Why does Jordan get a pass for '95?
Comments
-
He didn't look like Jordan cause he wasn't wearing Jordan's jerseyTequilla said:Jordan didn't look like Jordan when he came back in '95 ... it's the consistency in his game that was off ... which was a hallmark of his game
-
Ok. He still put 30 a game in the ecf which means he was operating at a high clip. He lost to the magic, in his prime, on a team he was accustomed to with oover 25 games to shake off the rust (which includes playoff games that are insanely more competitive than the regular season.Tequilla said:Jordan didn't look like Jordan when he came back in '95 ... it's the consistency in his game that was off ... which was a hallmark of his game
My point is that blemish has been erased from history, and I think it's relevant. -
Actually there are quite a few. That's the fucking point.RoadDawg55 said:
There isn't one objective measure to put LeBron above Jordan. Maybe LeBron will finish with more regular season MVP's if you want to stoop that low. But MJ had Pippen and Phil Jackson, LeBron had to play for Mike Brown, yadda, yadda. Facts are facts, boobie lips. If you want to argue that LeBron is better than Bird and Magic, I would agree.ThomasFremont said:
Disagree.RoadDawg55 said:
LBJ is not underrated. He's one of the best of all time. Trying to compare him to Jordan is FS though. It's not even close.Doogles said:And to think I almost didn't click "post discussion"
I've moved to a much seedier dive and have switched from bloodies to Jameson and headlands ipa.
I'll keep drinking while the slap fight ensues. LBJ is underrated by this board, but Jordan kept hall of famers from wearing rings. My initial comment was more to the point that Jordan was beaten in his prime and didn't make the finals. Any Houston fans can also call Bullshit on the claim Olajuwon only won bc Jordan wasn't there. He was, he just missed the dance.
Jordan has 6-0.
LeBron has everything else. Against better competition.
If you think the 80s-90s NBA was better than the current version, go light yourself on fire.
This isn't even a debate. -
Fremont knows history
-
No one mentions the 1995 loss to the Magic because with a full season of MJ the next year the Bulls swept the Magic in the playoffs.
Questioning the competition that either of these guys faced is fucking stupid. Lebrons path through the East may have been easier but he's run into Duncan 3 times in the Finals. He's a top 10 player of all time. Dirk is probably around 20th all time. Durant and Curry could push their way into the teens very easily. And Jordan's who he beat resume would look a lot stronger if he every actually lost a Finals. We'd view Barkley, Drexler, Malone, Stockton, Payton and Kemp differently if they had a ring. -
The difference between Jordan and Lebron is Jordan would have murdered the Mavericks franchise if they tried to guard him with JJ Barea.
If you were going to have a 5 on 5 game of all the NBA greats in their prime and your life was on the line you'd pick Jordan first every time. It doesn't matter if anyone is ever a better basketball player. You'd pick him first because you wouldn't want to piss him off. That's why he's the GOAT. -
That's all anyone's been saying.allpurpleallgold said:No one mentions the 1995 loss to the Magic because with a full season of MJ the next year the Bulls swept the Magic in the playoffs.
Questioning the competition that either of these guys faced is fucking stupid. Lebrons path through the East may have been easier but he's run into Duncan 3 times in the Finals. He's a top 10 player of all time. Dirk is probably around 20th all time. Durant and Curry could push their way into the teens very easily. And Jordan's who he beat resume would look a lot stronger if he every actually lost a Finals. We'd view Barkley, Drexler, Malone, Stockton, Payton and Kemp differently if they had a ring.
I agree the Finals matchups have been nasty for LeBron, but that's kind of the poont. If he was coming out of the west he wouldn't have made it nearly as often.
Great point about Jordan's resume at the end. -
LeBron might end up with more regular season MVP's. That's about it. The competition one isn't cut and dry. Top to bottom the league is much better now, but there were some pretty stacked teams in the 80's and 90's.ThomasFremont said:
Actually there are quite a few. That's the fucking point.RoadDawg55 said:
There isn't one objective measure to put LeBron above Jordan. Maybe LeBron will finish with more regular season MVP's if you want to stoop that low. But MJ had Pippen and Phil Jackson, LeBron had to play for Mike Brown, yadda, yadda. Facts are facts, boobie lips. If you want to argue that LeBron is better than Bird and Magic, I would agree.ThomasFremont said:
Disagree.RoadDawg55 said:
LBJ is not underrated. He's one of the best of all time. Trying to compare him to Jordan is FS though. It's not even close.Doogles said:And to think I almost didn't click "post discussion"
I've moved to a much seedier dive and have switched from bloodies to Jameson and headlands ipa.
I'll keep drinking while the slap fight ensues. LBJ is underrated by this board, but Jordan kept hall of famers from wearing rings. My initial comment was more to the point that Jordan was beaten in his prime and didn't make the finals. Any Houston fans can also call Bullshit on the claim Olajuwon only won bc Jordan wasn't there. He was, he just missed the dance.
Jordan has 6-0.
LeBron has everything else. Against better competition.
If you think the 80s-90s NBA was better than the current version, go light yourself on fire.
This isn't even a debate. -
Teams were better back then, but the talent is on another level now. I think the spurs have balanced the two the best in the modern Era and that's why they are the most successful franchise. AAU ball, free agency, nutritional health, sports science, money have all played a role in raising the ceiling of the nba. Nobody has realized it's full potential yet. Closest is the spurs.
-
Comparing eras is always difficult ... I think you have to look at the era as is and not try to extrapolate. If you say that a player today would be better than a player 30 years ago, and reasons that are cited are because of improved nutritional health, sports science, money, travel arrangements, etc., then I think you also have to consider that players in the past would also be better players IF they played in an era where that was the norm.
The game is completely different now for a number of reasons. One of the biggest is the emphasis and de-emphasis on post play. With defensive rules that allow more hybrid zone defenses, the ability to post has virtually vanished while all young bigs are busy trying to show that they can shoot 3's.
Anybody that would try to suggest that players like Magic, Bird, etc. wouldn't be successful in today's game because they weren't athletic enough, etc. are full of BS.
