|
Post by klawrencio79 on May 6, 2021 15:29:41 GMT
Fact. I'd like to see an argument to the contrary that wasn't based on abject absurdities. I always thought that Bill Russell's 11 rings was a pretty reasonable argument. I'm just needling the thread. Threading the needle? Woah.
|
|
|
Post by masterofallgoons on May 6, 2021 15:58:53 GMT
I always thought that Bill Russell's 11 rings was a pretty reasonable argument. Not just the 11 rings, but the fact that the dynasty began and ended with him. They won 0 titles before Russell, won in his rookie year, lost the Finals the next year (when Russell had a foot injury), then won 10 of the next 11 titles. Then he retired after the 1969 season and they didn't win again for another five years. Also, Russell won back to back NCAA titles and an Olympic gold medal before even coming to the Cs. In terms of sheer basketball talent, Russell is not amazing by any stretch. But the defensive prowess, will to win and clutch factor are what built the Celtics mystique. He belongs in any conversation about the GOAT because he dominated the league-- without being a legitimate scoring threat. Yes. You could make a compelling argument that he is not the best player, but was indeed the most dominant player in the history of the league... or any of the major 4. Also, he coached those last 2 titles as well. That's gotta count for something too.
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on May 6, 2021 16:34:51 GMT
We get it, you're a Jordan groupie. And there can never be a "GOAT" of any sport. You list "GOAT" as if it were an objective fact.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on May 6, 2021 17:00:37 GMT
Busy today so just getting around to watching these. These vids are hilarious. - "He wasn't that great in college." Nobody ever said he was the greatest college player ever. He was a good college player, but certainly not the best. - "MJ got easy rings because the Finals teams he played had no inside presence." I already listed the impressive list of teams he destroyed in the Finals, and he went through HOF big men to get there. I guess you aren't impressed with Ewing, Mourning, Shaq or Mutombo as an inside presence?! But take a look at this and tell me what a big man was going to do to stop him. This is someone doing genuine analysis as opposed to whining like you and your youtube soulmate. Specifically, skip ahead to about the 5 minute mark to see some incredible stats from the 1996-97 season. Jordan led the league in midrange buckets, and Jordan made 49% of his midrange attempts for Christ's sake. 1st in midrange scoring, 3rd in efficiency. No doubt opposing coaches would've switched out their center on MJ 17 feet from the basket; he's lucky he didn't have to face an inside presence. You (or the guy in your vids doing your thinking for you) seem to have this idea in your head that Jordan was purely a dunker because his dunks were so electrifying. The guy even complains the Bulls lucked out when Ho Grant got hurt for the Magic. That team had Shaq!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (And they got swept by the Bulls in 96) - "Expansion teams diluted the league in the 90s" No argument here. Here's the thing. The best teams were still great. Jordan wasn't playing shitty teams in the playoffs. He was demolishing the best the league had to offer. Hall of Fame greats all over those rosters who played on deep, consistently good teams. Ewing's Knicks, Malone's Jazz, Mourning's Heat, Miler's Pacers, Drexler's Blazers just to name a few. And all of his career accolades stretch back into the 80s. MVP, scoring titles, first team all defense etc., he was doing that shit in the 80s. He was averaging 40 PPG for entire playoff series in the 80s. He dropped 63 points on the 1986 Celtics (one of the greatest teams of all time) in Boston. And his first title in 91 came at the expense of the Showtime Lakers, after the Bulls swept the two time defending champion Pistons. What an easy schedule that was. Jordan routinely beat 50+ and 60+ win teams in the playoffs and Finals. Still waiting for an actual argument from your perspective, other than telling me I'm wrong and calling me a retard. You debate sports like a 9 year old, which I suppose only makes sense, given that you have the sporting knowledge of a nine year old to begin with.
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on May 6, 2021 17:07:48 GMT
Busy today so just getting around to watching these. These vids are hilarious. - "He wasn't that great in college." Nobody ever said he was the greatest college player ever. He was a good college player, but certainly not the best. - "MJ got easy rings because the Finals teams he played had no inside presence." I already listed the impressive list of teams he destroyed in the Finals, and he went through HOF big men to get there. I guess you aren't impressed with Ewing, Mourning, Shaq or Mutombo as an inside presence?! But take a look at this and tell me what a big man was going to do to stop him. Specifically, skip ahead to about the 5 minute mark to see some incredible stats from the 1996-97 season. Jordan led the league in midrange buckets, and Jordan made 49% of his midrange attempts for Christ's sake. 1st in midrange scoring, 3rd in efficiency. No doubt opposing coaches would've switched out their center on MJ 17 feet from the basket; he's lucky he didn't have to face an inside presence. You (or the guy in your vids doing your thinking for you) seem to have this idea in your head that Jordan was purely a dunker because his dunks were so electrifying. The guy even complains the Bulls lucked out when Ho Grant got hurt for the Magic. That team had Shaq!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (And they got swept by the Bulls in 96) - "Expansion teams diluted the league in the 90s" No argument here. Here's the thing. The best teams were still great. Jordan wasn't playing shitty teams in the playoffs. He was demolishing the best the league had to offer. Hall of Fame greats all over those rosters who played on deep, consistently good teams. Ewing's Knicks, Malone's Jazz, Mourning's Heat, Miler's Pacers, Drexler's Blazers just to name a few. And all of his career accolades stretch back into the 80s. MVP, scoring titles, first team all defense etc., he was doing that shit in the 80s. He was averaging 40 PPG for entire playoff series in the 80s. He dropped 63 points on the 1986 Celtics (one of the greatest teams of all time) in Boston. And his first title in 91 came at the expense of the Showtime Lakers, after the Bulls swept the two time defending champion Pistons. What an easy schedule that was. Jordan routinely beat 50+ and 60+ win teams in the playoffs and Finals. Still waiting for an actual argument from your perspective, other than telling me I'm wrong and calling me a retard. You debate sports like a 9 year old, which I suppose only makes sense, given that you have the sporting knowledge of a nine year old to begin with. You Jordan nuthuggers are the worst. Keep telling that nonsense to yourself, retard. And you're a delusional, ignorant, retarded self-proclaimed basketball expert. Your opinion means shit. I'll take Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Oscar Robertson, Kobe Bryant, Hakeem Olajuwon, Julius Erving and Shaquille O'Neal over Jordan's overrated ass any day. Probably more.
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on May 6, 2021 17:28:40 GMT
I always thought that Bill Russell's 11 rings was a pretty reasonable argument. Not just the 11 rings, but the fact that the dynasty began and ended with him. They won 0 titles before Russell, won in his rookie year, lost the Finals the next year (when Russell had a foot injury), then won 10 of the next 11 titles. Then he retired after the 1969 season and they didn't win again for another five years. Also, Russell won back to back NCAA titles and an Olympic gold medal before even coming to the Cs. In terms of sheer basketball talent, Russell is not amazing by any stretch. But the defensive prowess, will to win and clutch factor are what built the Celtics mystique. He belongs in any conversation about the GOAT because he dominated the league-- without being a legitimate scoring threat. Russell was great, of course - - but for eight of those titles, there were fewer than ten teams in the league. It's like looking at the Canadians in hockey - - you were the best of six teams. Congrats - - but it needs proper context. Now, with Kareem, the context is all there . . .
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on May 6, 2021 17:37:02 GMT
Not just the 11 rings, but the fact that the dynasty began and ended with him. They won 0 titles before Russell, won in his rookie year, lost the Finals the next year (when Russell had a foot injury), then won 10 of the next 11 titles. Then he retired after the 1969 season and they didn't win again for another five years. Also, Russell won back to back NCAA titles and an Olympic gold medal before even coming to the Cs. In terms of sheer basketball talent, Russell is not amazing by any stretch. But the defensive prowess, will to win and clutch factor are what built the Celtics mystique. He belongs in any conversation about the GOAT because he dominated the league-- without being a legitimate scoring threat. Russell was great, of course - - but for eight of those titles, there were fewer than ten teams in the league. It's like looking at the Canadians in hockey - - you were the best of six teams. Congrats - - but it needs proper context. Now, with Kareem, the context is all there . . . I disagree. You were the best of six teams. Were teams not hiring the best available players at the time? Was Wilt Chamberlain not a great player, because Russell beat him consistently. Russell beat everyone he played through college, the Olympics and the pros. It's ironic that there's a dilution argument against later players, while the argument against players in the early years is they apparently didn't play anyone? But I agree Kareem belongs in the conversation as well.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on May 6, 2021 17:39:26 GMT
You Jordan nuthuggers are the worst. Keep telling that nonsense to yourself, retard. And you're a delusional, ignorant, retarded self-proclaimed basketball expert. Your opinion means shit. I'll take Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Oscar Robertson, Kobe Bryant, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal over Jordan's overrated ass any day. Probably more. People who can actually make an argument will always piss you off. Learn how to articulate your opinion instead of throwing insults around. Make the argument for any of the guys you mentioned. I mean a well thought out argument, not "Jordan sucks. LeBron rules, you retard."
|
|
|
Post by Mulder and Scully on May 6, 2021 17:42:34 GMT
You Jordan nuthuggers are the worst. Keep telling that nonsense to yourself, retard. And you're a delusional, ignorant, retarded self-proclaimed basketball expert. Your opinion means shit. I'll take Lebron James, Kevin Durant, Wilt Chamberlain, Bill Russell, Kareem Abdul Jabbar, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Oscar Robertson, Kobe Bryant, Hakeem Olajuwon and Shaquille O'Neal over Jordan's overrated ass any day. Probably more. People who can actually make an argument will always piss you off. Learn how to articulate your opinion instead of throwing insults around. Make the argument for any of the guys you mentioned. I mean a well thought out argument, not "Jordan sucks. LeBron rules, you retard."
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on May 6, 2021 18:05:05 GMT
Russell was great, of course - - but for eight of those titles, there were fewer than ten teams in the league. It's like looking at the Canadians in hockey - - you were the best of six teams. Congrats - - but it needs proper context. Now, with Kareem, the context is all there . . . I disagree. You were the best of six teams. Were teams not hiring the best available players at the time? Was Wilt Chamberlain not a great player, because Russell beat him consistently. Russell beat everyone he played through college, the Olympics and the pros. It's ironic that there's a dilution argument against later players, while the argument against players in the early years is they apparently didn't play anyone? But I agree Kareem belongs in the conversation as well. I do feel like there is a middle between the 6-8 team leagues and the 30-32 team leagues that does offer up the best high end competition. Jordan ends up getting six new franchises (Hornets, Heat, Timberwolves, Magic, Raptors, and Grizzlies) that thinned out the league during his run. None of the teams that Jordan beat were as good as the eighties Lakers and Celtics teams who were cannibalizing each other (not to mention the great 83 Sixers team).
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on May 6, 2021 18:05:57 GMT
If he hadn’t quit for two seasons, it’s possible he wins 8 straight NBA Finals. Mayyybee but those Rockets were undeniable.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on May 6, 2021 18:45:08 GMT
If he hadn’t quit for two seasons, it’s possible he wins 8 straight NBA Finals. Mayyybee but those Rockets were undeniable. If Nick Anderson hits a free throw in the 1995 NBA finals in game 1, the Rockets lose to the Magic. The Magic were up by 20 points in the 3rd quarter. They crumbled. They had a bunch of 22 year olds. They cracked. The Rockets wouldn’t have beat MJ if he was in his prime.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on May 6, 2021 18:49:07 GMT
Mayyybee but those Rockets were undeniable. If Nick Anderson hits a free throw in the 1995 NBA finals in game 1, the Rockets lose to the Magic. The Magic were up by 20 points in the 3rd quarter. They crumbled. They had a bunch of 22 year olds. They cracked. The Rockets wouldn’t have beat MJ if he was in his prime. yeah but who knows how momentum would;ve been affected.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on May 6, 2021 18:52:03 GMT
I disagree. You were the best of six teams. Were teams not hiring the best available players at the time? Was Wilt Chamberlain not a great player, because Russell beat him consistently. Russell beat everyone he played through college, the Olympics and the pros. It's ironic that there's a dilution argument against later players, while the argument against players in the early years is they apparently didn't play anyone? But I agree Kareem belongs in the conversation as well. I do feel like there is a middle between the 6-8 team leagues and the 30-32 team leagues that does offer up the best high end competition. Jordan ends up getting six new franchises (Hornets, Heat, Timberwolves, Magic, Raptors, and Grizzlies) that thinned out the league during his run. None of the teams that Jordan beat were as good as the eighties Lakers and Celtics teams who were cannibalizing each other (not to mention the great 83 Sixers team). I addressed this already though. Jordan went through the Lakers in 91 and the Pistons who had beaten up the Lakers and Celtics the last few years. He won the MVP in 1988 when Bird and Magic were still high level players. The only reason people don't talk about the late 90s Jazz or the 90s Knicks is because they couldn't win anything-- because Jordan wouldn't let them. These were absolutely title contenders for more than one season. The other argument is always about how Houston would've beat Jordan; funny how their two titles came while he was retired for almost two full seasons. The 90s teams couldn't cannibalize each other because Jordan was just better. The results bear that out. When splitting hairs between the elite of the elite, I see your point about Kareem over Russell, but Kareem also had great teammates for all his titles. He was hurt against the Sixers in the 1980 Finals and Magic filled in at Center and the Lakers won anyway. Russell was hurt in the 58 Finals and the Celtics lost. So in that regard you can certainly argue Russell was more valuable to his team. I'm not going to argue this point too hard because I don't think there's a wrong answer. But Jordan absolutely dominated the league at both ends of the floor, against the best competition out there (again he routinely beat 60 win teams in the playoffs) as a guard, not a guy who's just bigger than everyone else. 10 scoring titles, etc etc; see my previous posts in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on May 6, 2021 20:48:29 GMT
Based on his Hall of Fame speech, that is one bitter and angry goat. You would think that knowing you're the greatest to ever play the game would make you happy, but not in Jordan's case apparently.
I mean, I'm perfectly aware that I'm the GOAT of the IMDb2 sports board, and I'm pretty much in a good mood all the time. What's Jordan's problem?
|
|
SportsFan19
Junior Member
@sportsfan19
Posts: 2,844
Likes: 2,247
|
Post by SportsFan19 on May 6, 2021 21:35:06 GMT
Based on his Hall of Fame speech, that is one bitter and angry goat. You would think that knowing you're the greatest to ever play the game would make you happy, but not in Jordan's case apparently. I mean, I'm perfectly aware that I'm the GOAT of the IMDB2 sports board, and I'm pretty much in a good mood all the time. What's Jordan's problem? You're completely wrong, you've flipped the script. It's that attitude that drove him to this "goat-ness". I've have thought you understood as one of those "old goats" that lady keeps bitching about in this thread.
|
|
|
Post by tristramshandy on May 6, 2021 21:47:54 GMT
I do feel like there is a middle between the 6-8 team leagues and the 30-32 team leagues that does offer up the best high end competition. Jordan ends up getting six new franchises (Hornets, Heat, Timberwolves, Magic, Raptors, and Grizzlies) that thinned out the league during his run. None of the teams that Jordan beat were as good as the eighties Lakers and Celtics teams who were cannibalizing each other (not to mention the great 83 Sixers team). I addressed this already though. Jordan went through the Lakers in 91 and the Pistons who had beaten up the Lakers and Celtics the last few years. He won the MVP in 1988 when Bird and Magic were still high level players. The only reason people don't talk about the late 90s Jazz or the 90s Knicks is because they couldn't win anything-- because Jordan wouldn't let them. These were absolutely title contenders for more than one season. The other argument is always about how Houston would've beat Jordan; funny how their two titles came while he was retired for almost two full seasons. The 90s teams couldn't cannibalize each other because Jordan was just better. The results bear that out. When splitting hairs between the elite of the elite, I see your point about Kareem over Russell, but Kareem also had great teammates for all his titles. He was hurt against the Sixers in the 1980 Finals and Magic filled in at Center and the Lakers won anyway. Russell was hurt in the 58 Finals and the Celtics lost. So in that regard you can certainly argue Russell was more valuable to his team. I'm not going to argue this point too hard because I don't think there's a wrong answer. But Jordan absolutely dominated the league at both ends of the floor, against the best competition out there (again he routinely beat 60 win teams in the playoffs) as a guard, not a guy who's just bigger than everyone else. 10 scoring titles, etc etc; see my previous posts in this thread. I would say that at each level of the 80s Celtics or Lakers is better than the equivalent level of the 90s teams the Bulls beat. In other words, Magic was better than Gary Payton, Kareem was better than Shawn Kemp, Worthy was better than Detlef Schremp; Bird was better than Barkley, McHale was better than Kevin Johnson, Parrish was better than Tom Chambers. The third player was always just good, not an all-timer. Malone and Stockton are all-timers, but who was third on that team? Byron Russell? Greg Ostertag? Not getting those Bulls-Rockets championships is really a shame.
|
|
|
Post by millar70 on May 6, 2021 22:04:59 GMT
Based on his Hall of Fame speech, that is one bitter and angry goat. You would think that knowing you're the greatest to ever play the game would make you happy, but not in Jordan's case apparently. I mean, I'm perfectly aware that I'm the GOAT of the IMDB2 sports board, and I'm pretty much in a good mood all the time. What's Jordan's problem? You're completely wrong, you've flipped the script. It's that attitude that drove him to this "goat-ness". I've have thought you understood as one of those "old goats" that lady keeps bitching about in this thread. There's nothing wrong with that kind of competitive attitude when you're a prime athlete, it's quite a different thing when you're retired and coming off as angry and bitter. I'm not sure what your 2nd paragraph even means, to be honest with you.
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on May 6, 2021 22:35:14 GMT
I do feel like there is a middle between the 6-8 team leagues and the 30-32 team leagues that does offer up the best high end competition. Jordan ends up getting six new franchises (Hornets, Heat, Timberwolves, Magic, Raptors, and Grizzlies) that thinned out the league during his run. None of the teams that Jordan beat were as good as the eighties Lakers and Celtics teams who were cannibalizing each other (not to mention the great 83 Sixers team). I addressed this already though. Jordan went through the Lakers in 91 and the Pistons who had beaten up the Lakers and Celtics the last few years. He won the MVP in 1988 when Bird and Magic were still high level players. The only reason people don't talk about the late 90s Jazz or the 90s Knicks is because they couldn't win anything-- because Jordan wouldn't let them. These were absolutely title contenders for more than one season. The other argument is always about how Houston would've beat Jordan; funny how their two titles came while he was retired for almost two full seasons. The 90s teams couldn't cannibalize each other because Jordan was just better. The results bear that out. When splitting hairs between the elite of the elite, I see your point about Kareem over Russell, but Kareem also had great teammates for all his titles. He was hurt against the Sixers in the 1980 Finals and Magic filled in at Center and the Lakers won anyway. Russell was hurt in the 58 Finals and the Celtics lost. So in that regard you can certainly argue Russell was more valuable to his team. I'm not going to argue this point too hard because I don't think there's a wrong answer. But Jordan absolutely dominated the league at both ends of the floor, against the best competition out there (again he routinely beat 60 win teams in the playoffs) as a guard, not a guy who's just bigger than everyone else. 10 scoring titles, etc etc; see my previous posts in this thread. No! You are clearly hugging those ripe nuts of Jordan, Jordan has nothing on the actual GOAT which is Vince Carter.
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on May 6, 2021 23:04:51 GMT
I addressed this already though. Jordan went through the Lakers in 91 and the Pistons who had beaten up the Lakers and Celtics the last few years. He won the MVP in 1988 when Bird and Magic were still high level players. The only reason people don't talk about the late 90s Jazz or the 90s Knicks is because they couldn't win anything-- because Jordan wouldn't let them. These were absolutely title contenders for more than one season. The other argument is always about how Houston would've beat Jordan; funny how their two titles came while he was retired for almost two full seasons. The 90s teams couldn't cannibalize each other because Jordan was just better. The results bear that out. When splitting hairs between the elite of the elite, I see your point about Kareem over Russell, but Kareem also had great teammates for all his titles. He was hurt against the Sixers in the 1980 Finals and Magic filled in at Center and the Lakers won anyway. Russell was hurt in the 58 Finals and the Celtics lost. So in that regard you can certainly argue Russell was more valuable to his team. I'm not going to argue this point too hard because I don't think there's a wrong answer. But Jordan absolutely dominated the league at both ends of the floor, against the best competition out there (again he routinely beat 60 win teams in the playoffs) as a guard, not a guy who's just bigger than everyone else. 10 scoring titles, etc etc; see my previous posts in this thread. I would say that at each level of the 80s Celtics or Lakers is better than the equivalent level of the 90s teams the Bulls beat. In other words, Magic was better than Gary Payton, Kareem was better than Shawn Kemp, Worthy was better than Detlef Schremp; Bird was better than Barkley, McHale was better than Kevin Johnson, Parrish was better than Tom Chambers. The third player was always just good, not an all-timer. Malone and Stockton are all-timers, but who was third on that team? Byron Russell? Greg Ostertag? Not getting those Bulls-Rockets championships is really a shame. I don't disagree with anything you said, I guess my point was those players, like the teams themselves aren't regarded as highly because they never won. And they didn't win because Jordan was better. If the Lakers had kept the Celtics from winning titles, Bird & Co. wouldn't be regarded as highly and people could argue the Lakers never beat anyone on their level. And as a hardcore basketball fan I'd dare say the 92 Blazers, 93 Suns, 96 Sonics and 97-98 Jazz may not have had a third guy on par with the 80s Lakers, but beyond any given big three, their rosters were more talented top to bottom. They were more complete teams. The Blazers went to the Finals twice (and in between lost to the Lakers team Jordan beat in the 91 Finals). Utah went back to back. He consistently beat great teams. One final comparison between Kareem and Jordan. I already mentioned Magic standing in for an injured Kareem, leading to a Lakers title. That's just one game. Magic still made the Finals in 91 after Kareem retired (losing to guess who). How vital was Kareem to the Lakers success? Tough to say, given the evidence. Now look at the Bulls. They threepeat from 91-93, Jordan 'retires' for the better part of two seasons and the Bulls finish 3rd and 5th respectively those two seasons, not even making the conference finals. Jordan comes back for a full season starting in 1995-96 and they threepeat again. That's the effect he had on his team's ability to compete. And he never needed 7 games in the Finals.
|
|