NBA Playoffs

[superjohn]

The Jordan vs. Lebron debate is pointless. Different eras, different situations, different players. Jordan would not have fared as well against modern quasi-zone defenses. He benefited tremendously from the clear out isolation play, and the fact that the refs gave him every benefit. All stars get that to some degree, but nobody more than Jordan. That said, he played tremendous defense, which is often forgotten. I don't think Lebron works quite as hard at that end.

I think Lebron hasn't helped his legacy by changing teams several times. When people latch on to a "greatest" they want to associate him with a single team, not 3 or 4 of them.

I think it's fair enough to say Jordan is the greatest shooting guard ever. LeBron the greatest small forward. Center I'm not sure who is best, maybe Wilt, maybe Hakeem. Power Forward? Malone? Maybe Duncan if you consider him a PF. PG I'll go with Magic.

Without hand-checking and without the Jordan Rules, MJ would have averaged over 40.

 

[superjohn]

Generally agree with your theme. Center you can't say Wilt b/c of Russell's teams mastery of him, it matters. If Russell is ruled out b/c he wouldn't fit in modern era then you have to say Kareem who fit himself into 3 eras. But I also like Bob Ryan's argument that a healthy Bill Walton would have gone down as best ever. Walton would be even more powerful in today's game with his passing skills.
Definitely Duncan over Malone, no contest Duncan won way more and did more on both ends with varying teammates, take away Stockton & Malone is 'merely' great but not an all-timer.
Yeah, I guess PG is Magic - can't really make a compelling case for anyone even if we take a sometime SG like big O or someone current's projected full career (ie. Curry, Harden)
.

I hope to never see Magic and James Harden's names in the same sentence ever again.

 

[tzznandrew]

The Jordan vs. Lebron debate is pointless. Different eras, different situations, different players. Jordan would not have fared as well against modern quasi-zone defenses. He benefited tremendously from the clear out isolation play, and the fact that the refs gave him every benefit. All stars get that to some degree, but nobody more than Jordan. That said, he played tremendous defense, which is often forgotten. I don't think Lebron works quite as hard at that end.

I think Lebron hasn't helped his legacy by changing teams several times. When people latch on to a "greatest" they want to associate him with a single team, not 3 or 4 of them.

I think it's fair enough to say Jordan is the greatest shooting guard ever. LeBron the greatest small forward. Center I'm not sure who is best, maybe Wilt, maybe Hakeem. Power Forward? Malone? Maybe Duncan if you consider him a PF. PG I'll go with Magic.

Well, you can see what Harden does, though. If you surround a great iso player with great shooters, he can essentially play iso. Jordan wasn't half the 3point shooter Harden is, but he didn't have to be in the era.

Just imagine the freedom of movement players have now with a MJ surrounded by shooters. It's scary.

 

[Dogdeacon]

I hope to never see Magic and James Harden's names in the same sentence ever again.

This playoffs is very much a tipping point for Harden. Its essentially win a championship or join Russ in the regular season stats whore conga line.

 

[HuskyHawk]

Generally agree with your theme. Center you can't say Wilt b/c of Russell's teams mastery of him, it matters. If Russell is ruled out b/c he wouldn't fit in modern era then you have to say Kareem who fit himself into 3 eras. But I also like Bob Ryan's argument that a healthy Bill Walton would have gone down as best ever. Walton would be even more powerful in today's game with his passing skills.
Definitely Duncan over Malone, no contest Duncan won way more and did more on both ends with varying teammates, take away Stockton & Malone is 'merely' great but not an all-timer.
Yeah, I guess PG is Magic - can't really make a compelling case for anyone even if we take a sometime SG like big O or someone current's projected full career (ie. Curry, Harden)
.

I never bought into the Russell argument. He was great, Wilt was better. Russell just played on much better teams and was a masterful defensive player. Wilt was dominant on both ends. 30.1 PPG, 22.9 RPG, 4.4 APG, .540 FG% It's sort of like Brady vs. Manning. I don't think Championships are the true measure. Agree that if you consider Duncan a PF and not a center, he's the guy.

 

[nomar]

I never bought into the Russell argument. He was great, Wilt was better. Russell just played on much better teams and was a masterful defensive player. Wilt was dominant on both ends. 30.1 PPG, 22.9 RPG, 4.4 APG, .540 FG% It's sort of like Brady vs. Manning. I don't think Championships are the true measure. Agree that if you consider Duncan a PF and not a center, he's the guy.

You think Manning's better than Brady? I'm a Giants fan and I think Brady's way better.

 

[Dream Jobbed 2.0]

He'll have to rip that title from Eric Bledsoe's cold dead hands. Tom Heinsohn is the biggest homer in NBA broadcasting (Not surprising, given he's been operating east of 290 for literally 65 years), but in this case he is not wrong. Joe Prunty wants his team to play football out there. Not a good look aspiring to be the NBA's version of Jamie Dixon. Even if the refs are complicit, actual basketball talent normally wins out.

I wouldn’t classify Bledsoe as garbage though. Maker’s best attributes are being 7 ft tall with a wingspan of about 50 ft and being annoying . You’re right though, the Bucks in general are an extremely physical team

 

[mauconnfan]

You think Manning's better than Brady? I'm a Giants fan and I think Brady's way better.

I agree nomar. Manning's only better than Brady when it counts for crying out loud.Other than that I'd take Tom.

 

[HuskyHawk]

You think Manning's better than Brady? I'm a Giants fan and I think Brady's way better.

I'm a Patriots fan, and I think it's about a toss-up. But that was just an example. The best player at any team sport won't necessarily win championships. Marino was 100x better than Trent Dilfer.

 

[auror]

I hate Draymond, but how are him and Covington close?

Covington is probably 1st team all defense this year and shot 37% from 3 (career 36%). He had the 2nd best D-PIPM in the league. He fits a great role, just like Draymond does. He's a more useful Andre Roberson. Gave the edge to Draymond because of passing, although Covington's shooting almost enough to offset since Draymond's has cratered the last 2 years.

This was just about basketball ability in a series, but as an aside versatile wing defenders who can make 3s are at an absolute premium in the league. His contract is semi-front loaded as well so he'll only be owed ~12mil each year through 2022 with no options. It's a steal and he's locked in for years as a relative bargain.

 

[auror]

You're playing mental gymnastics here. Remember when LeBron's camp were trying to float that he wanted to go to GSW a couple months back, only to be rebuked by GSW brass? The 2 main reasons Durant was even able to go to GSW is because the team had their core on extremely team friendly deals/unprecedented rise in salary cap, and because Durant himself doesn't have the overwhelming "I'm the headliner here" ego that guys like LeBron and Kobe have. Neither of those are a negative on Durant.

I'm not following why any of this means LeBron going to the on the rise Sixers will be looked at in public perception as equivalent to Durant joining the already won a title Warriors. Arguing that Durant is a good guy doesn't really matter... the criticism and damage to his reputation already took place. It's not debatable. In his own words. In other players' minds.

 

[intlzncster]

I'm a Patriots fan, and I think it's about a toss-up. But that was just an example. The best player at any team sport won't necessarily win championships. Marino was 100x better than Trent Dilfer.

That argument works for a lower number of championships, but the higher number you get, the more you gotta realize it's not a coincidence that these guys are winning 3,4,5,6 championships.

While not the only factor, stats aren't necessarily a great representation either. The 'better team' argument works both ways. I mean, if a guy is on a lesser team, he has to be the focal point and consequently gets better stats, especially in basketball. If a guy's on a better team, his production suffers a bit, as other players contribute. But, speaking generally, if he were on a worse team, perhaps he could put up much better stats.

I'm not sure where this puts Russell vs Chamberlain, but stats certainly isn't the only delineator.

Just for fun, RE Brady v Peyton, I look to playoff performance, when the stakes are the highest. Brady vastly outperforms Peyton. By a mile. Peyton was shoddy in inclement weather too. I don't even think Peyton's #2 overall. I'd take both Montana and Rodgers over him.

 

[Dogdeacon]

I never bought into the Russell argument. He was great, Wilt was better. Russell just played on much better teams and was a masterful defensive player. Wilt was dominant on both ends. 30.1 PPG, 22.9 RPG, 4.4 APG, .540 FG% It's sort of like Brady vs. Manning. I don't think Championships are the true measure. Agree that if you consider Duncan a PF and not a center, he's the guy.

I never saw either play. But if you listen to Russell talk about it or read books about it, its abundantly clear that Russell owned Wilt. And as you point out Wilt's numbers are obscene especially for that era, so Russell's candidacy for GOAT partially rides up on the shoulders of Wilt's stats.

Play a hypothetical game evenly dispersing the 1st and 2nd GOATs at the other 4 positions, no doubt in my mind that Russell's team beats Wilts.

 

[Dogdeacon]

I'm not following why any of this means LeBron going to the on the rise Sixers will be looked at in public perception as equivalent to Durant joining the already won a title Warriors. Arguing that Durant is a good guy doesn't really matter... the criticism and damage to his reputation already took place. It's not debatable. In his own words. In other players' minds.

By the beard of Zeus, you make this complicated. Let's say both are basketball players. Both among top-5 in league. Both switch teams. For John Q public (a non-NBA fan) won't this be very, very similar (which is one of the things I wrote; "viewed similarly")?

If you go back and read my last post about this inanity all I say is that they will be compared. Then you tell me no they are not equivalent. This is a false argument. You are in fact comparing the situations every time you assert that they are not equivalent, but you are able to do so because they ARE comparable. And that is the definition of 'compare'. Sometimes one compares things and finds they are unequal, like your argument vs mine .

 

[HuskyHawk]

I never saw either play. But if you listen to Russell talk about it or read books about it, its abundantly clear that Russell owned Wilt. And as you point out Wilt's numbers are obscene especially for that era, so Russell's candidacy for GOAT partially rides up on the shoulders of Wilt's stats.

Play a hypothetical game evenly dispersing the 1st and 2nd GOATs at the other 4 positions, no doubt in my mind that Russell's team beats Wilts.

It's a little different than the way it is often portrayed. Russell never owned Wilt.
Russell Vs. Chamberlain: A Rivalry For The Ages

Put either of them in their prime on last year's UConn team, and Wilt's team is better than Russell's. It's not close. Put both on the current GS Warriors, and Russell's team is better. One guy is much more capable of carrying a team (as LeBron is) and the other a better piece among a talented group. For what it's worth, Brady is like Russell, but less able to carry a mediocre cast than some guys, including Rodgers.

 

[auror]

By the beard of Zeus, you make this complicated. Let's say both are basketball players. Both among top-5 in league. Both switch teams. For John Q public (a non-NBA fan) won't this be very, very similar (which is one of the things I wrote; "viewed similarly")?

If you go back and read my last post about this inanity all I say is that they will be compared. Then you tell me no they are not equivalent. This is a false argument. You are in fact comparing the situations every time you assert that they are not equivalent, but you are able to do so because they ARE comparable. And that is the definition of 'compare'. Sometimes one compares things and finds they are unequal, like your argument vs mine .

Here is your post:

No one said Philly- Golden State are the EXACT same, but if they lose in the finals or semis it is similar. Or it will be compared. ...

Regardless the point isn't the resumes or past accomplishments, its the fact that if LeBron joins a Houston or a Philly he will join an already championship contending team with very good basketball players and turn it into a heavily favorite stacked team. If you don't think its fair to criticize that or think that all comparisons to KD are invalid because its not the exact same you are myopically & hopelessly biased.

Here is my response to that post:

It will not be considered all that similar. Joining a team that already has proven to have enough (and has won a title) vs. one that is close but you put them over the top is entirely different.

At no point did I say that people would not compare them. I argued with your point that people would compare them and then find them similar enough to criticize him for the same reasons as KD.

For example, was CP3 widely criticized for joining the Rockets? No. In both his and KD's cases, an All-NBA caliber player without a ring on a team that had won 50+ games but had repeatedly demonstrated they could not get over the hump joined a team that had won 55+ games and was a title contender.

Why was CP3 not criticized, but KD was? Because the Warriors had already won a championship and won not just 55 games, but 70+ games. The Sixers have not yet won a title and only won 53 games. Even further, LeBron will not be impacted by the unfinished business narrative that KD had (or that LeBron had when going to Miami), because he won a title for Cleveland already.

Now, people may get pissed at LeBron leaving because he's a hometown blood traitor or just because he's LeBron, but not because he is joining a contender.

 

[Dogdeacon]

It's a little different than the way it is often portrayed. Russell never owned Wilt.
Russell Vs. Chamberlain: A Rivalry For The Ages

Put either of them in their prime on last year's UConn team, and Wilt's team is better than Russell's. It's not close. Put both on the current GS Warriors, and Russell's team is better. One guy is much more capable of carrying a team (as LeBron is) and the other a better piece among a talented group. For what it's worth, Brady is like Russell, but less able to carry a mediocre cast than some guys, including Rodgers.

That article pales versus Russell's personal accounts and what's been written in books about it. But it gets some of it right in quotes from Red about how Russell figured out how to impact games better even when it was games against Wilt. There might be some argument for Wilt's skills illustrated by how Wilt led the NBA in assists when he wanted to (Russell could never have done that, Jordan yes) and shot a high FT% the year he shot underhanded. Wilt was stronger, bigger, likely more skilled in most areas vs Russell, yet less effective. Again bottom line 2 NCAA championships - 0, 11 NBA - 2.

 

[Dogdeacon]

At no point did I say that people would not compare them. I argued with your point that people would compare them and then find them similar enough to criticize him for the same reasons as KD.

Now, people may get pissed at LeBron leaving because he's a hometown blood traitor or just because he's LeBron, but not because he is joining a contender.

Fair, though you did say; "I'm not following why any of this means LeBron going to the on the rise Sixers will be looked at in public perception as equivalent to Durant joining the already won a title Warriors."
But I did some of the same thing I accuse you. I imply that you saying they won't be looked at as equivalent is essentially saying that they won't be compared.

Although now you say LeBron will be criticized just b/c he's LeBron. But that's all part of it b/c the entire line of criticism (Namely: we didn't create superteams back in the day!) all owes its current place in sports world to LeBron's "The Decision" debacle as exacerbated by the rally. So its pretty certain that no matter what LeBron does he's going to face criticism b/c of his stature (similar but greater vs KD), his stated goal to win championships and his history of leaving home for greener pastures (LeBron leaving Cleveland 1st or 2nd time similar to KD leaving OKC small market, original team etc..) and that he plays basketball yada yada yada.

 

[Lefty2one]

Well, you can see what Harden does, though. If you surround a great iso player with great shooters, he can essentially play iso. Jordan wasn't half the 3point shooter Harden is, but he didn't have to be in the era.

Just imagine the freedom of movement players have now with a MJ surrounded by shooters. It's scary.

MJ would be a hyper-efficient Westbrook if he played today. His scoring numbers may not be the same but he'd have adapted and his assist numbers would have been through the roof. Hell, the man had seven straight triple-doubles (and 10 in 11 games) when he ran the point for a stretch in 1989, when defenses were more physical and the floor wasn't nearly as spread. I don't think it's a stretch to say MJ would have a 60% FG rate in today's NBA.

 

[Robertelamin]

Did the Pacers just get screwed?

 

[superjohn]

Yes, it was clearly a goaltend but props on the shot.

 

[Rocktheworld]

They posted a stat in the first half about LeBron's total amount of postseason games leading his team in all categories

The stat said 61 but now he has 62

Tied for second and third place were Larry Bird and Tim Duncan with 21 each.

 

[Rocktheworld]

Did the Pacers just get screwed?

I had the game on mute, did they make sure that the Pacers should have even had the ball? Looked like out on them on the previous Cavs possession

 

[Robertelamin]

I had the game on mute, did they make sure that the Pacers should have even had the ball? Looked like out on them on the previous Cavs possession

I didn't see it.

 

[Mr. French]

I had the game on mute, did they make sure that the Pacers should have even had the ball? Looked like out on them on the previous Cavs possession

Ya it should have been Cavs ball it looked like. They review every single play, but not that one.

I don’t know if that was a goaltend, I didn’t watch it up close more than once. I thought he pinned it. He got shook a bit but he made up for it.

 

[superjohn]

The Jazz are very good but this is disgraceful from OKC.

 

[superjohn]

Ya it should have been Cavs ball it looked like. They review every single play, but not that one.

I don’t know if that was a goaltend, I didn’t watch it up close more than once. I thought he pinned it. He got shook a bit but he made up for it.

Could have called an offensive on Lebron for 'bowing his defender all the way to the baseline but then it was off Pacers, then Lebron goaltended, then he hit the shot.

 

[husky429]

Yes, it was clearly a goaltend but props on the shot.

Definitely not "clearly" a goaltend. The ball was below rim level. And other angles show james probably hit ball first.

It's also a make up call. Pacers shouldnt hav e had possession

I say its a clean block--it's at least debatable

 

[CardiacAndre7]

Yes, it was clearly a goaltend but props on the shot.

That was incredibly bang-bang.

 

[superjohn]

Definitely not "clearly" a goaltend. The ball was below rim level. And other angles show james probably hit ball first.

It's also a make up call. Pacers shouldnt hav e had possession

I say its a clean block--it's at least debatable

Dude, it was a goaltend.

Redirect Notice