If LeBron went to the Warriors in 2014 do you think he would be considered the undisputed GOAT by most people.

[coastalmarker99]

I find it strange how much these GOAT debates can hinge on choices made by players

So let's say in an alternative universe LeBron decides to join a young Golden State team in 2014 instead of returning to Cleveland.


The lineup would look like this:

PG - Curry

SG - Klay

SF - LeBron

PF - Draymond

C - Bogut


Iggy sixth man.



You would have to think that Lebron certainly wins rings in 2015,2016,2017,2018 and in 2019.

As a result of this, I don't know how people would be able to make a case about someone being better than Lebron.



As LeBron would be 7 and 3 in the finals with 7 FMVPs and a 5-peat to go along with his insane finals streak and longevity.

[euroleague]

If he did, nobody would realize how good Curry/Klay are. Draymond wouldn't be a starter, as nobody would know how good he is.

Curry/Klay/Barnes/LBJ/Bogut with Iggy off the bench would still be ridiculous... and LBJ would get all the credit, as usual.

[sp6r=underrated]

Lebron, IMO, has the best case for GOAT. It isn't beyond a reasonable doubt but it is the strongest argument. And there are stupid arguments made against him. I'm on record saying I don't think his teams couldn't have made 10 finals if the conferences were balanced. But it is absurd to treat losing in the finals as better than not making the finals.

these GOAT debates can hinge on choices unrelated to basketball.

I'd phrase it differently, identifying the GOAT in team sports is much harder than an individual sports. It isn't "choice unrelated to basketball" but rather a dispute about how to weigh "basketball related environmental factors."

An example, Some factor into their rankings ability to lead an ATG team. And out of those people some only consider what actually happened rather than what could have happened.

For them, it matters that MJ led 3+ ten SRS teams. Kareem did it twice in his prime, and while one didn't win title but they lost to another +10 SRS team and outscored em in the series. Lebron's teams didn't. Accordingly those people, and I don't agree with em, think that Lebron for whatever reason couldn't lead ATG teams.

I'm not saying you have to agree with weighing ability to lead an ATG team into the GOAT consideration. I don't agree with the approach of only looking at what happened rather than what could have happened.

But this analysis isn't unrelated to basketball.

[coastalmarker99]

I do wonder which team with the Cavs now out of the picture would have been the biggest threat to the Warriors.


OKC with Durant could have posed a problem but you have to think GSW with Lebron probably deals with them in 5 games in 2016.


The Rockers would most likely get stomped out as well in 2018 and 2019.


The Raptors would put up a fight in 2019 but the talent deficit would be too much.


The Heat in 2020 are getting stomped.

[70sFan]

There will never be undisputed GOAT in basketball. I mean, Russell won 11 rings as the best player and there are people who have him outside top 10...

[picko]

In that scenario he is likely the best player on a string of title teams - probably nets himself a couple more MVPs.

And because we'd never seen MVP Steph we'd assume that he'd been elevated by LeBron.

So you'd be looking at a guy with potentially as many titles / MVPs as both Jordan and KAJ. He'd have an extremely strong case for greatest player ever.

[coastalmarker99]

There will never be undisputed GOAT in basketball. I mean, Russell won 11 rings as the best player and there are people who have him outside top 10...

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual dominance but lacks team success


Russell has the rings but lacks the two-way dominance.

[70sFan]

There will never be undisputed GOAT in basketball. I mean, Russell won 11 rings as the best player and there are people who have him outside top 10...

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

[coastalmarker99]

There will never be undisputed GOAT in basketball. I mean, Russell won 11 rings as the best player and there are people who have him outside top 10...

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If you watch footage of Wilt vs Russell it's clearly obvious who the better player is.

1964 finals in five postseason H2H's

Russell 11.2 ppg, 25.2 rpg, 5.0 APG 38.6 FG%

Wilt 29.2 ppg 27,6 rpg, 2.4 APG 51.7 FG%

Hell even Russell himself admitted that Wilt was the better player.


Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."-- Bill Russell 1972 Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper) p.24

[coastalmarker99]

There will never be undisputed GOAT in basketball. I mean, Russell won 11 rings as the best player and there are people who have him outside top 10...

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If Wilt had remotely close to the same amount of rings as Russell.


Everyone would be calling him the undisputed GOAT regardless of the era he played in and you know it.


As imagine trying to argue against the Guy who averaged 50 points and 25 rebounds for a season along with raking 8+ titles.


As how could anyone possibly top that?

[70sFan]

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If you watch footage of Wilt vs Russell it's clearly obvious who the better player is.

1964 finals in five postseason H2H's

Russell 11.2 ppg, 25.2 rpg, 5.0 APG 38.6 FG%

Wilt 29.2 ppg 27,6 rpg, 2.4 APG 51.7 FG%

Hell even Russell himself admitted that Wilt was the better player.


Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."-- Bill Russell 1972 Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper) p.24

1. I watch footage I provide and I don't think it's clearly obvious.

2. Comparing their scoring numbers is still focusing on offensive production, not impact.

3. You can reasonably argue that Wilt played better than Russell in 1964, but that's not the only time they faced each other. There are plenty of moments when Russell also outplayed Wilt, they were rivals after all.

4. Even if you assume that Wilt usually outplayed Russell h2h, it doesn't mean he's a better player overall.

[70sFan]

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If Wilt had remotely close to the same amount of rings as Russell.


Everyone would be calling him the undisputed GOAT regardless of the era he played in and you know it.


As imagine trying to argue against the Guy who averaged 50 points and 25 rebounds for a season along with raking 8+ titles.


As how could anyone possibly top that?

A lot of people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously, they wouldn't magically start doing so with him winning more rings.

There will never be an undisputed GOAT in basketball.

[coastalmarker99]

There will never be undisputed GOAT in basketball. I mean, Russell won 11 rings as the best player and there are people who have him outside top 10...

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If Kareem your favourite player had remotely close to the same amount of rings as Russell.


Everyone would be calling him the undisputed GOAT regardless of the era he played in and you know it.

I have it said before and I say it again.

If Kareem had won in 1972,1974,1984 there wouldn't be a Goat debate nowadays.

[coastalmarker99]

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If Wilt had remotely close to the same amount of rings as Russell.


Everyone would be calling him the undisputed GOAT regardless of the era he played in and you know it.


As imagine trying to argue against the Guy who averaged 50 points and 25 rebounds for a season along with raking 8+ titles.


As how could anyone possibly top that?

A lot of people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously, they wouldn't magically start doing so with him winning more rings.

There will never be an undisputed GOAT in basketball.

Those people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously because of his lack of winning so they call him a stat-padder


If Wilt had 8 plus rings.


Those same people would take his individual dominance much more positively.

[70sFan]

If Wilt had remotely close to the same amount of rings as Russell.


Everyone would be calling him the undisputed GOAT regardless of the era he played in and you know it.


As imagine trying to argue against the Guy who averaged 50 points and 25 rebounds for a season along with raking 8+ titles.


As how could anyone possibly top that?

A lot of people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously, they wouldn't magically start doing so with him winning more rings.

There will never be an undisputed GOAT in basketball.

Those people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously because of his lack of winning so they call him a stat-padder


If Wilt had 8 plus rings.


Those same people would take his individual dominance much more positively.

No, people don't take Wilt's stats seriously because we don't have much footage from that era and most people assume he played against amateurs and midgets.

[70sFan]

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If Kareem your favourite player had remotely close to the same amount of rings as Russell.


Everyone would be calling him the undisputed GOAT regardless of the era he played in and you know it.

I have it said before and I say it again.

If Kareem had won in 1972,1974,1984 there wouldn't be a Goat debate nowadays.

Kareem isn't my favorite player, Duncan is. Kareem already won 6 rings and people don't view him as the GOAT. I'm quite sure even with 9 rings many people wouldn't put him ahead of Jordan, who has much better media exposition.

[coastalmarker99]

A lot of people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously, they wouldn't magically start doing so with him winning more rings.

There will never be an undisputed GOAT in basketball.

Those people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously because of his lack of winning so they call him a stat-padder


If Wilt had 8 plus rings.


Those same people would take his individual dominance much more positively.

No, people don't take Wilt's stats seriously because we don't have much footage from that era and most people assume he played against amateurs and midgets.

Most people trust me 70's fan trust me don't take his numbers seriously because of his lack of winning and his scoring numbers dropping in the playoffs.

Plus they use the pace argument.


Wilt with 8 to 9 rings would be ranked number 1 on every single list nowadays as 95 percent of people know he wasn't facing amateurs and midgets.

[coastalmarker99]

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If Kareem your favourite player had remotely close to the same amount of rings as Russell.


Everyone would be calling him the undisputed GOAT regardless of the era he played in and you know it.

I have it said before and I say it again.

If Kareem had won in 1972,1974,1984 there wouldn't be a Goat debate nowadays.

Kareem isn't my favorite player, Duncan is. Kareem already won 6 rings and people don't view him as the GOAT. I'm quite sure even with 9 rings many people wouldn't put him ahead of Jordan, who has much better media exposition.

Most people don't view Kareem as the Goat due to his lack of team success in the 1970s and his lack of finals MVPs


If he has 9 rings he basically ends both of those arguments.


As Here is how the GOAT debate would look nowadays


MVPs:
6 KAJ
5 MJ
4 LBJ

1st All-NBA:
13 LBJ
10 KAJ
10 MJ


NBA All-Defensive First Team

9 MJ
5 KAJ
5 LBJ


FMVPs
6 MJ
5 KAJ
4 LBJ

Finals record:
9-3 KAJ
6-0 MJ
4-6 LBJ


Kareem would have the edge on Lebron and Jordan in almost everything besides FMVPs and 1st All-NBA and first-team all-defensive teams.

[70sFan]

Those people don't take Wilt's numbers seriously because of his lack of winning so they call him a stat-padder


If Wilt had 8 plus rings.


Those same people would take his individual dominance much more positively.

No, people don't take Wilt's stats seriously because we don't have much footage from that era and most people assume he played against amateurs and midgets.

Most people trust me 70's fan trust me don't take his numbers seriously because of his lack of winning and his scoring numbers dropping in the playoffs.

Plus they use the pace argument.


Wilt with 8 to 9 rings would be ranked number 1 on every single list nowadays as 95 percent of people know he wasn't facing amateurs and midgets.

On PC Board they know, but you can go as closely as GB to see ridiculous takes about Wilt's competition. If you go outside RealGM, you'll see that most people have no clue about 1960s basketball and it wouldn't change with more amount of rings.

I'm sure his position on all-time list would improve, but not to the degree that he'd be undisputed GOAT.

Another example - literally nobody has George Mikan as the GOAT, despite him having a lot of rings and dominating like nobody in history. Wilt's era is often mistaken with Mikan's era, as both were captured by B&W cameras.

[Dutchball97]

If Russell had similar offensive numbers to Kareem and Wilt in addition to his 5 MVP''s and 11 rings


He would be considered by most people nowadays as the undisputed GOAT.


Jordan is considered the GOAT by most people because he combined the best of Wilt and Russell.


Wilt has the individual domaince but lacks team success


Russell has team success but lacks the two-way dominance.

1. I don't think he would, people like dismissing that era anyway.

2. Why should it matter? Actual impact should matter more than the way someone impacts the game. Russell didn't have Wilt's or Kareem's offensive game, but you can argue he was a better player than them.

If you watch footage of Wilt vs Russell it's clearly obvious who the better player is.

1964 finals in five postseason H2H's

Russell 11.2 ppg, 25.2 rpg, 5.0 APG 38.6 FG%

Wilt 29.2 ppg 27,6 rpg, 2.4 APG 51.7 FG%

Hell even Russell himself admitted that Wilt was the better player.


Wilt is playing better than I used to -- passing off, coming out to set up screens, picking up guys outside, and sacrificing himself for team play."-- Bill Russell 1972 Great Moments in Pro Basketball, (by Sam Goldaper) p.24

I think you're mixing two things up here. Pretty much everyone agrees Wilt peaked higher than Russell but that doesn't immediately mean he had the better career. You've pointed out time and time again you think Wilt is the GOAT because he scored a lot of points and had a lot of rebounds (despite the pace heavily inflating both no matter how much you want to deny this being a factor) but the quote you have here from Russell is about when Wilt sacrificed his individual numbers for better team play and thus has no real bearing on 1964. Wilt didn't become better than Russell untill he started emulating Russell's playstyle.