Series Thread: WCF: Golden State Warriors vs San Antonio Spurs

[trojanfan12]

"No one is saying this"... Proceeds to say exactly that. Rings, yes. Of course. Finals record? That's just stupid.

If Jordan had gotten through the Celtics and Pistons in his first 3 years but lost in the Finals, he would be 6 - 3 and his legacy would be even more impressive than what it is.

6 - 3 > 6 - 2 > 6 - 1 > 6 - 0. The first number trumps all, but the 2nd number can only add to a legacy.

Also, LeBron is 3 - 4. I know you guys have the Warriors already penciled in, but slow down there.

No it doesn't. Not at all. It's the tiebreaker. If you take the statistics of the all time greats that Lebron is in the conversation with and post them without names. It's very difficult to tell them apart. So, when ranking them, a tiebreaker becomes necessary and rings and finals records are the tiebreakers.

Kareem went to 10 finals and was 6-4. Yet, he ranks behind MJ on the all time list. The reason? Because he lost 4 times.

Lebron at 3-5 is assuming the Warriors win, obviously. But even 4-4 doesn't measure up to 6-0, 6-4 or 5-4. You can try to make all of the excuses you want about why Lebron's rings and finals record shouldn't count against him, but they do, just like they do against Magic and Kareem. Those things matter. They always have and they always will.

In some ways, Lebron is lucky to be ranked where he is considering his finals record is also worse than Kobe and Timmy, who both get ranked below Lebron despite being all time greats and future first ballot HoF'ers themselves.

 

[trojanfan12]

Has anyone else ever made 8 finals?

Or gone to 6 in a row?

Plus the 07 Cavs never had a chance. Look at that team, it was Lebron and an expansion team level roster. And 2015 was Lebron w/out Kyrie or Love and they still went 6.

2011 is the only real series was supposed to win and didn't. You can argue 2014 too I guess. The Lebron cramps def doesn't help him in that story either.

Like @gordontrue said, the 60's Celtics. I think the 60's Lakers might have been close too, since they always seemed to make the finals where they always got beat by the Celtics.

Since then, I think the 4 by the Heat with Lebron is the most consecutive finals by any team.

 

[The Q]

Like @gordontrue said, the 60's Celtics. I think the 60's Lakers might have been close too, since they always seemed to make the finals where they always got beat by the Celtics.

Since then, I think the 4 by the Heat with Lebron is the most consecutive finals by any team.

My point was it's a really rare accomplishment.

 

[gordontrue]

No it doesn't. Not at all. It's the tiebreaker. If you take the statistics of the all time greats that Lebron is in the conversation with and post them without names. It's very difficult to tell them apart. So, when ranking them, a tiebreaker becomes necessary and rings and finals records are the tiebreakers.

Kareem went to 10 finals and was 6-4. Yet, he ranks behind MJ on the all time list. The reason? Because he lost 4 times.

Lebron at 3-5 is assuming the Warriors win, obviously. But even 4-4 doesn't measure up to 6-0, 6-4 or 5-4. You can try to make all of the excuses you want about why Lebron's rings and finals record shouldn't count against him, but they do, just like they do against Magic and Kareem. Those things matter. They always have and they always will.

In some ways, Lebron is lucky to be ranked where he is considering his finals record is also worse than Kobe and Timmy, who both get ranked below Lebron despite being all time greats and future first ballot HoF'ers themselves.

I'm glad you brought up Kareem. In my opinion, 6 - 4 is a better Finals record than 6 - 0. In terms of just Finals record, Kareem has the edge. They both won 6 titles, but Kareem also made it to the Finals 4 additional times. Kareem is behind Jordan on the list for other reasons. Jordan's edge comes in winning his 6 titles in 7 seasons, from having a run of dominance. If he would've proceeded that run with a few Finals losses and/or followed-up that run with a few finals losses.... that would only improve his resume.

I agree that LeBron doesn't measure up... but its because of the 3 being less than 5 and 6... not because of the 4 he lost. You always think I'm trying to defend LeBron. I'm not, I'm just defending logic.

And, no it hasn't always been like that. Before Jordan, no one ever, ever cared about Finals record. No one ever talked about Jerry West being 1 - 8, or Magic being 5 - 4, or Wilt being 2 - 4.


The bottom line is that you are treating a Finals apperance as a negative on a resume, but igoring losses earlier in the playoffs... which means you are saying that it is better to lose in the early rounds of the playoffs than to lose in the Finals. And no matter how you try to spin it... that is indefensibly stupid.

 

[The Q]

I'm glad you brought up Kareem. In my opinion, 6 - 4 is a better Finals record than 6 - 0. In terms of just Finals record, Kareem has the edge. They both won 6 titles, but Kareem also made it to the Finals 4 additional times. Kareem is behind Jordan on the list for other reasons. Jordan's edge comes in winning his 6 titles in 7 seasons, from having a run of dominance. If he would've proceeded that run with a few Finals losses and/or followed-up that run with a few finals losses.... that would only improve his resume.

I agree that LeBron doesn't measure up... but its because of the 3 being less than 5 and 6... not because of the 4 he lost. You always think I'm trying to defend LeBron. I'm not, I'm just defending logic.

And, no it hasn't always been like that. Before Jordan, no one ever, ever cared about Finals record. No one ever talked about Jerry West being 1 - 8, or Magic being 5 - 4, or Wilt being 2 - 4.


The bottom line is that you are treating a Finals apperance as a negative on a resume, but igoring losses earlier in the playoffs... which means you are saying that it is better to lose in the early rounds of the playoffs than to lose in the Finals. And no matter how you try to spin it... that is indefensibly stupid.

I think it's kinda silly to base so much on team results for individual accolades.

LeBron played for the CLEVELAND CAVALIERS. In 2003 they made the Browns look like the 70s Steelers.

 

[trojanfan12]

My point was it's a really rare accomplishment.

No doubt. But this also isn't one team making that many consecutive appearances. This is one guy on 2 different teams. It's still a great accomplishment, but it's not as if he went that many times with the same team.

 

[The Q]

No doubt. But this also isn't one team making that many consecutive appearances. This is one guy on 2 different teams. It's still a great accomplishment, but it's not as if he went that many times with the same team.

Probably makes it more impressive.

 

[trojanfan12]

I'm glad you brought up Kareem. In my opinion, 6 - 4 is a better Finals record than 6 - 0. In terms of just Finals record, Kareem has the edge. They both won 6 titles, but Kareem also made it to the Finals 4 additional times. Kareem is behind Jordan on the list for other reasons. Jordan's edge comes in winning his 6 titles in 7 seasons, from having a run of dominance. If he would've proceeded that run with a few Finals losses and/or followed-up that run with a few finals losses.... that would only improve his resume.

I would be inclined to agree with this (especially since it's Kareem lol), but that is not how it's decided and never has been. I used to make the same arguments about first Magic and then Kareem before finally giving up. It always came back to MJ being 6-0. Even the other all time greats rank MJ as GOAT for the same reason.

Trust me, you are very much in the minority on this, just like I was.

I agree that LeBron doesn't measure up... but its because of the 3 being less than 5 and 6... not because of the 4 he lost. You always think I'm trying to defend LeBron. I'm not, I'm just defending logic.

It's both. Because along with those 3 wins, comes the 4 losses. You can't simply pretend they didn't happen. Just like along with Kareem's 6 wins, comes his 4 losses...which can't be ignored either. That's the logic, whether you and I agree with it or not. Besides, whether he doesn't measure up in ring count, finals record or both, the bottom line is...he doesn't measure up in that tiebreaker.

Now if you want to make the argument that if Lebron gets 6 rings, that catches him up to Kareem and MJ and makes him GOAT, that's fine. But how about we wait and see if he gets to 6 before making it?

And, no it hasn't always been like that. Before Jordan, no one ever, ever cared about Finals record. No one ever talked about Jerry West being 1 - 8, or Magic being 5 - 4, or Wilt being 2 - 4.

Actually, yes it has. Always. Jerry West hasn't been in the GOAT conversation since at least MJ. Wilt hasn't been in the GOAT conversation since the 70's and Magic dropped in the GOAT conversation after MJ went 6-0. All of them dropped because of their finals record compared to MJ.

 

[trojanfan12]

Probably makes it more impressive.

Meh, I don't know about that. I think it's more impressive to stay with one team and reach multiple finals. Both time Lebron left, he went to a better team. He didn't stick it out and allow the FO to make the necessary changes around him to maintain that run of finals appearances.

 

[The Q]

Meh, I don't know about that. I think it's more impressive to stay with one team and reach multiple finals. Both time Lebron left, he went to a better team. He didn't stick it out and allow the FO to make the necessary changes around him to maintain that run of finals appearances.

He did not go to a better team when he came back to CLE.

Not even close.

They added Love after lebron got there.

And even then it's debatable if they're better than those Heat teams.

 

[gordontrue]

It's both. Because along with those 3 wins, comes the 4 losses. You can't simply pretend they didn't happen. Just like along with Kareem's 6 wins, comes his 4 losses...which can't be ignored either.

I agree, but then you have to keep in the context of other failures. Why should the failure only be counted if it occurred in the Finals. If LeBron loses to the Celtics, he gets a pass... but if he loses to the Warriors... that becomes part of a tiebreaker for his legacy? Illogical.

Now if you want to make the argument that if Lebron gets 6 rings, that catches him up to Kareem and MJ and makes him GOAT, that's fine. But how about we wait and see if he gets to 6 before making it?

I feel like I have to say this every other day. I do not think that LeBron is the goat. I'm not making any arugment in defense of LeBron. You and I actually agree, I think, on the top-5 and the order for the most part. This isn't about LeBron, no matter how much you want to believe that it is. We could easily take LeBron completely out of the conversation and still have an interesting discussion on what Finals records really indicate in terms of a players legacy.

Actually, yes it has. Always. Jerry West hasn't been in the GOAT conversation since at least MJ. Wilt hasn't been in the GOAT conversation since the 70's and Magic dropped in the GOAT conversation after MJ went 6-0. All of them dropped because of their finals record compared to MJ.

Again, I don't think that's the reason. Its not the fact that he never lost in the Finals... .its the fact that he dominated the league for 6 straight seasons (ignorning the 95 for a moment). If he would've lost in the Finals before that or after that... it would've only added to his legacy... because he still had that run of dominance unlike anything we've seen since the early Celtics.

There's also the fact that his numbers are way better than any of those guys.

 

[trojanfan12]

He did not go to a better team when he came back to CLE.

Not even close.

They added Love after lebron got there.

And even then it's debatable if they're better than those Heat teams.

Yes he absolutely did. D-Wade wasn't playing at the level or even the same number of games as he was when Lebron first joined the Heat and the majority of the rest of the roster was getting old.

The Cavs team that Lebron joined is not the same one he left or even the same team that they were before he agreed to come back. People like to use that when they say "Lebron joined a 33 win team" when comparing to KD going to the Warriors. Lebron didn't join that 33 win team. There were 11 players on the Cavs roster the season before Lebron's return that were not on the roster the season he returned. That is not the same team.

Kevin Love was in the works and on board before Lebron signed. The reason the signing of Wiggins was held up for so long was because the trade for Love was being worked out.

He went to a team with a rising young star in Kyrie and with another all star on his way via trade. Not to mention the complete remake of the rest of the roster via FA and trades.

 

[gordontrue]

Kevin Love was in the works and on board before Lebron signed.

Not true. Wolves were in complete control of that situation and had offers on the table from other teams.

 

[trojanfan12]

I think it's kinda silly to base so much on team results for individual accolades.

LeBron played for the CLEVELAND CAVALIERS. In 2003 they made the Browns look like the 70s Steelers.

Again, it's not basing it all on team results for individual accolades...it's using finals results as the tiebreaker because everything else among the all time greats is so close that a tiebreaker becomes necessary.

I mean, when you look at the stats and records of guys like MJ, Kareem, Magic, Lebron, Bird, Kobe, Timmy, etc., etc. it's virtually impossible to separate them, so you go to a tiebreaker which happens to be finals results. It's why other all time greats like Malone, Barkley, etc. who have stats that put them in the same realm as MJ, Magic, Kareem, etc. can't even get into the GOAT conversation.

 

[Heatles84]

Not true. Wolves were in complete control of that situation and had offers on the table from other teams.

The only other team that was truly in trade talks with the Wolves were the Warriors. In the end, Iirc Jerry West nixed that potential trade in the quickness - which seemed to have worked out for both parties (Kevin Love).

 

[trojanfan12]

Not true. Wolves were in complete control of that situation and had offers on the table from other teams.

Just stop. This has been hashed out before. Even if it wasn't Love. Someone else was coming. That's why the Wiggins signing was held up for so long. Bottom line is, Lebron wasn't going back to the Cavs unless he had another star coming to add to himself and Kyrie.

 

[gordontrue]

The only other team that was truly in trade talks with the Wolves were the Warriors. In the end, Iirc Jerry West nixed that potential trade in the quickness - which seemed to have worked out for both parties (Kevin Love).

Yeah, I agree. Point is, it was far from a sure thing. LeBron knew that the Cavs would spend money to get people, he knew that his presence would attract free agents, he knew the Cavs had some trade assets and that Love was a possibility... but he didn't know Kevin Love was coming that season when he signed.

 

[gordontrue]

Just stop. This has been hashed out before. Even if it wasn't Love. Someone else was coming. That's why the Wiggins signing was held up for so long. Bottom line is, Lebron wasn't going back to the Cavs unless he had another star coming to add to himself and Kyrie.

Stop what? Correcting blatantly false statements?

 

[trojanfan12]

I agree, but then you have to keep in the context of other failures. Why should the failure only be counted if it occurred in the Finals. If LeBron loses to the Celtics, he gets a pass... but if he loses to the Warriors... that becomes part of a tiebreaker for his legacy? Illogical.

It doesn't matter whether it's logical or not. It's the way it's been done for decades. Like I said, I've made all of the same arguments and it all comes down to 6-0 vs. not 6-0. The only logic I can put on it is that it's because it's about the performance on the biggest stage...which is the finals (at least that's the most logical argument I've heard).

I feel like I have to say this every other day. I do not think that LeBron is the goat. I'm not making any arugment in defense of LeBron. You and I actually agree, I think, on the top-5 and the order for the most part. This isn't about LeBron, no matter how much you want to believe that it is. We could easily take LeBron completely out of the conversation and still have an interesting discussion on what Finals records really indicate in terms of a players legacy.

I do tend to agree with you on this point. But as I said, it's what virtually everyone, including the all time greats themselves use to separate the all time greats. End of the day, if Magic or Kareem say "MJ is the GOAT and not me because he's 6-0 and I'm not" (Magic has actually said that, to my knowledge, Kareem has never commented) who the hell am I to argue?

Again, I don't think that's the reason. Its not the fact that he never lost in the Finals... .its the fact that he dominated the league for 6 straight seasons (ignorning the 95 for a moment). If he would've lost in the Finals before that or after that... it would've only added to his legacy... because he still had that run of dominance unlike anything we've seen since the early Celtics.

There's also the fact that his numbers are way better than any of those guys.

When an all time great says "MJ is the GOAT, he's 6-0 in the finals and I'm not" tells me that it is the reason. If you have an issue with that, I'd suggest you talk to Magic and all of the other all time greats because they're saying it as much as anyone else.

His numbers aren't that much better than the other guys, they all have great numbers...except for that 6-0 part.

 

[trojanfan12]

Stop what? Correcting blatantly false statements?

It wasn't a blatantly false statement. As I said, that's already been hashed out and whether it was Love or someone else, there was another star coming. As Heatles pointed out, the only other team involved was the Warriors and Jerry West nixed that.

The Wolves were trying to get as much as they could and that's why Wiggins was left twisting in the wind for so long.

There was a turnover of 11 players when Lebron came to the Cavs. He didn't join the Cavs team that won 33 games.