Is it Time to Revisit What the MVP Actually Means?

[xtapolapacetl]

Delonte West, Ilgauskas who went after Lebron to Miami, Shaq.

Jamison missed 26 games
Baron Davis only played 15 games
Mo Williams only played 36 games
Gibson missed 15 games
Varejao only played 31 games
Parker missed 10 games

They only had 4 players that played over 70 games and two of them were scrubs. Even the scrubs missed a lot of games that year. That team was either legitimately riddled with injuries or were in full tank mode. Dudes were not even trying to get a good record.

So yeah Lebron leaving WAS THE ONLY FACTOR that led to their poor record right?

Did you really mention Horace Grant as proof that MJ was not that valuable to his team?

The misinformation lebron stans are the worst.

They were NINETEEN and SIXTY THREE that season. Your desperate hater *** can try to list injuries all you want, but the fact remains that their strongest lineup still played some games together.

You think you can just slide in some injuries and not escape evidence? Their strongest lineup that season consisting of Daniel Gibson, Mo Williams, Anthony Parker, Antawn Jamison and Anderson Varejao played 9 games:

View media item 405502
As you can see their record in those 9 games is 1-8 with the one W coming in OT. No matter how you try to spin it, the 2010-11 Cavs SUCKED without LeBron. No matter who they had from the previous year (other than LeBron of course) and how healthy they were, they were a 30, maybe 35 win team AT MOST.

I also like how you list both Mo Williams and Baron Davis on that list and then mention "only played" to make the roster look extra depleted when in fact they were traded for each other halfway throughout the season due to the Cavs' major suckage.

Ilgauskas? The same guy who at his very peak at the age of 27 and playing 81 games led the Cavs to an unbelievable 17-65 record in 2002-03. Yeah, I'm sure that a 35 year-old Ilgauskas would've taken them to the promised land had he stayed.

Shaq?
The same Shaq who wasn't on the 2008-09 Cavs when they had a 66-16 record? Someone else must've led the Cavs to all those Ws that year without Shaq.

Delonte West?
He missed 18 games in the 2008-09 season. The Cavs record in those games: 14-4
He missed 22 games in the 2009-10 season. The Cavs record in those games: 19-3
Yeah, I can see that he was absolutely VITAL in the Cavs success those seasons.

BTW, the Cavs record in the 7 games that LeBron missed in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons: 1-6. Please explain this. You can mention any other variable than LeBron to explain the difference between the pre and post LeBron Cavs and it can be shut down through empirical evidence.

 

[mister friendly]

Delonte West, Ilgauskas who went after Lebron to Miami, Shaq.

Jamison missed 26 games
Baron Davis only played 15 games
Mo Williams only played 36 games
Gibson missed 15 games
Varejao only played 31 games
Parker missed 10 games

They only had 4 players that played over 70 games and two of them were scrubs. Even the scrubs missed a lot of games that year. That team was either legitimately riddled with injuries or were in full tank mode. Dudes were not even trying to get a good record.

So yeah Lebron leaving WAS THE ONLY FACTOR that led to their poor record right?

Did you really mention Horace Grant as proof that MJ was not that valuable to his team?

The misinformation lebron stans are the worst.

They were NINETEEN and SIXTY THREE that season. Your desperate hater *** can try to list injuries all you want, but the fact remains that their strongest lineup still played some games together.

You think you can just slide in some injuries and not escape evidence? Their strongest lineup that season consisting of Daniel Gibson, Mo Williams, Anthony Parker, Antawn Jamison and Anderson Varejao played 9 games:

View media item 405502
As you can see their record in those 9 games is 1-8 with the one W coming in OT. No matter how you try to spin it, the 2010-11 Cavs SUCKED without LeBron. No matter who they had from the previous year (other than LeBron of course) and how healthy they were, they were a 30, maybe 35 win team AT MOST.

I also like how you list both Mo Williams and Baron Davis on that list and then mention "only played" to make the roster look extra depleted when in fact they were traded for each other halfway throughout the season due to the Cavs' major suckage.

Ilgauskas? The same guy who at his very peak at the age of 27 and playing 81 games led the Cavs to an unbelievable 17-65 record in 2002-03. Yeah, I'm sure that a 35 year-old Ilgauskas would've taken them to the promised land had he stayed.

Shaq?
The same Shaq who wasn't on the 2008-09 Cavs when they had a 66-16 record? Someone else must've led the Cavs to all those Ws that year without Shaq.

Delonte West?
He missed 18 games in the 2008-09 season. The Cavs record in those games: 14-4
He missed 22 games in the 2009-10 season. The Cavs record in those games: 19-3
Yeah, I can see that he was absolutely VITAL in the Cavs success those seasons.

BTW, the Cavs record in the 7 games that LeBron missed in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons: 1-6. Please explain this. You can mention any other variable than LeBron to explain the difference between the pre and post LeBron Cavs and it can be shut down through empirical evidence.

Like I said earlier my post you ignored

If Gilbert keeps Brown as the head coach and Lebron is honest to the Cavaliers about his intentions. The Cavaliers couldve picked up a decent replacement in the beginning of free agency and tried to piece the remaining roster and it could have been a 35 to 40 win team.

Lebron was valuable to those Cavs teams,You cant act like he was just one piece. They built their whole roster around him. A bunch of those guys wouldn't have been on the Cavs roster if they didn't complement Lebrons skills.

The Bulls built around Jordan but they also had a system that everybody had to fit into including Jordan. Which makes it easier for a team to transition without a player with a decent replacement available.

And those 7 games Lebron missed were basically rest games...He never was just out by myself some other key part of the rotation was out too whether it be Mo Williams, Shaq, Delonte, Parker or Gibson.

But yes Lebron was valuable to the Cavs....Kobe is valuable to the Lakers......Melo is valuable to the Knicks....Dirk is valuable to Mavs..... etc etc...Anybody knows that

Anyways what is your argument?

That Lebron is better than Jordan or is it to teach us new ways how great Lebron is?

Or that Lebron was shafted because he didn't win the 2013 NBA MVP award unanimously?

I'm really trying to be serious when I ask that.

 

[xtapolapacetl]

Oh yeah I forgot the 37 year old bargain bin free agent signing of Wilkins who started 26 games. Come on man ..he was done at that point.

You know Kukoc was a better player as rookie than 1997 Wilkins was. The only reason why Kukoc averages aren't better that year is because the Bulls were set at the starting forwards spots with Pippen and Grant and he didn't get a bunch of minutes. If you give Kukoc the same minutes and the same amount of shots as 1997 Wilkins was getting, Kukoc is a more productive player.

Who did Phil draw the game winning play for? Toni Kukoc.

If he wasn't that good. Phil definitely aint going to him as first option in the playoffs vs the Knicks

And the differences between those teams were key parts of the rotation were gone like Shaq, Big Z and Delonte, not to mention Jamison and Varajelo missed significant time too that season, so it made it hard for them to establish a rhythm.

People can hate on Mike Brown but he's a good coach, The Lakers posted the 6th best record in the NBA, his only full season as their coach.

If Gilbert keeps Brown as the head coach and Lebron is honest to the Cavaliers about his intentions. The Cavaliers couldve picked up a decent replacement in the beginning of free agency and tried to piece the remaining roster and it could have been a 35 to 40 win team.

Lebron was valuable to those Cavs teams,You cant act like he was just one piece. They built their whole roster around him. A bunch of those guys wouldn't have been on the Cavs roster if they didn't complement Lebrons skills.

The Bulls built around Jordan but they also had a system that everybody had to fit into including Jordan. Which makes it easier for a team to transition without a player with a decent replacement available.

Yeah, I know you forgot him. But you sure as hell didn't forget an Euro rookie, a type of player who never make an impact as soon as they come into the league, did you? Petrovic didn't. Dirk didn't. Manu didn't. And Kukoc didn't either. And we all know that prime Kukoc's numbers were sooo much better than the done Wilkins' 18.2 and 6.2 in 98-99 when he had the whole Bulls roster to himself and averaged 18.8, 7.0 and 5.3 assists while leading the Bulls to a phenomenal 13-37 record.

Who did Phil draw up a play for when there were 0.4 seconds left against the Spurs? Fisher. What the hell does drawing up a single play mean? Why are you bringing that up? Are you trying to say that Toni Kukoc was a better player than Scottie Pippen?

So Mike Brown is a good coach but the guy in your avatar gave him the "death stare" and fired him after what, 5 games into the season because he couldn't win a game with him going into the season?
6th best record with the Lakers with Kobe, Pau and Bynum compared to the very best record in the league with the Cavs, not one but two straight seasons?

The Cavaliers got more than just a "decent" replacement in Kyrie Irving eventually and they still suck. But what's really hilarious is that even when you struggle and try to make those Cavs look as best as you possibly can, your best case scenario for that team is 40 wins. It wouldn't have been quite that much, but let's say that it was. That is still 21-26 games less than LeBron's two MVP seasons in Cleveland. Because of one player. But to you apparently that is still less significant than the two extra games the Bulls lost in 93-94.

"Lebron was valuable to those Cavs teams,You cant act like he was just one piece. They built their whole roster around him. A bunch of those guys wouldn't have been on the Cavs roster if they didn't complement Lebrons skills." - Are you trying to praise or insult LeBron with this statement? Because what I'm reading is you're saying that LeBron made those players better. So why exactly are you claiming that they would've won 40 games without him when "they wouldn't have been on the Cavs roster" if not for LeBron?

And I am still trying to figure out the point that YOU'RE trying to make. Why the hell did you reply to my first post in the first place? My post was aimed at the discussion that was going on about a player's "value to his team". I said that IF you're going to use that logic, then Jordan should've only won 1-2 MVPs and you might as well claim that John Wall is closer to MVP than LeBron. And then you go on writing an essay claiming that you don't want to use this logic. So why the hell did you reply to begin with?

 

[mister friendly]

Yeah, I know you forgot him. But you sure as hell didn't forget an Euro rookie, a type of player who never make an impact as soon as they come into the league, did you? Petrovic didn't. Dirk didn't. Manu didn't. And Kukoc didn't either. And we all know that prime Kukoc's numbers were sooo much better than the done Wilkins' 18.2 and 6.2 in 98-99 when he had the whole Bulls roster to himself and averaged 18.8, 7.0 and 5.3 assists while leading the Bulls to a phenomenal 13-37 record.

Who did Phil draw up a play for when there were 0.4 seconds left against the Spurs? Fisher. What the hell does drawing up a single play mean? Why are you bringing that up? Are you trying to say that Toni Kukoc was a better player than Scottie Pippen?

So Mike Brown is a good coach but the guy in your avatar gave him the "death stare" and fired him after what, 5 games into the season because he couldn't win a game with him going into the season?
6th best record with the Lakers with Kobe, Pau and Bynum compared to the very best record in the league with the Cavs, not one but two straight seasons?

The Cavaliers got more than just a "decent" replacement in Kyrie Irving eventually and they still suck. But what's really hilarious is that even when you struggle and try to make those Cavs look as best as you possibly can, your best case scenario for that team is 40 wins. It wouldn't have been quite that much, but let's say that it was. That is still 21-26 games less than LeBron's two MVP seasons in Cleveland. Because of one player. But to you apparently that is still less significant than the two extra games the Bulls lost in 93-94.

"Lebron was valuable to those Cavs teams,You cant act like he was just one piece. They built their whole roster around him. A bunch of those guys wouldn't have been on the Cavs roster if they didn't complement Lebrons skills." - Are you trying to praise or insult LeBron with this statement? Because what I'm reading is you're saying that LeBron made those players better. So why exactly are you claiming that they would've won 40 games without him when "they wouldn't have been on the Cavs roster" if not for LeBron?

And I am still trying to figure out the point that YOU'RE trying to make. Why the hell did you reply to my first post in the first place? My post was aimed at the discussion that was going on about a player's "value to his team". I said that IF you're going to use that logic, then Jordan should've only won 1-2 MVPs and you might as well claim that John Wall is closer to MVP than LeBron. And then you go on writing an essay claiming that you don't want to use this logic. So why the hell did you reply to begin with?

My point is that Kukoc as a rookie had more impact than a 37 year Wilkins did for the 1997 Spurs who planned to have David Robinson when the season started. So lets not act like the Spurs could've got a decent replacement once the season has already began. Unlike the Bulls could relative to Jordan.

Phil didn't draw up the play for Fisher ...... He was the only dude open on the inbounds pass. You don't remember man? Must have been too busy playing GTA

No I'm not saying Kukoc was better than Pippen what I'm saying is that he wasn't a scrub and he was decent part to fit into the Bulls system when Jordan left.

Yes Mike Brown is a good coach even though he didn't have the best record in the league with the Lakers, he still took the 2012 Lakers as deep into the playoffs as Lebron took him and the Cavs into the playoffs in 2011.

Yes I was praising Lebron with my statement......would you like me to slurp him some more? I'm sorry its going to take me awhile to get on your level

My point was that your point that Jordan shouldve only won 1-2 MVPs based on value is wrong.

 

[mister friendly]

My point is that Kukoc as a rookie had more impact than a 37 year Wilkins did for the 1997 Spurs who planned to have David Robinson when the season started. So lets not act like the Spurs could've got a decent replacement once the season has already began. Unlike the Bulls could relative to Jordan.

Phil didn't draw up the play for Fisher ...... He was the only dude open on the inbounds pass. You don't remember man? Must have been too busy playing GTA

No I'm not saying Kukoc was better than Pippen what I'm saying is that he wasn't a scrub and he was decent part to fit into the Bulls system when Jordan left.

Yes Mike Brown is a good coach even though he didn't have the best record in the league with the Lakers, he still took the 2012 Lakers as deep into the playoffs as Lebron took him and the Cavs into the playoffs in 2011.

Yes I was praising Lebron with my statement......would you like me to slurp him some more? I'm sorry its going to take me awhile to get on your level

My point was that your point that Jordan shouldve only won 1-2 MVPs based on value is wrong.

 

[knightngale]

They were NINETEEN and SIXTY THREE that season. Your desperate hater *** can try to list injuries all you want, but the fact remains that their strongest lineup still played some games together.

You think you can just slide in some injuries and not escape evidence? Their strongest lineup that season consisting of Daniel Gibson, Mo Williams, Anthony Parker, Antawn Jamison and Anderson Varejao played 9 games:

View media item 405502
As you can see their record in those 9 games is 1-8 with the one W coming in OT. No matter how you try to spin it, the 2010-11 Cavs SUCKED without LeBron. No matter who they had from the previous year (other than LeBron of course) and how healthy they were, they were a 30, maybe 35 win team AT MOST.

I also like how you list both Mo Williams and Baron Davis on that list and then mention "only played" to make the roster look extra depleted when in fact they were traded for each other halfway throughout the season due to the Cavs' major suckage.

Ilgauskas? The same guy who at his very peak at the age of 27 and playing 81 games led the Cavs to an unbelievable 17-65 record in 2002-03. Yeah, I'm sure that a 35 year-old Ilgauskas would've taken them to the promised land had he stayed.

Shaq?
The same Shaq who wasn't on the 2008-09 Cavs when they had a 66-16 record? Someone else must've led the Cavs to all those Ws that year without Shaq.

Delonte West?
He missed 18 games in the 2008-09 season. The Cavs record in those games: 14-4
He missed 22 games in the 2009-10 season. The Cavs record in those games: 19-3
Yeah, I can see that he was absolutely VITAL in the Cavs success those seasons.

BTW, the Cavs record in the 7 games that LeBron missed in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons: 1-6. Please explain this. You can mention any other variable than LeBron to explain the difference between the pre and post LeBron Cavs and it can be shut down through empirical evidence.

Go on, list all the other "differences" between those Cavs other than LeBron.

That is what you asked then you get angry when I replied with some of the differences other than Lebron?

Stop trying to downplay Shaq. He commanded double teams even during his last year with the celtics and does not need Lebron to create for himself and keep his FG % over 55%.

Stop trying to act like the cavs were actually trying to win and not being in full tank mode to get someone like Irving. Cavs could have easily reached the 35 win mark or higher without all those other changes that do not include lebron and if they were not in tank mode.If you watched the cavs that season (yeah right) you would have seen Scott playing some of the worst players on the team for no reason at all other than to tank. He still does that this year with players like Luke Walton messing up play after play yet still gets to play.

 

[Maximus Meridius]

Shaq commanded double teams in Boston? From what team?


Shaq was done after he got traded to Phoenix.

 

[scooterman87]

With of the history lessons everybody is giving at the end of the day, lebron still won the mvp

 

[xtapolapacetl]

Obviously it's easier to get to 55 wins on a team led by prime Pippens and Horace Grants than have success on a team where David Robinson was by far the best player. And it doesn't matter that Wilkins was 37. It doesn't matter if he was 50. It matters how he played and 18 points and 6 rebounds in 31 minutes is not "done". In comparison, your 95-96 all-star Sean Elliott whom you didn't hesitate to mention averaged 20 and 5 in 38. And he still played half of that 96-97 season, and the Spurs were still garbage without David Robinson.

And Kukoc was taken by the Bulls all the way back in the 1990 draft, loong before Jordan retired. He wasn't picked up as an improvised replacement for Michael Jordan because he retired. But what's funny is that even if he was, it just shows that David Robinson was more "valuable" to the Spurs in 95-96 than Jordan was to the Bulls since according to you Jordan could be somewhat replaced with a combination of Kukoc and Kerr. Who would/could've the Spurs replaced David Robinson with if they knew that they would't have him from the start? Unlike SG/SFs who are reasonably obtainable, quality 7 footers don't grow on trees, even then where more centers were available. All hail the true 95-96 NBA MVP David Robinson!

Yeah, Phil drew that play for the open man. So if he's essentially prepared to draw up a play for anyone open on the court other than the player who inbounds, why is it such a big deal that he drew up a play for Kukoc? Did he ever draw up a play for Shaq?

Jordan winning 2 MVPs at most based on the "take him off the team and they win X games" rationale is not wrong. The whole "take him off the team" reasoning in itself is wrong and idiotic, but IF you use it, then saying that Jordan should've won 1-2 MVPs is not wrong. I've already proved it in the form of the 93-94 season, but I can't carry on a rational discussion with someone who tries to make a 10ppg rookie look like a major impact maker while conveniently not mentioning a 18ppg in 31 mpg scorer (as well as Vernon Maxwell whom the Spurs added in 96-97) because it goes against your agenda. Therefore, I am done with this thread.

 

[knightngale]

Shaq commanded double teams in Boston? From what team?


Shaq was done after he got traded to Phoenix.

just by his size alone
with certain matchups he would just back someone down and create havok even if he lacked his past athleticism and even when he bricked
he still shot over 60%

 

[C.Magneto]

Had a Convo with my dad about this last night. We both agreed that there needs to be a more defined criteria. He brought up a good point though. I've been with the train of thought that it should go to the player who is most valuable player to the team. That's why theirs been discussion about other players deserving the reward. At any rate my dad suggested what if its the most valuable player to the league. Thought about it, and no one is more valuable to the league then Lebron at the moment. If he got hurt, guarantee their would be a significant decrease in playoff interest etc from the casual fans perspective. Not trying to open a can of worms, but people saying refs protecting him and what not. From a business perspective, who wouldn't protect their most valuable asset.

So when you put things at a league level, I don't think it's even close when discussing who the MVP is.

 

[sn souljah]

recent MVP mistakes

2005 Shaq
2006 Kobe

 

[sn souljah]

Shaq was still the best offensive big man in the league when he was with PHX. He had some great games. He was not done

17.8 ppg
8.4 rpg

60.9 % fg

and one of his best FT shooting seasons of his career,
and playing 30 mpg ...that is far from "done"

was he 1999 Shaq? ummm no, but he was not done

 

[black migo]

Shaq was still the best offensive big man in the league when he was with PHX.

View media item 405968

 

[mister friendly]

Obviously it's easier to get to 55 wins on a team led by prime Pippens and Horace Grants than have success on a team where David Robinson was by far the best player. And it doesn't matter that Wilkins was 37. It doesn't matter if he was 50. It matters how he played and 18 points and 6 rebounds in 31 minutes is not "done". In comparison, your 95-96 all-star Sean Elliott whom you didn't hesitate to mention averaged 20 and 5 in 38. And he still played half of that 96-97 season, and the Spurs were still garbage without David Robinson.

And Kukoc was taken by the Bulls all the way back in the 1990 draft, loong before Jordan retired. He wasn't picked up as an improvised replacement for Michael Jordan because he retired. But what's funny is that even if he was, it just shows that David Robinson was more "valuable" to the Spurs in 95-96 than Jordan was to the Bulls since according to you Jordan could be somewhat replaced with a combination of Kukoc and Kerr. Who would/could've the Spurs replaced David Robinson with if they knew that they would't have him from the start? Unlike SG/SFs who are reasonably obtainable, quality 7 footers don't grow on trees, even then where more centers were available. All hail the true 95-96 NBA MVP David Robinson!

Yeah, Phil drew that play for the open man. So if he's essentially prepared to draw up a play for anyone open on the court other than the player who inbounds, why is it such a big deal that he drew up a play for Kukoc? Did he ever draw up a play for Shaq?

Jordan winning 2 MVPs at most based on the "take him off the team and they win X games" rationale is not wrong. The whole "take him off the team" reasoning in itself is wrong and idiotic, but IF you use it, then saying that Jordan should've won 1-2 MVPs is not wrong. I've already proved it in the form of the 93-94 season, but I can't carry on a rational discussion with someone who tries to make a 10ppg rookie look like a major impact maker while conveniently not mentioning a 18ppg in 31 mpg scorer (as well as Vernon Maxwell whom the Spurs added in 96-97) because it goes against your agenda. Therefore, I am done with this thread.

I'm glad you admit that it easier to win with Pippen and Grant as opposed to a 37 year old Wilkins and a half available Sean Elliott. Like I said if you gave Kukoc the same minutes and shot attempts as Wilkins, he's more productive than Wilkins was. You act like numbers work in a vacuum, that Wilkins would be able to get numbers like that for contending team

Yes Kukoc was taken earlier but they made the real push to get him after Jordan retired. Like I said earlier the team got key upgrades in their rotation with Kukoc, Kerr, Longley and Wennington over the 1993 team. I didn't even mention Jordan's true replacement, Pete Myers because his contribution was minimal.

Its not like the 1994 Bulls only lost 2 games in the win column when Jordan left .... they were world championships in 1993. Only getting to the 2nd round in 1994 is a huge drop off in team performance.

Another thing you left out is that the Bulls had 22-47 record during in seasons when MJ missed games in seasons he was active. But I guess he wasn't valuable to the Bulls

The fact is that Phil didn't draw the play up for Fisher. He drew up a play for Kukoc because he was a capable player who had real impact in the clutch.

I cant remember if Phil drew up a game winning play for Shaq......I would assume didn't because he had Kobe. But if he never drew up a gw play for Shaq it was because Shaq couldn't be counted on to make free throws. Its doesn't mean Shaq wasn't an impactful player though.

I'm glad you see how wrong your statement was that Jordan should only have 2 MVPs based on the value rationale is wrong.

Its hard to havea rational discussion with somebody who says Jordan should only 2 MVPs

Thats a far more irrational statement then that Kukoc had more of an impact for the 1994 Bulls than Wilkins did for the 1997 Spurs. Most people don't even remember that Wikins even played for the Spurs.

I have no agenda except to tell you that your statement about Jordan was quite riduclous

 

[mister friendly]

Shaq was still the best offensive big man in the league when he was with PHX.

View media item 405968

I wouldn't say Shaq was the best but he definitely was an elite center that year. Shaq's 2009 PPG and shooting percentages compare quite nicely to Yao's and Dwight's numbers

He was also All-NBA that season.

 

[doyung9]

Shaquille O'Neal benefitted from the league needing a marketable star post-MJ.

His stats are inflated due to being allowed to bend most of the NBA rules regarding offensive fouls.

 

[mister friendly]

Shaquille O'Neal benefitted from the league needing a marketable star post-MJ.

His stats are inflated due to being allowed to bend most of the NBA rules regarding offensive fouls.

I considered your comment at face value but then I looked it up and Shaq was just a productive scorer when Jordan was still in the NBA. So I decided your comment is wrong.

Shaq was 29 PPG scorer his 2nd year!

 

[doyung9]

I considered your comment at face value but then I looked it up and Shaq was just a productive scorer when Jordan was still in the NBA. So I decided your comment is wrong.

Shaq was 29 PPG scorer his 2nd year!

His second year... you mean the year Michael Jordan retired the first time?

 

[mister friendly]

I considered your comment at face value but then I looked it up and Shaq was just a productive scorer when Jordan was still in the NBA. So I decided your comment is wrong.

Shaq was 29 PPG scorer his 2nd year!

His second year... you mean the year Michael Jordan retired the first time?

But he was 29, 26, 26 and 28 in the other seasons him and Jordan both played.

He was a 27-29 PPG scorer in the most dominant "post Jordan' seasons. Thats not much of a difference.

 

[xtapolapacetl]

I know that I said that I was done with this thread, but your arguments are so ridiculous and easy to shut down that it's impossible not to reply to.

So a ROOKIE Kukoc would be as good as 96-97 Wilkins given all the minutes and shot attempts, eh? You still haven't addressed Kukoc's 98-99 season with the Bulls when he in his prime averages the same scoring and rebounding numbers that the "done" Dominque Wilkins did in 96-97 and led the Bulls to a phenomenal 13-37 record. What is your explanation for this season when a still in his prime Kukoc could do anything he wanted? A 6 year veteran accustomed to the NBA averaged the same scoring and rebounding numbers, but a ROOKIE Kukoc in his first experience with NBA basketball something that even players much superior to him like Petrovic and Nowitzki had to adjust to would've been more impactful? Yeah, I am sure that he as a rookie was the reason why the Bulls lost only 2 games less and not Pippen, Grant and B.J. all of whom Jordan had prior to that season. And even if he was as impactful given the minutes, etc. (which he wouldn't have been as is proven by his 98-99 season), then what exactly is your point since he WASN'T given the minutes and shot attempts? In the end, he was a distant 4th leading scorer on those Bulls, while Nique was by far Spurs' leading scorer in 96-97 season, yet he was still not worth mentioning apparently, and neither was the addition of Vernon Maxwell, but the "half available" Sean Elliott who had a 11-28 record with the Spurs in the 39 games he did play that season BEFORE getting injured couldn't have be forggoten.

And you're damn right that noone remembers Wilkins playing for the Spurs that season. Just like noone remembers him playing for the Celtics and Clippers. Partly because 90% of his career, accomplishments and memorable moments came in a Hawks jersey and partly because those Spurs SUCKED so much because they didn't have David Robinson.

22-47 record without Jordan??

"In season"S""???? What seasonS? Are you friggin KIDDING ME?? You mean the 85-86 seasoN when when he missed most of the games due to injury. They were 9-9 in the 18 games he played that year. Sucked without him, mediocre with him. Other than that season, he missed 7 games total in the 11 full seasons he played with the Bulls. @ your desperate *** mentioning going to such an idiotic extreme that can be shut down so easily.

And what about the 91-92 season when David Robinson missed 14 games? Their record in those 14 games? 5-9. Their record in the 68 games Robinson played that year? 42-26. Or will you not address this like Kukoc's 98-99 season.

 

[knightngale]

How many legit first team options did Jordan ever play with?

Wade and Bosh are legit first options on most teams in the NBA.

Horace Grant tho?

 

[a55a5in11]

How many legit first team options did Jordan ever play with?

Wade and Bosh are legit first options on most teams in the NBA.

Horace Grant tho?

Pippen, rodman are hall of famers

 

[premium3g]

my girl watches ball a little bit, and based off what she saw. she said" i thought Carmelo would've gotten it"

i told her yeah he played great but LeBron was just that good this year... I didnt watch that many Heat games this year but I saw highlights and breakdowns every night.. the man is a beast... a freak of nature.. Im mad AS **** he didnt come to the knicks a few years ago.. But i still respect his dominance on the court...

Carmelo is the peoples MVP this year.. his game was on point...

 

[mister friendly]

I know that I said that I was done with this thread, but your arguments are so ridiculous and easy to shut down that it's impossible not to reply to.

So a ROOKIE Kukoc would be as good as 96-97 Wilkins given all the minutes and shot attempts, eh? You still haven't addressed Kukoc's 98-99 season with the Bulls when he in his prime averages the same scoring and rebounding numbers that the "done" Dominque Wilkins did in 96-97 and led the Bulls to a phenomenal 13-37 record. What is your explanation for this season when a still in his prime Kukoc could do anything he wanted? A 6 year veteran accustomed to the NBA averaged the same scoring and rebounding numbers, but a ROOKIE Kukoc in his first experience with NBA basketball something that even players much superior to him like Petrovic and Nowitzki had to adjust to would've been more impactful? Yeah, I am sure that he as a rookie was the reason why the Bulls lost only 2 games less and not Pippen, Grant and B.J. all of whom Jordan had prior to that season. And even if he was as impactful given the minutes, etc. (which he wouldn't have been as is proven by his 98-99 season), then what exactly is your point since he WASN'T given the minutes and shot attempts? In the end, he was a distant 4th leading scorer on those Bulls, while Nique was by far Spurs' leading scorer in 96-97 season, yet he was still not worth mentioning apparently, and neither was the addition of Vernon Maxwell, but the "half available" Sean Elliott who had a 11-28 record with the Spurs in the 39 games he did play that season BEFORE getting injured couldn't have be forggoten.

And you're damn right that noone remembers Wilkins playing for the Spurs that season. Just like noone remembers him playing for the Celtics and Clippers. Partly because 90% of his career, accomplishments and memorable moments came in a Hawks jersey and partly because those Spurs SUCKED so much because they didn't have David Robinson.

22-47 record without Jordan??

"In season"S""???? What seasonS? Are you friggin KIDDING ME?? You mean the 85-86 seasoN when when he missed most of the games due to injury. They were 9-9 in the 18 games he played that year. Sucked without him, mediocre with him. Other than that season, he missed 7 games total in the 11 full seasons he played with the Bulls. @ your desperate *** mentioning going to such an idiotic extreme that can be shut down so easily.

And what about the 91-92 season when David Robinson missed 14 games? Their record in those 14 games? 5-9. Their record in the 68 games Robinson played that year? 42-26. Or will you not address this like Kukoc's 98-99 season.

Is it bad that Kukoc probably was basically a finished product at 25? He was a 5 position player with rare skills. They didn't call him the EuroMagic or White Magic for nothing. You got to remember he was playing in the Euroleagues 9 years before he came to the NBA. He was basically a 3 time Euroleague MVP prior to coming to the Bulls in 1994.
Also Petrovic didn't struggle coming into the NBA. Adelman just wouldn't play him plus he was behind 2 All Star level guards in Clyde Drexler and Terry Porter. If you gave him starters minutes, his numbers are the same as they were the last 2 years of his career. One of which he earned an All-NBA selection. Dirk was an undeveloped 20 year old when he was a rookie and wasn't a Eurostar before coming to the NBA unlike Kukoc. Even lesser know players like Sarunas Marciulionis , Dino Radja and Rik Smits were productive players when they first got to the NBA. If you look at their advanced stats most of them were productive if they were given starters minutes. Coaches just hadn't totally crossed that "Euro" bridge in the 1990s. With the example above I showed you Euros had the capability to have an impact in the NBA during their rookie years.So that point isn't valid.

Kukoc's 1999 season is slightly better than Wilkins 1997 seasons. The PPG and APG were the similar but Kukoc averaged 2 1/2 more assists per game than Wilkins which means he was making his teammates better by getting them open looks. He also lead the Bulls in PPG,RPG and APG. Also you can talk about how bad Kukoc's 1999 record with the Bulls was at 13-31 but the Bulls didn't win a game without him (0-6) Also with Wilkins if he was so great when wasn't he on some NBA teams roster the next season?

And you ignored that I said the Bulls 'replaced' MJ with 4 key upgrades ......Kukoc, Kerr, Longley and Wennington plus Pete Myers ......Thats 48 PPG compared to the 51 PPG they lost with Jordan and other 1993 contributors.....King,Tucker, Corey Williams, Darrell Walker and Rodney McCrary. Thats how they were able to win games because they were able to replace the scoring production they lost, plus gain youth in their rotation to account for Jordan's absence They didn't just trot out in 1994 with the same 1993 team minus Jordan and win 55 games.

The 1997 Spurs are a different case than the 1994 Bulls. Since David Robinson went down after the season began, they couldn't sign quality free agents at that point and they didn't have a quality international player coming down the pipeline to replace some of Robinson's production. They couldn't even make a trade because they were an older team and they didn't have a young player you could use as tradebait to get a immediate contributor. They chose to stand pat and they were rewarded by winning the 1997 lottery.

It wasn't that Robinson was that much more valuable than Jordan, its just that the Bulls were fortunate that their prior transactions to worked while the Spurs weren't (See Charles Smith)

I brought up the Jordan missed game record as indication of just how valuable he was to the Bulls. Its just as valid as you bringing up Robinson's or Lebron's missed game record.

About Jordan's value for 1986 season. You can talk smack all you want about the Bulls 9-9 " mediocre" record with Jordan but .500 in the East that year wouldve earned a 6th seed, where you'd play a 76ers team without Moses Malone in the first round as opposed to the eventually World Champion Boston Celtics. Who knows what wouldve happened if the below .500 Washington Bullets led by Jeff Malone took them to 3-2, who knows what a Jordan led team could do?

And about Robinson missing time at the end of the 1992 season. Starter Willie Anderson missed time too. Anderson came back 7 games after Robinson went down and led the team to a 3-3 record. But then he was on the sideline the rest of the year with Robinson. The 1992 Spurs record was 2-5 went both Robinson and Anderson were out. I'm not saying Willie Anderson=David Robinson but he was a valuable piece to the 1992 Spurs puzzle.

Anymore random ways you'd like to compare David Robinson to Michael Jordan?

I don't even know why we are comparing them. David Robinson never even sniffed an NBA Finals before Tim Duncan came along but yet you are comparing him to the Michael Jordan And I'm ridiculous?