Who was Kobe when Shaq went to LA? Apples to oranges if you ask me.
NBA Playoff Format
- Thread starter Anon1712931820
- Start date
Who was Kobe when Shaq went to LA? Apples to oranges if you ask me.
In theory, best team should still win. Only splitting hairs when it comes to the runner up and a given team's path to the finals.
You are right, Jordan practically won 6 titles 1 on 5. I wasn't downplaying what Jordan did, I was making fun of you downplaying 2 titles in 4 years for Lebron. Ever heard of Horace Grant? What about Toni Kukoc? And you realize that the same team minus Jordan won exactly 2 less games the year Jordan went to baseball. Jordan was great, and most believe the greatest ever, but the gap between him and everybody else isn't as great as some make it out to be. And if anything, people should look at that and see that one thing is for certain, no matter how good you are, it takes a great supporting cast for any superstar to win a title.
Oh, and to answer the question on Cal, no, I've never heard him say that, but he is the coach so I wouldn't expect it from the coach. I have, however, heard our players say that, and it didn't bother me. I like the confidence. Now, had that Heat team been just over .500, and lost in the first round of the playoffs, I would be all for making fun of that press conference. They made the finals all 4 years they were together, so it wasn't like they were far from 4 titles in 4 years, they were pretty close.
[roll][roll][roll][roll][roll]
:joy::joy::joy:
But what did that Jordanless team do when it mattered? Regular season doesn't mean squat when you can't finish in the playoffs (LeBron). Jordan made sure they won when it counted.
Not a big gap between Jordan and everyone else he played with/against...........:joy:
A lot of people argue that The East was better back in Jordan's era, and that Lebron, more or less, just walks to the finals. I can somewhat agree with that. I'm not sure HOW strong they were after the top5 teams.. but strong at the top.
But what about the West? Because Jordan really just had to get to the Finals, and it was pretty much over. Lebron's toughest games were always the Finals against the West. Yes, part because the East was weak, but that means that law of averages, the West was very strong.
People love to talk about Jordans competition like they were all-star teams, while Lebron just played scrubs. Far from the truth. Jordan's East was stronger, but Lebron's Western conference was better (And I'd argue that the West during Lebrons title run was better than the East in Jordan's run).. Which would explain why grabbing titles has been quite difficult for him.
But what about the West? Because Jordan really just had to get to the Finals, and it was pretty much over. Lebron's toughest games were always the Finals against the West. Yes, part because the East was weak, but that means that law of averages, the West was very strong.
People love to talk about Jordans competition like they were all-star teams, while Lebron just played scrubs. Far from the truth. Jordan's East was stronger, but Lebron's Western conference was better (And I'd argue that the West during Lebrons title run was better than the East in Jordan's run).. Which would explain why grabbing titles has been quite difficult for him.
Last edited:
This shows your ignorance on the matter lol. You do realize Shaq went to the Lakers the same year Kobe was drafter out of highschool right? I'm sure Shaq was thinking....I'm going to team up with the 13th pick in the draft who is an 18 year old kid and win multiple titles lol.
You have no clue...thanks for letting me know how much attention I should pay to your posts on the NBA.
So what you're saying is the East had 5 strong teams back in MJs day...right? So that means in the Eastern Conference playoffs 5 out of the 8 teams were strong, so that meant MJ would have faced more competition because how many teams in the East playoff are not crap this year? It is Cleveland and then everyone else...period.
I just threw out 5 off the top of my head, but it wasn't even that much. the point was that people think the East back in the 90's was some behemoth.. in some part, sure.
But the Pistons aged. Celtics, a sure-fire roadblock in the East, were garbage in the 90's. Both those teams were coming off of an "era" in their franchise and weren't legitimate competition. Their come down paved the way for another team to take over: The Bulls.
The Pacers and the Knick's.. Cleveland and Orlando in part.. That's about it.
But the Pistons aged. Celtics, a sure-fire roadblock in the East, were garbage in the 90's. Both those teams were coming off of an "era" in their franchise and weren't legitimate competition. Their come down paved the way for another team to take over: The Bulls.
The Pacers and the Knick's.. Cleveland and Orlando in part.. That's about it.
This is ignorant. And Pippen is a top 25-ish player all time, and a terrific fit next to Jordan.
Spot on.
FWIW, the Western Conference had 7 of the top10 teams in the 90's based on winning percentage. Now, Jordan and the Bulls were SO good, they certainly helped push the rest of the Eastern Conference down..
But regardless.. 7 of 10. Let's say 5 of 10 if the Bulls weren't so good. That doesn't strike me as an era where the East was overly dominant.
But regardless.. 7 of 10. Let's say 5 of 10 if the Bulls weren't so good. That doesn't strike me as an era where the East was overly dominant.
I realize you are having trouble with this, so let me be as straightforward as I can. The gap I am talking about is between Jordan and the other players considered great, not just every player in the NBA. My response was about people believing that Jordan is the greatest ever, and it's not close. Well actually it is pretty close. And while the Jordanless team lost a 7 game series in the semifinals, the next year with Jordan back, they lost a 6 game series in...........you guessed it, the semifinals. The point was that a team that won the title with Jordan, ended up winning just two less games, making the conference semifinals without Jordan, which would prove that Jordan had just as much help as any other superstar that has ever won a title.
This conversation has evolved to a Jordan versus Lebron debate. There is no debate, the evidence is that Jordan was better. Outside of a Lebron homer, nobody in their right mind would believe otherwise. But the people who believe that Lebron has been afforded the same circumstances that Jordan was, are delusional. For most of his career, Jordan played with better players, won titles during a somewhat down period in the NBA, following the retirement of a few of the greatest players to have ever played. However, that doesn't matter, Jordan won 6 titles in 13 years, and that is impressive regardless of the circumstances.
Back to the original topic, a non divided playoff would not likely change much of anything, other than travel for a few teams. And this type of situation is not relegated to just basketball, you could make the same argument for baseball and football. As another poster said, these things tend to be cyclic, and with the way players are using free agency now, that is not likely to change.
Just a couple thoughts about the "Super Team" the OP is referring too. I will agree that it is VERY rare for arguably the top player in the game to leave his team and go join forces with another team that already has a superstar. The reason i don't blame Lebron for doing it is that the Cavs were not going to get a big time free agent to join him and his supporting cast was atrocious in his first stint. Here are the 2nd and 3rd leading scorers on Lebron's teams in his first stint in Cleveland:
03/04 - Carlos Boozer and Big Z
04/05 - Big Z and Drew Gooden
05/06 - Big Z and Larry Hughes
06/07 - Larry Hughes and Big Z
07/08 - Big Z and Daniel Gibson
08/09 - Mo Williams and Big Z
09/10 - Antawn Jamison and Big Z
People always get on Lebron about having to go somewhere else to win a title. Look at that supporting cast.
03/04 - Carlos Boozer and Big Z
04/05 - Big Z and Drew Gooden
05/06 - Big Z and Larry Hughes
06/07 - Larry Hughes and Big Z
07/08 - Big Z and Daniel Gibson
08/09 - Mo Williams and Big Z
09/10 - Antawn Jamison and Big Z
People always get on Lebron about having to go somewhere else to win a title. Look at that supporting cast.
If people think that ego-maniac Jordan would have put up with a garbage supporting cast and losing in the playoffs (and Finals) year after year.. [roll]
The whole arguement that this player needed talent to win titles is just silly. Which player in the history of the game ever won a title without having talent on their team? No player in the history of the game has ever put a bunch of scrubs on their back and won a title. It just doesn't happen. The mighty Bulls everyone wants to talk about being the best ever had insane talent. Scottie Pippen never gets the credit he deserves, but that dude is a top 50 player in Nba history. He was the man always playing D on the best guard/forward on whatever team the bulls played. Dennis Rodman was a rebounding machine. Shaq and Kobe are two more examples of the best players playing together. Why is LeBron any different from some of these other best players in history? That Heat team didn't have as much talent as people like to believe today. We all know what type of player Bosh is. Put him on a team of his own and he scores 20 and grabs 10 boards, but don't make the playoffs and can't lead a team of his own. Yeah, Wade was a badazz. So was Pippen and Kobe. Bird was always on some of the most talented teams in Nba history. If you want to say LeBron can't win without a major talent advantage, you need to be fair and say the same for Kobe, Jordan and Shaq. I really don't care if you personally like LeBron or not, but you need to respect the man's talent. You could literally put LeBron on any team in the league and he would have them fighting for a playoff spot. He's that good. He makes others that good. I can't really say i'm a fan of LeBron, but i do respect the dude and his game on the basketball court. If you want to discredit LeBron and his titles, you need to do the same for the rest. I'm not the type of fan that thinks if you put this player in this era he wouldn't look as good. The truth is if you put one of the best talents in the history of the game in any era he would still be badazz. It's not luck. It's talent. Same for Bird and today's game. If Bird was playing in today's game, he would still be Larry the Legend. I hated the Bulls and Jordon, but i always respected their talent. I hated Jordon probably more than any player ever, but the man could play. I do believe he was helped by the Nba and refs more than any player in history, but even without that, he would still be one of the best in the game.
The timing wasn't my point. My point was Shaq did what so many other NBA stars have done and will continue to do. They go somewhere they'll have a better opportunity to win a championship. It's been that way since I started watching the NBA in the 70s. You're too obsessed with LeBron to have a rational discussion with.
Lebron's and his foundation are putting up 41 million dollars to help 1,100 underprivileged kids go to college for four years. Just tossing that out there.
You're discrediting the Heat teams that were "created." I guess because they didn't draft everyone of their players it doesn't count. It wasn't built like the Lakers teams that traded for Gasol in what was considered to be the most lopsided trade in history at the time? Or how the Lakers signed Shaq, just like the Heat signed Lebron? The Lakers have 5 titles in that stretch. Maybe we should take those out.
The Celtics traded for both KG and Ray Allen. Guess those titles are diminished. What about when Detroit traded for Rasheed Wallace to help them get over the hump? Title should be vacated. Really, I suppose the only team that has legitimately won a title would be the Spurs, but even they had to trade for Leonard. Oh and by the way, MJ didn't start winning titles until Pippen was acquired. The Heat didn't do anything original in how they built their team.
NFL blows all other complaints out of the water. When a 7-9 team makes the playoffs due to being in a crap conference and a 8-8 or 9-7 is sitting at the house...that is ridiculous.
I get what your saying and agree with most. The thing that rubbed people including myself was how they went about it. It wasn't just the Heat signing two top players to come in with Wade...it was the three players coming together and mainly one player bragging about how they were going to win so many championships and allowing ESPN to create the most douche bagged special in the history of sports.
Let me say this...I like LeBron and think he is top 5 all time right now with the chance to be as high as #2 (will never unseat MJ with his Finals record and I don't think he gets 6). I actually hope they can somehow unseat the Warriors this series because I will feel bad for the guy if his record goes to 2-5 because that will put a huge damper on his legacy. When he first came into the league you could have never made me believe that if the guy made 7 finals that he would lose 5...he's too good a player for that, but that may become a reality.
That's always the borderline teams. There have been better records stay at home. The wildcats games helped the situation but not always
A 2-5 record is definitely a black eye on him. There's not much arguing that with people. No one will change their minds about that. The loss to the Mavs was really bad. Outside of that, I don't think his team was the clear favorites to win. The Spurs teams were awfully good. Plus in last year's finals he was historically good. Just didn't have the help.
I think The Decision was a mistake and the proclamation that they're going to win a lot of titles could rub people the wrong way. It didn't bother me too much. It was a pep rally. I saw it as being similar to when Cal said he wanted to return UK to its rightful spot on top of the mountain. Similar setting with essentially the same message.