Does MJ elevating the 2nd Rd Bulls to 3-peat mean he could 3-peat with the 19' Celts?

[3ball]

Wait are you saying he took the 94 squad to a later three peat? Kukoc was a rookie. Rodman wasn't there yet. Neither was Harper. That's three of the top six guys in the rotation not counting Jordan himself who weren't on that 94 team or were only a rookie. He didn't elevate the second round Bulls.

As far as elevating the Celtics. Yes, he'd almost certainly do that and win some titles for them (though I'm not sure Irving puts up with him). So would LeBron, Magic, Kareem, Bird and plenty of other ATGs. The Celtics have solid role players and coaching and are just missing an elite leader to take them to the next level.

Tbe 19' celtics had much more talent than the 94' bulls, so MJ/Kyrie 3-peating in Boston is actually a conservative modern day estimate of what MJ did in the 90's

[Manny98]

Add anyone in the top 10 to the 19 Celtics and they would 3-peat

Kyrie
Brown
Tatum
LeBron
Horford

That's basically the 2015-2017 Cavs on steroids

[3ball]

Add anyone in the top 10 to the 19 Celtics and they would 3-peat

Kyrie
Brown
Tatum
LeBron
Horford

That's basically the 2015-2017 Cavs on steroids

^^^ that's worse than the Warriors, or the Lebron/Wade/Bosh/Allen Heat, and neither 3-peated, so the lebron-celtics surely wouldn't either.. 3-peating is hard and it requires goat teamwork, goat athleticism and skill to mesh the two.

For simplicity, let's ssume that Lebron/Kyrie/Love cancel out with Lebron/Kyrie/Horford... Therefore, the edge that you think Tatum/Brown have over Tristan/JR is enough to turn a near-record blowout in 17' into a victory?

No way - maybe if Tatum or Brown turn into mega stars, but not their 19' versions (bad role players that weren't even better than JR/Tristan/Korver-level players - if Hayward made them that bad then Lebron would destroy then worse than he did Hughes and Jamison)..

Again, 3-peating is hard and Lebron, Durant, Curry, and Kobe weren't good enough to do it

[SouBeachTalents]

^^^ that's worse than the Warriors, or the Lebron/Wade/Bosh/Allen Heat, and neither 3-peated, so the lebron-celtics surely wouldn't either.. 3-peating is hard and it requires goat teamwork, goat athleticism and skill to mesh the two.

For simplicity, let's ssume that Lebron/Kyrie/Love cancel out with Lebron/Kyrie/Horford... Therefore, the edge that you think Tatum/Brown have over Tristan/JR is enough to turn a near-record blowout in 17' into a victory?

No way - maybe if Tatum or Brown turn into mega stars, but not their 19' versions (bad role players that weren't even better than JR/Tristan/Korver-level players - if Hayward made them that bad then Lebron would destroy then worse than he did Hughes and Jamison)..

Again, 3-peating is hard and Lebron, Durant, Curry, and Kobe weren't good enough to do it

The '17 Warriors would've beaten the Bulls too

[3ball]

The '17 Warriors would've beaten the Bulls too

^^^ espn blather...


1) Why did Kawhi's Spurs and also Curry/Klay/Dray flirt with 70 wins, while Lebron/Kyrie/Love couldn't even win 60??... Lebron's cast had the best or equal talent, but the worst team

Now imagine a scenario where Lebron/Kyrie/Love are a juggernaut like they're supposed be in 2016, and they flirt with 70 wins like Kawhi and Curry did - so when the Cavs beat Curry that year, it isn't perceived as an upset, and the 70-win, championship Cavs enter 2017 as a juggernaut of the highest order.. obviously, it wouldn't matter what KD did in that scenario - the Cavs would be ready and favored in 2017..

But instead of the 17' Cavs being a legendary juggernaut, they were a weak 51-win underdog.. let me repeat - 51 wins with prime Kyrie and Love - there's no excuse for that, yet you're using the resulting underdog status to say the Cavs were outmatched.


2) Now let's look at your claim more closely - you're saying that lebron lost with goat help (29 ppg from 2nd option), so that means MJ would lose too - but the best help that MJ ever lost with was Pippen's 19 on 40.9% in the 95' ECF (baseball year).. Or his rookie year with Woolridge's 20 on 50% in the 1st Rd

Outside of his rookie year and his baseball year, the best help he lost with was Pippen's 16 on 42% in the 90' ECF (migraine).. edit: he also lost with woolridge's 21 on 40% in 86' 1st Rd.

Basically, MJ would never lose with juggernaut 27 ppg help (Wade in 11' Finals), or 29 ppg (Kyrie in 17' Finals), because he barely lost with 16 ppg help, and never had more than 22 ppg help in any series (6 rings, 6/6)


3) What if Lebron held Durant to his regular season average of 25, and made him work, so like 46% shooting - is that too much to ask?.. Holding Durant to 11 less points (his normal averages) would've overcome the Cavs' deficit and won the series... Why is this too much to ask?


4) Why can't Lebron get his same stats but with more off-ball play so his teams have better ball movement and get more effective points from Lebron/Kyrie than just "your-turn-my-turn" brand that gets it's doors blown off???.....
..

[SouBeachTalents]

^^^ espn blather...


1) Why did Kawhi's Spurs and also Curry/Klay/Dray flirt with 70 wins, while Lebron/Kyrie/Love couldn't even win 60??... Lebron's cast had the best or equal talent, but the worst team

Now imagine a scenario where Lebron/Kyrie/Love are a juggernaut like they're supposed be in 2016, and they flirt with 70 wins like Kawhi and Curry did - so when the Cavs beat Curry that year, it isn't perceived as an upset, and the 70-win, championship Cavs enter 2017 as a juggernaut of the highest order.. obviously, it wouldn't matter what KD did in that scenario - the Cavs would be ready and favored in 2017..

But instead of the 17' Cavs being a legendary juggernaut, they were a weak 51-win underdog.. let me repeat - 51 wins with prime Kyrie and Love - there's no excuse for that, yet you're using the resulting underdog status to say the Cavs were outmatched.


2) Now let's look at your claim more closely - you're saying that lebron lost with goat help (29 ppg from 2nd option), so that means MJ would lose too - but the best help that MJ ever lost with was Pippen's 19 on 40.9% in the 95' ECF (baseball year).. Or his rookie year with Woolridge's 20 on 50% in the 1st Rd

Outside of his rookie year and his baseball year, the best help he lost with was Pippen's 16 on 42% in the 90' ECF (migraine).. edit: he also lost with woolridge's 21 on 40% in 86' 1st Rd.

Basically, MJ would never lose with juggernaut 27 ppg help (Wade in 11' Finals), or 29 ppg (Kyrie in 17' Finals), because he barely lost with 16 ppg help, and never had more than 22 ppg help in any series (6 rings, 6/6)


3) What if Lebron held Durant to his regular season average of 25, and made him work, so like 46% shooting - is that too much to ask?.. Holding Durant to 11 less points (his normal averages) would've overcome the Cavs' deficit and won the series... Why is this too much to ask?


4) Why can't Lebron get his same stats but with more off-ball play so his teams have better ball movement and get more effective points from Lebron/Kyrie than just "your-turn-my-turn" brand that gets it's doors blown off???.....
..

Jordan in his prime never came close to facing a team as good as the 2017 Warriors, that's honestly not even up for debate

The way you just add and remove ppg and act like that's applicable for series played 20-30 years apart is laughable. I could use the same arguments, that LeBron averaging 35/10/10 and losing in '17/'18 shows he would've won replacing 2nd 3peat Jordan producing significantly less across the board. But basketball doesn't work that way, you have to account for era, pace, matchups etc., something you either blatantly pretend not to do or refuse to do

And of course you fail to acknowledge that Durant averaged 5 more shots per game and over 6 additional mpg in the Finals compared to the regular season, a very similar reason why LeBron's ppg also increased significantly in that series

[MrFonzworth]

Hard to say. Like OP said, Celtics had more talent top to bottom by a massive margin, it's a testament to how much better players are now vs. Back then.

[Manny98]

^^^ that's worse than the Warriors, or the Lebron/Wade/Bosh/Allen Heat, and neither 3-peated, so the lebron-celtics surely wouldn't either.. 3-peating is hard and it requires goat teamwork, goat athleticism and skill to mesh the two.

For simplicity, let's ssume that Lebron/Kyrie/Love cancel out with Lebron/Kyrie/Horford... Therefore, the edge that you think Tatum/Brown have over Tristan/JR is enough to turn a near-record blowout in 17' into a victory?

No way - maybe if Tatum or Brown turn into mega stars, but not their 19' versions (bad role players that weren't even better than JR/Tristan/Korver-level players - if Hayward made them that bad then Lebron would destroy then worse than he did Hughes and Jamison)..

Again, 3-peating is hard and Lebron, Durant, Curry, and Kobe weren't good enough to do it

They wouldn't be facing the 17 Warriors though if it's the 2019 Celtics and KD would have been injured and left the Warriors so no one could stop them from 3-peating

LeBron would have 3-peated with the Heat as well if Wades knees didn't break down

[SpaceJam]

Pippen elevated them to the 2nd round.

Exactly.

[3ball]

Jordan in his prime never came close to [COLOR="DarkRed"]facing a team as good as the 2017 Warriors[/COLOR], that's honestly not even up for debate

MJ overcame bigger talent deficits - that's all that matters - you're comparing teams from a 2-star format to teams from the Big 3 era as if you won't be called out for it - but you will and if that's your argument, ur wrong

Lebron had a 3-star team to face the 3-star opponents he had through 2016, so he didn't face any talent deficits until 2017.

And even when the Warriors added a 4th star in 2017, Lebron still didn't face the talent deficit that MJ faced against the 89' Cavs (1 all-star vs 3 all-stars and ron harper), or the Pistons (2 all-star vs. five 3x all-stars) - the goat is supposed to make up for differences in talent - MJ did, Lebron didn't...

The way you just add and remove ppg and act like that's applicable for series played 20-30 years apart is laughable. [COLOR="navy"][COLOR="darkred"]I could use the same arguments[/COLOR], that LeBron averaging 35/10/10 and losing in '17/'18 shows he would've won replacing 2nd 3peat Jordan[/COLOR] producing significantly less across the board. But basketball doesn't work that way, you have to account for era, pace, matchups etc., something you either blatantly pretend not to do or refuse to do

You can't use the same argument because Lebron's offense wasn't my argument - it's his defense that allowed Durant 11 points above his regular season average

There's no excuse for letting Durant get 36 on 56% - that's utterly ridiculous and that alone makes him nowhere NEAR goat.. it's just a horrific defensive performance - literally the worst defense ever - and this isn't some fluke - he let kawhi and Iggy go off too, and they were 8-12 ppg players at the time

MJ never did that - infact, he always held his man to 35-43% shooting, which is amazing

And of course you fail to acknowledge that [COLOR="Blue"]Durant averaged 5 more shots per game[/COLOR] and over 6 additional mpg in the Finals compared to the regular season, a very similar reason why LeBron's ppg also increased significantly in that series

Lebron let him get those shots....

His defense was horrific..

It's funny that you don't attribute Durant's play to the guy guarding him...

Lebron's defense was all-time bad - so far from "goat".... ...

it's hard to fathom that people think a matador who gives up FMVP's and breakout performances like it's candy on Halloween is anywhere NEAR mj .. it's preposterous

[Wally450]

The 2017-18 Celtics would push the Bulls to the limit.

Yes, even without Kyrie and Hayward.

[ImKobe]

The 2017-18 Celtics would push the Bulls to the limit.

Yes, even without Kyrie and Hayward.

imagine rookie Tatum trying to score against Jordan or Pippen. It's laughable. The 2018 Celtics were below-average offensively and that's with Irving playing 60 games.

[AirBonner]

I could see Tatum blocking MJ 4 times in one game