People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Moderators: trex_8063, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Clyde Frazier, Doctor MJ
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- RealGM
- Posts: 22,395
- And1: 18,828
- Joined: Mar 08, 2012
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Jordan has lead the Hornets to greatness.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 874
- And1: 751
- Joined: May 21, 2022
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Stalwart wrote:capfan33 wrote:prolific passer wrote:I mean Bird had hof center in Dave Cowens when he joined the celtics. Magic had hof center in Kareem when he joined the Lakers. Both guys were mvps and champions. Jordan went to a team that didn't have somebody of that caliber. His best teammate at the time was Woolridge.
Always wonder what would have happened if the bulls still had Artis when they drafted Jordan.
Also Jordan's leadership style isnt that much different then Russell, Magic, and Bird before him who were hard on their teammates. They all wanted to win and felt they had to push their teammates to close to their level to help them win.
Someone else here who knows more than me could respond to this better, but from everything I know, it was pretty different lol. Even if you consider Jordan the GOAT, doesn't mean he has to be the best at everything or even a lot of things. Bird and Russell specifically were friends with many of their teamamtes and rarely acted as caustically as Jordan did to his. I honestly don't think this is debatable.
I don't think this how you measure leadership lol. Thats the problem. You guys think leadership = friendship or lack of conflict. Thats not at all what leadership is. Leadership is measured by your ability to direct a path others will follow. You get bonus points when you can inspire and bring the most out of those following. Sometimes that actually requires conflict and unpleasantries. In fact the first thing a good leader knows is that its not your job to make friends and you're not always going to be liked or appreciated.
There is no objective was to measure leadership in the 1st place, that's the problem. All other things being equal, being a leader that doesn't have to scream/punch/act like an ass to your co-workers is preferable, I think all of us should be able to agree on that.
And once again, what evidence do you have that Jordan was the best at fulfilling your leadership criterion? I mean "direct a path others will follow" is so vague that it's borderline meaningless, which is exactly why I think it's so difficult to evaluate this topic in the 1st place. Even if we ignore aesthetics, I have yet to see any real evidence as to how Jordan's leadership,indepedent of on-court ability, was more effective in helping his team win than Russell, Bird, Duncan, Curry etc.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
- prolific passer
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,149
- And1: 1,459
- Joined: Mar 11, 2009
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
HeartBreakKid wrote:Jordan has lead the Hornets to greatness.
Jordan was around Krause so much that he pretty much makes the same moves that he did after the dynasty broke up.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Forum Mod - Raptors
- Posts: 92,281
- And1: 31,867
- Joined: Oct 14, 2003
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
homecourtloss wrote:For a player lauded for ultimate skill, he didn’t expand his game in any meaningful way to deal with lost athleticism.
What?
If you mean just specifically in Washington, then that's... I don't know what to do with that, because he was too old for any skill adjustment to be super meaningful.
If you mean on the balance of his career, then it's violently inaccurate. His jump shot and post game were not things he hit the league with, and he had some notable style differences in the second three-peat compared to before his first retirement. In his stint with Washington, he had all kinds of craft and guile, but there's a functional limit to how much you can do as an old man in the league without size. Mid-range shooting goes only so far. So ultimately what your remark comes down to is "Mike never developed a three."
Stalwart wrote:These are just your characterizations of Ewing not necessarily facts: "He worked better shooting jumpers, hes mechanical, and he's not special". Ok, that could all be true, or false. But when I turn on the tape and watch Ewing work in the post I see better footwork and more moves. Plain and simple. I see Ewing chain these moves together in a way I don't see from Wilt. Now if you want to bring passing into it or athleticism then that's something else. But as far as moves and footwork in the post...I see more of that of Ewing.
We can agree to disagree about this. I recall watching at the time, the commentary then and reviewing his game since and being very much underwhelmed by his post game (specifically as compared to his peers, though). Same with D-Rob.
Ewing also spent his career going against better more modern defense then Wilt Chamberlain did.
This is a little more of your characterization than necessarily fact. He went up against better specific defenders on a higher proportion of his games, too, particularly in the playoffs. So there's some trade off between the comparatively mild impact of the 3pt shot and defensive strategy adjustments into the 90s as compared to the 60s versus playing a ton of games versus Bill Russell and Nate Thurmond and Kareem and so forth.
So if he struggled here or didn't match up well there then that just speaks to how good his peers were and how strong the defense was. You point out that he looked like "stank ass"(so disrespectful) against Olajuwon. Ok. Thats Hakeem Olajuwon, a great post and team defender from a more modern era. Thats also just one series at the tail end of his prime. Put the '90 or '91 version of Pat Ewing up against Bill Russell and lets see what those numbers look like.
Ewing wouldn't do super well against Russell. In fact, that series would probably look quite similar to the 94 Ewing. Same weaknesses, same strengths in the primary defender. Same weak passing that didn't let him exploit double teams as effectively as other HoF bigs, etc.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,839
- And1: 959
- Joined: Jun 06, 2021
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
capfan33 wrote:Stalwart wrote:capfan33 wrote:
Someone else here who knows more than me could respond to this better, but from everything I know, it was pretty different lol. Even if you consider Jordan the GOAT, doesn't mean he has to be the best at everything or even a lot of things. Bird and Russell specifically were friends with many of their teamamtes and rarely acted as caustically as Jordan did to his. I honestly don't think this is debatable.
I don't think this how you measure leadership lol. Thats the problem. You guys think leadership = friendship or lack of conflict. Thats not at all what leadership is. Leadership is measured by your ability to direct a path others will follow. You get bonus points when you can inspire and bring the most out of those following. Sometimes that actually requires conflict and unpleasantries. In fact the first thing a good leader knows is that its not your job to make friends and you're not always going to be liked or appreciated.
There is no objective was to measure leadership in the 1st place, that's the problem. All other things being equal, being a leader that doesn't have to scream/punch/act like an ass to your co-workers is preferable, I think all of us should be able to agree on that.
And once again, what evidence do you have that Jordan was the best at fulfilling your leadership criterion? I mean "direct a path others will follow" is so vague that it's borderline meaningless, which is exactly why I think it's so difficult to evaluate this topic in the 1st place. Even if we ignore aesthetics, I have yet to see any real evidence as to how Jordan's leadership,indepedent of on-court ability, was more effective in helping his team win than Russell, Bird, Duncan, Curry etc.
Well its not my position that Jordan has the best off court leadership. It's my position that he is one of the best off court leaders. He is arguably the best on court leader however. And when you combine the two it makes him arguably the best overall leader in NBA history.
What is off court leadership? Off court leadership is establishing and maintaining the culture others have to abide by and the standard others must live up to. For example. When you join Steph Currys team you're joining a strength by numbers culture. You're going to be expected to drop your ego at the door. Steph teams play selfless, they play loose, they have fun, and everyone has their chances to shine if they play well. And the expectation for the players and the team is excellence. That's the team culture in Golden State. Those are the values that team embodies and showcases. Of course some of this comes from the coaching and management staff but its Steph who maintains this standard for the locker room(with help from Draymond). He's the face of the team. He's the guy who has to carry that standard for everyone else. I call that leadership. I call that setting and directing a path others will follow. So props to the great Steph Curry.
I think Jordan did this same thing in Chicago. When you joined Michael Jordan's team you were expected to compete every game and every practice as Jordan was such a competitor himself. There was no coasting or sandbagging through out the season. You were expected to be mentally tough and able to execute under pressure as Jordan was going to challenge you mentally and physically on a daily basis. You were expected to put in the extra work on your body and game as he did. And again, the standard was excellence. That was the culture and standard his teams embodied and showcased on a nightly basis. The testimony of his teammates and coach, and the results, is your evidence.
I think guys like Russell, Duncan, Steph, Bird, Magic, Kobe, Lebron, and others have been comparably great as off court leaders. My contention has been all the extra criticism being levied against Jordan's leadership. Its being used as a knock against him despite the fact that Jordan has had literally the best results from a leadership position than anyone other than Bill Russell. So how can you honestly criticize his leadership style when it produced more titles than everyone else? Steph, Duncan, Bird might have had a more palatable leadership style but they also produced less results. I think that's important to remember.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
- NO-KG-AI
- Retired Mod
- Posts: 44,145
- And1: 20,188
- Joined: Jul 19, 2005
- Location: The city of witch doctors, and good ol' pickpockets
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
What's the absolute worst ranking anyone has Jordan at? I think a big sign of respect for Jordan's game, is even the people that aren't comparably high on Jordan, still have him top 5, no? I mean, what's the biggest knock ever, someone has him like 7 or something? lol.
Doctor MJ wrote:I don't understand why people jump in a thread and say basically, "This thing you're all talking about. I'm too ignorant to know anything about it. Lollerskates!"
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,786
- And1: 7,618
- Joined: Mar 18, 2017
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Not to derail, but Jordan fans will oftentimes do this deceptive thing where they reduce Pippen to simply being ONE all-star that Jordan played with — meanwhile, they’ll start rattling off a bunch of former all-stars that other ATGs played with.
Not many guys had an All-NBA First Team AND All-NBA First Defense caliber player for the equivalent of a decade.
Not many guys had an All-NBA First Team AND All-NBA First Defense caliber player for the equivalent of a decade.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Senior Mod - NBA Player Comparisons
- Posts: 30,410
- And1: 9,937
- Joined: Aug 14, 2004
- Location: South Florida
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
It is fair to say that there have been many examples of success from negative or abusive leadership styles, mainly college coaches. Bobby Knight in Indiana comes to mind. It is my personal belief that such leadership is less effective than a more positive and supportive style combined with accountability but that is just anecdotal from what has worked in my life and what I have heard from others.
Because I believe this, I feel Jordan's style was counterproductive in terms of creating a culture. On the other hand, like Knight he was successful with it so you can only go so far with the criticism. But when comparing him to Bill Russell who won more, it could be a legitimate point of difference.
Because I believe this, I feel Jordan's style was counterproductive in terms of creating a culture. On the other hand, like Knight he was successful with it so you can only go so far with the criticism. But when comparing him to Bill Russell who won more, it could be a legitimate point of difference.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,839
- And1: 959
- Joined: Jun 06, 2021
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Antinomy wrote:Not to derail, but Jordan fans will oftentimes do this deceptive thing where they reduce Pippen to simply being ONE all-star that Jordan played with — meanwhile, they’ll start rattling off a bunch of former all-stars that other ATGs played with.
Not many guys had an All-NBA First Team AND All-NBA First Defense caliber player for the equivalent of a decade.
And Jordan critics like to do this thing where they pretend playing with Scottie Pippen is equivalent to playing with 5 or 6 different all stars and hall of famers. Also, Pippen was only All NBA and All Defense for 6 or 7 seasons not an entire decade.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Head Coach
- Posts: 6,786
- And1: 7,618
- Joined: Mar 18, 2017
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Stalwart wrote:Antinomy wrote:Not to derail, but Jordan fans will oftentimes do this deceptive thing where they reduce Pippen to simply being ONE all-star that Jordan played with — meanwhile, they’ll start rattling off a bunch of former all-stars that other ATGs played with.
Not many guys had an All-NBA First Team AND All-NBA First Defense caliber player for the equivalent of a decade.
And Jordan critics like to do this thing where they pretend playing with Scottie Pippen is equivalent to playing with 5 or 6 different all stars and hall of famers. Also, Pippen was only All NBA and All Defense for 6 or 7 seasons not an entire decade.
He made 7 All-NBA Teams & 10 All-Defensive Teams (most in NBA history for a SF).
Jordan had THAT quality of player for a decade of INDIVIDUAL seasons.
Once again, you’re trying to equate other GOAT candidates playing with guys who were former all-stars in completely different seasons to a guy in Pippen who did it every single year WITH Jordan.
They also do this thing where they slide Grant & Rodman into “role player” territory — and also duck the all-star appearances of Ron Harper & BJ Armstrong.
For example: I could make the argument that Jordan had 4 All-Stars & a 6th man of the year from 1996-1998, so of course they dominated.
I could also argue that he lost against the 1995 Magic while having 4 all-stars — It’s a redundant argument.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
- eminence
- RealGM
- Posts: 17,054
- And1: 11,867
- Joined: Mar 07, 2015
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
NO-KG-AI wrote:What's the absolute worst ranking anyone has Jordan at? I think a big sign of respect for Jordan's game, is even the people that aren't comparably high on Jordan, still have him top 5, no? I mean, what's the biggest knock ever, someone has him like 7 or something? lol.
I debate him at 5th or 6th vs KG.
LeBron/Duncan/KAJ/Russell my top 4.
I bought a boat.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 776
- And1: 975
- Joined: Sep 20, 2014
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Stalwart wrote:Does Ben Taylor have any thoughts on how many titles Lebron would win without Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Kyrie Irving, Kevin Love, and Anthony Davis?
Or Bill Russell without Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Tom Heinsohn, John Havlicek, Bill Sharman, Bailey Howell, Frank Ramsey, and KC Jones?
We already have the answer to this, and I'm not sure that you'd like it. James has won
2 without Wade,
2 without Bosh,
3 without Irving,
3 without Love,
and 3 without Davis.
For Russell, well that's a lot of teammates, but he has the most rings in history with no ties, so logically he's won at least 1 championship without each of those teammates.
Just to reiterate, Jordan has 0 without Pippen

Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,839
- And1: 959
- Joined: Jun 06, 2021
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Bidofo wrote:Stalwart wrote:Does Ben Taylor have any thoughts on how many titles Lebron would win without Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Kyrie Irving, Kevin Love, and Anthony Davis?
Or Bill Russell without Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Tom Heinsohn, John Havlicek, Bill Sharman, Bailey Howell, Frank Ramsey, and KC Jones?
We already have the answer to this, and I'm not sure that you'd like it. James has won
2 without Wade,
2 without Bosh,
3 without Irving,
3 without Love,
and 3 without Davis.
Oh ok. Has he won any rings without any of them?
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 776
- And1: 975
- Joined: Sep 20, 2014
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Stalwart wrote:Bidofo wrote:Stalwart wrote:Does Ben Taylor have any thoughts on how many titles Lebron would win without Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Kyrie Irving, Kevin Love, and Anthony Davis?
Or Bill Russell without Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Tom Heinsohn, John Havlicek, Bill Sharman, Bailey Howell, Frank Ramsey, and KC Jones?
We already have the answer to this, and I'm not sure that you'd like it. James has won
2 without Wade,
2 without Bosh,
3 without Irving,
3 without Love,
and 3 without Davis.
Oh ok. Has he won any rings without any of them?
Ah I see. So when you said this:
Stalwart wrote:AEnigma wrote:Stalwart wrote:Does Ben Taylor have any thoughts on how many titles Lebron would win without Dwyane Wade, Chris Bosh, Kyrie Irving, Kevin Love, and Anthony Davis?
Or Bill Russell without Bob Cousy, Sam Jones, Tom Heinsohn, John Havlicek, Bill Sharman, Bailey Howell, Frank Ramsey, and KC Jones?
Wow, Pippen is equivalent to all those guys at once? Sounds like we have been underrating him.
What a strange interpretation
it was actually the correct interpretation

Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Pro Prospect
- Posts: 874
- And1: 751
- Joined: May 21, 2022
-
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Stalwart wrote:capfan33 wrote:Stalwart wrote:
I don't think this how you measure leadership lol. Thats the problem. You guys think leadership = friendship or lack of conflict. Thats not at all what leadership is. Leadership is measured by your ability to direct a path others will follow. You get bonus points when you can inspire and bring the most out of those following. Sometimes that actually requires conflict and unpleasantries. In fact the first thing a good leader knows is that its not your job to make friends and you're not always going to be liked or appreciated.
There is no objective was to measure leadership in the 1st place, that's the problem. All other things being equal, being a leader that doesn't have to scream/punch/act like an ass to your co-workers is preferable, I think all of us should be able to agree on that.
And once again, what evidence do you have that Jordan was the best at fulfilling your leadership criterion? I mean "direct a path others will follow" is so vague that it's borderline meaningless, which is exactly why I think it's so difficult to evaluate this topic in the 1st place. Even if we ignore aesthetics, I have yet to see any real evidence as to how Jordan's leadership,indepedent of on-court ability, was more effective in helping his team win than Russell, Bird, Duncan, Curry etc.
Well its not my position that Jordan has the best off court leadership. It's my position that he is one of the best off court leaders. He is arguably the best on court leader however. And when you combine the two it makes him arguably the best overall leader in NBA history.
What is off court leadership? Off court leadership is establishing and maintaining the culture others have to abide by and the standard others must live up to. For example. When you join Steph Currys team you're joining a strength by numbers culture. You're going to be expected to drop your ego at the door. Steph teams play selfless, they play loose, they have fun, and everyone has their chances to shine if they play well. And the expectation for the players and the team is excellence. That's the team culture in Golden State. Those are the values that team embodies and showcases. Of course some of this comes from the coaching and management staff but its Steph who maintains this standard for the locker room(with help from Draymond). He's the face of the team. He's the guy who has to carry that standard for everyone else. I call that leadership. I call that setting and directing a path others will follow. So props to the great Steph Curry.
I think Jordan did this same thing in Chicago. When you joined Michael Jordan's team you were expected to compete every game and every practice as Jordan was such a competitor himself. There was no coasting or sandbagging through out the season. You were expected to be mentally tough and able to execute under pressure as Jordan was going to challenge you mentally and physically on a daily basis. You were expected to put in the extra work on your body and game as he did. And again, the standard was excellence. That was the culture and standard his teams embodied and showcased on a nightly basis. The testimony of his teammates and coach, and the results, is your evidence.
I think guys like Russell, Duncan, Steph, Bird, Magic, Kobe, Lebron, and others have been comparably great as off court leaders. My contention has been all the extra criticism being levied against Jordan's leadership. Its being used as a knock against him despite the fact that Jordan has had literally the best results from a leadership position than anyone other than Bill Russell. So how can you honestly criticize his leadership style when it produced more titles than everyone else? Steph, Duncan, Bird might have had a more palatable leadership style but they also produced less results. I think that's important to remember.
This makes your argument much clearer, so thank you.
I guess at the end of the day it's a difference in what we attribute Jordan's success to. If we assume for the sake of argument most of his success is due to him and not factors outside of his control, I think it had much more to do with his incredible abilities as a basketball player than anything else. The whole, "Jordan set a high competitive standard" argument is true, but I think Jordan could have easily done this without being an ****.
I also don't think you can prove that Jordan set any less of a competitive standard than Magic, Bird, Duncan or Russell's teams did. To the Warrior's point, Draymond is clearly the vocal leader of the team, and he can be hard on the younger guys at times, this has been pretty well-documented. But he's not over the top about it the way MJ was, you can be hard and strict task master without being a caustic bully to your teammates. Popovich and Riley are also great examples of this, they're both hardasses but I don't think you could characterize ether of them as meanspirited or being hard-asses just for the sake of being hardasses. MJ clearly went over that line and I don't think it had any additional benefit.
Moreover, as I said I think Scottie, PJ, and Tex Winters also smoothed over a lot of Jordan's rougher traits enabling MJ to be himself without hurting the team at all. So overall, I think MJ's teams, in no small part due to his extraordinary basketball talents, won in spite of some of his leadership qualities, not because of them.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,839
- And1: 959
- Joined: Jun 06, 2021
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Bidofo wrote:Stalwart wrote:Bidofo wrote:We already have the answer to this, and I'm not sure that you'd like it. James has won
2 without Wade,
2 without Bosh,
3 without Irving,
3 without Love,
and 3 without Davis.
Oh ok. Has he won any rings without any of them?
Ah I see. So when you said this:Stalwart wrote:AEnigma wrote:Wow, Pippen is equivalent to all those guys at once? Sounds like we have been underrating him.
What a strange interpretation
it was actually the correct interpretation
I'm not sure what games you guys are playing but I was just trying to figure out if Lebron James and Bill Russell ever won titles without being flanked by multiple hall of famers and all stars. For some reason you guys are afraid to answer the question.
I think we all know why.
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,130
- And1: 5,976
- Joined: Jul 24, 2022
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
So it is now an absolute given that Kyrie and Love make the hall of fame?
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,839
- And1: 959
- Joined: Jun 06, 2021
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
AEnigma wrote:So it is now an absolute given that Kyrie and Love make the hall of fame?
I think they should definitely make it. Kyrie dominated the greatest regular season team of all time and brought home a championship fot Cleveland.
But if they happened to get snubbed from the HOF they still qualify as all stars.
And you still aren't answering the question...
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Assistant Coach
- Posts: 4,130
- And1: 5,976
- Joined: Jul 24, 2022
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
Because it is a laughably framed question. Kyrie and Love are not guaranteed hall of fame (Davis probably is because NCAA success matters too), and you seem to at least acknowledge Love’s case is weak. So not multiple hall-of-famers there. There are multiple hall-of-famers on the 2020 Lakers… if you include old Dwight Howard playing twenty minutes a game in the postseason. Contrast that with the 1996-98 Bulls, who had Pippen and Rodman and Kukoc as their next three key guys.
Multiple all-stars? Only if you include other seasons (Lebron was the only all-star in 2016), but in that case Horace Grant suddenly qualifies.
And of course all of this is before getting into Jordan’s hall of fame coach and front office.
The Russell attack is somehow even less genuine, and not even the most fervent Jordan stan seriously believes guys like Satch Sanders and Tom Heinsohn and K.C. Jones are better pieces than Horace Grant (without getting into the what-should-be-obvious logic that a concentrated league is probably going to see concentrated talent on literally every team…).
Multiple all-stars? Only if you include other seasons (Lebron was the only all-star in 2016), but in that case Horace Grant suddenly qualifies.
And of course all of this is before getting into Jordan’s hall of fame coach and front office.
The Russell attack is somehow even less genuine, and not even the most fervent Jordan stan seriously believes guys like Satch Sanders and Tom Heinsohn and K.C. Jones are better pieces than Horace Grant (without getting into the what-should-be-obvious logic that a concentrated league is probably going to see concentrated talent on literally every team…).
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
-
- Sixth Man
- Posts: 1,839
- And1: 959
- Joined: Jun 06, 2021
Re: People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?
AEnigma wrote:Because it is a laughably framed question. Kyrie and Love are not guaranteed hall of fame (Davis probably is because NCAA success matters too), and you seem to at least acknowledge Love’s case is weak. So not multiple hall-of-famers there. There are multiple hall-of-famers on the 2020 Lakers… if you include old Dwight Howard playing twenty minutes a game in the postseason. Contrast that with the 1996-98 Bulls, who had Pippen and Rodman and Kukoc as their next three key guys.
Multiple all-stars? Only if you include other seasons (Lebron was the only all-star in 2016), but in that case Horace Grant suddenly qualifies.
And of course all of this is before getting into Jordan’s hall of fame coach and front office.
The Russell attack is somehow even less genuine, and not even the most fervent Jordan stan seriously believes guys like Satch Sanders and Tom Heinsohn and K.C. Jones are better pieces than Horace Grant (without getting into the what-should-be-obvious logic that a concentrated league is probably going to see concentrated talent on literally every team…).
I dunno man. Comparing Horace Grant to Tommy Heinsohn and Kevin Love might be where I draw the line.