Is Steph winning his fourth Finals putting Lebron Era to the back burner for the 00s

[murksiderock]

It has never been about how many championships a player has.
It has always been about how many times were you the undisputed driving force to win the championship.

Kobe may have 5 but he was only the driving force for 2 of them. While Hakeem only has 2 but he was the driving force for both of them. So Kobe and Hakeem are comparable on the all time list. Some people have Hakeem in their top 10 and leave Kobe out others put Kobe in and leave Hakeem out.

Steph has only been the undisputed driving force for one championship. So by winning another championship he cements himself as a top 15 player.
Steph needs to go back to back to become top 10.

15 players have won multiple times (at least twice) as the best players on championship rosters. The only three of those 15, who aren't considered Top 15, are Cowens, Zeke, and Mikan---->in place of Oscar, West, and Karl Malone who are viewed as Top 15 going into this season...

Steph is already Top 15 in many people's eyes, and Top 20 to virtually everyone, so yeah locking in a second title run as the best player erases any doubt he's a Top 15 GOAT. Again 80% (12 of 15) players to lead those runs are Top 15, getting that second one pretty much locks you into it...

We'll see how it goes next week but he's Top 15 as we currently stand for me...

 

[Th3Birdman]

My take:

What deads the "can Curry surpass Bron historically" conversation is LeBron had a HOF career before Curry even became Curry, circa 2013 or '14. Even of someone says Steph and Bron are equals since that time, which is still debatable, there is no equalizer period for 2003-14. What Curry's done since '14 has created a formidable resume on his own merits, and very much could be equal to LeBron's since then, but it isn't touching LeBron's entire body of work...

I definitely think that you're overstating the relevance of the Finals MVP. The MVP is the high dollar award, most guys who won an MVP didn't win the FMVP either because they never made a Finals or lost when they got there. Just within the last 10 years we have '15 Iggy and '14 Kawhi winning it, essentially making it the "who guarded LeBron" award and neither were the best players for their teams that season. I'm a huge Tony Parker Stan, but he won it in '07 for exploiting that terrible Cleveland backcourt, not because he was SA's best player...

Pierce won it in '08 when during the season Garnett was the 3rd place MVP finisher that year. Was Chauncey really the best player on the '04 Pistons? Did he even have the best series? That's five examples in the last 18 years...

What's happened now since it became the Who Gaurded LeBron Award, is it took on an elevated stature of accomplishment that it really didn't have before 2014. I'm definitely not saying that FMVP never mattered bruh, because it did, but it's overstated now and calling it the most important award is hyperbolic ...

The Bron and Kobe thing was deaded 6 years ago to everyone besides Anti-LeBron's. And to me, you can boil down their comparison simply to this:

•Kobe had a 7-year head start, but every mile marker along the way, Bron was the better player. Rookie Kobe vs Rookie Bron, Y2 Kobe vs Y2 Bron, Y3 Kobe vs Y3 Bron, etc. There isn't a single season of Kobe's career that he was a better player than Bron at the exact same point of his. That has to matter and it matters to me greatly;

•we saw them overlap careers for 13 years, 2003-2016, which for added context, that's the exact amount of time we've currently seen Bron and Steph overlap (2009-present). In that time frame, not only did Bron have the H2H winning record (16-6), he generally performed better, and beats Kobe everywhere relevant from efficiency to traditional stats to advance stats to MVPs (4-1), FMVPs (3-2), Finals appearances (7-4), conference finals appearances (8-4), All-NBA accolades, and of course, the LOB (3-2)...

We all saw these dudes play in the sane exact league for 13 years, same rules, same opponents. One of these guys clearly dominated to a degree higher than the other and it just wasn't close. Kobe guys on here have tried to argue that you have to exclude the latter years he was post-prime but ignore that you'd have to do the same and exclude the years Bron was pre-prime, and it still doesn't change the end result. We saw these guys at the same time for over a dozen years, it wasn't close, that's a helluva sample size...

.........

I've gone down the minutiae with these dudes before but you can sum up the Bron/Kobe thing with those two points, I dont think the FMVP is relevant to the convo at all. And it ceased even being debatable once Bron closed the door in '16...

Also, I'm younger (33 next week, been watching NBA since '99), so I never saw Mike plays besides Wizards Mike. I think he's the only legitimate historical threat for Bron as greatest ever, and most people agree they are 1 and 2, bit where I divert is I have Bron over Mike. Greater floor-raiser, better defender peak-for-peak, better all-around player, more iconic playoff moments (Mike is the only person in the convo for greatest playoff performer ever), and Bron was all of these things in a more complex and talented NBA----->the same reason heads prop Mike over Russell...

Most people disagree and obviously have Mike at 1, I'm cool with that and certainly see the logic, but for the reasons I stated it's Bron for me!

I have to respectfully agree to disagree.

I can certainly see where you are coming from-- LeBron is in many ways a superior basketball player to Michael; LeBron shoots a higher percentage from three, he's a significantly better playmaker and rebounder, he's taller, stronger, faster in a game that rewards the taller, stronger and faster players. LeBron is my favorite athlete ever, and actually, I don't like Michael that much as a person. I think he's an overly sensitive a$$hole, that we romanticize due to nostalgia.

That being said, there is something to be said for winning. Earlier, I made the case that LeBron's finals losses have context that is being ignored by the public at large. You and I both understand this. But Jordan has 6 Finals with all six of those having him as the driving force behind those titles (FMVPs).

Me? Once LeBron wins six titles with six FMVPs, Jordan has nothing over him anymore. As I said earlier, losses do not count, only victories do-- this argument also works against Jordan's favor because he played in the NBA for 15 years, but only won 6 times. That means his 6-0 record is really 6-9, because he didn't win every year. It's silly when we put it like that, but that's what haters want to do: count losses. It is disingenuous to ONLY count Finals because it ignores every other time Michael failed at his goal. These nikkas want to act like 1985-1990 never happened.

LeBron has him in basically every other record-- points, assists, rebounds, you name it, LeBron has it. Stupid ass metrics like slam dunk champion and the like are irrelevant to who was the better basketball player. Mike has DPoY, LeBron has him beat in other areas like all-time assists, longevity and points. People like to ignore what makes LeBron great, and only focus on what he doesn't have with respect to Jordan.

I said all that to say this: Finals MVPs are quite literally the most valuable pieces of jewelry an NBA player can have. It says that you were the most valuable piece and the driving force en route to the most important goal of the season: winning that title. There are outliers like Kawhi and Iguodala winning FMVP, simply because they were guarding LeBron (which is literally another positive case in Bron's favor; you literally won FMVP because you were guarding LeBron. That speaks to LeBron's greatness). But generally speaking, the best player on the winning team wins FMVP, so the metric is solid.

I can't give the ranking to LeBron yet, because although I understand the context behind his Ls, I need him to have the hardware so that I can in good conscience argue that LeBron did at least everything Jordan did. If Jordan is the measuring stick, LeBron still has a little work left to do, in my opinion. Get these last two chips, and it's on and cracking

 

[KidJSoul]

You probably thought you were cooking with this. My friend, you didn't say anything that contradicted my points. Curry played on an excellent team-- that's not facing adversity, which was my thesis.

LeBron faced that team; that's facing adversity.

Do you not see the difference between those two situations? One was the roadblock, one faced the roadblock. One of these is more difficult.


Bruh, I did not ignore anything. The point is that Steph's teammates compliment him in a way that makes the game far easier for him. He has unselfish teammates that will spend the entire game setting screens for him, and making extra passes just to get him the ball. Compare that with Westbrook for the Lakers this year, who not only has a non-complementary style for LeBron, he's actually a detriment to LeBron, causing the Lakers to lose possessions with bone-headed play.

Steph does not have to worry about this with Dray and Klay (and Iggy, and Poole, and Wiggins, and Durant, and Livingston, etc. the list goes on)

Sidenote: you don't seem to be understanding my points AT ALL, because you are saying and replying to things that I never said. What in my post made you think I was "ignoring the flaws of his teammates?" What?



This is half true. LeBron presents a unique challenge for coaches (his), in that you either play Dwight Howard from 2009 ball, or you have LeBron play hero ball and hope for the best.

This has obviously had mixed results, but if you're giving me 4 championships out of that, I'm taking it every single time. Contrary to popular hater belief, losses do not count, only championships do, and let the haters tell it, you wouldn't think LeBron had a single one.

Contrast this with Curry's game, and he hasn't yet matched LeBron in titles. So on one hand you've got a smoother experience as a coach and teammate, but one is winning more. Both work for me, but again, LeBron has been to the Finals more, won more, and has 4 Finals MVPs to show for it-- results speak for themselves.

Geez, I'm not misunderstanding anything.

The reason why I'm saying you're ignoring Curry's teammates flaws is that you're saying that Stephen hasn't faced adversity and LeBron has....

And that's misleading because to say that would mean you are willfully ignoring things.

Curry's adversity - 2019, KD is hurt, his depth is weak. Beats Houston in game 6 dropping 33 in the second half, SWEEPS Portland who a lotta people thought would be a challenge by averaging a record 36ppg, and then lost to Toronto in 6 after KD and Klay went down, averaging 30ppg being boxed and one.

And guess what? I still wasn't impressed with Curry in that Toronto series, but guess what? How's that any worse than LeBron losing in 6 in 2015, or losing in 5 to the Spurs when Wade and Bosh got hurt?

Again, Curry playing with 6'9 forward who barely shoots and needs his shooters to constantly cut, is difficult. Draymond's offense is a product of Steph. Steph having to carry Dray's offense is adversity.

You're gonna bring up unselfish teammates who run screens? When Curry runs around like hell, and is the consummate professional unself leader?

That's not getting into the fact that the Warriors were terrible when he got there - 1 playoff appearance in the previous 15 years - and his ankle injuries too.

Anyway, I'm not saying that Curry is better than LeBron. Even if Curry ties him in rings, he isn't better. But I don't think it'll be stupid to argue Steph, even if I still think Bron will be better.

And again, for the record, I understand that Celeveland didn't build well around LeBron early on. But from 2010 onwards? You have to put some of this on LeBron and his playstyle.

If the Lakers had kept KCP, Caruso, etc. And signed regular role players like Otto Porter-esque players, they literally could have been like this iteration of the Warriors.

But at the end of the day, LeBron has been opting to blow teams up and get borderline superstars - and there's a reason he's doing that. And it's because his playstyle - despite how excellent of a floor raiser it is, despite how consistently great it is, at the end of the day, will still need another couple superstars to bring home a chip with.

You're gonna really bring up Westbrook as adversity, when LeBron is the one who wanted him on board because he didn't want to play with a regular organic team.

Look at Luka. Luka wouldn't win with this Golden State group. Is he gonna make Draymond and Looney stand on the corner to shoot 3s

It's easy for Curry to have good depth that plays well (which you are still overrating) because Curry's style of play objectively makes it easy for others to get into a rhythm and excel. It makes it easy to build around.

Look at GP2 and Draymond. They are not good scorers. But it's okay, because Curry makes up for that. Golden state has great roster flexibility because they can get 1-way defensive players, since those players scoring can be masked by Curry. @murksiderock

You see what I'm getting at? It's not as simple to say "Curry has a lot of help, he's lucky to have so much help and face little adversity!", but you're ignoring how Curry plays into that.

Again, I'll still have LeBron ahead if Curry wins, but at a certain point I don't think the gap between Curry and LeBron will be as large as yall think.

We know Curry had help, and got Durant. We also know LeBron got Wade and Bosh and Love and Kyrie and Anthony Davis. That's what we'll remember.

 

[Trojan 24]

These boys losing they shyt at just the thought of Steph getting 4. The gravity

 

[Th3Birdman]

WHEN U CONSTANTLY SON WEIRDOS WHO CONSIDER LEBRON THEIR DADDY WIT FACTS, A LOT OF TIMES THEYLL GET IN THEIR FEELINGS AND RESORT TO NEGGING WHEN U PUT THEM AT A LOSS FOR WORDS. EACH NEG REPRESENTS A VICTORY.

Sccit, I have lurked this forum for about 7 years. I have personally seen you say the most outlandish shyt someone could say, especially in the Laker gameday threads.

At some point, you have to sit back and think, "Damn, nikka, I'm in the negative 19,000s. Maybe it's me"

But nah, you think it's because you have been winning the arguments. Fam, if people have negged you over nineteen thousand times, it's time to reflect.



And thanks for the welcome. I'm still on yo ass

 

[Th3Birdman]

The reason why I'm saying you're ignoring Curry's teammates flaws is that you're saying that Stephen hasn't faced adversity and LeBron has....

Except that is NOT what I said.

Here is what I actually said:

It's frustrating as hell, and although I've seen Curry face adversity, he has NEVER faced the kind of adversity as Bron

^^That is literally me stating I've SEEN him face adversity, just not at the level LeBron has. This right here is why I said you are not comprehending what I'm saying to you bruh.

You're gonna really bring up Westbrook as adversity, when LeBron is the one who wanted him on board because he didn't want to play with a regular organic team

What does wanting a player on your team have to do with finding out he isn't a great fit for you? You guys keep bringing that up as if that absolves Westbrook from being a bad player.

Let me give you an analogy: you're hungry so you want a meal from McDonald's or some other fast food joint. You go buy some nuggets, but they're undercooked and bland, so they aren't fullfulling.

How is it YOUR fault that the cooks didn't do their job? All you did was order food-- it was up to the cooks to provide you with at least a competent meal?

The analogy is this: LeBron thought Westbrook would be able to run the offense when he was on the bench. It turns out that Brook regressed as a basketball player. That is NOT LeBron's fault. He didn't make that nikka launch 15 footers that hit the top of the goddamn backboard

 

[Sccit]

Sccit, I have lurked this forum for about 7 years. I have personally seen you say the most outlandish shyt someone could say, especially in the Laker gameday threads.

At some point, you have to sit back and think, "Damn, nikka, I'm in the negative 19,000s. Maybe it's me"

But nah, you think it's because you have been winning the arguments. Fam, if people have negged you over nineteen thousand times, it's time to reflect.



And thanks for the welcome. I'm still on yo ass

LURKIN A FORUM FOR 7 YEARS WITOUT POSTIN? DEEZAMN .. YEA U ON MY ASS ALRIGHT

OF COURSE U GUNA THINK I SAY OUTLANDISH THINGS WHEN U A CASUAL WHO BELIEVES LEBRON IS ACTUALLY ON THAT GOAT LEVEL… MOST BASKETBALL FANS ARE CASUALS DRIVEN BY A MEDIA AGENDA, HENCE WHY 80% OF THE FORUM THINKS WHAT I SAY IS “OUTLANDISH”..

BUT SINCE U BEEN LURKIN FOR 7 YEARS, U KNOW I AINT HERE FOR THAT.. IM HERE FOR THE 20%- THE REAL ONES. GETTIN THE 80% RILED UP IS JUST A BYPRODUCT OF WHAT I DO YOUNG’N.

 

[Sccit]

Except that is NOT what I said.

Here is what I actually said:



^^That is literally me stating I've SEEN him face adversity, just not at the level LeBron has. This right here is why I said you are not comprehending what I'm saying to you bruh.




What does wanting a player on your team have to do with finding out he isn't a great fit for you? You guys keep bringing that up as if that absolves Westbrook from being a bad player.

Let me give you an analogy: you're hungry so you want a meal from McDonald's or some other fast food joint. You go buy some nuggets, but they're undercooked and bland, so they aren't fullfulling.

How is it YOUR fault that the cooks didn't do their job? All you did was order food-- it was up to the cooks to provide you with at least a competent meal?

The analogy is this: LeBron thought Westbrook would be able to run the offense when he was on the bench. It turns out that Brook regressed as a basketball player. That is NOT LeBron's fault. He didn't make that nikka launch 15 footers that hit the top of the goddamn backboard

EVERYBODY REGRESSES WIT LEBRON

THATS KINDA THE POINT HERE

 

[GPBear]

That doesn't mean Curry hadn't had an impact

.....

Steph is the reason why it's normal to see guys pull up from the logo. Why it's normal for literally everyone to pull up and shoot the three off the dribble instead of just dudes having the hot hand. He showed you could acutally win a chip with a 3pt shooting guard as your best player. He normalized shyt that was frowned upon.

wow for a guy with no impact, he certainly seems to have had an impact

 

[GPBear]

EVERYBODY REGRESSES WIT LEBRON

THATS KINDA THE POINT HERE

for all we disagree on, at least we see eye-to-eye on that

mf'er started a superteam with the sole purpose of winning "not 5... not 6..."

then got stomped out repeatedly, sent crying back to cleveland


lucky shot by ray, lucky shot by kyrie... without those 2 lucky shots, Lebron would only have 2 rings.
Without AD, that goes down to only 1 ring the one where the super-stacked Heat beat the OKC Thunder.
That's his legacy. That and the JR Smith freethrow line debacle.

 

[GPBear]

This is casual history by fans. Steph is not the reason the league shoots more 3pts.


In 2014 the Rockets led the league with 2179 3pt attempts. Steph and the Warriors were back in 6th place.

In 2015 the Rockets set a new record with 2680 3pt attempts, the first team to shoot 30+ threes a game (nearly 33/game). Warriors were in 4th.

In 2016 the Warriors and Rockets were neck-and-neck, with Warriors edging them out 31.6 threes/game to 30.9.

2017 the Rockets blew the Warriors out of the water with over 40 threes/game, another record. Warriors were way back in 5th again.

2018 the Rockets broke their own record averaging 42 threes/game. Warriors were all the way back in SIXTEENTH place, yet won the title.

2019 the Rockets hit a new level with 45 threes/game. Bucks had 38, Hawks and Mavs 37, Nets 36....Warriors all the way back in 8th place.



Steph was the face for casuals because he's so good. But NBA teams weren't copying Steph, no one could copy Steph because they don't shoot like Steph. And the Warriors don't spam threes like that, they've only been top-3 in 3pt attempts once in Steph's entire tenure. NBA teams shoot more threes due to analytics, and if they're copying anyone they're copying the #1 analytics team - the Houston Rockets. That's why their offenses look like Houston's offense, they don't look like Golden State's offense.

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

yea, and how many of those threes were the rockets making?

run and gun has been a thing since the introduction of the 3-point line. Don Nelson, UNLV, etc. all did that strategy.

Steph was the first person to make it work. That's the difference.

You have to be blinded by hate to think that Steph isn't the reason people shoot more threes now.

The rockets, for example, shot a lot of threes - but they weren't making them. We all saw them miss 27 three pointers in a row, or are you too casual to remember that WCF

You're the one that's bringing up casual ass arguments if you're trying to equate the two strategies just because they had high volume of three point attempts.

The warriors revolved around passing and open-floor schemes, which resulted in made 3 pointers by ungodly shooting by Steph/Klay.
The rockets shot a lot of threes because Harden was flopping like a soccer player and fishing for fouls.
Two completely different strategies, and the Warriors' with Kerr's bulls-inspired offense are clearly the team that's influenced the league, and beyond with even highschool kids trying to shoot like that.

Meanwhile, nobody's trying to replicate Harden's flopping bs man's a shell of his former self now that the league stopped calling those bs fouls and he's withering away in obscurity in the East.


but keep telling yourself the warriors didnt change the game just because the 1990 Nuggets shot a lot of 3's too

"Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf is just as influential as Steph Curry "

 

[Th3Birdman]

LURKIN A FORUM FOR 7 YEARS WITOUT POSTIN? DEEZAMN .. YEA U ON MY ASS ALRIGHT

OF COURSE U GUNA THINK I SAY OUTLANDISH THINGS WHEN U A CASUAL WHO BELIEVES LEBRON IS ACTUALLY ON THAT GOAT LEVEL… MOST BASKETBALL FANS ARE CASUALS DRIVEN BY A MEDIA AGENDA, HENCE WHY 80% OF THE FORUM THINKS WHAT I SAY IS “OUTLANDISH”..

BUT SINCE U BEEN LURKIN FOR 7 YEARS, U KNOW I AINT HERE FOR THAT.. IM HERE FOR THE 20%- THE REAL ONES. GETTIN THE 80% RILED UP IS JUST A BYPRODUCT OF WHAT I DO YOUNG’N.

The Coli was the only space I could hear us (Black men) speak their piece. This place is funny as hell, so it was entertaining watching you nikkas go at it.

It was also frustrating as hell for me, a natural born argumentative person, to see some of the asinine shyt you all be saying. Like the folk who sit here and say if you mixed, you ain't Black, or when Civic got in his flat earth bag. So I really don't see what's so bad about lurking this forum for so long, especially since I finally made it in



And one thing you need to know about me is ain't NOTHING casual about me, my dude. I have lived and breathed basketball for the past 27 years (I'm in my 30s), and most of what you see me post is from memory. I have excellent recall when it comes to basketball. You remember that one time LeBron was getting some buzz when he recalled exactly what happened in a game?


I can do that exact same thing. It's called an eidetic memory, something I also have but on the lower end of the scale. Here is me (yes me) doing exactly that, live on my livestream ( just click play, I have timestamped it for you):

 

[Sccit]

The Coli was the only space I could hear us (Black men) speak their piece. This place is funny as hell, so it was entertaining watching you nikkas go at it.

It was also frustrating as hell for me, a natural born argumentative person, to see some of the asinine shyt you all be saying. Like the folk who sit here and say if you mixed, you ain't Black, or when Civic got in his flat earth bag. So I really don't see what's so bad about lurking this forum for so long, especially since I finally made it in



And one thing you need to know about me is ain't NOTHING casual about me, my dude. I have lived and breathed basketball for the past 27 years (I'm in my 30s), and most of what you see me post is from memory. I have excellent recall when it comes to basketball. You remember that one time LeBron was getting some buzz when he recalled exactly what happened in a game?


I can do that exact same thing. It's called an eidetic memory, something I also have but on the lower end of the scale. Here is me (yes me) doing exactly that, live on my livestream ( just click play, I have timestamped it for you):

THATS DOPE..HOPE U ARE ABLE TO UTILIZE THAT SKILL IN PROPER FASHION. U DONT SEEM AS FUNNYSTYLE AS SOME OF THE OTHER BRON APOLOGISTS ON HERE, SO ILL KICK BACK N PLAY IT BY EAR.

 

[KidJSoul]

Except that is NOT what I said.

Here is what I actually said:



^^That is literally me stating I've SEEN him face adversity, just not at the level LeBron has. This right here is why I said you are not comprehending what I'm saying to you bruh.




What does wanting a player on your team have to do with finding out he isn't a great fit for you? You guys keep bringing that up as if that absolves Westbrook from being a bad player.

Let me give you an analogy: you're hungry so you want a meal from McDonald's or some other fast food joint. You go buy some nuggets, but they're undercooked and bland, so they aren't fullfulling.

How is it YOUR fault that the cooks didn't do their job? All you did was order food-- it was up to the cooks to provide you with at least a competent meal?

The analogy is this: LeBron thought Westbrook would be able to run the offense when he was on the bench. It turns out that Brook regressed as a basketball player. That is NOT LeBron's fault. He didn't make that nikka launch 15 footers that hit the top of the goddamn backboard

Fine I misquoted you on the adversity shyt but you get my point. It's closer than you think.

And that McDonald's analogy is poor. Lebron getting another superstar is the point.

And you ignored everything else I said.

 

[KidJSoul]

wow for a guy with no impact, he certainly seems to have had an impact

Breh reread my post again... we're on the same page lol