Mikal Bridges says LeBron would get 90 a game against 86' Celtics (Burning Bridges ?)

[TheGOATRises007]

Even if he said 50 a game this would be severely exaggerating, never mind 90

Bron has never in his career been an empty the clip kind of player in his career. Only during that finals when he was forced to, and we all saw his efficiency tumble.

I guess 2009 and 2012 didn't happen.

Lebron's volume scoring in 2012 was not all-time great.

[freethedevil]

Even if he said 50 a game this would be severely exaggerating, never mind 90

Bron has never in his career been an empty the clip kind of player in his career. Only during that finals when he was forced to, and we all saw his efficiency tumble.

I guess 2009 and 2012 didn't happen.

Lebron's volume scoring in 2012 was not all-time great.

Yeah I meant to type 2014. 2018 and 2017 were also all time great.

[Antinomy]

Basketball, interestingly enough, seems to be the only athletic feat in which the athletes have not improved drastically after 30 years.

Fans of every other sport will accept this. Only basketball fans go through mental gymnastics to explain their nostalgic nonsense.

[-TheDocOfDenial]

Basketball, interestingly enough, seems to be the only athletic feat in which the athletes have not improved drastically after 30 years.

Fans of every other sport will accept this. Only basketball fans go through mental gymnastics to explain their nostalgic nonsense.

Pretty sure the same holds true for football and NFL (on defense at least)

[Roddy B for 3]

Basketball, interestingly enough, seems to be the only athletic feat in which the athletes have not improved drastically after 30 years.

Fans of every other sport will accept this. Only basketball fans go through mental gymnastics to explain their nostalgic nonsense.

If UsainBolt runs a 7.9 100 meter dash it'll be 100 years before anyone comes close.

MJ/Wilt/Kareem were such outliers modern all time greats are merley comparable and not aromatically better.

MJ is still elite fast/elite vertical/great dribbling/crazy high iq/elite hand eye coordination

Low end roation guys from the '90s probably don't make today's NBA as is though. The league is undoubtedly (imo) MUCH deeper now.

[DavidSterned]

You saying irrelevant evidence is relevant doesn't make it so. If you can't be bothered to read, don't waste time trying to respond.

Speaking of not responding

I don't humor red herrings, sorry. Learn to stay on topic. If you disagree with someone, you rebut their points. Which off course you failed to:

Considering what you decided to cite as evidence, I'm going to assume you don't understand the nature of what you're arguing.

Relative to era stats will not answer how well a player will do in another era. This is a cross era comparison, you citing **** like o-rating and assists isn't relevant. The question wasn't, who was better relative to era, the question was, if we transport lebron to another era, how well would he do. Things like the three point shooting, more advanced defensive schemes, and the evolution of offensive schemes don't particularly care about anything you've cited.
.

I directly addressed the subject of your rebuttal. You, on the other hand...

I assumed you haven't watched them play

Simple yes or no, have you ever watched the 1986 Celtics play?

If you need to preemptively discredit your opponent to feel secure in making your arguments, you probably don't know what you're talking about. (which would explain why you tried to prove a team from 1986 had better passing with season-specific assist totals and season-specific o-rating. Or why you used total assists(which have very little correlation with offensive efficiency) to measure passing.)

Could've kept it shorter by simply saying, "No, I haven't".

That's all I needed to know.

[freethedevil]

Speaking of not responding

I don't humor red herrings, sorry. Learn to stay on topic. If you disagree with someone, you rebut their points. Which off course you failed to:

Considering what you decided to cite as evidence, I'm going to assume you don't understand the nature of what you're arguing.

Relative to era stats will not answer how well a player will do in another era. This is a cross era comparison, you citing **** like o-rating and assists isn't relevant. The question wasn't, who was better relative to era, the question was, if we transport lebron to another era, how well would he do. Things like the three point shooting, more advanced defensive schemes, and the evolution of offensive schemes don't particularly care about anything you've cited.
.

I directly addressed the subject of your rebuttal. You, on the other hand...

I assumed you haven't watched them play

Simple yes or no, have you ever watched the 1986 Celtics play?

If you need to preemptively discredit your opponent to feel secure in making your arguments, you probably don't know what you're talking about. (which would explain why you tried to prove a team from 1986 had better passing with season-specific assist totals and season-specific o-rating. Or why you used total assists(which have very little correlation with offensive efficiency) to measure passing.)

Red herring #3

Why do you keep running away?

Considering what you decided to cite as evidence, I'm going to assume you don't understand the nature of what you're arguing.

Relative to era stats will not answer how well a player will do in another era. This is a cross era comparison, you citing **** like o-rating and assists isn't relevant. The question wasn't, who was better relative to era, the question was, if we transport lebron to another era, how well would he do. Things like the three point shooting, more advanced defensive schemes, and the evolution of offensive schemes don't particularly care about anything you've cited.
.

[DavidSterned]

I don't humor red herrings, sorry. Learn to stay on topic. If you disagree with someone, you rebut their points. Which off course you failed to:


I directly addressed the subject of your rebuttal. You, on the other hand...


If you need to preemptively discredit your opponent to feel secure in making your arguments, you probably don't know what you're talking about. (which would explain why you tried to prove a team from 1986 had better passing with season-specific assist totals and season-specific o-rating. Or why you used total assists(which have very little correlation with offensive efficiency) to measure passing.)

Red herring #3

Why do you keep running away?

Considering what you decided to cite as evidence, I'm going to assume you don't understand the nature of what you're arguing.

Relative to era stats will not answer how well a player will do in another era. This is a cross era comparison, you citing **** like o-rating and assists isn't relevant. The question wasn't, who was better relative to era, the question was, if we transport lebron to another era, how well would he do. Things like the three point shooting, more advanced defensive schemes, and the evolution of offensive schemes don't particularly care about anything you've cited.
.

Hard to make it past the bloviation, but I assume the gist of what you're trying to say is that the prospect of having to actually watch pre mid-2000s basketball is kind of scary to you?

[freethedevil]

Red herring #3

Why do you keep running away?

Considering what you decided to cite as evidence, I'm going to assume you don't understand the nature of what you're arguing.

Relative to era stats will not answer how well a player will do in another era. This is a cross era comparison, you citing **** like o-rating and assists isn't relevant. The question wasn't, who was better relative to era, the question was, if we transport lebron to another era, how well would he do. Things like the three point shooting, more advanced defensive schemes, and the evolution of offensive schemes don't particularly care about anything you've cited.
.

Hard to make it past the bloviation, but I assume the gist of what you're trying to say is that the prospect of having to actually watch pre mid-2000s basketball is kind of scary to you?

Do I really have to spell this out to you? You're in no position to make assumptions about what I have or haven't seen. You doing that instead of addressing my rebuttal is gaslighting. Stop trying to put yourself on a pedestal. If you know ****, demonstrate it.

Considering what you decided to cite as evidence, I'm going to assume you don't understand the nature of what you're arguing.

Relative to era stats will not answer how well a player will do in another era. This is a cross era comparison, you citing **** like o-rating and assists isn't relevant. The question wasn't, who was better relative to era, the question was, if we transport lebron to another era, how well would he do. Things like the three point shooting, more advanced defensive schemes, and the evolution of offensive schemes don't particularly care about anything you've cited.
.

You know why I haven't asked you if you watched the celtics play? Because I don't need to, I'm familiar enough with the subject that I can let my posts do the talking. You on the other hand?

did you ever watch the 1986 Celtics play basketball? Even a Youtubed game? If not, please stop pretending to know what you're talking about. It's actually embarrassing to read.

What part of my post was this a response to? Oh right, nothing, because have zero clue what you're talking about. Hence why you tried to use era-specfic stats for a cross-era comparison.

[ballup]

Remember how Lebron was scrutinized for his lack of mental fortitude before his first championship run? Imagine that against one of the best trash talkers in league history.

Trash talk always fired LeBron up, and his mental fortitude was fine for a player still learning how to win and what it takes to win.

I mean Jordan got past the "Bad Boys" and their "Jordan Rules", but it's not like he did it on his first try and when he did beat them - they were already in decline (won just 50 games and would lose to the Knicks in the first round the next season). He never did beat the Celtics in the playoffs, and he did beat the Lakers, but they had lost Kareem and Riley, and were about to lose Magic.

A smart coach in the '80's would had figured out he needed to make a young LeBron beat his team with his shaky at times jump shot, but he'd first have to figure out a way to keep him out of the paint without leaving shooters open. Once Phil got it through to Jordan that he had to pass to his open shooters, Jordan starting winning championships. James understood that from before he entered the league.

What you're talking about is prime Lebron, not young Lebron. Prime Lebron had the "I'm going right back at ya" attitude. Young Lebron was ridiculed for being LeBrick or LeChoke. Not having a reliable post game nor a go to ISO move barred him from being a closer up to that Mavs series. Lebron would get hammered going to the rim against the '86 Celtics. Of course he'd make it a decent series and would get his usual lines, but his team would not have control of the series.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

[og15]

yes, get a 500ib former sumo wrestler standing out there if you want, the defence have to stand out there with him or double team LeBron

are you telling me with your guy standing in the corner 3 that you can stand 15ft away from him near the paint waiting for LeBron?, or even worse 2 or 3 guys doing that?

how do you achieve this?

What I'm saying is that you are transporting strategies that were not how teams played in 1986 into 1986

well I am transporting LeBron back there to play, and I assumed his brain with all his knowledge is included in the transportation package

but even with normal isolation plays that Jordan was using for his 63pts, that's good enough for LeBron

Well of course he would produce, LeBron is very good, he'll get points, he won't be shut down or something, but he is not likely to perform as well as Jordan did individually. At that same stage in their careers, Jordan was the better scorer and much better shooter and would be so against that same defense. Even if you transport LeBron and his knowledge at 22, which is not the same as his knowledge later and now, his coaches and teammates aren't going to be setting up like they are playing modern pace and space or 90's iso ball.

[2Mas]

LeBron would not average 90 vs the 86 Celtics.

LeBron wouldn't of been in the playoffs in 86.

LeBron wouldn't have came back in that 86 season. Woulda took the year off while complaining that he needs more help to the FO.

You are bragging about what exactly? The Bulls made the playoffs with a 30 and 52 record.

LeBron has never played on a team with a record that bad.

I think he makes the playoffs with a bar that low. It’s likely his body holds up (as is his history) and his team is better then 8th.

He's just saying he doesn't think Lebron would have came back that season if his leg broke.

Lol exactly. Thank you.

No bragging here.

[EAS Law]

I don’t think this thread needs to devolve into a LeBron v. Jordan comparison.

LeBron has put up some crazy individual stats in the playoffs many times over. He won’t ever touch 90 a game unless you’re talking about playing teams from Wilt and Russel days.

LeBron has never been a good shooter. He’s gotten better as time has gone on, but he’s a scorer that has always gotten points from the foul line and driving.

He’s a great finisher and does many other things at an all time level, but I’m sure a major portion of his career totals come from teams backing off at the rim to avoid the million And1s that he was always bound to get especially during his prime runs.

[WillyJakkz]

Why the defense of the 80's and early 90's gets conflated with the defense of the late 90's and early 00's, i will never understand. The 80's played at a faster pace than the break neck one that we have today, with worse athletes and much, much poorer defensive strategy.

Ya, Lebron would dominate

This is what I don't get about people not getting it today.

LeBron would average 30 maybe 40+ while also getting 10rebs 10asts while the players of that day would be mystified by his skillset for such a big body.

Just prime LeBron and his speed and vision as well as athleticism would be idoled.

[mademan]

You are bragging about what exactly? The Bulls made the playoffs with a 30 and 52 record.

LeBron has never played on a team with a record that bad.

I think he makes the playoffs with a bar that low. It’s likely his body holds up (as is his history) and his team is better then 8th.

He's just saying he doesn't think Lebron would have came back that season if his leg broke.

Lol exactly. Thank you.

No bragging here.

we saw Lebron come back last year, when the Lakers were 3+games out of the playoffs, and it was gonna take an enormous run to make it. If he's healthy, he's playing, like he always has.

[12footrim]

generation Z is pushing back against this MJ campaign.
I know some collegiate players who refuse to even watch it because anybody could doninate back then.
A whole generation of athletes who have little concept on basketball, but still excel at it. Its amazing.

I'm a 41 year old Generation X'er who also thinks even a 22 year old Lebron would destroy the 86 celtics as well. Not 90 points but by the time you added up all the points/assist/rebounds and efficiency probably similarly impressive over the course of the whole series.

Who the hell is guarding Lebron in that series, between Larry Bird, 6-4 Dennis Johnson, and 6-4 Danny Ainge that were guarding Jordan? They had no one and would have been at a bigger disadvantage IMO because Lebron could actually make 3's and was already a beast at 22.

[HotRocks34]

One more Celtics 1986 video. Two things from this.

1. If the 2020 playoffs is played without fans, it's going to suck. Crowds are a massive part of the experience.

2. Watch how the Celtics dug-in and collapsed on defense at times in these videos. They would swarm LeBron. Their defense was dominant.

Watch on YouTube

Young Hakeem (23 years old here) was one of the most athletic, destructive forces in the history of the NBA. And as you can see in the video, he already had the turnaround fadeaway. He had a big series (24/11) but Boston contained him enough to let their big guns (Bird 24/9/9; McHale 25/8) get the job done.

[SoulJah]

No he won't, because nobody gave sissy calls in 90s. Two dunks in a row, and the third time in the lane, he'll feel the pain with no call. That's the difference, that era was physical, manly calls... nowadays, every little star feels entitled to be protected by the referees even if somebody breathes close to them.

[mademan]

No he won't, because nobody gave sissy calls in 90s. Two dunks in a row, and the third time in the lane, he'll feel the pain with no call. That's the difference, that era was physical, manly calls... nowadays, every little star feels entitled to be protected by the referees even if somebody breathes close to them.

When you realize refs called way more fouls in the 80's...

[Priest24]

The thing that is baffles me about statements like this is that people don't believe past players had the ability to adapt. The Celtics may have allowed Lebron to score that much but no one else would score. His statement is also vague in this context by not pointing out who would win.