Did MJ really go against tougher competition?

[LLJ]

He only dodged Hakeem from what I can recall. he played against most of the best in his generation.

That's like saying Lebron dodged Kobe and the Lakers in 08, 09, 10.

How the hell can you control who makes it to the Finals in the other conference?

You need to chill out. You should be able to tell by my post that I obviously didn't mean it like he had any control over it or did it by purpose.

[OdomFan]

Yea..no. You're literally doing nothing here but naming out players with no real argument to convince anyone with common sense that you know what you're talking about. The fact is as a unit that Jazz team was able to pull off a sweep on a Shaq and Kobe team that also featured two other very good All Stars than go on to nearly took Jordan's Bulls to a game 7.

If they can do that than they can most definitely beat the Warriors. I'm more than confident that a good coach like Jerry Sloan would be able to figure out a gameplan with his talent to pull it off.

[Tribe]

You mean an old, past-their-prime Celtics team who hadn't won a championship in years? (Basically the same as what Jordan did with the Pistons, except the Pistons core was younger when Jordan was going up against them)

You're forgetting quite a few things. That "old, past-their-prime" Celtics team still made it to the Eastern Conference Finals as a 4th seed. The narrative at the time was that those Celtics were comprised of composed savvy veterans that knew how to win. The Heat, on the other hand, had just lost Chris Bosh for the ECF series due to injury. Dwyane Wade was also playing injured. So that left LeBron James versus Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, Ray Allen and Rajon Rondo.

And when those Celtics went up 3-1 nobody was saying that they were old and past their prime. That only came out of critics' mouths after LeBron ripped their hearts out.

You're also wrong about the Pistons comparison because Isaiah Thomas was playing injured for most of the end of that season. His injury was well covered at the time and many predicted that the Pistons reign was going to end because of it, even long before the playoffs began. This is what was written in a newspaper about Thomas' injury in January of 1991:

Their (The Pistons) chances of winning the Eastern Conference championship - or even the Central Division title - may have vanished the instant the announcement was made that Thomas would be reporting to sick bay instead of the scorer's table for the next three months.

So the 1991 Jordan/Pippen/Grant Bulls faced a hobbled Pistons in the ECF. And the 2012 Garnett/Pierce/Allen Celtics faced a hobbled Heat in the ECF. The difference between Jordan and LeBron here is obvious.

See above. You mean those geriatric Spurs with Tim and Manu being 36 and 35 respectively? How exactly do you reconcile this with the criticisms against Jordan against the Pistons?

Those "geriatric" Spurs that lost to LeBron were the #1 seed in the West (62 wins) the very next season, and then they won the NBA title. I.e. LeBron beat that Spurs team when they were still championship quality. They didn't play like geriatrics.

The Pistons that Jordan beat in 1991 were in no way on the level of either the 2013 San Antonio Spurs (whom LeBron beat in the Finals) or the 2014 San Antonio Spurs (whom LeBron didn't beat in the Finals).

But he lost against a team that only won 67 games the very next season, 4-1. Why's that?

Well, obviously because Golden State added Kevin Durant and because LeBron's #2 and #3 were still notoriously bad defensive players that often need to be taken out of the game because they are so bad on defense. In other words, the addition of KD to Golden State made up for everything that LeBron had been doing to make up for the fact that he wasn't playing with good defensive teammates.

This is why the addition of Crowder (and to a lesser extent Jeff Green) was so important to Cleveland.

Actually, as shown above, Jordan had very similar situations in his championship career. See Pistons/Celtics.

Jordan never beat the Bird/McHale/Parrish Celtics in the playoffs. He only got swept by them. And, as I mentioned above, in 1991 the Pistons were playing with an injured Isaiah Thomas who missed several months of that season. Those are poor examples.

So you're gonna ignore the injuries the Celtics had in 2012 including pierce and ray then lol

Revisionist history, the big 3 Celtics window was small when they formed and damn near no one saw them winning a championship in 2012

A healthy isiah wasn't gonna make a difference from them getting spanked 4-0 to winning the east, the bulls were simply better and the difference from them losing to 7 the year previously was due to the development of pippen/grant. But yeah the 91 pistons were just isiah plus scrubs so without him they were a completely hobbled team. Its not like they had other players like the dpoy Rodman or an all NBA/all defensive guard dumars

[NbaAllDay]

Yea..no. You're literally doing nothing here but naming out players with no real argument to convince anyone with common sense that you know what you're talking about. The fact is as a unit that Jazz team was able to pull off a sweep on a Shaq and Kobe team that also featured two other very good All Stars than go on to nearly took Jordan's Bulls to a game 7.

If they can do that than they can most definitely beat the Warriors. I'm more than confident that a good coach like Jerry Sloan would be able to figure out a gameplan with his talent to pull it off.

You've essentially said no to any argument presented to you, yet have very little to no substance to back up your claims.

You continue to say that any top team from the 90s would beat the current Warriors teams yet when you are given examples of who would be matching up with each other you (which is a 'real argument') your retort is saying something a long the lines of "a before their prime 90s team were beaten by the Jazz therefore, the Jazz could beat a 70+ win team who added one of the best players in the league onto their roster"
I'm not sure if you realize how silly that sounds.

That Lakers team in 1998 had a 19 year old Kobe who put up 10 ppg....
Very good All stars in Nick Van Excel and Eddie Jones? Who were also horrible in that series.....

You are being completely disingenuous with your arguments.

[OdomFan]

Yea..no. You're literally doing nothing here but naming out players with no real argument to convince anyone with common sense that you know what you're talking about. The fact is as a unit that Jazz team was able to pull off a sweep on a Shaq and Kobe team that also featured two other very good All Stars than go on to nearly took Jordan's Bulls to a game 7.

If they can do that than they can most definitely beat the Warriors. I'm more than confident that a good coach like Jerry Sloan would be able to figure out a gameplan with his talent to pull it off.

You've essentially said no to any argument presented to you, yet have very little to no substance to back up your claims.

You continue to say that any top team from the 90s would beat the current Warriors teams yet when you are given examples of who would be matching up with each other you (which is a 'real argument') your retort is saying something a long the lines of "a before their prime 90s team were beaten by the Jazz therefore, the Jazz could beat a 70+ win team who added one of the best players in the league onto their roster"
I'm not sure if you realize how silly that sounds.

That Lakers team in 1998 had a 19 year old Kobe who put up 10 ppg....
Very good All stars in Nick Van Excel and Eddie Jones? Who were also horrible in that series.....

You are being completely disingenuous with your arguments.

And your retort is what? Being just another person bringing up the 73 wins in a season despite it being against completely different competition so it does nothing to prove how well they'd do agianst Utah or any other team outside of their era in a basketball game. However if that's how you want to play it that Jazz team won 64 games in 97 and 62 the following year so it's not like they're far off from this highs scale you want to try and sit the Modern Warriors up on.

I like how you just say Van Exel and co didn't play well as if you never heard of what defense is. That Jazz team played some of the best team ball I've ever seen and they could score just as well as anybody. Had great coaching and great ball movement as an overall team to be able to give anyone you can think of a run for their money and i'll stand by that any day of the week.

Btw that Lakers team won 61 games as well that year and they were running through everyone in those playoffs until they reached Utah so if that sounds like nothing special to you than yeah. You don't have a clue.

Malone and Stockton were able to play at a high level and lead teams to the playoffs for nearly 3 decades and it wouldn't be any different if they were playing now.

[homecourtloss]

LMAO, in what planet???

The Jazz would be lucky to get a single game against the Warriors

It doesnt make any sense to continue the argument about Jazzz and about how bad they were. They are people who live in the Darkness and they are people who live in the Light. And I am afraid you are one of the night people. Warriors defense is so bad comparing to older teams that they would loose even from 90s Vancouver Grizzlies which was the worst team of thar decade. Everyone has their opinion of course.. The thing is that no one plays real defense now. You get touched and you go to the free throws line.

Ok I won't go as far as to say ANY team but majority of the elite teams from the 90s would most definitely be able to match up well and defeat the Warriors or any modern day champion from the last 5 years.

Based on what? They’d all be run out of the gym other than the Bulls team that had multiple plus defenders but probably not enough offensive firepower to beat the Warriors. Every other team gets destroyed.

[homecourtloss]

In my mind, MJ is no doubt a better player (it's not even close) but Lebron faced tougher competition in the Finals.

Just my 2 cents

well your 2 cents is incorrect.

The 92 Blazers, 93 Knicks, 93 Suns, 96 Magic, 96 Sonics, 95 Knicks, 98 Pacers and 98 Jazz are all just as good if not better than the teams Lebron faced.

This HAS to some type of schtick, right? You’ve added the ‘95 Knicks?

[JordansBulls]

The only time Lebron went against an elite big in there primes was in 2009 against Dwight and he lost and he had HCA in it. I'm not going to hold 2007 losing to Duncan but his play was dreadfull in that one. Lebron also has been down every year of his career in the playoffs in a series at least 3-2 even 5 years in a row with HCA to inferior teams.

[OdomFan]

It doesnt make any sense to continue the argument about Jazzz and about how bad they were. They are people who live in the Darkness and they are people who live in the Light. And I am afraid you are one of the night people. Warriors defense is so bad comparing to older teams that they would loose even from 90s Vancouver Grizzlies which was the worst team of thar decade. Everyone has their opinion of course.. The thing is that no one plays real defense now. You get touched and you go to the free throws line.

Ok I won't go as far as to say ANY team but majority of the elite teams from the 90s would most definitely be able to match up well and defeat the Warriors or any modern day champion from the last 5 years.

Based on what? They’d all be run out of the gym other than the Bulls team that had multiple plus defenders but probably not enough offensive firepower to beat the Warriors. Every other team gets destroyed.

Face it dude clearly the Bulls are all you know about the 90s. Just another dude over hyping the Warriors just because they won 70 something games in 1 season.

[DavidDunn21]

Bron was favoured to win 2 finals...he won 3.
Jordan had a cakewalk in every final compared to LeBron

Yet 2 of those 6 titles against the Suns and Jazz came down to a final basket in the final seconds of game 6. If that honestly sounds like a cakewalk to you than you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

The. Ills were favored in every series with the ‘93 Finals being close. They were either comfortable or heavy favorites in every other series.

The '91 Lakers were Vegas favorites.

[NbaAllDay]

The only time Lebron went against an elite big in there primes was in 2009 against Dwight and he lost and he had HCA in it. I'm not going to hold 2007 losing to Duncan but his play was dreadfull in that one. Lebron also has been down every year of his career in the playoffs in a series at least 3-2 even 5 years in a row with HCA to inferior teams.

You do realise this should render the 'Elite big" would stop Lebron from scoring in the paint, or make it more difficult for him in general argument since he literally put up 38.5/8/8 on a high efficiency in that series....
Unless you want to also blame him for having Mo Williams as his second best player.

Yes Lebrons performance in 2007 wasn't great. But for context another ATG had similar numbers at the exact same age in a Finals with a much stronger supporting cast. Not to mention against an inferior team than a Prime 2007 Spurs.
22/7/7 on 43% TS Lebron
24.5/8/6 on 50% TS Kobe


He has also been down in this series yet has needed some historical performances to bring them back 'See 2012 ecf g6' 'see 2007 ecf game 5' By what metric are these teams inferior?

Also note, no one argues that the Eastern conference teams of the past decade have been particularly strong.

The oxymoron of many statements made surrounding Lebron discredit him from making the Finals in an 'inferior conference' yet punish him for losing in the Finals against a 'superior conference/team'

We also speak of Lebron losing a series/winning a series as if a team metric should be solely placed on one individual. It can easily be used to bolster a player (see Jordan) or diminish a player (see lebron) since we arn't factoring in the players around them.

Bar 2011 and 2012, and you could maybe argue 2016. Jordan easily had a superior team during his champ runs.

So when we talk about 'MJ going against "tougher competition" we also need to factor in the level of player they had around them. As facing tougher/weaker competition is only relative to the team your are on.

[mysticOscar]

The only time Lebron went against an elite big in there primes was in 2009 against Dwight and he lost and he had HCA in it. I'm not going to hold 2007 losing to Duncan but his play was dreadfull in that one. Lebron also has been down every year of his career in the playoffs in a series at least 3-2 even 5 years in a row with HCA to inferior teams.

You do realise this should render the 'Elite big" would stop Lebron from scoring in the paint, or make it more difficult for him in general argument since he literally put up 38.5/8/8 on a high efficiency in that series....
Unless you want to also blame him for having Mo Williams as his second best player.

Yes Lebrons performance in 2007 wasn't great. But for context another ATG had similar numbers at the exact same age in a Finals with a much stronger supporting cast. Not to mention against an inferior team than a Prime 2007 Spurs.
22/7/7 on 43% TS Lebron
24.5/8/6 on 50% TS Kobe


He has also been down in this series yet has needed some historical performances to bring them back 'See 2012 ecf g6' 'see 2007 ecf game 5' By what metric are these teams inferior?

Also note, no one argues that the Eastern conference teams of the past decade have been particularly strong.

The oxymoron of many statements made surrounding Lebron discredit him from making the Finals in an 'inferior conference' yet punish him for losing in the Finals against a 'superior conference/team'

We also speak of Lebron losing a series/winning a series as if a team metric should be solely placed on one individual. It can easily be used to bolster a player (see Jordan) or diminish a player (see lebron) since we arn't factoring in the players around them.

Bar 2011 and 2012, and you could maybe argue 2016. Jordan easily had a superior team during his champ runs.

So when we talk about 'MJ going against "tougher competition" we also need to factor in the level of player they had around them. As facing tougher/weaker competition is only relative to the team your are on.

The issue i have about you claiming that Lebron faced tougher finals opponents is that its relative to that era they played in.

If the Jazz, Sonics or any other teams Jordan faced in the finals managed to beat the Bulls...they would be looked at a different light. Some of those team may have not disbanded or continued on to defend there titles. Same goes for Lebrons opponents that beat him.

Its almost like were punishing Jordan for enabling the Bulls to be superior and actually beating there opponents or punishing Jordan for his game style being so adaptable and conducive to winning.

LBJ extreme fans can come up with excuses or context to prop up there boy and discredit Jordan......

BUT even if we accept the premise that the Bulls were favourites in all 6 finals....they still won 6 out of 6 in 8 years (2 years disrupted by MJ leaving) in the form of two 3peats and multiple seasons of 60+ wins including a record 72 win with different team mates (with exception of Pippen) in those 2 3peats...that is just utter team domination that cannot be explained just based on better supporting cast.

That is something that LBJ fans cannot fathom nor accept in giving credit to the player that was clearly the BEST not only in the RS, PS but also in finals.

LBJ has accomplished so much and can be accounted as definatley one of the greats (top 3 for me)...but there is nothing that LBJ is better at than MJ...not championships, not stats, not team dynasty...nothing that matters anyway to me when it comes to GOAT rankings...and now LBJ fans are clinging there hope on longevity to stake his claim as GOAT....which is not the reason why players even play for.

But i guess thats what they are left to play with...longevity and discredit Jordans accomplishments.

[homecourtloss]

Yet 2 of those 6 titles against the Suns and Jazz came down to a final basket in the final seconds of game 6. If that honestly sounds like a cakewalk to you than you really don't have a clue what you're talking about.

The. Ills were favored in every series with the ‘93 Finals being close. They were either comfortable or heavy favorites in every other series.

The '91 Lakers were Vegas favorites.

I highly, highly doubt it. The Bulls had homecourt and a much higher SRS, something Vegas used at the time even if wasn’t exactly called that. I see almost no way that the Bulls weren’t favored in that series.

[JordansBulls]

The. Ills were favored in every series with the ‘93 Finals being close. They were either comfortable or heavy favorites in every other series.

The '91 Lakers were Vegas favorites.

I highly, highly doubt it. The Bulls had homecourt and a much higher SRS, something Vegas used at the time even if wasn’t exactly called that. I see almost no way that the Bulls weren’t favored in that series.

You realize SRS was something that has come out in the past 10 years or so? That wasn't something that was available in 90's. In fact hardly any advanced stats were used in Basketball nor Baseball till the mid 2000's.

[DavidDunn21]

The '91 Lakers were Vegas favorites.

I highly, highly doubt it. The Bulls had homecourt and a much higher SRS, something Vegas used at the time even if wasn’t exactly called that. I see almost no way that the Bulls weren’t favored in that series.

You realize SRS was something that has come out in the past 10 years or so? That wasn't something that was available in 90's. In fact hardly any advanced stats were used in Basketball nor Baseball till the mid 2000's.

Watch on YouTube

Go to 6:30

[nk657]

It doesnt make any sense to continue the argument about Jazzz and about how bad they were. They are people who live in the Darkness and they are people who live in the Light. And I am afraid you are one of the night people. Warriors defense is so bad comparing to older teams that they would loose even from 90s Vancouver Grizzlies which was the worst team of thar decade. Everyone has their opinion of course.. The thing is that no one plays real defense now. You get touched and you go to the free throws line.

Ok I won't go as far as to say ANY team but majority of the elite teams from the 90s would most definitely be able to match up well and defeat the Warriors or any modern day champion from the last 5 years.

Based on what? They’d all be run out of the gym other than the Bulls team that had multiple plus defenders but probably not enough offensive firepower to beat the Warriors. Every other team gets destroyed.

In 2040, 25 years from now fans of Real Gm will say how Warriors sucked comparing to 2040 teams.You know what I mean? We are so sure that there is progress in basketball but in the end this is an illusion because its the same game. Only the tempo changes but you get used to the tempo.

[OdomFan]

Ok I won't go as far as to say ANY team but majority of the elite teams from the 90s would most definitely be able to match up well and defeat the Warriors or any modern day champion from the last 5 years.

Based on what? They’d all be run out of the gym other than the Bulls team that had multiple plus defenders but probably not enough offensive firepower to beat the Warriors. Every other team gets destroyed.

In 2040, 25 years from now fans of Real Gm will say how Warriors sucked comparing to 2040 teams.You know what I mean? We are so sure that there is progress in basketball but in the end this is an illusion because its the same game. Only the tempo changes but you get used to the tempo.

Couldn't have said it better.

[LeBird]

The Bulls themselves would probably smashed, let alone the also rans of the 90s. I was old enough to watch these teams and they were no more talented than the Clippers of yesteryear.

Saying those teams would beat GSW is the definition of trolling.

[Franco]

Yea..no. You're literally doing nothing here but naming out players with no real argument to convince anyone with common sense that you know what you're talking about. The fact is as a unit that Jazz team was able to pull off a sweep on a Shaq and Kobe team that also featured two other very good All Stars than go on to nearly took Jordan's Bulls to a game 7.

If they can do that than they can most definitely beat the Warriors. I'm more than confident that a good coach like Jerry Sloan would be able to figure out a gameplan with his talent to pull it off.

You've essentially said no to any argument presented to you, yet have very little to no substance to back up your claims.

You continue to say that any top team from the 90s would beat the current Warriors teams yet when you are given examples of who would be matching up with each other you (which is a 'real argument') your retort is saying something a long the lines of "a before their prime 90s team were beaten by the Jazz therefore, the Jazz could beat a 70+ win team who added one of the best players in the league onto their roster"
I'm not sure if you realize how silly that sounds.

That Lakers team in 1998 had a 19 year old Kobe who put up 10 ppg....
Very good All stars in Nick Van Excel and Eddie Jones? Who were also horrible in that series.....

You are being completely disingenuous with your arguments.

And your retort is what? Being just another person bringing up the 73 wins in a season despite it being against completely different competition so it does nothing to prove how well they'd do agianst Utah or any other team outside of their era in a basketball game. However if that's how you want to play it that Jazz team won 64 games in 97 and 62 the following year so it's not like they're far off from this highs scale you want to try and sit the Modern Warriors up on.

I like how you just say Van Exel and co didn't play well as if you never heard of what defense is. That Jazz team played some of the best team ball I've ever seen and they could score just as well as anybody. Had great coaching and great ball movement as an overall team to be able to give anyone you can think of a run for their money and i'll stand by that any day of the week.

Btw that Lakers team won 61 games as well that year and they were running through everyone in those playoffs until they reached Utah so if that sounds like nothing special to you than yeah. You don't have a clue.

Malone and Stockton were able to play at a high level and lead teams to the playoffs for nearly 3 decades and it wouldn't be any different if they were playing now.

The Jazz weren't some pushover team, nobody is saying that they're the Nets of 2017. But is ridiculous to think that they could beat a team that is basically build like the 90's Bulls that beat them twice.

Yeah, the Dubs don't have the same defensive prowess, but their offensive arsenal more than makes up for it. The Jazz's defense would get slaughtered game in and game out, that's no knock agains't them, but there isn't a team in history who would win by trying to outgun the Warriors. Cleveland just put up an ATG ORtg and still got beatdown in 5 games.

Let's say that even if Malone and Stockton played KD and Curry to a standstill (they can't)... who would match Klay's and Green's production? Hornacek?

The only time Lebron went against an elite big in there primes was in 2009 against Dwight and he lost and he had HCA in it. I'm not going to hold 2007 losing to Duncan but his play was dreadfull in that one. Lebron also has been down every year of his career in the playoffs in a series at least 3-2 even 5 years in a row with HCA to inferior teams.

Uh... what? During the last 5 years he was down 3-2 (or worse) on these ocasions:

2013 Finals Vs Spurs (won 4-3)

2014 Finals Vs Spurs (lost 1-4)

2015 Finals Vs Warriors (lost 2-4)

2016 Finals Vs Warriors (won 4-3)

2017 Finals Vs Warriors (lost 1-4)

He only had HCA in 2013, and still won that finals.

In every other series he had an inferior cast AND didn't have HCA.

[JordansBulls]

You've essentially said no to any argument presented to you, yet have very little to no substance to back up your claims.

You continue to say that any top team from the 90s would beat the current Warriors teams yet when you are given examples of who would be matching up with each other you (which is a 'real argument') your retort is saying something a long the lines of "a before their prime 90s team were beaten by the Jazz therefore, the Jazz could beat a 70+ win team who added one of the best players in the league onto their roster"
I'm not sure if you realize how silly that sounds.

That Lakers team in 1998 had a 19 year old Kobe who put up 10 ppg....
Very good All stars in Nick Van Excel and Eddie Jones? Who were also horrible in that series.....

You are being completely disingenuous with your arguments.

And your retort is what? Being just another person bringing up the 73 wins in a season despite it being against completely different competition so it does nothing to prove how well they'd do agianst Utah or any other team outside of their era in a basketball game. However if that's how you want to play it that Jazz team won 64 games in 97 and 62 the following year so it's not like they're far off from this highs scale you want to try and sit the Modern Warriors up on.

I like how you just say Van Exel and co didn't play well as if you never heard of what defense is. That Jazz team played some of the best team ball I've ever seen and they could score just as well as anybody. Had great coaching and great ball movement as an overall team to be able to give anyone you can think of a run for their money and i'll stand by that any day of the week.

Btw that Lakers team won 61 games as well that year and they were running through everyone in those playoffs until they reached Utah so if that sounds like nothing special to you than yeah. You don't have a clue.

Malone and Stockton were able to play at a high level and lead teams to the playoffs for nearly 3 decades and it wouldn't be any different if they were playing now.

The Jazz weren't some pushover team, nobody is saying that they're the Nets of 2017. But is ridiculous to think that they could beat a team that is basically build like the 90's Bulls that beat them twice.

Yeah, the Dubs don't have the same defensive prowess, but their offensive arsenal more than makes up for it. The Jazz's defense would get slaughtered game in and game out, that's no knock agains't them, but there isn't a team in history who would win by trying to outgun the Warriors. Cleveland just put up an ATG ORtg and still got beatdown in 5 games.

Let's say that even if Malone and Stockton played KD and Curry to a standstill (they can't)... who would match Klay's and Green's production? Hornacek?

The only time Lebron went against an elite big in there primes was in 2009 against Dwight and he lost and he had HCA in it. I'm not going to hold 2007 losing to Duncan but his play was dreadfull in that one. Lebron also has been down every year of his career in the playoffs in a series at least 3-2 even 5 years in a row with HCA to inferior teams.

Uh... what? During the last 5 years he was down 3-2 (or worse) on these ocasions:

2013 Finals Vs Spurs (won 4-3)

2014 Finals Vs Spurs (lost 1-4)

2015 Finals Vs Warriors (lost 2-4)

2016 Finals Vs Warriors (won 4-3)

2017 Finals Vs Warriors (lost 1-4)

He only had HCA in 2013, and still won that finals.

In every other series he had an inferior cast AND didn't have HCA.

No he was down 5 years in a row with HCA. 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013. 3 years in a row lost with HCA. 2012 was down 3-2 to Boston and 2013 down 3-2 to the Spurs. That is what I am talking about. Besides like I said he has been down in a series every year of his career at least 3-2.