NBA FINALS: LeBron faced 5 teams in the top 50 greatest teams, MJ only 1

[Phoenix]

How is his comp being used to disqualify him? Maybe I'm crazy but it just seems to be used as an argument to dispute his status. Such arguments are present for every goat level player, should Mj get a special no criticism pass?

Are you really asking this, and in this thread of all instances? This very thread is being used to basically say 'MJ didn't face anyone of consequence in the finals'. Like, you're shitting me with this question, right? How many times has Jordan's 'weak' finals competition been said on this forum? You're too good a poster to act like you haven't seen this argument presented here 1000 times starting with this thread, where the underlying intent is obvious.

My question isn't to dismiss that argument or to suggest that Jordan should be immune from that particular talking point. So first, let's establish that nothing in my post infers what you're suggesting. I'm asking why 'finals competition' isn't used in the same manner as a talking point about why the Warriors are being called the GOAT. That's a standalone question that doesn't have anything to do with MJ directly. I only dropped MJ's name to ask why finals competition is held against him...and not the Warriors....when making the case that MJ is or isn't the GOAT player, and the Warriors are or aren't the GOAT team, with finals competition in each case being a fair arguing point. Why isn't that argument being applied objectively in both cases? Surely that was easy enough to comprehend in my prior post and if it wasn't, hopefully it's clear now what I'm asking.

[guy]

Am I missing something? What is this ranking from?

[guy]

Are you really asking this, and in this thread of all instances? This very thread is being used to basically say 'MJ didn't face anyone of consequence in the finals'. Like, you're shitting me with this question, right? How many times has Jordan's 'weak' finals competition been said on this forum? You're too good a poster to act like you haven't seen this argument presented here 1000 times starting with this thread, where the underlying intent is obvious.

My question isn't to dismiss that argument or to suggest that Jordan should be immune from that particular talking point. So first, let's establish that nothing in my post infers what you're suggesting. I'm asking why 'finals competition' isn't used in the same manner as a talking point about why the Warriors are being called the GOAT. That's a standalone question that doesn't have anything to do with MJ directly. I only dropped MJ's name to ask why finals competition is held against him...and not the Warriors....when making the case that MJ is or isn't the GOAT player, and the Warriors are or aren't the GOAT team, with finals competition in each case being a fair arguing point. Why isn't that argument being applied objectively in both cases? Surely that was easy enough to comprehend in my prior post and if it wasn't, hopefully it's clear now what I'm asking.

The competition argument is funny to me cause you can literally apply it against like 90% of NBA championships. The way people talk about it, there

[Da_Realist]

Am I missing something? What is this ranking from?

LeBronFanboy.com

[Manny98]

Wait MJ faced 0 top 30 teams in the finals?

How can these pathetic stans brag about "6/6" when he faced no top teams in the finals

Its like bragging about never losing on 2k when you only play on the easiest difficulty

[Phoenix]

The competition argument is funny to me cause you can literally apply it against like 90% of NBA championships. The way people talk about it, there’s only 7-8 championships in NBA history that are relevant.

Yes. Case in point, the Lakers and Celtics beating each other in the 80's should carry exponentially more weight given they are both historically great teams. Though they were pretty much evenly matched. The Celtics win more than 3 titles if the Lakers weren't around, and the Lakers probably end up with 6 rings unless someone else other than Boston was beating them in 84. Also, bear in mind that the 86 Celtics for a long time were considered the GOAT team......when they beat a finals opponent that isn't historically significant. So the more you expand this argument, the more you see the inconsistencies.

The inverse of the 'Lebron faced all time GOAT teams( Durant Warriors) with inferior squads, so you can't dismiss his GOAT argument on that account'....is 'The Durant Warriors faced vastly inferior finals opponents( notably 2018) which should bring their GOAT status under critique'. It doesn't dismiss it, because the Warriors with Durant obviously have too much firepower to think they wouldn't be the favorites against the majority of teams in the history of the league. But they never beat another 'all-time great' team in the finals, or anywhere close to it....but that's not held against them. I mean the 2018 Rockets probably by several advanced metrics are one of the all-time great teams and they pushed Golden State as far as possible.....but the Warriors didn't face them in the finals and 'finals' competition is the barometer being used. It seems to be 'finals competition' should be fair criteria when arguing for BOTH the GOAT player AND the GOAT team in terms of who you face and beat...but I'm not seeing that argument applied equally in each case. Not on this board anyway....and we know why, of course.

[guy]

Yes. Case in point, the Lakers and Celtics beating each other in the 80's should carry exponentially more weight given they are both historically great teams. Though they were pretty much evenly matched. The Celtics win more than 3 titles if the Lakers weren't around, and the Lakers probably end up with 6 rings unless someone else other than Boston was beating them in 84. Also, bear in mind that the 86 Celtics for a long time were considered the GOAT team......when they beat a finals opponent that isn't historically significant. So the more you expand this argument, the more you see the inconsistencies.

The inverse of the 'Lebron faced all time GOAT teams( Durant Warriors) with inferior squads, so you can't dismiss his GOAT argument on that account'....is 'The Durant Warriors faced vastly inferior finals opponents( notably 2018) which should bring their GOAT status under critique'. It doesn't dismiss it, because the Warriors with Durant obviously have too much firepower to think they wouldn't be the favorites against the majority of teams in the history of the league. But they never beat another 'all-time great' team in the finals, or anywhere close to it....but that's not held against them. I mean the 2018 Rockets probably by several advanced metrics are one of the all-time great teams and they pushed Golden State as far as possible..I...but the Warriors didn't face them in the finals and 'finals' competition is the barometer being used. It seems to be 'finals competition' should be fair criteria when arguing for BOTH the GOAT player AND the GOAT team in terms of who you face and beat...but I'm not seeing that argument applied equally in each case. Not on this board anyway....and we know why, of course.

It

[Phoenix]

[QUOTE=guy]It

[Manny98]

[QUOTE=guy]It

[superduper]

MJ's playoff competition was [COLOR="Green"]75% harder than Bran's (3 rounds).[/COLOR]
Bran's playoff competition was [COLOR="Red"]25% harder than MJ's (1 round).[/COLOR]

Peace and 1*'d.

[guy]

All of LeBrons championships are 100% legit

Well yea he

[tpols]

So old spurs & baby warriors...

3ball may be annoying but he's right.

There is absolutely no excuse lebrons prime big 3's should have ever been dogs to those teams...

[sdot_thadon]

Are you really asking this, and in this thread of all instances? This very thread is being used to basically say 'MJ didn't face anyone of consequence in the finals'. Like, you're shitting me with this question, right? How many times has Jordan's 'weak' finals competition been said on this forum? You're too good a poster to act like you haven't seen this argument presented here 1000 times starting with this thread, where the underlying intent is obvious.

My question isn't to dismiss that argument or to suggest that Jordan should be immune from that particular talking point. So first, let's establish that nothing in my post infers what you're suggesting. I'm asking why 'finals competition' isn't used in the same manner as a talking point about why the Warriors are being called the GOAT. That's a standalone question that doesn't have anything to do with MJ directly. I only dropped MJ's name to ask why finals competition is held against him...and not the Warriors....when making the case that MJ is or isn't the GOAT player, and the Warriors are or aren't the GOAT team, with finals competition in each case being a fair arguing point. Why isn't that argument being applied objectively in both cases? Surely that was easy enough to comprehend in my prior post and if it wasn't, hopefully it's clear now what I'm asking.

I have and let's be real both of us know any thread that mentions Mj, Kobe, or Lebron by name have underlying intent 99% of the time. I asked how one aspect of a huge debate could disqualify anyone from the discussion. I only asked you because I respect your opinion, most times when I see blank takes Lebron out of whatever discussion I don't bother to be honest. And also I'll always highlight Mj being handled with kid gloves in certain topics, but that's just me. That said, there's 2 things we know for sure:

1) Lebron did in fact face tougher teams in the finals than Mj did.
2) How much tougher is a gray area that's been difficult to quantify.

About the 17 Warriors thing, it's a great point but playing devil's advocate that Cavs team was pretty good, and I think they'd beat any version of that warrior team with a lesser replacement than Kd in Barnes place. It's not so much they faced weak comp, its that they were super loaded.

[guy]

So old spurs & baby warriors...

3ball may be annoying but he's right.

There is absolutely no excuse lebrons prime big 3's should have ever been dogs to those teams...

And baby Thunder. His underdog status is a result of underperformances in his case, whether it was in past seasons or the season in question.

I mean think about it, by 2012 he went three straight seasons where his teams lost embarrassingly as a favorite. Of course people are going to be skeptical to bet on him again after that.

[Manny98]

And baby Thunder. His underdog status is a result of underperformances in his case, whether it was in past seasons or the season in question.

I mean think about it, by 2012 he went three straight seasons where his teams lost embarrassingly as a favorite. Of course people are going to be skeptical to bet on him again after that.

The "baby Thunder" are still better than any team Jordan faced in the finals