OT: Bill Simmons article on LeBron
A lot of Simmons's articles get posted on here, and I think for good reason. To me, he's one of the best writers out there (along with Brian, of course...). I think his article on Lebron is insightful to say the least.
One more thought I have on why LeBron doesn't seem to have the killer instinct that Jordan had: remember, LeBron was coronated as a king when he entered the league. He was on the cover of SI when he was in high school. Jordan was cut from his high school team as a sophomore. I think Jordan always carried that "nobody believes in me attitude" his whole career (even when everyone did believe in him). Jordan's HOF induction speech is evidence of that.
For reminding me that Smush Parker was once a starting point guard in the NBA. I still remember seeing the local Fox Sports affiliate do a human interest piece about the customized "Smushcalade" that he rolled around LA in.
One more thing, just because it interests me - that 1996 Magic team they broomed in the Eastern Finals was gross. Shaq, Penny, Anderson, Scott, Grant.
If that's your logic, Zeke missed Bird (they didn't beat the Celtics until Bird missed the entire season, and he was already 32 anyway),
Actually, the Pistons first beat the Celtics in 1988, when Bird was healthy. It was the following year that Bird missed the whole season.
You're rewriting history just as much as you claim everyone else is. Your apparent hatred for Jordan is a little odd. You seem to be claiming that Jordan wouldn't have won the number of championships that he won if the elite players of each decade hadn't retired. I'm sorry, but what? Jordan was one of the elite players for his decade and his abilities and drive (yes, I said drive) pushed him well beyond what Larry and Magic did. Don't get me wrong, they were incredibly important figures in the evolution of the NBA, but there is a reason why Jordan is the undisputed best player of all time.
And really, talking about Jordan being an asshole when you include Isiah freaking Thomas on your list? I see your selection criteria and raise you some logic.
Magic won 5 NBA titles in his initial 12 year run pre-AIDS and made the Finals 9 times. His only losses in the Finals came to the Pistons (after he blew his hamstring early in the series), Bird's Celtics (he went 2-1 against them in the Finals), the Fo-Fo-Fo Sixers with Dr. J and Moses Malone (possibly the most underrated player in NBA history), and Jordan's Bulls after he had contracted freaking AIDS (he tested positive that offseason). Magic was all NBA 9 times and MVP 3 times.
Jordan won six titles in six Finals appearances during his initial 12 full-season run. He was all NBA 10 times and MVP 5 times.
I don't see how any of those numbers for Jordan are "well beyond" what Magic accomplished as a player.
There is also no list. I didn't say Thomas was better than Jordan. I merely pointed out the obvious fact that Jordan never won when the league was filled with strong/deep teams led by HOF players as the Sixers, Lakers, Celtics, and Pistons were in the 80's. The point is important when a player like Lebron is being criticizing for not winning a championship in a situation where Jordan never won one either, since Jordan is being held up as the ultimate example of a winner (the current Lakers and Celtics have far superior overall rosters compared to Lebron's Cavs, just like their 80's counterparts did in comparison to Jordan's Bulls who never won anything at that time).
I'm not sure Jordan is the undisputed best player of all-time. The media jumped on that bandwagon during his career, but many NBA observers have made the case for Wilt Chamberlain. Comparing the two is apples and oranges, obviously.
As for Jordan going beyond what Magic and Bird, there is something to be said for the point that he didn't have a nemesis that he'd be likely to face every year in the Finals, as those two did. The '90s NBA was a little watered-down due to expansion and it resulted in a great deal of parity in the Western Conference, especially. Jordan's six titles came against five different opponents. Magic and Bird had to face each other over and over, so it's not surprising they split the difference. I do think that if you could magically transport the '90s Bulls to the '80s, they'd have won more like 3-4 titles - which would still be an amazing accomplishment.
Isiah and Jordan probably are similar in personality. The difference is Isiah is vilified by the national media for it, and Jordan's personality is ignored.
If you do the research, you couldn't be more wrong. For his first championship, Jordan went through:
-Knick led by a 28 year old Patrick Ewing (1 HOF player)
-76er team led by a 27 year old Charles Barkley and a 24 year old Hersey Hawkins (1 HOF player, and a very good player)
-Piston team led by a 29 year old Zeke, 29 year old Dumars, 29 year old Rodman (2 HOF players, and one of the best rebounders/defenders ever)
-Lakers team with 31 year old, pre-AIDS Magic, and Worthy (2 HOF players)
All these players were HOF'ers in their prime. Totally no competition to Joe Johnson and Gilbert Arenas!
I think Jordan is considered the ultimate winner by so many in the media because he won six titles, not one. I would argue strongly that Magic and Worthy were not in their prime at that point in their careers. That is by far the most impressive run of any in Jordan's career. Let's not forget that he had a hall of fame player with him at this point as well. I would take Pippen over Dumars, Hawkins, or Worthy at the tail end of his career. Throw in Grant, Cartwright, and Armstrong and it still looks to me like Jordan has the best supporting cast in addition to (obviously) being the best individual player in the league by that point.
You're hemming and hawing, qualifying your statements, and narrowing your argument. Which player won WITHOUT a good supporting cast? Why is your argument even relevent? Show me who won without a good team behind them.
Also, you can say "Oh, those guys were past their prime, but the oldest was 31 years old. That's a tough sell.
Lebron James is being criticized for not winning a championship, despite the fact that his team is not nearly as good/deep/talented as those in Boston and LA. He is being compared unfavorably to "the ultimate winner" Michael Jordan. Therefore, it is relevant to point out that Jordan had similarly not won a championship at this point in his career and did not do so until he had quite arguably the best supporting cast in the league (not just some good players).
Magic was 31 and had already contracted the HIV. He tested positive that offseason and retired immediately (though he did make a brief comeback five years later), so it shouldn't be a surprise that Jordan had surpassed him as an individual player at that point. My further point was that the cast around Jordan (Pippen, Grant, Cartwright, Armstrong) was at least comparable if not significantly better than after 30 Worthy (injured in Game 4), Byron Scott (also injured in game 4), Sam Perkins, AC Green, and old Mychal Thompson.
Jordan didn't win until he had a better supporting cast than the other top players in the league. As a result, Lebron shouldn't be criticizing for failing to win when his supporting cast is crap.
I agree that the criticism that LeBron hasn't won is premature. People are upset about HOW he lost, I think. Did Jordan ever have a game like LeBron's game 5 in a big playoff game? When they lost to the pistons, he went down firing. LeBron took 14 shots. We all know that the Cavs can't win when he takes 14 shots.
Lebron doesn't "save" Cleveland, even if he stays and wins it all. I love Simmons' writing, but this notion that athletes save cities--that's the sort of bread and circuses b.s. we can do without. I don't think it's getting too political--left, right, or center--to say we really need to understand the difference. And I worry that a lot of people don't.
All I wonder is how well would James teams have been these last few years had the Cavs drafted an emering top-50 player of all time and then had a pair of lottery picks in a later draft in the leadup to this allegedly magical 7th year.
What exactly does Jordan win in Year 7 without Scottie Pippen, BJ Armstrong and Stacy King?
But Stacey King is not helping the argument. He was a bust, IMO as a Bulls fan. I think it might be better to throw in Bill Cartwright, who was a good player for the Knicks but became expendable once Ewing arrived, having averaged 17.5 pts and 7.7 rebounds per game in the '86-87 season. I get what you're saying, though: Stacey King was a relatively high draft pick. But I would hypothesize that Jordan wins that title in year 7 without Stacey King. He just wasn't that integral, really.
HAHAHA Stacy King. He fell out of the rotation by 92. I think you mean Ho Grant.
Well, I had to put King in there since he was part of that double lottery
we're talking specifically about why Jordan won in this allegedly magical year 7 and lebron didnt. my point is that in the leadup to that year, the Bulls were fortunate enough to draft another top 50 of all time player and also had a draft with a pair of lottery picks, armstrong and king. King scored like 6 a game off the bench during that first title, which is all I am talking about. So, the Bulls went 2 for 3 in developing those key draft picks. The cavs as a franchise have done nothing quite as close to that in surrounding James.
I hated growing up in Detroit during the Bad Boy era. Reached a certain point, however, where I can't hate a player for being emotional or good. I just appreciate them, even Jordan. Saying Lebron's not better becuase he's not on pace w/ Kobe or Jordan is laughable. How old was Kevin Garnett when he got his ring? Malone and Stockton were great, but never brought the trophy to Utah. All great players. And killer instinct? Can't possibly imagine Jordan could have turned Cleveland around on his own and made them contenders as quickly as Lebron did.
My personal opinion is if he couldn't have won a title with either of the last two teams he will have problems winning a title in Cleveland period. Ultimately I feel their is three choices in the matter. He can either A.) Stay in Cleveland and still loyal to the organization and still play close to where he grew up. B.) He can go to Chicago where they would be a contender right away and with all the young talent they have be in contention for titles for a long time. Or C.) Go to New York and play in front of all the media but would need the Knicks to make a series of other moves to help the team be a contender instead of a one man show.
That was his whole point. A: Stay in Cleveland and try to win. B: Go to New York and bring a BBall Championship back to the Big Apple. Or C: Go to Chicago which gives him the best possibility to be a part of a dynasty. I don't think it's entirely your idea...unless you are Bill Simmons. In which case, I love your articles and keep up the good work. I find that unlikely, seeing that Simmons would know better than to use "their is three choices" in anything he writes.
Please stop comparing LeBron to Jordan. If anything he's much more like Magic Johnson.
Honestly, I think James is a better Pippen, not a Jordan. I don't mean that as an insult - Pippen was probably the best on-the-ball defender in the NBA, his team's best ball-handler and passer, a solid rebounder, and a dangerous scorer, when he needed to be. James, I don't think, wants to be the guy taking 30 shots a game - and on this Cavs team, he sort of needs to be. The team NEEDED him in the second half to take over, as Mo Williams died at halftime and Jamison was a ghost. But instead, he kicked it out to Delonte West.
It didn't help that Mike Brown kept playing Shaq all series, who could do nothing. LeBron needs to be on a team with an alpha scorer - a guy who puts the pedal on the floor in the 4th.
The other night, the Jazz got ahead by six against the Lakers with about 6 mins left, Kobe, who had played somewhat badly, hit trey, forced a TO, and converted an "and 1". I just don't see LBJ doing that in big situations.
I don't like the James, Pippen comparison. I think if anything Lebron is a better Barkley, probably not a great comparison either but better than Pippen.
I'm talking skill set wise - both Pippen and James could do virtually anything on a court - score, pass, rebound, defend, block shots. James just does them all better. Both were their team's primary ball-handlers at least 50% of the time, both drew the #1 defensive assignment. I'd say Pippen was probably a better defender, but James is better in any other metric.
I use Pippen because while Pippen could score (James can score better), he was most valuable in all the other things he could do. I don't think James want to shoot 30 times a game, like Jordan or Kobe.
I think we're all trying too hard to compare these guys to someone who played before them. Every once-in-a-generation player is unique. The one common thread among them is that they can never win titles by themselves. Give LeBron another superstar to play with and he'll win one.
I felt like James had a number of those Kobe moments in the conference finals against Detroit a few years ago. He definitely crapped the bed the other night against Boston, but he has had some single-handed playoff success. I think we underestimate the gap between what he has to work with and what KG (Allen, Pierce, Rondo) and Kobe (Gasol, Bynum, Artest, Odom) have at their disposal because of James' ability level and the easy time they have with the rest of the league in the regular season.
I don't disagree with any of that. That said, that 25 point 4th quarter armageddon against Detroit sort of sticks out as the exception in his resume right now.
Who was the last team that won an NBA championship without 2 NBA HOF'ers?
The sixers at Dr. J and Moses Malone.
Celtics had Bird and McHale.
Lakers had Magic, Kareem, Worthy.
Pistons had Zeke, Dumars
Bulls had Jordan and Pippen
Rockets had Hakeem and Drexler
Spurs had Robinson/Duncan then Duncan/Parker (maybe?)
Lakers had Shaq/Kobe then Kobe/Gasol (maybe?)
Heat had Wade/Shaq
The only team I can think of without 2 is the recent Pistons, who probably had 0. Maybe 1, in Chauncey.
I posted this on another message board yesterday. If this doesn't tell you that his supporting cast isn't good enough to take home a title, I don't know what will. Heck, you could even look at the teams that most of those champions defeated and you'd find better talent.
Even the 04 Pistons had four all-stars that year.
It wasn't until 2006 that they actually got all 4 on an All-Star team (unless you meant potential or future). You usually have to be good a year or two before they'll put you on the team, even if you've been playing better than those that are making it.
Johnson is probably a HoF (though more for his earlier career). Likewise, Walton. And they'll probably throw in Parrish and/or Ainge, because they're Celtics, and because the basketball HoF is the easiest to get into.
Also, if they were better liked, Laimbeer and Rodman's numbers are borderline HoF, though I don't expect either to get in (people forget Laimbeer used to lead the League in rebounding in his younger days).
Which does show a progression of needing 3 HoF type players in the 80's (or 2 with Jordan counting as 2 to make it to 3), to 2 in the 90's, to maybe 1 and a half now. Though to be fair and help your argument the Celtics had 2-3 (maybe 4 with Rondo keeps going), and Manu might be better than Parker, even though he came off the bench.