NBA - Main

14 readers

3 users here now

Game analysis, highlights and everything else that is happening in the NBA.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

communick@nba.space

Another GOAT take (like we needed it) (alien.top)

submitted 1 year ago by RopeBottleTowel@alien.top to c/nba@nba.space

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Best of all time to add to a poor team: LeBron

His style of play and record of deep runs compared with MJ's without Pippen

Best of all time to add to a medium team: Jordan

Give him a Pippen and nobody stops him

Best of all time to add to a good team: Curry

His insane efficiency and spacing. He should be 1st pick and would be the point of difference on any all time 5v5 scenario.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] gintoki-sama@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

I still remember jordan leaving the bulls and them still winning a shit ton of games and making a deep playoff run.

Lebron that one year left the cavs and they had like 18 wins the whole season after.

There's levels to this. Lebron goat

[–] 33birdboy@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Jordan bulls 6 rings > lebrons cavs 1 ring

Big difference when comparing

[–] RopeBottleTowel@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Jordan played 35 Finals games... never once got more than 5 steals on the biggest stage - 7 ring Horry did. Horry GOAT? Or could selective context to prove a predetermined point be a bit silly?

[–] BlockOfTheYear@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Im pretty sure his point was that while Jordans team did better without him, they also did better with him. It was simply a better team than Lebrons Cavs.

Bulls won 6 rings and went out in the 2nd round without Jordan. Cavs won 1 ring and missed the playoffs without Lebron. Huge dropoff in both cases.

Obviously, there is more context than this for both of their situatios, but I think you missed his main point.

[–] RopeBottleTowel@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The comment reduced the whole argument purley to number of rings, disregarding any other context. It's right there in black and white.

Then you reinterpret it with paragraphs of context you presume to know he "meant", but I missed?

[–] BlockOfTheYear@alien.top 1 points 1 year ago

Its not really hard to comprehend, those added paragraphs was for you, so you would understand, which is still seems like you dont.

The guy he replied to said Bulls was still good without Jordan while Cavs was trash without Lebron. His response is that the Bulls also had much more success with Jordan than the Cavs did with Lebron. Do you get it now?

The fact that he said "1 Cavs ring" instead of "4 Lebron rings" should have been a clear indicator for you that he is simply responding to the point made in the comment above him lol.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)