Moderators: Harry Garris, ken6199, Dirk, bisme37, KingDavid, bwgood77, zimpy27, cupcakesnake, Domejandro, infinite11285
fansse wrote:OriginalRed wrote:fansse wrote:Jordan didn't win ONE playoff series before Pippen lol
Lebron didn't win ONE playoff series before Larry Hughes.
See how dumb both those statements sound without context?
Larry Hughes joined the Cavs in LeBron’s third season. Pippen joined in Jordan’s 8.
fansse wrote:OriginalRed wrote:fansse wrote:Jordan didn't win ONE playoff series before Pippen lol
Lebron didn't win ONE playoff series before Larry Hughes.
See how dumb both those statements sound without context?
Larry Hughes joined the Cavs in LeBron’s third season. Pippen joined in Jordan’s 8.
knicksNOTslick wrote:fansse wrote:OriginalRed wrote:Lebron didn't win ONE playoff series before Larry Hughes.
See how dumb both those statements sound without context?
Larry Hughes joined the Cavs in LeBron’s third season. Pippen joined in Jordan’s 8.
Lebron fans are so desperate they are making up lies now. Jordan was drafted in 84. Pippen in 87. The maths don't make sense.
NyKnicks1714 wrote:Snakebites wrote:Michael Jordan is an all time great. I personally have him as number two all time- I'm definitely not one of those guys who says he'd be DeRozen if he played today.
But the talent level in the league is higher today. Look up and down a typical roster in today's NBA vs the 1990s- I really don't think there's any argument that this isn't the case. The game got more popular (in part due to Michael Jordan) both in the US and abroad. More people domestically and abroad became basketball players. The talent pool got deeper.
I don't know how people argue this, yet they do. Four teams were added from 1988 to 1989, with another two coming in 1995. That is a significant dilution of talent in a very short time frame: 4 teams in 2 years, 6 teams in 7 years. Meanwhile, the current NBA hasn't seen expansion in 20 years (and that was just one team), while also seeing a massive influx of international talent and even more talent with the G league. There's no comparison.
Both conferences had teams that were trash and won 15-30 games, and then each conference had 4-5 really solid teams. Every team that made the playoffs that year did it with a winning record. The Atlanta Hawks with Dominique, Doc, and Moses only won 41games and didn't even make the playoffs 
NbaAllDay wrote:MavsDirk41 wrote:Snakebites wrote:Michael Jordan is an all time great. I personally have him as number two all time- I'm definitely not one of those guys who says he'd be DeRozen if he played today.
But the talent level in the league is higher today. Look up and down a typical roster in today's NBA vs the 1990s- I really don't think there's any argument that this isn't the case. The game got more popular (in part due to Michael Jordan) both in the US and abroad. More people domestically and abroad became basketball players. The talent pool got deeper.
Jordan defeated the following teams in the finals:
Post-Kareem Lakers
Barkley/KJ Suns
Drexler Blazers
GP/Kemp Sonics
Stock/Malone Jazz
Those are some great teams in their own time, but all of them also had guys who'd never crack a playoff rotation today getting key minutes, even starter minutes. All of them had limited three point shooting which would make it harder to outpace the output a Jordan-based offense could put out.
Lets compare the talent level to what Lebron has faced, chronologically speaking:
Duncan/Gino/Parker Spurs
Dirk/Kidd Mavericks
KD/Westbrook/Harden Thunder
Later Spurs
Butler Heat
Oh, and the Warriors FOUR TIMES IN A ROW.
I'd personally argue that both versions of the Spurs were better than anything Jordan faced. Heck, from a pure talent standpoint you can probably put the Thunder there too.
And NONE of those teams hold a candle to the Warriors, a team prime Lebron had the fortune of running into FOUR TIMES.
You can say Jordan would have still gotten six titles than Lebron when faced with those opponents, but there isn't a solid body of proof of that when looking at the opponents he actually had to face.
What are you going off of to say the teams James faced were stronger competition? Stats like SRS and Overall Net Rating will say otherwise. Kidd was 38 and Caron Butler was injured in 2011. That Miami Heat team was missing their 3rd best player (Dragic) the entire series and their second best player (Bam) missed two games in the finals. That Miami team is the worst out of all the funals teams either player faced. Miami was playing Olynk and Meyers Leonard at center with Bam out.
The 2012 OKC team were young and the underdog by far. Golden St and San Antonio were legit but James played with two of the best players in the nba in Miami and the same in Cleveland. James played with more talent than Jordan. Pick whoever you want between the two but look at the other side of the spectrum.
This is where we probably dig a little deeper. The original comment just looking at Finals is also a fairly narrow scope.
No one should argue Miami were a strong team. It's not like it was a breeze for LA to make the Finals although it looked easier because LeBron played like the best player in the League alongside AD.
2011 a clear downside for Lebron that is obvious, but throwing out a few old ages is a bit dishonest to that Mavs team. They swept the defending champs and 4-1 the up and coming OKC. You can argue they are lower across MJs opponents if you wish but it is in bad faith the way it's described.
2012 I'd agree they were favourites. OkC again underrated by your explanation of them but sure.
2013 Wade and Bosh were not even close to 'best players in the league' anymore. Lebron needed a lot of monster games to drag them through. Ray Allen was also 37, 1 year Removed from Kidd for reference.
Similar above to 2014.
15 is unique with all the injuries I won't go there with time in mind.
16 to 18 GSW were better than any Team Jordan faced.
Now yes Lebron had 'more' help collectively because he played with more elite players. It doesn't mean he always had a 'better' team. Plenty of context goes into aging Wade, Love. Diminished role of a 3rd player on every single roster. Top heavy = less depth teams.
You could go back and forth about it but tldr
I could agree that LeBron had a better team at times, while also be confident that he played better teams at times too.
Which is why the team v team arguement is silly imo. Let's analyse what they did on the court and how they helped their teams rather than 'he had more help' narratives. Not saying that's what you are doing but it doesn't actually add value to how good a particular player is unless you extrapolate their individual impact specifically.
One_and_Done wrote:Jordan would likely be a top 5 player if he played today, but I doubt anyone would consider him the GOAT. The 90s sucked compared to today's league.
SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Jordan would likely be a top 5 player if he played today, but I doubt anyone would consider him the GOAT. The 90s sucked compared to today's league.
Peak Jordan would be the MVP of the current NBA.
The only thing better about the current NBA players is their 3 point shooting.
Current 3 point shooters remove the help defenders that are needed to stop Jordan in the paint.
It is OK that Jordan waa not a good 3 point shooter as along as he is surrounded by 3 point shooters.
SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Jordan would likely be a top 5 player if he played today, but I doubt anyone would consider him the GOAT. The 90s sucked compared to today's league.
Peak Jordan would be the MVP of the current NBA.
The only thing better about the current NBA players is their 3 point shooting.
Current 3 point shooters remove the help defenders that are needed to stop Jordan in the paint.
It is OK that Jordan waa not a good 3 point shooter as along as he is surrounded by 3 point shooters.
MavsDirk41 wrote:NbaAllDay wrote:MavsDirk41 wrote:
What are you going off of to say the teams James faced were stronger competition? Stats like SRS and Overall Net Rating will say otherwise. Kidd was 38 and Caron Butler was injured in 2011. That Miami Heat team was missing their 3rd best player (Dragic) the entire series and their second best player (Bam) missed two games in the finals. That Miami team is the worst out of all the funals teams either player faced. Miami was playing Olynk and Meyers Leonard at center with Bam out.
The 2012 OKC team were young and the underdog by far. Golden St and San Antonio were legit but James played with two of the best players in the nba in Miami and the same in Cleveland. James played with more talent than Jordan. Pick whoever you want between the two but look at the other side of the spectrum.
This is where we probably dig a little deeper. The original comment just looking at Finals is also a fairly narrow scope.
No one should argue Miami were a strong team. It's not like it was a breeze for LA to make the Finals although it looked easier because LeBron played like the best player in the League alongside AD.
2011 a clear downside for Lebron that is obvious, but throwing out a few old ages is a bit dishonest to that Mavs team. They swept the defending champs and 4-1 the up and coming OKC. You can argue they are lower across MJs opponents if you wish but it is in bad faith the way it's described.
2012 I'd agree they were favourites. OkC again underrated by your explanation of them but sure.
2013 Wade and Bosh were not even close to 'best players in the league' anymore. Lebron needed a lot of monster games to drag them through. Ray Allen was also 37, 1 year Removed from Kidd for reference.
Similar above to 2014.
15 is unique with all the injuries I won't go there with time in mind.
16 to 18 GSW were better than any Team Jordan faced.
Now yes Lebron had 'more' help collectively because he played with more elite players. It doesn't mean he always had a 'better' team. Plenty of context goes into aging Wade, Love. Diminished role of a 3rd player on every single roster. Top heavy = less depth teams.
You could go back and forth about it but tldr
I could agree that LeBron had a better team at times, while also be confident that he played better teams at times too.
Which is why the team v team arguement is silly imo. Let's analyse what they did on the court and how they helped their teams rather than 'he had more help' narratives. Not saying that's what you are doing but it doesn't actually add value to how good a particular player is unless you extrapolate their individual impact specifically.
Lets look into the Bulls finals opponents:
1991: Magic was runner up to Jordan for league MVP that year. He was awesome that year. Worthy was still an all star level player and played well in the finals. They were big with Divac, Perkins, and Campbell. They had depth/role players with AC Green, Byron Scott, and Teagle. Great team.
1992: similar to the 2011 Mavs they were led by one all time super star in Drexler who was runner up to Jordan for league mvp that year. They were great defensively, rebounded well, and had depth. Terry Porter, Buck Williams, Jerome Kersey, Aine, Duckworth, and Cliff Robinson. This was a veteran team that was well coached too.
1993: Barkley won league mvp over Jordan that year. He was unstoppable in the regular season and finals. Prolly his best year in the league. KJ was a great point guard. Thunder Dan Majerle was the prototypical 3 and D player. Chambers, Ainge, and Dumas. They were an offensive juggernaut, not so great defensively.
1996: Kemp and Payton were a great duo. Payton garnered some mvp votes several years in the mid 90s. Kemp was one of the best power forwards in the league. Detlef Schrempf was a multi talented euro player who could do score, shoot the ball, pass, defend. Hawkins and McMillian were great defensively. They also had Sam Perkins.
97/98: Utah was awesome throughout the mid 90s. Malone won mvp in 97 and was runner up to Jordan in 98. Stockton was the best point guard in the league. They were a veteran team with some good role players in Hornacek, Ostertag, Russell, Eisley, Anderson, and Antoine Carr. They also had an all time great coach in Sloan.
Just like James, Jordan had help. James has played with more all star players, especially in their prime, but Jordan had a great sidekick in Pippen along with Rodmam, Kukoc, Horace Grant, and some really good role players. Other than the GS teams, i would put any of these teams up against the teams James faced.
ChipotleWest wrote:SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Jordan would likely be a top 5 player if he played today, but I doubt anyone would consider him the GOAT. The 90s sucked compared to today's league.
Peak Jordan would be the MVP of the current NBA.
The only thing better about the current NBA players is their 3 point shooting.
Current 3 point shooters remove the help defenders that are needed to stop Jordan in the paint.
It is OK that Jordan waa not a good 3 point shooter as along as he is surrounded by 3 point shooters.
It's really a false narrative that Jordan was a bad 3 point shooter. What brought his average down was actually the seasons where he didn't shoot them. He would average 1 or less a game probably had some half court heaves at the buzzard and averaged 20 percent. When Jordan shot 3 or more 3 pointers per game he shot an average percentage even before those seasons they moved up the 3 point line, it's just that most seasons he didn't shoot them at all. He would be an average to above average 3 point shooter in today's game. Larry Bird was a good 3 point shooter but in the years he shot 1 or less per game his average was around 20% as well.
SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:ChipotleWest wrote:SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:
Peak Jordan would be the MVP of the current NBA.
The only thing better about the current NBA players is their 3 point shooting.
Current 3 point shooters remove the help defenders that are needed to stop Jordan in the paint.
It is OK that Jordan waa not a good 3 point shooter as along as he is surrounded by 3 point shooters.
It's really a false narrative that Jordan was a bad 3 point shooter. What brought his average down was actually the seasons where he didn't shoot them. He would average 1 or less a game probably had some half court heaves at the buzzard and averaged 20 percent. When Jordan shot 3 or more 3 pointers per game he shot an average percentage even before those seasons they moved up the 3 point line, it's just that most seasons he didn't shoot them at all. He would be an average to above average 3 point shooter in today's game. Larry Bird was a good 3 point shooter but in the years he shot 1 or less per game his average was around 20% as well.
Jordan only had one decent 3 point shooting year without the shortenned 3 pont line.
NbaAllDay wrote:MavsDirk41 wrote:NbaAllDay wrote:
This is where we probably dig a little deeper. The original comment just looking at Finals is also a fairly narrow scope.
No one should argue Miami were a strong team. It's not like it was a breeze for LA to make the Finals although it looked easier because LeBron played like the best player in the League alongside AD.
2011 a clear downside for Lebron that is obvious, but throwing out a few old ages is a bit dishonest to that Mavs team. They swept the defending champs and 4-1 the up and coming OKC. You can argue they are lower across MJs opponents if you wish but it is in bad faith the way it's described.
2012 I'd agree they were favourites. OkC again underrated by your explanation of them but sure.
2013 Wade and Bosh were not even close to 'best players in the league' anymore. Lebron needed a lot of monster games to drag them through. Ray Allen was also 37, 1 year Removed from Kidd for reference.
Similar above to 2014.
15 is unique with all the injuries I won't go there with time in mind.
16 to 18 GSW were better than any Team Jordan faced.
Now yes Lebron had 'more' help collectively because he played with more elite players. It doesn't mean he always had a 'better' team. Plenty of context goes into aging Wade, Love. Diminished role of a 3rd player on every single roster. Top heavy = less depth teams.
You could go back and forth about it but tldr
I could agree that LeBron had a better team at times, while also be confident that he played better teams at times too.
Which is why the team v team arguement is silly imo. Let's analyse what they did on the court and how they helped their teams rather than 'he had more help' narratives. Not saying that's what you are doing but it doesn't actually add value to how good a particular player is unless you extrapolate their individual impact specifically.
Lets look into the Bulls finals opponents:
1991: Magic was runner up to Jordan for league MVP that year. He was awesome that year. Worthy was still an all star level player and played well in the finals. They were big with Divac, Perkins, and Campbell. They had depth/role players with AC Green, Byron Scott, and Teagle. Great team.
1992: similar to the 2011 Mavs they were led by one all time super star in Drexler who was runner up to Jordan for league mvp that year. They were great defensively, rebounded well, and had depth. Terry Porter, Buck Williams, Jerome Kersey, Aine, Duckworth, and Cliff Robinson. This was a veteran team that was well coached too.
1993: Barkley won league mvp over Jordan that year. He was unstoppable in the regular season and finals. Prolly his best year in the league. KJ was a great point guard. Thunder Dan Majerle was the prototypical 3 and D player. Chambers, Ainge, and Dumas. They were an offensive juggernaut, not so great defensively.
1996: Kemp and Payton were a great duo. Payton garnered some mvp votes several years in the mid 90s. Kemp was one of the best power forwards in the league. Detlef Schrempf was a multi talented euro player who could do score, shoot the ball, pass, defend. Hawkins and McMillian were great defensively. They also had Sam Perkins.
97/98: Utah was awesome throughout the mid 90s. Malone won mvp in 97 and was runner up to Jordan in 98. Stockton was the best point guard in the league. They were a veteran team with some good role players in Hornacek, Ostertag, Russell, Eisley, Anderson, and Antoine Carr. They also had an all time great coach in Sloan.
Just like James, Jordan had help. James has played with more all star players, especially in their prime, but Jordan had a great sidekick in Pippen along with Rodmam, Kukoc, Horace Grant, and some really good role players. Other than the GS teams, i would put any of these teams up against the teams James faced.
Anyone saying Jordan's finals were easy are silly. I don't disagree there were some strong teams. However I would take the 17/18 GSW over anything MJ faced fairly convincingly. 16 likely too. Spurs 14 also very slept on.
The only reason that any of this matters is if you claim Lebron had more help, it only matters comparatively to what they faced. Outside of 11 there is no Finals he should have won (argument for 15 if no injuries) and In almost all other cases unless he goes supernova they don't win 16 (+ a few things that went there way)
So the whole finals opponent thin is silly because there are plenty of factors
ChipotleWest wrote:SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:ChipotleWest wrote:
It's really a false narrative that Jordan was a bad 3 point shooter. What brought his average down was actually the seasons where he didn't shoot them. He would average 1 or less a game probably had some half court heaves at the buzzard and averaged 20 percent. When Jordan shot 3 or more 3 pointers per game he shot an average percentage even before those seasons they moved up the 3 point line, it's just that most seasons he didn't shoot them at all. He would be an average to above average 3 point shooter in today's game. Larry Bird was a good 3 point shooter but in the years he shot 1 or less per game his average was around 20% as well.
Jordan only had one decent 3 point shooting year without the shortenned 3 pont line.
And the rest were all 1 or less per game which basically means he didn't shoot them. If there's 2 seconds left and he throws up a half court buzzard beater and it misses which it usually will it counts against him. He wasn't sitting there trying to nail 3's as part of the offense. Again Larry Bird nobody calls him a bad 3 point shooter but in the years he shot 1 or less he had averages of 20% like Jordan did. That doesn't mean he was incapable of shooting them. Do you think he just magically could shoot them that one year but not the others? The way the offense was set up was not for him to shoot 3s. Find me anyone that shot 1 or less on average per game and I bet their averages are low.
Archx wrote:Chessboxer wrote:MJ would average 40, quite easily if he wanted too. The amount of spacing in todays' league, MJ would have a freeway to the rim. Also with MJs' ability to cause turnovers (3X steals leader), he would be piling up points in transition.
If you forget all the double or triple teams and blitzes... sure. But in a real world it doesn't always go like that. Otherwise nr1 scorer in the league right now would also average over 40ppg. If anything i would argue he could have potentially averaged more assists than anyone rather than points.
SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:ChipotleWest wrote:SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:
Peak Jordan would be the MVP of the current NBA.
The only thing better about the current NBA players is their 3 point shooting.
Current 3 point shooters remove the help defenders that are needed to stop Jordan in the paint.
It is OK that Jordan waa not a good 3 point shooter as along as he is surrounded by 3 point shooters.
It's really a false narrative that Jordan was a bad 3 point shooter. What brought his average down was actually the seasons where he didn't shoot them. He would average 1 or less a game probably had some half court heaves at the buzzard and averaged 20 percent. When Jordan shot 3 or more 3 pointers per game he shot an average percentage even before those seasons they moved up the 3 point line, it's just that most seasons he didn't shoot them at all. He would be an average to above average 3 point shooter in today's game. Larry Bird was a good 3 point shooter but in the years he shot 1 or less per game his average was around 20% as well.
Jordan only had one decent 3 point shooting year without the shortenned 3 pont line.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
Cavsfansince84 wrote:SinceGatlingWasARookie wrote:One_and_Done wrote:Jordan would likely be a top 5 player if he played today, but I doubt anyone would consider him the GOAT. The 90s sucked compared to today's league.
Peak Jordan would be the MVP of the current NBA.
The only thing better about the current NBA players is their 3 point shooting.
Current 3 point shooters remove the help defenders that are needed to stop Jordan in the paint.
It is OK that Jordan waa not a good 3 point shooter as along as he is surrounded by 3 point shooters.
I agree in the sense that I think overall comparing today's nba to MJ's he would be somewhere between 98%-105% as effective in today's era. The explosion of 3 pt shooting in the last 10 years wouldn't render him less effective by much if at all because I think he'd adapt(by becoming slightly better at it) and also the spacing and more lax rules on dribbling/traveling would also help him. So I think he'd win his 3-4 mvps in today's league as well.
Warspite wrote:Billups was a horrible scorer who could only score with an open corner 3 or a FT.
