To the LeBron haters

[SJ76]

Pretty absolute statement. KAJ had a 12/5/2 stat line in 26 minutes in his last finals victory. Is that really great play? Or was he pretty much a role player at that point?

His last game at the end of his career.. He wasn't great then just like Jordan as a Wizard.

 

[flyerhawk]

My point is if a team is 2-0 that is a winning record vs. being 6-7. It's about the stat only. Not any supporting factors such as being 6-7 means you've made the Finals more times than if a team is 2-0.

When I see a 6-7 record that immediately tells me that team loses more than it wins. I'm not saying, gee they've made the Finals 13 times. Reason being is because winning is more important to me than the # of attempts that end up in losses.

Yes 6-7 means that someone lost more times than they won finals. Can't argue with that logic.

You see 2-0 vs 6-7 and think that 2-0 is better because that player never lost a finals. I find that logic completely baffling.

Wanna list of players that have been in 9 finals and are not in the Hall of Fame? Wanna list of players that have won 2 finals and will never be in the Hall of Fame?

 

[flyerhawk]

His last game at the end of his career.. He wasn't great then just like Jordan as a Wizard.

Please follow along with the conversation and don't cherry pick a single comment.

 

[LAD]

Yes 6-7 means that someone lost more times than they won finals. Can't argue with that logic.

You see 2-0 vs 6-7 and think that 2-0 is better because that player never lost a finals. I find that logic completely baffling.

Wanna list of players that have been in 9 finals and are not in the Hall of Fame? Wanna list of players that have won 2 finals and will never be in the Hall of Fame?

Where in my posts did I ever use the word better? I am simply pointing out that a WINNING record is more impressive to me. That's it. Maybe you're impressed by 13 Finals appearances, regardless of the outcome. I am not. Because at the end of the day I understand the goal as WINNING - not just how many times a team/player makes it to the last dance. I would find it hard to brag about making the Finals 13 times if the next question I have to answer is how many of them I won & the answer is less than I lost.

 

[msgkings322]

Where in my posts did I ever use the word better? I am simply pointing out that a WINNING record is more impressive to me. That's it. Maybe you're impressed by 13 Finals appearances, regardless of the outcome. I am not. Because at the end of the day I understand the goal as WINNING - not just how many times a team/player makes it to the last dance. I would find it hard to brag about making the Finals 13 times if the next question I have to answer is how many of them I won & the answer is less than I lost.

Meanwhile sane people would find it hard to brag about winning 2 rings to a guy who won 6

 

[flyerhawk]

Where in my posts did I ever use the word better? I am simply pointing out that a WINNING record is more impressive to me. That's it. Maybe you're impressed by 13 Finals appearances, regardless of the outcome. I am not. Because at the end of the day I understand the goal as WINNING - not just how many times a team/player makes it to the last dance. I would find it hard to brag about making the Finals 13 times if the next question I have to answer is how many of them I won & the answer is less than I lost.

Better and more impressive must have some qualitative difference in your mind but I sure don't know what it is.

I'm sure the guy with 6 championship rings would probably be too ashamed to brag about it if he had a losing record.

You DON'T seem to understand the goal is winning because you want to pretend that misses the playoffs is better than losing in the finals. NO ONE other than people with a clear agenda agree with that.

13 finals appearances would be an incredible achievement REGARDLESS of the record.

 

[flyerhawk]

Meanwhile sane people would find it hard to brag about winning 2 rings to a guy who won 6

I feel like I need to take crazy pills to understand their argument.

 

[SJ76]

Please follow along with the conversation and don't cherry pick a single comment.

Like this entire thread isn't a hot mess going round and round. Same shit different page

When I logged back in that's where it took me. Don't worry, I didn't read anymore of your posts to call you out on.

 

[flyerhawk]

Like this entire thread isn't a hot mess going round and round. Same shit different page

When I logged back in that's where it took me. Don't worry, I didn't read anymore of your posts to call you out on.

Context matters. I wasn't criticizing Kareem and I was referring to the entire series.

 

[LAD]

Meanwhile sane people would find it hard to brag about winning 2 rings to a guy who won 6

And smart people would wonder why guy #1 with only 2 wins would waste his time if he knows guy #2 has 6 wins. SMH

 

[Wamu]

Well, it goes without saying that the Lakers were better. I mean, they're the Lakers.

Amirite @Wamu?

 

[LAD]

Better and more impressive must have some qualitative difference in your mind but I sure don't know what it is.

I'm sure the guy with 6 championship rings would probably be too ashamed to brag about it if he had a losing record.

You DON'T seem to understand the goal is winning because you want to pretend that misses the playoffs is better than losing in the finals. NO ONE other than people with a clear agenda agree with that.

13 finals appearances would be an incredible achievement REGARDLESS of the record.

So we disagree. So what? I think your opinion is asinine because it includes more losing than winning. I personally wouldn't brag about losses. That's just me & probably most competitive people. But, I understand some might not feel that way - such as yourself.

 

[flyerhawk]

So we disagree. So what? I think your opinion is asinine because it includes more losing than winning. I personally wouldn't brag about losses. That's just me & probably most competitive people. But, I understand some might not feel that way - such as yourself.

You don't consider a season where a player missed the playoffs a loss. That's the problem.

 

[LAD]

You don't consider a season where a player missed the playoffs a loss. That's the problem.

OMG. Are you just arguing to argue now? I have said MULTIPLE times - probably at least once on EVERY page that A LOSS IS A LOSS IMO. I don't care when it happens. We ended up with Finals records for the purpose of differentiating between GREAT PLAYERS on the biggest stage.

I think this is it for me on this topic, seriously.

 

[flyerhawk]

OMG. Are you just arguing to argue now? I have said MULTIPLE times - probably at least once on EVERY page that A LOSS IS A LOSS IMO. I don't care when it happens. We ended up with Finals records for the purpose of differentiating between GREAT PLAYERS on the biggest stage.

I think this is it for me on this topic, seriously.

You keep doing the same thing. You agree that a loss is a loss is a loss EXCEPT when comparing great players THEN only finals losses count. Because reasons.

The great player not making the playoffs is WORSE than the great player getting to the Finals and losing.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Lebron is crazy good. Top 5 all time.

 

[LAD]

You keep doing the same thing. You agree that a loss is a loss is a loss EXCEPT when comparing great players THEN only finals losses count. Because reasons.

The great player not making the playoffs is WORSE than the great player getting to the Finals and losing.

No, you are assuming. I am only comparing Finals losses because they are the last point before achieving the final prize.

 

[Black Adam]

can't believe this has reached 27 pages...

 

[StanMarsh51]

Yes, that is correct there is only 1 winner, which is why I don't understand the argument of there being levels of losing. Meaning, why is it better to lose in the Finals vs. the 1st round of the playoffs if the goal is to win a title? IMO the winner in the Finals is the only winner, period.
Not sure I agree with your reasoning of why Finals stats are recorded.

So you think the 2016 Knicks are on the same level as the 2016 Warriors because you don't think there should be different levels of losing?

What is going through your head??

 

[bksballer89]

So you think the 2016 Knicks are on the same level as the 2016 Warriors because you don't think there should be different levels of losing?

What is going through your head??

She's crazy