The Championship only counts if you win Finals MVP?

[Mantis Toboggan M.D.]

Curry should have won FMVP in 2015. 26/5/6 there's only been like 2-3 guys in NBA history to put up those kind of numbers on the winning team and not win it. The media was hell bent on being on LeBron getting it that year so it fukked him over to prove a point

Only 3 guys have done that dating all the way back to the 1998 finals. Kobe did it, LeBron then did it after him and after curry, and of course curry as you mentioned. He absolutely should've been the MVP of the series.

 

[mbewane]

MJ is 6 for 6 in finals...but going by logic he's 6 for 15 in winning chips. The coli has spoken you don't get credit for losing in the 1st round as opposed to the finals Nobody wants to answer how many rings the goat had at Brons age

By this logic Bron is 3 for 14 in winning chips. If I'm correct MJ had as many championships (3) as Bron at age 32, while having played less seasons at that moment. I'm not sure what your point is tho

 

[Illeye buckmatic]

By this logic Bron is 3 for 14 in winning chips. If I'm correct MJ had as many championships (3) as Bron at age 32, while having played less seasons at that moment. I'm not sure what your point is tho

I'm not trying to make a case for Bron as the goat. Never had never will. MJ is the goat to me. But the points Im trying to make are 1)they have the same amount of chips at the same age and 2) Bron losing in the finals is not worse than MJ losing in the early rounds. We have no idea how many chips he will end up with

 

[MalikX]

By this logic Bron is 3 for 14 in winning chips. If I'm correct MJ had as many championships (3) as Bron at age 32, while having played less seasons at that moment. I'm not sure what your point is tho

He's going to slam Jordan for not coming into the league at 18 like Bron did even though that was unheard of in the mid 80s. They think some of LeBron's final losses shouldn't count against him because he was so young.

 

[Illeye buckmatic]

He's going to slam Jordan for not coming into the league at 18 like Bron did even though that was unheard of in the mid 80s. They think some of LeBron's final losses shouldn't count against him because he was so young.

How am I slamming MJ when he's the goat to me

 

[Remote]

Think you can trash Kareem to build up Kobe, brehs.

 

[Ben.]

Magic's 1980 FMVP should be Kareem's

 

[MalikX]

MJ is 6 for 6 in finals...but going by logic he's 6 for 15 in winning chips. The coli has spoken you don't get credit for losing in the 1st round as opposed to the finals Nobody wants to answer how many rings the goat had at Brons age

We don't count Almost-Rings.

Do the Buffalo Bills get props for making the Super Bowl 4 times and never winning? Why should LeBron? Though I'm sure by the time he retires his fan club will have forced the sports world to acknowledge almost-rings and being 2nd place as an accomplishment

 

[Illeye buckmatic]

We don't count Almost-Rings.

Do the Buffalo Bills get props for making the Super Bowl 4 times and never winning? Why should LeBron? Though I'm sure by the time he retires his fan club will have forced the sports world to acknowledge almost-rings and being 2nd place as an accomplishment

Name ONE poster who counted ALMOST rings,just ONE You can't say me cause I said they both have 3 at this point in their careers. You can't say Jordan gets extra credit for getting eliminated in the the 1st instead of the finals An L is an L no matter what round. Jordan is my goat but not for being undefeated in the finals

 

[mbewane]

I'm not trying to make a case for Bron as the goat. Never had never will. MJ is the goat to me. But the points Im trying to make are 1)they have the same amount of chips at the same age and 2) Bron losing in the finals is not worse than MJ losing in the early rounds. We have no idea how many chips he will end up with

Fair enough

I agree they're a somewhat irrational extra "negative" put on losing in the Finals as opposed to in the earlier stages, but I guess one could make the argument that MJ's utter dominance at the highest level compensates those early first round exits. Also from 88-89 he at least reached the Conference Finals every year (except for the comeback year, and I'm not considering the "extra" seasons in Washington neither), so he didn't lose THAT much in the early rounds.

But the main thing ist that its like the Finals is a whole new chapter, what you've before doesn't matter anymore (kind of like the RS doesn't matter once the playoffs start) and you're only judged on those games, you either win or lose, regardless of the fact that you won a damn lot just to get there. 2nd place is always the worst place, even though it's obviously better than 11th. But people see you as the guy who lost on the biggest stage, not as the guy who beat three teams just to get there

But indeed we don't know how many chips Bron will end up with, I wouldn't be surprised if he gets at least two more. I think he's still got at least 5 elite-level years in him.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

You can't set a standard and only apply it to players you want to hate on. You gotta apply that standard to everybody or else it's bullshyt. Using these nikkas logic, Tim Duncan is a top 3 player and is better than Kareem seeing as he has the stats and numbers and "led" his squad to 3 out of 5 Finals vs. Kareem only "leading" his to 2 out of 6.

Except that had NEVER been my standard or anyone else's. I have NEVER said that you should judge someone on Finals MVP alone. EVER.

Duncan isn't even top 10

You're a moron and your Kobe hatred is transparent. That's why your logic is all over the place and changing ever five seconds.

Tim Duncan has way more Rings and Finals MVPs than Wilt Chamberlain yet TD isnt top 10 but Wilt is. So are you really using your own criteria (as you stated, rings, mvps, Finals MVPs) to judge players or are you just moving your logic around every 6 seconds to accommodate for who you wanna prop up and who you don't

I said that Duncan isn't even top ten all time in SCORING. This whole thread is revolving around you not even knowing what other people are saying.

I already said above that that Duncan has an argument for top-five. You seriously can't follow a breh.

We don't count Almost-Rings.

Do the Buffalo Bills get props for making the Super Bowl 4 times and never winning? Why should LeBron? Though I'm sure by the time he retires his fan club will have forced the sports world to acknowledge almost-rings and being 2nd place as an accomplishment

NO ONE gave Lebron credit for "almost rings". They just said that you claim that going 3 for 7 in Finals is worse than going three for three, because by that logic its better to lose in the first round than to make the championship with an inferior team.

 

[IllmaticDelta]

No LeBron stans. Y'all nikkas are retarded.

This logic gets levied everyday against Kobe yet I never see it used against other players when we talk about their legacies.

How does this logic apply to Kareem who has 6 rings and only 2 FMVPs. Does that mean 4 of his rings don't count? (Don't reply to this thread without answering this)

Does Stephen Curry have no rings considering Igoudala took home the MVP that Finals?

if you don't get the finals MVP, it means you were a sidekick

 

[Truefan31]

That's why MJ is goat. There's no doubt, no confusion. 6 for 6 and he was by far the best player every finals. It's crystal clear. He was the best player on the highest stage when the stakes were highest. No arguing over who was fmvp. It was him. Every time.

MJ =GOAT

 

[UpAndComing]

Now answer the question on Kareem Abdul
Jabbar.

He has 6 championships and 2 finals mvps. He's widely considered a top 3-4 player all time by all basketball heads. Using this same silly logic, he's only led his team to 2 rings. The other 4 times he was "carried" by whoever won MVP. Why is this logic not used on him? Explain the discrepancy. If you win 2 FMVPs on 5 rings, you're a bum but if you win 2 FMVPs on 6 rings (which is worse), you're not a bum and considered top 3 all time? Explain that breakdown in logic

To me this premise would be a dumb argument

Seeing that his teammate was Magic Johnson. Jordan, Lebron, or Kobe after Shaq left never had a teammate as talented as Magic to compete for Finals MVP


Curry on the other hand

 

[Street Knowledge]

Kareem was clearly the best player on the first 2 Laker Championship teams.