How long has the 6-0 Arguement for MJ been around?

[NbaAllDay]

It started to skyrocket when Lebron became an actual threat to Jordan's legacy and old-heads wanted an argument that would permanently disable Lebron's chances (once you lose a 0...it's gone forever), no matter what he did in the future, because for once the idea of a player projecting beyond Jordan was possible to a non-trivial degree.

Reframing "winning" in terms of "not losing a Finals" essentially penalizes players who swim upstream to the Finals, while benefitting players who run downhill (or are in even odds situations).

The 6-0 argument is dumb. You shouldn't get penalized for making the finals and losing.

Now the argument that MJ won 6 titles in only 12 year span basically is a strong argument for how great he is.

There are two teams in the finals. That means you have a 50/50 chance of winning, just like whether you flip heads or tails. For Jordan to break that law and bat 100%, while Lebron under performed the expected number is a very important difference. That means Lebron performed worse than chance, meaning you replace him with a random player and they probably win more. The odds of winning 6 straight is 1 in 64 (which are the odds of flipping heads 6 straight times). That's insane.

Hold up, surely you missed the green font? You are actually saying that it's a 50/50 chance for both teams in the Finals?

Everything with 2 outcomes is only a 50/50 chance? Do I dare explain how silly this is to you? My flabbers are gassed at this one.

[Tim Lehrbach]

I honestly don’t remember going 6-0 being a talking point until LeBron became a GOAT candidate and lost in the Finals as an underdog a bunch of times.

The thing is, people wanted to write off LeBron so bad after the 2011 Finals, and then he ended up dominating the league after that, so Finals record became the only thing to grasp onto.

Rings themselves were never a thing until Jordan either. Wilt was considered a GOAT candidate despite only having 2 rings. Bird was a GOAT candidate despite only having 3 rings.

The rings argument is funny though because people act like Kareem doesn’t have 6 also and that Russell doesn’t nearly double them up with 11. But I guess since he was 11-1 in the Finals it’s not the same as 6-0? We also get into people disrespecting the 60s because they realize their rings argument for Jordan falls apart when they have to give proper respect to Russell’s rings.

I think this is kind of revisionist history or a mischaracterization of things. Lebron lost to the Spurs as an underdog in 2007. Next time he made the finals he lost in embarrassing fashion as a favorite while playing like ****. I don't think many people really started disqualifying him or using the "6-0" argument against him in earnest until that loss to DAL with Miami. Because people didn't really have it out for him until the decision. I think holding MJ's 6-0 as something Lebron can't match really started there, not with his one underdog loss to the Spurs in 07.

People absolutely started disqualifying LeBron from GOAT prior to The Decision. He was dragged mercilessly for how his 2009 and 2010 seasons ended.

[madmaxmedia]

The 6-0 argument is dumb. You shouldn't get penalized for making the finals and losing.

Now the argument that MJ won 6 titles in only 12 year span basically is a strong argument for how great he is.

Another way of putting it is that his Bulls teams won the title for 6 straight years, obviously discounting his retirement year and the year he only came back for the last 17 games.

To your point, people also talk about Joe Montana going 4-0 in Super Bowls, but those were pretty spread out (1982, 1985, 1989, 1990) with a lot of playoff losses in between. I'd consider Tom Brady's 7-3 Super Bowl record to be superior (who was the better QB is a different question.)

Obviously evaluation of all these sorts of stats is subjective, we don't give the same credit to the Bulls players that played on most or all of those title years so the record itself is obviously not enough.

[Mr Puddles]

The 6-0 argument is probably the most illogical point frequently used in basketball discussions.

Jordan reached the playoffs 11 times in his career. Following the logic of the 6-0 argument, if Jordan had made it to the NBA Finals in the five years when the Bulls were eliminated in the first or second round, it would have damaged his legacy. Name one other situation in which winning more games is somehow damaging to your legacy?

The mental gymnastics required to justify this line of thinking requires Simone Biles level dexterity.

[Nate505]

Since win number 6

[madmaxmedia]

The 6-0 argument is probably the most illogical point frequently used in basketball discussions.

Jordan reached the playoffs 11 times in his career. Following the logic of the 6-0 argument, if Jordan had made it to the NBA Finals in the five years when the Bulls were eliminated in the first or second round, it would have damaged his legacy. Name one other situation in which winning more games is somehow damaging to your legacy?

The mental gymnastics required to justify this line of thinking requires Simone Biles level dexterity.

For me, it's less about 6-0 all time, than winning 6 consecutive titles during his prime. Had he lost 3 titles and then won 6 in a row, it wouldn't change the greatness of that streak (discounting of course the retirement year and the 17 game return season, though perhaps getting those 2 years off arguably helped.)

If Lebron or whoever won 6 titles in a row (even if on different teams), I'd be similarly impressed even if there were some title losses before or after. You need a lot of things out of your control to go right (teammates, health, etc.), but MJ's streak does point to how he was dominant he was over that period.

I'm not married to it being the end-all be-all claim of him being the GOAT though.

[AmIWrongDude]

It’s crazy that MJ is the GOAT but he only played 6 seasons. Dude never even lost once!

[jokeboy86]

I'm one of those who never hold Magic, Lebron, Kobe or Bird's Finals losses against them. It's just with Jordan it's not simply the 6-0 in the Finals but 3-peat repeat. In the realm of modern pro sports the only thing that probably rivals it is the Islanders and Oilers runs in the 80s.

The one thing I don't like about the citing of MJ going 6-0 is in the same breath no one ever wants to bring up Tim Duncan going 5-1 (best player on 4 of those teams) and yet they rank many players over Duncan pretty frequently.

[KyRo23]

Since the memory of losing to shaq and penny in the 95 playoffs became inconvenient

Was that the finals?

Losing before the finals being better than losing in the finals is my favorite thing of all time

[Blame Rasho]

I'm one of those who never hold Magic, Lebron, Kobe or Bird's Finals losses against them. It's just with Jordan it's not simply the 6-0 in the Finals but 3-peat repeat. In the realm of modern pro sports the only thing that probably rivals it is the Islanders and Oilers runs in the 80s.

The one thing I don't like about the citing of MJ going 6-0 is in the same breath no one ever wants to bring up Tim Duncan going 5-1 (best player on 4 of those teams) and yet they rank many players over Duncan pretty frequently.

I wonder how history would look at Duncan if somehow he had won in 2013 and been 3-0 vs Lebron in the finals and how would Lebron would look with just 3 titles with three different teams.

It is amazing how much one rebound and three can change everything for James.

I said this before, I am a big boxing guy, and people put Ali as some demigod but he had some fights he should have lost(this is just a fact), vs Norton and Frazier and that would radically change how people view him. Both Norton and Frazier would have beat him twice.

[jokeboy86]

I'm one of those who never hold Magic, Lebron, Kobe or Bird's Finals losses against them. It's just with Jordan it's not simply the 6-0 in the Finals but 3-peat repeat. In the realm of modern pro sports the only thing that probably rivals it is the Islanders and Oilers runs in the 80s.

The one thing I don't like about the citing of MJ going 6-0 is in the same breath no one ever wants to bring up Tim Duncan going 5-1 (best player on 4 of those teams) and yet they rank many players over Duncan pretty frequently.

I wonder how history would look at Duncan if somehow he had won in 2013 and been 3-0 vs Lebron in the finals and how would Lebron would look with just 3 titles with three different teams.

It is amazing how much one rebound and three can change everything for James.

I said this before, I am a big boxing guy, and people put Ali as some demigod but he had some fights he should have lost(this is just a fact), vs Norton and Frazier and that would radically change how people view him. Both Norton and Frazier would have beat him twice.

Love Ali, probably my sports hero but he also didn't want to give Foreman a rematch and I'm one of those who believe that the ropes in their fight were loosened to an extreme so he could lean back like that. I'm one of those who think Ali post-ban is slightly overrated and Ali pre-ban has become incredibly underrated.

[AmIWrongDude]

I'm one of those who never hold Magic, Lebron, Kobe or Bird's Finals losses against them. It's just with Jordan it's not simply the 6-0 in the Finals but 3-peat repeat. In the realm of modern pro sports the only thing that probably rivals it is the Islanders and Oilers runs in the 80s.

The one thing I don't like about the citing of MJ going 6-0 is in the same breath no one ever wants to bring up Tim Duncan going 5-1 (best player on 4 of those teams) and yet they rank many players over Duncan pretty frequently.

Does 3 peating hold more value to you than winning 3 rings but one every other year instead of 3 in a row?

I don’t really see the difference other than marketing/narrative stuff

[mcfly1204]

9,752 days.

[AmIWrongDude]

To me going 6-0 in the finals has no extra value compared to going 6-6 or something. That argument implies that the best thing to do is win in the Finals and the worst thing to do is lose in the finals. I don’t give extra credit for making it to the finals and losing but it being a negative is insane.

If MJ carried his team to the finals one year and they lost instead of losing in an earlier round, now he’s 6-1.
Perfect finals record gone and the reason is because he brought a team that had no chance as far as they could go. Why on earth would you penalize him for that? It’s completely illogical. That’s saying It’s basically better to not make the playoffs than to lose in the finals.

MJ winning 6 rings is what matters. 6-0 is really just a marketing thing.

[Handlez]

Since like...when he went 6-0 without even needing a game 7.

It was pretty cool.

He was so good that he decided to play some professional baseball and comeback to win a few more.

Neat stuff.

[wegotthabeet]

The 6-0 argument is dumb. You shouldn't get penalized for making the finals and losing.

Now the argument that MJ won 6 titles in only 12 year span basically is a strong argument for how great he is.

I agree. This is more impressive than 6-0. If they had played the Pistons in the Finals the three years before he’d be 6-3. Just lucky that they were in the same conference. It doesn’t take away from winning six regardless.

[durden_tyler]

From the end of those title runs UNTIl someone actually accomplishes something better.

[og15]

It started to skyrocket when Lebron became an actual threat to Jordan's legacy and old-heads wanted an argument that would permanently disable Lebron's chances (once you lose a 0...it's gone forever), no matter what he did in the future, because for once the idea of a player projecting beyond Jordan was possible to a non-trivial degree.

Reframing "winning" in terms of "not losing a Finals" essentially penalizes players who swim upstream to the Finals, while benefitting players who run downhill (or are in even odds situations).

The 6-0 argument is dumb. You shouldn't get penalized for making the finals and losing.

Now the argument that MJ won 6 titles in only 12 year span basically is a strong argument for how great he is.

There are two teams in the finals. That means you have a 50/50 chance of winning, just like whether you flip heads or tails. For Jordan to break that law and bat 100%, while Lebron under performed the expected number is a very important difference. That means Lebron performed worse than chance, meaning you replace him with a random player and they probably win more. The odds of winning 6 straight is 1 in 64 (which are the odds of flipping heads 6 straight times). That's insane.

Hold up, surely you missed the green font? You are actually saying that it's a 50/50 chance for both teams in the Finals?

Everything with 2 outcomes is only a 50/50 chance? Do I dare explain how silly this is to you? My flabbers are gassed at this one.

Every regular season game has two teams and there is a 50/50 chance that a specific team wins or loses, did you forget?

It's wild if that was a serious statement

[Big J]

The reason that 6-0 is important is because MJ never lost a single series after he won his first championship that didn't include him playing on baseball legs. That's why he is the GOAT.

[therealbig3]

The reason that 6-0 is important is because MJ never lost a single series after he won his first championship that didn't include him playing on baseball legs. That's why he is the GOAT.

I mean you’re making excuses right there. The guy played and practiced (famously) that year, and then came back and played at the end of the regular season. Dropped 55 on the Knicks. Put up really similar numbers compared to his career averages in those playoffs too. He was in better condition than LeBron in 2010 with his injured elbow or Curry in 2016 with his injured knee, but nobody gives them this kind of pass.

Also, yeah, Jordan won a ton after he broke through. We all know this. Why does that erase the fact that his team lost a lot before that? Again, this kind of hand waving away doesn’t happen with other greats. LeBron somehow gets criticized for his poor play as a 22 year old in the 07 Finals, when his team really shouldn’t have even been there. He gets criticized for losing to a Celtics team in 2010 when he was hurt and his team was outmatched and those Celtics went on to barely lose a game 7 in the Finals. He gets criticized for literally putting up video game numbers against the #1 defense in 09 because his team lost, with Mo Williams as his #2 option.

You won’t find a single person that will defend LeBron’s 2011 Finals as being anything other than bad. But the overreaction to it has been insane. He went on to win titles in 2012 and 2013 despite injuries to his best teammates and again, by all accounts, his teams should not have won those years considering that. He dragged his team to the Finals over and over again, even when they really didn’t deserve to be there, like 2014, 2015, and 2018. He led the upset over the greatest RS team of all time with a historic 3-1 comeback, and this led to people overrating the **** out of Kyrie Irving, a guy who has failed without a superior teammate every single step of the way. Pretty sure the only time his team has been the clear favorite in the Finals other than 2011 was 2020, in which he was again the best player in the league and led his team to the title.

LeBron overachieving and getting some of the teams he’s had as far as he has is every bit as impressive as 6-0 in the Finals.