There's A Difference Between The GOAT And YOUR GOAT

[Stuntone]

Lebron the Goat. Kawhi is my favorite.

 

[Art Barr]

WELL PUT YOUNG LADY










​

Shuts all you new guys completely up.



Art Barr

 

[GreatestLaker]

The 6-0 record indicates 100% u fckin’ moron…..sorry to hit a nerve. Get ‘Brons d!ck outta your mouth before typing b!tch. By your crack head logic the only conclusion is the 6-1 player has a FACTUALLY better conference finals record, no FINALS record. Reading is fundamental bruh. Go to sleep, you have middle school in the AM

Are you slow? This is one of the dumbest sports take i've read.

Going by your logic losing in the first round is better than making the finals and not winning.

 

[GreatestLaker]

If you lose in the conf finals then your team didn’t have a chance to win a chip. If your team get to the title game then you get to showcase how great you are if you can close and if not then the loss goes on your title record.

What the fukk did I just read?

We got a lot of special needs people on thecoli.

 

[Mʀ2ᴋDᴇᴇᴢ]

I think I just fell in love. I’ve always said MY GOAT is Kobe. But yeah the GOAT is MJ. It is what it is.

This

 

[fifth column]

What the fukk did I just read?

We got a lot of special needs people on thecoli.

Define read? Maybe you did something else

 

[fifth column]

Are you slow? This is one of the dumbest sports take i've read.

Going by your logic losing in the first round is better than making the finals and not winning.

Losing in the 1st round means your team is not a title contender, losing in the finals means your team had a chance to win but you couldn’t close. Smarten up

Nobody brings up great players 1st round records because common sense tells us their team wasn’t a title contender.

 

[broller]

Are you slow? This is one of the dumbest sports take i've read.

Going by your logic losing in the first round is better than making the finals and not winning.

What the fukk did I just read?

We got a lot of special needs people on thecoli.

I'm saying.

 

[fifth column]

I'm saying.

other than Bronsexuals bringing up MJ losing in the 1st round with a trash team in his 1st few years in the NBA, which other great player get their 1st round record brought up?

It’s simple, once your team is good enough to contend in the finals then you should win more than you lose.

 

[GreatestLaker]

Losing in the 1st round means your team is not a title contender, losing in the finals means your team had a chance to win but you couldn’t close. Smarten up

Nobody brings up great players 1st round records because common sense tells us their team wasn’t a title contender.

Few things.

You could be a title contender but still lose in the first round if you got a bad match up. The 07 Mavs beats every other team in the NBA besides the Warriors. The 2002 Nets wouldn't have beaten any of the West contenders. They went through a historical weak eastern conference. Literally no one in real time had them winning title against anyone.

Going by your logic the 2001 Iverson led Sixers would have been better off losing to the Pacers in the first round than losing to the Lakers in the finals.

 

[fifth column]

Few things.

You could be a title contender but still lose in the first round if you got a bad match up. The 07 Mavs beats every other team in the NBA besides the Warriors. The 2002 Nets wouldn't have beaten any of the West contenders. The got through a historical weak eastern conference. Literally no one in real time had them winning title against anyone.

Going by your logic the 2001 Iverson led Sixers would have been better losing to the Pacers in the first round than losing to the Lakers in the finals.

By your logic the 2004 Pistons had no chance against Shaq and Kobe. Like I said, once your team is good enough to get to the finals then you have a chance to contend for the title.

If the 2001 sixers lost in the 1st round then history would tell us that they weren’t title contenders.

Title contenders are ranked separate of 1st round exit teams so there is no correlation. Is it better to have a $100 problem or have a $1 million problem, depends on how much money you have

 

[Treblemaka]

I don't get involved in these Jordan vs whoever conversations anymore because not much I'm going to say that will convince someone who, imo, is blind to how great Jordan was that he's GOAT. I will say that it's wild that all these years after he retired, ESPN can do a poll where all ages have him as GOAT by a vast margin. This despite Lebron having entire PR teams in the league, media, etc while Jordan just stays silent (hint: If you have to call yourself GOAT it's a huge red flag). Mike said he cringed when people called him GOAT, Lebron "that one right there......"

This PR thing is one problem I have when people bring up this part of the conversation, regardless of whether someone can see that Jordan is the more accomplished athlete on the court (in his prime)

Jordan acted like he thought was the best player in the way he talked to other players and how he treated other people. He just understood PR a little bit better and wanted to appear more humble to the public because vvhites don't like arrogant players and "Republicans buy sneakers too."

Lebron might have a PR team but Jordan had an entire F500 athletic company that grew to be the largest in the world that had a vested interest in him being percieved as the best. Nike did everything they could and ran as much PR as they could to make him look as good as possible. Jordan had Sneakers and a Brand that at the time had never been done on that scale and was ground breaking. The NBA also put alot of Marketing behind Jordan and making him look unassailable at the time. None of his degeneracy or fuk ups ever were more than a blip in the news (which at the time wasn't anywhere near what it is today), and I barely remember him getting roasted when he had down games after he came into his prime.

There's not a single company that has had a vested interest in marketing Lebron as the GOAT the way Jordan had.

 

[fifth column]

This PR thing is one problem I have when people bring up this part of the conversation, regardless of whether someone can see that Jordan is the more accomplished athlete on the court (in his prime)

Jordan acted like he thought was the best player in the way he talked to other players and how he treated other people. He just understood PR a little bit better and wanted to appear more humble to the public because vvhites don't like arrogant players and "Republicans buy sneakers too."

Lebron might have a PR team but Jordan had an entire F500 athletic company that grew to be the largest in the world that had a vested interest in him being percieved as the best. Nike did everything they could and ran as much PR as they could to make him look as good as possible. Jordan had Sneakers and a Brand that at the time had never been done on that scale and was ground breaking. The NBA also put alot of Marketing behind Jordan and making him look unassailable at the time. None of his degeneracy or fuk ups ever were more than a blip in the news (which at the time wasn't anywhere near what it is today), and I barely remember him getting roasted when he had down games after he came into his prime.

There's not a single company that has had a vested interest in marketing Lebron as the GOAT the way Jordan had.

MJ’s play on the court might have something to do with it, don’t you thinkboth the NBA and Nike rode MJ’s back to unprecedented prominence. To this day they are still chasing that high

 

[Ozymandeas]

You fukkin idiot. You don't start playing in the finals, so 6-0 in the finals, unless you played only 6 seasons doesn't indicate 100% you buffoon.

You must be casual as fukk because apparently you think the season starts in June.

Move from me you fukkin CAC.

Your logic doesn't make sense. With this logic, Joe Burrow is a better QB than Josh Allen because he made the Superbowl. In the real world, most people put them on the same exact playing field. You don't get brownie points for losing.

 

[Silkk]

Kobe = GOAT


fukk all that other shyt