Cowherd: just admit you're critical of Lebron because you're worried he's better than Jordan

[trojanfan12]

In the 80's-90's players still smoked, go watch a game...they were soo slow, the athletes now a days would dominate any of the players from that era

This is the stupidest argument in the history of stupid arguments. It actually makes the "Robert Horry argument" look intelligent by comparison. I mean, I'm amazed you were able to stop licking the window long enough to type this.

If today's players were in the 80's and 90's, they'd be doing the same things that players were back then. They'd also only have access to the same training techniques and supplements that the players back then had. So they would be no better and possibly worse than the players back then.

If players from the 80's and 90's had access to the same training techniques and supplements that players today have...Guess what? They'd use them and would be just as great in this era.

Also, if today's players are so much better, why do they need so much more rest?

 

[SJ76]

We need a thread every year for who makes the all SportsHoopla Spin team. 1st team - top 5. 2nd team - next 5.


Some of these guys spin so hard they should get more recognition.

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

Some questions are so stupid that you don't think they need an answer, but I guess I overestimated you.

Let's see if we can do this Socratically. I'll answer your question with a question: Is it better to lose in the conference championship game or to lose in the divisional playoff game? If you know that answer you know the answer to our first question.

Just answer the question genius. Why is it better, in your opinion, to lose in the CG and not the CCG.

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

And ftr, I fucking hate MJ as GOAT. Argued against it for years. But I could never get past the fact that he's unbeaten on the leagues biggest stage.

And not to poor salt, but elevated his game too...

 

[msgkings322]

Let's be honest here if it's possible.


Better athletes today no doubt and a much lower bball IQ. Much less effort on defense. Much less physical defense. There's more kids coming in this league every year due to the one and done -- see bball IQ comment.

LeBron, Chris Paul, Draymond, Kawhi, and many many others have 'basketball IQs' as high as players back then.

Look, it's fine, you're one of those typical 'back in my day there were gods among men' people. And in 30 years there will be some great player and the 20 year olds then will say 'oh yeah This Guy is better than LeBron James was' and the 50 year olds then will say 'how dare you, they don't play defense like they did in the 2010s, these players today ain't shit'. Same as it ever was.

 

[msgkings322]

Just answer the question genius. Why is it better, in your opinion, to lose in the CG and not the CCG.

For the same reason it's better to lose in the CCG than the Divisional Game. I can't make your brain think for you, you gotta put on your big boy pants and figure that out for yourself.

Hint: it has to do with winning more games.

 

[msgkings322]

Awwww here comes the butthurt rainbows from the Bay Area

LOL nice try throwing that shade with your ghey avi

 

[tlance]

LeBron, Chris Paul, Draymond, Kawhi, and many many others have 'basketball IQs' as high as players back then.

Look, it's fine, you're one of those typical 'back in my day there were gods among men' people. And in 30 years there will be some great player and the 20 year olds then will say 'oh yeah This Guy is better than LeBron James was' and the 50 year olds then will say 'how dare you, they don't play defense like they did in the 2010s, these players today ain't shit'. Same as it ever was.

This is right on.

Yes, there are some players in the league today who lack certain fundamental skills that every player had in the 80s. However, overall basketball IQ for players today is significantly higher than it has ever been. There was no such thing as advanced analytics back in the 90s. Coaches/players today understand the power of the 3 point line and how it can be used to spread out the defense and create quality shots at the rim.

While it is true that defenses in the 90s were more physical and probably better, these spread offenses today would stretch and challenge the best of the best defenses from the 90s. Offense today is MUCH better than it has ever been.

While it is true that the Warriors have never seen a defense as tough as the 90s Bulls, the Bulls never saw anything close to the offensive firepower/efficiency of the Warriors. That style of play simply did not exist and no team has ever accumulated such a potent set of perimeter scorers.

So for everyone saying that the Current teams never saw anything like 90s defense, well guess what? The opposite is also true. The top teams are still pretty darn good defensively also.

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

For the same reason it's better to lose in the CCG than the Divisional Game. I can't make your brain think for you, you gotta put on your big boy pants and figure that out for yourself.

Hint: it has to do with winning more games.

So your position is that losing in the championship game is better because it means you won more games, correct?

 

[trojanfan12]

However, overall basketball IQ for players today is significantly higher than it has ever been.

No it isn't. You have more guys going to the NBA after only 1 year of college. Many players today come into the league less prepared and knowing less about the game. Players today know how to market themselves better, but they don't know the game better.

There was no such thing as advanced analytics back in the 90s.

Advanced analytics don't measure a players basketball iq. They measure the players efficiency and performance. Advanced analytics may help coaches and front offices as far as what players to go after in FA or when to play certain players, help coaches tell a player what he needs to work on, etc. But they don't do anything for the players basketball iq. The players don't really care about advanced analytics.

While it is true that the Warriors have never seen a defense as tough as the 90s Bulls, the Bulls never saw anything close to the offensive firepower/efficiency of the Warriors. That style of play simply did not exist and no team has ever accumulated such a potent set of perimeter scorers.

You can look at the physical makeup of the players in question and make a fairly educated guess as to what may happen.

For example, MJ and The Glove were both bigger and stronger than Steph Curry and just as quick, if not quicker. How many open looks from 3 do you think he gets? How about Pippen on Klay Thompson? By the same token, what are Curry and Thompson going to be able to do defensively with MJ and Pippen?

The Warriors offense isn't that difficult to figure out. It's the Showtime Lakers with an emphasis on the 3. Or even better stated, it's D'Antoni's offense with some defense thrown in. Basically, you have to be able to defend the perimeter with bigger players that are just as quick, or at least close. Several teams from the 80's and 90's were built to be able to do just that. Especially the Bulls.

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

So your position is that losing in the championship game is better because it means you won more games, correct?

So then winning the most games is what your interpretation is for the most successful season, yes?

 

[msgkings322]

So then winning the most games is what your interpretation is for the most successful season, yes?

Wouldn't go that far. In the NBA a team going from 30 wins to 50 and a playoff berth and a second round loss can be said to have a more successful season than a defending champ losing in the conference Finals.

But just looking at the playoffs, the farther you go the better.

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

But just looking at the playoffs, the farther you go the better.

Why?

 

[SU Nittany Tide]

Forget Cowherd's comment. I don't think LeBron will ever surpass Jordan, but this rings thing is garbage. GOAT conversation is about a lot more than just titles. They are important, but not the only measure. LeBron does not need 7 or even 6 to put himself in the discussion. I think 2 more will make it pretty interesting.

Let's just say hypothetically that in 20 years some player comes along and posts insane numbers while carrying a mediocre supporting roster to 3 or 4 rings. Are we really going to say that player isn't GOAT worthy because they don't have 6? Because if that is the case, then Bill Russell is the GOAT.

I am not saying LeBron is that player. He isn't. But 6 rings is not a necessity to be in GOAT conversation. The landscape of the league continues to evolve and each era presents new and different obstacles to winning titles. An individual player's greatness needs to be evaluated by much more than just rings. That is an extremely lazy argument.

Hasn't LeBron shown to be exactly that kind of player at times in his career already? Making the finals with that rag tag team early with Cleveland was nothing short of incredible.

 

[tlance]

No it isn't. You have more guys going to the NBA after only 1 year of college. Many players today come into the league less prepared and knowing less about the game. Players today know how to market themselves better, but they don't know the game better.



Advanced analytics don't measure a players basketball iq. They measure the players efficiency and performance. Advanced analytics may help coaches and front offices as far as what players to go after in FA or when to play certain players, help coaches tell a player what he needs to work on, etc. But they don't do anything for the players basketball iq. The players don't really care about advanced analytics.



You can look at the physical makeup of the players in question and make a fairly educated guess as to what may happen.

For example, MJ and The Glove were both bigger and stronger than Steph Curry and just as quick, if not quicker. How many open looks from 3 do you think he gets? How about Pippen on Klay Thompson? By the same token, what are Curry and Thompson going to be able to do defensively with MJ and Pippen?

The Warriors offense isn't that difficult to figure out. It's the Showtime Lakers with an emphasis on the 3. Or even better stated, it's D'Antoni's offense with some defense thrown in. Basically, you have to be able to defend the perimeter with bigger players that are just as quick, or at least close. Several teams from the 80's and 90's were built to be able to do just that. Especially the Bulls.

1 year of college means that players are not as prepared for the league when they enter it.

But guess what prepares players for the NBA even better than college? The NBA.

It takes some awhile to figure it out, but it isn't like these guys are sitting on their couches instead of playing in college. They are now professionals with nothing limiting their training time. Sure, their are not as many team practices in the NBA, but still plenty of opportunity for a motivated player to improve their skills and knowledge. Far more so than in college.

Also, of course the good players today have higher basketball IQs. Coaches in the 90s had not figured this stuff out yet.

There are more raw players today than perhaps ever before, but the good teams almost never rely on those guys to play significant minutes. The basketball IQ of the seasoned vets is higher than ever before, and this is not even really debatable. Coaches today know more than coaches 20 years ago, and top players do too.

 

[BrockForBroglio]

I really don't care either way, but in order to pass Michael Jordan - LeBron would need to win six titles and that is still possible, so we have to wait and see. Jordan had one hell of a run though and he walked away from the NBA for two years and came back and won three more titles as if he had never missed a step. Most likely - Houston would have won a third title if not for Jordan - I just doubt that LeBron could walk away from the game for two years and then come back and play the same. I would have to see it happen

Jordon did NOT walk away from basketball....he was facing gambling problems....Kraus let him TRY baseball for a while until the smoke cleared.

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

Hasn't LeBron shown to be exactly that kind of player at times in his career already? Making the finals with that rag tag team early with Cleveland was nothing short of incredible.

Yeah. Or incredibly lucky to be playing in a horribly weak East. They would have been the 6 in the West.

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

Jordon did NOT walk away from basketball....he was facing gambling problems....Kraus let him TRY baseball for a while until the smoke cleared.

Link?

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

Why?

So @msgkings322 you won't answer my question?

 

[HuskerCradle2Grave]

So @msgkings322, you concede you can't substantiate your position. Thanks for playing.