To the LeBron haters

[LAD]

So 2016 Knicks = 2016 Warriors in your view?

did either of them WIN A CHAMPIONSHIP that year? NO, NO, NO, NO!!!!!!!!!!!!! Which means neither were good enough that year. Now, certainly the Warriors had a better team than the Knicks as they were able to win more individual games - however, what prize did GS get for that??? Asking if the 2016 Knicks are equal to the 2016 Warriors is such a flawed logic. Here's why. Because team A (in this case GS) can be better than team B (in this case Knicks) but also still not good enough to win the ultimate prize.

 

[LAD]

It is NOT reasonable to argue that losing in the finals somehow is worse than not making the finals.

For the last time, this was NOT my point.

 

[flyerhawk]

For the last time, this was NOT my point.

Yes it was. You said it over and over and over again. You LITERALLY said that winning percentage in finals matters. It is an absurd argument and you constantly try to dance around it when challenged.

6-0 or 6-7 mean the same thing to me.

 

[trojanfan12]

How many championships do you think Magic would have if he joined the Celtics in free agency in the 80s.

I think a better question is how many more titles would he and Bird have if he convinced Larry to come to the Lakers. lol

 

[LAD]

Yes it was. You said it over and over and over again. You LITERALLY said that winning percentage in finals matters. It is an absurd argument and you constantly try to dance around it when challenged.

6-0 or 6-7 mean the same thing to me.

LOL

just because you can't follow my point doesn't mean I'm dancing. Just say you don't understand & move on - remember, you don't have to agree with everyone or anyone for that matter. But don't make things up.

 

[trojanfan12]

First you say this:

FTR, MJ is the GOAT at least at this time.

Then you say this:

6-0 or 6-7 mean the same thing to me.

Kareem is 6-4 in the finals. If 6-0 and 6-7 mean the same thing to you...then 6-0 and 6-4 should also mean the same.

So, shouldn't you then have Kareem as at least co-GOAT with MJ?

 

[flyerhawk]

First you say this:



Then you say this:



Kareem is 6-4 in the finals. If 6-0 and 6-7 mean the same thing to you...then 6-0 and 6-4 should also mean the same.

So, shouldn't you then have Kareem as at least co-GOAT with MJ?

No. Because there are other metrics that come into play. Otherwise Bill Russell would be the GOAT or, if we were to discount his rings as being too long ago, Robert Horry would be the GOAT because he's got 7 rings. Or John Havlichek who has 8 rings. And neither of them lost a finals either.

Rings matter of course. But they aren't the end all be all.

 

[flyerhawk]

LOL

just because you can't follow my point doesn't mean I'm dancing. Just say you don't understand & move on - remember, you don't have to agree with everyone or anyone for that matter. But don't make things up.

Well your point is pretty easy to follow.

I don't have any interest in arguing about your opinion. You are free to believe whatever you want. But I will argue against specious logic.

 

[LAD]

But I will argue against specious logic.

To each his own if you like going round & round in circles.

 

[StanMarsh51]

First you say this:



Then you say this:



Kareem is 6-4 in the finals. If 6-0 and 6-7 mean the same thing to you...then 6-0 and 6-4 should also mean the same.

So, shouldn't you then have Kareem as at least co-GOAT with MJ?

As pointed out though, Kareen wasn't 'the guy' on all of those 6 teams championship teams...that's the big difference between his 6 rings and Jordan's. On the '88 championship team, Kareem was probably the 4th best player, and on the '87 team he was probably 3rd best on his team, he was either 2nd or 3rd best.

That's the difference between him and Jordan - Jordan was clearly his team's best player in all of his 6 winning finals...Kareem wasn't.

 

[tlance]

It's difficult to make a case for player B being the best player in the league even during his era if 10 times another team beat his.

You've definitely exaggerated the difference between Lebron and Jordan though. There's a huge difference between 3-0 and 6-0 (which most likely would've been 8-0 had he not "retired to play baseball"). Lebron is a dominating player for sure. My argument has always been that Jordan was more skilled and had more fire inside, and Lebron is the more dominant physical player (rare skill set for a player of his size, like a combo guard in Karl Malone's frame).

I am not talking about LeBron vs. Jordan. Jordan is better. I have never once said I though LeBron is better than MJ. Not once.

I am not sure about Jordan being more skilled. His shot wasn't great when he entered the league. Stats show LeBron is the better shootet overall, although late career MJ was clearly a very good shooter.

The fire part? Hell yes. It was defense and most of all will that makes Jordan better than LeBron. Not anything tangible.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

I am not talking about LeBron vs. Jordan. Jordan is better. I have never once said I though LeBron is better than MJ. Not once.

I am not sure about Jordan being more skilled. His shot wasn't great when he entered the league. Stats show LeBron is the better shootet overall, although late career MJ was clearly a very good shooter.

The fire part? Hell yes. It was defense and most of all will that makes Jordan better than LeBron. Not anything tangible.

Bullshit. It was just defense and will that make Jordan better than lebron?

How come you don't view Kobe better than him too then?

 

[tlance]

Ok so after reading this it's clear we're debating different points. I'm not using his Finals record to debate whether or not I think he's top anything. All I'm saying is IMO I can't rate him GOAT because he has lost more than he's won on the big stage.

Personally, I don't make top 5 or top 3 lists because for me it's impossible. There were too many players that were great at different things. They've played different positions & in different eras where there have been different rules to the game.

I'm not rating him GOAT either. Because like you said, 3 isn't enough.

I just don't think the 5 matters at all. At least not in a negative light.

 

[tlance]

Bullshit. It was just defense and will that make Jordan better than lebron?

How come you don't view Kobe better than him too then?

Kobe has more will. He was not as good defensively or offensively as LeBron. He was a better pure scorer. That was it. Kobe isn't even in the conversation.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Kobe has more will. He was not as good defensively or offensively as LeBron. He was a better pure scorer. That was it. Kobe isn't even in the conversation.

 

[Wamu]

Kobe has more will. He was not as good defensively or offensively as LeBron. He was a better pure scorer. That was it. Kobe isn't even in the conversation.

Here are LeBron & Kobe's #'s through 14 full seasons.

LeBron: 27.1 ppg, 7.3 rebs, 7.0 asts, 1.7 stls, 0.8 blks / FG%: .546 & 3 pt. %: .342
Kobe: 24.9 ppg, 5.3, rebs, 4.7 asts, 1.5 stls, 0.5 blks / FG%: .479 & 3 pt. %: .331

LeBron > Kobe

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

Here are LeBron & Kobe's #'s through 14 full seasons.

LeBron: 27.1 ppg, 7.3 rebs, 7.0 asts, 1.7 stls, 0.8 blks / FG%: .546 & 3 pt. %: .342
Kobe: 24.9 ppg, 5.3, rebs, 4.7 asts, 1.5 stls, 0.5 blks / FG%: .479 & 3 pt. %: .331

LeBron > Kobe

Kobe: 9 x All Defensive First Team, 3 x Second Team
Lebron: 5 x All Defensive First Team, 1 x Second team

Yeah, lebron is clearly the better defender

 

[tlance]

Nice response.

But yeah.

In 14.5 seasons, LeBron has had 150 offensive win shares and 63 defensive win shares.

Kobe had 122.3 offensive win shares and 50.7 defensive win shares in 20 seasons. It is an open and shut case. Kobe isn't even in the ballpark with LBJ.

But you know who is in the ballpark with LeBron?

Jordan had 149.9 offensive win shares and 64.1 defensive win shares in 15 seasons. Nearly identical to where LeBron is now.

 

[tlance]

Kobe: 9 x All Defensive First Team, 3 x Second Team
Lebron: 5 x All Defensive First Team, 1 x Second team

Yeah, lebron is clearly the better defender

By accolades voted on by humans?

Maybe.

Not by stats.

Also, you must consider that the competition for all defense teams at SG is nowhere near as tough as it is at SF.

But, I am impressed that you actually came back with legit data for once.

 

[Shaqdaddy11]

By accolades voted on by humans?

Maybe.

Not by stats.

Also, you must consider that the competition for all defense teams at SG is nowhere near as tough as it is at SF.

But, I am impressed that you actually came back with legit data for once.

Oh, so we can discredit All-Star selections and MVPs too when discussing and comparing players?