2011 NBA Playoffs Thread

[Sammy Sofa]

Okay, I don't frequent NBA threads much, but what is going on here? Are people comparing LeBron to Jordan in a GOAT debate? Because that would be preposterous. Maybe in 8-10 years, but not now.

 

Even more preposterous would be saying LeBron is has a better case for GOAT right now. I hope no one is suggesting that.

 

Yes, nobody can compare one player to another player until both player's careers are done.

 

If you're building a case for GOAT, it's kind of difficult to make that call when one of the players hasn't had half the time of the other to establish a legacy, isn't it?

 

But nobody here is really building him up as the GOAT right now. It's more a "wow, this guy has a real chance to be the GOAT when all is said and done...and there's a lot of meatball arguments out there acting like this is impossible hearsay."

[SpongeWorthy]

I have to ask, since this is a baseball states with people who have incredible understanding of statistics, is it fair to use championships as an indicator of success in basketball. If LeBron puts up great stats his whole career but never wins a title can we still put him up in the list of greatest ever?

 

Of course. Obviously the lack of championship is going to knock him down a peg, but it's not like he's be in terrible company never having won a title. Ewing, Barkley, Wilkins, Iverson, Baylor, Maravich, Miller, Stockton, Malone...who is really going to knock any of these guys as not being some of the very greatest of all time?

 

That'd be pretty terrible company for Lebron all things considered.

[DivineBovine]

 

There's always an excuse for LeBron not winning, because he puts up those stats. The stats people will always assume that its not his fault. This might have worked with Cleveland, but it's over now. No more excuses like that. Of course, I'm sure LeBron supporters will continue to find blame in the supporting cast because the stats say he's the best ever. Since its been tough to blame Wade, Bosh, Miller, Chalmers and Bibby lately, then maybe they'll blame Ilgauskas and Howard the finals loss.

 

By the way, I have nothing against math. I use statistics a lot in what I do for a living. But I feel that stats can be misleading and are overused.

 

So what was Jordan's excuse?

 

 

The last year before the Bulls first championship, he averaged 37/7/7 with 3 steals in the playoffs. The 1990 Bulls are no comparison to the 2011 Heat in terms of supporting cast. And don't bring up the fact that BJ Armstrong started an All-Star game.

[Sammy Sofa]

I can't recall seeing you in the Cubs game threads much; does this "stats are deceiving, sample size uber alles" translate over there, too?

 

 

Statistical analysis is far more applicable to baseball than any other sport.

 

True, but you're taking a pretty night/day approach between the two by effectively suggesting that any talk of LeBron being the GOAT down the line is based on statistical smoke and mirrors.

[Magnetic Curses]

lebron will win a title or 2 before he's done. just like the third greatest oscar robertson of all time himself.

[Sammy Sofa]

I have to ask, since this is a baseball states with people who have incredible understanding of statistics, is it fair to use championships as an indicator of success in basketball. If LeBron puts up great stats his whole career but never wins a title can we still put him up in the list of greatest ever?

 

Of course. Obviously the lack of championship is going to knock him down a peg, but it's not like he's be in terrible company never having won a title. Ewing, Barkley, Wilkins, Iverson, Baylor, Maravich, Miller, Stockton, Malone...who is really going to knock any of these guys as not being some of the very greatest of all time?

 

That'd be pretty terrible company for Lebron all things considered.

 

Why? Those are some of the very greatest players of all time.

[XZero771679666304]

Okay, I don't frequent NBA threads much, but what is going on here? Are people comparing LeBron to Jordan in a GOAT debate? Because that would be preposterous. Maybe in 8-10 years, but not now.

 

Even more preposterous would be saying LeBron is has a better case for GOAT right now. I hope no one is suggesting that.

 

No one is. What's happening is that people hate LeBron and love Jordan so much that they're so eager to make sure the comparison never gets made that they make incredibly specious statements about LeBron to make themselves feel better about the media making comparisons.

 

So taking shots at LeBron because they fear he may be anointed GOAT at some point? Out of fear their guy might not hold that mantle forever?

 

Well, there are a lot of Bulls fans here, I guess. Still, pretty stupid. Someone will probably unseat Jordan as consensus GOAT at some point, and that person may just be really unlikeable (like Jordan).

 

At this point, my money would be on Kobe, if I had to pick one. And I do hate me me some Kobe Bryant.

[DivineBovine]

I have to ask, since this is a baseball states with people who have incredible understanding of statistics, is it fair to use championships as an indicator of success in basketball. If LeBron puts up great stats his whole career but never wins a title can we still put him up in the list of greatest ever?

 

Of course. Obviously the lack of championship is going to knock him down a peg, but it's not like he's be in terrible company never having won a title. Ewing, Barkley, Wilkins, Iverson, Baylor, Maravich, Miller, Stockton, Malone...who is really going to knock any of these guys as not being some of the very greatest of all time?

 

That'd be pretty terrible company for Lebron all things considered.

 

 

I think LeBron will probably get one. But Ewing and Barkley never had a supporting cast that LeBron has right now.

 

Rightly or wrongly, anything short of multiple (at least 2-3) championships will mean failure for LeBron in the eyes of many.

[Sammy Sofa]

 

There's always an excuse for LeBron not winning, because he puts up those stats. The stats people will always assume that its not his fault. This might have worked with Cleveland, but it's over now. No more excuses like that. Of course, I'm sure LeBron supporters will continue to find blame in the supporting cast because the stats say he's the best ever. Since its been tough to blame Wade, Bosh, Miller, Chalmers and Bibby lately, then maybe they'll blame Ilgauskas and Howard the finals loss.

 

By the way, I have nothing against math. I use statistics a lot in what I do for a living. But I feel that stats can be misleading and are overused.

 

So what was Jordan's excuse?

 

 

The last year before the Bulls first championship, he averaged 37/7/7 with 3 steals in the playoffs. The 1990 Bulls are no comparison to the 2011 Heat in terms of supporting cast. And don't bring up the fact that BJ Armstrong started an All-Star game.

 

Any other rules?

[Sammy Sofa]

I can't tell if DivineBovine is really overrating the Heat or really underrating a bunch of other teams (though yes, Barkely was screwed with [expletive] supporting players throughout his prime, probably more than anyone in NBA history with that much talent).

[Magnetic Curses]

I can't tell if DivineBovine is really overrating the Heat or really underrating a bunch of other teams (though yes, Barkely was screwed with [expletive] supporting players throughout his prime, probably more than anyone in NBA history with that much talent).

 

i can't wait to see what lebron has to say about teams and fans when he's a TNT analyst.

[SpongeWorthy]

I have to ask, since this is a baseball states with people who have incredible understanding of statistics, is it fair to use championships as an indicator of success in basketball. If LeBron puts up great stats his whole career but never wins a title can we still put him up in the list of greatest ever?

 

Of course. Obviously the lack of championship is going to knock him down a peg, but it's not like he's be in terrible company never having won a title. Ewing, Barkley, Wilkins, Iverson, Baylor, Maravich, Miller, Stockton, Malone...who is really going to knock any of these guys as not being some of the very greatest of all time?

 

That'd be pretty terrible company for Lebron all things considered.

 

Why? Those are some of the very greatest players of all time.

 

The same way Wilt is knocked down for "only" winning 2 titles. If Lebron wins no titles? He's on a completely different level than the rest of those guys. He'd blow Dan Marino out of the water in terms of having a black mark on his career for not winning a championship...like literally lapping the rest of the field.

[SouthSideRyan]

I'd put the over/under on Lebron titles at 3.5

[Sammy Sofa]

I have to ask, since this is a baseball states with people who have incredible understanding of statistics, is it fair to use championships as an indicator of success in basketball. If LeBron puts up great stats his whole career but never wins a title can we still put him up in the list of greatest ever?

 

Of course. Obviously the lack of championship is going to knock him down a peg, but it's not like he's be in terrible company never having won a title. Ewing, Barkley, Wilkins, Iverson, Baylor, Maravich, Miller, Stockton, Malone...who is really going to knock any of these guys as not being some of the very greatest of all time?

 

That'd be pretty terrible company for Lebron all things considered.

 

Why? Those are some of the very greatest players of all time.

 

The same way Wilt is knocked down for "only" winning 2 titles. If Lebron wins no titles? He's on a completely different level than the rest of those guys. He'd blow Dan Marino out of the water in terms of having a black mark on his career for not winning a championship...like literally lapping the rest of the field.

 

But that's not what bcl was asking. He was asking if LeBron could be considered one of the greatest players ever if he never wins a title, so I listed a bunch of players considered some of the very greatest NBA players ever who also never won a title. Of course he wouldn't be as highly rated if he never wins one; that's just common sense.

[SouthSideRyan]

 

 

The last year before the Bulls first championship, he averaged 37/7/7 with 3 steals in the playoffs.

 

Fantasy stats IMO

[bcl412]

Another question, can a basketball player be considered the best ever without winning a ring?

[Sammy Sofa]

I'd put the over/under on Lebron titles at 3.5

 

I'm thinking 3, too.

[Sammy Sofa]

Another question, can a basketball player be considered the best ever without winning a ring?

 

Probably not. Not unless they were on almost nothing but garbage teams their whole career and still put otherworldly numbers.

[SpongeWorthy]

Another question, can a basketball player be considered the best ever without winning a ring?

 

No.

 

Consider Wilt's absolutely mind boggling numbers and he wasn't even considered the best player of his era. It's safe to say that no one will have that overwhelming statistical dominance ever again.

[SouthSideRyan]

Another question, can a basketball player be considered the best ever without winning a ring?

 

It's possible, but unlikely to ever happen. Any player that's that great is going to get sick of playing with Jamario Moon and Moe Williams and look elsewhere. If Jordan got stuck on the 80s-90s Mavs, he wouldn't have been any less of a player just because Roy Tarpley was his #2.

[DivineBovine]

 

 

The last year before the Bulls first championship, he averaged 37/7/7 with 3 steals in the playoffs.

 

Fantasy stats IMO

 

 

Yeah, I know. I used stats. How's this for supporting cast?

 

Scotty Pippen in his second year, Horace Grant in his second year, BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Will Perdue, Bill Cartwright, Charles Davis, Jack Haley, Ed Nealy, Jeff Sanders, Clifford Lett, Craig Hodges

[Sammy Sofa]

 

 

The last year before the Bulls first championship, he averaged 37/7/7 with 3 steals in the playoffs.

 

Fantasy stats IMO

 

 

Yeah, I know. I used stats. How's this for supporting cast?

 

Scotty Pippen in his second year, Horace Grant in his second year, BJ Armstrong, John Paxson, Will Perdue, Bill Cartwright, Charles Davis, Jack Haley, Ed Nealy, Jeff Sanders, Clifford Lett, Craig Hodges

 

Bron-Bron would have killed for that team over the course of his career up until this season.

Edited June 10, 2011 by Sammy Sofa

[SpongeWorthy]

check my stats is a nice argument for Lebron as long as you don't look at the 9 Finals games where he hasn't even had one game that is up his normal standards, or even close

[Sammy Sofa]

Another question, can a basketball player be considered the best ever without winning a ring?

 

No.

 

Consider Wilt's absolutely mind boggling numbers and he wasn't even considered the best player of his era. It's safe to say that no one will have that overwhelming statistical dominance ever again.

 

His era is key. Wilt was an amazing player, but he dominated largely because he was a freak-show because of the era he played in.

[imb]

Another question, can a basketball player be considered the best ever without winning a ring?

 

There is absolutely no chance of fans/analysts ever putting someone ahead of Jordan without winning even one ring. People argued in the past that LeBron was better, but it was more like giving him the benefit of the doubt since he had so much time left. He's probably halfway through being a big difference maker and he has 0 rings. He's got no chance of ever surpassing Jordan.

 

To ever top MJ you're going to have to win more than six rings and win them all as the alpha dog.