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

I was super tempted to delete the last post itt.

But I'll leave it up for laughs.

Of course he can be criticized for teaming up.

But FG is so bad at arguing the pro Jordan case that he has two MJ fans arguing against him. He's that bad. He's actually detrimental to MJ's case, and may actually individually be helping LeBron more than if he won another Championship.

In that case maybe fallguy should pull a Jordan.

GIF deleted.

Mod Note: do NOT post footage of animal cruelty. This is your one and only WARNING.

This is a great question and I don't know the answer. I will say that I used to be critical of LeBron for the Miami move, but in reality it was a completely standard decision he made as a free agent. It's not like he joined an already elite team -- the Miami Heat had a combined record of 105 wins and 141 losses over the previous 3 seasons. Wade was really good obviously but was already showing injury and durability issues. Honestly, I feel like if LeBron had kept a low profile when he was a free agent and simply signed with Miami it would have all blown over really quickly and not been a big deal at all.

In the long run though, this move was great for LeBron's legacy. It proved that he could win with multiple teams, with multiple coaches, and within multiple offensive schemes. This also proved that both his playmaking (4th all time in assists) and scoring (1st all time) leads to winning teams and dynastic achievements across any team and any system; unfortunately with Wade's injury issues and his desire to go back to Cleveland he was only able to play in Miami 4 seasons, but he proved his versatility by building a dynasty across two different teams when he won in 2012, 2013, and 2016 (beating the 73 win Warriors team in 2016).

This is something that MJ cannot say -- he was only capable of winning within one system and one coach. His career and legacy were rescued by Phil Jackson, Scottie Pippen, and the triangle offense. And no one can say MJ "could have" won within other systems or with other coaches if he chose to -- this would be ridiculous because it factually did not happen. That would be like saying Shaq "could have" been a dominant 3 point shooter if he chose to. It just doesn't make sense.

Those videos of wildlife get 2 to 50 million views each, since they're fascinating videos, in this case of an old lion being disposed of younger lions that are taking over the pride - it's literally standard nature that in 2024 gets filmed extensively and widely.

Thank you for having the balls and manhood to engage me, thereby helping the world determine that all high scorers with low assisted rates, aka ball-dominators cannot produce the best basketball, such as dynasties or dominant champions (0 for 16 since 97')... This inability to produce the best basketball is why ball-dominators like Lebron are inferior to the best players of higher-assisted skillsets..

You should congratulate yourself because others before you like SABR or Seadood couldn't hang in there long enough to reach the truth - but you did - you hung in there long enough to prove Lebron and other ball-dominators are massive frauds that can't produce the best basketball... You deserve kudos for that... I would take the day off or something - kick your feet up and reward yourself..

It's partly or mainly the unfolding of events that was needed to prove my previous claims... And that has happened, which confirmed that ball-dominators stink (just like I always said) due to 0 for 16, while it took 10 years for people to get bored of the threes, easy-scoring beginner format, and non-competitiveness/softness of players... Smh . I literally said that everyone would get tired of it 5 and 10 years ago.

There was a 1-star organic chip up for grabs in 2011 that Dirk grabbed, but it would've been Lebron's Cavs if he stayed - they had the long-standing chemistry and defense that the Heat lacked... And I don't understand how Dirk can win with Terry and old guys, but Lebron can't with Mo and old guys - there's no excuse - Lebron simply gave up a year early.. Once he wins in 2011, the floodgates open up and everything seems easier - every good player will be coming to Cleveland... By 2025, Lebron would, EASILY have 5+ chips in Cleveland.. They might win this year without him.

So no, Lebron was better off staying in Cleveland and using the favorite status and chemistry that they had already developed to produce the best caliber of basketball (dynasties and dominant champions).. This is better than hopping on other people's teams and producing perennial losers (never a great team/dynasty).. Lebron gave up on learning the chemistry required to win with what you have (organic).. He almost did, but he gave up a year early and pursued talent-based winning instead (all-star team strategy).

And why not team-up with just 1 other star like Bosh??. If you want to be like MJ, why wasn't Bosh enough??? Why get a kobe-level player in Wade as well??? That was obvious overkill and deck-stacking... Wade was the 2nd-best player in the game in 2010 by being 2nd in everything to Lebron (PER, BPM, WS/48, VORP), so that's like Magic and Bird teaming up (the top 2 players).. People knock Durant for getting an unprecedented advantage for 2 years but Lebron had an unprecedented advantage for 6 years before Durant - no one ever had 6 straight preseason favorites (11-16').. Durant was correct counter this unprecedented deck-stacking with his own unprecedented deck-stacking..

Btw, Wade played better in 13' and 14' than Pippen played in the 2nd three-peat playoffs (17 on 41% for entire 96-98' Playoffs).. So there's no excuse for slightly older players that are still all-stars - you have to win with them to match the goat standard.. Plus Lebron had a 2nd Pippen in Bosh, but Bosh had been reduced to spot-up shooter.

You should also know that it's childish to say that Lebron created dynasties... That's the childish part .. Lebron only produced perennial losers, and it's due to the bad chemistry that ball-dominators have - their high volume of unassisted buckets produces lower average ranking in team assists, and never produced the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions - 0 for 16)... Only highly-assisted players can produce the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions), since all dynasties and dominant champions had highly-assisted 1st options.

And Lebron only plays 1 system - it's Lebron-ball that requires extra stars and still mostly loses... His skill restriction to ball-dominance imposes spot-up roles that produces zero young player development, bad chemistry and perennial losers with every cast..

Finally, since Jordan was unbeatable with just 1 all-star teammate, he was never going to need additional all-stars like everyone else did... So haters were always going to say he was attached to one player - they're simply punishing Jordan for being good enough to win with the first all-star he received and never needed another one like everyone else did.. It's literally the dumbest argument anyone can make, especially since Pippen only shows futility, such as 0/6 in FMVP - everyone that won more than 2 Finals needed to teammate to get FMVP or 25 ppg for 1 or more of the Finals, but Pippen is 0/6 in FMVP and peaked at 21 ppg.. Pippen also forced Jordan to win with the worst shooting splits that anyone ever had in 93', 96', and 98' Playoffs.. Pippen averaged 19 on 42% in 6 Finals, and we know that AD would get downgraded historically and traded with those numbers, regardless of his defense.

Pippen never had a "moment" and never dominated - ever.. He was just a dunker and largely unavailable in tight halfcourt sets - Kukoc was often preferred.. And Phil/Tex had no idea that Jordan would save their pathetic triangle that no one knew about and had never won before as a team's primary offense - they thought Jordan wouldn't be scoring champ, and he shocked them by making the triangle a household name and setting the blueprint that Kobe copied - MJ was so great that he won another 5 chips with a lesser version of himself in Kobe...

Show me where Lebron, Luka or ANY high-scoring, low-assisted player was the 1st option on a dominant champion or dynasty (the best basketball).

It never happened because all 16 dominant champions or dynasties (the best basketball) required highly-assisted 1st options, who produce higher-assist teams and foster the great ball movement that every dynasty or dominant champion has.

Engaging you helped me think LeBron was better.

When Lebron had zero or 1 all-star teammate and lost in the 06-10' Playoffs, no one questioned or scrutinized him, but when MJ drags a worse cast and nothing to the 89' ECF, he "needed Phil to get him over the hump".

That makes no sense - he just needed a modicum of help, and the instant he got it, he was unbeatable.. Phil just happened to be there at the right time after MJ had done the heavy lifting to develop teammates.. Phil had no clue about MJ and thought MJ wouldn't be scoring champ anymore in the triangle, so he just lucked-out that MJ was a highly-assisted 1st option like all dynasties or dominant champions require, smh

I know you're lying because you guys stopped debating the instant I caught your trick... You guys thought I forgot about Shaq and were claiming that there were only 3 dynasties since 97', and only 2 of them had high-assist teams .. Once I remembered Shaq, it destroyed your "only 2 for 3 argument" and you quit...

In addition to dynasties generally having higher assist levels, you SUPER-quit when the conversation steered back to just looking at the 1st options of dynasties (they're all highly-assisted) and then we added 12 of 12 dominant champs as well!!!!.... So 16 of 16 dynasties or dominant champs required highly assisted 1st options... Game, set, match...

So you're definitely done now and that's how it was on ISH as well - as soon as I clearly win the argument, the children that Im arguing with quit without having the manliness to concede... So go along.. Run away...but don't lie and say you think Lebron is better.... 2 pages ago you said MJ was better, but now that I've definitively won the debate, you're backtracking.. It's obvious lies and sophistry, motivated by pride and that's understandable.. It's embarrassing to fall for fraud.

Hi fallguy, it's been a while and hope your holiday season is going well. Is it your sincere opinion that Matt and fidstar realize now that they'd been wrong all along but are lying and quitting to avoid conceding the argument?

Btw, Fidstar said that MJ was the goat and better than Lebron just 2 or 3 pages ago (I can find the post), and he's said that throughout the thread - so he's just lying on this page now that we actually proved it - lol

Meanwhile, you guys continue to be ridiculously wrong on everything as McLovin dumbsss thought I posted an animal cruelty video - I'm trying to figure out if this is more wrong than thinking a skillset that can't be 1st option for the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champion) is goat... They're both so absurdly wrong that I have no choice but to question competency levels of everyone itt

It don't matter if you put lipstick on pig and call it a point forward - history shows that NO PLAYER with below 40% assisted rate can produce the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champions) - there's never been a ball-dominator like Luka, Lebron or any low-assisted 1st option on a dynasty or dominant champion... 16 of 16 dominant champions or dynasties had highly-assisted 1st options.

The issue is that low-assisted 1st options have high volume of unassisted buckets that cause low average ranking in team assists... Accordingly, all dynasties and dominant champions require highly-assisted 1st options, since they produce higher-assist teams and foster the great ball movement that all dynasties have..

I actually didn't count the Bulls being they were predominately before 1997.

.
Final Thread Cliffs

JORDAN FAN: Lebron isn't goat or anywhere near.

LEBRON FAN: why not

JORDAN FAN: because high scorers that are low-assisted (below 40% and not capable of 50 or 60)) can't be the 1st option for the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions).. 16 of 16 dynasties or dominant champions had highly-assisted 1st options with assisted rates or 40 and higher, with the proven capability for 50 and 60 (not a ball-dominator).

LEBRON FAN: Wow. I didn't know that.. Thanks for setting me straight on the inferior skillset of high-scoring ball-dominators - they cannot produce the best basketball by virtue of never being 1st option on a dynasty or dominant champion (0 for 16).

jfc, you have no idea. I meant I thought LeBron was better than what I thought he was before I started talking to you. Not better than Jordan.

You literally make a worse case for Jordan than anyone I've spoken to about this subject. You have not been able to convince anyone in this thread to date. In fact, you've turned people the other way. Excellent work.

People cannot accept the truth, so once we finally arrived on it, everyone has run away.

10 years ago, I stated that ball-domination was an inferior skillset that cannot produce the best basketball, and 10 years later there's a sufficient sample size of dynasties and dominant champions to prove me right ...

Assisted rates below 40% (ball-dominators) can't be the 1st option for the best basketball (dynasties or dominant champions).. 16 of 16 dynasties or dominant champions had highly-assisted 1st options with assisted rates or 40 and higher, with the proven capability for 50 and 60 (not a ball-dominator).

It don't matter if you put lipstick on pig and call it a point forward - history shows that NO PLAYER with below 40% assisted rate can produce the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champions) - there's never been a ball-dominator like Luka, Lebron or any low-assisted 1st option on a dynasty or dominant champion... 16 of 16 dominant champions or dynasties had highly-assisted 1st options.

The issue is that low-assisted 1st options have high volume of unassisted buckets that cause low average ranking in team assists... Accordingly, all dynasties and dominant champions require highly-assisted 1st options, since they produce higher-assist teams and foster the great ball movement that all dynasties have..

Big picture - we figure out that Lebron's skillset cannot produce the best basketball such as dynasties or dominant champions, yet I still have him 12th all-time - a losing skillset is still 12th - that's a testament to his goat-level talent (but not skill)

Thoughts on Steph's 2 point, 0 FG game +/- of -41? I'm sure you may have mentioned it if LeBron had one. A month ago you were talking Championships for him? Thoughts now?

Also your thoughts on the tanking music industry because CD sales are down, and porn being less popular than before because Playboy magazine sales are down.

Since you've completely won this argument, at least in your mind, though we should come back to this at some point, let's revisit your life. After all, as far as I can see, the reason why you think you won comes down to your confidence in your analytical skills and some measure of professional success, right?

What happened to the promising career of a real estate analyst that was tasked with solving such monumental and challenging problems as figuring out whether to opt out of a lease and sign a new one to maximize the efficiency of a lease portfolio? That must have been like 15 years ago? What happened since? Given your continued confidence in your abilities, it sounds to me that you must sincerely believe that you deserve better in life and whatever that hasn't worked out, must then be the fault of others, right? Who wronged you? Who are these villains of your life with too many unassisted FGs that play the wrong brand of ball, metaphorically speaking, in the game of fallguy's life? In other words, who are the Lebrons of your life?

If LeBron had a game like that we'd get 147 different essays about how it was proof that he's a fraud.