Reggie had 1 "korver" all-star for all his playoff runs until 2002 - that's nothing compared to Lebron's 2004-2010 Cavs, who had many all-stars, all-defenders and decorated players (Zydrunas, Mo, Jamison, Hughes, Varejao, and HOF coach) - that's far more help than Miller ever had.

And stop telling lies about Lebron's off-ball game - he was never good off-ball, which is why he never produced a great team and produced perennial losers instead, while also having a long list of bad fits and virtually ZERO young player development - it's a statistical fact that Lebron imposes spot-up roles, which stalls young players, thereby needing ready-made stars to win (and still mostly losing).

And Lebron went 1 for 5 with a sidekick that out-produces Duncan, so no, Lebron is bad at basketball compared to MJ, Kobe, Curry or Duncan, who won far more with far less... Curry would never lose with AD, or Wade/Bosh, or Love/Kyrie - that's a ridiculous amount of help that Duncan, Curry, Kobe or MJ would never lose with - they would win the title every year - that's how much better they are at basketball... They won far more with far less, and the careers of Duncan, Kobe, MJ and Curry is a BIG SAMPLE to show that great jumpshooting/ball movement is a superior basketball skillset than ball-domination.
.

The earth goes from flat to round - that's how it works.

The problem is that you guys are still thinking the earth is flat (in the basketball sense) by thinking that the best ball-dominators (Luka, Lebron, Oscar) are good at basketball compared to the best jumpshooters (MJ, Curry, Kobe) - they obviously aren't by virtue of their skillset producing weak chemistry/teams that require far more help but still mostly lose, and can never produce great teams/dynasties - this is over a massive sample that is the entirety of NBA history...

The best high-scoring point guards, aka "ball-dominators" cannot produce great chemistry or teams like the best expert jumpshooters or fundamental bigs do - this is over the entire history of NBA basketball.

Kobe Bryant 44.7% FG, 32.9% on 3s at 4 attempts per game. 83.7% from FT - 20 shots per game. TS% .550

Carmelo Anthony 44.7% FG, 35.5% on 3s a 4 attempts per game. 81% from FT -18 shots per game TS% .543

Carmelo Anthony's efficiency is exactly the same as Kobe Bryant. Kobe Bryant had exactly the same efficiency as a jump shooter as perennial loser Carmelo Anthony!

Argument won, game over.

Now that we have established that fallguy is a liar and his arguments cannot stand on merit, I believe it’s safe to conclude there is more to basketball than jump shooting skill, and Shaquille O’Neal, LeBron James, and James Harden were good basketball players. Phew that was a close one — he almost had us.

You listed overall efficiency, which includes at-rim efficiency - but I said JUMPSHOOTING EFFICIENCY, which is different.

Kobe's jumpshooting volume and efficiency was far higher than Carmelo's.. Carmelo was actually a ball-dominant, rim attacker that also chucked mid-range pull-ups at bad efficiency.

Carmelo's jumpshooting efficiency, aka his "efg" on jumpers (effective field goal percentage on jumpers) was under 40% for every year that he was an all-star except 09' and 13', while his volume almost never scraped 1000 attempts.. Otoh, Kobe's jumpshooting efficiency was between 42-47% nearly every year, with 1000-1700 attempts.. So it's not even close - Kobe was a "jumpshooter", while Melo wasn't - he was a rim attacker that chucked jumpers at low efficiency...

Jumpshooting stats for Carmelo and Kobe can be seen in the links below - scroll down to the sub-category "shot type" and there's a row labeled "Jump Shots" where you can see Melo's effective FG % on jumpers - you can change the year in the address bar at the top of the page:

07' Melo: https://www.nba.com/stats/player/2546/sh...
07' Kobe:

https://www.nba.com/stats/player/977/shooting?Season=2006-07&SeasonType=Regular%20Season

nba

Kobe Bryant | Los Angeles Lakers

smh.... the argument was never that EVERY jumpshooter wins.

You changed the argument into that so you can beat it.. Then you went out and found the crappiest, most ball-dominant jumpshooters you could find to say "see, these bums didn't win, so jumpshooters don't always win"...

Except no one said that jumpshooters always win, or that every jumpshooter wins - that was never the argument and it's revealing that you would try to change the argument into that.. It reveals that you lost the actual argument, which was that high-scoring point guards, aka "ball-dominators", produce weak chemistry, perennial losers and cannot produce great teams like other skillsets can.. But obviously, that doesn't mean that every player from those other skillsets can produce great teams.

Ultimately, there are no counters to what I said because it's the historical record... If there were high-scoring point guards, aka "ball-dominators" that produced great teams, then this would instantly destroy and discredit my argument - but there aren't any, so there's no counter - the only skillsets that produced great teams are fundamental bigs or expert jumpshooters - never ball-dominators.. It isn't a counter to find losing jumpshooters like Mitch Richmond, Dale Ellis, Majerle, Miller or Melo.. That isn't a counter.

smh.... the argument was never that EVERY jumpshooter wins.

You changed the argument into that so you can beat it.. Then you went out and found a prominent jumpshooter that never won and pretend it's a rebuttal... "see, here's a jumpshooter that didn't win, so jumpshooters don't always win"...

Except no one said that jumpshooters always win, or that every jumpshooter wins - that was never the argument and it's revealing that you would try to change the argument into that.. It reveals that you lost the actual argument, which was that high-scoring point guards, aka "ball-dominators", produce weak chemistry, perennial losers and cannot produce great teams like other skillsets can.. But obviously, that doesn't mean that every player from those other skillsets can produce great teams (although there will be a general correlation of jumpshooters winning more with less than other skillsets - Miller doing well in the playoffs despite little help has always been a great example of this).

Ultimately, there are no counters to what I said because it's the historical record... If there were high-scoring point guards, aka "ball-dominators" that produced great teams, then this would instantly destroy and discredit my argument - but there aren't any, so there's no counter - the only skillsets that produced great teams are fundamental bigs or expert jumpshooters - never ball-dominators.. It isn't a counter to find losing jumpshooters like Mitch Richmond, Dale Ellis, Majerle, Miller or Melo.. That isn't a counter.

Miller actually lost to the better jumpshooters in question - MJ and Kobe in 98' and 00' - otherwise Miller would have 2 chips.. But again, it isn't a viable counter in the first place to say "I found a jumpshooter that didn't win!!!"

Now do Tim Duncan up to the age of30 (AD's current age).

Someone do Carmelo jump shot volume and efficiency. Probably close to Kobe.

I still have Kobe higher on the GOAT list, but it's close.

Kobe @ 41% TS% on jump shots was better than Miller in 2000?

lol

just stop it.