The 'legacy' BS - LeBron and others

[trojanfan12]

Why are we even here then? Clearly our opinions don't matter. No sense in discussing anything basketball. Just leave it to the all time greats and we should all just take what they say and leave it at that.

Considering it's them that's being ranked and it's their legacies...pretty much.

But then, you know better than they do...right?

 

[trojanfan12]

Bird and Magic were each drafted on to championship caliber teams.

Really?!? You sure about that?

The 1978-79 Los Angeles Lakers were 47-35, finished 3rd in the Pacific Division and were eliminated in the 2nd round of the playoffs 4 games to 1.

The 1978-79 Boston Celtics went 29-53 and did not qualify for the playoffs.

 

[tlance]

Really?!? You sure about that?

The 1978-79 Los Angeles Lakers were 47-35, finished 3rd in the Pacific Division and were eliminated in the 2nd round of the playoffs 4 games to 1.

The 1978-79 Boston Celtics went 29-53 and did not qualify for the playoffs.

Which is comparable to the Thunder drafting Simmons. That is almost impossible today, yet it seemed to happen all the time back then.

 

[tlance]

Considering it's them that's being ranked and it's their legacies...pretty much.

But then, you know better than they do...right?

It isn't about knowing better. Anyone with a basketball background is qualified to have an opinion. I have coached high school ball for a decade. I have coached some really good players, and been part of a state championship team. I am nothing special, but I am not a casual fan either.

To say that the all time greats opinions are more important than anyone else implies that they also know more about the game then anyone else. That is not necessarily true. Case and point, look at some of the best coaches in the history of the league. How many of them were all time great players? Some, like Pop, never even played in the NBA.

In many cases, the greats perspectives are terribly jaded because they have huge egos are biased toward their own eras. They may in fact be too close to the data to have a neutral opinion. A marginal player might be more qualified to have an opinion than someone actually on the list. Again though, @gordontrue asked for proof, you have yet to provide it.

Lastly, I agree that Jordan is GOAT, but the standard and reasons you continue to put forward are wrong, regardless of who may believe it.

 

[trojanfan12]

Which is comparable to the Thunder drafting Simmons. That is almost impossible today, yet it seemed to happen all the time back then.

Yeah, a 29-53 team getting a high draft pick never happens.

 

[trojanfan12]

It isn't about knowing better. Anyone with a basketball background is qualified to have an opinion. I have coached high school ball for a decade. I have coached some really good players, and been part of a state championship team. I am nothing special, but I am not a casual fan either.

Stopped reading after this. I coached high school basketball too. Doesn't mean I know more than guys who actually are good enough to be all time greats.

Bottom line, it's their legacies and it's how they differentiate themselves. If you think you're qualified to tell them how they should rank themselves and what criteria they should use, knock your socks off. I have more respect for them than that.

 

[lebron23james]

Stopped reading after this. I coached high school basketball too. Doesn't mean I know more than guys who actually are good enough to be all time greats.

Bottom line, it's their legacies and it's how they differentiate themselves. If you think you're qualified to tell them how they should rank themselves and what criteria they should use, knock your socks off. I have more respect for them than that.

To be fair Charles barkleys opinion is usually terrible, and certain fans can break down the analytics that players just can't...but I still respect what a player says over a fan

 

[tlance]

test

 

[tlance]

we are talking about opinions here. Trojan wants to claim that the greats agree on what the list is and their criteria for separating themsleves, yet he fails to offer proof.

In a '97 interview, Wilt claimed he would score 70 a game if active then. Russell agreed and also stated the Celts would still win 11 titles if they played in that era agiainst Jordan.

Clearly these opinions are more valid than anybody here because they came from greats. Right?

 

[trojanfan12]

we are talking about opinions here. Trojan wants to claim that the greats agree on what the list is and their criteria for separating themsleves, yet he fails to offer proof.

In a '97 interview, Wilt claimed he would score 70 a game if active then. Russell agreed and also stated the Celts would still win 11 titles if they played in that era agiainst Jordan.

Clearly these opinions are more valid than anybody here because they came from greats. Right?

I don't need to provide proof. All you have to do is watch pretty much any interview with any great player and they all say MJ is GOAT and say it's the rings. I'd suggest you stop making shit up and claiming people are saying things they aren't.

But then again, you think you should be able to tell the all time greats how they should separate themselves, so you probably think you can just speak for others on here as well.

 

[Heatles84]

we are talking about opinions here. Trojan wants to claim that the greats agree on what the list is and their criteria for separating themsleves, yet he fails to offer proof.

In a '97 interview, Wilt claimed he would score 70 a game if active then. Russell agreed and also stated the Celts would still win 11 titles if they played in that era agiainst Jordan.

Clearly these opinions are more valid than anybody here because they came from greats. Right?

Exactly. The only challenge Russell's Celtics faced were the Jerry West's Lakers. It says a lot of what the talent level is like when you keep facing the same team in the Finals - and beating them.

It's class snarky old man syndrome.

 

[trojanfan12]

Exactly. The only challenge Russell's Celtics faced were the Jerry West's Lakers. It says a lot of what the talent level is like when you keep facing the same team in the Finals - and beating them.

It's class snarky old man syndrome.

And Russell is no longer in the GOAT conversation. Neither is West.

It's classic snarky young man "nothing before I was born was better than it is right now" recency bias syndrome.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

Isn't is fair to say that Jordan is universally ( not unanimoussly) number 1, then after that the discussion goes several different ways?

 

[tlance]

Isn't is fair to say that Jordan is universally ( not unanimoussly) number 1, then after that the discussion goes several different ways?

Yes. I agree totally. I don't think we are arguing that, more why he is number 1.

But the fact that the conversation goes several different ways after Jordan only proves my point. The great players don't all agree on a set algorithm. They all have their own opinions, just like us.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

Yes. I agree totally. I don't think we are arguing that, more why he is number 1.

But the fact that the conversation goes several different ways after Jordan only proves my point. The great players don't all agree on a set algorithm. They all have their own opinions, just like us.

The 'why', IMO, does for the most part go to the 6-0 included in the resume.
Reason being, how many people have seen/remember most of the great players throughout the decades?
Jordan is easily the most current, unless someone is trying to argue for LeBron or Kobe, which rarely happens.

 

[tlance]

The 'why', IMO, does for the most part go to the 6-0 included in the resume.
Reason being, how many people have seen/remember most of the great players throughout the decades?
Jordan is easily the most current, unless someone is trying to argue for LeBron or Kobe, which rarely happens.

And that is an opinion that many share, but not everyone. To me, 6-4 is more impressive than 6-0. The most important number is the one in the left. The one on the right just states that your team was very close. Being close is better than not being close.

Seriously, talk about a double standard. Star Players are criticized if they can't get their team to the playoffs or out of the first round. Then, a player like LeBron Gets nailed for exactly the opposite. He has his team in the hunt every single year, but because they don't finish, those Finals' losses somehow count against him.

Which is it? Is it good to win playoff series or not?

Jordan was 6-9, not 6-0. He failed to win a title 9 times. By the way, that is still really awesome in the modern NBA.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

And that is an opinion that many share, but not everyone. To me, 6-4 is more impressive than 6-0. The most important number is the one in the left. The one on the right just states that your team was very close. Being close is better than not being close.

Seriously, talk about a double standard. Star Players are criticized if they can't get their team to the playoffs or out of the first round. Then, a player like LeBron Gets nailed for exactly the opposite. He has his team in the hunt every single year, but because they don't finish, those Finals' losses somehow count against him.

Which is it? Is it good to win playoff series or not?

Jordan was 6-9, not 6-0. He failed to win a title 9 times. By the way, that is still really awesome in the modern NBA.

Put it this way, if both players would have been in the same draft, whoever picked 2nd would have been just fine and over the course of their careers they would have taken each other down the same way other great generational players have.

 

[tlance]

Put it this way, if both players would have been in the same draft, whoever picked 2nd would have been just fine and over the course of their careers they would have taken each other down the same way other great generational players have.

I agree, assuming their supporting rosters were comparable. If Jordan gets Pippen, Rodman and Kukoc and LeBron gets Irving, love, Thompson and Smith, then Jordan wins every time.

 

[TurnUpTheHeat]

I agree, assuming their supporting rosters were comparable. If Jordan gets Pippen, Rodman and Kukoc and LeBron gets Irving, love, Thompson and Smith, then Jordan wins every time.

I'm not even figuring in who they played with, or timeframe.
Just an assumption that both FO's would have done everything they could to win.
They would beat each other.

 

[Four4Four]

Here's the thing. The Cavs won so the narrative is about how LeBron is now for sure a top 5 all timer, defining moment, etc. etc. Fine.

But if Kyrie misses that last 3 and Steph makes his, the Warriors win. Nothing to do with LeBron but then the narrative is "2-5, he sucks, can't win the big series". How is he worse or better just because Kyrie makes a shot and Steph misses one?

Same thing with his time in Miami, if Ray Allen misses that now iconic shot to ice that Finals, how does that change how we view LeBron? Should it?

Skip Bayless is this you? I thought u retired.