Bidofo wrote:Bidofo wrote:Spoiler:LA Bird wrote:This should be obvious but people often confuse cause and effect when it comes to winning. You aren't better because you win. You win because you are a better player (assuming equal level of supporting cast, opponents and luck). Bill Russell didn't win 11 rings because he was born a winner. Russell won a lot because he was by far the greatest defender ever. Jordan didn't go 6/6 because he was competitively obsessed with winning and refused to lose. His team success came because he was the GOAT scorer and was elite in other areas of the game too. Calling a player better because he is a "winner" is just a lazy way to count rings without actually evaluating what makes that player great.
Isiah has 2 rings but what it is about him that actually made the Pistons win? Was it because Isiah was a top scorer, rebounder, playmaker, shooter or defender? There is a lot of talk about Isiah being a "winner" but none of his supporters ever go into discussing his actual level of play during the title winning years. Why? Because a closer look will show he was not as good a player as a few other all time great PGs who didn't win as much as he did. Isiah fans will argue he was sacrificing his individual play for his team's success but exactly how did his sacrifice help the Pistons? Did Isiah sacrifice offensive volume to elevate his team's offense? No, because his efficiency didn't improve on lower volume as one would usually expect and the Pistons' offense was worse during the title years than before. Did Isiah sacrifice offense for more defense then? Maybe, but he was never a top defensive guard and the addition of Rodman, Dumars, Mahorn and John Salley probably had more to do with the Pistons' defensive improvement in the late 80s. Isiah making sacrifices for his team makes for a better storyline but the reality is that Pistons rose to championship level because the improvements in Isiah's supporting cast more than offset his decline from his peak in the mid-80s. Isiah's argument begins and ends with his rings because he doesn't really have much of an argument otherwise to be a top 5 point guard of all time (unless anybody wants to go ahead and make a case for his peak being that high because he sure doesn't have the longevity for it).
And since it is a popular narrative to hype up Isiah as a legendary small guard who beat Magic/Bird/Jordan in David v Goliath fashion, let's look at who the Pistons actually beat to win their two titles:
• 89 Celtics without Bird (injured) and Ainge (traded). DJ missed the end of the season due to ankle injury and limped his way to 2.7 ppg in the series because the Celtics had zero guard depth.
• 89 Bucks without two of their best players in Cummings and Pressey. They went 6-9 in the regular season without Pressey.
• 89 Bulls. 47 wins, +2.1 SRS. They have MJ but the Bulls as a team (16 games behind) were not a contender yet.
• 89 Lakers without Byron Scott and Magic for half the series. By G4, LA was starting 42 year old Kareem, AC Green, Worthy, Cooper and Tony Campbell. Minus Worthy, that starting lineup is arguably worse than Detroit's bench.
• 90 Pacers. 42 wins, -0.2 SRS. Poor defense and easy first round fodder.
• 90 Knicks. 45 wins, +0.8 SRS. Ewing one man team that went 10-20 to finish the regular season after a mid-season trade.
• 90 Bulls. Title contender and healthy. Dumars played like a superstar in the Piston's first three wins while Isiah disappeared (26ppg on 63% TS vs 8ppg on 36% TS). That's no typo - Pistons won 3 games against MJ despite Isiah scoring only 8.3 ppg on 36% TS.
• 90 Blazers. Title contender and healthy. Impressive series by Isiah destroying Terry Porter who was an All Star level point guard.
All in all, that's 3 non contenders at 47 or less wins, 3 opponents missing multiple starters (all in one playoffs), a series against the Jordan Bulls where Isiah's failures got completely overlooked because of Dumars going hot, and a series against the Blazers where Isiah played excellent in. For someone whose career legacy rests heavily on these two postseasons, it's really not that notable of a run. Luckily for Isiah though, most NBA fans don't really care about basketball history and will just repeat whatever they hear on social media, which is something like "Isiah beat Magic/Bird/Jordan in the toughest era of all time so he must be top 20 all time!!"
I can’t wait for posts like this and others that bring up very valid points and criticisms of the pro-Isiah side to be completely ignored, resulting in the same people posting the same outdated tropes about Thomas’ career the next time he’s mentioned.
You don’t need a foot in this debate to see which side is making a much more convincing argument. Typically when you get to the point of “Basketball is not all about stats”/“Actually watch the game”, you’re kind of on your last legs and lose much credibility. That’s just me though...
Nothing to see here, just quoting myself because I was very much right.
If it helps you sleep at night, go ahead and tell yourself that
