Does anyone in here actually think MJ isn't the GOAT?

[ClipperRevival]

KAJ? Sure, I can give you that. But besides those two, does anyone in here pick another GOAT over those two? If so, who? I am curious to know if anyone seriously thinks there is another GOAT besides those two. Please keep it constructive and objective.

[ortonsaw]

basically all the pathetic lebron fans lol

[JohnMax]

#7) Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (http://airjudden2.tripod.com/jordan/rank.htm)

Strengths: The greatest and most unstoppable move in history. Can you think of a big man who you'd rather throw it to at the end of the game when your team is down one point? He also had longevity. At 38 years old, he was the best center in the league and won the finals MVP. As a young player, he looked like the 2nd coming of Wilt Chamberlain. Very good defensive player. He could pass out of the double team and shot free throws better than Russell and Wilt (but don't confuse him with Bird).

Weaknesses: Kareem had to have a dominating point guard in order to succeed. In Milwaukee, he had Oscar Robertson. when Robertson retired, they went from the NBA finals to a losing record. The next year, Jabbar went to L.A, where he posted another losing record, playing with hall of fame guard Gail Goodrich. His Lakers underachieved, even though he played with Norm Nixon, until Magic Johnson joined the team and made them great. Jabbar was a major player on those teams, but without Magic, they aren't a contender. That is the biggest reason he is #7. If you draw names from a hat, what are the chances of getting Oscar or Magic? Anything less and Kareem's team will struggle. Furthermore, he was an underachieving rebounder when compared to guys like Wilt, Russell, Hakeem Olajuwon, and Nate Thurmond. Wilt led the league in rebounding at the age of 36. Kareem wasn't even the best on his own team at that age, averaging less than 8 per game.

[Dr Hawk]

The more I learn about MJ, the surer I'm he is the GOAT

[ClipperRevival]

The more I learn about MJ, the surer I'm he is the GOAT

Ditto. He comes out on top any way you slice it. Even the advanced stats all confirm he's the GOAT. KAJ gets kind of knocked in that he wasn't clearly "the man" in his 6 titles while MJ clearly was. And that is a legit argument. Being "the man" carries more weight.

[jzek]

Guys who were born in the 00s.

They've only seen 5 min YouTube vids of Jordan so of course their pick is either Kobe or LBJ.

[ClipperRevival]

#7) Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (http://airjudden2.tripod.com/jordan/rank.htm)

Strengths: The greatest and most unstoppable move in history. Can you think of a big man who you'd rather throw it to at the end of the game when your team is down one point? He also had longevity. At 38 years old, he was the best center in the league and won the finals MVP. As a young player, he looked like the 2nd coming of Wilt Chamberlain. Very good defensive player. He could pass out of the double team and shot free throws better than Russell and Wilt (but don't confuse him with Bird).

Weaknesses: Kareem had to have a dominating point guard in order to succeed. In Milwaukee, he had Oscar Robertson. when Robertson retired, they went from the NBA finals to a losing record. The next year, Jabbar went to L.A, where he posted another losing record, playing with hall of fame guard Gail Goodrich. His Lakers underachieved, even though he played with Norm Nixon, until Magic Johnson joined the team and made them great. Jabbar was a major player on those teams, but without Magic, they aren't a contender. That is the biggest reason he is #7. If you draw names from a hat, what are the chances of getting Oscar or Magic? Anything less and Kareem's team will struggle. Furthermore, he was an underachieving rebounder when compared to guys like Wilt, Russell, Hakeem Olajuwon, and Nate Thurmond. Wilt led the league in rebounding at the age of 36. Kareem wasn't even the best on his own team at that age, averaging less than 8 per game.

Is that your all time great list? If so, it might be THE worst list I have ever seen.

[ClipperRevival]

Guys who were born in the 00s.

They've only seen 5 min YouTube vids of Jordan so of course their pick is either Kobe or LBJ.

Yeah, they probably think because the game is more athletic than ever, someone from the past can't be the GOAT. But greatness is greatness, you can't help when you are born. Watching highlights don't do MJ justice. He dominated almost every night and was relentless on both ends. Best two way player ever and he truly imposed his WILL on the court.

[LAZERUSS]

MJ has a CASE as the GOAT, as do Wilt, Magic, Kareem, and Russell.

BTW, Kareem actually has LESS of a case than Chamberlain.

[sdot_thadon]

MJ has a CASE as the GOAT, as do Wilt, Magic, Kareem, and Russell.

BTW, Kareem actually has LESS of a case than Chamberlain.
This, except for the Jabbar-Chamberlain bit. While I feel Mj has perhaps the strongest all around case, others have a case. And that's all that's necessary to have the conversation.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

KAJ is the GOAT IMO. But hes the only one with the consistent body of work over a long period, domination at every level (HS, college, NBA) and strong prime/peak/playoff performances to be argued against MJ

[Rocketswin2013]

I'd take certain players at their peak over his peak(LeBron, Shaq, Wilt. Only those 3).


I would also, in a hypothetical all-time draft, take either Wilt or LeBron over him IF, and only if, I have Phil Jackson for Wilt and Gregg Pop for LeBron(PJ would be good, too). as coaches. If Jackson could coach all the personalities he did, he could coach Wilt and deal with all of his shit.


I also can't imagine what Pop and his staff would do with a young prime(08 - 10) LeBron James. Let alone the rest of his years. Hell, even his second year.


Otherwise, he's clearly the greatest player ever all things considered.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

I'd take certain players at their peak over his peak(LeBron, Wilt.


I would also, in a hypothetical all-time draft, take either Wilt or LeBron over him IF, and only if, I have Phil Jackson for Wilt and Gregg Pop for LeBron(PJ would be good, too).
:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:


































:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[warriorfan]

I'd take certain players at their peak over his peak(LeBron, Shaq, Wilt. Only those 3).


I would also, in a hypothetical all-time draft, take either Wilt or LeBron over him IF, and only if, I have Phil Jackson for Wilt and Gregg Pop for LeBron(PJ would be good, too). As coaches. If Jackson could coach all the personalities he did, he coach Wilt and deal with all of his shit.


I also can't imagine what Pop and his staff would do with a young prime(08 - 10) LeBron James. Let alone the rest of his years. Hell, even his second year.


Otherwise, he's clearly the best player ever all things considered.

Full Retard

[dubeta]

Jordan fan here, but no I don't think he's the clear cut GOAT

[SpecialQue]

This question seems to pop up every few months. Then everyone decides that Kareem has the best case but they still prefer MJ because he's the more recent player.

[Beastmode88]

Jordan fan here, but no I don't think he's the clear cut GOAT

so whos ur top 10 since you're clearly an objective jordan stan.

[Rocketswin2013]

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:


































:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
I really shouldn't have expected this forum to receive this well. ****ing idiots.

[dubeta]

so whos ur top 10 since you're clearly an objective jordan stan.

1. Kareem

2. Magic

3. Russell

4. LeBron

5. Jordan

6. Shaq

7. Bird

8. Wilt

9. Hakeem

10. Duncan


#donthate

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Full Retard
My G dont act like u aint say Terry Porters impact in 91 wasnt far off MJ http://www.thecoli.com/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/5I5s8.png

[Sportal]

I honestly don't know a lot about KAJ, but if the thing that someone posted is true.. That when the Big O left, the went from Finals to losing record, then is KAJ really that good? They also said he did nothing in LA till Magic come around?

I mean, I don't know this stuff, but it'd be a knock against any "GOAT" tag.

[Rocketswin2013]

Which conclusion is retarded? LeBron, Shaq or Wilts. If you say something like all 3, then it's not worth talking about. May have to pull a 3ball.

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

Which conclusion is retarded? LeBron, Shaq or Wilts. If you say something like all 3, then it's not worth talking about. May have to pull a 3ball.
I took Shaqs name out for a reason.................Peak Shaq is the GOAT but MJ is the only one on his level, lmfao at Wilt and Bran:roll: :facepalm

[outbreak]

1. Kareem

2. Magic

3. Russell

4. LeBron

5. Jordan

6. Shaq

7. Bird

8. Wilt

9. Hakeem

10. Duncan


#donthate
http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/of.gif

[Suguru101]

I honestly don't know a lot about KAJ, but if the thing that someone posted is true.. That when the Big O left, the went from Finals to losing record, then is KAJ really that good? They also said he did nothing in LA till Magic come around?

I mean, I don't know this stuff, but it'd be a knock against any "GOAT" tag.

Jordan didn't do anything without Pippen. It's just tough to win by yourself.

[G0ATbe]

Jordan isn't even top 10, and there's no shame in that. He was still a great player. I'm just amazed at what a great job the media has done to fuel his legend.

[ClipperRevival]

MJ has a CASE as the GOAT, as do Wilt, Magic, Kareem, and Russell.

BTW, Kareem actually has LESS of a case than Chamberlain.

I am sorry but Wilt has no case. Peak dominance does not gurantee you GOAT status. He didn't win when it mattered. I know you are the biggest Wilt fan and I think he gets underrated by the younger gen but he has no case over MJ or KAJ when you look at the entire body of work.

Magic has no case. Even ask Magic himself, he will tell you MJ was greater. Also, he was not very good on D.

Same with Russell. He couldn't dominate you offensively. I am sorry but if you want to be GOAT, especially as a big, you need to be dominant on both ends. Greatest winner without taking into context? Of course. But GOAT? Lol.

[ClipperRevival]

KAJ is the GOAT IMO. But hes the only one with the consistent body of work over a long period, domination at every level (HS, college, NBA) and strong prime/peak/playoff performances to be argued against MJ

And I have no problem with that. That's why most objective bball fans have MJ/KAJ as 1/2 either way. When you look at the entire body of work, you can only conclude with these two.

[Rocketswin2013]

I took Shaqs name out for a reason.................Peak Shaq is the GOAT but MJ is the only one on his level, lmfao at Wilt and Bran:roll: :facepalm
Misconception. Wilt is literally impossible to argue for on this forum. People will call KAJ andRussell GOATs or top 3 and leave him out of the top 10......


But people definitely sleep on peak(IMO 2009) LeBron around here. This place is really homogenous on some things so I shouldn't be too surprised.

[Suguru101]

Misconception. Wilt is literally impossible to argue for on this forum. People will call KAJ andRussell GOATs or top 3 and leave him out of the top 10......


But people definitely sleep on peak(IMO 2009) LeBron around here. This place is really homogenous on some things so I shouldn't be too surprised.

Why do you think 2009 LeBron is better than 2012 LeBron (post game, better defense/maturity)?

[ClipperRevival]

1. Kareem

2. Magic

3. Russell

4. LeBron

5. Jordan

6. Shaq

7. Bird

8. Wilt

9. Hakeem

10. Duncan


#donthate

Lol. You are the ultimate Bron fan. Your list is a joke. Bron over MJ? Lol.

[ClipperRevival]

Jordan isn't even top 10, and there's no shame in that. He was still a great player. I'm just amazed at what a great job the media has done to fuel his legend.

How old are you? My guess is about 10.

[KungFuJoe]

MJ and it's pretty clear in my book. And yes I watched him play. I was born in the 70s.

He's got all the accolades. Won in college and pros. Kareem had accolades and longevity but Jordan was no Walton. He played long enough and at a high enough level that no one doubts he could have been one of the best for many many more years.

Best offensive and defensive player. No weaknesses. Charisma and marketability. Dunk contest champ. Kids emulated him. Unstoppable when it counted.

He's the one guy that you could make an argument for in nearly every single category based on his size and position.

[dubeta]

Lol. You are the ultimate Bron fan. Your list is a joke. Bron over MJ? Lol.

Nah bro Jordan fan first and foremost, and I respect the hell out of MJ, but you have to look at his career in context. The 90's surrounded by the 2nd best player in the era (Pippen) as his teammate as well as greatest coach Phil Jackson, allowed him to win.

- No other top tier wings

- Many watered down expansion-teams (Today has a legit 30 teams)

- Bulls were successful with or without Jordan (1994)

- Jordan was not successful with or without Phil and Scottie

- Not much success post 2000- (didnt make playoffs)

I love MJ, but we need to put his career in perspective, I can't reasonably put him more than #5 all time

[Hamtaro CP3KDKG]

MJ and it's pretty clear in my book. And yes I watched him play. I was born in the 70s.

He's got all the accolades. Won in college and pros. Kareem had accolades and longevity but Jordan was no Walton. He played long enough and at a high enough level that no one doubts he could have been one of the best for many many more years.

Best offensive and defensive player. No weaknesses. Charisma and marketability. Dunk contest champ. Kids emulated him. Unstoppable when it counted.

He's the one guy that you could make an argument for in nearly every single category based on his size and position.
Best defensive guard of his time yes, not close to best defensive player.

Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing sht on him defensively. Payton and Pippen were arguably better too

[ClipperRevival]

Nah bro Jordan fan first and foremost, and I respect the hell out of MJ, but you have to look at his career in context. The 90's surrounded by the 2nd best player in the era (Pippen) as his teammate as well as greatest coach Phil Jackson, allowed him to win.

- No other top tier wings

- Many watered down expansion-teams (Today has a legit 30 teams)

- Bulls were successful with or without Jordan (1994)

- Jordan was not successful with or without Phil and Scottie

- Not much success post 2000- (didnt make playoffs)

I love MJ, but we need to put his career in perspective, I can't reasonably put him more than #5 all time

:oldlol: Do you realize there are people on this board that started watching bball starting in the 80's who try to keep it real? And when we read what you just typed, you make yourself look like an idiot. Really man, just check yourself. This is the big leagues. You think your bullshit will fly with the veterans of the game?

[c5terror]

KAJ? Sure, I can give you that. But besides those two, does anyone in here pick another GOAT over those two? If so, who? I am curious to know if anyone seriously thinks there is another GOAT besides those two. Please keep it constructive and objective.

Yes, the one who have bill or kareem as their GOAT. That makes MJ ranking in about 2 or 3.

[jlip]

The opinion that MJ is the "clear" GOAT is strongest amongst those between the ages 25-45. For those older than that, players such as Russell, Wilt, and Kareem tend to appear in the conversation more.

[KungFuJoe]

Best defensive guard of his time yes, not close to best defensive player.

Hakeem, Robinson, Ewing sht on him defensively. Payton and Pippen were arguably better too

Yeah but that's th thing. You can find players that might be better than him at ONE thing. Carter was a better dunker. But he excelled at everything. Payton was better defensively. MJ was better at everything else.

[COnDEMnED]

Jordan fan here, but no I don't think he's the clear cut GOAT
You forget to switch accounts short dick rider?

[LAZERUSS]

I am sorry but Wilt has no case. Peak dominance does not gurantee you GOAT status. He didn't win when it mattered. I know you are the biggest Wilt fan and I think he gets underrated by the younger gen but he has no case over MJ or KAJ when you look at the entire body of work.

Magic has no case. Even ask Magic himself, he will tell you MJ was greater. Also, he was not very good on D.

Same with Russell. He couldn't dominate you offensively. I am sorry but if you want to be GOAT, especially as a big, you need to be dominant on both ends. Greatest winner without taking into context? Of course. But GOAT? Lol.


First of all, MAGIC is the greatest "winner" in NBA history. PERIOD. True, Russell won more rings, but Magic's career winning percentage is #1. Furthermore, Magic went to NINE Finals, winning FIVE of them, in the toughest era in NBA history.

I have said it before, but if you move MJ's 90's Bulls into the 80's, he is not winning six rings. Hell, he might not have won any.


I am sorry but if you want to be GOAT, especially as a big, you need to be dominant on both ends.

And no other player in NBA HISTORY, dominated at BOTH ends of the floor like Chamberlain. Russell is generally regarded as the GOAT defensive player in NBA history, yet, aside from Russell, Chamberlain has the next two highest Defensive Win Share seasons in NBA history. And H2H, Wilt reduced Russell's efficiency, far more than Russell did his. And blocked shots? Chamberlain was easily the greatest shot-blocker in NBA history. Even in their careers H2H's, Wilt has twice as many known blocks as Russell.

Defense?

How about this post-season defense...


Wilt's post-season FG% allowed:

59-60:

Kerr regular season FG% against the league: .392
Kerr against Wilt in the playoffs: .294

Dierking regular season FG%: .365
Dierking vs Wilt in the post-season: .333

Russell regular season: .467
Russell vs. Wilt in the post-season: .446


60-61:

Kerr regular season: .397
Kerr vs Wilt: .321

Halbrook regular season: .335
Halbrook vs Wilt: .387


61-62:

Kerr regular season: .443
Kerr vs. Wilt: .376

Russell regular season: .457
Russell vs Wilt: .399


63-64:

Beaty regular season: .444
Beaty vs. Wilt: .520

Russell regular season: .433
Russell vs. Wilt: .386


64-65:

Embry regular season: .456
Embry vs Wilt: .438

Russell regular season: .438
Russell vs. Wilt: .446


65-66:

Russell regular season: .415
Russell vs. Wilt: .424


66-67:

Dierking regular season: .399
Dierking vs Wilt: .427

Russell regular season: .454
Russell vs. Wilt: .358

Thurmond regular season: .437
Thurmond vs. Wilt: .343


67-68:

Bellamy regular season: .541
Bellamy vs. Wilt: .421

Russell regular season: .425
Russell vs. Wilt: .440


68-69:

Thurmond regular season: .410
Thurmond vs Wilt: .392

Beaty regular season: .470
Beaty vs. Wilt: .383

Russell regular season: .433
Russell vs. Wilt: .397


69-70:

Walk regular season: .470
Walk vs Wilt: .395

Fox regular season: .524
Fox vs Wilt: .362

Bellamy regular season: .523
Bellamy vs Wilt: .456

Reed regular season: .507
Reed vs Wilt: .483


70-71:

Boerwinkle regular season: .485
Boerwinkle vs Wilt: .463

Fox regular season: .458
Fox vs Wilt: .434

Kareem regular season: .577
Kareem vs Wilt: .481


71-72:

Ray regular season: .499
Ray vs Wilt: .529

Kareem regular season: .574
Kareem vs Wilt: .457

Lucas regular season: .512
Lucas vs Wilt: .500


72-73:

Awtry regular season: .480
Awtry vs Wilt: .542

Thurmond regular season: .446
Thurmond vs Wilt: .373

Reed regular season: .474
Reed vs Wilt: .493




And, how many GOATs, aside from Magic, have led the league in assists? And also led the post-season in apg?

And before someone mentions Wilt's Post-season "decline", in Wilt's "scoring" seasons (of which he missed the entire playoffs in a year in which he averaged 45 ppg), he averaged 33 ppg, 27 rpg, 4 apg, and shot nearly 10% above the post-season league average (.505 in post-seasons that shot about .420 in the same span.)

Carry thru to his peak, in '67, and Wilt averaged 30 ppg, 27 rpg, 5 apg, and shot .515 (in post-seasons that shot about .425.) Add in a minimum of 8+ bpg, and you have, BY FAR, the most dominant player at BOTH ENDS in NBA history.

And finally...Russell is the GOAT champion...winning 11 rings in his 13 seasons. BUT, Chamberlain, with infrior, to far inferior rosters, nearly beat him in four game seven (losing by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points.) AND, when he finally had a roster that was the equal of Russell's, and healthy, he and his Sixers destroyed Russell's eight-time defending, and 60-21, Celtics in a near sweep.

John Wooden said it best...had Wilt and Russell swapped rosters, and coaches, and it would have been Wilt holding all those rings.

Now, where would you rank Chamberlain with between 7-11 rings?


Oh, and don't forget the RECORD BOOK. Chamberlain literally holds HUNDREDS, and likely THOUSANDS of NBA RECORDS, including MANY post-season records.

His domination was so overwhelming that the league had to create MULTIPLE RULES in an attempt to curtail his mass destruction of his peers.

To say that Wilt has NO CASE as a GOAT is pure IDIOCY.

[gts]

I have Kareem at 1A and MJ 1B

[Rocketswin2013]

Why do you think 2009 LeBron is better than 2012 LeBron (post game, better defense/maturity)?
His strengths covered up his weaknesses. His strengths overwhelmed the league. He was literally unstoppable. The amount of pressure he put on opposing defenders was absurd. I don't think people understand just how explosive and athletic he was. Probably the most explosive and athletic wing player ever.

Also, his clutchness was off-the-charts. He was never as hungry as he was in 2009. He seemed like Scottie Pippen on Bane venom. That's the only comparison I can make. No one else was like him.

And there's this...

[QUOTE]I already made a thread before on Shaq's case for the GOAT peak, now here is LeBron 2009's case for the GOAT peak. I'll highlight his stats, defense, team success, playoffs, clutch, 4th quarter, and teammates to show why he has a case for the GOAT peak.


Stats:
28-8-7, .591 TS%, 9.3 RAPM (1st)

31.7 PER (4th all-time), .318 WS/48 (6th all-time)

LeBron led his team in points, assists, rebounds, blocks, and steals becoming only the 4th player in history to accomplish that feat.

Team Success:
66-16 (.805)
+8.68 SRS (8.83 when LeBron played, 6th in the 3 point era)
112.4 Offensive Rating
102.4 Defensive Rating
+10.0 efficiency differential (4th in NBA history)

On court: +15.0
Off court: -6.2 off court (equivalent to this year

[3ball]

In 2009, Bron was probably the most explosive and athletic wing player ever.


lebron is an average leaper off two feet - everyone knows this..

don't make me start posting GIFs of him barely jumping over a phone book off two feet, and then comparing that to MJ flying.

MJ was an elite leaper off one or two feet, whereas Lebron is only elite off one foot.. MJ was also much quicker.. Alot of guys are actually
.

[Rocketswin2013]

lebron is an average leaper off two feet - everyone knows this..

don't make me start posting GIFs of him barely jumping over a phone book off two feet, and then comparing that to MJ flying.

MJ was an elite leaper off one or two feet, whereas Lebron is only elite off one foot.. MJ was also much quicker.. Alot of guys are actually
.
Yes, your only urge is to spam gifs and Jordan propaganda. Surprising. :rolleyes:

I honestly don't care enough about something small like that. I said probably, btw. I had others in mind.

Bottom line is, I'd take 2009 James over any Jordan because I believe he was better than MJ's best. Specifically defensively, and getting to the rim. It's that simple. If someone took Jordan? Obviously I wouldn't care. I was 50/50 about this before. I watched some of those games and now I'm 60/40 in favor of LeBron. I don't think it's a blowout or anything like some people. I actually think it's really close, but LeBron's postseason was unprecedented in some ways.

[24-Inch_Chrome]

There aren't many serious posters. Small group that picks KAJ, even smaller group that pick Wilt/Russell.

[Deuce Bigalow]

2/6

2/6http://img.pandawhale.com/post-41349-jonah-hill-oscars-cut-it-out-g-w5Tc.gif

[3ball]

.
The softest defense possible is when all 4 help defenders are on the far weakside, and therefore furthest from helping on strongside action:


http://cdn.makeagif.com/media/6-05-2015/P5Zone.gif



Obviously, the aforementioned defense would be much tougher if the 4 help defenders were on the strongside instead, and therefore closest to helping on strongside action:


http://gifsforum.com/images_new/gif/other/grand/573113292e852dcb8f5fe242c53e3982.gif


In the first play shown above, weakside spacing drew all help defenders to the weakside, leaving the strongside with literally zero help defenders.. This only occurs in today's game, where every team's 3-point shooting and spacing strategy uses weakside spacing to reduce the number of strongside defenders.

In the 2nd GIF, there is no weakside spacing, so all 4 help defenders remained on strongside.. This was the case in the 80's when teams didn't shoot 3-pointers or have spacing.
.

[3ball]

LeBron's postseason was unprecedented in some ways.


Specifically, in what ways was Lebron's 2009 playoff run "unprecedented"?

Also, Lebron averaged 28/7/7 in 2009... That doesn't compare to MJ's best.

[comerb]

MJ has a CASE as the GOAT, as do Wilt, Magic, Kareem, and Russell.

BTW, Kareem actually has LESS of a case than Chamberlain.

Neither Magic or Russell have a case. They were not good two way players.

[Psileas]

Neither Magic or Russell have a case. They were not good two way players.

Arbitrary criterion which doesn't matter. If in the end player A helps his team win more than player B while being a 1 way player, it doesn't matter who's the best 2 way player.

[Psileas]

Btw, why does it matter who here thinks Jordan isn't the GOAT? It's not as if this board is anywhere near the pinnacle of NBA history knowledge and it's not as if the age of its posters is fairly distributed.
Yes, there is a good number of people who have someone else as the GOAT. due to their age, most of them spend their time in more constructive ways than debating with 15-20 year olds, but they do exist, in higher numbers than most sites would indicate. Even here, most posters who are old enough to have watched basketball since Wilt and Russell don't view Jordan as the untouchable deity that some other portrait him to be.

[Lebron23]

http://blogstorage.s3.amazonaws.com/upload/SportsBlogcom/1264668/0893163001421785386_filepicker.jpg

[LAZERUSS]

Neither Magic or Russell have a case. They were not good two way players.


Russell is generally regarded as the greatest defensive player in NBA history, while Magic is almost universally recognized as the greatest point-producing player in NBA history.

Regarding Russell's defensive impact...take a look at some great defensive NFL champions, like the '63 Bears, the '00 Ravens, the '02 Bucs, and the '13 Seahawks. These teams did not have exceptional offenses. The Seahawks ranked 17th in ypg, and yet they slaughtered a Broncos team that set NFL offensive records.

BTW, and for the record, Russell had Finals in which he averaged 23.6 ppg on a .543 FG%, 22.9 ppg on a .538 FG%, and 17.8 ppg on...get this... a .702 FG%.


Now, here is just an example of Magic's greatness...


Now let's actually put in a PEAK Magic, and not some way-past-his-prime Magic that carried a shell of what had been a dynasty in the 80's, past a peak Blazer team in the WCF's, and then up against a peak Jordan (and with Pippen being the one to slow him down), with his stacked roster that wiped out Magic's rapidly declining, and injury-plagued roster in the '91 Finals.

How about Magic at HIS PEAK, in 86-87.

First, MJ vs. Magic...

MJ: 37.0 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 4.0 apg, .429 FG%, .875 FT%, .474 TS%
Magic: 29.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 12.5 apg, .500 FG%, .933 FT%, .563 TS%.
Oh, and 2-0 W-L


MJ vs. Boston in regular season, and Magic vs. Boston in regular season:

MJ: 29.7 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.8 apg, .428 FG%, .820 FT%
Magic: 35.0 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 9.0 rpg, .556 FG%, .864 FT%


How about MJ vs, Boston, and Magic vs. Boston in that same post-season:

MJ: 35.7 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 6.0 apg, .417 FG%, .817 FT%, .529 TS%
Magic: 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, .541 FG%, .960 FT%, .590 TS%

Oh, and MJ's Bulls vs. Boston in the playoffs... 0-3
Magic's Lakers vs. Boston in the Finals... 4-2


So, YES, BOTH Russell and Magic have SOLID cases as GOATs.

[Asukal]

Btw, why does it matter who here thinks Jordan isn't the GOAT? It's not as if this board is anywhere near the pinnacle of NBA history knowledge and it's not as if the age of its posters is fairly distributed.
Yes, there is a good number of people who have someone else as the GOAT. due to their age, most of them spend their time in more constructive ways than debating with 15-20 year olds, but they do exist, in higher numbers than most sites would indicate. Even here, most posters who are old enough to have watched basketball since Wilt and Russell don't view Jordan as the untouchable deity that some other portrait him to be.

Those guys are called senile old men. :oldlol:

[Kblaze8855]

I want call someone an idiot because they have more information than I do and made a decision that I don't agree with. There is a reason so many people who saw older players play think they are great and it isn't just because it happened a long time ago. My opinion on how good michael Jordan is won't be any less valid in 30 years than it is now. But some kid who never saw him is going to act like it is.

If you saw Wilt Chamberlain and Oscar Robertson play I'm at least going to hear you out.....

That said I don't think anyone has or will be better than Jordan and basketball. But I believe he's one of a few people who has reached that level where what you actually accomplished will be more a matter of circumstance than you flat out being better than everyone else.

The things Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, and as many as three others were capable of are so great I don't see how you really differentiate between them as much as just show your preference for one of their styles over the others. I'd say Jordan is in a hard to dispute tie to be as good as a basketball player can be.

[salwan]

http://blogstorage.s3.amazonaws.com/upload/SportsBlogcom/1264668/0893163001421785386_filepicker.jpg
:applause: :applause:

[Psileas]

Those guys are called senile old men.

We're not talking about strictly 2015. You don't become senile or old at 45-50, which had been many of these people's age when Jordan played his last really meaningful game.

[IcanzIIravor]

KAJ is the GOAT IMO. But hes the only one with the consistent body of work over a long period, domination at every level (HS, college, NBA) and strong prime/peak/playoff performances to be argued against MJ

This is why it is Kareem for me. He dominated at every single level of competition. He has a case as GOAT at every level of competition he was in.

[TAZORAC]

LBJ is better then Jordan. Lebron is SO DOMINATE that he can carry shit teams to contender status by himself. Jordan is basically the original version of Kobe Bryant (he will score, play defense, but won't make people around him better and if his team is bad, they won't be contenders).

[jayfan]

Which conclusion is retarded? LeBron, Shaq or Wilts. If you say something like all 3, then it's not worth talking about. May have to pull a 3ball.

Lebron. Obviously.



.

[Rocketswin2013]

Lebron. Obviously.



.
Obviously, eh? You probably followed the whole discussion, so you saw the wall of text in pg 3. What player obviously played at a higher level than LeBron in 2009? Be specific, and back it up with at least something worth mentioning.

Unless of course, the fact that he didn't win a title is enough to relieve you of the pressure of bringing up a better player, we can just stop here.

[jayfan]

Obviously, eh? You probably followed the whole discussion, so you saw the wall of text in pg 3. What player obviously played at a higher level than LeBron in 2009? Be specific, and back it up with at least something worth mentioning.

Unless of course, the fact that he didn't win a title is enough to relieve you of the pressure of bringing up a better player, we can just stop here.

Before even addressing the question, is this thread/topic about a single-year capsule?



.

[Elosha]

There are five arguable GOAT's in my opinion. In no particular order:

MJ
KAJ
Wilt
Magic
Russell

I just can't see the argument for anyone else such as Bird, Shaq, Oscar, Lebron, Kobe, or other luminaries, great as they all are. For instance, you could put Oscar's stats, particularly at his prime, against anyone in history, but he didn't have much success in the playoffs, and notably his numbers overall went down in the playoffs from 25.7 career to 22.2 in the playoffs. Moreover, he fell off pretty hard at the end of his career and was definitely not a prime player in his last four years. Hard to stack up against someone like MJ, who was still the best in the league at 35.

Similarly for Shaq, I think its a credible argument to state that from his prime - 94-95 to 2002-03 seasons - he was perhaps the most physically dominant and explosive big man in NBA history, with no small amount of skill as well. He obviously won 4 championships, the threepeat has the main focal point, and one past his prime, as a very solid 1a option for Miami. Yet, Shaq also got swept 6 times, including many times during his prime. And again, he fell off hard after 2006 season, and probably should have retired several years earlier. Also didn't keep himself in best of shape during his career, which may have contributed to his sharp decline.

WE could do that to any of the second tier greats. You can also nit pick at any GOAT candidates career. But Jordan has the overall fewest weaknesses. His resume/career accolades, his performance against other all-time greats, accolades of peers, superior playoff performances, clutch moments, offense/defense completeness, "eye-test"/demonstrated skill level, etc. all make him have the best case.

That said - it's almost impossible to keep bias out of such GOAT lists. I'm 41 and grew up with Jordan and the Bulls, triumphing with their victories and agonizing over their defeats. People who extensively watched the 80's even more than I did may favor Magic/Bird, although Jordan stacks up pretty well against them overall. Others favor KAJ for his longevity and sustained excellence, Wilt for his enormous statistical anomalies, or Russell for his team success and ability to consistently win over Wilt. We all will let our younger years influence our current thoughts of the past greats, and the current ones.

Bias also influences even people's view of the future. It annoys me when someone says, "MJ/[other great] the greatest there was or ever will be." It may just be hyperbole, but some people actually believe that. How the hell could anyone know that. If the NBA continues into decades and coming centuries, statistically speaking it is quite likely that a greater player than Jordan or any other GOAT candidate will come along. And then that future player may very well be surpassed. The debate will go on forever, but the hardest thing to do is to keep an open mind and a rational outlook both for the past, current and future greats.

[Dragonyeuw]

Nah bro Jordan fan first and foremost, and I respect the hell out of MJ, but you have to look at his career in context. The 90's surrounded by the 2nd best player in the era (Pippen) as his teammate as well as greatest coach Phil Jackson, allowed him to win.

- No other top tier wings

- Many watered down expansion-teams (Today has a legit 30 teams)

- Bulls were successful with or without Jordan (1994)

- Jordan was not successful with or without Phil and Scottie

- Not much success post 2000- (didnt make playoffs)

I love MJ, but we need to put his career in perspective, I can't reasonably put him more than #5 all time

If one wants to be objective, you can nitpick pretty much any players resume, or the circumstances surrounding them, if the agenda is making a case against them. Some guys played in more diluted eras, some put up huge stats but didnt win as much as others for whatever reason, some played on stacked teams, or came into the league with great talent already there, some won when a generally acknowledged better player stepped away.... I mean pretty much every top 10 goat candidate can be picked apart this way. When there is no set criteria being used to judge, it becomes pointless to argue.

[diamenz]

LBJ is better then Jordan. Lebron is SO DOMINATE that he can carry shit teams to contender status by himself. Jordan is basically the original version of Kobe Bryant (he will score, play defense, but won't make people around him better and if his team is bad, they won't be contenders).

did you seriously just say he's dominate?

/credibility

[Dragonyeuw]

There are five arguable GOAT's in my opinion. In no particular order:

MJ
KAJ
Wilt
Magic
Russell

I just can't see the argument for anyone else such as Bird, Shaq, Oscar, Lebron, Kobe, or other luminaries, great as they all are. For instance, you could put Oscar's stats, particularly at his prime, against anyone in history, but he didn't have much success in the playoffs, and notably his numbers overall went down in the playoffs from 25.7 career to 22.2 in the playoffs. Moreover, he fell off pretty hard at the end of his career and was definitely not a prime player in his last four years. Hard to stack up against someone like MJ, who was still the best in the league at 35.

Similarly for Shaq, I think its a credible argument to state that from his prime - 94-95 to 2002-03 seasons - he was perhaps the most physically dominant and explosive big man in NBA history, with no small amount of skill as well. He obviously won 4 championships, the threepeat has the main focal point, and one past his prime, as a very solid 1a option for Miami. Yet, Shaq also got swept 6 times, including many times during his prime. And again, he fell off hard after 2006 season, and probably should have retired several years earlier. Also didn't keep himself in best of shape during his career, which may have contributed to his sharp decline.

WE could do that to any of the second tier greats. You can also nit pick at any GOAT candidates career. But Jordan has the overall fewest weaknesses. His resume/career accolades, his performance against other all-time greats, accolades of peers, superior playoff performances, clutch moments, offense/defense completeness, "eye-test"/demonstrated skill level, etc. all make him have the best case.

That said - it's almost impossible to keep bias out of such GOAT lists. I'm 41 and grew up with Jordan and the Bulls, triumphing with their victories and agonizing over their defeats. People who extensively watched the 80's even more than I did may favor Magic/Bird, although Jordan stacks up pretty well against them overall. Others favor KAJ for his longevity and sustained excellence, Wilt for his enormous statistical anomalies, or Russell for his team success and ability to consistently win over Wilt. We all will let our younger years influence our current thoughts of the past greats, and the current ones.

Bias also influences even people's view of the future. It annoys me when someone says, "MJ/[other great] the greatest there was or ever will be." It may just be hyperbole, but some people actually believe that. How the hell could anyone know that. If the NBA continues into decades and coming centuries, statistically speaking it is quite likely that a greater player than Jordan or any other GOAT candidate will come along. And then that future player may very well be surpassed. The debate will go on forever, but the hardest thing to do is to keep an open mind and a rational outlook both for the past, current and future greats.

:bowdown: repped.

[ClipperRevival]

There are five arguable GOAT's in my opinion. In no particular order:

MJ
KAJ
Wilt
Magic
Russell

I just can't see the argument for anyone else such as Bird, Shaq, Oscar, Lebron, Kobe, or other luminaries, great as they all are. For instance, you could put Oscar's stats, particularly at his prime, against anyone in history, but he didn't have much success in the playoffs, and notably his numbers overall went down in the playoffs from 25.7 career to 22.2 in the playoffs. Moreover, he fell off pretty hard at the end of his career and was definitely not a prime player in his last four years. Hard to stack up against someone like MJ, who was still the best in the league at 35.

Similarly for Shaq, I think its a credible argument to state that from his prime - 94-95 to 2002-03 seasons - he was perhaps the most physically dominant and explosive big man in NBA history, with no small amount of skill as well. He obviously won 4 championships, the threepeat has the main focal point, and one past his prime, as a very solid 1a option for Miami. Yet, Shaq also got swept 6 times, including many times during his prime. And again, he fell off hard after 2006 season, and probably should have retired several years earlier. Also didn't keep himself in best of shape during his career, which may have contributed to his sharp decline.

WE could do that to any of the second tier greats. You can also nit pick at any GOAT candidates career. But Jordan has the overall fewest weaknesses. His resume/career accolades, his performance against other all-time greats, accolades of peers, superior playoff performances, clutch moments, offense/defense completeness, "eye-test"/demonstrated skill level, etc. all make him have the best case.

That said - it's almost impossible to keep bias out of such GOAT lists. I'm 41 and grew up with Jordan and the Bulls, triumphing with their victories and agonizing over their defeats. People who extensively watched the 80's even more than I did may favor Magic/Bird, although Jordan stacks up pretty well against them overall. Others favor KAJ for his longevity and sustained excellence, Wilt for his enormous statistical anomalies, or Russell for his team success and ability to consistently win over Wilt. We all will let our younger years influence our current thoughts of the past greats, and the current ones.

Bias also influences even people's view of the future. It annoys me when someone says, "MJ/[other great] the greatest there was or ever will be." It may just be hyperbole, but some people actually believe that. How the hell could anyone know that. If the NBA continues into decades and coming centuries, statistically speaking it is quite likely that a greater player than Jordan or any other GOAT candidate will come along. And then that future player may very well be surpassed. The debate will go on forever, but the hardest thing to do is to keep an open mind and a rational outlook both for the past, current and future greats.

:applause:

[DMV2]

My argument against Kareem are:

1. Only won 1 ring during his prime where he won like 5 MVPs. This was also considered to be the weakest era(1970's) of the NBA.

2. Played with a Top 5 player in Magic, the GOAT PG...and also got his first ring with another Top 3-5 PG in the Big O.

Sure Jordan never won without Pippen but Pippen is nowhere near the Top 10, Top 15....he's prob more in #25-#35 range.

But a great argument for Kareem is that he was also the greatest college player ever. GOAT NCAA player + Top 2 NBA player is extremely awesome. However, guys like JJ Redick and Tyler Hansbrough were also great all-time NCAA players too.

[ClipperRevival]

If anyone is considering Magic as GOAT, then objectively, you have to include Duncan. Their individual and team accomplishments are very similiar. But Duncan was dominant on both ends and had greater longevity. And I don't consider either if them as GOAT. Case for top 3-4? Sure. But over Jordan or KAJ? No.

[pauk]

I think Jordan is the GOAT mostly because of my criteria and that is individual talent/skill/ability (the impact/outcome that gives, context) > individual accolades > individual milestones/records > team accomplishments....

I dont give two shits about championships, you/we are ranking individual players here within the context of any accolades, not teams, if you want to evaluate a players career based on rings you have to look into the context instead, you have to look at the championship run itself, rather then the numerics of how many rings he has.... a player can be the greatest talent ever and NEVER win a ring if he is cursed with a scrub team his entire career.... yet can win a ring every season if he has the best team all the time.... yet between those two completely opposite roads the individual player is EXACTLY the same in both, he just had different stuff to work with around him...

But in terms of accolades, Bill Russell is by far GOAT.... Bill Russell won 11 championships (as the man / best player / FMVP) out of 13 seasons played and has 5 mvps and stuff like that....

[LAZERUSS]

I think Jordan is the GOAT mostly because of my criteria and that is individual talent/skill/ability (the impact/outcome that gives, context) > individual accolades > individual milestones/records > team accomplishments....

I dont give two shits about championships, you/we are ranking individual players here within the context of any accolades, not teams.... a player can be the greatest talent ever and NEVER win a ring if he is cursed with a scrub team his entire career.... yet can win a ring every season if he has the best team all the time.... yet between those two completely opposite roads the individual player is EXACTLY the same in both, he just had different stuff to work with around him...

But in terms of accolades, Bill Russell is by far GOAT.... Bill Russell won 11 championships (as the man / best player / FMVP) out of 13 seasons played and has 5 mvps and stuff like that....

And yet, Chamberlain dominated him. Keep in mind that in their ten years in the league together, Wilt held a 7-2 edge in First-Team All-NBA selections.

And how about this...in their 143 H2H games, in which Wilt slaughtered Russell in scoring, rebounding, efficiency, passing, and shot-blocking...

Chamberlain averaged 28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg.

Think about that...in their 143 career H2H's, Wilt nearly averaged a 30-30 game EVERY TIME he stepped on the floor against Russell.

[Soundwave]

In most normal GOAT discussions here (ie: disregarding the kids trolling) Jordan gets about 80%+ of the votes for GOAT.

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=350073

I think you can make a case for Kareem and Russell, but it's pretty hard to make a case for anyone else over MJ.

[pauk]

And yet, Chamberlain dominated him. Keep in mind that in their ten years in the league together, Wilt held a 7-2 edge in First-Team All-NBA selections.

And how about this...in their 143 H2H games, in which Wilt slaughtered Russell in scoring, rebounding, efficiency, passing, and shot-blocking...

Chamberlain averaged 28.7 ppg and 28.7 rpg.

Think about that...in their 143 career H2H's, Wilt nearly averaged a 30-30 EVERY TIME he stepped on the floor against Russell.

Thats my point.... I would never take Russell over Wilt....

[kshutts1]

I think it's fair to say that a lot of people do not list MJ as the GOAT, though maybe not on here. But I have never met anyone that doesn't think MJ is one of the multiple GOAT candidates.

I think it's impossible to truly consider one player the greatest of them all, especially once we start considering era-specific differences, as well as the positional differences.

That said, I prefer the "tier ranking". Everyone in my first tier has an argument for GOAT.

First tier, in no order obviously... it's a tier!:
MJ
Kareem
Wilt
Russell
Magic
Bird
Oscar
Shaq

I believe that all of those players have a respectable case for being a GOAT or the GOAT.

[KendrickPerkins]

I want call someone an idiot because they have more information than I do and made a decision that I don't agree with. There is a reason so many people who saw older players play think they are great and it isn't just because it happened a long time ago. My opinion on how good michael Jordan is won't be any less valid in 30 years than it is now. But some kid who never saw him is going to act like it is.

If you saw Wilt Chamberlain and Oscar Robertson play I'm at least going to hear you out.....

That said I don't think anyone has or will be better than Jordan and basketball. But I believe he's one of a few people who has reached that level where what you actually accomplished will be more a matter of circumstance than you flat out being better than everyone else.

The things Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, and as many as three others were capable of are so great I don't see how you really differentiate between them as much as just show your preference for one of their styles over the others. I'd say Jordan is in a hard to dispute tie to be as good as a basketball player can be.
well said!

[pauk]

My real top 10 is something like:

#1 Jordan
Wilt
Shaq
Lebron
Oscar
Bird
Hakeem
Magic
Kobe
Baylor/West.... (gets kindof hard here).

Those are the best overall individual players ive seen and im sorry but they are just THAT good with or without any team accomplishments (aka. with or without scrub supporting casts/fantastic supporting casts)..... not seen enough of Wilt/Oscar/Baylor/West obviously so its kindof subjective & difficult but im gona just trust their insane numbers & what everybody (coaches/players etc.) said about them for now....

[ClipperRevival]

I think Jordan is the GOAT mostly because of my criteria and that is individual talent/skill/ability (the impact/outcome that gives, context) > individual accolades > individual milestones/records > team accomplishments....

I dont give two shits about championships, you/we are ranking individual players here within the context of any accolades, not teams, if you want to evaluate a players career based on rings you have to look into the context instead, you have to look at the championship run itself, rather then the numerics of how many rings he has.... a player can be the greatest talent ever and NEVER win a ring if he is cursed with a scrub team his entire career.... yet can win a ring every season if he has the best team all the time.... yet between those two completely opposite roads the individual player is EXACTLY the same in both, he just had different stuff to work with around him...

But in terms of accolades, Bill Russell is by far GOAT.... Bill Russell won 11 championships (as the man / best player / FMVP) out of 13 seasons played and has 5 mvps and stuff like that....

You sort of contradict yourself. First you say a player has almost no control of whether his team wins or not and mention that you have to look at context/situation. Yet, in your last sentence, you rank Russell the greatest in terms of accolades yet don't consider his circumstances/context.

I will have to 100% disagree that great players shouldn't be judged by rings. At least play a big factor. There is no other team sport where one player can impose his will on the game and impact the outcome so much. The greater you are, the more you impact the game. We see it from time to time. Mkst recently, Lebron in games 1-3 against GS. The notion that a certain player NEVER had a good team around him is an extreme example as you pointed out. At some point, every great player has enough talent to win imo. I mean I know where you are coming from, but I just think in basketball, where a great player can impact the game so much, chamionships should carry a lot of weight. But yes, you also have to consider circumstances/context.

[LAZERUSS]

You sort of contradict yourself. First you say a player has almost no control of whether his team wins or not and mention that you have to look at context/situation. Yet, in your last sentence, you rank Russell the greatest in terms of accolades yet don't consider his circumstances/context.

I will have to 100% disagree that great players shouldn't be judged by rings. At least play a big factor. There is no other team sport where one player can impose his will on the game and impact the outcome so much. The greater you are, the more you impact the game. We see it from time to time. Mkst recently, Lebron in games 1-3 against GS. The notion that a certain player NEVER had a good team around him is an extreme example as you pointed out. At some point, every great player has enough talent to win imo. I mean I know where you are coming from, but I just think in basketball, where a great player can impact the game so much, chamionships should carry a lot of weight. But yes, you also have to consider circumstances/context.

And I would tell you that if Russell and Wilt swapped rosters, that Wilt would have had a MINIMUM of SEVEN rings, and perhaps as many as ELEVEN.

[ClipperRevival]

My real top 10 is something like:

#1 Jordan
Wilt
Shaq
Lebron
Oscar
Bird
Hakeem
Magic
Kobe
Baylor/West.... (gets kindof hard here).

Those are the best overall individual players ive seen and im sorry but they are just THAT good with or without any team accomplishments (aka. with or without scrub supporting casts/fantastic supporting casts)..... not seen enough of Wilt/Oscar/Baylor/West obviously so its kindof subjective & difficult but im gona just trust their insane numbers & what everybody (coaches/players etc.) said about them for now....

Your list seems to be based primarily on individual brilliance, referencing back to your previous post of how you feel players have little control of whether they win or not. So you put a lot of weight on just individual talent and not team success. As I stated in a previous post, I disagree. I think you have to find the right balance between individual brilliance and team success.

[ClipperRevival]

And I would tell you that if Russell and Wilt swapped rosters, that Wilt would have had a MINIMUM of SEVEN rings, and perhaps as many as ELEVEN.

How many times did Wilt/Russell face off in the playoffs? Of those, how many went to a 7th game? Not here to bash, just honestly curious.

[kshutts1]

You sort of contradict yourself. First you say a player has almost no control of whether his team wins or not and mention that you have to look at context/situation. Yet, in your last sentence, you rank Russell the greatest in terms of accolades yet don't consider his circumstances/context.

I will have to 100% disagree that great players shouldn't be judged by rings. At least play a big factor. There is no other team sport where one player can impose his will on the game and impact the outcome so much. The greater you are, the more you impact the game. We see it from time to time. Mkst recently, Lebron in games 1-3 against GS. The notion that a certain player NEVER had a good team around him is an extreme example as you pointed out. At some point, every great player has enough talent to win imo. I mean I know where you are coming from, but I just think in basketball, where a great player can impact the game so much, chamionships should carry a lot of weight. But yes, you also have to consider circumstances/context.
Baseball with the pitcher. Hockey.

And in games 1-3, where Lebron's team managed to go 2-1? Ridiculously small sample size, and we saw how the rest of the series played out. Over the long haul, one player can not do it.

[kshutts1]

How many times did Wilt/Russell face off in the playoffs? Of those, how many went to a 7th game? Not here to bash, just honestly curious.
Regardless of answer, does it matter?

If the 2015 Finals Cleveland roster played the 2015 finals GSW warriors roster in 100 different series.... Cleveland loses probably 95 times. Does that mean Lebron is not as good as Curry?

[pauk]

You sort of contradict yourself. First you say a player has almost no control of whether his team wins or not and mention that you have to look at context/situation. Yet, in your last sentence, you rank Russell the greatest in terms of accolades yet don't consider his circumstances/context.

It doesnt contradict, it actually supports... A player has control only over himself, a player can like Magic Johnson was the best at help his teammates get greater looks, yes, but the rest is completely up to them/their talent/skill... and so is it especially defensively.... there is just to much to compensate for individually to win over a team that is far better, a team that has ten players averaging 10 ppg will win over a team that has one player averaging 50 and the rest 1-5....

When the leader/best player of a team wins a championship, you have to look at the context... what did he do, what did he have around, who did he play against, what were the circumstances...

Player A vs Player B:
All his teammates are massive scrubs, he takes them to Finals, to even Game 7, but loses, averages 50-10-10-10-10, schools Player B individually.

Player B vs Player A:
Most stacked team ever, he takes them to Finals and wins, he averages 20 something, wins FMVP, gets schooled by Player A individually, "but he won the championship" :rolleyes:

Who was really more of a winner? Who should be ranked higher? Who really is a better talent? Who really impacts his team more?

Team success is important, that is the impact, its very important, but what i am saying is that you can measure that WITHOUT that player ending up winning the championship.....

[ClipperRevival]

Baseball with the pitcher. Hockey.

And in games 1-3, where Lebron's team managed to go 2-1? Ridiculously small sample size, and we saw how the rest of the series played out. Over the long haul, one player can not do it.

You mean a guy who plays once every 5th game and doesn't hit? Maybe in a playoff series, yes, where he might pitch 3 games. Bumgarner was a great example last year.

But a dominant, two way basketball player can completely impose his will on the basketball court unlike any other sport. You can make a case for QB in football but he can't play defense.

[LAZERUSS]

How many times did Wilt/Russell face off in the playoffs? Of those, how many went to a 7th game? Not here to bash, just honestly curious.

First of all...HALF of them went to a 7th game...and were decided by margins of 2, 1, 4, and 2 points. And in Wilt's rookie season, had he not badly injured his hand at the end of game two, and was worthless in game three (and nowhere near 100% in game four), they lost a game six by two points. In yet another one, in the '64 Finals, Wilt somehow took a POS roster from the year before, and while they lost the series, 4-1, the last two games were decided in the waning seconds, against Russell and his SEVEN other HOF teammates.

Of course, when Wilt had an equal roster, that was healthy, he annihilated Russell (like he did so often), and led his TEAM to a near-sweep of the eight-time defending 60-21 champs. They were four points away from a sweep in game four, and then crushed Boston in game five by a 14-116 margin.

CLEARLY, in their first SIX seasons in the league...swap rosters, and Chamberlain easily wins SIX rings, and Russell might not have made the playoffs in any of them.

And in their last four, we know that with a healthy set of teammates, it was not even a contest. In the other three, Russell's teammates brutalized Wilt's in one (holding them to a combined .352 FG%); Chamberlain and his teammates were decimated by injuries in another (and lost a game seven by four points); and Wilt's COACH clearly cost them one more (in a series in which they were ONE PLAY away from winning, 4-1.)

[ClipperRevival]

Regardless of answer, does it matter?

If the 2015 Finals Cleveland roster played the 2015 finals GSW warriors roster in 100 different series.... Cleveland loses probably 95 times. Does that mean Lebron is not as good as Curry?

Yes it matters. The more game 7s they have played, the more the case against Wilt is stronger because you can say he had chances to beat Russell.

And your 2015 example is an extreme one. Of course few expected a DEPLETED Cavs to beat the stacked Warriors. And that is exactly why I don't hold this L against Lebron. Context/circumstance. But I do hold 2011 seriously against Lebron because he folded under pressure.

[LAZERUSS]

Yes it matters. The more game 7s they have played, the more the case against Wilt is stronger because you can say he had chances to beat Russell.

And your 2015 example is an extreme one. Of course few expected a DEPLETED Cavs to beat the stacked Warriors. And that is exactly why I don't hold this L against Lebron. Context/circumstance. But I do hold 2011 seriously against Lebron because he folded under pressure.

Just the complete OPPOSITE. It was a MIRACLE that Chamberlain was taking far inferior rosters, who played even worse in the post-season, to so many game seven losses.

For instance in Cherry's book on Chamberlain, he quoted a Philly sports writer who claimed that Boston was favored in EVERY game of the '62 EDF's...in a series that was decided by TWO points on Boston's home court in a game seven.

[ClipperRevival]

It doesnt contradict, it actually supports... A player has control only over himself, a player can like Magic Johnson was the best at help his teammates get greater looks, yes, but the rest is completely up to them/their talent/skill... and so is it especially defensively.... there is just to much to compensate for individually to win over a team that is far better, a team that has ten players averaging 10 ppg will win over a team that has one player averaging 50 and the rest 1-5....

When the leader/best player of a team wins a championship, you have to look at the context... what did he do, what did he have around, who did he play against, what were the circumstances...

Player A vs Player B:
All his teammates are massive scrubs, he takes them to Finals, to even Game 7, but loses, averages 50-10-10-10-10, schools Player B individually.

Player B vs Player A:
Most stacked team ever, he takes them to Finals and wins, he averages 20 something, wins FMVP, gets schooled by Player A individually, "but he won the championship" :rolleyes:

Who was really more of a winner? Who should be ranked higher? Who really is a better talent? Who really impacts his team more?

Team success is important, that is the impact, its very important, but what i am saying is that you can measure that WITHOUT that player ending up winning the championship.....

Why do people keep bringing up the EXTREME example of the 2015 finals? Yes, Bron was by far the best player in that series despite losing. But most times, situations aren't that extreme. Sometimes the difference in a series can be determined by the superior play of a great player.

I also noticed you didn't mention clutchness or the ability to raise your game when it matters. You seem to describe great players as almost robot like figures. Like they will give you a certain amount of points, rebs, asst every night and whether he wins is completely dependent on factors outside of this player. And I don't see it that way. I also look at playoff numbers and clutchnees and see if a player can raise his level of play when it matters.

[ClipperRevival]

Just the complete OPPOSITE. It was a MIRACLE that Chamberlain was taking far inferior rosters, who played even worse in the post-season, to so many game seven losses.

For instance in Cherry's book on Chamberlain, he quoted a Philly sports writer who claimed that Boston was favored in EVERY game of the '62 EDF's...in a series that was decided by TWO points on Boston's home court in a game seven.

Fyi, I would take Wilt over Russell without hesitation if I had to pick one to start a team. He had the type of talent that would transcend any era. He was the far superior individual talent and could dominate on both ends. But, you have to give some weight, whether good or bad, to the fact that Russell won like no other in history and Wilt couldn't win much and his playoff numbers dipped tremendously in the playoffs.

[HighFlyer23]

MJ doesn't have a glaring deficiency or weakness in comparison to the rest.

Magic wasn't the best scorer and was an average defender in comparison to Jordan.
Bird also doesn't compare when we look at defensive ability.
Wilt didn't win enough despite his dominance of the league. His free throw shooting was another weakness.
Russell doesn't have the offensive ability to compare to MJ.
Kareem was outplayed in head to head match ups, such as in 1983 against Moses Malone. Jordan never let anyone outshine him.

[dubeta]

MJ doesn't have a glaring deficiency or weakness in comparison to the rest.

Magic wasn't the best scorer and was an average defender in comparison to Jordan.
Bird also doesn't compare when we look at defensive ability.
Wilt didn't win enough despite his dominance of the league. His free throw shooting was another weakness.
Russell doesn't have the offensive ability to compare to MJ.
Kareem was outplayed in head to head match ups, such as in 1983 against Moses Malone. Jordan never let anyone outshine him.


http://www.blogcdn.com/massively.joystiq.com/media/2011/10/facepalm.jpg

[SexSymbol]

The way I see it, you play the game for only one reason and that's winning, so obviously Russell is the greatest player of all time, 11 rings are too magnificent of an achievement to overlook

[Carter_17]

1/9
Also Kobe>MJ

[Quickening]

Dude couldn't do jack chit in the playoffs until the 90s when all the other superstars retired or got old... MJ at his peak in the late 80s wasn't good enough to get a top seed.

People will make out his peak was when he won the championships, but that was just when he got a stacked team/coach and a watered down era.

[Soundwave]

The Lakers/Celtics/Pistons are lucky the Blazers made the dumbest decision in NBA history to draft Sam Bowie over Michael Jordan, otherwise Jordan + Drexler + several other players the Blazers had likely start winning titles around 1988 or so (sorry Pistons).

Larry Bird even said that after Jordan dropped 63 on them, he went to the Celtics front office to tell them to do everything possible to win now, because he was convinced it was only a matter of time before the Bulls got their sh*t together and put a good team around Jordan and when that happened it would be over for everyone else.

And he was right.

To be honest the Bulls were never really that stacked in a conventional sense. The Lakers/Celtics were stacked, their 3rd best player (Worthy, Parrish) would be the best player several other teams. The Bulls were never built like that.

[hawke812]

Heard of Michael, but never watched any of his games. Space Jam was a disappointment. 1/5 stars. Bill Murray carried that movie.

[FKAri]

Heard of Michael, but never watched any of his games. Space Jam was a disappointment. 1/5 stars. Bill Murray carried that movie.

Bill Murray is one of the goats (srs)

[BBallZen83]

basically all the pathetic lebron fans lol

Nice attempt at painting a broad stroke. Besides your obvious agenda, I have seen Kobe trolls in here who try to prop up Kobe over Jordan as well. Is that the whole damn Kobe fan base? Yeah. Don't be a tard. There are select stans(trolls) in both fanbases that say stupid shiet. I'm a Lebron fan, but I'm not a dumbace, so no I don't rank Lebron higher than Jordan.

[3ball]

MJ (had) a stacked team


All of the Bulls' championship teams required MJ to lead the league in scoring and be the greatest scorer and clutch player the game's ever seen.

Accordingly, MJ had the least offensive help of any superstar in the history of the game - no other player was required to carry the offensive burden that MJ carried.. The stats are what they are.. And we're also talking about one of the best defensive players of all time - he's in the top group of wing defenders along with Detroit's Rodman, Payton, Pippen, and Moncrief.





Larry Bird even said that after Jordan dropped 63 on them, he went to the Celtics front office to tell them to do everything possible to win now, because he was convinced it was only a matter of time before the Bulls got their sh*t together and put a good team around Jordan and when that happened it would be over for everyone else.


Bob Cousy (played with Bill Russell):


"4 years ago I was going into places like Los Angeles and Chicago and saying Bird was the best player I've ever seen.. Sitting here today, I don't think there's any doubt that Larry Bird certainly deserves to be mentioned in the same breath, as does Magic Johnson, with Michael Jordan, but at this point in time, Michael Jordan is the best basketball player that I've ever seen perform."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtKnm-Sf7t8&t=3m33s


Jerry West:


"I don't think there's any flaw in this guy's game. He's the best defensive player in the league in my opinion. He's the best competitor in the league in my opinion. He's BY FAR the best offensive player in my opinion. He's the best clutch player in the game. He's got the whole package. And his skill level - on top of that enormous physical package - really sets him apart from the other players."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtKnm-Sf7t8&t=1m18s

[hateraid]

:oldlol: Do you realize there are people on this board that started watching bball starting in the 80's who try to keep it real? And when we read what you just typed, you make yourself look like an idiot. Really man, just check yourself. This is the big leagues. You think your bullshit will fly with the veterans of the game?
I've been watching ball since the 80's and I happen to agree with his points
It's stans like you that need a reality check and realize that these conversations are all subjective. Comments like the one you just made make Jordan stans look like insecure whiners

[kshutts1]

Yes it matters. The more game 7s they have played, the more the case against Wilt is stronger because you can say he had chances to beat Russell.

And your 2015 example is an extreme one. Of course few expected a DEPLETED Cavs to beat the stacked Warriors. And that is exactly why I don't hold this L against Lebron. Context/circumstance. But I do hold 2011 seriously against Lebron because he folded under pressure.
Since I was discussing Wilt vs Russell with the "extreme" example, can it not be argued that Wilt's teams vs Russell's team was also extreme?

And as for pitcher playing one out of every 5 games... that's one pitcher. I just said a pitcher, the position of pitcher, has an absolute ton of control over a game. Essentially a non issue; a minor technicality, but it is correct.

[jbryan1984]

To me there is just no comparing him to anyone. To play like he did at the time he did, against the players he played against and be flawless 6 for 6 in the finals? It'll never happen again. I really think had he never retired early, he would of won the entire decade. I love having LeBron on my time but he just doesn't play with the confidence Jordan did and he can't match him either.

[kshutts1]

To me there is just no comparing him to anyone. To play like he did at the time he did, against the players he played against and be flawless 6 for 6 in the finals? It'll never happen again. I really think had he never retired early, he would of won the entire decade. I love having LeBron on my time but he just doesn't play with the confidence Jordan did and he can't match him either.
Please tell me who these players are.

Old Magic? Old Bird? Old Isiah? Really young Shaq?

Jordan was phenomenal. Don't get me wrong. But he came into greatness at a really fortuitous time for both himself and the league.

The league expanded, the top talent was on the downswing, the next wave of talent had not hit yet, and Stern was being a media mastermind making Jordan the deity he is today. Granted, that marketing ploy would not have succeeded if Jordan was bad, but we can't act like the marketing doesn't at least affect our opinions.

[ClipperRevival]

Please tell me who these players are.

Old Magic? Old Bird? Old Isiah? Really young Shaq?

Jordan was phenomenal. Don't get me wrong. But he came into greatness at a really fortuitous time for both himself and the league.

The league expanded, the top talent was on the downswing, the next wave of talent had not hit yet, and Stern was being a media mastermind making Jordan the deity he is today. Granted, that marketing ploy would not have succeeded if Jordan was bad, but we can't act like the marketing doesn't at least affect our opinions.

Hmm, let's see.

1991 - Magic's Lakers
1992 - Clyde's Blazers
1993 - Barkley's Suns
1996 - Payton/Kemp's Sonics
1997 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz
1998 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz

If MJ didn't exist, some of these guys would have rings. MJ prevented these guys from getting one. He imposed his will on the game and came out on top. But yeah, it's the expanded era (forgetting the fact that the league at this point was really starting to scout for international talent, hence greatly increasing the talent pool).

[kshutts1]

Hmm, let's see.

1991 - Magic's Lakers
1992 - Clyde's Blazers
1993 - Barkley's Suns
1996 - Payton/Kemp's Sonics
1997 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz
1998 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz

If MJ didn't exist, some of these guys would have rings. MJ prevented these guys from getting one. He imposed his will on the game and came out on top. But yeah, it's the expanded era (forgetting the fact that the league at this point was really starting to scout for international talent, hence greatly increasing the talent pool).
Forgetting nothing. Who were these great non Americans entering the league and being stars? I'll wait.

[ClipperRevival]

Forgetting nothing. Who were these great non Americans entering the league and being stars? I'll wait.

That's not the point. The point is starting around the late 80's, we started seeing a trickle of international talents who were scouted internationally playing in the NBA in succeeding (Drazen, Vlade, Sabonis, etc). And after the 1992 Olympics, it opened the flood gates in terms of the talent pool being scouted.

[ClipperRevival]

It's really funny to be honest. MJ can't win in any scenario according to some of you. He's 6/6 and never stretched to a game 7 and it's the expansion era as an excuse. And if he were to lose any of those finals, people would bring this up ad naseum. I can't imagine how hard he would be bashed if he was 2/6 like Bron.

[kshutts1]

Hmm, let's see.

1991 - Magic's Lakers
1992 - Clyde's Blazers
1993 - Barkley's Suns
1996 - Payton/Kemp's Sonics
1997 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz
1998 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz


Let's also expand this out to the other rounds of the playoffs. What all time greats did Jordan's Bulls beat there?

[kshutts1]

It's really funny to be honest. MJ can't win in any scenario according to some of you. He's 6/6 and never stretched to a game 7 and it's the expansion era as an excuse. And if he were to lose any of those finals, people would bring this up ad naseum. I can't imagine how hard he would be bashed if he was 2/6 like Bron.
I will NEVER argue against Jordan being A GOAT. But I will forever argue against him being the only GOAT, the pinnacle of GOATness. Jordan-is-a-deity makes me sick. Not saying you, personally, take it to that length. But that is my motive.

[LAZERUSS]

Hmm, let's see.

1991 - Magic's Lakers
1992 - Clyde's Blazers
1993 - Barkley's Suns
1996 - Payton/Kemp's Sonics
1997 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz
1998 - Malone/Stockton's Jazz

If MJ didn't exist, some of these guys would have rings. MJ prevented these guys from getting one. He imposed his will on the game and came out on top. But yeah, it's the expanded era (forgetting the fact that the league at this point was really starting to scout for international talent, hence greatly increasing the talent pool).

Honest question...how do those above teams compare to the Sixers of the first half of the decade of the 80's (particularly '83); the Bad Boys in the last half of the decade of the 80's (particularly '89 and '90); and the Celtics (especially from '84 thru '87), and Lakers teams (particularly '80, '82, '85, and '87) of the entire decade of the 80's?

For instance...how does Magic's '91 Lakers compare to his '85 and '87 Lakers?

Furthermore, plant MJ's 90's Bulls teams into the 80's, and how many rings do they get?

[ClipperRevival]

Let's also expand this out to the other rounds of the playoffs. What all time greats did Jordan's Bulls beat there?

Jesus Christ you are dense. Do you not realize that had MJ lost to some of these guys, their legacies would be enhanced and might be considered all time greats? Like Barkley, Malone, Drexler, etc? But MJ prevented these guys from winning, which further enhanced MJ's legacy and further degraded their legacies?

MJ really can't win in your eyes. If he beats them, they weren't that good to begin with. If he loses to them, he was never that great. :banghead: I'll stop here.

[ClipperRevival]

Honest question...how do those above teams compare to the Sixers of the first half of the decade of the 80's (particularly '83); the Bad Boys in the last half of the decade of the 80's; and the Celtics and Lakers teams of the entire decade of the 80's?

Furthermore, plant MJ's 90's Bulls teams into the 80's, and how many rings do they get?

No way to tell. I can tell you that MJ's Bulls from the 1st 3 peat and 2nd 3 peat rank pretty high on my all time great teams list. Anytime you have MJ, Pippen and Grant and MJ, Pippen and Rodman on the same floor, you are an ultra athletic team that can suffocate you on D with their speed and athleticism. That's one aspect that always gets overlooked about these Bulls. They were great defensive teams. Maybe not on paper but when it mattered, they could lock you down. Same goes on the other end, they could really run up and down the court and manufacture easy buckets.

I am not going to sit here and say the 90's were stronger than the 80's in terms of top tier teams. The 80's is the greatest era ever for top tier teams, not even close. But MJ didn't have the choice of choosing when to be born. He could only deal with the opponents he had to face.

[TheMan]

Please tell me who these players are.

Old Magic? Old Bird? Old Isiah? Really young Shaq?

Jordan was phenomenal. Don't get me wrong. But he came into greatness at a really fortuitous time for both himself and the league.

The league expanded, the top talent was on the downswing, the next wave of talent had not hit yet, and Stern was being a media mastermind making Jordan the deity he is today. Granted, that marketing ploy would not have succeeded if Jordan was bad, but we can't act like the marketing doesn't at least affect our opinions.
If you nitpick enough, you can say this about many greats, including Shaq (he had to wait for MJ, Hakeem, Ewing, DRobinson, KMalone, Barkley etc to decline and he dominated in the early 2000s before Duncan, KG, Dirk, Wade etc came into their own, perfect timing!) :rolleyes:

How bout Bran? He needed to wait for the Big 3 Celtics to get old and for the demise of the repeat Kobe Lakers (same argument MJ haters say about the Bad Boys Pistons, Showtime Lakers and Larry's Celtics) to finally win in 2012 and 2013! How convenient for him that he hit his peak prime in 09 through 12 just when KG, Kobe, Duncan, Dirk etc are getting old and before KD, Harden, CP (gets hurt), Rose (same), Howard (ditto), RW etc are pre peak/prime?

A player has no control when he was born and you can't use the he lucked out that his prime was in between so and so old team/players and so and so young team/players argument. That's just being a hater.

[ClipperRevival]

Let's also expand this out to the other rounds of the playoffs. What all time greats did Jordan's Bulls beat there?

Shaq and his Magic. Ewing and his Knicks. That's another two.

[kshutts1]

Jesus Christ you are dense. Do you not realize that had MJ lost to some of these guys, their legacies would be enhanced and might be considered all time greats? Like Barkley, Malone, Drexler, etc? But MJ prevented these guys from winning, which further enhanced MJ's legacy and further degraded their legacies?

MJ really can't win in your eyes. If he beats them, they weren't that good to begin with. If he loses to them, he was never that great. :banghead: I'll stop here.
I'm not dense at all. I don't use rings as a way of judging individuals. I don't expect you to know that because, even though I've been on here singing that same song since about 2006, I'm a nobody on here.

Barkley, Malone, Drex, Stockton, Magic... all greats. But at least look at circumstance, and when's the last time there was a Finals matchup without greats on both sides?

But seriously.. who else did Jordan beat in other rounds?

[riseagainst]

1. Kareem

2. Magic

3. Russell

4. LeBron

5. Jordan

6. Shaq

7. Bird

8. Wilt

9. Hakeem

10. Duncan


#donthate

:lol
:roll:





























:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:
:roll:

[kshutts1]

If you nitpick enough, you can say this about many greats, including Shaq (he had to wait for MJ, Hakeem, Ewing, DRobinson, KMalone, Barkley etc to decline and he dominated in the early 2000s before Duncan, KG, Dirk, Wade etc came into their own, perfect timing!) :rolleyes:

How bout Bran? He needed to wait for the Big 3 Celtics to get old and for the demise of the repeat Kobe Lakers (same argument MJ haters say about the Bad Boys Pistons, Showtime Lakers and Larry's Celtics) to finally win in 2012 and 2013! How convenient for him that he hit his peak prime in 09 through 12 just when KG, Kobe, Duncan, Dirk etc are getting old and before KD, Harden, CP (gets hurt), Rose (same), Howard (ditto), RW etc are pre peak/prime?

A player has no control when he was born and you can't use the he lucked out that his prime was in between so and so old team/players and so and so young team/players argument. That's just being a hater.
Being a hater? Or taking context in to account?

I'd be hating if I steadfastly refused to admit that Jordan is not a GOAT candidate, and I maintained that he's not even a top 20 talent. That would be a hater. That's not me.

Considering context, however, is how to get a (hopefully) more clear picture. I'm perfectly content to admit that Jordan is, along with many others, a GOAT candidate. Again, what I always have and always will argue against is the mythology surrounding Jordan, and those that believe it is so.

I prefer to call that being a realist.

[ClipperRevival]

I'm not dense at all. I don't use rings as a way of judging individuals. I don't expect you to know that because, even though I've been on here singing that same song since about 2006, I'm a nobody on here.

Barkley, Malone, Drex, Stockton, Magic... all greats. But at least look at circumstance, and when's the last time there was a Finals matchup without greats on both sides?

But seriously.. who else did Jordan beat in other rounds?

WTF? :facepalm

[kshutts1]

Furthermore, do people not use "era" to argue against Wilt, Russell, Cousy, Pettit, Baylor? Why is that argument considered valid against them, but we can't consider circumstance with Jordan?

Why can we say that Lebron gets an "easy pass to the Finals" but we can't say that about Jordan?

Why can we discount Kobe's earlier rings, to an extent, because he played with Shaq, but can't consider the help that Jordan had without being flamed or called a hater?

[ClipperRevival]

Being a hater? Or taking context in to account?

I'd be hating if I steadfastly refused to admit that Jordan is not a GOAT candidate, and I maintained that he's not even a top 20 talent. That would be a hater. That's not me.

Considering context, however, is how to get a (hopefully) more clear picture. I'm perfectly content to admit that Jordan is, along with many others, a GOAT candidate. Again, what I always have and always will argue against is the mythology surrounding Jordan, and those that believe it is so.

I prefer to call that being a realist.

Here's some facts for you buddy. In his last 6 full seasons with the Bulls, he won 6 titles. Highest scoring avg in history for regular season and playoffs Highest PER in history for regular season and playoffs. Won a scoring title in 10 of his 11 eligible seasons as a Bull and the only season he missed it was his rookie year and he averaged 28.2 ppg. So pretty much every year he was healthy after his rookie year, he led the league in scoring. 6 FMVP, 5 MVP, 2 gold medal.........

[TheMan]

Jesus Christ you are dense. Do you not realize that had MJ lost to some of these guys, their legacies would be enhanced and might be considered all time greats? Like Barkley, Malone, Drexler, etc? But MJ prevented these guys from winning, which further enhanced MJ's legacy and further degraded their legacies?

MJ really can't win in your eyes. If he beats them, they weren't that good to begin with. If he loses to them, he was never that great. :banghead: I'll stop here.
This

Let's say the KMalone Jazz beat the Bulls in 97 and 98, MJ ends up 4/6, today's haters like khutts would be even more relentless in their hatred of Jordan. He wasn't good enough to beat that great Jazz team. The Jazz would be seen as a great team today, nobody disses a repeat champion. But like you said, you can't win with these fools. :rolleyes:

[ClipperRevival]

This

Let's say the KMalone Jazz beat the Bulls in 97 and 98, MJ ends up 4/6, today's haters like khutts would be even more relentless in their hatred of Jordan. He wasn't good enough to beat that great Jazz team. The Jazz would be seen as a great team today, nobody disses a repeat champion. But like you said, you can't win with these fools. :rolleyes:

And the thing is, the Jazz team from that era was absolutely a great team. They punked the ultra talented Lakers in the late 90's (which included Kobe/Shaq) for a couple of years. I mean they had no chance. But MJ comes up clutch in both years and beats them but it gets discarded. Unfreaken believable.

[kshutts1]

Here's some facts for you buddy. In his last 6 full seasons with the Bulls, he won 6 titles. Highest scoring avg in history for regular season and playoffs Highest PER in history for regular season and playoffs. Won a scoring title in 10 of his 11 eligible seasons as a Bull and the only season he missed it was his rookie year and he averaged 28.2 ppg. So pretty much every year he was healthy after his rookie year, he led the league in scoring. 6 FMVP, 5 MVP, 2 gold medal.........
Jordan was awesome. Please show me a post I've made where I said anything but.

But, literally the sole purpose of this entire thread, is wondering how someone can actually think Jordan is not THE GOAT.

That type of close-minded, short-sighted, no-historical-context thinking is asinine. You asked. Don't ask a stupid question if you don't want "stupid" answers.

[Quickening]

I am not going to sit here and say the 90's were stronger than the 80's in terms of top tier teams. The 80's is the greatest era ever for top tier teams, not even close. But MJ didn't have the choice of choosing when to be born. He could only deal with the opponents he had to face.

You realise that MJ did actually play in the 80s, I know his fans like to make out he only took part in the 90s. But he did face quality opponents in the 80s, and was a first round exit.

People act like MJ willed his team to win, ignoring he only stated willing teams to win ina washed down era when all the other top 10 candidates got old/retired.

[kshutts1]

Time for me to go shoot around, though. I really need to improve upon my horrific-of-late FT shooting. 68% :facepalm

[TheMan]

You realise that MJ did actually play in the 80s, I know his fans like to make out he only took part in the 90s. But he did face quality opponents in the 80s, and was a first round exit.

People act like MJ willed his team to win, ignoring he only stated willing teams to win ina washed down era when all the other top 10 candidates got old/retired.
You, as a Bron stan, should know more than most, the importance of quality teammates. Do you hold it against Jordan for not beating those legendary Celtics teams with cokehead Woolridge and Corzine as your next best players? Really? :facepalm

These dudes are just ridiculous.

I'm holding it against Bran for not beating GS these Finals, 2/6 what a loser:rolleyes:

[ClipperRevival]

You realise that MJ did actually play in the 80s, I know his fans like to make out he only took part in the 90s. But he did face quality opponents in the 80s, and was a first round exit.

People act like MJ willed his team to win, ignoring he only stated willing teams to win ina washed down era when all the other top 10 candidates got old/retired.

You know what, I had no idea he played in the 80's until you just told me right now. Thanks for the history lesson.

[Dro]

Nobody else has a case as far as I'm concerned.....

[warriorfan]

You know what, I had no idea he played in the 80's until you just told me right now. Thanks for the history lesson.

:oldlol:

[oarabbus]

MJ is the GOAT.

But you could make a case for Russell... or a shakier case for Kareem.

But the way I see it MJ is the greatest to ever lace em up. I bet all the MJ nut-slobberers are jerking it to this thread.