If Lebron is the GOAT then how did he allow younger star players to catch him in rings already in his era?

[DimesandKnicks]

Did you watch Irving or Love?

Did you look up Love's 2016 NBA Finals stats?

He had 47% TS% and the Cavs were way worse on the floor with him. I can't tell if you're joking?

[Blaze4G]

Steph is 31 and Klay is 29. Lebron is 35.

Draymond Green is 29, as is Klay. Does it bother you that KD allowed younger players like them to pass him in rings? I mean, KD will retire with at least one ring less than them, making him (by your logic) inferior to them both. Pretty sad, huh?

Warriors will never win another ring again without KD and KD will get at least one ring with the Nets if not two. The east is trash. Only team he has to worry about is Philly.

By the way Warriors lost both 2016 and 2019 Finals without him. I don’t see them getting another ring

I'll bet that Curry will win another ring before KD does...that is if KD even wins another one.

[Baski]

2019 Warriors lose four times on their way to the finals, Raptors lose six times.

2018 Warriors lose 5 times on their way to the finals, Cavaliers lose six times on their way to the finals.

2017 Warriors do not lose a single game before the finals, Cavaliers lose one game before the finals.

2016 Warriors lose five games on the way to the finals, Cavaliers lose two games.

2015 Warriors lose three games on the way to the finals, Cavaliers lose two games on the way to the finals.

2014 Spurs lose six games on the way to the finals, Heat lose three games on the way to the finals.

2013 Spurs lose two games on the way to the finals, Heat lose 4 games on the way to the finals.

2012 Thunder lose three games on the way to the finals, Heat lose six games on the way to the finals.

2011 Mavericks lose three games on the way to the finals, Heat lose three games on the way to the finals.

2010 Lakers lose four games on the way to the finals, Celtics lose five games on the way to the finals.

In the last 10 years the east champions have had more losses on their way to the finals then the West champions six times. The West champions have had more losses on their way to the finals three times. Getting through the East is not the cake walk it is often described to be.

In the last 5 years the Warriors have a record of 60-17 in their Conference playoffs, a 78% win percentage equivalent to winning 63 games over the course of an 82 game season. Their record against the East during that time is 17-11, a 61% win percentage equivalent to a 50 win pace over the course of an 82 game season. 2018 is the only year where the East champion fared worse against the Warriors than the Warriors' WCF competitor. In 2016, 2017 and 2019, the East champion did better against the Warriors than any Western team.

The West is full of pretender contenders. The East has had fewer of those, but the idea that the West is a brutal slog and the East is a stroll through the daisies is not accurate.

Well put. There's just something incredibly stupid about actually believing that winning the East for 8 years straight is easily replicable by any non-2017 Warriors team

[Baski]

Think about this for a second - Remember the 2014 Finals?

Kawhi and company beat the STUFFIN outta LeBron, Bosh, and Wade AFTER being taken to 7 games by the geriatric Mavericks in the 1st round. Lol. Largest beatdown at the time in NBA finals history.

How did the Spurs get rewarded? Matched up with the Clippers next year and they were eliminated in the first round, game 7 by that CP3 bank shot.

What was LeBron doing? Created ANOTHER superteam and going up against the Isaiah Thomas led Celtics in the first round. Lol.

If you don't think LeBron benefited from EXTREME conference disparity and superteams out East, youre less than disingenuous at this point.

This is why I say he shouldn't be compared to the players who've had to grind their entire careers out West...especially without even making the playoffs.

I guess the 8-seed Mavericks were actually the second-best team in the league, seeing as they were the only ones to take the 2014 Spurs to seven games.

And I guess the 2008 Lakers were worse than the 2008 Hawks (and 2008 Cavaliers) because they lost to the Celtics in six games, whereas those other teams lost in seven games.

It is almost as if some teams round into form the later they go. Incredible.

You’re arguing with an infamous ISH troll (34-24 footwork). He tries to sound smart but dude literally doesn't know what a first option is (he claims Pau was the first option on the Lakers from 08-11 and predicted Marcus Morris would be the first option on the 17 Celtics)

Lmao so that's who this guy is? Hilarious how his posts suddenly make sense now.

[Throwback24]

All this coulda woulda shoulda. KD had miles on him, he was in no condition to play against the Raptors. The Raptors won. That's history.

[Pennebaker]

"If Lebron is the GOAT then how did he allow younger star players to catch him..."

LeBron: 4x MVP, 3x FMVP, 3 Rings - 10 total
Durant: 1x MVP, 2x FMVP, 2 Rings - 5 total
Steph: 2x MVP. 0x FMVP, 3 Rings - 5 total
Kawhi: 0x MVP, 2x FMVP, 2 Rings - 4 total
Harden: 1x MVP, 0x FMVP, 0 Rings - 1 total
Russ: 1x MVP, 0x FMVP, 0 Rings - 1 total
Giannis: 1x MVP, 0x FMVP, 0 Rings - 1 total

Clearly the younger stars still have a ton of work to do to catch King James.

[Greed]

Is there any other fanbase in ANY SPORT that manufactured "finals appearances" as an accolade?

Why do you think it's better to lose in the first round (or not even make the playoffs) than it is to play for a ring?

I've literally never seen anyone say that

[guy1]

Winning is predominantly dependent on the talent surrounding you, with very few exceptions. Curry from the beginning had more talent around him than LeBron had until 2011, his 8th year. Curry would have not been able to carry that trash roster farther than first round, and that is a generous estimation, more likely he would have missed the playoffs every damn year. Summa summarum, winning titles has little to do with age and it does not show how dominant you are.

The best players ever usually win multiple championships and mostly all star players get the opportunity to have enough talent around them to win. Part of it has to do with how easy they are to build around.

Steph Curry’s best teammates his first few years were Monta Ellis and David Lee. Let’s not act he was playing on some juggernaut from the beginning. Then he got Klay and Draymond who were nobodies when they started out and then developed while playing with Steph who helped them in their development.

Lebron had a great team from 2011 to 2017 (minus 2015). Furthermore, he’s basically picked his teammates and ushered in the era of players teaming up (so he’s kinda responsible for Durant going to the Warriors) and been his own worst enemy in a lot of ways (his noncommittal nature basically being the reason Kyrie wanted out). Can we stop with the excuses that he couldn’t have won more? ****, if he didnt have basically have the biggest choke ever, the observation I laid out wouldn’t exist.

Yeah, let us not give credit to his opposing teams, it is just him choking. Oh how does that make Curry look like only really beating LeBron when he either teamed up with KD or when the Cavs had serious injury problems? You bring up his "choke" but on the other hand it seems like you are unwilling to give him credit coming back from a huge deficit in the finals. In the end, you can spin your narratives as you like, Curry and the Warriors winning 3 rings is not an argument for Curry being more dominant than LeBron at all. The only area in which Curry is a more efficient shooter than LeBron. He is not even a better passer than him, which considering their respective positions is actually sad.

Well, did he not choke in 2011? If he didn’t, then he would have 4 rings and my observation wouldn’t exist.

I never said Steph is better than Lebron. He’s not. Just that you can’t really say Lebron really dominated and owned his era to a certain level when other star players won just as much or close to it during his career. You can contextualize all you want, doesn’t really change anything.

[XxIronChainzxX]

The best players ever usually win multiple championships and mostly all star players get the opportunity to have enough talent around them to win. Part of it has to do with how easy they are to build around.

Steph Curry’s best teammates his first few years were Monta Ellis and David Lee. Let’s not act he was playing on some juggernaut from the beginning. Then he got Klay and Draymond who were nobodies when they started out and then developed while playing with Steph who helped them in their development.

Lebron had a great team from 2011 to 2017 (minus 2015). Furthermore, he’s basically picked his teammates and ushered in the era of players teaming up (so he’s kinda responsible for Durant going to the Warriors) and been his own worst enemy in a lot of ways (his noncommittal nature basically being the reason Kyrie wanted out). Can we stop with the excuses that he couldn’t have won more? ****, if he didnt have basically have the biggest choke ever, the observation I laid out wouldn’t exist.

Yeah, let us not give credit to his opposing teams, it is just him choking. Oh how does that make Curry look like only really beating LeBron when he either teamed up with KD or when the Cavs had serious injury problems? You bring up his "choke" but on the other hand it seems like you are unwilling to give him credit coming back from a huge deficit in the finals. In the end, you can spin your narratives as you like, Curry and the Warriors winning 3 rings is not an argument for Curry being more dominant than LeBron at all. The only area in which Curry is a more efficient shooter than LeBron. He is not even a better passer than him, which considering their respective positions is actually sad.

Well, did he not choke in 2011? If he didn’t, then he would have 4 rings and my observation wouldn’t exist.

I never said Steph is better than Lebron. He’s not. Just that you can’t really say Lebron really dominated and owned his era to a certain level when other star players won just as much or close to it during his career. You can contextualize all you want, doesn’t really change anything.

He totally dominated his own era. No one's won close to him. The only guy is Curry who's won as much with far less Finals berths and a better team. Otherwise no one is close to his # of MVPs and Finals appearances.

The only times one guy cleaned house on titles was in the 60s. MJ was next with the 2x 3pears and even then 40% of the time someone else won the title.

This era is more like the 80s, except there's no one guy on the level of Bird to rival Magic.

[guy1]

Yeah, let us not give credit to his opposing teams, it is just him choking. Oh how does that make Curry look like only really beating LeBron when he either teamed up with KD or when the Cavs had serious injury problems? You bring up his "choke" but on the other hand it seems like you are unwilling to give him credit coming back from a huge deficit in the finals. In the end, you can spin your narratives as you like, Curry and the Warriors winning 3 rings is not an argument for Curry being more dominant than LeBron at all. The only area in which Curry is a more efficient shooter than LeBron. He is not even a better passer than him, which considering their respective positions is actually sad.

Well, did he not choke in 2011? If he didn’t, then he would have 4 rings and my observation wouldn’t exist.

I never said Steph is better than Lebron. He’s not. Just that you can’t really say Lebron really dominated and owned his era to a certain level when other star players won just as much or close to it during his career. You can contextualize all you want, doesn’t really change anything.

He totally dominated his own era. No one's won close to him. The only guy is Curry who's won as much with far less Finals berths and a better team. Otherwise no one is close to his # of MVPs and Finals appearances.

The only times one guy cleaned house on titles was in the 60s. MJ was next with the 2x 3pears and even then 40% of the time someone else won the title.

This era is more like the 80s, except there's no one guy on the level of Bird to rival Magic.

I could care less about total finals appearances. No one cared about that **** before Lebron.

So no, there are star players that have come close to winning as much as him because there are some that have actually won as much as him.

I never said he wasn’t dominant or that others have dominated more during his era - I said he hasn’t dominated to the extent that other stars have dominated their eras like the ones you mentioned for example.

[ClubLakers KB8]

Because rings aren't the be-and-end-all for ranking individuals? It's a team sport.

[The Laker Kid]

Thread has nothing to do with Kobe yet he dominates the first page

[freethedevil]

Giannis just posted basically the same o/d rtg per 100 as LeBron at ages 24.

G 121/99, L 122/99. His Ast/Turnover isn't on the same level but overall rating isn't hurt much.

If Giannis could improve on the offensive end he actually IMO has an outside shot of getting in the GOAT conversation.

He's already more impactful on defense than MJ or Lebron ever were.

Jason Kidd screwed him up a bit but it'll come around. His work ethic is up there.

After he played his first preseason games for Milwaukee, I knew he'd be in that conversation.. The defensive intensity he had right out of the gate was insane, as were the coast to coast dunks that followed.

His defense will only get better too. Thanasis, his older brother is all hustle & will be with him all season.

Lebron was the best player when he won, hence he gets credit for it. Lebron was also the best player when he lost in 14 and 15, 17 and 18, hence he gets credit for it. Why wouldn't we give credit to the best player? The double standard is something you made up/ We don't blame lebron for losses he played great in, the real question is why we don't give him credit for playing great in 7 straight final apps. Who else can say that?

Bill Russel and....

oh, right, no one.

[LKN]

If Giannis could improve on the offensive end he actually IMO has an outside shot of getting in the GOAT conversation.

He's already more impactful on defense than MJ or Lebron ever were.

Jason Kidd screwed him up a bit but it'll come around. His work ethic is up there.

After he played his first preseason games for Milwaukee, I knew he'd be in that conversation.. The defensive intensity he had right out of the gate was insane, as were the coast to coast dunks that followed.

His defense will only get better too. Thanasis, his older brother is all hustle & will be with him all season.

Lebron was the best player when he won, hence he gets credit for it. Lebron was also the best player when he lost in 14 and 15, 17 and 18, hence he gets credit for it. Why wouldn't we give credit to the best player? The double standard is something you made up/ We don't blame lebron for losses he played great in, the real question is why we don't give him credit for playing great in 7 straight final apps. Who else can say that?

Bill Russel and....

oh, right, no one.

Did you mean to respond to a different post? LOL...

[XxIronChainzxX]

Well, did he not choke in 2011? If he didn’t, then he would have 4 rings and my observation wouldn’t exist.

I never said Steph is better than Lebron. He’s not. Just that you can’t really say Lebron really dominated and owned his era to a certain level when other star players won just as much or close to it during his career. You can contextualize all you want, doesn’t really change anything.

He totally dominated his own era. No one's won close to him. The only guy is Curry who's won as much with far less Finals berths and a better team. Otherwise no one is close to his # of MVPs and Finals appearances.

The only times one guy cleaned house on titles was in the 60s. MJ was next with the 2x 3pears and even then 40% of the time someone else won the title.

This era is more like the 80s, except there's no one guy on the level of Bird to rival Magic.

I could care less about total finals appearances. No one cared about that **** before Lebron.

So no, there are star players that have come close to winning as much as him because there are some that have actually won as much as him.

I never said he wasn’t dominant or that others have dominated more during his era - I said he hasn’t dominated to the extent that other stars have dominated their eras like the ones you mentioned for example.

The reason people say the 80s were dominated by the Celtics and Lakers both, despite the fact that the Celtics only won 3 titles, is because they were always in the Finals. The Lakers "only" won 5 titles, but they were in the Finals basically every year in the 80s.

LeBron was on that same level as Bird / Magic, below guys like MJ, and it totally makes sense since he's below the latter and on the same level as the former.

[guy1]

He totally dominated his own era. No one's won close to him. The only guy is Curry who's won as much with far less Finals berths and a better team. Otherwise no one is close to his # of MVPs and Finals appearances.

The only times one guy cleaned house on titles was in the 60s. MJ was next with the 2x 3pears and even then 40% of the time someone else won the title.

This era is more like the 80s, except there's no one guy on the level of Bird to rival Magic.

I could care less about total finals appearances. No one cared about that **** before Lebron.

So no, there are star players that have come close to winning as much as him because there are some that have actually won as much as him.

I never said he wasn’t dominant or that others have dominated more during his era - I said he hasn’t dominated to the extent that other stars have dominated their eras like the ones you mentioned for example.

The reason people say the 80s were dominated by the Celtics and Lakers both, despite the fact that the Celtics only won 3 titles, is because they were always in the Finals. The Lakers "only" won 5 titles, but they were in the Finals basically every year in the 80s.

LeBron was on that same level as Bird / Magic, below guys like MJ, and it totally makes sense since he's below the latter and on the same level as the former.

Okay, sure the Celtics dominated the 80s, but I don’t think anyone would deny that the Lakers dominated the 80s even more, because they won more titles and not because they made it to the finals more. If the Celtics were 3/9 and the Lakers were 5/5, people would still say the Lakers were the more dominant team of the 80s.

I’m not sure we’re really disagreeing that much here.

[XxIronChainzxX]

I could care less about total finals appearances. No one cared about that **** before Lebron.

So no, there are star players that have come close to winning as much as him because there are some that have actually won as much as him.

I never said he wasn’t dominant or that others have dominated more during his era - I said he hasn’t dominated to the extent that other stars have dominated their eras like the ones you mentioned for example.

The reason people say the 80s were dominated by the Celtics and Lakers both, despite the fact that the Celtics only won 3 titles, is because they were always in the Finals. The Lakers "only" won 5 titles, but they were in the Finals basically every year in the 80s.

LeBron was on that same level as Bird / Magic, below guys like MJ, and it totally makes sense since he's below the latter and on the same level as the former.

Okay, sure the Celtics dominated the 80s, but I don’t think anyone would deny that the Lakers dominated the 80s even more, because they won more titles and not because they made it to the finals more. If the Celtics were 3/9 and the Lakers were 5/5, people would still say the Lakers were the more dominant team of the 80s.

I’m not sure we’re really disagreeing that much here.

Sure, but we don't really have a Lakers equivalent here. I guess the Spurs as a team come closest. They're 5/6 over somewhat the same span of time. And saying LeBron and the Spurs dominated the last 20 years isn't exactly wrong. I suppose one could say LeBron, the Spurs and the Lakers. That's 13/20.

My point is just that for all his failings relative to MJ LeBron's the guy who was most dominant in his own period.

[freethedevil]

Jason Kidd screwed him up a bit but it'll come around. His work ethic is up there.

After he played his first preseason games for Milwaukee, I knew he'd be in that conversation.. The defensive intensity he had right out of the gate was insane, as were the coast to coast dunks that followed.

His defense will only get better too. Thanasis, his older brother is all hustle & will be with him all season.

Lebron was the best player when he won, hence he gets credit for it. Lebron was also the best player when he lost in 14 and 15, 17 and 18, hence he gets credit for it. Why wouldn't we give credit to the best player? The double standard is something you made up/ We don't blame lebron for losses he played great in, the real question is why we don't give him credit for playing great in 7 straight final apps. Who else can say that?

Bill Russel and....

oh, right, no one.

Did you mean to respond to a different post? LOL...

-_-

Yes. Was directed at PG13

[guy1]

The reason people say the 80s were dominated by the Celtics and Lakers both, despite the fact that the Celtics only won 3 titles, is because they were always in the Finals. The Lakers "only" won 5 titles, but they were in the Finals basically every year in the 80s.

LeBron was on that same level as Bird / Magic, below guys like MJ, and it totally makes sense since he's below the latter and on the same level as the former.

Okay, sure the Celtics dominated the 80s, but I don’t think anyone would deny that the Lakers dominated the 80s even more, because they won more titles and not because they made it to the finals more. If the Celtics were 3/9 and the Lakers were 5/5, people would still say the Lakers were the more dominant team of the 80s.

I’m not sure we’re really disagreeing that much here.

Sure, but we don't really have a Lakers equivalent here. I guess the Spurs as a team come closest. They're 5/6 over somewhat the same span of time. And saying LeBron and the Spurs dominated the last 20 years isn't exactly wrong. I suppose one could say LeBron, the Spurs and the Lakers. That's 13/20.

My point is just that for all his failings relative to MJ LeBron's the guy who was most dominant in his own period.

I was only referring to 04-today, meaning the span of Lebron’s career. If we’re talking about the last 20 years then Lebron is clearly below the Spurs and Lakers in terms of dominance. Again, apply whatever context around it you want, it doesn’t change that he wasn’t as successful.

[Ito]

Bron been to the finals more than anybody else since who knows who, probably somebody from the 70s or 80s going to the finals 8 straight times like he did more impressive than winning multiple rings