The4thHorseman wrote: RakimAbdulJabar wrote:
The4thHorseman wrote:Basically it comes down to this.
In 1998, MJ avg. 33-4-2 on 42% shooting, wIns the Finals, wins FMVP and still get's praised like no other. In 1996, he avg. 27-5-4 on 41% shooting and still goes on to win that Finals in pretty much easy fashion.
In 2017, James avg. 33-10-12 on 56% shooting and loses in 5gms. Yet he gets penalized for losing and supposedly not doing enough to bring his team to victory. In 2018, he avg. 34-8-10 on 52% shooting. Same as above, penalized for losing and not doing enough for his team.
I don't believe in ever using stats without context to understand them. I don't hold it against Lebron for losing to the Warriors, they were the better team with better players. But I don't like to compare the stats as previously mentioned because you're playing with a different set of teammates against a completely different team, with different mindsets, from different positions and eras so the numbers aren't going to be comparable. In a case like this I strongly believe you need to just watch the game and see how each player impacted their teams chances of winning and whether there was anything they could have done to win that they didn't. I can't blame Lebron for JR Smith's free throw line antics, but I'm also not going to give him more credit than he deserves.I don't think he should be excused for any of the Heat series losses, on paper they had the better team each time no matter how good the Spurs were, they were mostly at the tail end of their careers other than Kawhi. If you're the GOAT all stats aside, that's a scenario that I feel you need to win no matter what.Then fans start to factor in the Draymond suspension and the Ray Allen shot and while luck is part of the game and every player has benefited and suffered due to it at some point, it's fair to at least consider that he could easily be 1-8 in the finals right now
and that has to have some kind of impact on a discussion of the greatest of all time.
We both know that championships aren't won on paper and Miami's awful defense in that 2014 series definitely didn't show up on that paper pre-series. Plus in 2014, nobody was really referring to LeBron as the GOAT at the time
Not sure why you bring up luck. Ray Allen has made the most 3's in NBA history. If him hitting a corner 3 (the easiest place on the floor) is considered luck, then people need to look up the definition. Draymond, who was considered probably 4 option on offense at the time, put up 32-15-9 in game 7 and GSW still couldn't win "at home." Luck didn't have much to do with Cavs winning in 2016. It was more about GSW getting over-confident.
You mention MJ tired after 3 straight appearances and Pippen bad back in '98 yet they STILL won in convincing fashion. That means either Chicago had tremendous help or the Jazz weren't really that good to begin with. I think we both know the answer to that considering Utah scored 54pts in one game and 34yr old Hornacek was their 2nd leading scorer at 10ppg on 41% shooting. That's down right awful.
I addressed with the other poster, but correct it's not won on paper, but when you have the advantage on paper then I don't want to hear excuses about why you didn't win.
The luck in that scenario is one of the greatest coaches of all time not having Duncan on the court to help secure a defensive rebound, having the bounce go to the offensive team and not only hitting a corner 3, but one with time expiring and maybe an extra little step allowed.
What does it matter whether people were referring to him as the GOAT or not?
I never said MJ was tired because of 3 straight appearances, I simply said he was tired. It could have been the 7 game series with the Pacers, it could have been from giving 100% on both ends, it could have been a variety of factors but he still found a way to will his team over the line
You actually believe the Jazz weren't that good? The team that made the Finals 2 years in a row, lead by Stockton and Malone, that beat Hakeems Rockets, Duncan and Robinsons Spurs 4-1 and swept Shaq and Kobe's Lakers
What convincing fashion are you speaking of? Game 1 was decided by 3 in Utah's favour, Game 2 by 5 to the Bulls, Game 4 by 4 pts to the Bulls, Game 5 by 2 pts to the Jazz and Game 6 by 1 pt to the Bulls.....so he had an anomaly in Game 4 which was a blowout, other than Malone no one could make a shot. It makes no sense to ignore the 5 very close games and look at one blowout and say the Bulls won in convincing fashion
That series the teams averaged 88 and 80 points, so you weren't going to have a lot of guys in double digits. The Bulls 2nd leading scorer only averaged 15.
The Jazz had basically played that way the whole playoffs however Stockton and Russell were averaging around 3-5 more pts a game before the Bulls series, that certainly hurt them considering how close 5 of the 6 games were.