RGM GOAT Debate Thread (Part 3)

[ScrantonBulls]

How much do dynasties matter in being GOAT, and does Lebron have one? 4 years, 2 rings.. is that enough?

It doesn't mean much to intelligent NBA fans. The definition of a "dynasty" is arbitrary and it lacks any context needed when evaluating an individual player. It's like the "bright" fans that simply count rangz when evaluating a player.

[SaveTheHens]

How much do dynasties matter in being GOAT, and does Lebron have one? 4 years, 2 rings.. is that enough?

It doesn't mean much to intelligent NBA fans. The definition of a "dynasty" is arbitrary and it lacks any context needed when evaluating an individual player. It's like the "bright" fans that simply count rangz when evaluating a player.

Ah thank god you chimed in, we were desperate for an intelligent NBA fan to contribute. The context of a dynasty is showing that a player has the power to maintain a winning culture in a place for a sustained period. Just like players get some points for longevity, points for dominance, you can get points for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning. And as a side note, those 'bright' fans include some of the greatest legends of the nba so I think at least some of them do have at least an inch of your intelligence, maybe..

[ScrantonBulls]

How much do dynasties matter in being GOAT, and does Lebron have one? 4 years, 2 rings.. is that enough?

It doesn't mean much to intelligent NBA fans. The definition of a "dynasty" is arbitrary and it lacks any context needed when evaluating an individual player. It's like the "bright" fans that simply count rangz when evaluating a player.

Ah thank god you chimed in, we were desperate for an intelligent NBA fan to contribute. The context of a dynasty is showing that a player has the power to maintain a winning culture in a place for a sustained period. Just like players get some points for longevity, points for dominance, you can get points for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning. And as a side note, those 'bright' fans include some of the greatest legends of the nba so I think at least some of them do have at least an inch of your intelligence, maybe..

Wait wait now. You just implying that winning with 2 different teams is potentially a "failure" . But somehow your claiming working with "changing parts" is a testament to a player's greatness? Changing teams is the ultimate "change of parts" when it comes to playing with new players.

Stay with me here for a second. It's almost as if individual players don't went championships, but TEAMS do. So maybe we should apply a little context, and look at every team and championship differently, and see how much a player contributed to a team during a season. "Rangz" and "dyanastiez" is just bottom of the barrel, contextless drivel. I take it you have Bill Russell as your GOAT. Ultimate dynasty. Unless you want to use some context here...

[michaelm]

So you have moved on from ad hominem to calling arguments you haven’t disproved ‘mental gymnastics’ now ?.

I hate to break it to you but the English language was not invented in the USA nor does the USA control English usage.

I am well aware of the meaning of the word “ and used it quite advisedly, in this context your first definition being relevant. It implies taking things past the point of normal sports fandom to the point of ideology/a fixed position and is common usage in the context of sporting fandom in Australia and England. I have mostly applied it generically to those who are imo extreme LeBron fans, but if I have inattentively applied it to you directly you might have me on ad hominem. I would admit to being a Steph Curry partisan, in regard to whom I am able to see little wrong, and before him my favourite player was Tim Duncan. I do consider Jordan the GOAT having watched many of the finals games from the dual threepeats in various sports bars because I was mostly in the USA at the time, and followed the 2nd threepeat team more intensively because the Australian player Luc Longley was involved, but would not classify myself as a fan in the same sense that I am a Curry or Duncan fan.

Just for the heck of it I googled partisan fan myself, and the first thing which came up was from Reddit, viz-
“A partisan fan is one who strongly supports a team or athlete, prioritizing their success over all else, even the quality of the game itself. They are deeply invested in their teams wins and losses, often exhibiting a strong emotional connection. This contrasts with a ‘purist’ fan who appreciates the sport itself and may follow multiple teams or focus on the overall quality of play”.


Reddit is I believe an American/US site hence the spelling of “prioritizing”. “Partisan fan “ employs partisan as an adjunctive noun, but I just say partisan because it is both more efficient and avoids tautology.

Using reddit as a citation, dear lord. What’s even more hilarious is the word used right after in redundancy.

It's better than the trash you've been posting like offensive plus minus and blaming points per game doesn't matter! You have embodied the word redundancy with your last several posts. Dear lord.

Perhaps not this guy or these guys, but many point to LeBron’s points record. I don’t see how that is relevant but Jordan’s many scoring titles are irrelevant, except for proving LeBron’s longevity which everyone acknowledges.

The irony word applies once more to your point in this post particularly given I have been chastised for going off topic when nearly all of my recent posts have been in reply to ad hominem posts pointing out that they were ad hominem posts.

Again there are arguments for LeBron which these guys don’t seem able or willing to make, instead concentrating on trying to diminish Jordan, which both has been fruitless and is an admission of defeat imo, including by pointing to the accolades of Jordan’s team mates as though that is somehow a negative for Jordan, particularly since while doing so Jordan’s own accolades such as his scoring titles are dismissed.

If the only reply someone has is that I posted a redundant “-“, fairly close to the smallest possible small point, I perhaps oddly don’t feel particularly dismayed.

[SaveTheHens]

It doesn't mean much to intelligent NBA fans. The definition of a "dynasty" is arbitrary and it lacks any context needed when evaluating an individual player. It's like the "bright" fans that simply count rangz when evaluating a player.

Ah thank god you chimed in, we were desperate for an intelligent NBA fan to contribute. The context of a dynasty is showing that a player has the power to maintain a winning culture in a place for a sustained period. Just like players get some points for longevity, points for dominance, you can get points for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning. And as a side note, those 'bright' fans include some of the greatest legends of the nba so I think at least some of them do have at least an inch of your intelligence, maybe..

Wait wait now. You just implying that winning with 2 different teams is potentially a "failure" . But somehow your claiming working with "changing parts" is a testament to a player's greatness? Changing teams is the ultimate "change of parts" when it comes to playing with new players.

Stay with me here for a second. It's almost as if individual players don't went championships, but TEAMS do. So maybe we should apply a little context, and look at every team and championship differently, and see how much a player contributed to a team during a season. "Rangz" and "dyanastiez" is just bottom of the barrel, contextless drivel. I take it you have Bill Russell as your GOAT. Ultimate dynasty. Unless you want to use some context here...

I said 'for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning'.. reading comprehension needs to catch up to your IQ I think . Just jumping ship and joining a team with two fresher superstars is easier than dealing with the coming & going of talent. And Bill russell is nowhere near my goat list you can keep the psychoanalyst gig on hold for now.

[ScrantonBulls]

Ah thank god you chimed in, we were desperate for an intelligent NBA fan to contribute. The context of a dynasty is showing that a player has the power to maintain a winning culture in a place for a sustained period. Just like players get some points for longevity, points for dominance, you can get points for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning. And as a side note, those 'bright' fans include some of the greatest legends of the nba so I think at least some of them do have at least an inch of your intelligence, maybe..

Wait wait now. You just implying that winning with 2 different teams is potentially a "failure" . But somehow your claiming working with "changing parts" is a testament to a player's greatness? Changing teams is the ultimate "change of parts" when it comes to playing with new players.

Stay with me here for a second. It's almost as if individual players don't went championships, but TEAMS do. So maybe we should apply a little context, and look at every team and championship differently, and see how much a player contributed to a team during a season. "Rangz" and "dyanastiez" is just bottom of the barrel, contextless drivel. I take it you have Bill Russell as your GOAT. Ultimate dynasty. Unless you want to use some context here...

I said 'for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning'.. reading comprehension needs to catch up to your IQ I think . Just jumping ship and joining a team with two fresher superstars is easier than dealing with the coming & going of talent. And Bill russell is nowhere near my goat list you can keep the psychoanalyst gig on hold for now.

Ah got it, so dealing with MODERATELY changing parts is very impressive, but dealing with a complete part change is a "failure" this type of thinking is mindboggling. It's obvious you're just making this point based on what fits your narrative. It's a terrible point. By your logic, if a GOAT level player has a god tier front office that continuously puts the best supporting cast around him, it's a testament to the player if they keep winning. Let's ignore any context regarding the front office or the talent surrounding the player though. Because the front office put together the great team instead of the player.going to a great team, it's somehow a massive difference

But Bill Russell is the ultimate dynasty player. He kept winning with changing parts on the same team. He has the best dynasty in NBA history by far What happened? I thought that's what defined a GOAT?

[MavsDirk41]

Spo and Pat Riley havent ever accomplished much drafting/developing players, attracting free agents, or getting the most out of the players on their rosters. I can see why James left Miami.

[michaelm]

Wait wait now. You just implying that winning with 2 different teams is potentially a "failure" . But somehow your claiming working with "changing parts" is a testament to a player's greatness? Changing teams is the ultimate "change of parts" when it comes to playing with new players.

Stay with me here for a second. It's almost as if individual players don't went championships, but TEAMS do. So maybe we should apply a little context, and look at every team and championship differently, and see how much a player contributed to a team during a season. "Rangz" and "dyanastiez" is just bottom of the barrel, contextless drivel. I take it you have Bill Russell as your GOAT. Ultimate dynasty. Unless you want to use some context here...

I said 'for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning'.. reading comprehension needs to catch up to your IQ I think . Just jumping ship and joining a team with two fresher superstars is easier than dealing with the coming & going of talent. And Bill russell is nowhere near my goat list you can keep the psychoanalyst gig on hold for now.

Ah got it, so dealing with MODERATELY changing parts is very impressive, but dealing with a complete part change is a "failure" this type of thinking is mindboggling. It's obvious you're just making this point based on what fits your narrative. It's a terrible point. By your logic, if a GOAT level player has a god tier front office that continuously puts the best supporting cast around him, it's a testament to the player if they keep winning. Let's ignore any context regarding the front office or the talent surrounding the player though. Because the front office put together the great team instead of the player.going to a great team, it's somehow a massive difference

But Bill Russell is the ultimate dynasty player. He kept winning with changing parts on the same team. He has the best dynasty in NBA history by far What happened? I thought that's what defined a GOAT?

Bill was fairly definitely considered the GOAT at the time, and how exactly could he have achieved more if he had been a better player than he was ? .

Same as comparisons between LeBron and Jordan, except more so, you can’t compare players across widely disparate eras, and Bill’s career was 60 years ago now. By my criteria if not yours Bill deciding that his career aim was to make his team win, as he has said in interviews he determined should be his purpose quite early in his career, and succeeding in doing so to the extent he did are fairly hard to gainsay imo.

And yes a great FO and coach still need a foundation stone to build on. How many titles exactly have the Bulls won without Jordan ?. And you have yet to explain how other players being able to shine next to Jordan somehow diminishes him. Same goes for Tim Duncan and Steph Curry imo.

[SaveTheHens]

Wait wait now. You just implying that winning with 2 different teams is potentially a "failure" . But somehow your claiming working with "changing parts" is a testament to a player's greatness? Changing teams is the ultimate "change of parts" when it comes to playing with new players.

Stay with me here for a second. It's almost as if individual players don't went championships, but TEAMS do. So maybe we should apply a little context, and look at every team and championship differently, and see how much a player contributed to a team during a season. "Rangz" and "dyanastiez" is just bottom of the barrel, contextless drivel. I take it you have Bill Russell as your GOAT. Ultimate dynasty. Unless you want to use some context here...

I said 'for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning'.. reading comprehension needs to catch up to your IQ I think . Just jumping ship and joining a team with two fresher superstars is easier than dealing with the coming & going of talent. And Bill russell is nowhere near my goat list you can keep the psychoanalyst gig on hold for now.

Ah got it, so dealing with MODERATELY changing parts is very impressive, but dealing with a complete part change is a "failure" this type of thinking is mindboggling. It's obvious you're just making this point based on what fits your narrative. It's a terrible point. By your logic, if a GOAT level player has a god tier front office that continuously puts the best supporting cast around him, it's a testament to the player if they keep winning. Let's ignore any context regarding the front office or the talent surrounding the player though. Because the front office put together the great team instead of the player.going to a great team, it's somehow a massive difference

But Bill Russell is the ultimate dynasty player. He kept winning with changing parts on the same team. He has the best dynasty in NBA history by far What happened? I thought that's what defined a GOAT?

I tried to make it clear originally that dynasty is a factor in ones legacy… really trying to reach there arent you? Changing teams and winning has its own challenges, though even kobe had it harder after shaq left and being patient until another allstar waa got. Lebron just jumped to two allstars. Its still overall a feat of its own to win with 3 diff teams, but he hasnt created a dynasty culture anywhere, not the biggest factor but still a stain on what hes been able to show/prove. 3 in miami or cleveland or even LA would of done it but he doesnt get that checkmark.

[Gregoire]

Man, Jordan ragdoll LeBron one more time...
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2470670
Two LeBron fan clowns (AEnigma and OhayoKD, maybe others, there are a lot of clowns there) organized 2 projects with the goal of discrediting the best in history - MJ and past projects of the board, and put forward their LeBron doll as the best... They created a million accounts and started "voting". Unanimously the best peak in history - Jordan... in 3rd place on there... Unanimously the best in 9 seasons at least - Jordan, was there best player... in 5 seasons. Hahaha.
This is another knockout in favor of MJ... Brutal, these LeBron fanboys are very similar to James in his insecurity and desire to surpass Jordan, although all sane people understand who is the best.

GB strike 2 issued for baiting and insulting posters. You seem to be already banned from the PC forum, and the point of that is obviously not to have you insult folks on the GB for stuff that's happening over there. -b

[ScrantonBulls]

Man, Jordan ragdoll LeBron one more time...
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2470670
Two LeBron fan clowns (AEnigma and OhayoKD, maybe others, there are a lot of clowns there) organized 2 projects with the goal of discrediting the best in history - MJ and past projects of the board, and put forward their LeBron doll as the best... They created a million accounts and started "voting". Unanimously the best peak in history - Jordan... in 3rd place on there... Unanimously the best in 9 seasons at least - Jordan, was there best player... in 5 seasons. Hahaha.
This is another knockout in favor of MJ... Brutal, these LeBron fanboys are very similar to James in his insecurity and desire to surpass Jordan, although all sane people understand who is the best.

Imagine writing something like this an claiming others and "insecure" It's an online discussion bro. It's not an Olympic boxing match between the USA and USSR that will determine athletic superiority.

[The4thHorseman]

I said 'for working with the current players & changing parts to keep winning'.. reading comprehension needs to catch up to your IQ I think . Just jumping ship and joining a team with two fresher superstars is easier than dealing with the coming & going of talent. And Bill russell is nowhere near my goat list you can keep the psychoanalyst gig on hold for now.

Ah got it, so dealing with MODERATELY changing parts is very impressive, but dealing with a complete part change is a "failure" this type of thinking is mindboggling. It's obvious you're just making this point based on what fits your narrative. It's a terrible point. By your logic, if a GOAT level player has a god tier front office that continuously puts the best supporting cast around him, it's a testament to the player if they keep winning. Let's ignore any context regarding the front office or the talent surrounding the player though. Because the front office put together the great team instead of the player.going to a great team, it's somehow a massive difference

But Bill Russell is the ultimate dynasty player. He kept winning with changing parts on the same team. He has the best dynasty in NBA history by far What happened? I thought that's what defined a GOAT?

I tried to make it clear originally that dynasty is a factor in ones legacy… really trying to reach there arent you? Changing teams and winning has its own challenges, though even kobe had it harder after shaq left and being patient until another allstar waa got. Lebron just jumped to two allstars. Its still overall a feat of its own to win with 3 diff teams, but he hasnt created a dynasty culture anywhere, not the biggest factor but still a stain on what hes been able to show/prove. 3 in miami or cleveland or even LA would of done it but he doesnt get that checkmark.

LeBron won 3 titles and 3 fmvp's with 2 different teams in 5 years. That's a dynasty.

[Iwasawitness]

Man, Jordan ragdoll LeBron one more time...
viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2470670
Two LeBron fan clowns (AEnigma and OhayoKD, maybe others, there are a lot of clowns there) organized 2 projects with the goal of discrediting the best in history - MJ and past projects of the board, and put forward their LeBron doll as the best... They created a million accounts and started "voting". Unanimously the best peak in history - Jordan... in 3rd place on there... Unanimously the best in 9 seasons at least - Jordan, was there best player... in 5 seasons. Hahaha.
This is another knockout in favor of MJ... Brutal, these LeBron fanboys are very similar to James in his insecurity and desire to surpass Jordan, although all sane people understand who is the best.

This is some pretty pathetic stuff right here. Imagine calling out other posters in this kind of fashion because you're butthurt about a thread they made. If I was a hardcore MJ fan, I'd be pretty embarrassed by this.

[bisme37]

Friendly reminder that personal attacks are not allowed. Disagree with each other's posts as strongly as you'd like, but don't insult the poster himself. And don't make bait posts that are simply meant to start fights.

I'm seeing a lot of "stan" and "homer" and "fanboy" and "nuthugger" etc. Most of that stuff is not among the most egregious insults we see around here, but when you use those terms to insult the other posters and diminish their opinion, it does qualify as baiting and personal attack.

Please help us get this thread on a better track. There's really no reason to be so dang hostile you guys, and it kinda sucks for posters who want to talk about the GOAT debate but don't enjoy the constant war that's happening here. Thanks.

[Kawaii Leonard]

I read the Djokovic thread and have never cringed more in my life. It’s his schtick, his humiliation ritual to be so self-admittedly uninformed, while claiming the boldest of takes. Now multiply that when he’s in stanning or autoplay discredit mode. One good look at his sig says everything.
I also question your credibility and your username but from what I’ve gathered in our ‘better defender’ talks a few pages back, you at least have some insight and something to have second thoughts on.

Oh, and his god awful clutch shooting is a literal stat, and if you’re really trying to prop him up as a scorer against Jordan as the ten to one scoring titles don’t mean anything? Well…

The sig:

Read on Twitter

Let’s start fact checking before we copy and paste anything more in to this thread from partisan fan made youtube shorts.

[bledredwine]

I read the Djokovic thread and have never cringed more in my life. It’s his schtick, his humiliation ritual to be so self-admittedly uninformed, while claiming the boldest of takes. Now multiply that when he’s in stanning or autoplay discredit mode. One good look at his sig says everything.
I also question your credibility and your username but from what I’ve gathered in our ‘better defender’ talks a few pages back, you at least have some insight and something to have second thoughts on.

Oh, and his god awful clutch shooting is a literal stat, and if you’re really trying to prop him up as a scorer against Jordan as the ten to one scoring titles don’t mean anything? Well…

The sig:

Read on Twitter

Let’s start fact checking before we copy and paste anything more in to this thread from partisan fan made youtube shorts.

Nice! You cherry picked and eliminated all the misses. My stat was specifically for 5 seconds left, to win or tie the game.
So good!

Here's a legit video, finals only.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=SE8F9E48jjs&embeds_widget_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fundisputedgoat.medium.com%2F&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.embedly.com%2F&embeds_referring_origin=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.embedly.com&source_ve_path=Mjg2NjY[/youtube]

Lebron really sucks when it comes to game winning/tying shots in the final moments. Hell, otherwise we'd be talking about his game winning shots way more often.
I don't even remember the last one.
I love that you're getting upset over it But you're not his fan, right?

When it comes to that career stat (5 seconds left, tie or win), Kobe's a lot more clutch.
I mean, for a portion of his career, Lebron had no 4th quarter, or so was the running joke.

Durant had 3x the clutch points when he flamed him in the finals too

lol this was on basketball reference way back in the day well before it was updated and was just as bad. YOU need to fact check.

Oh, and Lebron's 16 missed game winning 3's in a row? That was ESPN who first reported that gem.


NOW, let's enjoy some stats between him and Jordan! This is about 5 years old. But I imagine it looks worse now.

Playoff game-winners/tyers with 25 seconds or less
Jordan 10/19 (53%)
LeBron 10/27 (37%)
Playoff game-winners/tyers with 24 seconds or less
Jordan 9/18 (50%)
LeBron 10/27 (37%)
Playoff game-winners/tyers with 10 seconds or less
Jordan 7/15 (47%)
LeBron 9/22 (41%)
Playoff game-winners/tyers with 5 seconds or less
Jordan 5/11 (45%)
LeBron 7/17 (41%)
Finals game-winners/tyers with 25 seconds or less
Jordan 4/8 (50%)
LeBron 0/7 (0%)
Career buzzer beaters
Jordan 9
LeBron 7
Playoff series ending buzzer beaters
Jordan 2
LeBron 0
It should come as no surprise that the all-time buzzer-beater king is Jordan. His shots were all jumpers, ranging from 14 feet (’95 in Atlanta) to 26 feet (’92 vs. Detroit). 6 were in the regular season (trailing only Kobe and Johnson), and 3 were in the playoffs (trailing only LeBron). 2 of those 3 even ended the series. 7 were unassisted, which is tied for the most with Johnson. Jordan also averaged 34.4 points per game in the 9 games he won at the horn, which is the highest average among the 11 players with 5+ buzzer-beaters (beating LeBron by a fraction).
Zoom image will be displayed

Zoom image will be displayed

Zoom image will be displayed

SUPPORTING CAST
Post-1954 Finals Teams with sub-60 ppg supporting casts
’74 Bucks — 59.4 ppg
’94 Rockets — 59.3 ppg
’07 Cavs — 58.5 ppg
’01 Sixers — 58.2 ppg
’06 Heat — 58.2 ppg
’15 Cavs — 57.7 ppg
’99 Spurs — 57.4 ppg
’97 Bulls — 55.5 ppg
’04 Lakers — 55.2 ppg
’98 Jazz — 55.2 ppg
’98 Bulls — 54.5 ppg
’99 Knicks — 53.8 ppg
Post-1954 Championship Teams with sub-60 ppg supporting casts
’94 Rockets — 59.3 ppg
’06 Heat — 58.2 ppg
’99 Spurs — 57.4 ppg
’97 Bulls — 55.5 ppg
’98 Bulls — 54.5 ppg
None of LeBron’s teams in the Finals have produced as little offensivly as Jordan’s Bulls did in ’97 and ’98, yet Jordan still won back to back titles under those circumstances, and at age 34 and 35 no less.
Title teams with sub-70 PPG supporting casts for the overall playoffs
Post-1954 (Shot-Clock Era)
12. 2002 Lakers — 69.4 PPG
11. 2000 Lakers — 69.0 PPG
10. 1994 Rockets — 68.3 PPG
9. 2006 Heat — 67.8 PPG
8. 1993 Bulls — 67.3 PPG
7. 2012 Heat — 67.0 PPG
6. 1996 Bulls — 66.7 PPG
Title teams with sub-66 PPG supporting casts for the overall playoffs
Post-1954 (Shot Clock Era)
5. 1992 Bulls — 65.9 PPG
4. 2004 Pistons — 65.6 PPG
3. 1999 Spurs — 65.2 PPG
2. 1997 Bulls — 61.5 PPG
1. 1998 Bulls — 60.8 PPG
In the shot-clock era, Jordan has
5 of the 8 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams
4 of the 6 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams
3 of the 5 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams
The 2 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams- Jordan is the only player to lead multiple top 10 lowest-scoring playoff supporting casts among title teams
The only player to lead a lesser scoring supporting cast to the NBA Finals than the ’97 or ’98 Bulls is Allen Iverson on the ’01 Sixers. The ’01 Sixers’ teammates outside of Iverson scored 60.3 PPG in the 22 playoff games Iverson played. Game 3 against the Bucks in which Iverson did not play is excluded from this calculation.


All from this site, and I have yet to find a wrong stat.
https://undisputedgoat.medium.com/jordan-in-the-clutch-30f6e7ed4c43

[bledredwine]

Partisan:

1. a strong supporter of a party, cause, or person.

2. a member of an armed group formed to fight secretly against an occupying force, in particular one operating in enemy-occupied Yugoslavia, Italy, and parts of eastern Europe in World War II.

- A partisan is someone who strongly supports a particular political party, cause, or idea. This often means a person who is deeply committed to their party's policies and is unwilling to compromise with opponents. The term can also refer to a member of a group engaged in irregular warfare, often against an occupying force.

Yes continue to use a word primarily associated and used in the affairs of politics, military resistance movements in WW2 and ideological allegiances, when a simple “fan”, “stan”, “supporter”, “devotee”, heck even “homer” suffices and are far more natural. It’s outdated and pretentious considering context. If you disagree, move on instead of picking at the scab.

Now would you like the definition for irony? You sure have let examples of this word go right over your head throughout this discussion as a Bledredwine Windbag partisan.

How’s this for an example. It’s ironic that the poster accusing others of replying more of the same and resorting to argumentum ad hominem, happens to have contributed anything meaningful in the discourse—for the last 3 pages—but questioning others on their knowledge of the english dictionary while calling them “schoolboys”. A hypocrite’s actions (preaching one thing, doing the opposite) is ironic because their behaviour contradicts what they publicly stand for.
I’m sure you at least know what a ‘hypocrite’ means or perhaps some examples of why I think you’re an exemplary case will help?

I called your insults/ad hominem schoolboyish which is an opinion I continue to hold, and left it open as to whether you were a schoolboy, just as as I said rightly or wrongly in regard to how Jordan was regarded during his heyday which you obviously didn’t observe, and are hence not in much of a position to determine whether Bledred was being revisionist or employing rose coloured glasses as you claimed. I followed the site rules and took issue with your opinions and arguments and in particular your constant employment of ad hominem when anyone disagrees with you, a logical fallacy btw, rather than employing personal insults myself, obviously anticipating your reply apart from anything else.

Broken record.
The mental gymnastics is strong with this one. It makes sense why you’re his lapdog. Still waiting on that article with partisan used since it’s so universally repeated, as you claim, instead of the examples above.

You pretending to teach the word "partisan" in basketball discussion is hilarious. You're not fooling anyone.

Nor can you get around your cherry-picked stats and poor arguments by doing this. It's way off topic.
Those are empty, verbose posts that could be summed up in a few sentences at most. I'd highly recommend learning to be concise
with your language like most human beings. You don't need to explain the meaning of "partisan" to anyone especially for four paragraphs.

[bledredwine]

Since you enjoy your cherries so much, I’ll offer you some as well. With the season on the line, Jordan shot 38% and 30% in the 1st round of the playoffs in ‘85 & ‘87. But I bet you’re one of those Jordan fans who prefers your player to underperform in the first 2 Rounds of the the playoffs, rather than in the Finals—especially against a more formidable/favoured, outmatched and experienced team.

Interesting.

Because basketball reference says that Jordan shot .436 and .417 respectively. That first one being his rookie season, by the way
You must be desperate.

Care to link me to the sources you got those percentages from?
Reality says completely otherwise.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html

This, of course, is pertaining to Lebron having multiple series where he shot terribly or even disappeared and Jordan lacking so, just to refresh your memory.

[bledredwine]

This is for Kawhi since he seems to question resources when there's no refute.

This guy posts validated facts, as mine have been.

Watch on YouTube

[Kawaii Leonard]

Oh, and his god awful clutch shooting is a literal stat, and if you’re really trying to prop him up as a scorer against Jordan as the ten to one scoring titles don’t mean anything? Well…

The sig:

Read on Twitter

Let’s start fact checking before we copy and paste anything more in to this thread from partisan fan made youtube shorts.

Nice! You cherry picked and eliminated all the misses. My stat was specifically for 5 seconds left, to win or tie the game.
So good!

Here's a legit video, finals only.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=SE8F9E48jjs&embeds_widget_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fundisputedgoat.medium.com%2F&embeds_referring_euri=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.embedly.com%2F&embeds_referring_origin=https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.embedly.com&source_ve_path=Mjg2NjY[/youtube]

Lebron really sucks when it comes to game winning/tying shots in the final moments. Hell, otherwise we'd be talking about his game winning shots way more often.
I don't even remember the last one.
I love that you're getting upset over it But you're not his fan, right?

When it comes to that career stat (5 seconds left, tie or win), Kobe's a lot more clutch.
I mean, for a portion of his career, Lebron had no 4th quarter, or so was the running joke.

Durant had 3x the clutch points when he flamed him in the finals too

lol this was on basketball reference way back in the day well before it was updated and was just as bad. YOU need to fact check.

Oh, and Lebron's 16 missed game winning 3's in a row? That was ESPN who first reported that gem.


NOW, let's enjoy some stats between him and Jordan! This is about 5 years old. But I imagine it looks worse now.

Playoff game-winners/tyers with 25 seconds or less
Jordan 10/19 (53%)
LeBron 10/27 (37%)
Playoff game-winners/tyers with 24 seconds or less
Jordan 9/18 (50%)
LeBron 10/27 (37%)
Playoff game-winners/tyers with 10 seconds or less
Jordan 7/15 (47%)
LeBron 9/22 (41%)
Playoff game-winners/tyers with 5 seconds or less
Jordan 5/11 (45%)
LeBron 7/17 (41%)
Finals game-winners/tyers with 25 seconds or less
Jordan 4/8 (50%)
LeBron 0/7 (0%)
Career buzzer beaters
Jordan 9
LeBron 7
Playoff series ending buzzer beaters
Jordan 2
LeBron 0
It should come as no surprise that the all-time buzzer-beater king is Jordan. His shots were all jumpers, ranging from 14 feet (’95 in Atlanta) to 26 feet (’92 vs. Detroit). 6 were in the regular season (trailing only Kobe and Johnson), and 3 were in the playoffs (trailing only LeBron). 2 of those 3 even ended the series. 7 were unassisted, which is tied for the most with Johnson. Jordan also averaged 34.4 points per game in the 9 games he won at the horn, which is the highest average among the 11 players with 5+ buzzer-beaters (beating LeBron by a fraction).
Zoom image will be displayed

Zoom image will be displayed

Zoom image will be displayed

SUPPORTING CAST
Post-1954 Finals Teams with sub-60 ppg supporting casts
’74 Bucks — 59.4 ppg
’94 Rockets — 59.3 ppg
’07 Cavs — 58.5 ppg
’01 Sixers — 58.2 ppg
’06 Heat — 58.2 ppg
’15 Cavs — 57.7 ppg
’99 Spurs — 57.4 ppg
’97 Bulls — 55.5 ppg
’04 Lakers — 55.2 ppg
’98 Jazz — 55.2 ppg
’98 Bulls — 54.5 ppg
’99 Knicks — 53.8 ppg
Post-1954 Championship Teams with sub-60 ppg supporting casts
’94 Rockets — 59.3 ppg
’06 Heat — 58.2 ppg
’99 Spurs — 57.4 ppg
’97 Bulls — 55.5 ppg
’98 Bulls — 54.5 ppg
None of LeBron’s teams in the Finals have produced as little offensivly as Jordan’s Bulls did in ’97 and ’98, yet Jordan still won back to back titles under those circumstances, and at age 34 and 35 no less.
Title teams with sub-70 PPG supporting casts for the overall playoffs
Post-1954 (Shot-Clock Era)
12. 2002 Lakers — 69.4 PPG
11. 2000 Lakers — 69.0 PPG
10. 1994 Rockets — 68.3 PPG
9. 2006 Heat — 67.8 PPG
8. 1993 Bulls — 67.3 PPG
7. 2012 Heat — 67.0 PPG
6. 1996 Bulls — 66.7 PPG
Title teams with sub-66 PPG supporting casts for the overall playoffs
Post-1954 (Shot Clock Era)
5. 1992 Bulls — 65.9 PPG
4. 2004 Pistons — 65.6 PPG
3. 1999 Spurs — 65.2 PPG
2. 1997 Bulls — 61.5 PPG
1. 1998 Bulls — 60.8 PPG
In the shot-clock era, Jordan has
5 of the 8 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams
4 of the 6 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams
3 of the 5 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams
The 2 lowest scoring playoff supporting casts for title teams- Jordan is the only player to lead multiple top 10 lowest-scoring playoff supporting casts among title teams
The only player to lead a lesser scoring supporting cast to the NBA Finals than the ’97 or ’98 Bulls is Allen Iverson on the ’01 Sixers. The ’01 Sixers’ teammates outside of Iverson scored 60.3 PPG in the 22 playoff games Iverson played. Game 3 against the Bucks in which Iverson did not play is excluded from this calculation.


All from this site, and I have yet to find a wrong stat.
https://undisputedgoat.medium.com/jordan-in-the-clutch-30f6e7ed4c43

And I am the upset one. Look at you throwing a tantrum, running back to copy paste another brick wall that no one’s is going to bother with. I already corrected you multiple times on your sources and stats like Game 6 of the 2010 ECSF, when you claimed Lebron scored 17, was it?

Another brick wall of drivel, which is probably again littered with cherry-picking or incorrect numbers, isn’t going to bury your “special behaviour” here.