If a guy plays in a league with 8 teams and a guy plays in a league with 28 teams, which player is going to have a more difficult path to a championship?

If I guy plays in a league where the average salary makes a player well-off, but nowhere near rich, and a guy plays in a league where they're on TV every night making the majority of the league rich, how much talent is going to be attracted to the league in those scenarios?


Russell was good, but using his championships as a barometer of quality against guys that came in a later era is like saying guys in the 60's and 70's were superior, because they scored more points, because they played in an era where there were ~30% more possessions per game.

Who?mikejones! said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

aezmvp said:

---

agdoc2001 said:

---

Jordan v Kobe is at least a better conversation, lebron isn't even in the conversation

---

Lebron just doesn't have the killer instinct that Jordan and Kobe had.

---

Lebron has a better playoff record, regular season record, better go tie or go ahead shooting percentage in the last 10 seconds (43% vs 22%), and had a 16-6 record head to head.

Y'all make yourselves look like absolute clowns when you deny LeBron is the clear cut number 2. What is being said about LeBron in this thread is broadly speaking more accurately applicable to Kobe.

---

LeBron isnt the clear cut number 2. I think he falls somewhere between 5 and 10

---

And that makes you look clownish.

hph6203 said:

---

If a guy plays in a league with 8 teams and a guy plays in a league with 28 teams, which player is going to have a more difficult path to a championship?

If I guy plays in a league where the average salary makes a player well-off, but nowhere near rich, and a guy plays in a league where they're on TV every night making the majority of the league rich, how much talent is going to be attracted to the league in those scenarios?


Russell was good, but using his championships as a barometer of quality against guys that came in a later era is like saying guys in the 60's and 70's were superior, because they scored more points, because they played in an era where there were ~30% more possessions per game.

---

Sorry but Bill Russell changed the game with his type of defensive play not his number of rings

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

The correct answer is Pete Chilcutt.

---

We always cheered for Chilly Pete!

You racist *******s just wont admit that Jokic is the best NBA player. Hes so good he looks bored while dominating lesser players. Give him several more years of such results and hell be the GOAT.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

The correct answer is Pete Chilcutt.

---

that a Tecmo Basketball reference?

MJ - greatest player
LeBron - greatest nba career
Kareem - greatest basketball career (high school, college, pro)

VP at Pierce and Pierce said:

---

MJ - greatest player
LeBron - greatest nba career flopper
Kareem - greatest basketball career (high school, college, pro)

---

FIFY hope that helps

hph6203 said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

hph6203 said:

---

aezmvp said:

---

agdoc2001 said:

---

Jordan v Kobe is at least a better conversation, lebron isn't even in the conversation

---

Lebron just doesn't have the killer instinct that Jordan and Kobe had.

---

Lebron has a better playoff record, regular season record, better go tie or go ahead shooting percentage in the last 10 seconds (43% vs 22%), and had a 16-6 record head to head.

Y'all make yourselves look like absolute clowns when you deny LeBron is the clear cut number 2. What is being said about LeBron in this thread is broadly speaking more accurately applicable to Kobe.

---

LeBron isnt the clear cut number 2. I think he falls somewhere between 5 and 10

---

And that makes you look clownish.

---

There is a clown here, but it isn't me.

If we were to have a draft of all time greats, you and I, I wouldn't select james in my top 5. I've seen him play. He is great. One of the best to ever do it, right near the top.

But I'd take Bird every day and Sunday over lebron at the power/small forward position. I dont actually think it's a hard decision.

My line up would look something like this:
Shooting gaurd- Jordan
Sf/pf- bird
Pg- magic
Center- Kareem
Duncan or Bryant depending on how i want to line up


I'll add id be interested in what pistol pete would look like in modern offense as well. I think his greatness is very underrated

Charlie is correct about the NBA. I think it would be fun if they had a portion of the season with no 3 pointers to see if it was more entertaining.

Steph is a generational talent, but he also has taken advantage of defenses not being able to hand-check players around the perimeter.

Had he been born in 2000 and playing today he'd be bigger, faster, etc as would everyone that came later.

Don't care what anyone thinks the Bird/Magic championship runs era were must see. Even people who weren't fans of basketball tuned in to watch it. They were slugfests. Two teams loaded with talent and each having a great leader. Must see TV

Bird is way better than Lefraud, Lefraud is a linebacker who can occasionally shoot.

It's already been stated in this thread but if Bird were black, we'd be having this conversation about him and Jordan.

If you didn't watch Bird play, you have no say in this argument. Dude was an absolute assassin. Talked **** and backed it up. Didn't back down from anyone.

Kirk is right but he needs to know that Jordan DID play until he was 40. Nobody wants to remember the Washington Bullets days (I guess they were the Wizards by then).

I'd put Steph ahead of LeBron personally with how he has changed the game and how his skill set would be able to work across all eras

jja79 said:

---

Points in individual games aren't that big a deal. Chamberlain's 1962 season was historic but he didn't win anything.

---

Points are important, of course, because they determine the game winner. The Celtics beat the Warriors in 7 games in the playoffs (winning game 7 by only 2), then took 7 games to win the finals. So, in spite of their regular season record, the marginal difference between them and their 2 playoff opponents wasn't that great. Besides, in the Warriors series, the Celtics had 6 players who averaged 9 or more points a game while the Warriors only had 4 such players.

In game 7, Al Attles of the Warriors played 23 minutes and didn't score. His career average was 9 PPG. All he had to do was go 1/3 of that average and the Warriors win, and your statement would be meaningless.

I'm not saying you rewrite history; I'm saying that the Warriors were damn close and saying "they didn't win anything," especially in an era with 8 teams and 2 playoff rounds, is horribly misleading.

jja79 said:

---

Had he been born in 2000 and playing today he'd be bigger, faster, etc as would everyone that came later.

---

If ands and buts.

The only point of sports is to win the championship. No one can touch the guy as a champion.

jja79 said:

---

The only point of sports is to win the championship. No one can touch the guy as a champion.

---

The GOAL of sports is to win the championship.
That's far, far from the only POINT of sports.
Your attitude is what's become so prevalent in sports at all levels and it's absolute ruining them.

Jordan was and is the greatest basketball player of all time. He did things on the court LeBron could only dream of. I saw absolute magic during his many playoffs runs. True story: I quit watching basketball after he left the Bulls. It's just not fun.


But, how is this politics related?

Michael Jordan will always be the greatest basketball player of all time.

Iraq2xVeteran said:

---

Michael Jordan will always be the greatest basketball player of all time.

---

See. Even the AI bot knows that Jordan is the best ever.