First Round Playoff Thread

Ayt · Post #3661 » by **Ayt** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 10:33 pm

Nebula1 wrote:
mattg wrote:
Nebula1 wrote:Garnett took a step up in greatness when he went to Boston. There was greater pressure and expectations and they met them. If Lebron and the Heat do the same, it will elevate Lebron's greatness in the same fashion.

In terms of legacy, then yeah a title adds to greatness. But you don't honestly think that a player gets more impactful on the court when he wins a championship?

Garnett elevated his game when he got to Boston. By default, playing with better players elevates your game (at least it should) and he was the galvanizing force that earned them a title. So yes, I'd say he had a greater impact on the floor because situationally the pressure was higher every game and therefore the demand on his game was higher.

In what way?

Nebula1 · Post #3662 » by **Nebula1** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 10:34 pm

Newz wrote:
Nebula1 wrote:Garnett took a step up in greatness when he went to Boston.

False. His supporting cast took a step up and thus they could achieve more as a team.

It is mind boggling how people think champions are individual accomplishments.

Garnett's team was certainly better, but so was he. He solidified his greatness by proving anything is possible.

A team is comprised of individuals and winning a title is both a team and individual accomplishment. When a guy trains his entire life for that ring and achieves it, it's a culmination of personal sacrifice and accolades as well as a team accomplishment.

Ayt · Post #3663 » by **Ayt** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 10:37 pm

Nebula1 wrote:
Newz wrote:
Nebula1 wrote:Garnett took a step up in greatness when he went to Boston.

False. His supporting cast took a step up and thus they could achieve more as a team.

It is mind boggling how people think champions are individual accomplishments.

Garnett's team was certainly better, but so was he. He solidified his greatness by proving anything is possible.

A team is comprised of individuals and winning a title is both a team and individual accomplishment. When a guy trains his entire life for that ring and achieves it, it's a culmination of personal sacrifice and accolades as well as a team accomplishment.

InsideOut · Post #3664 » by **InsideOut** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 10:57 pm

Nebula1 wrote:I value rings over production, obviously. But you slanted the question to be about signing players, which is a nonsense angle. Like I said before, I would rather win a championship with poor production than lose with good production.

And yes, it's a slight against Malone that he couldn't defeat Jordan's Bulls. It also elevated Jordan's greatness that he never lost a Finals and was that dude.

My question wasn't slanted and you finally answered it by saying you value rings over production. I'd say most people can't agree with that when it comes to a team sport. If you and I are the same size and play one on one 10 times and you beat me each game it is fair to say you are the better player. But then if we play 5 on 5 and I add 4 guys that are much better than the 4 guys you added and we crush your team you somehow think that now makes me the better/greater player? Do you see how nuts that sounds? You are the better player and the fact we added 8 other players to the equation shouldn't change that fact.

You realize Jordan's team were always favored over Malone's teams because he played for the better team? So in your mind if the year before their first title if by some twist of fate the Bulls traded MJ for Malone and Malone won all those titles then Malone is the GOAT while MJ is just a rich man's Dominique Wilkins. You really think that is how to judge a player and how great they were?

Wooderson · Post #3665 » by **Wooderson** » Fri Jun 8, 2012 11:07 pm

Nebula1 wrote:Garnett took a step up in greatness when he went to Boston. There was greater pressure and expectations and they met them. If Lebron and the Heat do the same, it will elevate Lebron's greatness in the same fashion.

What about Kobe 05-07?

Nebula1 · Post #3666 » by **Nebula1** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 1:53 am

Nebula1 · Post #3667 » by **Nebula1** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 2:05 am

Ayt wrote:

Good to see someone has a sense of humor around here.

InsideOut wrote:My question wasn't slanted and you finally answered it by saying you value rings over production. I'd say most people can't agree with that when it comes to a team sport. If you and I are the same size and play one on one 10 times and you beat me each game it is fair to say you are the better player. But then if we play 5 on 5 and I add 4 guys that are much better than the 4 guys you added and we crush your team you somehow think that now makes me the better/greater player? Do you see how nuts that sounds? You are the better player and the fact we added 8 other players to the equation shouldn't change that fact.

Your question was slanted by asking which I value more in signing a player, ERA or prior championships. Obviously that is too simplified to answer. However, I would rather have a player win a title than have top tier production. I'm looking forward while you're looking at trailing factors.

I don't disagree that adding additional variables (players) can skew the title of "best player on Earth" but I think it's fairly agreed that the top best players currently are James and Durant. They know it too and have been going at each other since summer. James' team is plenty talented with Bosh and Wade as is Durant's with Harden, Westbrook and Ibaka. These two guys will be playing for title of best player in addition to the title. Lebron is the current belt-holder and Durant is the challenger.

Even if Jordan's team were favored, he was still the better player and closed the door on Malone multiple times. Are you going to argue that Malone was better than Jordan? That's up to you. I argue that Michael Jordan would have found a way to the title one way or another. He was unstoppable.

InsideOut · Post #3668 » by **InsideOut** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 3:27 am

Nebula1 wrote:
Ayt wrote:

Good to see someone has a sense of humor around here.

InsideOut wrote:My question wasn't slanted and you finally answered it by saying you value rings over production. I'd say most people can't agree with that when it comes to a team sport. If you and I are the same size and play one on one 10 times and you beat me each game it is fair to say you are the better player. But then if we play 5 on 5 and I add 4 guys that are much better than the 4 guys you added and we crush your team you somehow think that now makes me the better/greater player? Do you see how nuts that sounds? You are the better player and the fact we added 8 other players to the equation shouldn't change that fact.

Even if Jordan's team were favored, he was still the better player and closed the door on Malone multiple times. Are you going to argue that Malone was better than Jordan? That's up to you. I argue that Michael Jordan would have found a way to the title one way or another. He was unstoppable.

MJ was unstoppable once he was surrounded by another 1st team all NBA and top 50 player ever, two another all-stars, the best defensive and rebounding player in the league and maybe the best coach ever. Take those guys away and he was just a scorer than couldn't win dink and was being called out for it.

I'll argue that with your bias toward titles that if MJ was drafted by the Clipper's and Malone was on the Bulls you'd be calling the Mailman the GOAT and MJ a rich man Dominique Wilkins. No player can win a title playing with crap...not even MJ.

Nebula1 · Post #3669 » by **Nebula1** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 3:49 am

Agree to disagree on those MJ points

Post #3670 » by **ReasonablySober** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 4:24 am

Jordan was unstoppable regardless of the cast. If you gave him a roster of even average talent he would have won rings right away. But he didn't even have that. There was no one on those early to mid 80's rosters worth a ****. Couple that with the fact he was going against historically great teams the likes of which we haven't seen in decades and I'm not docking Jordan points for not winning rings early on.

LeonSmith · Post #3671 » by **LeonSmith** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 4:37 am

InsideOut wrote:
Nebula1 wrote:
Ayt wrote:

Good to see someone has a sense of humor around here.

InsideOut wrote:My question wasn't slanted and you finally answered it by saying you value rings over production. I'd say most people can't agree with that when it comes to a team sport. If you and I are the same size and play one on one 10 times and you beat me each game it is fair to say you are the better player. But then if we play 5 on 5 and I add 4 guys that are much better than the 4 guys you added and we crush your team you somehow think that now makes me the better/greater player? Do you see how nuts that sounds? You are the better player and the fact we added 8 other players to the equation shouldn't change that fact.

Even if Jordan's team were favored, he was still the better player and closed the door on Malone multiple times. Are you going to argue that Malone was better than Jordan? That's up to you. I argue that Michael Jordan would have found a way to the title one way or another. He was unstoppable.

MJ was unstoppable once he was surrounded by another 1st team all NBA and top 50 player ever, two another all-stars, the best defensive and rebounding player in the league and maybe the best coach ever. Take those guys away and he was just a scorer than couldn't win dink and was being called out for it.

I'll argue that with your bias toward titles that if MJ was drafted by the Clipper's and Malone was on the Bulls you'd be calling the Mailman the GOAT and MJ a rich man Dominique Wilkins. No player can win a title playing with crap...not even MJ.

When he won his first title Pippen wasn't even an all-star and Rodman was five years away from joining the Bulls. I don't know where you're getting the "two another all-stars" bit from unless you're counting guys like Robert Parish who was 62 years old when he was a Bull. If you're counting Horace Grant then you shouldn't include Rodman because they never played together. If you're counting BJ Armstrong then LOL. It would be like saying LeBron isn't that great because he couldn't win in Cleveland and he was surrounded by three all-stars, a DPOY and a top 10 player of all-time*.

It's not that Jordan won with nothing, but if you look at the Bulls from when he was drafted to what they became, it's pretty amazing. If you want to knock Jordan for anything knock him for allegedly resisting the moves like trading for Pippen (a MASSIVE risk - people don't realize the Bulls got killed by the media/public for that draft day trade when it happened) and him wanting a guy like Joe Wolf instead. Kind of the precursor to his GM days though

* (That's Carlos Boozer, Mo Williams, Antwan Jamison, Ben Wallace and Shaq for those of you playing along at home.)

bigkurty · Post #3672 » by **bigkurty** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 4:37 am

DrugBust wrote:Jordan was unstoppable regardless of the cast. If you gave him a roster of even average talent he would have won rings right away. But he didn't even have that. There was no one on those early to mid 80's rosters worth a ****. Couple that with the fact he was going against historically great teams the likes of which we haven't seen in decades and I'm not docking Jordan points for not winning rings early on.

Agreed. Put prime Jordan on the bucks right now and we win a chip or at least come close. Dude was a killer and by far the GOAT. You only need to watch that YouTube video showing how crazy aggressive teams D'd up on him back in the day to realize just how soft the nba has become and how great he was.

AussieBuck · Post #3673 » by **AussieBuck** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 9:04 am

bigkurty wrote:
DrugBust wrote:Jordan was unstoppable regardless of the cast. If you gave him a roster of even average talent he would have won rings right away. But he didn't even have that. There was no one on those early to mid 80's rosters worth a ****. Couple that with the fact he was going against historically great teams the likes of which we haven't seen in decades and I'm not docking Jordan points for not winning rings early on.

Agreed. Put prime Jordan on the bucks right now and we win a chip or at least come close. Dude was a killer and by far the GOAT. You only need to watch that YouTube video showing how crazy aggressive teams D'd up on him back in the day to realize just how soft the nba has become and how great he was.

If we could also trade Gooden for Asik* I could see it.
Jennings
Jordan
Delfino
Ersan
Asik

Beno
Ellis
Dunleavy
Luc
Odoh
Sanders
Harris

* Yeah I know that trade would never happen but we are getting time machine Jordan so lets stretch reality a bit.

brettski · Post #3674 » by **brettski** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 10:22 am

Anyone else see this?

http://www.beantownbanter.com/celts/nba ... eat-shirts

I know I'm getting my tinfoil hat out now.

InsideOut · Post #3675 » by **InsideOut** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 2:18 pm

bigkurty wrote:
DrugBust wrote:Jordan was unstoppable regardless of the cast. If you gave him a roster of even average talent he would have won rings right away. But he didn't even have that. There was no one on those early to mid 80's rosters worth a ****. Couple that with the fact he was going against historically great teams the likes of which we haven't seen in decades and I'm not docking Jordan points for not winning rings early on.

Agreed. Put prime Jordan on the bucks right now and we win a chip or at least come close. Dude was a killer and by far the GOAT. You only need to watch that YouTube video showing how crazy aggressive teams D'd up on him back in the day to realize just how soft the nba has become and how great he was.

You need to watch a You Tube video to tell me about Jordan? Well I was at the games and I'm telling you that you guys are absolutely nuts if you think MJ on the Bucks wins a title or MJ playing with a bunch of mediocre talent wins a title. Even playing with other great players the Bulls often needed 6 or 7 games to get past Indiana or the Jazz and yet you think he still beats those teams playing with average guys? Where is the logic in that? MJ didn't win dink right away and only did when he was paired with other great players like Pippen, Rodman, Grant and another guy that made the all-star game in Armstrong. The switch to Jackson as coach also helped a ton.

Help me out here PP and you older guys and set these You Tube guys straight. MJ was great...the Bulls were great but MJ on his own wasn't winning any titles. In fact, nobody on their own is winning any titles...Wilt couldn't do it either.

Newz · Post #3676 » by **Newz** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 2:21 pm

I never thought I'd say this... but you guys overrate Michael Jordan if you think you could put him on the Bucks and instantly win a championship. You guys realize when he was winning rings he had another MVP candidate on his team and for the last three he had the best rebounder/top 5 defender of all-time in addition to that... right?

Nowak008 · Post #3677 » by **Nowak008** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 3:15 pm

Newz,

Was it Lebron's fault for not winning the championship last year? Was his supporting cast too weak or were the Mavs too strong of a team?

jakecronus8 · Post #3678 » by **jakecronus8** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 3:51 pm

I think you're over rating no tip pip a tad. Good player but not so great when MJ wasn't around. Id certainly say Wade is a better player but pip was a better fit with Jordan. Also, the Bulls never had a #3 option even remotely close to Bosh.

Newz · Post #3679 » by **Newz** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 3:54 pm

Nowak008 wrote:Newz,

Was it Lebron's fault for not winning the championship last year? Was his supporting cast too weak or were the Mavs too strong of a team?

I think if you count the times that I said last year against the Mavs was on LeBron in this thread, it would be around six or seven.

He didn't play up to the level he should and it was the primary thing that cost them a ring last year. No doubt.

Newz · Post #3680 » by **Newz** » Sat Jun 9, 2012 3:55 pm

jakecronus8 wrote:I think you're over rating no tip pip a tad. Good player but not so great when MJ wasn't around. Id certainly say Wade is a better player but pip was a better fit with Jordan. Also, the Bulls never had a #3 option even remotely close to Bosh.

Rodman >>> Bosh

Also, I would take Pippen over Wade.

You also come off as very uninformed when you say that Pippen wasn't 'so great' when Jordan was around. He lead the Bulls to 50+ wins and almost won MVP without Jordan on the team. How is that 'not so great'?