Jordan vs. LeBron
-
Yea? And what is that context?
I'm pretty sure you already know that answer.
I'm pretty sure you already know that answer.
I honest don't know what the fuck you are talking about "context". The context is a basketball court. 94 feet by 50 feet. 10 foot rims. That is the only context I am aware of.
The only other thing I can think if is the context of your lifetime.....which is no context at all. Your life is irrelevant.
-
I'm pretty sure you already know that answer.
I honest don't know what the fuck you are talking about "context". The context is a basketball court. 94 feet by 50 feet. 10 foot rims. That is the only context I am aware of.
The only other thing I can think if is the context of your lifetime.....which is no context at all. Your life is irrelevant.
I honest don't know what the fuck you are talking about "context". The context is a basketball court. 94 feet by 50 feet. 10 foot rims. That is the only context I am aware of.
The only other thing I can think if is the context of your lifetime.....which is no context at all. Your life is irrelevant.
Come on trivia boy....you can't be this stupid
-
I'm pretty sure you already know that answer.
I honest don't know what the fuck you are talking about "context". The context is a basketball court. 94 feet by 50 feet. 10 foot rims. That is the only context I am aware of.
The only other thing I can think if is the context of your lifetime.....which is no context at all. Your life is irrelevant.
I honest don't know what the fuck you are talking about "context". The context is a basketball court. 94 feet by 50 feet. 10 foot rims. That is the only context I am aware of.
The only other thing I can think if is the context of your lifetime.....which is no context at all. Your life is irrelevant.
The context of being 7'0 and athletic when 95% of your competition is 6'4" and much less athletic
-
I honest don't know what the fuck you are talking about "context". The context is a basketball court. 94 feet by 50 feet. 10 foot rims. That is the only context I am aware of.
The only other thing I can think if is the context of your lifetime.....which is no context at all. Your life is irrelevant.
The context of being 7'0 and athletic when 95% of your competition is 6'4" and much less athletic
The context of being 7'0 and athletic when 95% of your competition is 6'4" and much less athletic
So, you are saying that height matters when assessing the greatest of all time?
Well then, maybe Spud Webb and Mugsy Bogues should be considered the GOATS.
-
The context of being 7'0 and athletic when 95% of your competition is 6'4" and much less athletic
So, you are saying that height matters when assessing the greatest of all time?
Well then, maybe Spud Webb and Mugsy Bogues should be considered the GOATS.
So, you are saying that height matters when assessing the greatest of all time?
Well then, maybe Spud Webb and Mugsy Bogues should be considered the GOATS.
Don't forget Earl Boykins LOL...
-
The context of being 7'0 and athletic when 95% of your competition is 6'4" and much less athletic
So, you are saying that height matters when assessing the greatest of all time?
Well then, maybe Spud Webb and Mugsy Bogues should be considered the GOATS.
So, you are saying that height matters when assessing the greatest of all time?
Well then, maybe Spud Webb and Mugsy Bogues should be considered the GOATS.
If you want to argue just to argue please ignore me. Wilt was physically dominant over lesser competition. It doesn't preclude many, including myself, as giving him the credit of being one of the best basketball players ever but when you evaluate players across generations you factor in the competition they play against.
-
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
"And they don't really know even what they're talkin' about And I can't imagine what empty heads can achieve." -
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
http://www.nba.com/history/bulls_dynasty.html
• 1991: Michael vs. Magic
The Bulls really were not supposed to win in 1991. Chicago had finally vanquished its longtime nemesis, the Detroit Pistons....
• 1992: A Trail through Portland
The Trail Blazers thought that 1992 would be their year to win the title. Portland had been defeated by the Pistons in the 1990 Finals, and the same core of players - Drexler, Kersey, Porter, Robinson, Duckworth, Williams - had returned to the Finals both ready and determined. But not as ready and determined as the Bulls, apparently.....
• 1993: Sir Charles is Denied his Crown
Winning two titles in a row almost had become the norm - the last three teams to win NBA championships had done just that (Lakers 1987-88, Pistons 1989-90, and Bulls 1991-92). Winning three in a row, now that was truly a challenge......
1996: Greatest Team Ever? 70!
Bulls fans celebrate the 70th win of the record-breaking 95-96 season.
With Jordan back at full strength after his foray into baseball, the Bulls compiled an amazing regular season record of 72-10, breaking the Lakers' record of 69-13 set in the early '70s....
• 1997: All That Jazz
If you had to pick one defining moment for Michael Jordan, chances are you would choose Game 5 of the 1997 Finals against the Jazz in Utah.....
• 1998: The Final Chapter
Throughout Jordan's career, although he was always the brightest of the stars on the court, there always seemed to be room for his teammates to step up and make a difference at key moments in important games......
-
Jordan is all in a league by himself. The same with Lebron.
School and Solar Eclipse -
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
Russell was good but even he wasn't close to the physical specimen Wilt was. Wilt was some much more physically gifted than everyone he played against. Imagine Shaq in his prime playing against high school kids.
-
-
So, you are saying that height matters when assessing the greatest of all time?
Well then, maybe Spud Webb and Mugsy Bogues should be considered the GOATS.
If you want to argue just to argue please ignore me. Wilt was physically dominant over lesser competition. It doesn't preclude many, including myself, as giving him the credit of being one of the best basketball players ever but when you evaluate players across generations you factor in the competition they play against.
If you want to argue just to argue please ignore me. Wilt was physically dominant over lesser competition. It doesn't preclude many, including myself, as giving him the credit of being one of the best basketball players ever but when you evaluate players across generations you factor in the competition they play against.
Wilt probably played against more great players than Jordan. He had to go up against Russell, Walton, Kareem, Bellamy, Oscar Robertson, Jerry West and Elgin Baylor when he was not playing with them (most of his career as not with Lakers) Jerry Lucas, Bob Petit, Nate Thurmond, Willis Reed, all the other Celtics...Heinshon/Havlicek etc.
I can argue....likely correctly...that Wilt had greater competition in his career than did Jordan. How many great centers did he have to go against? Many. How many great shooting guards did MJ have to go against? Well, there was Drexler...and there was...Drexler...and there was Reggie Miller...and...that is about it.
So...if you don't want to argue...then don't pose such an easily arguable question.
-
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
See above....at the same position: Drexler and Reggie Miller. (Chris Mullin??)
-
Didn't Wilt have to play against Bill Russell for years? Who did MJ play against that was that good?
Russell was good but even he wasn't close to the physical specimen Wilt was. Wilt was some much more physically gifted than everyone he played against. Imagine Shaq in his prime playing against high school kids.
Russell was good but even he wasn't close to the physical specimen Wilt was. Wilt was some much more physically gifted than everyone he played against. Imagine Shaq in his prime playing against high school kids.
I am going to make an assumption that you are not old enough to see Wilt play....or his competition play. Given the smaller league...on just about every night he played against an outstanding opposing center.....and it WAS a big man's game back then...no 3 pt. shot. The game was played primarily in the paint. Russell, Thurmond, Reed, Wes Unseld, Dolph Shayes, Zelmo Beatty, Bellamy, Petit, Artis Gilmore, Bob Lanier. Later he played some against Kareem and Walton, for a year or two maybe.
These were men playing the game...big ass motherfuckers, not boys. Wilt did dominate...but he had tough, tough competition.
The players outlined in blue above are all Hall of Famers....which, by the way is just about every SOB he went up against.
Kareem 7-2 250
Russell 6-10 250
Thurmond 6-11 250
Unseld 6-8 250
Reed 6-9 250
Petit 6-9 210
Bellamy 6-11 225
Gilmore 7-2 260
Lanier 6-10 250
Beatty 6-9 230
These guys all match up with the biggest/best centers of today...or recent years.
Shaq of course was a beast at 7'1 325...but he was highly unusual.
-
Russell was good but even he wasn't close to the physical specimen Wilt was. Wilt was some much more physically gifted than everyone he played against. Imagine Shaq in his prime playing against high school kids.
I am going to make an assumption that you are not old enough to see Wilt play....or his competition play. Given the smaller league...on just about every night he played against an outstanding opposing center.....and it WAS a big man's game back then...no 3 pt. shot. The game was played primarily in the paint. Russell, Thurmond, Reed, Wes Unseld, Dolph Shayes, Zelmo Beatty, Bellamy, Petit, Artis Gilmore, Bob Lanier. Later he played some against Kareem and Walton, for a year or two maybe.
These were men playing the game...big ass motherfuckers, not boys. Wilt did dominate...but he had tough, tough competition.
The players outlined in blue above are all Hall of Famers....which, by the way is just about every SOB he went up against.
Kareem 7-2 250
Russell 6-10 250
Thurmond 6-11 250
Unseld 6-8 250
Reed 6-9 250
Petit 6-9 210
Bellamy 6-11 225
Gilmore 7-2 260
Lanier 6-10 250
Beatty 6-9 230
These guys all match up with the biggest/best centers of today...or recent years.
Shaq of course was a beast at 7'1 325...but he was highly unusual.
I am going to make an assumption that you are not old enough to see Wilt play....or his competition play. Given the smaller league...on just about every night he played against an outstanding opposing center.....and it WAS a big man's game back then...no 3 pt. shot. The game was played primarily in the paint. Russell, Thurmond, Reed, Wes Unseld, Dolph Shayes, Zelmo Beatty, Bellamy, Petit, Artis Gilmore, Bob Lanier. Later he played some against Kareem and Walton, for a year or two maybe.
These were men playing the game...big ass motherfuckers, not boys. Wilt did dominate...but he had tough, tough competition.
The players outlined in blue above are all Hall of Famers....which, by the way is just about every SOB he went up against.
Kareem 7-2 250
Russell 6-10 250
Thurmond 6-11 250
Unseld 6-8 250
Reed 6-9 250
Petit 6-9 210
Bellamy 6-11 225
Gilmore 7-2 260
Lanier 6-10 250
Beatty 6-9 230
These guys all match up with the biggest/best centers of today...or recent years.
Shaq of course was a beast at 7'1 325...but he was highly unusual.
I have only watched Wilt through highlights and specials but here what I've seen. Layups, finger rolls and dunks. His free throw percentage is god awful which is another suggestion he couldn't shoot. I am unaware of anyone who raves about his mid-range game or his incredible hook shot. The guys who I know who watched him play all talk about how dominant he was in the paint. They all talk about his ability to get to the rim. That is only possible if you are bigger, stronger and quicker than the guys defending you. Shaq didn't have a basketball superpower he was just a big guy playing against less physically gifted guys. Michael Jordan had physical abilities that others in his generation didn't have and so does Lebron but they also have the ability to attack a defense in multiple ways which Wilt did not have. Again not saying his dominance didn't exist just that the numbers are skewed.
-
I think you are just taking into account the fact that he was not very good at the free throw line...and extrapolating that to other aspects of his game unwarrantedly. No...he couldn't/didn't shoot 3 pointers...because they didn't exist at the time. The point of the game at that time was to get a shot in as close to the basket as possible. He could run the floor plenty well enough. And his assist numbers are likely as good or better as any big man who ever played...in fact they were just about as good as Jordan's were.
You didn't qualify this argument by saying who was the best center or guard or forward....just player....at any position.
So...Wilt scored better, rebounded better, and assisted just about as well as Jordan. Jordan probably stole the ball more...but fyi....steals was not a category during Wilt's career, so we don't know what kind of stats he may have had there.
You also act as if he was a man among boys. He wasn't. He was a man among men....big men, as I have pointed out.
-
I think you are just taking into account the fact that he was not very good at the free throw line...and extrapolating that to other aspects of his game unwarrantedly. No...he couldn't/didn't shoot 3 pointers...because they didn't exist at the time. The point of the game at that time was to get a shot in as close to the basket as possible. He could run the floor plenty well enough. And his assist numbers are likely as good or better as any big man who ever played...in fact they were just about as good as Jordan's were.
You didn't qualify this argument by saying who was the best center or guard or forward....just player....at any position.
So...Wilt scored better, rebounded better, and assisted just about as well as Jordan. Jordan probably stole the ball more...but fyi....steals was not a category during Wilt's career, so we don't know what kind of stats he may have had there.
You also act as if he was a man among boys. He wasn't. He was a man among men....big men, as I have pointed out.
I think you are just taking into account the fact that he was not very good at the free throw line...and extrapolating that to other aspects of his game unwarrantedly. No...he couldn't/didn't shoot 3 pointers...because they didn't exist at the time. The point of the game at that time was to get a shot in as close to the basket as possible. He could run the floor plenty well enough. And his assist numbers are likely as good or better as any big man who ever played...in fact they were just about as good as Jordan's were.
You didn't qualify this argument by saying who was the best center or guard or forward....just player....at any position.
So...Wilt scored better, rebounded better, and assisted just about as well as Jordan. Jordan probably stole the ball more...but fyi....steals was not a category during Wilt's career, so we don't know what kind of stats he may have had there.
You also act as if he was a man among boys. He wasn't. He was a man among men....big men, as I have pointed out.
If numbers were the sole determining factor we wouldn't be having any sports discussions.
-
I think you are just taking into account the fact that he was not very good at the free throw line...and extrapolating that to other aspects of his game unwarrantedly. No...he couldn't/didn't shoot 3 pointers...because they didn't exist at the time. The point of the game at that time was to get a shot in as close to the basket as possible. He could run the floor plenty well enough. And his assist numbers are likely as good or better as any big man who ever played...in fact they were just about as good as Jordan's were.
You didn't qualify this argument by saying who was the best center or guard or forward....just player....at any position.
So...Wilt scored better, rebounded better, and assisted just about as well as Jordan. Jordan probably stole the ball more...but fyi....steals was not a category during Wilt's career, so we don't know what kind of stats he may have had there.
You also act as if he was a man among boys. He wasn't. He was a man among men....big men, as I have pointed out.
If numbers were the sole determining factor we wouldn't be having any sports discussions.
If numbers were the sole determining factor we wouldn't be having any sports discussions.
Exactly. Bill Russell would be the greatest player
He won 11 titles. END OF STORY
-
If numbers were the sole determining factor we wouldn't be having any sports discussions.
Exactly. Bill Russell would be the greatest player
He won 11 titles. END OF STORY
Exactly. Bill Russell would be the greatest player
He won 11 titles. END OF STORY
He may be the greatest player nonetheless. It is certainly arguable. Even aside from the 2 NCAA titles, one Olympic Gold Medal (back in the days when you only got one chance to win one), 11 NBA titles....which of course, you can never really put aside.
While Russell was not necessarily the prolific scorer (he didn't have to be..but he probably could have if asked)...he played defense, handed out assists, rebounded as well as anyone ever has.
-
Exactly. Bill Russell would be the greatest player
He won 11 titles. END OF STORY
He may be the greatest player nonetheless. It is certainly arguable. Even aside from the 2 NCAA titles, one Olympic Gold Medal (back in the days when you only got one chance to win one), 11 NBA titles....which of course, you can never really put aside.
While Russell was not necessarily the prolific scorer (he didn't have to be..but he probably could have if asked)...he played defense, handed out assists, rebounded as well as anyone ever has.
He may be the greatest player nonetheless. It is certainly arguable. Even aside from the 2 NCAA titles, one Olympic Gold Medal (back in the days when you only got one chance to win one), 11 NBA titles....which of course, you can never really put aside.
While Russell was not necessarily the prolific scorer (he didn't have to be..but he probably could have if asked)...he played defense, handed out assists, rebounded as well as anyone ever has.
Greatness is Greatness.. No matter where it shines in someones game,,,,
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login