When will Lebron pass Jordan?

[Shanemansj13]

Yep... 3-6 Is about a 25-30 percent winning percentage on the biggest stage. ROFLMAO. And you goofballs want to compare him to MJ with 100 PERCENT?


GTHO. The manufactured FRAUD Is better off tanking

That “fraud” destroys the Baby Dinos every year and at times it looks like it is too easy, he gets bored. He takes quarters bc it’s so easy and will still end up with 30+ ppg and a triple double. It’s funny the biggest lebron hater is the guy that is supposedly a fan of the team he absolutely dominates with ease year in and year out LOL. Have fun losing buddy boy

 

[SU Nittany Tide]

Seriously?!? That crap was debunked long ago. Just stop. No one says it's all that matters. It's the tiebreaker. All of the all time greats are so good that you can literally make a strong case for any of, at least the top 5, to be GOAT. So titles are the tiebreaker and MJ is 6-0. This even trumps Kareem who also has 6 rings, but also lost 4 times.

Getting to the finals and losing is worse than losing before the finals? That is a poor argument.

 

[Shanemansj13]

This is probably hard for a retard to understand, but here it goes...

The point is that Lebron's competition *to* the Finals has been easier than most, and his competition *in* in the Finals (relative to his supporting talent) has been more difficult than most (on average), compared to the cluster of legends in his general area historically (guys like Bird, Jordan, Magic, Kobe/Shaq/Duncan, etc...).

That's why his finals appearances streak isn't as good as it would appear in a vacuum, and his finals record isn't as bad as it would appear in a vacuum, divorced from context.

It’s very hard for most understand this but is completely true.

I mean if you look at two Finals appearancss inparticular:

2007 Finals and 2015 Finals, his teams had no business being in the Finals. His 2007 was absolute shit and he doninated the World Champion Pistons to get them there. Then you look at 2015 and he had a team without Love and Kyrie and won 2 games against the Warriors.

I will admit he had a bad Finals against the Mavs but it’s his one blemish, other than that his team has just been an underdog in a losing effort where he just absolutely dominates.

 

[jontaejones]

It's also worth adding that if the 1992 Portland Trailblazers, who lost to the Bulls in the NBA Finals 4 games to 2, had added the second best player in the NBA to their team, who was probably David Robinson (?) that they would have come back the next year and beat the Bulls the next year... and broken Jordan's streak.

Or how about the 1997 Jazz adding Hakeem Olajuwon or Grant Hill?

That might have gotten them over the hump as well...

 

[tlance]

MJ beat 20 teams with 50+ wins in the playoffs. LeBron is now at 11. MJ had to deal with an East that was the equivalent of today's West, if not tougher. Tell me more how he didn't play good teams

No it wasn't.

The issue for LeBron is the top end teams in the West. Specifically Golden State and San Antonio before.

Yes, there were more good teams in the Eastern conference. But, nobody, East or Wes had a legit chance to beat Chicago. And contrary to popular belief it was not all because of Jordan.

If there were one team in the NBA on the level of Golden State or even San Antonio in the 90s, Jordan would not have won 6 titles. It doesn't matter that there were many good teams. Literally none (besides the Bulls) were great. LeBron has faced multiple great teams in the Finals.

 

[DorianRo]

There were a few teams with legit chances to beat Chicago over the years. The Pacers took them 7. Great team in the late 90s. , The Knicks battered them and gave them a rough go at it. Plenty of solid teams around in the 90s. As as well as the Bad Boys but Under today's Sissy league though that wouldn't fly.

The ONLY teams over the last 20 years or so that would give the Bulls a rough go at it are few and far between. No not the Spurs. Last years Warriors and probably the 2001 Lakers. Thats it. They would probably beat the '98 Bulls when they were older and injured. Not the 96/97 bulls however. And probably not the 91-93 Bulls when MJ was at the peak of his power.

Though, I don't think the roles are nearly as good as the 2001 Lakers. So probably just the '01 Lakers. Warriors don't beat the 96/97 Bulls. Maybe the 98 one.

The reason I say the Lakers have the best chance is because of a peak Shaq and perfect balance inside-out to hurt Chicago. Something the Warriors don't have full of perimeter jump shooters. You would have to have a mix to beat Chicago.


But then you have to realize its the FINALS. Its hard to imagine Jordan losing in a finals period. Thats what separates him from the rest... Everyone else has LOST at sometime or another. Jordan just REFUSED to lose when it was finals time

You don't bet against Jordan on the biggest stage if you're a gambling man

 

[Raw_Bee808]

LeBron is one of the greatest of all time, but I can't put him over Jordan.

Seriously, how you call this guy the GOAT?

I mean, look at this....

This is an embarrassment. I can't believe people call him the greatest ever.

 

[flyerhawk]

The Chicago Bulls won 55 games the first year Jordan sat out for gambling. The Cavs won 19 the year after Lebron left. The Heat won 37 the year after he left. And the Cavs would win about 35 next year if Lebron leaves.

 

[Raw_Bee808]

The Chicago Bulls won 55 games the first year Jordan sat out for gambling. The Cavs won 19 the year after Lebron left. The Heat won 37 the year after he left. And the Cavs would win about 35 next year if Lebron leaves.

They won 55 games and lost in the second round of the playoffs. The next year they were sitting with a record of 34-31 and Pippen was begging MJ to come back.

Michael came back and they went 13-4 over the last 17 games of the season.

 

[flyerhawk]

They won 55 games and lost in the second round of the playoffs. The next year they were sitting with a record of 34-31 and Pippen was begging MJ to come back.

Michael came back and they went 13-4 over the last 17 games of the season.

So what part of "the Bulls won 55 games without Jordan" do you disagree with?

 

[Raw_Bee808]

So what part of "the Bulls won 55 games without Jordan" do you disagree with?

I was giving it context.

 

[flyerhawk]

I was giving it context.

Did that context change the fact that they won 55 games?

FTR, I don't care if someone thinks that Lebron or MJ or KAJ or whomever is the GOAT. We are all entitled to our opinions and you could make great arguments for all of them, Wilt as well.

But the mythology around MJ is more than a little ridiculous. When the Bulls were a one man show with MJ they were a sub-500 team. That isn't a knock on MJ. It's the reality of basketball

 

[Raw_Bee808]

Did that context change the fact that they won 55 games?

FTR, I don't care if someone thinks that Lebron or MJ or KAJ or whomever is the GOAT. We are all entitled to our opinions and you could make great arguments for all of them, Wilt as well.

But the mythology around MJ is more than a little ridiculous. When the Bulls were a one man show with MJ they were a sub-500 team. That isn't a knock on MJ. It's the reality of basketball

They won 55 games then lost in the second round to a team that they owned when MJ was playing. People try to use that as some sort of indictment against MJ when the following year they were struggling and needed him to return and right the ship.

"One Man Show" MJ was competing against STACKED Celtic, Pistons, and Laker teams. He was going against them with scrubs like Dave Corzine and Brad Sellers as starters, not exactly a fair fight.

 

[flyerhawk]

They won 55 games then lost in the second round to a team that they owned when MJ was playing. People try to use that as some sort of indictment against MJ when the following year they were struggling and needed him to return and right the ship.

"One Man Show" MJ was competing against STACKED Celtic, Pistons, and Laker teams. He was going against them with scrubs like Dave Corzine and Brad Sellers as starters, not exactly a fair fight.

It's not an indictment of MJ. The Bulls were obviously much better with MJ than without him. But that Bulls team was VERY good even without MJ.

The Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons weren't the reason why the Bulls were a bad team for 4 years when MJ joined them.

 

[Raw_Bee808]

It's not an indictment of MJ. The Bulls were obviously much better with MJ than without him. But that Bulls team was VERY good even without MJ.

The Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons weren't the reason why the Bulls were a bad team for 4 years when MJ joined them.

During the first 3peat, the Bulls were sometimes called "Michael Jordan and the Jordanaires" and obviously his teammates didnt like that so when he retired, they went pedal to the metal that season to prove they werent the Jordanaires. Whereas in '93, coming off back to back titles, they were just kinda coasting through the regular season waiting for the playoffs making sure everyone was rested and healthy.

Talent disparity wasn't a reason? LOL. So Jordan was supposed to beat the '86 Celtics (one of the greatest teams of all time) with a lineup that consisted of: himself, Orlando Woolridge, Dave Corzine, rookie Charles Oakley, and the immortal Kyle Macy. That was supposed to beat Bird, Mchale, Parrish, DJ, and Ainge? Not to mention they also had Bill Walton as their sixth man. Like I said before, not exactly a fair fight and MJ balled out in that series (averaged over 40ppg) included dropping a playoff record 63 points in the Boston Garden in game 2.

Those Pistons and Laker teams were stacked as well, those were the teams that were winning titles during MJ's early years.

 

[WiggyRuss]

No it wasn't.

The issue for LeBron is the top end teams in the West. Specifically Golden State and San Antonio before.

Yes, there were more good teams in the Eastern conference. But, nobody, East or Wes had a legit chance to beat Chicago. And contrary to popular belief it was not all because of Jordan.

If there were one team in the NBA on the level of Golden State or even San Antonio in the 90s, Jordan would not have won 6 titles. It doesn't matter that there were many good teams. Literally none (besides the Bulls) were great. LeBron has faced multiple great teams in the Finals.

that Pacer team def. had a legit chance to beat Jordan i think his very last year -- other htan that though you are prob right.

 

[flyerhawk]

During the first 3peat, the Bulls were sometimes called "Michael Jordan and the Jordanaires" and obviously his teammates didnt like that so when he retired, they went pedal to the metal that season to prove they werent the Jordanaires. Whereas in '93, coming off back to back titles, they were just kinda coasting through the playoffs making sure everyone was rested and healthy.

Talent disparity wasn't a reason? LOL. So Jordan was supposed to beat the '86 Celtics (one of the greatest teams of all time) with a lineup that consisted of: himself, Orlando Woolridge, Dave Corzine, rookie Charles Oakley, and the immortal Kyle Macy. That was supposed to beat Bird, Mchale, Parrish, DJ, and Ainge? Not to mention they also had Bill Walton as their sixth man. Like I said before, not exactly a fair fight and MJ balled out in that series included dropping a playoff record 63 points in the Boston Garden in game 2.

Those Pistons and Laker teams were stacked as well, those were the teams that were winning titles during MJ's early years.

The reason why Jordan didn't beat the 86 Celtics is because they won 30 games. Pretty sure they didn't play the Celtics 52 times that year.

 

[WiggyRuss]

It's not an indictment of MJ. The Bulls were obviously much better with MJ than without him. But that Bulls team was VERY good even without MJ.

The Celtics, Lakers, and Pistons weren't the reason why the Bulls were a bad team for 4 years when MJ joined them.

this is a good point.

After jordan left the bulls still won a bunch of games and some playoff series

something tells me that if LeBron left the Cavs they would not be winning playoff series. lol

 

[flyerhawk]

that Pacer team def. had a legit chance to beat Jordan i think his very last year -- other htan that though you are prob right.

The Pacers were a collection of really good players with one borderline superstar.

 

[flyerhawk]

this is a good point.

After jordan left the bulls still won a bunch of games and some playoff series

something tells me that if LeBron left the Cavs they would not be winning playoff series. lol

If Lebron leaves the Cavs aren't a playoff team.