Is Jokic better than Lebron ever was ? Has he already peaked higher ? How long before he surpasses him all time?

[LaLover11]

Carmelo was one of the best scorers of all time but nobody cares because he has no rings.

If Melo would've won 6-0 Championships in his career
He would be seen in a while different perspective like Jordan or KB24

Smh

[bledredwine]

Lebron's midrange game was never an issue and he has had at least a semblance of a post game since 2012. He has been actively and regularly using the mid ans low block since then, even more since his second go with the Cavs and then with the Lakers.

His issues have been with 3pt shooting and at the line.

Lebron's shot in the 30 percentile from midrange his whole career and it gets even worse in the playoffs (still in the 30's, but a declined 30's). He's he's never had an effective back-to-the-basket game.

It's part of the reason Jokic has better control of the game. I just don't see the argument for Lebron being a better offensive player. Lebron's better at driving but that's really it.

40k Points and #1 all time scorer of all time

That alone makes LeBron a better scorer than Jokic

Jokic is not a better scorer than LeBron lmao

Longevity stats don't matter when comparing peaks lol

Jokic has been more reliable than Lebron ever has, especially in controlling a series. He has an all around game,
not just slashing passing, 3s and dunks.

That alone makes Jokic a better scorer than Lebron.

[LaLover11]

Lebron's shot in the 30 percentile from midrange his whole career and it gets even worse in the playoffs (still in the 30's, but a declined 30's). He's he's never had an effective back-to-the-basket game.

It's part of the reason Jokic has better control of the game. I just don't see the argument for Lebron being a better offensive player. Lebron's better at driving but that's really it.

40k Points and #1 all time scorer of all time

That alone makes LeBron a better scorer than Jokic

Jokic is not a better scorer than LeBron lmao

Longevity stats don't matter when comparing peaks lol

Jokic has been more reliable than Lebron ever has, especially in controlling a series. He has an all around game,
not just slashing passing, 3s and dunks.

That alone makes Jokic a better scorer than Lebron.

I guess Livingston has a better game than Curry
You learn something everyda

LeBron has a 21 ye Peak with the Best Overall Skillset
Just because you think he can't shoot or doesn't have a post game doesn't make it true

[Infinite Llamas]

Imagine being in a world thinking that 2022-23 Cleveland was better than Miami or Sacramento was better than Lakers because of “seeding”. News flash. In this era of load managing, seeding isn’t important as it used to be. So to say that they beat an “8th seed” in the Finals lacks context on so many levels.

First off, Sacramento was definitely better than LA that year. I’ll give you Cleveland being inferior to Miami, but not the other.

Second, there’s much more to it than seeding. Again, it’s important to note their records and why they had said records to begin with. Again, the West was considered weak that year and for very good reasons.

Third, load management? That isn’t why Miami had a lower seed, same with LA. In reality, LA didn’t actually get better until they traded away Westbrook and acquired better fitting supporting pieces for their roster. And even then, they just barely squeaked their way in. Nice try but if you’re going to play the “apply context” game, do it correctly.

Jokic battled Bam, AD, Gobert in the playoffs last year…

Yeah and how’d that work out for them? None of them were capable of guarding Jokic and LA even stopped having AD guard Jokic at one point because they actually did better when he didn’t since they knew Jokic was usually looking to pass. But again, nice try.

who’d Lebron battle in the east once the Celtics core broke up? Paul George? DeRozan? Joe Johnson????

Significantly better teams, with higher SRS ratings and much better records. I’m not sure if you’re aware of this or not, but basketball is a team sport. Name dropping people and completely ignoring what kind of teams they were on (DeRozen was on multiple 50 win teams and wasn’t even the best player on his own team, Paul George was on the best defensive team in the league on multiple occasions). And I’m sorry, why are you ignoring the Thunder, the Spurs and the Warriors? Hell, the 2011 Mavericks were much better than the 2023 Heat. Are you just ignoring the Finals opponents?

Lebron had the easiest path to the Finals year in and year out and even if those Chicago and Indiana teams were feisty, they were still no match for a team with Lebron and Kyrie.

And yet none of those teams Jokic faced were a match for his Nuggets squad, so why aren’t you applying that same logic to them? Meanwhile when paired with Irving, LeBron had to face multiple 50 win teams and even a 60 winner at one point, on top of facing the Warriors every single time. Keep in mind that my argument is about having the easiest path to a title… you trying to move the goal posts isn’t going to help you here. And I know why you’re doing it, because that alone kills the argument that LeBron had an easier path.

There is only one year where you can argue LeBron had an easier path, and that’s 2017 when no one stood a realistic chance of defeating the Cavaliers even on their worst day… until they got to the finals, where they faced the greatest team ever put together. Please do tell me at what point did Denver face anything close to that? If they didn’t, your point is mute and your argument is automatically refuted.

“Quite literally the easiest path” is absolute lmao

It’s the absolute truth. Not my problem if you aren’t smart enough to understand why.

Mmmmm. Clearly you aren’t the brightest bulb the box has to offer either if you understand that as a truth. When you have Milwaukee just two years previous beating a couple 41-win teams, KD and a hobbled nets team and a Paul/Booker led Suns team. You don’t have to dredge through the annals of NBA history to find an easier path. Sometimes it’s extremely recent history.

And Input very little stock in those mid mid-2010 teams of the east. Indiana, Toronto and Atlanta were good better than their sun teams but they struck fear in nobody. Sure Lebron faced some formidable teams in the Finals but let’s not afford grandeur to some of those teams he beat along the way. It was called the Leastern conference and with good reason.

[Infinite Llamas]

Lebron's midrange game was never an issue and he has had at least a semblance of a post game since 2012. He has been actively and regularly using the mid ans low block since then, even more since his second go with the Cavs and then with the Lakers.

His issues have been with 3pt shooting and at the line.

Lebron's shot in the 30 percentile from midrange his whole career and it gets even worse in the playoffs (still in the 30's, but a declined 30's). He's he's never had an effective back-to-the-basket game.

It's part of the reason Jokic has better control of the game. I just don't see the argument for Lebron being a better offensive player. Lebron's better at driving but that's really it.

40k Points and #1 all time scorer of all time

That alone makes LeBron a better scorer than Jokic

Jokic is not a better scorer than LeBron lmao

Robert Parish has more career points than Larry Bird. Guess he was the better scorer.

[LaLover11]

Lebron's shot in the 30 percentile from midrange his whole career and it gets even worse in the playoffs (still in the 30's, but a declined 30's). He's he's never had an effective back-to-the-basket game.

It's part of the reason Jokic has better control of the game. I just don't see the argument for Lebron being a better offensive player. Lebron's better at driving but that's really it.

40k Points and #1 all time scorer of all time

That alone makes LeBron a better scorer than Jokic

Jokic is not a better scorer than LeBron lmao

Robert Parish has more career points than Larry Bird. Guess he was the better scorer.

Jokic is not better nor will ever be better than LeBron let alone Shaq. Keep dreaming

[Iwasawitness]

Imagine being in a world thinking that 2022-23 Cleveland was better than Miami or Sacramento was better than Lakers because of “seeding”. News flash. In this era of load managing, seeding isn’t important as it used to be. So to say that they beat an “8th seed” in the Finals lacks context on so many levels.

First off, Sacramento was definitely better than LA that year. I’ll give you Cleveland being inferior to Miami, but not the other.

Second, there’s much more to it than seeding. Again, it’s important to note their records and why they had said records to begin with. Again, the West was considered weak that year and for very good reasons.

Third, load management? That isn’t why Miami had a lower seed, same with LA. In reality, LA didn’t actually get better until they traded away Westbrook and acquired better fitting supporting pieces for their roster. And even then, they just barely squeaked their way in. Nice try but if you’re going to play the “apply context” game, do it correctly.

Jokic battled Bam, AD, Gobert in the playoffs last year…

Yeah and how’d that work out for them? None of them were capable of guarding Jokic and LA even stopped having AD guard Jokic at one point because they actually did better when he didn’t since they knew Jokic was usually looking to pass. But again, nice try.

who’d Lebron battle in the east once the Celtics core broke up? Paul George? DeRozan? Joe Johnson????

Significantly better teams, with higher SRS ratings and much better records. I’m not sure if you’re aware of this or not, but basketball is a team sport. Name dropping people and completely ignoring what kind of teams they were on (DeRozen was on multiple 50 win teams and wasn’t even the best player on his own team, Paul George was on the best defensive team in the league on multiple occasions). And I’m sorry, why are you ignoring the Thunder, the Spurs and the Warriors? Hell, the 2011 Mavericks were much between Mmmmm. Clearly you aren’t the brightest bulb the box has to offer either if you understand that as a truth. When you have Milwaukee just two years previous beating a couple 41-win teams, KD and a hobbled nets team and a Paul/Booker led Suns team. You don’t have to dredge through the annals of NBA history to find an easier path. Sometimes it’s extremely recent history.

And Input very little stock in those mid mid-2010 teams of the east. Indiana, Toronto and Atlanta were good better than their sun teams but they struck fear in nobody. Sure Lebron faced some formidable teams in the Finals but let’s not afford grandeur to some of those teams he beat along the way. It was called the Leastern conference and with good reason.

Nice try but no. The Suns were a very worthy finals opponent who still managed to win 50+ in a shortened season AND had a 5+ SRS, far better than anything Denver faced. So no, they did not have an easier path. But I’ll tell you this: the brightest bulb the box has to offer would know this.

And if you’re calling people who refer to it as the Leastrrn conference credible, you truly aren’t a bright light bulb at all (all is fair when you call me stupid first). I can remember one person who made this claim who thought there were no all NBA players in the East from 2011-2018 outside of LeBron and Rose (who then doubled back on that claim and tried to say he meant first team, and he was still wrong). I had one person claim LeBron never beat a 60 win team during that time span during the playoffs (he did it twice). Probably my favorite is one who used that term and in that very same sentence claimed LeBron never beat a team with three all stars on it (not only had he done this a multitude of times, he’s actually beaten two teams with four stars). These are the kinds of people you are basing your arguments on: who don’t know what they’re talking about and clearly don’t know the actual history behind LeBron’s eight straight visits to the finals.

In reality, LeBron played against a lot of really great teams. Was every single opponent LeBron went up against great? No, some of them were a joke and didn’t belong in the postseason. And as we all know, 2017 was about as easy as it got before he got to the finals. But that doesn’t take away from the postseason runs where he had to overcome some really good teams. In 2011, he had to go through the Celtics with four all stars and the 60 win Bulls. In 2012/13/14, he had to overcome the best defensive team in the league (although 2014 in general was pretty weak, still a tougher path than 2023 though). He had to overcome a 50 win team AND a 60 win team in 2015. 2016 he had to beat the 56 win Raptors.

And of course, there’s 2018, where people try to foolishly downplay his opponents, not realizing how bad his team was and how good they actually were, and that he had to straight up carry his teams. Raptors were a 59 win team with a 7+ SRS rating, and they got dominated by LeBron. Boston was the best defense in the league, didn’t stop LeBron from dominating them with multiple 40 point performances, including game 7. Cavs made history that year as one of the select few teams in history to have a worse SRS rating than all of their opponents and still make the finals.

To think any of those were less difficult than Jokic’s 2023 run is peak comedy. I can’t imagine being so clueless and deluded to the point where my brain actually thinks “yeah, that makes sense”.

[Infinite Llamas]

First off, Sacramento was definitely better than LA that year. I’ll give you Cleveland being inferior to Miami, but not the other.

Second, there’s much more to it than seeding. Again, it’s important to note their records and why they had said records to begin with. Again, the West was considered weak that year and for very good reasons.

Third, load management? That isn’t why Miami had a lower seed, same with LA. In reality, LA didn’t actually get better until they traded away Westbrook and acquired better fitting supporting pieces for their roster. And even then, they just barely squeaked their way in. Nice try but if you’re going to play the “apply context” game, do it correctly.



Yeah and how’d that work out for them? None of them were capable of guarding Jokic and LA even stopped having AD guard Jokic at one point because they actually did better when he didn’t since they knew Jokic was usually looking to pass. But again, nice try.



Significantly better teams, with higher SRS ratings and much better records. I’m not sure if you’re aware of this or not, but basketball is a team sport. Name dropping people and completely ignoring what kind of teams they were on (DeRozen was on multiple 50 win teams and wasn’t even the best player on his own team, Paul George was on the best defensive team in the league on multiple occasions). And I’m sorry, why are you ignoring the Thunder, the Spurs and the Warriors? Hell, the 2011 Mavericks were much between Mmmmm. Clearly you aren’t the brightest bulb the box has to offer either if you understand that as a truth. When you have Milwaukee just two years previous beating a couple 41-win teams, KD and a hobbled nets team and a Paul/Booker led Suns team. You don’t have to dredge through the annals of NBA history to find an easier path. Sometimes it’s extremely recent history.

And Input very little stock in those mid mid-2010 teams of the east. Indiana, Toronto and Atlanta were good better than their sun teams but they struck fear in nobody. Sure Lebron faced some formidable teams in the Finals but let’s not afford grandeur to some of those teams he beat along the way. It was called the Leastern conference and with good reason.

Nice try but no. The Suns were a very worthy finals opponent who still managed to win 50+ in a shortened season AND had a 5+ SRS, far better than anything Denver faced. So no, they did not have an easier path. But I’ll tell you this: the brightest bulb the box has to offer would know this.

And if you’re calling people who refer to it as the Leastrrn conference credible, you truly aren’t a bright light bulb at all (all is fair when you call me stupid first). I can remember one person who made this claim who thought there were no all NBA players in the East from 2011-2018 outside of LeBron and Rose (who then doubled back on that claim and tried to say he meant first team, and he was still wrong). I had one person claim LeBron never beat a 60 win team during that time span during the playoffs (he did it twice). Probably my favorite is one who used that term and in that very same sentence claimed LeBron never beat a team with three all stars on it (not only had he done this a multitude of times, he’s actually beaten two teams with four stars). These are the kinds of people you are basing your arguments on: who don’t know what they’re talking about and clearly don’t know the actual history behind LeBron’s right straight visits to the finals.

In reality, LeBron played against a lot of really great teams. Was every single opponent LeBron went up against great? No, some of them were a joke and didn’t belong in the postseason. And as we all know, 2017 was about as easy as it got before he got to the finals. But that doesn’t take away from the postseason runs where he had to overcome some really good teams. In 2011, he had to go through the Celtics with four all stars and the 60 win Bulls. In 2012/13/14, he had to overcome the best defensive team in the league (although 2014 in general was pretty weak, still a tougher path than 2023 though). He had to overcome a 50 win team AND a 60 win team in 2015. 2016 he had to beat the 56 win Raptors.

And of course, there’s 2018, where people try to foolishly downplay his opponents, not realizing how bad his team was and how good they actually were, and that he had to straight up carry his teams. Raptors were a 59 win team with a 7+ SRS rating, and they got dominated by LeBron. Boston was the best defense in the league, didn’t stop LeBron from dominating them with multiple 40 point performances, including game 7. Cavs made history that year as one of the select few teams in history to have a worse SRS rating than all of their opponents and still make the finals.

To think any of those were less difficult than Jokic’s 2023 run is peak comedy. I can’t imagine being so clueless and deluded to the point where my brain actually thinks “yeah, that makes sense”.

Beating a team who’s best player was a 19 year old rookie is hardly praise worthy in 2018. That team was an overachiever due to Stevens and Rozier and Brown were forced into bigger roles after Irving and Hayward went down. They were massively inexperienced.

2010-11 Celtics big 3 were all in their twilights and it was obvious they were on their last legs. Miami has 3 HOF guys in their prime and it would have been a TRAVESTY to lose to the geriatric squad Boston was trotting out.

And sure Atlanta has a boatload of all stars in the coach Bud era. They were well coached with solid vets, but does a Al Horford and Joe Johnson led team strike fear in the hearts of opponents? Stars win in the playoffs. Just the nature of the beast.

I’ve seen every Celtics game since 2006 and I can say with a straight face that it was an inferior conference year in and year out. There were some good, well coaches teams, but as long as Kawhi and Curry and Kobe and Duncan and KD were out west, the east was never going to get its flowers.

…and the 2021 Suns were nothing special. Does SRS factor things like CP3 as a playoff choker or Ayton staying up to 4 am playing video games? That team was filled with guys who “weren’t ready” and a vet team like Milwaukee easily disposed of them. Would have been a sweep if Giannis hadn’t gotten hurt at the end of the Hawks series.

[infinite11285]

Jokic is better, IMO.

Did it without superstar help and special treatment.

LeBron’s physical peak is generally acknowledged during the first stint with Cleveland in 2009. What superstar did he play with?

Heck...did it without a single all star.

Murray is chopped liver—Murray/KCP/AG/MPJ aren't slouches—as a matter of fact, those 4 are the primary reasons Denver comfortably separates themselves from the rest of the league. Jokic himself would admit that.

Jokic is the better player and teammate.

Totally subjective and can't be proven.

[MrBigShot]

17-18 LeBron is better than any version of Jokic so far in my opinion.

[Iwasawitness]

Beating a team who’s best player was a 19 year old rookie is hardly praise worthy in 2018. That team was an overachiever due to Stevens and Rozier and Brown were forced into bigger roles after Irving and Hayward went down. They were massively inexperienced.

There it is again: the same brain dead take that many others have made because they don’t know any better.

“Err Tatum was only 19, Brown was young, they were inexperienced, they overachieved”. Absolute utter nonsense this statement is.

They were a 55 win team who were better without Irving. They had the best ranked defense in the league. They did not overachieve by any stretch of the imagination. If anything they underachieved. Their ECF opponents were a dysfunctional bunch whose second best player averaged 12.5 PPG in that series. Cleveland had no business being competitive, let alone winning the damn series. But they did, because LeBron put on a carry job of historic proportions. But because you don’t want to give any credit to him, it’s gotta be “oh but the Celtics were young”. That’s cute, didn’t stop them from beating Giannis and the Bucks. Didn’t stop them from beating Embiid and the 76ers. So what changed here with the Cavs? I’ll tell ya, those teams didn’t have LeBron.

Oh and by the way, the Celtics definitely had some experience. Al Horford was their defensive anchor and first team all defense that season. Marcus Morris had already been through his fair share of playoffs. Hell, Marcus Smart was already a four year veteran at this point and had been in the playoffs every season. That’s the same amount of times as Kevin Love. Jaylen Brown even had playoff experience, hell he made the ECF the previous year.

So no, don’t even try to claim they were inexperienced. That’s a lie and you know it.

2010-11 Celtics big 3 were all in their twilights and it was obvious they were on their last legs. Miami has 3 HOF guys in their prime and it would have been a TRAVESTY to lose to the geriatric squad Boston was trotting out.

The 2011 Miami Heat had major fit issues, lacked depth and were terrible against Boston that season. Boston on the other hand had four players make the all star team, had far better depth and much better chemistry. One of the major reasons Miami even won that series is because of multiple injuries to the Celtics, most notably Rondo.

And sure Atlanta has a boatload of all stars in the coach Bud era. They were well coached with solid vets, but does a Al Horford and Joe Johnson led team strike fear in the hearts of opponents? Stars win in the playoffs. Just the nature of the beast.

I don’t give a **** if a team strikes fear in someone. If you’re letting the opposing team cause you any kind of fear, you don’t belong in the postseason, let alone the Finals. I don’t even think the Warriors struck fear in LeBron, just like I’m sure no team ever struck fear in Jordan (and yes, this includes the Celtics, get over it people, the man scored 63 on them). Before LeBron won a ring, that was something he did let teams do and the results spoke for themselves.

I’ve seen every Celtics game since 2006 and I can say with a straight face that it was an inferior conference year in and year out. There were some good, well coaches teams, but as long as Kawhi and Curry and Kobe and Duncan and KD were out west, the east was never going to get its flowers.

Inferior conference doesn’t = weak. That’s a very simple minded thing to think and it demonstrates a lack of critical thinking ability for anyone who tries to make such a claim. The East has always been weaker (apart from 2023… what a surprise) and the East always had really great teams. Both things can be true.

…and the 2021 Suns were nothing special. Does SRS factor things like CP3 as a playoff choker or Ayton staying up to 4 am playing video games? That team was filled with guys who “weren’t ready” and a vet team like Milwaukee easily disposed of them. Would have been a sweep if Giannis hadn’t gotten hurt at the end of the Hawks series.

It’s funny you mention Paul being a choker, considering the two games they won were in large part due to him. And I can very easily argue that the only reason the Bucks even won that series is because Paul got injured. A lot of people don’t remember this… but that was a very close series that could have went either way. The Suns put up an incredible fight. And it’s funny you mention Ayton… because he was actually very good in that series too. It’s cute that you’re trying to use irrelevant circumstances to argue against how good they were (you don’t actually think Ayton was staying up until 4 AM playing video games during the FINALS?), it just further proves my point that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

[dk1115]

Please look at this roster that LeBron carried to the NBA Finals.

....

[tsherkin]

Carmelo was one of the best scorers of all time but nobody cares because he has no rings.

If Melo would've won 6-0 Championships in his career
He would be seen in a while different perspective like Jordan or KB24

Smh

Carmelo was one of the highest-volume scorers of all-time, which isn't the same as "one of the best scorers of all-time." And he lacked playoff resiliency. That, more than the absence of rings, contributes more to attitudes toward him.

[lessthanjake]

In reality, LeBron played against a lot of really great teams. Was every single opponent LeBron went up against great? No, some of them were a joke and didn’t belong in the postseason. And as we all know, 2017 was about as easy as it got before he got to the finals. But that doesn’t take away from the postseason runs where he had to overcome some really good teams. In 2011, he had to go through the Celtics with four all stars and the 60 win Bulls. In 2012/13/14, he had to overcome the best defensive team in the league (although 2014 in general was pretty weak, still a tougher path than 2023 though). He had to overcome a 50 win team AND a 60 win team in 2015. 2016 he had to beat the 56 win Raptors.

And of course, there’s 2018, where people try to foolishly downplay his opponents, not realizing how bad his team was and how good they actually were, and that he had to straight up carry his teams. Raptors were a 59 win team with a 7+ SRS rating, and they got dominated by LeBron. Boston was the best defense in the league, didn’t stop LeBron from dominating them with multiple 40 point performances, including game 7. Cavs made history that year as one of the select few teams in history to have a worse SRS rating than all of their opponents and still make the finals.

I don’t think the Nuggets had a very difficult slate of opponents in 2023. SRS definitely undersells their opponents—the Lakers were *way* better after the trades, the Suns hadn’t had Durant for the vast majority of the season, and the Heat always seem substantially better in the playoffs (likely in large part due to Spoelstra). But, of course, if we just looked at SRS, the 2023 slate of opponents look like complete jokes. That wasn’t the case in reality, and I think we all know that, if we’re being honest about it. But that doesn’t mean it was a super difficult run. It wasn’t. The league’s other best teams that year were probably the Bucks and Celtics, and Giannis got injured and the Celtics got upset. That said, the Nuggets didn’t face teams with major star players out with injury, while some other title winners did. In other words, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle here. I’d say the Nuggets run was on the easier side of things overall.

That said, LeBron’s Finals runs didn’t actually include “a lot of really great teams.” I think this is intuitively obvious to people who watched basketball at the time and don’t simply *want* to believe otherwise. But just for reference, I’d say that +1000 or better pre-playoff title odds is a pretty reasonable dividing line that marks whether a team was a real contender. Teams with worse odds than that essentially never win the title. Indeed, the only teams to have done so since 1976 (the first year we have data for this) are the 2011 Mavs and the 1995 Rockets (but multiple teams at +1000 exactly have won, so this is actually a natural dividing line). In all of his Finals runs combined, how many teams with +1000 or better pre-playoffs title odds did LeBron’s teams beat prior to the Finals? Well, only five. Those are the 2007 Pistons, the 2011 Celtics, the 2011 Bulls, the 2014 Pacers, and the 2015 Hawks (barely, at +1000 exactly). And the only one of those teams that was actually a top 3 team in pre-playoffs title odds that year was the 2011 Bulls. I do actually think that the East was not weak in 2011, and the Heat’s run to the Finals that year was actually on the difficult side. But the rest of it was *really* sparse. When we’re hanging our hats on teams like the 2015 Hawks and 2014 Pacers—ensemble-cast teams in a mold that almost always fails in the playoffs—as the banner teams for playing “really great” opponents, then I think it’s obvious that there just weren’t a lot of really good opponents.

Ultimately, LeBron benefited from an easy conference. It really shouldn’t be a debatable premise. He very obviously did and everyone recognized that at the time. That makes his 10 Finals appearances less impressive than it would otherwise be. At the same time, though, I also think it contextualizes his Finals record a lot. LeBron’s teams probably shouldn’t have made 10 Finals and wouldn’t have done so if he was not frequently in such a weak conference. So of course they lost in the Finals a lot—they were often a team that didn’t even really belong there and got there because their conference was weak. If he were in a stronger conference, LeBron would almost certainly have made significantly fewer than 10 Finals, but his record in the Finals also probably would be a lot better. Ironically, there are people who make arguments that indicate they think LeBron would be a better/greater player if that were the case, because they claim to supremely care about record in the Finals. I don’t think that’s right. If LeBron played in the harder conference and made like 5 Finals and won 4 of them, to me it wouldn’t be any better or worse. It’d be a similarly impressive achievement in a different context.

[tsherkin]

Lebron's shot in the 30 percentile from midrange his whole career and it gets even worse in the playoffs (still in the 30's, but a declined 30's). He's he's never had an effective back-to-the-basket game.

Yeah, it isn't MJ's mid-range game, I'll give you that, but you can't give him those shots or he'll end up burning you. And he's actually shot quite well on post-ups for years. You have to go back to like 2016 to find a season where he didn't shoot over 50% on that play, and mostly from 53-58%.

[lessthanjake]

Carmelo was one of the best scorers of all time but nobody cares because he has no rings.

If Melo would've won 6-0 Championships in his career
He would be seen in a while different perspective like Jordan or KB24

Smh

For Carmelo Anthony to have won 6 titles in his career, he would have to have been a substantially better player than he was in reality. So yeah, he’d be seen in a different perspective, because he’d actually be a different player!

[Infinite Llamas]

Beating a team who’s best player was a 19 year old rookie is hardly praise worthy in 2018. That team was an overachiever due to Stevens and Rozier and Brown were forced into bigger roles after Irving and Hayward went down. They were massively inexperienced.

There it is again: the same brain dead take that many others have made because they don’t know any better.

“Err Tatum was only 19, Brown was young, they were inexperienced, they overachieved”. Absolute utter nonsense this statement is.

They were a 55 win team who were better without Irving. They had the best ranked defense in the league. They did not overachieve by any stretch of the imagination. If anything they underachieved. Their ECF opponents were a dysfunctional bunch whose second best player averaged 12.5 PPG in that series. Cleveland had no business being competitive, let alone winning the damn series. But they did, because LeBron put on a carry job of historic proportions. But because you don’t want to give any credit to him, it’s gotta be “oh but the Celtics were young”. That’s cute, didn’t stop them from beating Giannis and the Bucks. Didn’t stop them from beating Embiid and the 76ers. So what changed here with the Cavs? I’ll tell ya, those teams didn’t have LeBron.

Oh and by the way, the Celtics definitely had some experience. Al Horford was their defensive anchor and first team all defense that season. Marcus Morris had already been through his fair share of playoffs. Hell, Marcus Smart was already a four year veteran at this point and had been in the playoffs every season. That’s the same amount of times as Kevin Love. Jaylen Brown even had playoff experience, hell he made the ECF the previous year.

So no, don’t even try to claim they were inexperienced. That’s a lie and you know it.

2010-11 Celtics big 3 were all in their twilights and it was obvious they were on their last legs. Miami has 3 HOF guys in their prime and it would have been a TRAVESTY to lose to the geriatric squad Boston was trotting out.

The 2011 Miami Heat had major fit issues, lacked depth and were terrible against Boston that season. Boston on the other hand had four players make the all star team, had far better depth and much better chemistry. One of the major reasons Miami even won that series is because of multiple injuries to the Celtics, most notably Rondo.

And sure Atlanta has a boatload of all stars in the coach Bud era. They were well coached with solid vets, but does a Al Horford and Joe Johnson led team strike fear in the hearts of opponents? Stars win in the playoffs. Just the nature of the beast.

I don’t give a **** if a team strikes fear in someone. If you’re letting the opposing team cause you any kind of fear, you don’t belong in the postseason, let alone the Finals. I don’t even think the Warriors struck fear in LeBron, just like I’m sure no team ever struck fear in Jordan (and yes, this includes the Celtics, get over it people, the man scored 63 on them). Before LeBron won a ring, that was something he did let teams do and the results spoke for themselves.

I’ve seen every Celtics game since 2006 and I can say with a straight face that it was an inferior conference year in and year out. There were some good, well coaches teams, but as long as Kawhi and Curry and Kobe and Duncan and KD were out west, the east was never going to get its flowers.

Inferior conference doesn’t = weak. That’s a very simple minded thing to think and it demonstrates a lack of critical thinking ability for anyone who tries to make such a claim. The East has always been weaker (apart from 2023… what a surprise) and the East always had really great teams. Both things can be true.

…and the 2021 Suns were nothing special. Does SRS factor things like CP3 as a playoff choker or Ayton staying up to 4 am playing video games? That team was filled with guys who “weren’t ready” and a vet team like Milwaukee easily disposed of them. Would have been a sweep if Giannis hadn’t gotten hurt at the end of the Hawks series.

It’s funny you mention Paul being a choker, considering the two games they won were in large part due to him. And I can very easily argue that the only reason the Bucks even won that series is because Paul got injured. A lot of people don’t remember this… but that was a very close series that could have went either way. The Suns put up an incredible fight. And it’s funny you mention Ayton… because he was actually very good in that series too. It’s cute that you’re trying to use irrelevant circumstances to argue against how good they were (you don’t actually think Ayton was staying up until 4 AM playing video games during the FINALS?), it just further proves my point that you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Lol that 2018 was counted out by March when Kyrie went down. They had home court but they weren’t the favorites to win ANY of those series. They were crazy underdogs because of their youth. Smart missed some games early on too. You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. Brad Stevens had great defenses even when he was playing Isaiah Thomas 40 minutes a game. He got guys to play hard and buy in, but nobody expected Tatum and Brown to beat Giannis and Middleton or Embiid or Lebron.

I’ll concede my Lebron takes are hasty but your Boston analysis is tragic. 2010 Finals was the collective death of that Boston big-3 team. Blowing that lead in the Finals in game 7 was it. Everything else was just an extended death rattle.

If I stop talking about Lebron please, oh please I beg of you to stop taking about the Celtics. I’ve read enough quarter-baked takes for one day.

[IG2]

The roster was defensively slanted, so on-off won’t necessarily tell us whether someone was a good defender or not.

That roster was slanted towards lack of talent more than anything. Besides Snow, nobody else had a defensive reputation. Hughes was mainly known as a gambler. He was a net-negative defensively in all 3 of his seasons with Cleveland and by huge margins to boot in 2006 (-5.2) and 2008 (-4.6). Calling him a "massive" part of Cleveland's defensive success is some high level comedy. There's nothing to support it. Take it from someone who watched every LeBron game, Hughes was a bum. Straight up garbage on both ends. Cleveland used to win DESPITE him.

And if we wanted to talk about the playoffs specifically, what made the 2007 Cavaliers do so well

I would attribute almost all of Cleveland's defensive success to Mike Brown's schemes, LeBron's own burgeoning defensive prowess and most importantly, his ability to take on such a load offensively that the rest of his [inept] cast could focus most of their energy on an end that didn't require skill, just effort. Think 2001 76ers with AI, but significantly less talented.

Definitionally, some people on the team will have positive on-offs and some will have negative on-offs.

Dude, successful teams might have the occasional core player who's a net-negative, just nowhere near to the extent Cleveland did. You won't find anything resembling an NBA finalist with starters as heavily in the negatives as Gooden and Snow. You'll only see that on lottery teams.

Calling LeBron's 07 cast "quality NBA players" is high level trolling, nothing more.

[lessthanjake]

The roster was defensively slanted, so on-off won’t necessarily tell us whether someone was a good defender or not.

That roster was slanted towards lack of talent more than anything. Besides Snow, nobody else had a defensive reputation. Hughes was mainly known as a gambler. His on/off splits have him as a slight negative defender too, while being backed up by defensive juggernauts like Pavlovic, Boobie Gibson and Damon Jones . This isn't even getting into his putrid offense. I occasionally watch Cleveland games from that era and get physically ill watching him play. Cleveland used to win DESPITE him.

And if we wanted to talk about the playoffs specifically, what made the 2007 Cavaliers do so well

I would attribute almost all of Cleveland's defensive success to Mike Brown's schemes, LeBron's own burgeoning defensive prowess and most importantly, his ability to take on such a load offensively that the rest of his [inept] cast could focus most of their energy on an end that didn't require skill, just effort. Think 2001 76ers with AI, but significantly less talented.

Mike Brown certainly helps, but he’s not out there playing the game. You don’t get probably the best defense of any team LeBron ever had without a supporting cast of players who are playing extremely good defense. That’s just the reality. Of course, if you try to act like a supporting cast shouldn’t be evaluated on their defense because that “doesn’t require skill, just effort” then you’re just making a transparently silly point. The 2007 Cavs were an amazing defense, and were a historically good defense in the playoffs. That absolutely cannot happen without LeBron’s supporting cast being genuinely great defensively. And a team’s defense is obviously a massive deal! To compare that team to the 2022 Nuggets is just totally ridiculous. I’m shocked to even see it suggested, to be honest.

Definitionally, some people on the team will have positive on-offs and some will have negative on-offs.

Dude, successful teams might have the occasional core player who's a net-negative, just nowhere near to the extent Cleveland did. You won't find anything resembling an NBA finalist with starters as heavily in the negatives as Gooden and Snow. You'll only see that on lottery teams.

Calling LeBron's 07 cast "quality NBA players" is high level trolling, nothing more.

Trying to look at individual players’ on-off to evaluate how good the team was as a whole is just obviously dumb. Again, it’s a zero-sum game. If you think the Cavs starters had abnormally bad on-off compared to most teams’ starters, then that just definitionally means that the bench had abnormally good on-off compared to most teams’ bench. Is that a good or bad tradeoff? Who knows! It’s all a zero-sum game, so it tells us nothing. That said, it’s certainly worth noting that their top 11 players in minutes played (which includes everyone they ultimately had in their playoff rotation) ALL had a positive net rating when they were on the court (and that 12th player that had a negative net rating only played 202 minutes). Looking at net rating is actually meaningful, since it’s not a zero-sum game! And it is at least somewhat indicative of the depth that the team had as well as its defensive prowess. What is also indicative of that is the fact that the team only had a -2.6 net rating with LeBron off the court (note: the 2022 Nuggets had a -8.0 net rating with Jokic off the court). Of course, the obvious reason that they didn’t do too badly with LeBron off the court is that their defense was fantastic whether LeBron was on or not (a fantastic 102.5 DRTG even with LeBron off). Which is the whole point here: The supporting cast of the 2007 Cavs was objectively elite defensively. The 2022 Nuggets supporting cast was not elite (or even remotely good) at anything. It’s just a bad comparison, that people only make because they’re so used to talking about how bad the 2007 Cavs supporting cast was. And people just are not realizing they’re not talking about the same measuring stick here. The 2007 Cavs supporting cast was not a good enough supporting cast that the team could reasonably be expected to do well against the 2007 Spurs. But they are still miles above the putrid 2022 Nuggets supporting cast.

[MacGill]

Post deleted - not going to retype it all.