Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In some ways I think Russell’s and MJ’s domination sorta hurts them in some people’s eyes. How can players reach such a level of utter domination without some sort of funny business going on? Russell won 11 and MJ probably wins 8 or 9 if he doesn’t retire the first two times. What do we often hear about MJ? Competition of the 90s sucked...not as many good players, etc - that’s why he won so much.
No reasonable person claims the competition sucked during the 1990's and that's why Jordan won.
Utah Jazz, Knicks, Phx Suns, Pistons etc. we're talking teams with extremely loaded rosters.
Some Bulls championships were dominant but others were nearly a coin flip.
I just hear these comments and think "I wonder if the poster ever watched those series."
I mean, I comment all the time but I never watched the finals prior to 1988ish. But I don't make claims that those earlier teams were weak etc. when I can easily look at see that a team like Utah had one heckuva squad and the Phx team was almost an all-star fest etc
Bill Russell is indeed one of the best centers to ever play the game. He had more rebounds than anyone except fellow Hall of Famer Wilt Chamberlain.
I don't really like to compare players. Bill Russell was a center, while MJ was a shooting guard and LeBron James is a small forward. All of those guys have different body types, playing styles, and their respective times to shine.
Comparing is just not my style if you know what I mean. I prefer to just appreciate greatness, regardless of what position an NBA player played or what time they shined brightest.
Please, there was a small fraction of talent back when Russell played compared to recent decades. Russell was offensively challenged and you're talking GOAT? I doubt he was any better then Ben Wallace. You're just stuck in nostalgia land.
Olajuwon and Shaq to name just 2 would have used him like a rental car.
No reasonable person claims the competition sucked during the 1990's and that's why Jordan won.
Utah Jazz, Knicks, Phx Suns, Pistons etc. we're talking teams with extremely loaded rosters.
Some Bulls championships were dominant but others were nearly a coin flip.
I just hear these comments and think "I wonder if the poster ever watched those series."
I mean, I comment all the time but I never watched the finals prior to 1988ish. But I don't make claims that those earlier teams were weak etc. when I can easily look at see that a team like Utah had one heckuva squad and the Phx team was almost an all-star fest etc
10 to 20% of league was made up of absolute bums who couldn’t have played in the 80s or ‘00s. Because of expansion, the number of players in the league increased by 26% between 1988 and 1995. Teams hadn’t effectively tapped into the international talent pool, so the league was filled with a bunch of American scrubs. John Starks would not start for any team in before 1988 or after 2002 (when the league hit 20% foreign born).
You will never convince me those Suns were better than the ‘02 Kings or ‘08 Celtics. Hell, I don’t think they were as good as the 03 Mavericks. That was the best team that Jordan faced in the finals. Don’t get me wrong; those Suns were a championship caliber team, but every season, since ‘02 has featured 3-6 teams just as good.
10 to 20% of league was made up of absolute bums who couldn’t have played in the 80s or ‘00s. Because of expansion, the number of players in the league increased by 26% between 1988 and 1995. Teams hadn’t effectively tapped into the international talent pool, so the league was filled with a bunch of American scrubs. John Starks would not start for any team in before 1988 or after 2002 (when the league hit 20% foreign born).
You will never convince me those Suns were better than the ‘02 Kings or ‘08 Celtics. Hell, I don’t think they were as good as the 03 Mavericks. That was the best team that Jordan faced in the finals. Don’t get me wrong; those Suns were a championship caliber team, but every season, since ‘02 has featured 3-6 teams just as good.
League expanding equals = teams led by elite 1 superstar. Now you have the best players surrounded by all stars/good role players concentrated on 3-4 elite teams. You have 2-3 elite teams in the west and 1 in the east with a clear path to the finals every year.
Look at players like Steph, Durant and Lebron - you will never convince me that Jordan isn’t MANY championships in today’s NBA while surrounded by players similar in talent to what Curry, Durant and Lebron have had.
League expanding equals = teams led by elite 1 superstar. Now you have the best players surrounded by all stars/good role players concentrated on 3-4 elite teams. You have 2-3 elite teams in the west and 1 in the east with a clear path to the finals every year.
Look at players like Steph, Durant and Lebron - you will never convince me that Jordan isn’t MANY championships in today’s NBA while surrounded by players similar in talent to what Curry, Durant and Lebron have had.
Jordan WAS surrounded by the same kind of talent that those guys have...arguably more, in some cases. Pippen made the top-50 of all time list. Are you willing to argue that Miami Wade, Cleveland Kyrie were better than prime Pippen? You’re 100% sure Draymond Green is better than Dennis Rodman? The Warriors, as currently constructed, with Durant have more talent than any Jordan-led team. They also, I have a 100% championship rate.
Jordan WAS surrounded by the same kind of talent that those guys have...arguably more, in some cases. Pippen made the top-50 of all time list. Are you willing to argue that Miami Wade, Cleveland Kyrie were better than prime Pippen? You’re 100% sure Draymond Green is better than Dennis Rodman? The Warriors, as currently constructed, with Durant have more talent than any Jordan-led team. They also, I have a 100% championship rate.
Lebron lost a championship with Wade putting up 27/7/5 on 55% shooting (61% TS). Jordan doesn’t lose with that as a second option. That’s the difference between the Heat going back to back and becoming a 3 peat dynasty right along side the Bulls and Kobe/Shaq Lakers. The same could be said for the Warriors losing a 3-1 lead in the finals. Doesn’t happen with Jordan.
The point is - Curry and Durant will ascend the all time rankings in large part because they could each end up with 4-5+ championships as part of the Warriors. If they do win that much, in 5 years we are probably discussing Curry and Durant as top 5 players all time. Therefore, if you want to make an argument about Jordan playing on stacked teams than you also have to ding Curry, Durant and Lebron for winning with good players. Where does that leave us?
And yes, I would say Dray is better than the 35 yr old version of Rodman the Bulls had. Rodman wasn’t even an all star or on an all NBA team.
Cleveland Kyrie hits big shots and gives you 27-30 ppg on 47% shooting in the NBA finals. Outside of top 10 all time greats, there aren’t many players in NBA history giving you that.
With the Cav's success thus far in the playoffs, there is a lot of talk about LeBron replacing Jordan as the 'greatest of all time.' The Captain Class is a book from last year by Sam Walker.
The author wanted to write a column about the greatest teams in all sports, and what their common characteristics were. He ended up researching the matter for 11 years; hence the book. He made up objective criteria for 'greatest.' Two NBA teams made the list--the Russell-era Celtics, and the Duncan-era Spurs. Jordan's Bulls did not make the list, IIRC, because they did not meet the longevity criterion. BTW this book is a good read for any sports fan.
The author did find one commonality in the greats--they all had a definite team leader, including Russell and Duncan. Neither were rah-rah types; they led mostly by example.
As for Russell:
Russell didn't have the star power of Jordan or James. He averaged 15 points/game over his career. But he had something they did not: leadership. Russell won 11 rings in his 13 years in the NBA.
Lebron lacks the killer instinct that Jordan had and that's what separates Jordan from Lebron. Jordan was a better defender but that was part of the intensity difference between Lebron and Jordan. Lebron is a better passer and rebounder which pretty much negates the fact Jordan was a better scorer and defender.....again, Jordan's intensity and drive to win is the differentiator.
Russell had that drive to win in the same degree as Jordan I think. He was part of a system that the Celtics of the day employed but Russell was not the complete player Jordan was...Russell was a defender and rebounder but he was not so great with the ball. I give Jordan the edge.
Status:
""...I wrote it down, now I follow thru...""
(set 23 days ago)
Location: North Raleigh x North Sacramento
5,774 posts, read 5,537,824 times
Reputation: 7052
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell
League expanding equals = teams led by elite 1 superstar. Now you have the best players surrounded by all stars/good role players concentrated on 3-4 elite teams. You have 2-3 elite teams in the west and 1 in the east with a clear path to the finals every year.
Look at players like Steph, Durant and Lebron - you will never convince me that Jordan isn’t MANY championships in today’s NBA while surrounded by players similar in talent to what Curry, Durant and Lebron have had.
Lolololol....
"Clear path" to The Finals, and yet at various points this decade, the Bulls were a 60-win team with an MVPthat was the popular pick to win it all; the Celtics had a Big 3 of HOFers that went to two Finals in three years and were picked to make another in '12; the Pacers and the current incarnation of the Celtics rose up as legitimate challengers with 55+ win teams and home court; the Hawks caught lightning in a bottle that one year and were everyone's favorite; the Raptors were this year's 2015 Hawks and everyone's favorite...
You know what all those teams had in common? They could not beat the best player in the game in the playoffs, teams constructed to specifically beat his team, gameplanned for it. Don't tell me it's an easy path year after year unless you want to play this same game for the Warriors path since '15. We've done this exercise before a year ago, it doesn't work in your favor lmao...
I guess all those other teams weren't real contenders, rather Lebron lose to them all and the narrative would be he couldn't win championships. Instead for 7 years straight he's led his team to the final round, bit it's an easy road. You guys kill me lol...
Quote:
Originally Posted by eddiehaskell
Lebron lost a championship with Wade putting up 27/7/5 on 55% shooting (61% TS). Jordan doesn’t lose with that as a second option. That’s the difference between the Heat going back to back and becoming a 3 peat dynasty right along side the Bulls and Kobe/Shaq Lakers. The same could be said for the Warriors losing a 3-1 lead in the finals. Doesn’t happen with Jordan.
The point is - Curry and Durant will ascend the all time rankings in large part because they could each end up with 4-5+ championships as part of the Warriors. If they do win that much, in 5 years we are probably discussing Curry and Durant as top 5 players all time. Therefore, if you want to make an argument about Jordan playing on stacked teams than you also have to ding Curry, Durant and Lebron for winning with good players. Where does that leave us?
And yes, I would say Dray is better than the 35 yr old version of Rodman the Bulls had. Rodman wasn’t even an all star or on an all NBA team.
Cleveland Kyrie hits big shots and gives you 27-30 ppg on 47% shooting in the NBA finals. Outside of top 10 all time greats, there aren’t many players in NBA history giving you that.
I just spoke to my dad the other day, who is 53, saw Mike play live in college, and has long held the belief that neither Lebron nor Jordan are better than the other. You have a bunch of "if" scenarios, so let's just go with what has actually happened...
Jordan never played anybody with his equal on the other side, and Jordan never played versus anybody close to the 10s Warriors because he played for the 10s Warriors, before the 10s Warriors, so this forecasting in what he could have won is futile...
Nobody will look at Durant or Steph as Top 5, stop it. Durant spent a decade in The League and proved he couldn't carry a team to a championship, that will eternally seperate him from being on Lebron's level, the fact he couldn't win until joining the team that beat him and won 73 games....Steph is not going to have the longevity in his favor. Also, where is his signature Finals moment? The 2x MVP is most remembered for being tossed out of a game in The Finals, being outplayed by an inferior player in The Finals (because he is a better player than Kyrie, but Kyrie has outplayed him), and being Wade to KD's Lebron for the last title. Where is his signature Finals moment? Here's Curry's Finals stats:
.429 shooting, .391 3fg%, 25/6/6...
The shooting numbers are well below his regular season and postseason career averages, and his slash line is only marginally better than his career averages. Until Curry has those Finals performances regularly that match his MVP seasons, nobody is putting him in any GOAT conversation, don't kid yourself. As it is, his durability/longevity of peak are likely going to exclude him anyway no matter how long he plays, unless he plays the next five years at the level he plays at now, without missing 31 games. Possible, but highly unlikely...
Quote:
Originally Posted by American Expat
Lebron lacks the killer instinct that Jordan had and that's what separates Jordan from Lebron. Jordan was a better defender but that was part of the intensity difference between Lebron and Jordan. Lebron is a better passer and rebounder which pretty much negates the fact Jordan was a better scorer and defender.....again, Jordan's intensity and drive to win is the differentiator.
Russell had that drive to win in the same degree as Jordan I think. He was part of a system that the Celtics of the day employed but Russell was not the complete player Jordan was...Russell was a defender and rebounder but he was not so great with the ball. I give Jordan the edge.
Lebron lacks the killer instinct is still the great myth in basketball...
"Clear path" to The Finals, and yet at various points this decade, the Bulls were a 60-win team with an MVPthat was the popular pick to win it all; the Celtics had a Big 3 of HOFers that went to two Finals in three years and were picked to make another in '12; the Pacers and the current incarnation of the Celtics rose up as legitimate challengers with 55+ win teams and home court; the Hawks caught lightning in a bottle that one year and were everyone's favorite; the Raptors were this year's 2015 Hawks and everyone's favorite...
Good lawd....you know your argument for the Eastern conference being stacked with talent is weak sauce when you have to go back to the KG/Allen/Piece Celtics. That team was a monster...a decade ago lol. The Pacers? Are you serious right now? The Atlanta Raptors? Just stop.
Quote:
You know what all those teams had in common? They could not beat the best player in the game in the playoffs, teams constructed to specifically beat his team, gameplanned for it. Don't tell me it's an easy path year after year unless you want to play this same game for the Warriors path since '15. We've done this exercise before a year ago, it doesn't work in your favor lmao...
Yes none of them could beat Lebron yet teams rising out the western conference had no problem with him.
Quote:
I guess all those other teams weren't real contenders, rather Lebron lose to them all and the narrative would be he couldn't win championships. Instead for 7 years straight he's led his team to the final round, bit it's an easy road. You guys kill me lol...
Mostly one/two year wonders with far less superstar talent. None of them are remembered as great teams.
Quote:
I just spoke to my dad the other day, who is 53, saw Mike play live in college, and has long held the belief that neither Lebron nor Jordan are better than the other. You have a bunch of "if" scenarios, so let's just go with what has actually happened...
Jordan never played anybody with his equal on the other side, and Jordan never played versus anybody close to the 10s Warriors because he played for the 10s Warriors, before the 10s Warriors, so this forecasting in what he could have won is futile...
It’s mostly excuse making on the part of Lebron fans. They want to rationalize Lebron being better than Jordan despite less accomplishments.
- Jordan has 6 rings
[Insert excuse for why Lebron doesn’t]
- Jordan never lost in the finals
[insert excuse for why Lebron has lost a lot]
- Jordan has 5 MVPs
[insert excuse for why Lebron doesn’t]
- Jordan has 6 finals MVPs
[insert excuse for why Lebron doesn’t]
- Jordan has 1 defensive player of the year award and 9 all defense selections
[insert excuse for why Lebron doesn’t]
- Jordan’s teams 3 peated twice
[insert excuse for why Lebron didn’t]
- Jordan was on a historical team that won a record breaking 72 games
[insert excuse for why Lebron wasn’t]
This is usually how things go. I’m willing to entertain maybe an argument for 1 of those but when the excuses go on and on I’m done. Sorta getting bored with the Lebron for GOAT atguments. Call me when he has 6 rings...not just a bunch of cumulative stat records.
Quote:
Nobody will look at Durant or Steph as Top 5, stop it. Durant spent a decade in The League and proved he couldn't carry a team to a championship, that will eternally seperate him from being on Lebron's level, the fact he couldn't win until joining the team that beat him and won 73 games....Steph is not going to have the longevity in his favor. Also, where is his signature Finals moment? The 2x MVP is most remembered for being tossed out of a game in The Finals, being outplayed by an inferior player in The Finals (because he is a better player than Kyrie, but Kyrie has outplayed him), and being Wade to KD's Lebron for the last title. Where is his signature Finals moment? Here's Curry's Finals stats:
.429 shooting, .391 3fg%, 25/6/6...
The shooting numbers are well below his regular season and postseason career averages, and his slash line is only marginally better than his career averages. Until Curry has those Finals performances regularly that match his MVP seasons, nobody is putting him in any GOAT conversation, don't kid yourself. As it is, his durability/longevity of peak are likely going to exclude him anyway no matter how long he plays, unless he plays the next five years at the level he plays at now, without missing 31 games. Possible, but highly unlikely
I didn’t say GOAT. If Curry and Durant finish their careers with 4-5 championships they will both have people making arguments for why they are top 5 all time. That’s 3 championships down the line...plenty of time for making memories. If they go bananas and do something like a 4 peat or 5 peat than yeah, I’m sure the GOAT arguments will be made.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
