Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2016 6:34 am Post subject: LeBron vs Mike - Teams Beaten for Rings
How many times did Jordan win a title by beating a team that was better than the teams LeBron beat for titles (12 OKC, 13 Spurs, 16 Warriors)?
The 91 Pistons were defending champs and had 3 HOF players (Zeke, Rodman, Dumars) plus Aguirre, Laimbeer and Vinnie. Zeke was hurt that year though and only avg 14 ppg in the playoffs. Lakers had Magic/Worthy but no other studs. Ewing never had another HOF’er alongside him. Blazers were deep but that was one historically great player (Drexler) and a bunch of really good ones (no one else in the HOF). If KJ gets in the HOF then the Suns would have had 2 HOF players (him and Barkley). The Magic had Shaq, Penny and other very good players. The Sonics were similar to the 92 Blazers. The Jazz had Stockton/Malone, but no other studs. The Pacers were similar to the Blazers and Sonics.
OKC had Durant and 2 more top 10 players (Russ and Harden), plus other good players. That trio will all wind up in the HOF. SA had a HOF trio and Leonard, and depth. GS had Curry, Klay, Green, Iggy and depth.
I think the 91 Pistons and 96 Magic were just as good, if not arguably better. I don’t see any other team that qualifies though.
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:03 am Post subject: Re: LeBron vs Mike - Teams Beaten for Rings
Dreamshake wrote:
How many times did Jordan win a title by beating a team that was better than the teams LeBron beat for titles (12 OKC, 13 Spurs, 16 Warriors)?
The 91 Pistons were defending champs and had 3 HOF players (Zeke, Rodman, Dumars) plus Aguirre, Laimbeer and Vinnie. Zeke was hurt that year though and only avg 14 ppg in the playoffs. Lakers had Magic/Worthy but no other studs. Ewing never had another HOF’er alongside him. Blazers were deep but that was one historically great player (Drexler) and a bunch of really good ones (no one else in the HOF). If KJ gets in the HOF then the Suns would have had 2 HOF players (him and Barkley). The Magic had Shaq, Penny and other very good players. The Sonics were similar to the 92 Blazers. The Jazz had Stockton/Malone, but no other studs. The Pacers were similar to the Blazers and Sonics.
OKC had Durant and 2 more top 10 players (Russ and Harden), plus other good players. That trio will all wind up in the HOF. SA had a HOF trio and Leonard, and depth. GS had Curry, Klay, Green, Iggy and depth.
I think the 91 Pistons and 96 Magic were just as good, if not arguably better. I don’t see any other team that qualifies though.
The Cavs probably faced teams with more Hall of Famers in the finals, but the Bulls faced a lot of deep strong teams.
The Warriors had injuries this year; the Lakers had injuries when the Bulls beat them in 91.
The Bulls probably faced harder competition on the way to the finals.
How it all shakes out is in the eye of the beholder. Never seen anyone do a compelling analysis of the level of competition a team faces. The opinion always gets skewed by teams or players they like/dislike (It's the "my guy had it harder then your guy" syndrome).
Joined: 24 Dec 2007 Posts: 35854 Location: Santa Clarita, CA (Hell) ->>>>>Ithaca, NY -≥≥≥≥≥Berkeley, CA
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:58 am Post subject:
I feel like the critique that LeBron always beat weak teams should die now that he beat the 73-9 Warriors. _________________ Damian Lillard shatters Dwight Coward's championship dreams:
I feel like the critique that LeBron always beat weak teams should die now that he beat the 73-9 Warriors.
Every superstar -- Lebron, Jordan, Kobe etc. --- has his share of people who insist their rings/accomplishments don't count because of competition, injuries, refereeing or the simple fact they don't like the guy.
Apart from the "Lebron is never allowed to succeed no matter what" crowd, I'd say people largely think he has answered all the past criticism -- that he faces easy competition, that he shrinks in the clutch.
He's had one of the best five year runs of any player in the history of the NBA.
Lebron has a very good chance to me of retiring as the GOAT
He really doesn't. KD made sure of that. Barring an injury, I would be very surprised if LeBron wins another ring. KD really (bleep) him. Bron will likely end his career with 3 rings and hover at the 5 spot.
What would really be (bleep) is if KD reeled off 3-4 straight championships and knocked LeBron out the top 5 right when the man is about to retire. _________________ A banana is killed every time a terrible thread or post is made. Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts!
Lebron has a very good chance to me of retiring as the GOAT
He really doesn't. KD made sure of that. Barring an injury, I would be very surprised if LeBron wins another ring. KD really (bleep) him. Bron will likely end his career with 3 rings and hover at the 5 spot.
What would really be (bleep) is if KD reeled off 3-4 straight championships and knocked LeBron out the top 5 right when the man is about to retire.
But to me that "rings" argument doesn't make much sense — and might have always been wrong. If two teams are on an equal playing field, and your team always loses, then that shows poorly on you. If, however, one team is CLEARLY better than the other — let's say Golden State will be that way — how could not winning those last couple rings possibly be a knock on LeBron?
Lebron has a very good chance to me of retiring as the GOAT
He really doesn't. KD made sure of that. Barring an injury, I would be very surprised if LeBron wins another ring. KD really (bleep) him. Bron will likely end his career with 3 rings and hover at the 5 spot.
What would really be (bleep) is if KD reeled off 3-4 straight championships and knocked LeBron out the top 5 right when the man is about to retire.
But to me that "rings" argument doesn't make much sense — and might have always been wrong. If two teams are on an equal playing field, and your team always loses, then that shows poorly on you. If, however, one team is CLEARLY better than the other — let's say Golden State will be that way — how could not winning those last couple rings possibly be a knock on LeBron?
It wont be a knock against him(negative), but it wont be a positive either. For someone like Jordan it is a positive because we're speaking in accomplishments, and he's won 6 rings. For example, let's say LeBron had 3 at the same time MJ had 3, and for argument's sake, let's say they are on the same level at this point. MJ reels off 3 consecutive championships, LeBron's stock will stay the same while MJ's will rise.
They played in two different times, so it might be easier just to say that MJ has reached a certain level of accomplishment and LeBron is chasing that level. It wont be a knock on him if he doesn't reach it, it will just be what it is. "He couldn't even win 6 rings" is not a valid argument. He's won 3, and that's great in itself.
It's just not 6.
We're not talking about whether he is a great player or not, we're talking about whether he stacks up to MJ. _________________ A banana is killed every time a terrible thread or post is made. Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts!
OKC had Durant and 2 more top 10 players (Russ and Harden), plus other good players. That trio will all wind up in the HOF. SA had a HOF trio and Leonard, and depth.
Westbrook may have been a top 10 player, but Harden was not in 2012. And it's debatable whether Westbrook was. SA trio was not in their prime. It wasn't until Leonard became Leonard and outplayed Lebron did the Spurs beat the stacked Heat team.
Beating the Warriors was a huge feat though. Lebron's Cavs are not that good and he put them on his back to beat what was historically the best team ever.
Joined: 25 Jul 2013 Posts: 9577 Location: Salem, OR
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:56 pm Post subject:
USCandLakers wrote:
The Logo wrote:
Lebron has a very good chance to me of retiring as the GOAT
He really doesn't. KD made sure of that. Barring an injury, I would be very surprised if LeBron wins another ring. KD really (bleep) him. Bron will likely end his career with 3 rings and hover at the 5 spot.
What would really be (bleep) is if KD reeled off 3-4 straight championships and knocked LeBron out the top 5 right when the man is about to retire.
Even if Lebron doesn't ever win a ring again, hypothetically, and still won one more MVP, and plays six more seasons, averaging 1925.66 points per season, he'd pass Kareem for the all time leading scorer (which he's on pace to do, considering he averages 2064 points per season), get 3145 more assists (got this number by totaling his assist numbers throughout his career, divided by his thirteen total seasons, and multiplied by six more hypothetical seasons), which would put him ahead of Oscar Robertson for 6th all time in assists, grab 3261 more rebounds, which would put him 36th all time in rebounds, get 764 more steals, which would put him ahead of Mo Cheeks for 5th all time in steals, and get 356 more blocks, which would put him 64th all time in blocks.
In conclusion, he'd be the all time leading scorer, have the 6th most assists all time, 36th most rebounds all time, 5th most steals, and 64th most blocks in NBA history, to go along with at least five MVPs, three Finals MVPs, and whatever amount of Finals appearances he has, which will be a lot more than what he has right now. With those accolades in mind, you could at least make a very substantial argument that he is the GOAT, along with the fact that the '13 Spurs and '16 Warriors were significantly better than any team that Jordan faced in the Finals. While KD might've (bleep) up Lebron's chances of winning another ring, he might've also improved his chances to win more than one MVP. The Steph and KD being on the same team could lead arguments to "whose team is it", in the media, which would detract MVP votes from both, just like it did in 2011 for Lebron and Wade and this past year for KD and Westbrook. I'd honestly be really skeptical of any list that has Lebron lower than top three all time, if Lebron plays in this hypothetical six year stretch.
Lets put this comparison against kobe n shaq eras.
We know all the giants in their heydays: the Spurs, the Blazers, The Kings, the Sixers, the Pistons and the Nets (Kidd prime years).
MJ and the bulls would also beat a lot of these teams.
Lets put this comparison against kobe n shaq eras.
We know all the giants in their heydays: the Spurs, the Blazers, The Kings, the Sixers, the Pistons and the Nets (Kidd prime years).
MJ and the bulls would also beat a lot of these teams.
Any Lebron team (even the Heat superteam) would be climbing the mountain to beat those giants.
I see no reason why the Cavs or the Heats couldn't beat those teams.
Lets put this comparison against kobe n shaq eras.
We know all the giants in their heydays: the Spurs, the Blazers, The Kings, the Sixers, the Pistons and the Nets (Kidd prime years).
MJ and the bulls would also beat a lot of these teams.
Any Lebron team (even the Heat superteam) would be climbing the mountain to beat those giants.
I see no reason why the Cavs or the Heats couldn't beat those teams.
Especially the Spurs with Duncan/Robinson/et al, Kings with Divac/Webber/Bibby/Stoja/etc OR Portland with Pippen/Sabonis/Smith/Wallace/Stoudamie? No way.
Lets put this comparison against kobe n shaq eras.
We know all the giants in their heydays: the Spurs, the Blazers, The Kings, the Sixers, the Pistons and the Nets (Kidd prime years).
MJ and the bulls would also beat a lot of these teams.
Any Lebron team (even the Heat superteam) would be climbing the mountain to beat those giants.
I see no reason why the Cavs or the Heats couldn't beat those teams.
Especially the Spurs with Duncan/Robinson/et al, Kings with Divac/Webber/Bibby/Stoja/etc OR Portland with Pippen/Sabonis/Smith/Wallace/Stoudamie? No way.
It took not one but two choked free throw job by Spurs to let the ring slip away.
Don't see why the "Kings with Divac/Webber/Bibby/Stoja/etc" or "Portland with Pippen/Sabonis/Smith/Wallace/Stoudamie" are more scary that the "Heat with Lebron/Bosh/Wade/Allen/etc."
moonriver24 wrote:
It took not one but two choked free throw job by Spurs to let the ring slip away.
So what? Portland and Sacramento couldn't even get to the finals. The Spurs with Robinson and Duncan lost in the first round to the Sun the year after they won a ring. Don't know why you think these teams are infallable, when they had their ups and downs like everyone else.
Last edited by activeverb on Wed Aug 03, 2016 9:37 pm; edited 3 times in total
Lets put this comparison against kobe n shaq eras.
We know all the giants in their heydays: the Spurs, the Blazers, The Kings, the Sixers, the Pistons and the Nets (Kidd prime years).
MJ and the bulls would also beat a lot of these teams.
Any Lebron team (even the Heat superteam) would be climbing the mountain to beat those giants.
I see no reason why the Cavs or the Heats couldn't beat those teams.
Especially the Spurs with Duncan/Robinson/et al, Kings with Divac/Webber/Bibby/Stoja/etc OR Portland with Pippen/Sabonis/Smith/Wallace/Stoudamie? No way.
It took not one but two choked free throw job by Spurs to let the ring slip away.
Not to mention Pop foolishly forcing the Generational G.O.A.T. to observe from the sidelines.
Joined: 25 Jul 2013 Posts: 9577 Location: Salem, OR
Posted: Wed Aug 03, 2016 9:51 pm Post subject:
moonriver24 wrote:
activeverb wrote:
moonriver24 wrote:
Lets put this comparison against kobe n shaq eras.
We know all the giants in their heydays: the Spurs, the Blazers, The Kings, the Sixers, the Pistons and the Nets (Kidd prime years).
MJ and the bulls would also beat a lot of these teams.
Any Lebron team (even the Heat superteam) would be climbing the mountain to beat those giants.
I see no reason why the Cavs or the Heats couldn't beat those teams.
Especially the Spurs with Duncan/Robinson/et al, Kings with Divac/Webber/Bibby/Stoja/etc OR Portland with Pippen/Sabonis/Smith/Wallace/Stoudamie? No way.
It took not one but two choked free throw job by Spurs to let the ring slip away.
I've always wondered what effect, if any, the expansion drafts in 88 and 89 had on the competition of the NBA at the time. Do the 4 extra teams make the league better? Or do they make some of the teams weaker?
I've always wondered what effect, if any, the expansion drafts in 88 and 89 had on the competition of the NBA at the time. Do the 4 extra teams make the league better? Or do they make some of the teams weaker?
People debate this a lot.
My sense is it had no immediate impact, apart from giving the better teams a few easy wins every year.
Over the longer term, sure, it's possible the better players on the expansion team could have gone elsewhere and reshaped the competitive landscape; it's just as likely it wouldn't have mattered. No matter how many teams are in the league, there is always some great teams with lot of talent and crappy teams with none. Talent is never even distributed.
And lots of people will argue any effect of expansion was more than cancelled out by the influx of foreign players. If there is a really strong analysis of how expansion affected the competitive landscape, I've never seen it.
Lebron has a very good chance to me of retiring as the GOAT
He really doesn't. KD made sure of that. Barring an injury, I would be very surprised if LeBron wins another ring. KD really (bleep) him. Bron will likely end his career with 3 rings and hover at the 5 spot.
What would really be (bleep) is if KD reeled off 3-4 straight championships and knocked LeBron out the top 5 right when the man is about to retire.
But to me that "rings" argument doesn't make much sense — and might have always been wrong. If two teams are on an equal playing field, and your team always loses, then that shows poorly on you. If, however, one team is CLEARLY better than the other — let's say Golden State will be that way — how could not winning those last couple rings possibly be a knock on LeBron?
It wont be a knock against him(negative), but it wont be a positive either. For someone like Jordan it is a positive because we're speaking in accomplishments, and he's won 6 rings. For example, let's say LeBron had 3 at the same time MJ had 3, and for argument's sake, let's say they are on the same level at this point. MJ reels off 3 consecutive championships, LeBron's stock will stay the same while MJ's will rise.
They played in two different times, so it might be easier just to say that MJ has reached a certain level of accomplishment and LeBron is chasing that level. It wont be a knock on him if he doesn't reach it, it will just be what it is. "He couldn't even win 6 rings" is not a valid argument. He's won 3, and that's great in itself.
It's just not 6.
We're not talking about whether he is a great player or not, we're talking about whether he stacks up to MJ.
True. I've never thought it was a negative, for example, that Lebron lost in the finals a lot. (I'd rather make it to the finals and lose then be knocked out in an earlier round). However, those years he obviously didn't win a ring, so he lost out on the chance to add accomplishments that would boost his standing against Jordan.
Lebron has had a cakewalk to the finals since he went to the Heat.
The fact that his teams make the finals every year has more to do with the fact that he faces hardly any competition in the east.
The media tries to hype up teams in the east (Celtics, Hawks, etc), but the #2 seed in the east has been a joke for the past 5-6 years.
Atleast Jordan had to face tough Pacers and Knicks teams on the way to the finals.
Yes, it's unfair to hold that against Lebron. But in my opinion, had he been in the West, he wouldn't make the finals 6 straight years.
His cakewalk does help in the finals when he is fresher, while the western team is fresh off a war in the west (rounds 2 and 3 especially). _________________ Dominating every day.
OKC had Durant and 2 more top 10 players (Russ and Harden), plus other good players. That trio will all wind up in the HOF. SA had a HOF trio and Leonard, and depth.
Westbrook may have been a top 10 player, but Harden was not in 2012.
Yes he was. He was just sacrificing his game. He made the Olympic Team in 2012 (and not because a bunch of guys decided not to play) and immediately took a poor Rockets team to the playoffs once he was traded.
vanexelent wrote:
And it's debatable whether Westbrook was.
Westbrook was also an Olympian and finished 2nd All-NBA that season.
vanexelent wrote:
SA trio was not in their prime. It wasn't until Leonard became Leonard and outplayed Lebron did the Spurs beat the stacked Heat team.
But still great collectively. Parker was only 30 and avg 20/8 a night. He made the 2nd All-NBA team and finished 6th in MVP voting. Duncan made the 1st All-NBA team, the 2nd All-D team and finished 7th in MVP voting. Both were still amongst the best in basketball. And the team was deep. And they were one rebound away from winning the title.
I've always wondered what effect, if any, the expansion drafts in 88 and 89 had on the competition of the NBA at the time. Do the 4 extra teams make the league better? Or do they make some of the teams weaker?
I'd say it had tremendous impact simply by making Detroit lose Rick Mahorn.
Lebron has had a cakewalk to the finals since he went to the Heat.
The fact that his teams make the finals every year has more to do with the fact that he faces hardly any competition in the east.
The media tries to hype up teams in the east (Celtics, Hawks, etc), but the #2 seed in the east has been a joke for the past 5-6 years.
Atleast Jordan had to face tough Pacers and Knicks teams on the way to the finals.
Yes, it's unfair to hold that against Lebron. But in my opinion, had he been in the West, he wouldn't make the finals 6 straight years.
His cakewalk does help in the finals when he is fresher, while the western team is fresh off a war in the west (rounds 2 and 3 especially).
yes exactly. We shouldn't hold it against him...but there is enough to hold against him anyway. he went to miami to win, then the second they started going downhill, he went back to cleveland as they were on the uphill. so imagine if kobe bolted to a championship team as soon as shaq leaves, then comes back right when pau arrives. that's what lebron did. no other goat superstar did that.
so it's borderline insufferable to hear people talk about him like those other guys. what if jordan just joined the pistons in the late 80s? or bird joined the lakers?
and that's not even it. that's just one example of one of the most extremely overrated athletes i have witnessed in my life.
I'd say it had tremendous impact simply by making Detroit lose Rick Mahorn.
The Pistons won a ring with Mahorn, lost him to the expansion draft, and immediately won a second ring without him, so losing him had no immediate impact.
The Piston went down after that. But that was more about the Bulls getting better than losing Mahorn, who was playing in Italy within a couple of years before coming back to the NBA as a deep bench player/
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Next
Page 1 of 6
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Save the bananas. Stop creating terrible posts!
