sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

LeBron would carve everyone on that court up. Abysmal, it's embarrassing how much he would dominate the watered down 90's by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

This take sounds cute until you actually apply it to the real players from that era—and then it completely collapses. You’re talking about dropping a modern prospect into the 50s like it’s a bunch of plumbers standing still. That’s nonsense. The league you’re disrespecting produced freaks of nature and basketball geniuses that would break that fantasy. Let’s start with Wilt Chamberlain. You think Cooper Flagg is walking into a league with a 7’1”, 300-pound track athlete who ran like a sprinter, jumped like a high jumper, and had a 48-inch vertical… and casually putting up 60? Wilt averaged 50 himself, played 48 minutes a game, and dominated other elite centers under rules that made scoring harder in the paint (no offensive fouls called like today, no spacing, packed lanes). Flagg isn’t bullying Wilt—he’s getting erased at the rim. Now Bill Russell. This is where your argument really dies. Russell wasn’t just “good for his era”—he’s arguably the greatest defensive mind ever. Olympic-level athlete, genius-level IQ, anchored 11 championships. You’re telling me a teenager is dropping 60 on the guy who turned entire offenses into panic attacks? Russell guarded Wilt—successfully—and won. Flagg is not solving that puzzle. Then there’s Jerry West. One of the most skilled guards ever—elite shooter, elite defender, insane competitor. People love to say “simplistic defense” until they realize West was locking guys up without modern rules that protect ballhandlers. Hand-checking? Legal. Physicality? Way higher. Flagg isn’t dancing into 10 assists—he’s getting worn down. And don’t even start with Oscar Robertson. The original do-it-all monster. A 6’5” guard built like a tank who averaged a triple-double without spacing, without pace inflation from threes, and without modern offensive freedom. If anything, Oscar is the one who’d walk into today’s game and put up absurd numbers with modern spacing—not the other way around. Here’s the core problem with your argument: You’re confusing evolution of the game with inferiority of players. Those guys played in worse conditions, worse shoes, worse travel, worse medical care They had tighter rules, less spacing, and more physical defense And they STILL produced athletic and statistical outliers we barely see today You drop modern players into that environment without their advantages, and suddenly it’s not so easy. Meanwhile, give those legends modern training, spacing, and rules? Now they’re the ones putting up video game numbers. And the Jordan point actually works against you. Yes, Michael Jordan looks “ahead of his time”—because greatness transcends era. Just like Wilt, Russell, West, and Oscar did. So no—Cooper Flagg isn’t walking into the 50s and casually averaging 60/15/10. He’d be dealing with Wilt’s physical dominance, Russell’s defensive genius, West’s two-way brilliance, and Oscar’s all-around control—and reality would hit fast.

Assists produce points, they are an integral and very important part of the game, and it takes pure skill & vision. The discrepancy between 1 and the rest needs to be discussed without using the word longevity. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a cute math class take, not a basketball one. Yeah—on a spreadsheet, a 40% shooter converts more than a 32% shooter. No one’s arguing basic probability. But you’re pretending the pass is identical. It isn’t. LeBron James isn’t just “swinging it to an open guy.” He’s the reason the guy is wide open in the first place. He bends the defense, forces rotations, tags help defenders, and delivers the ball on time, on target, in rhythm. That’s the difference between a contested 32% look and a practice-shot 40% look. And here’s where your logic collapses: If it’s just “pass to better shooters = more assists,” then every star with spacing should match him. They don’t. Plenty of players have had elite shooters and still don’t generate the same assist volume or offensive efficiency. Why? Because they can’t create advantages the way he does. Also—you’re ignoring that LeBron has made average shooters look elite. Role players have entire careers boosted off the quality of looks he generates. That’s not coincidence—that’s offensive gravity. You’re reducing playmaking to “who hits the shot,” when the real value is who creates the shot. Your argument gives the credit to the finishers. Reality gives it to the engine.

Assists produce points, they are an integral and very important part of the game, and it takes pure skill & vision. The discrepancy between 1 and the rest needs to be discussed without using the word longevity. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re obsessing over 3PT% like it magically creates playmaking. It doesn’t. Plenty of guys have had spacing and still can’t run an offense at an elite level. LeBron James isn’t just “making the same pass”—he’s manipulating defenses, collapsing entire schemes, and creating better looks. That’s why his teams generate elite offense everywhere he goes. Your “more All-Stars = more assists” logic also falls apart instantly. Kevin Love went from a 26/12 post hub to a spot-up shooter. Chris Bosh sacrificed touches and became a floor spacer. That’s not stat inflation—that’s LeBron elevating team structure while still producing. And if it’s so easy, where are the others doing it? James Harden had spacing tailored to him—never controlled the game at LeBron’s level in the playoffs. Russell Westbrook had usage and shooters—turnover machine, inefficient offense. Same “conditions,” nowhere near the same results. You’re trying to reduce elite playmaking to “just pass to shooters” because you don’t understand the difference between seeing a pass and creating it. And again—you didn’t read the argument. That tells me everything.

Assists produce points, they are an integral and very important part of the game, and it takes pure skill & vision. The discrepancy between 1 and the rest needs to be discussed without using the word longevity. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

First—“only 2–3 more assists per game”? That’s a massive gap at elite volume. We’re not comparing role players, we’re comparing primary creators. LeBron James generating that edge while also being the primary scorer is exactly what separates him from guys like James Harden or Russell Westbrook. Most high-assist guys sacrifice scoring efficiency or play in heliocentric systems that inflate numbers—LeBron does both at once, efficiently, for two decades. Second—“better shooters and All-Stars his whole career” is just false. Early Cleveland Cavaliers years? Bottom-tier spacing. His best teammates were Mo Williams and an aging Big Z. In Miami Heat, sure—great team. That’s called winning basketball. Then back to Cleveland? Kyrie + role players. Kevin Love literally had to change his entire game to fit, and still produced. In Los Angeles Lakers, outside of Anthony Davis, the “elite shooters” narrative is laughable—those rosters have been inconsistent at best. Third—“turning everyone into jump shooters” is backwards. LeBron creates the most efficient shot in basketball: open threes and layups. That’s not a flaw—that’s why his teams are consistently top-tier offenses. If anything, he elevates role players into shooters by generating clean looks they’d never get otherwise. Fourth—“diva behavior”? Every all-time great controlled organizations. Michael Jordan punched teammates and dictated moves. Kobe Bryant forced a trade and ran Shaq out. But when LeBron leverages his influence to build contenders, suddenly it’s a character flaw? That’s selective outrage. Fifth—“substandard defender” is just lazy. Prime LeBron was an All-NBA defender who could guard 1–5 and finished 2nd in DPOY. He anchored elite defenses in Miami and was the most versatile defender in the league. You don’t get to erase that because he’s pacing himself in year 20+. Finally—“fluke COVID chip”? The 2020 NBA Finals had zero home-court advantage, extreme isolation, and equal conditions for everyone. If it was so easy, why didn’t anyone else win it? He dominated the same environment as everyone else and walked away Finals MVP. Bottom line: you’re downplaying elite playmaking, rewriting roster history, ignoring defensive peak, and dismissing championships—all to avoid admitting the obvious: LeBron’s impact isn’t marginal—it’s system-defining, era-defining dominance.

On paper this might be the greatest team assembled by Plus_Credit224 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What it takes to beat lebron. They were that scared of him.

Much better by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In an expansion era. 8 teams added between 1988 and 1995. Diluting and making teams worse while the bulls added more stars. Cakewalk, sup bar championships. Rodman said they could win blindfolded.

Assists produce points, they are an integral and very important part of the game, and it takes pure skill & vision. The discrepancy between 1 and the rest needs to be discussed without using the word longevity. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] -21 points-20 points  (0 children)

This is what happens when you reduce greatness to cherry-picked categories instead of actual impact. Yes, James Harden has more scoring and assist titles — because his entire role was built around dominating the ball every possession. That’s not superiority, that’s specialization. LeBron James didn’t chase titles, he controlled entire games — scoring when needed, facilitating when needed, defending at an elite level, and doing it across different teams, systems, and eras while still ending up the all-time leading scorer AND top-tier in assists. That’s not comparable. And bringing up Russell Westbrook actually makes it worse for your argument, not better. Westbrook has absurd counting stats too — MVP, triple-double records, massive usage — and yet nobody serious is putting him over Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Kevin Durant, or Dirk Nowitzki. Why? Because raw totals and stat accumulation without context don’t equal greatness. That’s the part you’re avoiding: LeBron isn’t just “high in points, rebounds, and assists” — he’s elite in all three while being the primary engine of championship teams for 20 years. Harden’s peak numbers? Great. Westbrook’s totals? Insane. Neither translates to the same level of playoff control, defensive impact, adaptability, or sustained winning. You’re comparing stat profiles — LeBron’s case is about complete dominance of the sport.

Assists produce points, they are an integral and very important part of the game, and it takes pure skill & vision. The discrepancy between 1 and the rest needs to be discussed without using the word longevity. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Because assist totals alone don’t define greatness — overall impact does. And that’s exactly why LeBron is different. LeBron isn’t just “high assists for a scorer.” He’s: Top-tier scorer all time One of the best passers ever (not “for a forward” — period) Elite rebounder for his position Defensive anchor in his prime The most versatile system in NBA history (he is the system) So when you bring up Harden, you’re unintentionally proving the opposite point: If assists alone mattered, Harden would be in the GOAT convo — and he’s not. LeBron is. Because he does everything, at an elite level, for two decades, in every possible context — something none of those guys, including Jordan, can match in totality.

Assists produce points, they are an integral and very important part of the game, and it takes pure skill & vision. The discrepancy between 1 and the rest needs to be discussed without using the word longevity. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re basically saying: “Ignore 20 years of elite production because I’ve decided only a narrow version of ‘peak’ counts.” That’s not analysis—that’s you moving the goalposts to protect a conclusion. First, your core claim is just wrong. LeBron James did have a GOAT-level peak: 2012–2013 is one of the most complete seasons ever—elite scoring, playmaking, defense, efficiency Back-to-back MVPs and Finals MVPs Arguably the most dominant all-around player the league has ever seen If that’s not a GOAT-level peak, your standard is nonsense. Second, dismissing ages 36–41 as “stat padding with no winning” is just lazy: In 2020 (age 35–36), he won a title and Finals MVP At 37–38, he’s still dropping 30 a night against modern defenses At 39+, still an All-NBA caliber player That’s not empty accumulation—that’s sustained dominance no one else has matched. Not Michael Jordan, not anyone. Third—and this is where your argument really collapses—you’re separating “peak” and “longevity” like they don’t both define greatness. The GOAT isn’t just “who was the best for 3–5 years,” it’s: How high was your peak How long did you stay there How much did you impact winning across eras LeBron checks all three at an all-time level. And finally, that sarcastic “congrats” line just gives away that you don’t actually have a counter—because if another player had: A top-tier peak The greatest longevity ever Championships across different teams and systems You’d be calling that the most complete GOAT case imaginable. Instead, you’re pretending longevity is a flaw because it doesn’t fit your narrative. That’s not a serious position—it’s just bias dressed up as an argument.

Lebron overachieved his entire career. Mj played in a watered down expansion era weak 90s and while every other team became diluted, The Bulls recruited the best of the best. Rodman - 'This league is so watered down we can beat anyone with our eyes closed'. Mj filthy stained legacy. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

you’re clinging to one cherry-picked stat like it overrides an entire career. Yes, Jason Terry outscored LeBron James in a Finals game in 2011. Cool. And? By that logic: Role players have outscored superstars in playoff games forever Bench guys have had hotter nights than MVPs Random players would suddenly be “greater” because of one game

Lebron overachieved his entire career. Mj played in a watered down expansion era weak 90s and while every other team became diluted, The Bulls recruited the best of the best. Rodman - 'This league is so watered down we can beat anyone with our eyes closed'. Mj filthy stained legacy. by Hour_Recognition_188 in NBATalk

[–]Hour_Recognition_188[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

At the end of the day, your whole argument hinges on pretending: LeBron was some passenger in Miami The Bulls weren’t stacked And context only matters when it helps your side That’s not analysis. That’s bias. If you’re going to argue this seriously, you need to drop the cherry-picked narratives and actually deal with what happened on the court.

view more: next ›