1335 replies to this topic

[You Play to Win the Game]

I'm really not a fan of the "making players better" argument on any side of the equation. It's impossible to quantify... and even if a player's numbers improve, that doesn't mean it's because of who they played with. Does Ray Allen and Mario Chalmers get more wide open looks because they are on the floor with LeBron... sure... doesn't make them any better. I just don't understand that argument either way. I think it's lazy, and often cited as a trump card in lieu of not having more evidence to back up one's initial stance.

[mweb08]

I'm really not a fan of the "making players better" argument on any side of the equation. It's impossible to quantify... and even if a player's numbers improve, that doesn't mean it's because of who they played with. Does Ray Allen and Mario Chalmers get more wide open looks because they are on the floor with LeBron... sure... doesn't make them any better. I just don't understand that argument either way. I think it's lazy, and often cited as a trump card in lieu of not having more evidence to back up one's initial stance.

A good point about people confusing helping someone put up better stats vs actually helping him become better. I think we see far more of the former than the latter and that's easier to get some real idea of.

[bnickle]

I'm really not a fan of the "making players better" argument on any side of the equation. It's impossible to quantify... and even if a player's numbers improve, that doesn't mean it's because of who they played with. Does Ray Allen and Mario Chalmers get more wide open looks because they are on the floor with LeBron... sure... doesn't make them any better. I just don't understand that argument either way. I think it's lazy, and often cited as a trump card in lieu of not having more evidence to back up one's initial stance.

Screw the raw stats. Jordan would have willed a similarly talented team to better performances than LBJ just did.


Now, you can think that is BS, you can think there is no way to quantify how much, if at all, Jordan makes those around him perform better. That's fine, I obviously can't prove or quantify a hypothetical scenario. That said, I absolutely believe that it is true.

[bnickle]

You flat out said he's one of the best 2 players without qualifying it with any of this other stuff. As for best fit, he's a great guy to have on a team like that, I just wouldn't say he's the second best player like both you and Rob did.

I don't think I flat out said that, but anyway I'm saying now exactly how I feel or what I meant.


Physically speaking, or from a talent perspective, he's in the top 2. Arguably, even better than Jordan.


When it comes to the intangibles. Motivation, being a leader, mental toughness,etc. Jordan blows him away.


Lets not pretend those things haven't been legit issues with LeBron at times in his career.

[SportsGuy]

Branden...we get it, LBJ isn't Jordan.  What exactly is your point?  No one is saying that.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Screw the raw stats. Jordan would have willed a similarly talented team to better performances than LBJ just did.


Now, you can think that is BS, you can think there is no way to quantify how much, if at all, Jordan makes those around him perform better. That's fine, I obviously can't prove or quantify a hypothetical scenario. That said, I absolutely believe that it is true.

 

I do think that playing on a team you know has a chance to be great can get the most out of people... but I'm just not sold on the concept that a great player makes other players better. 

 

Are you saying that LeBron failed in willing Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade to play better in the Finals? 

[SammyBirdland]

I'm really not a fan of the "making players better" argument on any side of the equation. It's impossible to quantify... and even if a player's numbers improve, that doesn't mean it's because of who they played with. Does Ray Allen and Mario Chalmers get more wide open looks because they are on the floor with LeBron... sure... doesn't make them any better. I just don't understand that argument either way. I think it's lazy, and often cited as a trump card in lieu of not having more evidence to back up one's initial stance.

 

Back in my day, we just referred to "making players better"  as "playing team basketball"...

[Markus]

Screw the raw stats. Jordan would have willed a similarly talented team to better performances than LBJ just did.


Now, you can think that is BS, you can think there is no way to quantify how much, if at all, Jordan makes those around him perform better. That's fine, I obviously can't prove or quantify a hypothetical scenario. That said, I absolutely believe that it is true.

 

Ah, that line you always walk of passing off your opinions as absolute facts.

[bnickle]

Branden...we get it, LBJ isn't Jordan. What exactly is your point? No one is saying that.

Probably pretty close to the same overall position you have on LeBron.

I've heard you argue with Weber about LeBron.


My position is that, again, he is arguably the most physically skilled player to ever play the game. And that is a huge factor in greatness level.


That said, he has legit flaws or knocks that also hurt him. For you, you talk about the rings and now being 2-3 in the Finals. I'm digging deeper than just that.


I've said this before, it doesn't bother me that people appreciate how good LeBron is as a basketball player. It's the premature crown that has always been placed upon his head. Every step of the way people have got ahead of themselves with LeBron. That's what bothers me.

As I've said before, LBJ seems like a good guy. He's a great basketball player. I hate what he was given by the press and general public, not necessarily him.

[bnickle]

Ah, that line you always walk of passing off your opinions as absolute facts.

Did I not just say I can't prove it . Did I not say I absolutely BELIEVE it's true. I didn't say it was true, I said I BELIEVE it's true.

You guys are getting better with the trolling though and because I'm making an effort to be better around here, it's actually getting to me.


I guess I'm just going to have to go back into full on schtick mode.

[You Play to Win the Game]

Ah, that line you always walk of passing off your opinions as absolute facts.

Did I not just say I can't prove it . Did I not say I absolutely BELIEVE it's true. I didn't say it was true, I said I BELIEVE it's true.


You guys are getting better with the trolling though and because I'm making an effort to be better around here, it's actually getting to me.



I guess I'm just going to have to go back into full on schtick mode.

I honestly wasn't attempting to troll, just to be clear.

[SportsGuy]

Probably pretty close to the same overall position you have on LeBron.
I've heard you argue with Weber about LeBron.
My position is that, again, he is arguably the most physically skilled player to ever play the game. And that is a huge factor in greatness level.
That said, he has legit flaws or knocks that also hurt him. For you, you talk about the rings and now being 2-3 in the Finals. I'm digging deeper than just that.
I've said this before, it doesn't bother me that people appreciate how good LeBron is as a basketball player. It's the premature crown that has always been placed upon his head. Every step of the way people have got ahead of themselves with LeBron. That's what bothers me.
As I've said before, LBJ seems like a good guy. He's a great basketball player. I hate what he was given by the press and general public, not necessarily him.

No one had crowned him the greatest player ever.

He has lived up to everything people said about him.

All the accolades, all the admiration he has gotten only cements what people believe about him.

Now, the question is simple...how high up the charts does he get? He is already in the top 10...he is the best small forward ever.

[mweb08]

I think you have to ask who had more to do with getting more out of the other guys on the Bulls, Jordan or Phil. People seem to completely remove Phil in this, but the biggest attributes people point to as far as what makes him a great coach is his ability to teach his players, sometimes through unique ways, and his ability to manage egos. Meanwhile, MJ had some legit leadership issues, especially pre Phil, when he was still the best player, but he was unable to will his teams to the Finals.

[mweb08]

I do think that playing on a team you know has a chance to be great can get the most out of people... but I'm just not sold on the concept that a great player makes other players better. 

 

Are you saying that LeBron failed in willing Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade to play better in the Finals? 

 

If MJ was on the Heat, Wade would have found a way to make sure his legs weren't shot in the series!

 

BTW, Bosh may be the type that wouldn't respond too well to MJ's style of leadership.

[mweb08]

Another good article from Lowe on how San Antonio dominated this series. 

 

A nice blurb regarding Duncan's legacy:

 

This was Duncan’s fifth championship, same as Kobe and one more than Shaq. Scrap the “best power forward ever” designation. Duncan has been a center for the majority of his career, and the obsession over position moves the talk about his legacy away from where it should go. It’s time to talk about whether Duncan is one of the five greatest players ever — a well-rounded offensive force and one of the half-dozen greatest defenders in history.

[Dr. FLK]

If MJ was on the Heat, Wade would have found a way to make sure his legs weren't shot in the series!

 

BTW, Bosh may be the type that wouldn't respond too well to MJ's style of leadership.

 

Judging by his performance in this series, Bosh didn't respond well to LeBron either.  I'll never understand why the Heat took a solid big man (their only real big man) and turned him into a mediocre three point shooter.