LeBron has now lost 4 Finals series

Kaypain

#SuicideGang
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
34,907
Reputation
8,926
Daps
92,910
The bum ass Cavs? He picked them. How does he get a pass for that team, when he went there on his own accord?
Dumbass nikka keeps saying this shyt

Im pretty sure if he wanted to really hand pick his team he wouldn't have picked up Shump and JR

I'm pretty sure if luck was on his side, Kyrie, Love, and Varijao would be 100%

:camby:
 

Dr. Narcisse

Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2014
Messages
50,915
Reputation
11,532
Daps
168,304
Dont remind me man. Titles were left on the table here in the sunshine state :snoop:. Runs that historic aren't supposed to last just 4 years.
:francis:

Shame is Cleveland got the most aggressive Bron ever too. Just Wade being on the floor means a title was there. Then add Whiteside/Goran

:whoa: to anybody. I thought going to Cleveland was a good move as well. But its the long term/short term decision he had to make. Almost pulled it off this year too. Bron probably was looking at these cats :why:. About how they need to get they playoff weight up and be able to stay on the floor.
 

William F. Russell

11x Champion; 5x MVP; 1st Black Coach
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
20,063
Reputation
6,805
Daps
50,323
Nah Breh I'm saying Oscars numbers are inflated cause it was a track meet in the 60s. I agree Lebron is MUCH better, my argument is for him.

OK, dead this "60s was less competitive" argument. If anything, the 60s era was arguably the most competitive era (an argument can be made for the 90s).

The 60s had 9 or 10 teams in the NBA, meaning only the best of the NCAA and NIT players made it to the NBA. There were no expansion teams and the league's talent pool wasn't diluted with unproven college players, high school players or players from overseas. Only the best made it to the NBA back then. Compare that with today's league where there are numerous expansion teams and college players averaging 20 mins a game and players in inferior leagues overseas get drafted en masse. If anything the level of competition got worse throughout the league because more players are able to make the league.

Also each team played each other very frequently. This is important when you consider the fact that the 60s has the highest concentration of HOF players for any era in the NBA's history. Those HOF players included: Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West, Tommy Heinsohn, Wes Unseld, Elvin Hayes, Elgin Baylor, Bob Cousy, Willis Reed, Oscar Robertson, Bob Lanier, Bob McAdoo, Bob Pettit, Hal Greer, Nate Thurmond, Jerry Lucas, David Bing, Walt Bellamy, Frank Ramsey, Bill Sharman, Dave Debusschere, Dolph Schayes, and John Havlicek. I challenge you to find another decade in the league's history that had that many HOFers playing at the same time. Having all these HOF players on 9 teams clearly means that the competition was very fierce on a nightly basis.

Moreover, the 50s-60s era was bush league. Referees were looked the other way when players fouled each other (inadvertently, intentionally, or flagrantly). The league back then made the Bad Boy Pistons look like choir boys. The players also played without any medical staff available on the sidelines for injuries the players suffered while playing. Example: Bill Russell played with a busted eye socket during the NBA Finals. And let's not forget the racial hostility that existed during the 50s and 60s that certainly impacted the league.

Look it's perfectly fine if you wish not to include certain players from the 50s and 60s in your top 10 because you never saw them play. But when you say that the 60s wasn't a competitive era, you lose all credibility for evaluating players from different eras.

Stop spewing that "60s wasn't competitive" bullshyt.
 
Last edited:

LexDiamonds

Superstar
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
3,489
Reputation
865
Daps
14,466
Reppin
Toronto
OK, dead this "60s was less competitive" argument. If anything, the 60s era was arguably the most competitive era (an argument can be made for the 90s).

The 60s had 9 or 10 teams in the NBA, meaning only the best of the NCAA and NIT players made it to the NBA. There were no expansion teams and the league's talent pool wasn't diluted with unproven college players, high school players or players from overseas. Only the best made it to the NBA back then. Compare that with today's league where there are numerous expansion teams and college players averaging 20 mins a game and players in inferior leagues overseas get drafted en masse. If anything the level of competition got worse throughout the league because more players are able to make the league.

Also each team played each other very frequently. This is important when you consider the fact that the 60s has the highest concentration of HOF players for any era in the NBA's history. Those HOF players included: Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, Jerry West, Tommy Heinsohn, Wes Unseld, Elvin Hayes, Elgin Baylor, Bob Cousy, Willis Reed, Oscar Robertson, Bob Lanier, Bob McAdoo, Bob Pettit, Hal Greer, Nate Thurmond, Jerry Lucas, David Bing, Walt Bellamy, Frank Ramsey, Bill Sharman, Dave Debusschere, Dolph Schayes, and John Havlicek. I challenge you to find another decade in the league's history that had that many all-stars playing at the same time. Having all these HOF players on 9 teams clearly means that the competition was very fierce on a nightly basis.

Moreover, the 50s-60s era was bush league. Referees were looked the other way when players fouled each other (inadvertently, intentionally, or flagrantly). The league back then made the Bad Boy Pistons look like choir boys. The players also played without any medical staff available on the sidelines for injuries the players suffered while playing. Example: Bill Russell played with a busted eye socket during the NBA Finals. And let's not forget the racial hostility that existed during the 50s and 60s that certainly impacted the league.

Look it's perfectly fine if you wish not to include certain players from the 50s and 60s in your top 10 because you never saw them play. But when you say that the 60s wasn't a competitive era, you lose all credibility for evaluating players from different eras.

Stop spewing that "60s wasn't competitive" bullshyt.

It was competitive, but I'm saving you can't compare raw averages between eras without adjusting the pace. The pace in the 60's was much much faster than it is today. It was run and gun while today is more half court.
 

William F. Russell

11x Champion; 5x MVP; 1st Black Coach
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
20,063
Reputation
6,805
Daps
50,323
Dumbass nikka keeps saying this shyt

Im pretty sure if he wanted to really hand pick his team he wouldn't have picked up Shump and JR

I'm pretty sure if luck was on his side, Kyrie, Love, and Varijao would be 100%

:camby:

But LeBron did handpick JR and Shump while he was on his 2-week "vacation" and was seen at Knicks games shortly before the Cavs added them to the team. He was also responsible for recruiting James Jones, Shawn Marion, Kendrick Perkins, and Mike Miller.

Ain't no 2 ways around it: LeBron was playing GM
 

William F. Russell

11x Champion; 5x MVP; 1st Black Coach
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
20,063
Reputation
6,805
Daps
50,323
It was competitive, but I'm saving you can't compare raw averages between eras without adjusting the pace. The pace in the 60's was much much faster than it is today. It was run and gun while today is more half court.

Pace is arbitrary and ultimately insignificant. You can argue both ways how a half-court offense improves players' stats or hurts players' stats. Same thing for run and gun offenses. And the modern league has teams that run differently paced offenses. Pace is a cop-out excuse.
 

LexDiamonds

Superstar
Joined
May 26, 2012
Messages
3,489
Reputation
865
Daps
14,466
Reppin
Toronto
Pace is arbitrary and ultimately insignificant. You can argue both ways how a half-court offense improves players' stats or hurts players' stats. Same thing for run and gun offenses. And the modern league has teams that run differently paced offenses. Pace is a cop-out excuse.

So you're saying Baylor is better than Kobe since his raw averages are higher?

He shot low 40%'s and didn't win. I don't see any argument for him to be even considered as a top 20 player anyway you can slice it.
 

William F. Russell

11x Champion; 5x MVP; 1st Black Coach
Supporter
Joined
Oct 5, 2014
Messages
20,063
Reputation
6,805
Daps
50,323
So you're saying Baylor is better than Kobe since his raw averages are higher?

He shot low 40%'s and didn't win. I don't see any argument for him to be even considered as a top 20 player anyway you can slice it.

That's not what I'm saying. What I am saying is that we have to accept each player's stats as they are, regardless of the eras they played in.
 

Kaypain

#SuicideGang
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
34,907
Reputation
8,926
Daps
92,910
do you even know how to do proportions dummy? Its 2:4

Were you sleeping in chemistry? You dont remember dilutions?

You cookin like chef curry but dont know how to dilute the sauce?

a 1:100 dilution is 1 ounce of tomato sauce to 99 ounces of water

:snoop:

2-4 = 2 wins to 4 losses. Ratios are not the same as fractions
It's all about variables
 

Ohene

Free Sheist
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
72,682
Reputation
6,100
Daps
124,893
Reppin
Toronto
Exactly, I like how everyone is gonna act like a lot of us didn't even expect them to make it to the finals in the first year. Anything to bash him though :manny:
lol if you didnt expect it thats on yall.

there was literally NO OTHER CAPABLE TEAM in the East when it came to making the finals. This is especially true considering nobody thought the Hawks would be good. Wizards? Raptors? Nets....what other teams could've possibly madeit out the easy :patrice:?
 
Top