GOAT NBA Discussion: Biggest fraud poster: fallguy. Super AIDS Containment thread
Maybe that 91 Bulls team wasn’t a favorite because Jordan had got beat in by the two time defending champ Pistons for two straight years before that, and had never been to the Finals or been the MVP before that year. As opposed to LeBron, who’d done both while younger than MJ was before joining the Heat.
Maybe that 91 Bulls team wasn’t a favorite because Jordan had got beat in by the two time defending champ Pistons for two straight years before that, and had never been to the Finals or been the MVP before that year. As opposed to LeBron, who’d done both while younger than MJ was before joining the Heat.
?
Woops. Forgot MJ had it in 88. When he lost in the 2nd round. Black mark for sure right?
Fallguy is yet to comprehend that LeBron has actually outperformed the odds when he's been the preseason favourite. He also outperformed Kobe.
You lowered the bar from winning as the preseason favorite (my argument and the goat standard), to simply outperforming the odds (the lower bar that you invented for Lebron).
The argument was never about outperforming the odds, which is a top 250 player standard... The argument was about winning the title when the on-paper roster is expected to win more than any other roster in the league (preseason favorite).
But the larger point was about using preseason odds to explain why Lebron is always Finals underdog... He barely wins 50 games with the preseason favorite and therefore falls to Finals underdog... So his Finals underdog status is due to bad regular season records (bad basketball) and not the rosters, since the rosters are initially favored as the best on-paper talent in the league, aka preseason favorite.
He failed at Grade 3 math when the numbers were put in front of him and couldn't understand it.
It's easy to forget that Lebron got 3 seasons to develop a favored high seed before entering his first playoffs in 2006 - this included an all-star center and an acquisition that was better than 1990 Pippen on both sides of the ball... Since Lebron has always had good rosters or the best rosters, he's never "needed more help" and his problem was simply the team's quality of basketball, aka brand of ball, chemistry, and player development..
'
Lebron was actually doing a good job organically for 7 years and eventually won 62 games with an organic cast... But then he gave up a year too early, so Dirk grabbed the 1-star, organic chip that was up for grabs in 2011... Certainly the Cavs would've had the organic chemistry and reputed defense that the Heat lacked to beat the Mavs... Then Bosh would've come to Cleveland in 2012 and began a dynasty quite possibly.
That's all very nice, but Lebron is still a much better player than Jordan ever was. Perhaps if Jordan was born 20 years later they'd be comparable, but we'll never know.
Your argument is that Jordan played against plumbers and firemen, except Jordan and Lebron played against mostly the same guys.
In 1998, the all-stars were Shaq, Duncan, KG, Kobe, Kidd and others - Jordan was MVP over all these guys, and also FMVP, scoring champ and 1st Team Defense, which is unprecedented domination.. Otoh, Lebron was destroyed and completely locked up by KG in the 2008 Playoffs, or Duncan in 07', while Kobe fulfilled his end of the bargain by making the 09' Finals (Lebron lost as an OKC-level favorite)..
Ultimately, Jordan had the goat longevity of goat-level play, such as MVP's over a 10-year span (88' to 98'), and also top 5 DPOY + scoring champ from 88' to 98'.. Again, that's the goat longevity of goat-level play - that's 11 Jokic-like seasons, except with 6 titles and FMVP's as well.
Maybe that 91 Bulls team wasn’t a favorite because Jordan had got beat in by the two time defending champ Pistons for two straight years before that, and had never been to the Finals or been the MVP before that year. As opposed to LeBron, who’d done both while younger than MJ was before joining the Heat.
Jordan's losses would matter if he lost as the favorite... Specifically, oddsmakers hated Lebron for losing as the favorite for 3 straight years from 09' to 11', so they made his veteran super-team the underdog to baby Westbrick in 2012.
Let that sink in.... Essentially, you're projecting - Lebron is the guy that lost 3 straight years as the favorite, so he was an underdog thereafter and considered an EXTREMELY shaky bet for the rest of his career.
The other reason that he's a perennial Finals underdog is because he barely wins 50 games with the preseason favorite and therefore falls to Finals underdog.. So the Finals underdog status is caused by bad regular seasons (bad basketball), and not the rosters, since the rosters are initially favored as the preseason favorite.
Furthermore, the preseason odds show that no one thought the 91' Bulls or 15' Warriors had a good roster, but both teams took the league by storm with a superior brand of basketball that hadn't been seen prior.. So guys like MJ and Curry won more with superior brand of ball than talented rosters, because no one thought their rosters were favored or talented until after they won titles.. Again, they surprised everyone in those initial years of 91' and 15'.
So again, Lebron became a preseason favorite by teaming up with a FMVP champion and doing the "decision", while Jordan became a preseason favorite in 92' by winning the prior season in 91'... It's similar to Curry winning in 2015 when no one thought they would be a big factor heading into the season..
Your argument is that Jordan played against plumbers and firemen, except Jordan and Lebron played against mostly the same guys.In 1998, the all-stars were Shaq, Duncan, KG, Kobe, Kidd and others - Jordan was MVP over all these guys, and also FMVP, scoring champ and 1st Team Defense, which is unprecedented domination.. Otoh, Lebron was destroyed and completely locked up by KG in
No my argument is that the average player is better in 2025 than they were in 2015 than they were in 2005 than they were in 1995.... because they are.
.
.
APPLES TO APPLES
Back-to-Back Runs to the WCF at 22-23 Years Old - KJ vs ANT
Regular Season
89' and 90' KJ'........... 21.5 per... 0.191 ws/48... 4.6 obpm... 0.0 dbpm... 59.1 ts ()
24' and 25' ANT........ 19.9 per... 0.135 ws/48... 3.6 obpm... 0.2 dbpm... 58.5 ts ()
Playoffs
89' and 90' KJ'........... 21.4 per... 0.169 ws/48... 5.2 obpm... 0.6 dbpm... 58.2 ts ()
24' and 25' ANT........ 21.3 per... 0.163 ws/48... 4.7 obpm... 1.7 dbpm... 58.1 ts ()
CONCLUSION:
Since Americans are still the majority of the NBA, and since American basketball has devolved from MJ to KJ, we know that today's NBA player is worse on average than previous eras.
No my argument is that the average player is better in 2025 than they were in 2015 than they were in 2005 than they were in 1995.... because they are.
^^^ That's baby-brained.
The rules and format dictate the type of players produced, so today's hands-off, spaced-out, beginner format produces the worst players ever.. Americans are trash due to this format, while the tougher international formats produces all the best players.
If we went back in time and replaced Shaq, MJ, Robinson and all the best Americans with today's best Americans like Ant, Ja, and Haliburton, we would see the quality of the league crater.. Since Americans are still the majority of the NBA, and since American basketball has devolved from MJ to KJ (previous post), we can say conclusively that today's NBA players are worse than prior eras.
.
2007 1st Round
Jamison...... 32 ppg*
Lebron....... 28 ppg
* 20k career points
^^^ Despite having a better scorer than pippen at THIRD option and better defenses than the 1st three-peat Bulls, Lebron lost in the 2010 2nd Round as an OKC-level favorite
Woops. Forgot.. MJ had it in 88. When he lost in the 2nd round. Black mark for sure right?
The story for 22 years is how Lebron needed more help, even when he had super-teams, or even when he had AD or Luka, yet you won't admit that 80's Jordan had lottery casts?
Do you guys even know what a "lottery cast" is?... It's a roster where the 2nd-best player is an ordinary role player, such as a rebounder or 10/10 guy.... Jordan carried a roster like this to 50 wins in 88', while Lebron never had a roster like this because he entered the league with the East all-star center on his team.
Before Lebron entered his first playoffs, he had 3 years to develop a veteran high seed that included the East all-star center, all-defensive backcourt (Snow, Hughes), top coaching, and an acquisition that was better than 1990 Pippen on both sides of the ball.... Jordan developed far less into a dynasty.... Yet Lebron only "floor-raised" this to 45 wins by Year 5 (2008) before adding 2 more all-stars in 09' and 10' that made the team true contenders.
Unfortunately, Lebron's skillset of turning everyone into spot-up shooter prevents elite roster construction and chemistry, so he couldn't win with "normal" rosters of 1 franchise player, aka "organically"... This means that he never "ruled the East", since he was locked up in 07' and 08', and then upset in 09' and 10', at which point he fled to form super-teams.
^^^ That's baby-brained.The rules and format dictate the type of players produced, so today's hands-off, spaced-out, beginner format produces the worst players ever.. Americans are trash due to this format, while the tougher international formats produces all the best players.If we went back in time and replaced Shaq, MJ, Robinson and all the best Americans with today's best Am
Worst players ever lol
Jordan would likely be a bit above average player in today's NBA whichever ruleset they operated under. Players just more athletic and shoot a lot better as well as understanding offense better to be able to stop it.
Bit like comparing Carl Lewis to sprinters today. Compare within era sure but LOL at thinking that running 9.94 is competitive todaym
No my argument is that the average player is better in 2025 than they were in 2015 than they were in 2005 than they were in 1995.... because they are.
There are 550 players in the NBA today, so the median NBA player is the 275th best player in the world, and they're just a spot-up shooter like Caleb Martin or something - they can't average 10 ppg without shooting mostly threes.. Their only basketball ability is to be a three-point shooting robot with very little pure basketball ability required... Essentially, today's players are much worse at all forms of 2-point shot-making.
Otoh, the median player in 1990 was the 175th best player... And since the three-point line wasn't used, they were a pure scorer like James Edwards or Cliff Livingston that could get 10 ppg without threes - they weren't a robot that lived off today's open format of threes or dunks.. The average player was still a pure scorer compared to today's robots...
And the pure scorers of previous eras could learn today's robotic format of threes or dunks because it's the asier format - it's a format designed to take the easiest shots possible... This doesn't make today's player better - it makes them worse and dumbs down their hoops instinct.. This shows in international play when we underachieve our huge talent edge by barely beating 1-man squads with our 12 HOF'ers, or even losing many times.
In 2017, Adam Silver introduced a "no impede" rule so that ball-handlers can't be impeded from going where they want, and cutters can't be "bumped" or impeded off-the-ball... A league where the format has been dumbed down doesn't produce better players... People are simply fooled by all the threes, so they think "previous eras couldn't shoot threes, so today's players are better"... But the same advantage that today's players have on threes is the advantage previous eras had on 2's... And 2-point shot-making is far more diverse... . Ultimately, it's easier to become a 3-point shooting robot as the 275th best player in the world, compared to being the 175th-best pure scorer in the world.
Worst players ever lol
Jordan would likely be a bit above average player in today's NBA whichever ruleset they operated under. Players just more athletic and shoot a lot better as well as understanding offense better to be able to stop it.
Bit like comparing Carl Lewis to sprinters today. Compare within era sure but LOL at thinking that running 9.94 is competitive todaym
^^^ more baby brained thinking.
If athletes evolved as fast as you're saying, then the rim would've been raised by now.
But the reality is that guys run and jump the same as before... Ben Johnson ran a 9.78 in 1988, and he was the only guy that was juicing anywhere near the level of today's athletes.. Meanwhile, the high jump record by Javier Sotomayor has stood since 1993.
Furthermore, the difference in 100 meter times can be attributed to training equipment like shoes, starting blocks, track surface, etc:
"Some estimates suggest that with modern conditions, Jesse Owens could potentially run the 100m in the 9.6-9.7 second range, which is significantly faster than his 10.3 second record. This would put him in contention with the fastest sprinters of the modern era, like Usain Bolt."
https://www.google.com/search?q=jesse+Ow...
No one made a big deal when Vinnie Johnson did this 2-handed tip dunk in the 89' Finals, but 30 years later no one remembers that your typical bench guard could still rip the rim off just like today's bench guys.. It's the f'ing NBA:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ESz26WjjEr...
Here's Vinnie Johnson dunking again and then Spud Webb with the crazy goal tend on the next play:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mW-NY0mh6l...
Again, previous eras compare well to today's athletically, but people just have short memories.
Have you ever watched a game from the 90s? Or a game from today? Watch them side by side and tell me with a straight face that players back then were as good as today.
Why am I engaging with such a troll?
No one made a big deal when Vinnie Johnson did this 2-handed tip dunk in the 89' Finals, but 30 years later no one remembers that your typical bench guard could still rip the rim off just like today's bench guys.. It's the f'ing NBA:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ESz26WjjEr...Here's Vinnie Johnson dunking again and then Spud Webb with the craz
Dude you just posted a play that 95% of 6'2 high school players would make.
Have you ever watched a game from the 90s? Or a game from today? Watch them side by side and tell me with a straight face that players back then were as good as today.
Why am I engaging with such a troll?
Many nascent fans like the organization of today's neat spacing, while also enjoying the 3-point shooting and fancier handles/traveling/carrying.
But previous eras didn't use the 3-point line, so they didn't spam drive-and-kicks to jack up threes all night long (a watered-down version of basketball - a bastardized version of the game)... Accordingly, they had to really hoop and play pure basketball to get 100 points in a game.
Specifically, the lack of spacing meant that contested shots in traffic were the expectation, along with thread-needle passing... Accordingly, all players that made the NBA were amazing contested shot-makers and vastly superior and at all forms of 2-point shot-making than today's 3-point and dribble-happy robots.. Their skillset, shot-making and passing was much more sophisticated than today's 3-point spamming skillset (in a hands-off, open-paint, beginner format).
The international formats tell the story - they produce the best players, while our beginner format isn't capable of producing any more Lebron's, Curry's, MJ's, Magic's, Kobe's, Shaq's, Duncan's, Bird's, etc - those players are LONG GONE because the beginner format has dulled and dumbed down the pure basketball instinct and scoring ability... Instead, the beginner format has given us watered-down versions of Steve Francis like Ant or Ja.
Furthermore, the international formats show us that if you take away just a little bit of that spacing, and all of a sudden our players struggle and underperform in international play... And if we make the traveling and carrying rules the same as prior eras, then that fixes the handles issue.. Ultimately, the fancy handles are nothing more than Harlem globetrotter, while the only thing that really matters is the last dribble or 2 and the shot - previous eras were vastly superior at this.
Apparently, you never even played high school ball.
Less than 15% of today's 6'2" high school players could do that in a high school game, and virtually zero percent could do that in an NBA Finals game... And the point is that today's fan and media proclaim that today's players are better because "even the guy deep on the bench is really athletic amazing player" - but so were the bench players in previous eras - it's a weak and erroneous reason to think that the league has better talent now than before.
Ultimately, the median player in 1990 (the 175th-best player in a 350 player league) was an amazing mid-range pure scorer like James Edwards, while the median player in today (the 275th-best player in a 550 player league) is a spot-up shooting robot like Caleb Martin.
If you knew basketball, you would know what an amazing shot-maker that Vinnie was, with no threes.. He could really take over.. Unstoppable... Today's 6'2" player might have hops like Vinnie and can shoot threes, but they're vastly inferior scorer to Vinnie overall because Vinnie was such an amazing 2-point and mid-range shot-maker (just like all players back then)... Previous eras had the same advantage on 2-pointers that today's game has on 3-pointers.
.
Summary of why Preseason Odds are important
1) Preseason odds explain why Lebron is always Finals underdog - he barely wins 50 games with the preseason favorite, so he falls to underdog... And since his rosters are initially favored as the preseason favorite and the best on-paper talent, we know that inferior chemistry causes the weak regular seasons and fall to underdog.. The weak chemistry is Lebron's skillset of turning everyone into spot-up shooter.
2) Preseason favorites don't matter much in a one-off scenario, but they speak volumes when there's a TREND.. In this case, we see that Lebron fell from preseason favorite to underdog or loser for 6 straight years (11-16').. Since Lebron's rosters are initially favored as the preseason favorite and best on-paper talent, the fall to underdog is due to inferior chemistry, aka bron-ball, aka turning everyone into spot-up shooter.
Today's fan:
"It's true that the best Americans today like Ant and Ja are nothing compared to the best Americans of prior eras like MJ, Shaq, Lebron or Curry, but the AVERAGE american player is so much better."
^^^ this is a bs argument and obviously false... The massive drop-off from Shaq or Lebron to Ant indicates that the average player is much worse too... Bench players like Vernon Maxwell, Vinnie Johnson or Danny Ainge destroys today's bench guards and 3-point spamming robots like DiVincenzo or Caruso - these guys are bums compared to backup guards in prior eras... The gap in quality is massive.. The fact that the majority of the NBA has cratered (Americans) confirms that today's NBA players are much worse than prior eras.. The cratering of the majority (Americans) isn't offset by an increase in the minority (international).. Ultimately, the average American player is still far better than the average international player, but nowhere near the average American of prior eras.
It turns out that spamming and jacking threes doesn't produce good basketball players, and neither does the hand-off, spaced-out, beginner format... When Ant runs into traffic, he has no clue what to do because today's 3-point spamming format has dumbed down his hoops instinct and IQ.
Consequently, the best Americans can barely beat Jokic's 1-man Serbian team, which means that Jokic's 1 man team would destroy the original Dream Team right???.. Since basketball is so much better now??? That's total bs obviously and exposes the false narrative... Any of the original Dream Teams would beat Jokic's Serbia by at least 50, while today's Americans basically get beat.. This proves that basketball has cratered and players are much worse today.
.
Today's era is better at:
1) deciding to spam and jack threes all game
2) being allowed to carry and travel with impunity, aka "handles"
3) 2-man basketball format, aka high PNR spamming
Previous eras were better at:
1) every type of 2-point shot-making, aka basketball
2) moving and scoring off- screens (playing without dominating the ball)
3) post play
4) 5-man basketball, aka ball movement, sophisticated brands of ball (all the dynasties, aka dynasty-ball)
CONCLUSION: today's 3-point spamming is a dumbed down version of basketball that suits today's dumbed down society.. People like it much less than previous eras, so no one watches. It's for nerds that need another hobby or bored rich people. Either way, it isn't for anyone that actually knows what they're watching.. It's devolved gutter brand and skills that can't beat the "foreigners" anymore, lol dumb ignorant Americans.. The chickens have come home to roost, aka the easy-scoring format doesn't produce great players like MJ, Curry or Lebron, so no more gold medals for the US ever... Ja and Ant won't even win bronze.. So carry on watching this trash you nerds but the real ballers stopped watching a long time ago.. Shaq, Barkley and anyone not getting a player's check hates the current NBA... 3-point spamming, colluding, load management and easy-scoring beginner format that produces weak players like Ja and Ant, or Achilles Tatum.. Andrew the worst Finals ever.. Real basketball is dead (only threes exist now).
Have you ever watched a game from the 90s? Or a game from today? Watch them side by side and tell me with a straight face that players back then were as good as today.
Why am I engaging with such a troll?
Today's spacing produces robotic scoring styles, since everyone is taking threes, layups or alley-oops, and the objective is open looks... Otoh, contested shots in traffic were unavoidable in previous eras due to the lesser spacing, so each player was forced to develop their own individually-unique way of making contested shots... The unique scoring styles of Magic, Bird, MJ, Kareem, and all 80's players contrasts with the robotic styles of today's open-shot-makers, aka 3-point and layup spammers - it's mostly open shots due to the hands-off, spaced-out beginner format and the resulting robotic drive-and-kick approach.
So the 90's was far better to watch than today due to the greater individuality and caliber of shot-making and style of play, which was all inspired by the lesser-spaced and more physical format (advanced format)... Contested shots are simply more fun to watch, along with the individually-unique styles and ability required to make them... Furthermore, since players didn't rely on spamming threes via PNR drive-and-kick and 2-man basketball, they were elite at running off screens and playing various 5-man basketball styles.. Historically, 5-man basketball has a tremendous record against 2-man basketball and ball-domination.
Ultimately, only a nascent NBA fan thinks that 3-point jacking demonstrates superior basketball ability than the hoops instinct, skill and individuality required to operate in traffic and with physicality.. The 90's was actually the best decade ever because it used the 3-point line a fair amount (10-25 attempts per game, depending on the year), and therefore had the best-ever mix of at-rim, paint, mid-range, and 3-pointers... The best-ever ratings proved the point - everyone was watching on mainstream TV in more groups of people.
If the average player is better today, how come today's benches = undecorated 3-pt robots, while the benches of contenders in previous eras were completely STACKED with decorated players that possessed all-star, all-defensive and 20 ppg resumes??
For example, the 4 through 7 spots on OKC are 3-point robots like Dort, Caruso, Wiggins, and Wallace, while the 3 thru 7 spots on the 92' Blazers were decorated players with all-star, all-defensive and 20 ppg resumes of diverse scoring (not 3-point robots) - i.e. Duckworth, Ainge, Kersey, Cliff Robinson.
Similarly, the 4 thru 7 spots for the 93' Suns were decorated and versatile scorers like Chambers, Dumas, Ainge and also Oliver Miller getting 2 blocks per game off-the-bench... Meanwhile, the 91' Lakers' were stacked with Sam Perkins, all-star AC Green and 20 ppg scorer Byron Scott, and Elden Campbell...
Obviously the top 3 spots on all these teams match OKC's Shai/Jaylen/Chet (Magic/Worthy/Vlade, or Barkley/KJ/Majerle, or Clyde/Porter/Buck Williams... TLDR: today's era is weak af
.
.
Regular Seasonhttps://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hornaje01.html...... 17.7 PER.. 2.9 bpm.. 0.153 ws/48.. 42.1 vorp... 15/3/5 on 58.2 tsBasketball-Reference.comJeff Hornacek Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft Status and more | Basketball-Reference.comhttps://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thompkl01.html................ 16.4 PER.. 0.7 bpm.. 0.110 ws/48.. 14.4 vorp... 19/3/2 on 57.5 tsBasketball-Reference.comKlay Thompson Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft Status and more | Basketball-Reference.com
Playoffshttps://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/hornaje01.html...... 16.5 PER.. 3.1 bpm.. 0.145 ws/48.. 14.1 vorp.. 15/4/4 on 57.5 tsBasketball-Reference.comJeff Hornacek Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft Status and more | Basketball-Reference.comhttps://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thompkl01.html................ 14.4 PER.. 0.7 bpm.. 0.091 ws/48.... 3.1 vorp.. 19/3/2 on 56.0 tsBasketball-Reference.comKlay Thompson Stats, Height, Weight, Position, Draft Status and more | Basketball-Reference.com
Curry's Warriors were a consensus bad roster with +2800 preseason odds and a lower producer than Jeff Hornacek at 2nd option, yet Curry carried them to 67 and 73 wins... So it isn't impressive to beat a 1-man team with a "big 3" preseason favorite and the only super-team in the NBA (Lebron's Cavs).
And it's impossible to lose with a sidekick outplaying the league MVP, since that's like Pippen outplaying Barkley, or Jamal Murray outplaying SGA - it's impossible to lose in these scenarios.
Yet Lebron's super-team got a 1-3 deficit against a 1-man team because Lebron averaged 24 ppg and 6 TO's thru 4 games.. The Draymond suspension renewed his hope.
Ultimately, Lebron only averaged 29 with a teammate getting 27 and hitting the 2nd biggest shot in Finals history (behind Ray's).. Since Lebron always has equal-scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention, he never defeated max defensive attention (never carried the scoring load on the championship level).
His inability to carry the "star" category of scoring required more star help, so this matters more than barely leading role player categories and still needing great role plyers to co-lead.. This is why leading all 5 categories by tiny amounts is nothing more than a statistical anomaly and minor footnote in history.
