thedangerouskitchen wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 3:25 pm
If the 96 Bulls faced the Sonics without Payton (or Kemp), the Magic without Shaq or Penny, etc., then their status as the "undisputed" GOAT team would be questioned/debatable.
Gotcha.
So you admit that at an absolute minimum, if you placed them in today's NBA, you couldn't make a reasonable guess at whether or not they would be a scrub level team in absolute terms, since you claim the NBA is a complete scrub league now, correct? Even if they won ever game by 50 points, swept the playoffs etc...right (since that's not far off from what Boston has done to-date this year)?
Actually answer the question DIRECTLY. Be a man. Don't be a coward.
"I'm not convinced the 1987 Lakers are even a meaningfully different than average team...since they've only beaten .500-level clubs in the playoffs...let's see if they are above-average or not. No, I don't care they won 65 games and had the best net rating and offense in the league."
Robceltsfan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 2:58 pm
The '87 Lakers are considered the best version of the Magic Johnson era. They won 65 games. They won the title.
But in the WC playoffs, they faced teams with 37 wins, 42 wins and 39 wins. A total record of 118-128.
TIL that Stars thinks that Lakers team isn't "elite".
Seriously. LOL.
Those Magic lead Lakers teams went to the finals every year from 82-89 except for the 85-86 season. They were elite.
Boston on the other hand, one championship since Larry Bird.
Robceltsfan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 2:58 pm
The '87 Lakers are considered the best version of the Magic Johnson era. They won 65 games. They won the title.
But in the WC playoffs, they faced teams with 37 wins, 42 wins and 39 wins. A total record of 118-128.
TIL that Stars thinks that Lakers team isn't "elite".
Seriously. LOL.
Those Magic lead Lakers teams went to the finals every year from 82-89 except for the 85-86 season. They were elite.
Boston on the other hand, one championship since Larry Bird.
Those Magic led Lakers teams faced incredibly shitty Western Conference opponents throughout the 80's. Therefore, you don't think they're elite.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are dumber than that.
Da Stars. wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 3:31 pm
Seriously. LOL.
Those Magic lead Lakers teams went to the finals every year from 82-89 except for the 85-86 season. They were elite.
Wow, it's almost like an elite team can play in the inferior conference or something.
This isn't a sport where teams in different conferences fail to play each other.
If you want to get a sense of how the team in question does against better competition, just....look.
There's a bushel basket full of things you can examine to give you hints if it's a great team who simply lucked out into an easier conference (Boston this year), or a paper tiger that disproportionately feasts off shit teams (like the Magic this year...maybe they are a paper llama or something like that....not a tiger).
Robceltsfan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 2:58 pm
The '87 Lakers are considered the best version of the Magic Johnson era. They won 65 games. They won the title.
But in the WC playoffs, they faced teams with 37 wins, 42 wins and 39 wins. A total record of 118-128.
TIL that Stars thinks that Lakers team isn't "elite".
Seriously. LOL.
Those Magic lead Lakers teams went to the finals every year from 82-89 except for the 85-86 season. They were elite.
Boston on the other hand, one championship since Larry Bird.
Those Magic led Lakers teams faced incredibly shitty Western Conference opponents throughout the 80's. Therefore, you don't think they're elite.
LOL. Boston is getting ready to play a team with a worse regular season record than any team the Lakers during the 80's ever played.
Seriously. LOL.
Those Magic lead Lakers teams went to the finals every year from 82-89 except for the 85-86 season. They were elite.
Boston on the other hand, one championship since Larry Bird.
Those Magic led Lakers teams faced incredibly shitty Western Conference opponents throughout the 80's. Therefore, you don't think they're elite.
LOL. Boston is getting ready to play a team with a worse regular season record than any team the Lakers during the 80's ever played.
1981 - Lakers lose to 40 win Rockets team in the FIRST ROUND
1982 - Lakers get swept by a 48 win Spurs team in the WCF's
1988 - Lakers face a 54 win Pistons team in the Finals
That's leaving out A LOT of 36-44 win teams they walked past throughout the decade.
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are dumber than that.
lettherebehouse wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 3:44 pm
Dude we’re still more than 48 hrs away from tipoff. What kind of teaser shit is this? I’m going back to sleep.
Robceltsfan wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 2:58 pm
The '87 Lakers are considered the best version of the Magic Johnson era. They won 65 games. They won the title.
But in the WC playoffs, they faced teams with 37 wins, 42 wins and 39 wins. A total record of 118-128.
TIL that Stars thinks that Lakers team isn't "elite".
The 87 Lakers beat the GOAT-level Celtics in the Finals... that's what justified their greatness.
The 2024 Celtics (if they go all the way) will have beaten the 46-win Heat (withOut their best player), the 48-win Cavs (without their best player for half the series AND without their 17/11/64% starting C for the entire series), the 47-win Pacers (without their best player for half the series) and the 50-win Mavs.
Can you smell that?? It reeks of mediocrity.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
thedangerouskitchen wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 3:25 pm
If the 96 Bulls faced the Sonics without Payton (or Kemp), the Magic without Shaq or Penny, etc., then their status as the "undisputed" GOAT team would be questioned/debatable.
Gotcha.
So you admit that at an absolute minimum, if you placed them in today's NBA, you couldn't make a reasonable guess at whether or not they would be a scrub level team in absolute terms, since you claim the NBA is a complete scrub league now, correct? Even if they won ever game by 50 points, swept the playoffs etc...right (since that's not far off from what Boston has done to-date this year)?
Actually answer the question DIRECTLY. Be a man. Don't be a coward.
Yes or no. Only one word is needed.
Again, fool... I never said today's NBA is full of scrubs. I quoted what the NBA Commissioner, the NBA VP of Ops and many current NBA players/coaches said about today's Defense being weak and soft, while the rules heavily favor the Offense.
Seems your beef is with those "experts". Go write 'em a letter if you disagree, or prove that they're all wrong but you're right.
If the latter, I'll wait. If the former, tell us what they say when you try and convince them that they're wrong and you're right.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
The 2024 Celtics (contingent on winning a title) are a GOAT-tier team....who happened to be playing a lesser team than would be usual in a Finals.
Do you think the 1996 Bulls would have somehow gotten worse if they played the 96 Rockets (48 wins) in the Finals instead of the 96 Sonics?
Did every member of the Dream Team suddenly tank overnight because they were playing non-NBA players from Angola or Cuba or even Croatia?
Stop. Think. Edit your post. You'll be okay.
Just in the Finals. Bush. The Mavs faced a 50 win team in the first round. Celtics, 0. until facing the Mavs. Celts are hardly an elite team.
You can only play who is in front of you. Part of the reason that I have become less impressed with the 90s Bulls with the passage of time. The way they were constructed was terrific. Who they played in the playoffs, in general, were far weaker teams.
Precisely why you should stick to discussing Hockey or Moose Hunting, and leave the NBA talk to those of us who have a clue.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
thedangerouskitchen wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 3:55 pm
Again, fool... I never said today's NBA is full of scrubs.
Well, you are lying. But you (and everyone here) knows that.
You just got caught and smashed so many times, you had to scurry your opinion and positions back because you kept losing debates on that point, which made you try to do a revision on the sly hoping no one would notice (I did, and I doubt I'm the only one).
Just in the Finals. Bush. The Mavs faced a 50 win team in the first round. Celtics, 0. until facing the Mavs. Celts are hardly an elite team.
You can only play who is in front of you. Part of the reason that I have become less impressed with the 90s Bulls with the passage of time. The way they were constructed was terrific. Who they played in the playoffs, in general, were far weaker teams.
Precisely why you should stick to discussing Hockey or Moose Hunting, and leave the NBA talk to those of us who have a clue.
That isn't an argument TDK. It's just bluster. When you can actually make an argument, get back to me.
You can only play who is in front of you. Part of the reason that I have become less impressed with the 90s Bulls with the passage of time. The way they were constructed was terrific. Who they played in the playoffs, in general, were far weaker teams.
Precisely why you should stick to discussing Hockey or Moose Hunting, and leave the NBA talk to those of us who have a clue.
That isn't an argument TDK. It's just bluster. When you can actually make an argument, get back to me.
You didn't make an argument, you made a blanket statement with zero (0) fact and substance to back it up.
Get back to me when you have a clue.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
thedangerouskitchen wrote: ↑Tue Jun 04, 2024 3:55 pm
Again, fool... I never said today's NBA is full of scrubs.
Well, you are lying. But you (and everyone here) knows that.
You just got caught and smashed so many times, you had to scurry your opinion and positions back because you kept losing debates on that point, which made you try to do a revision on the sly hoping no one would notice (I did, and I doubt I'm the only one).
lmao!
Go ahead and post a link of TDK saying today's NBA is full of scrubs. I'll wait.
The fact remains YOU got bent over and raped by the NBA Commissioner, the NBA VP of Ops, and many current NBA players/coaches who laugh at you and all your silly charts and graphs. They are the experts and they all confirmed today's Defense is weak and soft, and the rules heavily favor the Offense.
Suck it up and move on, buttercup.
"Today's NBA is soft, the Defense is weak, and the rules 'really' favor the Offense."
"Lebron doesn’t guard for a full game and our game plan was to get him to play defense and he left me open all game."
