He won in 1995-96.. went 72-10!! And he just came back in retirement.. he never lost to shaq
Wrong! Jordan came back from retirement in 1995 for 17 games in the regular season. He lead the Bulls into the playoffs where they lost to Shaq, Penny, and the Orlando Magic in 6 games.
The Bulls were much better in 95-96 because they signed Dennis Rodman.
Shaq and Duncan is nasty but going against stud big defenders they wouldn't be as effective. Jordan and Lebron on the other hand dominate whoever it is that ends up on the other side of the ball as them. Throw a name like Kobe over on LL's team and then maybe he'd have something.
LeQuan900 7:06 pm
Those massively cut salaries will prove to be very useful
Quote:
iamsuchasucker846:44 pm 5'7 LeQuan9006:45 pm And a 6'1 guy is a defensive stelwart? iamsuchasucker846:45 pm that is 6 inches LeQuan9006:45 pm 4 inches genius, 5 actually
Shaq and Duncan is nasty but going against stud big defenders they wouldn't be as effective. Jordan and Lebron on the other hand dominate whoever it is that ends up on the other side of the ball as them. Throw a name like Kobe over on LL's team and then maybe he'd have something.
That's not true at all. Check out the stats I posted. Shaq faired FAR better against Hakeem Olajuwon than Jordan and James did against Payton and Pierce. Pippen would defend Jordan better than Payton ever did. Same with Pierce and Lebron.
__________________
Last edited by Living_Legend33; 04-30-2009 at 12:50 AM..
This is a tough one, but, in the end, I have to go with KC's team. The two teams are essentially even at the point guard and power forward spots, but KC's 2 and 3 happen to be the two best players on either team. I feel like one of LL's weaknesses is that he lacks great slashers, as Shaq is at his best when people are slashing in. Paul Pierce can be a great slasher, but he's generally more of a small forward and a mid range player. By the same token, Duncan is more effective with a high-post center, which he doesn't have when paired up with Shaq. I feel like LL functionally has 2 centers and 2 small forwards starting, and his lineup is going to be significantly slower than KC's lineup. Unfortunately for LL, what he gives up in speed, he doesn't get back in rebounding. KC's lineup is superb for rebounding, with arguably the best rebounding point guard of all time, a 2 and a 3 who each can grab 7-8 boards a night, and a great rebounding front court. LL has a solid cast for rebounding, but they would get severely outrebounded by KC's cast. While I agree that LL's bench has a big edge on defense, KC's starters are quite the amazing defensive cast, and consists of five players who all were the best defender at their position at one point in their careers. Seeing as how the starters would likely play 35-40 minutes, I think that the difference between the benches in defense would hardly matter.
On a side note, I would personally start Dirk over Alonzo Mourning for KC's team, to fully exploit the unparalleled passing ability of his team, as well as his speed advantage.
__________________
12 For 12 in series predictions. Round 3: Cleveland in 5, LA in 7.
This is a tough one, but, in the end, I have to go with KC's team. The two teams are essentially even at the point guard and power forward spots, but KC's 2 and 3 happen to be the two best players on either team. I feel like one of LL's weaknesses is that he lacks great slashers, as Shaq is at his best when people are slashing in. Paul Pierce can be a great slasher, but he's generally more of a small forward and a mid range player. By the same token, Duncan is more effective with a high-post center, which he doesn't have when paired up with Shaq. I feel like LL functionally has 2 centers and 2 small forwards starting, and his lineup is going to be significantly slower than KC's lineup. Unfortunately for LL, what he gives up in speed, he doesn't get back in rebounding. KC's lineup is superb for rebounding, with arguably the best rebounding point guard of all time, a 2 and a 3 who each can grab 7-8 boards a night, and a great rebounding front court. LL has a solid cast for rebounding, but they would get severely outrebounded by KC's cast. While I agree that LL's bench has a big edge on defense, KC's starters are quite the amazing defensive cast, and consists of five players who all were the best defender at their position at one point in their careers. Seeing as how the starters would likely play 35-40 minutes, I think that the difference between the benches in defense would hardly matter.
On a side note, I would personally start Dirk over Alonzo Mourning for KC's team, to fully exploit the unparalleled passing ability of his team, as well as his speed advantage.
How is Zo or Dirk a better rebounder than Shaq or Duncan? Zo gives up size and Dirk gives up both size and strength.
Duncan played PF his whole career. He's not a center. Pippen can easily play SG as well or better than Pierce.
Also, how would bench play not matter? What if someone gets into foul trouble?
Jordan and Lebron will be slowed by my cast of defenders. They have been in the past. Shaq was never slowed by Olajuwon, Mourning, or Robinson. Likewise Duncan always put up great numbers no matter who was guarding him. Both Duncan and Shaq were more efficient than Jordan and Lebron, because big men always are. The numbers prove it. Shaq and Duncan were just as dominant as Jordan and Lebron.
Of course KC could foul them to exploit their biggest weakness; FT%. But then he'd have to play his bench, which we both agree is inferior.
Btw, nice job getting two of your friends to post right before the deadline KC. Congrats, you really earned this one. I hope you have fun gloating after you stick this contest in your little sig too.
__________________
Last edited by Living_Legend33; 04-30-2009 at 01:23 AM..
1. I didn't tell either of them to vote for me.
2. It's not even over yet.
3. It's not like they voted without reasoning. In fact, Pesty's was pretty detailed.
1. I didn't tell either of them to vote for me.
2. It's not even over yet.
3. It's not like they voted without reasoning. In fact, Pesty's was pretty detailed.
Whatever. I can't prove anything so I won't get into it. I just find it odd you get two votes right before the deadline. You obviously asked them to vote in hopes they would vote for you and tie it up or put you ahead right before Wed 12:59 Arizona Time or whenever it was.
I already addressed Pestilence and that weak argument. He basically said you would win because of Jason Kidd's rebounding and because bench play is irrelevant. That sure is convenient considering your bench would get torched. Sorry, but I'm not buying any of that.
Combs just stated something that was flat out wrong and obviously read nothing of what I posted.
If you win its because people believe in the myth that Jordan was invincible. Yes he won a lot, but when there were better teams with great big men and great defenses he lost more than he won.
So congrats, you've successfully argued 0 points against me and still win. You earned it.
If it means that much to you, you can have the win. You can't always win by debate, sometimes people just think what they see. At least I finished the whole All-Era draft.. 1st ever to complete a tourney. I swear I didn't tell them to vote for me though, I literally just sent a PM to all the people I saw online that had basketball knowledge and I just said, Please vote tonight in the all era championship. Pestilence is one of the smartest members we have here, I really wouldn't call his argument weak at all.
If it means that much to you, you can have the win. You can't always win by debate, sometimes people just think what they see. At least I finished the whole All-Era draft.. 1st ever to complete a tourney. I swear I didn't tell them to vote for me though, I literally just sent a PM to all the people I saw online that had basketball knowledge and I just said, Please vote tonight in the all era championship. Pestilence is one of the smartest members we have here, I really wouldn't call his argument weak at all.
Congrats on the win and thanks for finishing the tournament. I definitely let it fall apart, mostly because I could never get enough judges so we had to do the voting thing which worked out okay.
First of all, I am not one of KC's "friends," as you're suggesting, LL. The dude posts in the graphics section and I know nothing about him. Here's the PM he sent:
Quote:
can you help vote tonight in the championship all era thread since i know you have knowledge in that department! thanks =)
I didn't even know he was in the tournament based on that PM, and he certainly didn't ask me to vote for him.
And now for your "points"
Quote:
How is Zo or Dirk a better rebounder than Shaq or Duncan? Zo gives up size and Dirk gives up both size and strength.
Zo and Robinson can more than hold their own against Shaq and Duncan, reboundingwise. Robinson was the best rebounder of the four of them, in his prime, and it would likely be a wash between the two frontcourts in terms of boards. The reason that your team would likely be outrebounded is because, while the frontcourts are even on the boards, Lebron, Jordan, and Kidd are all superb rebounders, and are more than enough to make up for what might be a 1 rebound per game difference between Duncan and Zo.
Quote:
Duncan played PF his whole career. He's not a center. Pippen can easily play SG as well or better than Pierce.
Everybody knows that, while Duncan has always been called a power forward, he always has played with a high post center who basically functions as a power forward. He also tends to guard the opposing team's center. I don't see him co-existing well with a slow banger.
And Pippen never played shooting guard offensively, due to the fact that he had a fellow named Michael Jordan playing next to him for the majority of his career. However, it's unclear whether he could have handled the 2 at all offensively, as he didn't play a single minute at the 2 even when he played on a Portland team that had too many forwards and not enough guards.
Quote:
Also, how would bench play not matter? What if someone gets into foul trouble?
I'm not saying the bench "doesn't matter" as such, I'm saying that starters are responsible for 80% of the minutes, and probably 85-90% of the production, and the difference between the benches in defense would hardly matter. When one team has such a talent advantage, being slightly disadvantaged defensively for 8 minutes or so is hardly an insurmountable setback.
Quote:
Jordan and Lebron will be slowed by my cast of defenders. They have been in the past. Shaq was never slowed by Olajuwon, Mourning, or Robinson. Likewise Duncan always put up great numbers no matter who was guarding him. Both Duncan and Shaq were more efficient than Jordan and Lebron, because big men always are. The numbers prove it. Shaq and Duncan were just as dominant as Jordan and Lebron.
Shaq and Duncan would be slowed by the fact that they wouldn't be playing on their ideal styles of team, and by the fact that the inside would be clogged up by your lack of shooters (with the exception of Mullen, who gives up so much in other departments that he likely wouldn't be getting many minutes).
Frankly, what this comes down to, is that I believe that it is impossible to simultaneously cover arguably the two best offensive players to ever play the game (and by offensive I'm talking about the combination of scoring, passing, drawing traffic, etc, not just scoring). I frankly don't buy the argument that Pippen and Pierce would do a great job of shutting Jordan and Lebron down (the numbers you posted about Lebron vs. Pierce are not from the much-improved 08-09 Lebron).
In the end run, we both agree that KC has the more talented team. Where we disagree is which team would have better chemistry. Personally, I think that there are few players in NBA history who help a team's chemistry as much as Jason Kidd, Lebron, and Jordan do, and, while your team has a couple guys who can really boost chemistry (Pierce, Duncan, Mutumbo), it also has a host of cancers (Artest, Rasheed, Webber), as well as a couple of guys who sometimes really help a team's chemistry but sometimes hurt it (Shaq, Payton).
By the way, LL, you'd garner a lot more respect from the voters if you had a more level-headed approach to this discussion, and understood that sometimes people have differing opinions from each other, rather than the "I'm right, and if you don't see that then fuck you!" attitude that you have been employing.
__________________
12 For 12 in series predictions. Round 3: Cleveland in 5, LA in 7.
First of all, I am not one of KC's "friends," as you're suggesting, LL. The dude posts in the graphics section and I know nothing about him. Here's the PM he sent:
I didn't even know he was in the tournament based on that PM, and he certainly didn't ask me to vote for him.
You're right. I wa shaving a bad day and definitely overreacted.
You're on his "friends" page. I never said I was a detective. :-p
Quote:
And now for your "points"
Zo and Robinson can more than hold their own against Shaq and Duncan, reboundingwise. Robinson was the best rebounder of the four of them, in his prime, and it would likely be a wash between the two frontcourts in terms of boards. The reason that your team would likely be outrebounded is because, while the frontcourts are even on the boards, Lebron, Jordan, and Kidd are all superb rebounders, and are more than enough to make up for what might be a 1 rebound per game difference between Duncan and Zo.
As opposed to the 1 rebound per game between Pippen and Lebron and Jordan and Pierce? The only significant edge comes from Payton over Kidd, and PG's don't rebound much in general, especially when everyone on the floor is great at it like in this scenario here.
You're wrong about Zo. While Shaq and Robinson are equal, Zo is not equal to Duncan. Zo only averaged 11 rpg once in his entire career, and his career average is 9 rpg. Duncan has averaged 11 or 12 for every season in his career, and has a career average of 12 rpg.
So while KC has the rebounding advantage in the backcourt, I have it in the frontcourt.
Quote:
Everybody knows that, while Duncan has always been called a power forward, he always has played with a high post center who basically functions as a power forward. He also tends to guard the opposing team's center. I don't see him co-existing well with a slow banger.
Duncan played the first 5 years of his career with David Robinson. They won 2titles together and were always one of the best teams in the west. Duncan had to function as the power forward then.
Quote:
And Pippen never played shooting guard offensively, due to the fact that he had a fellow named Michael Jordan playing next to him for the majority of his career. However, it's unclear whether he could have handled the 2 at all offensively, as he didn't play a single minute at the 2 even when he played on a Portland team that had too many forwards and not enough guards.
What are the duties of a SG? He has to handle the ball, shoot outside, slash to the basket, and defend other SG's. Which one of those things would Pippen be incapable of doing? Scottie was an incredible ball handler and had enough offensive IQ and passing ability to play the point if need be. He could handle the SG spot with no problems.
Quote:
I'm not saying the bench "doesn't matter" as such, I'm saying that starters are responsible for 80% of the minutes, and probably 85-90% of the production, and the difference between the benches in defense would hardly matter. When one team has such a talent advantage, being slightly disadvantaged defensively for 8 minutes or so is hardly an insurmountable setback.
If all his starters play 36-40 minutes, that means they're still missing the majority if not an entire quarter. Defense always matters, especially when fresh players are coming off the bench to bother perimeter scorers. These elite defensive players can all score as well. So are Lebron and Jordan going to focus their energy on offense or defense? Eventually they would tire late in the game, unless they rested for a significant amount of time. But if KC can't trust his bench to defend, how long can they afford to be out?
Quote:
Shaq and Duncan would be slowed by the fact that they wouldn't be playing on their ideal styles of team, and by the fact that the inside would be clogged up by your lack of shooters (with the exception of Mullen, who gives up so much in other departments that he likely wouldn't be getting many minutes).
How does this team lack shooters? Pippen and Payton both shot well over ..300 for the majority of their careers and had a few seasons that were great. Pierce is a career .360+ shooter. Artest and Sheed can also hit the 3.
Quote:
Frankly, what this comes down to, is that I believe that it is impossible to simultaneously cover arguably the two best offensive players to ever play the game (and by offensive I'm talking about the combination of scoring, passing, drawing traffic, etc, not just scoring). I frankly don't buy the argument that Pippen and Pierce would do a great job of shutting Jordan and Lebron down (the numbers you posted about Lebron vs. Pierce are not from the much-improved 08-09 Lebron).
So you're ignoring most of Lebron's career in favor of a half a season this year? I actually did post numbers that show Pierce can still defend Lebron effectively, even this year. But I'll remember that you specifically mention the 08-09 Lebron for this next point.
Quote:
In the end run, we both agree that KC has the more talented team. Where we disagree is which team would have better chemistry. Personally, I think that there are few players in NBA history who help a team's chemistry as much as Jason Kidd, Lebron, and Jordan do, and, while your team has a couple guys who can really boost chemistry (Pierce, Duncan, Mutumbo), it also has a host of cancers (Artest, Rasheed, Webber), as well as a couple of guys who sometimes really help a team's chemistry but sometimes hurt it (Shaq, Payton).
With Lebron you pointed out one season and used that as how he would play. Why can't I do the same and say that Artest, Webber, and Rasheed wouldn't all be on their best behavior as well? The same with Shaq and Duncan. You can't have it both ways. Either you judge on how guys played over their entire careers, which reduces Lebron's stature significantly, or you use them at their best, which eliminates any character or chemistry questions on my team. It would also allow me to use years when Pippen and Payton were particularly lethal at hitting 3's and spreading the floor.
I guess my point is, don't judge Lebron solely on how he's been this season, but on his average performance over his relatively short career.
Quote:
By the way, LL, you'd garner a lot more respect from the voters if you had a more level-headed approach to this discussion, and understood that sometimes people have differing opinions from each other, rather than the "I'm right, and if you don't see that then fuck you!" attitude that you have been employing.
I hardly ever swear, and my approach is hard nosed but doesn't consist of personal attacks. I will admit I was annoyed at how this ended and threw a little tantrum. It was the end of a bad day, and I apologize if I offended you.
I post to debate points and go back and forth. That's why I wanted to do this competition so much. When nobody adresses the reasoning I present and say things like "KC has Jordan who always wins" it gets under your skin after awhile.
Linear Mode
