Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Michael played with two Hall of Famers.
If he loses this finals, he'll be 2-3 in finals appearances... While it is still impressive to be in 5 finals to date, Jordan was 6-0.
42-1 in the gamer count, I'd assume you just placed your vote? Oh wait, that isn't a real thing
I knew this thread wouldn't disappoint for laughs.
LeBron is currently 2-2 in the Finals at age 29. At age 29 Jordan was 2-0.
Setting aside the silly notion of equating team success and individual skill ...are you saying that it's better to fail early in the playoffs than in the Finals? If the 2007 Cavs had lost in the ECF to the Pistons instead of making the Finals and the 2011 Heat had lost to the Celtics instead of pulling off that dramatic series win, James would be 2-0 in the Finals, equal to Jordan's record with the Bulls. Would that be better than 2-2 in your eyes? Losing earlier in the playoffs means you're better?
he hit the game winner there too.
I didn't vote. You asked two weird, unanswerable questions. I'm just pointing out that your reasoning here would make it preferable to lose early in the playoffs rather than late, which is pretty silly.42-1 in the gamer count, I'd assume you just placed your vote?
I knew this thread wouldn't disappoint for laughs.
LeBron is currently 2-2 in the Finals at age 29. At age 29 Jordan was 2-0.
Setting aside the silly notion of equating team success and individual skill ...are you saying that it's better to fail early in the playoffs than in the Finals? If the 2007 Cavs had lost in the ECF to the Pistons instead of making the Finals and the 2011 Heat had lost to the Celtics instead of pulling off that dramatic series win, James would be 2-0 in the Finals, equal to Jordan's record with the Bulls. Would that be better than 2-2 in your eyes? Losing earlier in the playoffs means you're better?
They didn't just lose in 2007, they were swept... They lost to a team of inferior talent in 2011 BTW.
Oh yea, & Lebron has been in the league for 11 seasons... Jordan was 4-0 in Finals appearance by the end of his 11th season.
If you're aiming to make the dumbest statement in this thread, this is the bar you need to limbo under.
Comparing two players and who you would rather have is weird and unanswerable, gotcha...
No, comparing two players from different eras is unanswerable.
Gamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a 8 years apart (referring to Jordan's prime) is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
Can't compare the two, weird and unanswerable.
Lebron is better than Washington Jordan. Question answered. /threadGamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a decade apart (referring to Jordan's prime) is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
ETA: They actually were in the league at the same time when Jordan was on Washington
Two decades apart. Jordan was drafted in 1984 at age 23, LeBron in 2003 at age 19.Gamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a decade apart is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
This is obviously a joke right? I'll bite anyways...
Who cares where the players come from? The best players end up in the NBA. Are you suggesting that the Euro's today are more talented than the Americans from Jordan's era? And the times Jordan did compete against the Euro's he destroyed them. Remember the Dream Team? There's a reason there weren't a lot of non Americans in the NBA in 1988.Two decades apart. Jordan was drafted in 1984 at age 23, LeBron in 2003 at age 19.Gamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a decade apart is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
Let me give you just one example of the many reasons you can't do it: talent pool. How do you account for the fact that Jordan was competing almost exclusively against Americans, the only nation that had been playing basketball on a large scale for long enough to develop NBA talent at the time, while James competes against a global talent pool? Have you seen the Spurs roster? For the most part Jordan didn't have to beat Euro talent or South American talent or any of that because it didn't exist on a relevant scale.
That's one reason, but there's lots of other reasons why it's impossible to compare the two, or really any two players separated by more than a few years. Rule changes, training and diet improvements, etc. etc. etc.
You can compare their careers if you want, ask who was more impressive relative to their peers. That's a fair question. But that's a totally different question, and wouldn't be fair to the 29 year old vs. the retired guy anyway.
Do you really not understand the difference between quality of particular opponents and overall talent pool? Seriously?This is obviously a joke right? I'll bite anyways...
Jordan only had to compete against Showtime, the Bad Boys, & Bird and co... A group of scrubs he was up against
I would say the quality of opponent is more important when measuring true greatness, but that is just me (and anyone who isn't visually impaired)... I guess if more Euros were in the NBA in the 80's/90's you'd have more respect for Jordan...Do you really not understand the difference between quality of particular opponents and overall talent pool? Seriously?This is obviously a joke right? I'll bite anyways...
Jordan only had to compete against Showtime, the Bad Boys, & Bird and co... A group of scrubs he was up against
It's not where they come from, it's how many there are. The fact that the dream team manhandled the foreign teams actually helps my point. Basketball was a US-only sport then. Even the college teams could beat the foreign teams for the most part. If a college team still played in the foreign national teams now they'd get run off the floor. Jordan was the best of X number of guys who tried to make it big in basketball. LeBron is the best of 3X or 4X number of guys. Not saying that makes him better, saying that makes comparison impossible.Who cares where the players come from? The best players end up in the NBA. Are you suggesting that the Euro's today are more talented than the Americans from Jordan's era? And the times Jordan did compete against the Euro's he destroyed them. Remember the Dream Team? There's a reason there weren't a lot of non Americans in the NBA in 1988.Two decades apart. Jordan was drafted in 1984 at age 23, LeBron in 2003 at age 19.Gamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a decade apart is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
Let me give you just one example of the many reasons you can't do it: talent pool. How do you account for the fact that Jordan was competing almost exclusively against Americans, the only nation that had been playing basketball on a large scale for long enough to develop NBA talent at the time, while James competes against a global talent pool? Have you seen the Spurs roster? For the most part Jordan didn't have to beat Euro talent or South American talent or any of that because it didn't exist on a relevant scale.
That's one reason, but there's lots of other reasons why it's impossible to compare the two, or really any two players separated by more than a few years. Rule changes, training and diet improvements, etc. etc. etc.
You can compare their careers if you want, ask who was more impressive relative to their peers. That's a fair question. But that's a totally different question, and wouldn't be fair to the 29 year old vs. the retired guy anyway.
How many teams are there now compared to then? Talent could actually be more diluted.Do you really not understand the difference between quality of particular opponents and overall talent pool? Seriously?This is obviously a joke right? I'll bite anyways...
Jordan only had to compete against Showtime, the Bad Boys, & Bird and co... A group of scrubs he was up against
Maybe that had something to do with the fact that they were the greatest sports team ever assembled and it wouldn't matter who lined up across the court from them, maybe.
No it doesn't because there are a finite number of players in the NBA, and the best get there. It doesn't matter how many try out. I honestly can't believe you're trying to make this an argument.It's not where they come from, it's how many there are. The fact that the dream team manhandled the foreign teams actually helps my point. Basketball was a US-only sport then. Even the college teams could beat the foreign teams for the most part. If a college team still played in the foreign national teams now they'd get run off the floor. Jordan was the best of X number of guys who tried to make it big in basketball. LeBron is the best of 3X or 4X number of guys. Not saying that makes him better, saying that makes comparison impossible.Who cares where the players come from? The best players end up in the NBA. Are you suggesting that the Euro's today are more talented than the Americans from Jordan's era? And the times Jordan did compete against the Euro's he destroyed them. Remember the Dream Team? There's a reason there weren't a lot of non Americans in the NBA in 1988.Two decades apart. Jordan was drafted in 1984 at age 23, LeBron in 2003 at age 19.Gamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a decade apart is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
Let me give you just one example of the many reasons you can't do it: talent pool. How do you account for the fact that Jordan was competing almost exclusively against Americans, the only nation that had been playing basketball on a large scale for long enough to develop NBA talent at the time, while James competes against a global talent pool? Have you seen the Spurs roster? For the most part Jordan didn't have to beat Euro talent or South American talent or any of that because it didn't exist on a relevant scale.
That's one reason, but there's lots of other reasons why it's impossible to compare the two, or really any two players separated by more than a few years. Rule changes, training and diet improvements, etc. etc. etc.
You can compare their careers if you want, ask who was more impressive relative to their peers. That's a fair question. But that's a totally different question, and wouldn't be fair to the 29 year old vs. the retired guy anyway.
Yup, that would be a factor too. Yet another reason it's impossible to compare. Although we're supposedly trying to compare players, not teams, so it shouldn't matter. Unfortunately in basketball you can't separate the two ... yet another complication.How many teams are there now compared to then? Talent could actually be more diluted.Do you really not understand the difference between quality of particular opponents and overall talent pool? Seriously?This is obviously a joke right? I'll bite anyways...
Jordan only had to compete against Showtime, the Bad Boys, & Bird and co... A group of scrubs he was up against
And I can't believe you don't understand it. It's funny, but also kind of sad.No it doesn't because there are a finite number of players in the NBA, and the best get there. It doesn't matter how many try out. I honestly can't believe you're trying to make this an argument.It's not where they come from, it's how many there are. The fact that the dream team manhandled the foreign teams actually helps my point. Basketball was a US-only sport then. Even the college teams could beat the foreign teams for the most part. If a college team still played in the foreign national teams now they'd get run off the floor. Jordan was the best of X number of guys who tried to make it big in basketball. LeBron is the best of 3X or 4X number of guys. Not saying that makes him better, saying that makes comparison impossible.Who cares where the players come from? The best players end up in the NBA. Are you suggesting that the Euro's today are more talented than the Americans from Jordan's era? And the times Jordan did compete against the Euro's he destroyed them. Remember the Dream Team? There's a reason there weren't a lot of non Americans in the NBA in 1988.Two decades apart. Jordan was drafted in 1984 at age 23, LeBron in 2003 at age 19.Gamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a decade apart is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
Let me give you just one example of the many reasons you can't do it: talent pool. How do you account for the fact that Jordan was competing almost exclusively against Americans, the only nation that had been playing basketball on a large scale for long enough to develop NBA talent at the time, while James competes against a global talent pool? Have you seen the Spurs roster? For the most part Jordan didn't have to beat Euro talent or South American talent or any of that because it didn't exist on a relevant scale.
That's one reason, but there's lots of other reasons why it's impossible to compare the two, or really any two players separated by more than a few years. Rule changes, training and diet improvements, etc. etc. etc.
You can compare their careers if you want, ask who was more impressive relative to their peers. That's a fair question. But that's a totally different question, and wouldn't be fair to the 29 year old vs. the retired guy anyway.
Untrue when you're pulling the top miniscule percent from both sets. The bottom 50% of both of those sets of people are so far below the top 500 as to be irrelevant.And I can't believe you don't understand it. It's funny, but also kind of sad.No it doesn't because there are a finite number of players in the NBA, and the best get there. It doesn't matter how many try out. I honestly can't believe you're trying to make this an argument.It's not where they come from, it's how many there are. The fact that the dream team manhandled the foreign teams actually helps my point. Basketball was a US-only sport then. Even the college teams could beat the foreign teams for the most part. If a college team still played in the foreign national teams now they'd get run off the floor. Jordan was the best of X number of guys who tried to make it big in basketball. LeBron is the best of 3X or 4X number of guys. Not saying that makes him better, saying that makes comparison impossible.Who cares where the players come from? The best players end up in the NBA. Are you suggesting that the Euro's today are more talented than the Americans from Jordan's era? And the times Jordan did compete against the Euro's he destroyed them. Remember the Dream Team? There's a reason there weren't a lot of non Americans in the NBA in 1988.Two decades apart. Jordan was drafted in 1984 at age 23, LeBron in 2003 at age 19.Gamer doesn't exist and comparing players who played a decade apart is weird and unanswerable... I guess we are all settled here.
I was gonna let that one go because I'm having too much fun with fantasycurse, but it's a winner.
Let me give you just one example of the many reasons you can't do it: talent pool. How do you account for the fact that Jordan was competing almost exclusively against Americans, the only nation that had been playing basketball on a large scale for long enough to develop NBA talent at the time, while James competes against a global talent pool? Have you seen the Spurs roster? For the most part Jordan didn't have to beat Euro talent or South American talent or any of that because it didn't exist on a relevant scale.
That's one reason, but there's lots of other reasons why it's impossible to compare the two, or really any two players separated by more than a few years. Rule changes, training and diet improvements, etc. etc. etc.
You can compare their careers if you want, ask who was more impressive relative to their peers. That's a fair question. But that's a totally different question, and wouldn't be fair to the 29 year old vs. the retired guy anyway.
The best 500 out of a 500,000,000 sample will be better in anything will be better than the best 500 out of 100,000,000. Guaranteed.
Nope, it's still true. The larger the pool the better the elite members of the pool. Especially when you're drawing a pool of hundreds from a sample of millions, as is the case here.
Anything for this comment Tobias? The Dream Team was just rolling due to inferior competition?Maybe that had something to do with the fact that they were the greatest sports team ever assembled and it wouldn't matter who lined up across the court from them, maybe.
It depends how you define the pool, but that doesn't really matter. The concept is what's important. If an 8 year old kid picks up a basketball tomorrow (or in 1984), his chances of making the NBA are a lot less than an 8 year old kid who picks up a basketball in 1963. That translates to more talent in the NBA.
Except, that's not how you play the game. At all.
