CP3/Jordan/KG vs Steph/Kobe/Duncan

[70sFan]

While, eventually many of them may need to step down with players like Curry, Jokic, and Giannis panning out. I just would not dish those spots to players who could not dominate their contemporaries.

But Curry and LeBron dominated their contemporaries, why don't you have them ahead of Jordan?

LeBron has an argument but slow down a bit with Curry, let his career play out. I don't have LeBron but don't mi d others have him ahead MJ.

Why though? Curry won already 4 rings in a much more talented and competitive era than Jordan. The difference between the number of his rings and Jordan rings is smaller than Jordan vs Russell and Russell won his last ring (1969) vs Jordan's first ring (1991, so 22 years) in basically the same interval to Jordan's last ring (1998) vs Curry's first ring (2015, so 17 years). I can easily argue that the league changed drastically more between 1998 and 2015 than between 1969 and 1991 as well.

[dygaction]

But Curry and LeBron dominated their contemporaries, why don't you have them ahead of Jordan?

LeBron has an argument but slow down a bit with Curry, let his career play out. I don't have LeBron but don't mi d others have him ahead MJ.

Why though? Curry won already 4 rings in a much more talented and competitive era than Jordan. The difference between the number of his rings and Jordan rings is smaller than Jordan vs Russell and Russell won his last ring (1969) vs Jordan's first ring (1991, so 22 years) in basically the same interval to Jordan's last ring (1998) vs Curry's first ring (2015, so 17 years). I can easily argue that the league changed drastically more between 1998 and 2015 than between 1969 and 1991 as well.

You seem to have convinced yourself so run with it. To me MJ is still the best combination of personal accolades and team success. I do have Curry above Russell now.
Russell's rings came from a league averaged ~9 teams, MJ's from ~28 teams, and LeBron/Curry's 30 teams. you can estimate a conversion rate maybe factoring international players.

[70sFan]

You seem to have convinced yourself so run with it.

Me? It's you who put Jordan at the top, despite saying how much international pool matters...

To me MJ is still the best combination of personal accolades and team success.

He doesn't have more personal accolades or team success than Russell and Kareem though...

Russell's rings came from a league averaged ~9 teams, MJ's from ~28 teams, and LeBron/Curry's 30 teams. you can estimate a conversion rate maybe factoring international players.

5 more rings in between 30 years with the same talent pool, but less teams = not enough

2 more rings in between 30 years with significantly worse talent pool, but the same number of teams = more than enough

I am not the one who creates criteria to get the expected results.

[dygaction]

You seem to have convinced yourself so run with it.

Me? It's you who put Jordan at the top, despite saying how much international pool matters...

To me MJ is still the best combination of personal accolades and team success.

He doesn't have more personal accolades or team success than Russell and Kareem though...

Russell's rings came from a league averaged ~9 teams, MJ's from ~28 teams, and LeBron/Curry's 30 teams. you can estimate a conversion rate maybe factoring international players.

5 more rings in between 30 years with the same talent pool, but less teams = not enough

2 more rings in between 30 years with significantly worse talent pool, but the same number of teams = more than enough

I am not the one who creates criteria to get the expected results.

Jordan was winning three in a league with 27 teams and then again with 29 teams, with international players like Hakeem, Mutombo, Divac, Sabonis, Kukoc, Schrempf, Petrovic. Not as talented as right now, meaning the past 4 years with Jokic, Giannis, Embiid, Luka, SGA... emerging, which are not Curry's peak years.

Kareem would have a stronger case if he were clearly the best player on his own team, but his team success mostly came when teaming up with Magic. Again, I would not mind if you want to rank him above MJ. Similarly Curry had Durant who was an arguably better player. Much less arguments I have heard to suggest Pippen better than MJ.

[TheLand13]

Usually I go with Jordan but Steph/Kobe/Duncan in this case - three corner stones anchoring three winningest franchises. Steph and Duncan are also the perfect team players who can work with Kobe.

Why does that matter?

That's all you want in basketball and should go way before rapm, ppg or rpg, no?

Um, no lmao. Am I being trolled here or are you being for real?

[Tomtolbert]

The defense of the first group is too good to pass up.

Jordan is clearly the best player here. And I think KG would be on the short list of best possible options to pair up with Jordan.

[dygaction]

The defense of the first group is too good to pass up.

Jordan is clearly the best player here. And I think KG would be on the short list of best possible options to pair up with Jordan.

From that perspective, assume Kobe+Shaq is comparable to MJ+Pippen; KG to Pippen is a big upgrade while TD to Shaq is a lateral move; I do value Steph much higher than CP3, so at the end, still the later trio. Steph>>CP3, MJ>>Kobe, TD>KG.

[ShaqAttac]

steph is waaaay better than cp0. dunc clear kg. kobe aint waay worse than mj. team 2 takes it tbh. curry prob would clown the 2000s or 90s if we bein honeest