Would you rather make to the finals every year and win 50% or half the time and win 100%

[Alize]

3-6 again, 2016 is too special and was one of the best seasons overall

So you would have preferred to go 3-6 in the finals instead of 6-0? Because thats what my question was.

It was 40 years since we won the championship too, but i would rather we have gotten 4 titles in 4 years instead of 3 out of 5. The number of times that you have bragging rights for a full year is definitely more important than telling people "well at least we got to the finals", as far as im concerned.

I can't recall ever exercising "bragging rights" as a fan, so yes I'd rather my team be as competitive as possible and as fun to watch as possible as well which extends to the regular season.

My answer is I'd rather my team be 1-3 and accused of beating up on a weak conference than not make the finals at all.

You should run for office with that answer

I asked 3-6 or 6-0. So you value finals appearances over actual titles?

Sent from my SM-G950F using RealGM mobile app

[Hroz]

People are framing losing the Finals in the wrong way. Imagine if winning the Finals is a Gold medal and losing means Silver. I would rather have 5 Golds and 5 Silvers than 5 Golds.

Spot-on.

Horrible analogy. Last I checked all those people with silver medals actually have silver medals. The team that LOSES the NBA finals gets the exact same hardware as the team that finishes dead last in the regular season. I.e. NOTHING NADA ZIP.

Conference champions get trophies

[Drylick]

Sadly an unprovable statement is never gonna end the thread.

Jordan has the most total in terms of accolades and accomplishments in the NBA. Not to mention his stats/
Jordan in the clutch is 60++ points per 48 in 52% shooting. That is GODLY.
Jordan exposed the game worldwide. Players today owe the boom of the popularity of today's league to Michael.

Unfortunately, some cannot discern what facts are.

That isn't true. Wilt and Kareem exist.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

Jordan has the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever, etc. in the NBA. Not Kareem, not Wilt.

[Drylick]

3-6 again, 2016 is too special and was one of the best seasons overall

I can't recall ever exercising "bragging rights" as a fan, so yes I'd rather my team be as competitive as possible and as fun to watch as possible as well which extends to the regular season.

My answer is I'd rather my team be 1-3 and accused of beating up on a weak conference than not make the finals at all.

You should run for office with that answer

I asked 3-6 or 6-0. So you value finals appearances over actual titles?

Sent from my SM-G950F using RealGM mobile app

Good. So you like losing more than winning. Not surprised.

[Nazrmohamed]

I rather visit more finals cuz it means you're always competing, always playing at the highest level.

[Warriorfan]

Depends if the franchise is undefeated for the championship previously

I prefer 6-0 over 7-5

Prefer being a worse team/franchise...just so weird.

Its relative

Bulls win 6 in 8 years

Say another franchise has 7 over 80 yrs

[dhsilv2]

Depends if the franchise is undefeated for the championship previously

I prefer 6-0 over 7-5

Prefer being a worse team/franchise...just so weird.

Its relative

Bulls win 6 in 8 years

Say another franchise has 7 over 80 yrs

Well, 80 years is kinda a long time given life expectancy. The question was effectively a reasonable time period say 10 year 5 titles and 5 finals or 5 titles and 5 years of who knows...conference losses, maybe a missed playoffs, you decide how good/bad.

But 7 titles over 80 years with 73 nba finals appearances vs 6 titles in 8 years and being a first round exit/lottery team for 72 years...not a hard choice to make either.

[Edrees]

IF you really wanted to make a point, you should have said "would you rather make it once every 20 years and win 100% of the time or make it 20 years in a row and win 5% of the time". Imagine thinking making 1 finals in 20 and winning is better than making 20/20 and winning 1.

[JonFromVA]

Jordan has the most total in terms of accolades and accomplishments in the NBA. Not to mention his stats/
Jordan in the clutch is 60++ points per 48 in 52% shooting. That is GODLY.
Jordan exposed the game worldwide. Players today owe the boom of the popularity of today's league to Michael.

Unfortunately, some cannot discern what facts are.

That isn't true. Wilt and Kareem exist.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

Jordan has the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever, etc. in the NBA. Not Kareem, not Wilt.

You'd have to get everyone to agree what the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever was first ... then you could perhaps arrive at a conclusion and yet it would still be subjective BS.

[mixerball]

How can you be flawless and clutch if you lose before making it to the finals.


Makes no sense

you make no sense.

Here's a 10 year span of what your team could be like if you went with the making finals 50% and winning it 100%

Year 1. 15-67
Year 2. 25-58,
Year 3. 32-50,
Year 4. 48-37 (win finals, just caught fire at the right time)
Year 5. 56-26 (win finals)
Year 6. 50-32 (team is starting to hate each other, lose in the 2nd round as dysfunction happens)
Year 7. 54-28(win finals)
Year 8. 42-40 (win finals, injured riddled season but everyone got healthy at the same time and barely made the playoffs)
Year 9. 68-14 (chokefest in round 1 of the playoffs, players blame each other)
Year 10. 60-22 (Win finals, redeemed but team hates each other already so it completely disbands)

why did you quote me?

[Alize]

When these 2 guys played there were no accolades you could get for individual accomplishments.

Secondly, Jordan has many scoring records, we get it, but since James Harden crushed those back 2 back these records will be not important for new generations to measure players.
Harden made it look easy to score 35 to 40 per game.
So over time those "total accoplishments and accolades" will lose signifance, the only thing that is holding Jordan on No.1 is going 6-6 in the finals on team that was always to favourite to win that played in a expanded, wattered down league.

That isn't true. Wilt and Kareem exist.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

Jordan has the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever, etc. in the NBA. Not Kareem, not Wilt.

You'd have to get everyone to agree what the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever was first ... then you could perhaps arrive at a conclusion and yet it would still be subjective BS.

Sent from my SM-G950F using RealGM mobile app

[Vampirate]

IF you really wanted to make a point, you should have said "would you rather make it once every 20 years and win 100% of the time or make it 20 years in a row and win 5% of the time". Imagine thinking making 1 finals in 20 and winning is better than making 20/20 and winning 1.

Honestly I chose making the finals and winning 50% of the time but it'd kill me to constantly make the finals and basically lose all of them except that one time. Imagine the ridicule, people would call your team the other conference punching bag.

[prophet_of_rage]

Jordan has the most total in terms of accolades and accomplishments in the NBA. Not to mention his stats/
Jordan in the clutch is 60++ points per 48 in 52% shooting. That is GODLY.
Jordan exposed the game worldwide. Players today owe the boom of the popularity of today's league to Michael.

Unfortunately, some cannot discern what facts are.

That isn't true. Wilt and Kareem exist.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

Jordan has the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever, etc. in the NBA. Not Kareem, not Wilt.

That isn't true at all. Kareem has more points, MVPs, All-Star appearances, years played, equal championships won with two orhanisations far more blocks and rebounds, equal assist numbers, better field goal percentages.

You really want to put Wilts records up against Michael's?

Michael being the GOAT is a media line. Greatest shooting guard no debate. Greatest player is up for debate. He must be in the conversation, but it doesn't stop with just his name.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

[michaelm]

‘2nd best’ all the time or best half the time ?. Not a particularly difficult question for a competitive athlete I would have thought, particularly if getting to the finals is decided by an outcome against competition weaker than the best team faced in a given year.

[Drylick]

That isn't true. Wilt and Kareem exist.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

Jordan has the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever, etc. in the NBA. Not Kareem, not Wilt.

That isn't true at all. Kareem has more points, MVPs, All-Star appearances, years played, equal championships won with two orhanisations far more blocks and rebounds, equal assist numbers, better field goal percentages.

You really want to put Wilts records up against Michael's?

Michael being the GOAT is a media line. Greatest shooting guard no debate. Greatest player is up for debate. He must be in the conversation, but it doesn't stop with just his name.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

How many trophies Michael and Kareem have? Michael's stats are almost at the top, advanced and raw stats, especially for his position. Wilt's records? Yeah, when he WILTED in the Playoffs? Go on.

Michael has the biggest argument out of all the GOAT candidates. Insecure fans of other players just don't like to admit that fact.

[Drylick]

Didnt they beat the 73-9 Warriors, a team that is better than the 96 Bulls? Sure.

3-6 easy, who wants to beat up old unathletic teams every year and win it without even a game 7 in the finals.

Sent from my SM-G950F using RealGM mobile app

As opposed to beating up weak Eastern Conference teams and then getting knocked out when you play actually good teams in the Finals. Yeah 3 titles and 6 participation trophies is better to you than 6 actual titles huh?

Sent from my SM-G950F using RealGM mobile app

2016 Warriors better than the Bulls? Let me know if they won the ring. Oooppss!

[Drylick]

That isn't true. Wilt and Kareem exist.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk

Jordan has the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever, etc. in the NBA. Not Kareem, not Wilt.

You'd have to get everyone to agree what the best combination of accolades, stats, accomplishments, winning, whatever was first ... then you could perhaps arrive at a conclusion and yet it would still be subjective BS.

Google what the word combination means then you can arrive at a conclusion, not your subjective BS.

[Alize]

Who cares? They were 2 positions away from winning one. But what is more important they beat the bulls season record in a more stacked league.

Didnt they beat the 73-9 Warriors, a team that is better than the 96 Bulls? Sure.

As opposed to beating up weak Eastern Conference teams and then getting knocked out when you play actually good teams in the Finals. Yeah 3 titles and 6 participation trophies is better to you than 6 actual titles huh?

Sent from my SM-G950F using RealGM mobile app

2016 Warriors better than the Bulls? Let me know if they won the ring. Oooppss!

Sent from my SM-G950F using RealGM mobile app

[batmana]

Win 100% of the time and it's not even close.
It has nothing to do with the stupid "if you didn't make the finals, it means you lost earlier" mantra.
Paths to the finals are not the same every year. The Spurs/Lakers/Kings/Blazers were much more feared and respected in the early 00s than the Nets even though the Nets made 2 finals. Noone in their right mind considers those Nets a better team or puts Kenyon Martin farther up the all-time rankings because he made 2 finals.
Furthermore, it was mentioned very early, losing at a later stage is so much more impactful than losing earlier. You lose in round 1 or in round 2 - f* it, it wasn't your year anyway. Losing in the finals, at the biggest stage, has much greater implications.
Also, from a fan's perspective, losing in the finals is the worst thing ever. You lose earlier, you just shrug your shoulders after a couple of days. Losing in the finals stays for you for a VERY long time.

[prophet_of_rage]

Win 100% of the time and it's not even close.
It has nothing to do with the stupid "if you didn't make the finals, it means you lost earlier" mantra.
Paths to the finals are not the same every year. The Spurs/Lakers/Kings/Blazers were much more feared and respected in the early 00s than the Nets even though the Nets made 2 finals. Noone in their right mind considers those Nets a better team or puts Kenyon Martin farther up the all-time rankings because he made 2 finals.
Furthermore, it was mentioned very early, losing at a later stage is so much more impactful than losing earlier. You lose in round 1 or in round 2 - f* it, it wasn't your year anyway. Losing in the finals, at the biggest stage, has much greater implications.
Also, from a fan's perspective, losing in the finals is the worst thing ever. You lose earlier, you just shrug your shoulders after a couple of days. Losing in the finals stays for you for a VERY long time.

Not if you win 5he finals every other year.

Sent from my SM-N970W using Tapatalk