Reply With Quote
Lol @ the misleading le. The interview in general compliments LeBron. But regardless, hes only 27. How many les did Jordan have at that age again?
Ahhhh, but this is not talking about different attributes, it's about not showing up when it matters. Lebron did it once, Jordan never did. The concept is to evaluate a player through his triumphs as well as his failures. Jordan failed early in his career, but those were easily explainable with the level of compe ion vs. those of his supporting cast. Lebron can't play that card because he created his own super team, and failed to deliver in a spectacular fashion. The entire point isn't the fact that Lebron failed to win a championship in 2011, it's how he failed to win it. Nobody would count it against Lebron for losing to the Magic in the ECF, because Lebron was spectacular, he was dominating, just that his teammates sucked. On the other hand, vs. the Mavs, it was Lebron who sucked.
Lol @ the misleading le. The interview in general compliments LeBron. But regardless, hes only 27. How many les did Jordan have at that age again?
Stfu got
Lol internet thuggin'... lets internet fight
Lol internet dumbass... Real life be@nerLol internet thuggin'... lets internet fight
Lol internet dumbass??? Do you comprehend the situation? It appears to me that im talking basketball in a basketball forum while your talking out your ass like you know me... lmao. And lol @ 4500+ posts on a forum thats not even a team of your interest. Thats lame bro should I be offended by a person who spends his free time thuggin over internet? You boys are softer then a coupes seats.
Issues with ESPN le wouldn't be the first.
Jordan won his first ring in season 7, Lebron 8. Number of years in the league is probably a better indicator than age does not show how many "tries" a player had before winning the big one.
That said, the number of rings at what age/season doesn't mean anything, there are other more important variables such as compe ion, coaching, teammates, and such. The greatness of an individual should be judged solely on the level of an individual performance under the cir stances, and not that of team accomplishments. Of course there are such basic team accomplishments that should be achieved by the truly great ones regardless of teammates (mostly regular season accomplishments as playoff teams have more time to prepare, thus, concentrate on another team's weakness much better), but playoff glory is, in most cases, a team accomplishments. There are only two teams that I can think of who won a championship with a weak supporting cast (relatively), the 94 Rockets and the 03 Spurs, but both teams were very similarly constructed (superstar inside player, rough interior defender sidekick, lots of three point shooters) that it could be argued is more the product of a system rather than those of individual glory.
Yes, i agree with that. All variables should be considered when comparing greats. Im not saying that LeBron is going to surpass Jordan just yet but the stats and awards are already piling up and the guys still just in the beggining of his prime. That being said though, he still has alot to accomplish. Hes definatelly an all-time great though when its all said and done. Basketballs never seen an athlete quite like him.
If you are arguing that Jordan's career numbers trump James' 27 year old numbers, you won't have a debate at all. However, your initial post claimed that, no matter what James does, he won't surpass MJ because he had a bad series. He's been to the Finals 3 times already, every single time was by and large because of him. If he runs off 3 or 4 in a row which is very possible, there's no way you can say his career won't be comparable to MJ's. MJ was never on a team that had the scoring options the Heat has, but then no one averages 35 a game these days and those who try end up ting on the rest of the team (think Kobe). James has the combination game that we've not seen since Jordan, and I can imagine him winning a DPOY and MVP in the same season. I cannot imagine Kobe winning both.
Talent wise, Lebron is probably the only one who could approach Jordan. But like I said earlier, because of his monumental collaps in2011, he will never have what has no matter what he does from this point on, because his résumé has been tainted. It's like an architect who built a house that stunk, had support issues, then mold and had to be demolished. Even if he built 10 magnificent buildings in the future, he will never be as great as the one who only had 10 great buildings and no bad ones.
Lol good ole amb! If rings are your SOLE criteria you are correct. I don't think you should use any SINGLE CRITERIA when seperating the best of the best. Stats, advanced stats, rings, impact, on the game clutch moments should all be factors. Team sport or not the best of the best win. That is a huge reason why many take Duncan over Malone, Worthy over Nique, Russell over Wilt and MJ over LBJ. Is that the only reasons? No Malone tended to choke, Nique was selfish, Wilt too. But the object is to win and that should be tiebreaker when two players are close. Horry ain't close to MJ so that argument is silly. Kareem is close to MJ so I would argue his impact on his 6 is greater than Kareem's on his ...
Since I have been watching ball only 4 truly great players failed to ring ... Chuck, EwingStockton and Malone. Magic and Bird blocked them early and MJ/Hakeem/Duncan and Shaqobe after that. They are great players Nique and Ewing too but they are NOT better then those guys who rang ...the les just validate what you already know. Yes, Duncan, Shaq even MJ neede HOF help to win and Ewing never had that
But Hakeem didn't have a HOF on his first le team and he beat Ewing head2head ...again, the ring matters.
Let's not forget about Chris Paul...he didn't ring either...and I don't really count asterisk season rings.
By that logic, Jordan's repeated ownage by the Celtics and Pistons and his washed-up years in Washington cancel out his rings, tbh......
The Celtics and Pistons beat the Bulls, but Jordan was not horrible in those series like Lebron was in the 2011 series. I am not trying to draw a black and white case where I am expecting the greatest player of all time to not lose one series in his life, but those late 80s Bulls were no where close to Celtics and the Pistons in terms of talent and/or coaching. He still dominate games, and didn't come up with horrible games and withered in the 4th quarter like James did vs. the Mavs.
The number of rings, and whether somebody is close to another has no bearings whatsoever. Players should be judged strictly on individual accomplishments. Of course, team success given the cir stances should be factored in, as in Lebron failing to ring in 2011 despite a huge talent advantage over the Mavs in 2011, or Kobe's epic failure in 2004 and questionable performance in 2008 Finals.
My point is, a player should be judged on his successes as well as his failures as a whole body of work.
Ewing wasn't even close to Hakeem in terms of talent, Ewing wasn't even close to Robinson or Shaq. In every head to head matchup, Ewing comes up bottoms. I liked Ewing as a player, but he was easily one of the most overrated stars in the 90s. He was not on the same level as Barkley and Stockton.
Nique was a fantastic player, people do not see that instead of having McHale, Parish, DJ and Walton, he had Mo Cheeks (who was pretty good), Kevin Willis (great rebounder, physical but average defender) and Jon Koncak. I am not saying that he is as good as Bird, but if you switch Nique and Bird, he would have at least made the finals, or possibly even won. If you switch Nique and Worthy, there is no doubt Nique would have won a le. No, Worthy was not better than Nique, he just had Magic, Kareem, Scott and Cooper next to him.
So where does losing to an 8th seed or being backdoor swept while having hca leave Tim?
Of course failures matter, but less so when you win multiple times. I remember plenty games when Kobe, Shaq and even Magic failed in the clutch. But so has Bird, LBJ and Tim as ling as you win the success overrides those failures that is why it matters so much. LOL failing in the first or second round better than failing in the finals ...
Nique was a far more prolific scorer but Worthy was the better team-mate leader and had.amazing post moves. You know worthy reminds me of certain center disguised as a of and the same arguments could be made if you changed.the names to Duncan and Malone.
When he was over the hill? I mean, you are not going to talk about the mid 90's Magic or the Washington Jordan now, will you?
I will see what Lebron will do when he's over the hill, my guess is that he is a smart guy, and will hang it up before he's totally done.
Nique was never given the chance to be a great team-mate, he did well even during his Clippers day, and was quite a teammate when he was waaaaay over the hill with the Spurs for that lone season. Sure, Worthy is probably the one with the better post moves, and even ball-handling, but Nique was undoubtedly the better player.
As for your last sentence, don't mind if you can rewrite, I have trouble trying to get what you meant. Seriously.
Sorry my phone is killing me amb, the st is more phone friendly but still sux we will continue it later.
1. Lebron will not retire willingly. He will chose money over what some dippy headed on a forum thinks of his legacy.
2. Tim has never been compared to MJ by anyone who's not autistic, re ed or both.
3. No James only has one le. Senility?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions