Well, I do not despise their FO, the FO is one of the best I have encountered throughout the times with a straight face.
Yeah, it's not the best argument in the world against any player. It's silly on both sides. On one end, Caesar says LeBron had alot of help, Zydranus and Mo were decent players, but they are probably one of the weaker supporting cast on that chart list. Chicago for six title runs had combination of Pippen/Grant/Paxson/Armstrong or Pippen/Rodman/Kukoc/Kerr/Harper. I could say the best players ever are Rick Barry and Hakeem Olajuwon who both won a championship without a single current all-star on their roster in those seasons. MJ often went against his own GM, who actually had the best plan to getting the Bulls, much better than what they were at the time, yet who was standing in his way ... #23. Now, you see that the best thing that happened was MJ didn't get his way. because if he did I doubt the Bulls have had six titles. If we are taking Washington and Charlotte into consideration, he maybe the greatest ever (even I believe he's the greatest in most regards), but he should put the selecting players in someone else's hands. An active player acting as the team's GM could cause a serious conflict of interest, though I don't think it's necessarily bad by default. As you can see with players, like Bird, West, or Dumars that had alot of success as front office personnel. It could conceivably work. Most of these guys are all time great talents and know the game, very well. Know what it takes to win or keep a team together, and have been enough huddles and competed against said players, to recognize who could bring alot to a team and avoid the ones who wouldn't. Even in today's NBA, it's a silly argument to use. The Nuggets seem to be having alot of success, now because ... all of their best players are finally healthy...Murray was practically out for 2 and half years. People act like their success is something out of the norm, but in reality, the Nuggets have had one of the better NBA front-offices over the last 20 years. Denver just happened to catch lighting in a bottle with Jokic. A dominant 2nd round pick who has the team possibly on the cusp of an NBA championship. I don't think most people, even in the Nuggets organization, saw that except maybe one or two scouts. Even, they may not have known he'd be this good. You also have to consider that "basketball" as hard as people think it is to believe is a team game. You can have exceptional players on your roster that doesn't always workout .. see the 2010 Knicks, 2012 Lakers, 2004 Lakers (near the end), 1999 Rockets, and many other teams. Just because a team has all-star talent on it, doesn't mean they'll win anything. Hell, having a great squad, means very little in the playoffs, just look the 94 Supersonics, 07 Mavs, and this year Bucks, and almost the 93 Suns got their bags sent home in the 1st Round of the playoffs by teams who either barely reached the playoffs or had no business in the playoffs. You have to consider injuries, matchup problems, and inter-personal team matters. IF LeBRON/LeGM managed to orchestrate all of these trades and signings to get four titles out of it, that's sort of an accomplishment in itself, because people often argue that it's not fair or giving a player that much control will work against any team, because a player "so-called" did not have the acumen or team management skill to make a winning team.
I agree with everything on AD, but disagree with just the best team theory. While true all time, it was done organically and homegrown outside of the Lakers stealing Kareem away from Milwaukee where he already led them to a championship with Oscar-another all time player who teamed up with him. Them having all those top picks with Kareem-but that's the Lakers history of sus activity. Team ups don't get to be defaulted into "well, the best team won." They are the best teams for breaking an unspoken sports rule and forming nearly unbeatable teams. I've said it before i believe in this very thread, but i fully respect and am all for players who give their prime and their all to their franchises and decide it's time to team up around 32-33 years old(Clyde to the Rockets in 95 for example). All these players in their early to mid 20s teaming up is what broke the league and they tried to sell us that it was the same thing as Chuck going to the Rockets or the Celtics big 3 forming to protect LeBron's legacy because HE and HIS legacy needed the team ups. KD needed them only to try and match LeBron's strategic moves. LeBron gave KD no choice but to do the same, and everyone else is following the mindset even if KD and others are failing because he just isn't the leader or recruiter Lebron is and the gap from the very best of all time to some of the best in the league is just too wide and unfair for team ups. I give the guy his flowers. I just would have respected him more if he stuck it out with Cleveland and even if he didn't win anything(which is likely how it would have gone down) and had to go team up with AD in LA in his 30s and got 2 or 3 with LA, he still would be top 5 all time, but he would have done it right and owed Cleveland nothing. Back to AD. I was thinking again about how Gasol and basically the front line length and size was the real killer for those Lakers and Gasol advanced stats both in the short regular season post trade and playoffs was the more valuable player. Gasol easily can be argued to have won 1 of those FMVP. AD is basically Gasol AND Odom in one player. The level of the players LeBron has played with is wild and i'm tired of seeing all of them torn down-most of all DWade who was one of my personal favorites ever. It's no wonder Miami is still his city even while Lebron was there. Because winning the right way is long term more valued to the fans than short term bought championships. I made note of this in the GARM with regards to going after Harden and Brown or star chasing. I prefer home grown ups and downs and prevailing. We all do. I don't want to sell my soul for it like Lebron and KD and their fans have. It's just never as sweet as it should be. I'm so honored to have experienced Clutch City and Hakeem.
Tristan Thompsons stars were almost identical to Horace Grant. Offensive rebounding machines. Minimal face up game. Blue collar clean up guys. The difference being Horace was a good team defender who moved his feet well. Those Cavs were always top level defense including back when young LeBron was supposed to be carrying "plumbers." John Paxson averaged 7ppg and 3apg during the first 3 peat. Steve Kerr averaged 8ppg and 2apg during the 2nd 3 peat. Ron Harper had 2 terrible knees and was there to provide size at the 1 to give smaller point guards problems. He averaged 7.7ppg and 2.7apgp during the 2nd 3peat. BJ Armstrong made the all star game in 94 while MJ was retired due to fan voting -spam voting the name BJ at McDonlads all across America. He averaged 14ppg and 3apg. He was Paxsons backup during the first 3 peat and averaged 10ppg and 3.6apg during the 1st 3peat. Dennis Rodman was there for defense and rebounding with zero offensive support and unreliable to show up. Nearly ran out the league and was had for Will Perdue and a bag of chips because no one wanted him. He speaks admirably about Michael as the greatest and the respect he had for Michael is why he brought everything he had to the role. He started only 57 games in the 72 win season, 54 in the 69 win season and the most reliable he had been was in 98 when he was available for 80 games and started 66 while Scottie missed half the season. He averaged 5ppg over those 3 seasons. Kukoc was a 6th man of the year and deserves praise as a 6'11 point forward that would be even better today. He did his role, but he was no All-Star and his HOF entrance is largely based on being one of the original Euro players to succeed in the NBA and carve out that path for others. Scottie Pippen was a #2. Incredible defense and the original 'Be Like Mike' in how he tried to mimic MJ's style down to his dunk style, but a lot more stiff looking sort of like Kawhi, but Kawhi is way more robotic looking. Scottie played out of his mind for 1 season in 94 but that was never going to last because he wasn't a #1. The fact that i have to talk about Steve Kerr, John Paxson, Ron Harper and Horace Grant in a topic that is about LeBron James teaming up with some of the very best to do it is all i need to know. Scottie is the only one worth mentioning in the same tier of players that LeBron played with. Scottie averaged 15ppg on 33% FG and 3pt in the 96 semis vs NY. 15.7ppg on 34% FG and 23% from 3 in the 96 Finals. 16.7pgg and 3apg on 38 and 23% in round 1 of the 97 finals. Several more in the 98 run similar to these including basically being a broken back decoy in the Finals. At his best on those 3 peats he was low 40% shooting with 17 or 18 points. If that was LeBron's teammate, IF ANY of those Bulls are LeBrons teammates, they would be diminished and devalued to straight garbage tier because they would have ZERO championships and LeBron would have left to team up with the bad boy pistons 1st time around and with Shaq 2nd time around.
Yes. He had no post up game and his face up was limited to spotting up from a 15-18 feet-with a 69% career ft% showing his limits. If he didn't have the clean open shot, he couldn't take you off the dribble or post you up or fade away. LOL Did LeBron fans tell you MJ played with superstars Steve Kerr and Horace Grant LOL
Dwight Howard..another name LOL Joker is such a G. Too bad this is rigged for the Lakers vs Celtics 17 championship tie breaker matchup.
Ooooo. Not to get political, but... the curse is real. This is a great omen for the Nugs. Also, I love Jokic so much. "I don't remember." Hahahaha. What a normal, level-headed answer.
I misunderstood you. No, he couldn’t take folks off the dribble. He could shoot the open middies no problem. The Bulls were good enough to almost get to a ECF’s without Mike, before adding Rodman. He had great help when he won, like pretty much everyone else.
I agree. The bulls were a well put together and good team. Add Michael and they are a 2x 3 peat championship team, but as i mentioned previously, the 94 Bulls were the same 3 peat team minus MJ but reloaded with many key players of the 2nd 3 peat so it's not so apples to apples. Barely .500 the next year without Jordan(and no true PF). They were a properly constructed team. Not a superstar team up.
They were barely .500 after also losing Grant. Kinda hard to win relying on your SF to be your top rebounder in those days.
Yes, i agree and mentioned this, but Horace Grant wasn't keeping them on a mid 50's win pace without Jordan. They fell back to earth that year because Pippen just wasn't the leader he needed to be and questioned Phil's decisions and whined about his contract and was jealous of teammate success. Scottie Pippen is a real #2 and there's no one else arguable a #3 during the 2 3peats. LeBron has played with #1-B's AND #2's on the same teams + all the role players previously mentioned as supposedly notable players MJ played with.
