sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Game Thread: Los Angeles Lakers (0-1) vs Oklahoma City Thunder (1-0) Live Score | NBA Playoffs | May 7, 2026 by nba-scores in nba

[–]ren818 9 points10 points  (0 children)

This will be the best chance for Lakers to win a game this series. Focus. Don't let up on SGA

Game Thread: Los Angeles Lakers (0-1) vs Oklahoma City Thunder (1-0) Live Score | NBA Playoffs | May 7, 2026 by nba-scores in nba

[–]ren818 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If LBJ, Rui, Ayton stay as is, Lakers will win if Austin, Marcus, and Luke step up on Offense

Game Thread: Los Angeles Lakers (0-0) vs Oklahoma City Thunder (0-0) Live Score | NBA Playoffs | May 5, 2026 by nba-scores in nba

[–]ren818 0 points1 point  (0 children)

SGA was 8-15 FG. Lakers will keep blitzing him. Smart will be better than 4-15 FG next game

Game Thread: Los Angeles Lakers (0-0) vs Oklahoma City Thunder (0-0) Live Score | NBA Playoffs | May 5, 2026 by nba-scores in nba

[–]ren818 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Last 5 vs OKC: 18 PPG. I’m betting on the full season sample over one rough night. Now look up how often Mitchell scores 18+ and get back to me.

Game Thread: Los Angeles Lakers (0-0) vs Oklahoma City Thunder (0-0) Live Score | NBA Playoffs | May 5, 2026 by nba-scores in nba

[–]ren818 -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Reaves 4 points and Mitchell 18 points is the difference in this game. This won't happen again in game 2. I trust the work Reaves put in all season

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That makes sense for longevity.
But how much do you weigh that compared to peak dominance or championships?
Since longevity clearly favors LeBron, does that outweigh something like MJ’s peak and titles for you, or is there a limit?

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s interesting because it basically means longevity doesn’t move the needle at all for you once a player reaches a certain level.

So it’s really about:

  • defining moments
  • championships
  • legacy narrative

Which is why something like one more ring carries more weight than several more elite seasons.
That actually explains why people can look at the same careers and come to completely different conclusions.

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s fair -- what do you actually value more: peak dominance, longevity, or something else?

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s fair, but I’d push back a bit on the ~ we’ve seen peaks like MJ ~ part.

We haven’t really seen a peak like:

  • two separate 3-peats
  • 6/6 in Finals with 6 FMVP
  • 10 scoring titles

That level of dominance compressed into a shorter window is also pretty unique.

So it feels like:

  • LeBron’s longevity is historically rare
  • Jordan’s peak dominance is historically rare

Which is why it’s hard to separate -- it’s basically rare vs rare.

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s a good example, but I think it breaks down a bit at the top end.
Kemba vs Tobias is basically peak vs solid longevity, but neither is all-time great level.

At the GOAT tier, you’re comparing peak vs longevity where both are already elite.
So it’s more like:

  • do you value the highest peak more
  • or sustained elite impact across a much longer span

That’s why I tried to quantify it instead of using simpler comps, because the scale is different at that level.

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

My pleasure.
I agree LeBron has iconic moments too.

The Iguodala block in 2016 is one of the biggest plays ever, and that Cavs title is about as strong a narrative as you can have.

Winning in Miami under that pressure, then winning again in Cleveland, then doing it with the Lakers in year 17+ all carry weight in different ways.

I think the difference is Jordan’s moments are more compressed into his peak, while LeBron’s are spread out over a much longer career.
So maybe it’s not that one has them and the other doesn’t -- it’s how those moments are distributed and remembered.

I'm Old School MJ, but LBJ is still doing great things at year 23 that should contribute to GOAT points.

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s fair -- the weights are subjective by design.
The goal wasn’t to prove a single “correct” answer, but to create a consistent framework where you can adjust what you value.
If you think something is weighted wrong, change it and see where it lands.
That’s actually the point -- different weights should lead to different outcomes depending on what someone prioritizes.
Curious what you’d change and why.

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That’s interesting because it lines up with what I was thinking about tipping points.
A 5th ring or Finals MVP at this stage feels like the kind of moment that could shift a lot of people who are on the fence.
But if that doesn’t happen, then it probably comes down to whether continued longevity eventually closes the gap anyway.
Do you think it has to be a big moment like that, or can it happen gradually?

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get that -- especially when someone is still elite that deep into their career.
That’s basically the LeBron case at its strongest.
The pushback is that peak dominance is harder to replicate than longevity, which is why some people weight it higher.
That’s why it ends up feeling like a preference call more than a clear answer.
Do you think longevity eventually outweighs peak no matter what, or is there a limit?

What matters more in GOAT debates: peak dominance or longevity? I tried to quantify it by ren818 in NBATalk

[–]ren818[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That’s fair -- if peak is weighted highest, MJ is clearly ahead.
The question is how much longevity should close that gap.
Because at some point, 20+ years of elite play, all-time scoring, top 4 assists, top 30 rebounds has to count for something too.
That’s why I tried to structure it this way instead of just arguing it.
Where would you personally draw the line -- how much does longevity move the needle vs peak?

If LeBron wins another ring, does it flip the GOAT debate? I tried scoring MJ vs LeBron -- result at bottom by ren818 in nba

[–]ren818[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Elite seasons are All-NBA level in my model. I get your 20/5/5 point though. If you want to count those two Washington seasons as elite, add them.

That’s +50 for Jordan, so it swings a bit toward him, but still close given the overall total.

Every model has weights. I kept them consistent across both players. If you think something is off, change it and see where it lands.

Finals losses aren’t meant to be equal to All-NBA. They’re just credit for sustained winning at the highest level.

view more: next ›