People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?

[OhayoKD]

This doesn't neccestiate that wilt's team was more stacked in 67 than jordan's title teams. All star/all-nba's aren't neccesarily accurate proxies of team quality. Ex: The Cavaliers had 2 all stars but then when those two-all stars were left to their own deivices they could only win at a sub 30 win pace.

The 55 wins the bulls managed without Jordan and the 50 win srs they managed in b2b seasons is rarified air for casts built around atg's.

The argument offered for wilt isn't really compelling but "he had 2 all stars and therefore you can't argue jordan had a more stacked team" doesn't work either.

The major issue for either is Russell who won more and won with minimal help at least once in 69. Idk why people aren't addressing that, but someone probably should. Maybe you can get around this by arguing that wilt taking russell to 7 on the warriors(or the sixers without co-stars) was a super impressive carry job

I don't see 69 as a carry job for Russell. He had on top of his usual suspects(Hondo and a declining Jones) a very good Howell but then in the playoffs Hondo basically plays like a top 5 player in the league.

well they were sub.500 without him though. losing record that season, and a very bad record over a full season the next. For several years they were .500 without him and they did pretty well when russell's "co-stars" missed time. Even the best stretch for those celtics without russell(when he was a rookie) didn't see them do as well as the bulls did in 94 or the kd-warriors without durant. So the idea that Russell was just on stacked teams throughout his career doesn't stack up.

I'd guess at least some of those title teams weren't remarkable.

[PistolPeteJR]

Projection at its finest

Not really. It's pretty evident based on the arguments made that what Tex is talking about happens very often.

It’s also pretty evident who the usual parties are when it comes to arguing where they see fit and ignoring the facts where they see fit.

[PistolPeteJR]

Projection at its finest

Nah. You are mistaking me being high on players you don't like as doing the same thing. But its not. I don't trash KG or Duncan to elevate Dirk. I don't trash Kobe to elevate Duncan.

I am able to point out the positives in players I don't like. Nobody praises 06 Wade more than me despite how much I dislike him. When not interacting with Kobe stans I spend most of my time defending Kobe because despite disliking him as a player, I recognize he's one of the dozen best players we've ever seen. I don't like Lebron, but concede he is now the GOAT over a player I love in Russell. I don't like Duncan as he killed the Mavs for 2 decades, but I can acknowledge this guy had a near GOAT career, etc....

I can be honest about which players I am a fan of and not and still evaluate them honestly.

It's true. I even got him to say a critical thing or two about Jason Kidd... Dude tries to tell it like it as much as possible and admits when he has been proven incorrect. Rare traits. Would like to see more of that from others ITT...

Being self-critical requires integrity. The former is very difficult to find in people nowadays, and I wish we saw it more.

Not to say that those who aren’t self-critical lack integrity; perhaps things like fear, experience, nostalgia, etc., are what have them avoiding true self-criticism. We’re all guilty of it to some extent.

[PistolPeteJR]

Not really. It's pretty evident based on the arguments made that what Tex is talking about happens very often.

I see this behavior coming from Lebron fans. Jordan fans state their position. Lebron fans are the ones who are obsessed with their heros place in history. They make dishonest arguments and constantly try to rewrite history. They bash other players in an effort to elevate Lebron. The Lebron media has destroyed the reputations of many players in this endless effort to make Lebron GOAT. They have scapegoated every great player Lebron has played with.

So yeah I see this as projection.

Okay simply find the posts of me obsessed with Lebron being ranked anywhere much less first. Show me the dishonest arguments I am making or where I am re-writing history. Find where I am destroying the reputations of players to make Lebron look better(and please don't cite me saying I'd rather have Grant than Love as my 3rd guy when the first two players are Lebron/Kyrie or Mike/Pippen because that's not remotely trashing Love's reputation lol). Find where I scapegoat anyone.

then call me out for projection. But you won't find that. Even if you desperately try and cherry pick posts out of context you won't be able to make that case. But go for it, if it matters to you.

Let's get back to the players though. The real players, not the narratives good or bad. Not the myth. This shouldn't be about me. I'm nobody lol.

Rinse and repeat with this poster.
“LeBron is great”
“No he’s not”
“Facts into why he’s great”
“Dishonest”
“Prove it”
“Crickets”

[AEnigma]

This doesn't neccestiate that wilt's team was more stacked in 67 than jordan's title teams. All star/all-nba's aren't neccesarily accurate proxies of team quality. Ex: The Cavaliers had 2 all stars but then when those two-all stars were left to their own deivices they could only win at a sub 30 win pace.

The 55 wins the bulls managed without Jordan and the 50 win srs they managed in b2b seasons is rarified air for casts built around atg's.

The argument offered for wilt isn't really compelling but "he had 2 all stars and therefore you can't argue jordan had a more stacked team" doesn't work either.

The major issue for either is Russell who won more and won with minimal help at least once in 69. Idk why people aren't addressing that, but someone probably should. Maybe you can get around this by arguing that wilt taking russell to 7 on the warriors(or the sixers without co-stars) was a super impressive carry job

I don't see 69 as a carry job for Russell. He had on top of his usual suspects(Hondo and a declining Jones) a very good Howell but then in the playoffs Hondo basically plays like a top 5 player in the league. Definitely far above his 63-66 performances.

And they went up against Reed and Frazier (on a Knicks team that would go on to dominate in Russell’s absence), and then up against Wilt and West. The team collapsed without him the next year, with Havlicek and their next three highest minute players still there; this really should not be tough to figure out.

[Cavsfansince84]

well they were sub.500 without him though. losing record that season, and a very bad record over a full season the next. For several years they were .500 without him and they did pretty well when russell's "co-stars" missed time. Even the best stretch for those celtics without russell(when he was a rookie) didn't see them do as well as the bulls did in 94 or the kd-warriors without durant. So the idea that Russell was just on stacked teams throughout his career doesn't stack up.

I'd guess at least some of those title teams weren't remarkable.

1970 was a different team for them. I don't think that team can be use to say 69 was a carry job for Russ. It's impressive because he was player-coach at 35 and they still found a way to win with an aging roster but if its a carry job it would be by both Russell and Hondo.

[falcolombardi]

Usign all stars to evaluate supporting casts is flawed for multiple reasons

A) it only accounts for wingmen or co-stars and doesnt account for starter quality depth and great benches

B) by virtue of all star games being what they are they are biased towards flashy players, famous players and high volume scorers. Stuff that correlates to great impact but not close to a 1:1 way

This means that players who get great help from non-high scoring, non-flashy teammates will be overcredited for winning "without help" but those with help from flashy scorers of the same impact (which are more likely to get all star nods) will be undercredited

C) team record affects all star selections, so the better a player makes a team the more teammates he will get into all star games which will then be used to diminish his accomplishment because he had all star teammates

Russel suffers this in steroids cause the success he led celtics towarda made half of his rosters hall of famers

[PistolPeteJR]

Stalwart:

I see this behavior coming from Lebron fans. Jordan fans state their position. Lebron fans are the ones who are obsessed with their heros place in history. They make dishonest arguments and constantly try to rewrite history. They bash other players in an effort to elevate Lebron. The Lebron media has destroyed the reputations of many players in this endless effort to make Lebron GOAT. They have scapegoated every great player Lebron has played with.

So yeah I see this as projection.

Also Stalwart:

And no, bubble titles are not legitimate titles which is why people call it a mickey mouse title and don't take it seriously.

When the Laker's won the bubble title it didn't make me feel like we actually won a championship. It's more of an embarrassment than anything.

I am now no longer a Lakers fan and enjoy watching them crash and burn. There are lot of people like me who feel this way. When you are losing 25yr hardcore Laker fans over your front office moves I think its fair to say it was a mistake to bring Lebron in. His fans don't like or respect the Lakers franchise and history. They've made a mockery of the brand. And no pitiful bubble title no one respects makes any of this worth it.

However, nobody is going to forget that this was a Bubble title. Every Lebron James legacy debate will bring up the fact that his 2020 title was the weakest in sports history if not completely illegitimate. It's never going to stop. You think Jordan fans are going to forget? You think Kobe fans are going to let it go? KD fans? Imagine if Giannis gets up to 4 titles. You don't think his fans are going to bring up Lebron's Bubble title in the GOAT debates?

The Bubble title is extremely fraudulent. How one views the 2020 title is kind of a litmus test for how much of a drone someone is. When someone touts that mickey mouse title as legitimate you know what you're dealing with. Its either a Lebron stan or someone with no critical thinking and no personal standards whatsoever.

Classic double standard for Stalwart!

I don’t know how many times he’s been called out by the majority of reputable posters on here. Honestly, enough with the toxicity.

Time and time again Stalwart’s been responded to respectfully and in very intelligent ways, and time and time again, he toots the “LeBron fans suck” horn with no respect tendered in response to the respectful initiation by many posters who debate on this forum.

If you’re going to constantly spew rather than exchange respectfully, leave.

[AEnigma]

well they were sub.500 without him though. losing record that season, and a very bad record over a full season the next. For several years they were .500 without him and they did pretty well when russell's "co-stars" missed time. Even the best stretch for those celtics without russell(when he was a rookie) didn't see them do as well as the bulls did in 94 or the kd-warriors without durant. So the idea that Russell was just on stacked teams throughout his career doesn't stack up.

I'd guess at least some of those title teams weren't remarkable.

1970 was a different team for them. I don't think that team can be use to say 69 was a carry job for Russ. It's impressive because he was player-coach at 35 and they still found a way to win with an aging roster but if its a carry job it would be by both Russell and Hondo.

Yeah it was different in that they replaced their best player and sixth man and dropped by 6 SRS.

[Stalwart]

Stalwart:

Also Stalwart:

Classic double standard for Stalwart!

I don’t know how many times he’s been called out by the majority of reputable posters on here. Honestly, enough with the toxicity.

Time and time again Stalwart’s been responded to respectfully and in very intelligent ways, and time and time again, he toots the “LeBron fans suck” horn with no respect tendered in response to the respectful initiation by many posters who debate on this forum.

If you’re going to constantly spew rather than exchange respectfully, leave.

I wonder if Penbeast will ban this poster like he banned me. Probably not. Either way please stop quoting me as I can't actually respond without potentially getting banned. Thanks.

[tsherkin]

You don't seem to like pdople having standards, but standards are indeed going to be at play in this sort of conversation.

If the standards have no integrity, then yes, I tend to have a problem with them.

[OhayoKD]

You don't seem to like pdople having standards, but standards are indeed going to be at play in this sort of conversation.

If the standards have no integrity, then yes, I tend to have a problem with them.

"What does x do with y help" isn't really a matter of integrity. It's a rather basic standard which requires consideration if we're not going with "erneh" rings or proclaiming bill russell the undisputable goat

Do we really need an emptional appeal about respect and "diminshing accomplishments" every time someone raises this? Having more or as many all-stars does not necessitate comparable or superior help, even if you presume the all-star count is an accurate assessment of era-relative quality. Let's acknowledge that before we get into this "integrity" rabbit hole.

[tsherkin]

"What does x do with y help" isn't really a matter of integrity. It's a rather basic standard which requires consideration if we're not going with "erneh" rings or proclaiming bill russell the undisputable goat

Sure, it's a starting point. It's also one which requires context to be set.

Do we really need an emptional appeal about respect and "diminshing accomplishments" every time someone raises this?

Yes, because some people are highly disingenuous in how they approach this subject.

[Clyde Frazier]

Classic double standard for Stalwart!

I don’t know how many times he’s been called out by the majority of reputable posters on here. Honestly, enough with the toxicity.

Time and time again Stalwart’s been responded to respectfully and in very intelligent ways, and time and time again, he toots the “LeBron fans suck” horn with no respect tendered in response to the respectful initiation by many posters who debate on this forum.

If you’re going to constantly spew rather than exchange respectfully, leave.

I wonder if Penbeast will ban this poster like he banned me. Probably not. Either way please stop quoting me as I can't actually respond without potentially getting banned. Thanks.

This message is to everyone: stop the bickering and stick to the topic or the thread will be closed and warnings will be given out. Thanks.

[homecourtloss]

Stalwart:

Also Stalwart:

Classic double standard for Stalwart!

I don’t know how many times he’s been called out by the majority of reputable posters on here. Honestly, enough with the toxicity.

Time and time again Stalwart’s been responded to respectfully and in very intelligent ways, and time and time again, he toots the “LeBron fans suck” horn with no respect tendered in response to the respectful initiation by many posters who debate on this forum.

If you’re going to constantly spew rather than exchange respectfully, leave.

[prolific passer]

Welp. This thread has gone off the rails a bit. Let me get it back on track.
Longevity is good and all but Jordan put up monster numbers and had great success in such short span that it's hard to ignore.

Also you think Robert Parish was a better rebounder late in his career than Kareem was?

[penbeast0]

Welp. This thread has gone off the rails a bit. Let me get it back on track.
Longevity is good and all but Jordan put up monster numbers and had great success in such short span that it's hard to ignore.

Also you think Robert Parish was a better rebounder late in his career than Kareem was?

By the numbers . . . yes. Parish was at a reb rate better than 15% until his final season. Kareem was 33 the last time he managed a 15% rebound rate and barely broke 10% his last 4 seasons.

[falcolombardi]

Welp. This thread has gone off the rails a bit. Let me get it back on track.
Longevity is good and all but Jordan put up monster numbers and had great success in such short span that it's hard to ignore.

Also you think Robert Parish was a better rebounder late in his career than Kareem was?

I am a bit lost

what does parish vs kareem rebounding have to do with jordan?

[prolific passer]

Welp. This thread has gone off the rails a bit. Let me get it back on track.
Longevity is good and all but Jordan put up monster numbers and had great success in such short span that it's hard to ignore.

Also you think Robert Parish was a better rebounder late in his career than Kareem was?

I am a bit lost

what does parish vs kareem rebounding have to do with jordan?

Just something on my mind.

[prolific passer]

Welp. This thread has gone off the rails a bit. Let me get it back on track.
Longevity is good and all but Jordan put up monster numbers and had great success in such short span that it's hard to ignore.

Also you think Robert Parish was a better rebounder late in his career than Kareem was?

By the numbers . . . yes. Parish was at a reb rate better than 15% until his final season. Kareem was 33 the last time he managed a 15% rebound rate and barely broke 10% his last 4 seasons.

Parish probably could have been a 10 7 guy his last few years if given the chance imo.