[NBA] The Finals
- Thread starter Mr. S£im Citrus
- Start date
- Status
Shout out to @LPKingsFan, @Sluggah, @kingsboi, @bsegers, @Tetsujin, @Capt. Factorial, @63royals, @Telemachus, @Bibby10AZ, @Livinthedream, @ridingagain and @Volblorx8634, for correctly predicting the outcome of the Finals.
Yeap all of Serbian players minus Peja were non factors (Darko, Kuzmic, Bjelly), even Peja was a massively reduced role but he had some huge moments spurts in their run to the finals and was at least a valuable piece of the bench. I still feel in my heart that if BJelly went to the 76ers the year he first came to Sactown and they made that trade they did (Butler) they would have won with him they needed a 3point shooting PF/C so badly and that was his best year in the NBA by a massive margain.
I agree.
I’ve been LOL‘ing for a few years now at those defending KD for front running with the Warriors claiming he was the “best player on the team when he played there”.
While he may have been the “best player” he wasn’t the most impactful. Steph Curry was and still is the most impactful player in the NBA despite not being a 7-foot athletic freak.
Curry has proven himself with 2-titles as the undisputed alpha player while playing w/o KD. Meanwhile KD has ZERO titles without Steph/Klay drawing defenses away from him.
It’s akin to Kobe winning 2-titles w/o Shaq. It validates him as an all-time great bus driver.
He now has 4 rings which firmly places him alongside some of those names you mentioned.
IMO his 4 titles are more impressive than LBJ’s 4 titles for numerous reasons thus I’d surely have Steph above LBJ in the pantheon of greatest players. If Steph/GSW manages another title (or two) he’ll really be in rarified air.
My top 10:
Jordan
Magic
Kareem
Russell
Duncan
Bird
Wilt
Kobe
Shaq
Curry
**My list above combines individual accomplishments, titles won, and impact on changing the game.
I’ve been LOL‘ing for a few years now at those defending KD for front running with the Warriors claiming he was the “best player on the team when he played there”.
While he may have been the “best player” he wasn’t the most impactful. Steph Curry was and still is the most impactful player in the NBA despite not being a 7-foot athletic freak.
Curry has proven himself with 2-titles as the undisputed alpha player while playing w/o KD. Meanwhile KD has ZERO titles without Steph/Klay drawing defenses away from him.
It’s akin to Kobe winning 2-titles w/o Shaq. It validates him as an all-time great bus driver.
He now has 4 rings which firmly places him alongside some of those names you mentioned.
IMO his 4 titles are more impressive than LBJ’s 4 titles for numerous reasons thus I’d surely have Steph above LBJ in the pantheon of greatest players. If Steph/GSW manages another title (or two) he’ll really be in rarified air.
My top 10:
Jordan
Magic
Kareem
Russell
Duncan
Bird
Wilt
Kobe
Shaq
Curry
**My list above combines individual accomplishments, titles won, and impact on changing the game.
Last edited:
Mileage obviously varies but, IMO, the only argument for saying that Curry's championships are "more impressive" than LeBron James' championships is that LeBron James never had to beat LeBron James to win any of his championships. I'm also feeling hella cognitive dissonance in diminishing Kevin Durant's contribution to two of Curry's championships, while also elevating those championships above James' championships, in the exact same post.
The only argument? Um, no, not by a long shot.
First off, the idea of LBJ not having to beat himself is a very ridiculous one. I mean, you could insert any all-time great name in that sentence. It’s meaningless. I mean, Steph Curry didn’t have to beat himself either, right? SMH.
Meanwhile Curry’s team has beaten LBJ‘s team in the Finals 3x. That’s 3x more than the other way around. And the KD argument doesn’t hold since Steph’s team beat LBJ once before he even got there and just won another title w/o him.
As for why Steph’s titles are more impressive?
Reason 1: Steph has 4 titles in essentially 11 full seasons. LBJ has 4 in 18 full seasons.
**Discounted 1 season each for playing less than 50 games.
4 in 11 >>> 4 in 18.
Reason 2: Steph Curry didn’t need to jump ship and join 2 other alpha players to finally win. And while LBJ was voted MVP of those 2 Heat Finals wins — he was not the closer and relied on Dwyane Wade the first couple seasons then Ray Allen saved his @$$ to avoid losing to the Spurs a 2nd time.
As Curry has proven, he didn’t need KD to win and has always been a closer with an assassin clutch gene at a level that LBJ has never had.
Even the one time LBJ made a clutch play in the biggest of games (the block on Iguodala, which was one of the greatest I’ve seen) he still needed Kyrie Irving to sink the clutch shot. And Draymond Green to be suspended for a crucial game.
All players have to rely on teammates at some point (it’s a team game) but LBJ has had to rely on others in the biggest moments more than any other supposed top 10-15 player that I can think of.
Reason 3: I completely discount the 2020 bubble postseason. I won’t list all the reasons why (there are many). But my stance on this is consistent as I feel the exact same way about the Dodgers title that same season (I’m a life long Dodgers fan) for similar reasons. I get that they count in the record books but they are anomalies achieved under drastically different circumstances than any other season during the era.
And we’ve seen on the whole that the Lakers w/ LeBron aren’t that good. They’ve missed the postseason twice in 4 seasons and lost in the 1st round once. The bubble season with numerous super star players out with injury was an anomaly and extreme exception.
It counts in the record books, but isn’t as impressive nor definitive as other titles won.
Reason 4: Curry‘s presence on the floor scares opponents and changes defenses in a way LBJ doesn’t. For all his athletic greatness, opponents don’t rue the ball in LBJ’s hands at the end of games as they did the likes of Jordan, Kobe, Bird, and now Steph.
Defenses are worried about LBJ creating for others more than him making the clutch shot. And they surely aren’t scared of LBJ 30-35 feet from the basket.
I can list more reasons, but I’ll stop there.
You may be feeling it, but it ain’t real.
Take away the 2 titles that KD was part of and Steph has still got 2 as the undisputed alpha and closer. And not under any odd circumstances.
In my view, LBJ only has 1 legit title as the undisputed alpha and closer and that was the 2016 title over the Warriors when he led Cleveland. He still needed Kyrie to hit the big shot, but he was still the undisputed alpha of that team.
Even if I concede to the 2020 title being legit, that’s 2-2 with Steph being far younger and having played 7 less seasons.
Steph’s accomplishments in less time and greater impact on changing how the game is played is more impressive than anything LBJ has done.
Steph built his own dynasty and legacy while LBJ had to hop from org to org picking and choosing other star players to win with. And even then he had to rely on those other star players to bail him out far more than any other “transcendent“ player.
LBJ apologists seem to suffer from a bad case of amnesia. They seem to always forget how unclutch LBJ was prior to 2012-13. Passing up shots, cramping up in big games and bricking clutch free throws. He shriveled up like a prune against Boston in the ECF’s, against Dallas in the Finals and was about lose yet again against San Antonio after bricking the game-tying 3 in game 6 only to have Ray Allen drain one of the biggest shots in Finals history.
But, yeah, he’s as great as Jordan, Magic, Bird, etc. SMH.
He’s not even definitively greater than his contemporaries. Steph has already proven to be more impactful and a better closer, and KD also has an argument for being as good a player.
Again, no cognitive dissonance going on here except in your imagination.
First off, the idea of LBJ not having to beat himself is a very ridiculous one. I mean, you could insert any all-time great name in that sentence. It’s meaningless. I mean, Steph Curry didn’t have to beat himself either, right? SMH.
Meanwhile Curry’s team has beaten LBJ‘s team in the Finals 3x. That’s 3x more than the other way around. And the KD argument doesn’t hold since Steph’s team beat LBJ once before he even got there and just won another title w/o him.
As for why Steph’s titles are more impressive?
Reason 1: Steph has 4 titles in essentially 11 full seasons. LBJ has 4 in 18 full seasons.
**Discounted 1 season each for playing less than 50 games.
4 in 11 >>> 4 in 18.
Reason 2: Steph Curry didn’t need to jump ship and join 2 other alpha players to finally win. And while LBJ was voted MVP of those 2 Heat Finals wins — he was not the closer and relied on Dwyane Wade the first couple seasons then Ray Allen saved his @$$ to avoid losing to the Spurs a 2nd time.
As Curry has proven, he didn’t need KD to win and has always been a closer with an assassin clutch gene at a level that LBJ has never had.
Even the one time LBJ made a clutch play in the biggest of games (the block on Iguodala, which was one of the greatest I’ve seen) he still needed Kyrie Irving to sink the clutch shot. And Draymond Green to be suspended for a crucial game.
All players have to rely on teammates at some point (it’s a team game) but LBJ has had to rely on others in the biggest moments more than any other supposed top 10-15 player that I can think of.
Reason 3: I completely discount the 2020 bubble postseason. I won’t list all the reasons why (there are many). But my stance on this is consistent as I feel the exact same way about the Dodgers title that same season (I’m a life long Dodgers fan) for similar reasons. I get that they count in the record books but they are anomalies achieved under drastically different circumstances than any other season during the era.
And we’ve seen on the whole that the Lakers w/ LeBron aren’t that good. They’ve missed the postseason twice in 4 seasons and lost in the 1st round once. The bubble season with numerous super star players out with injury was an anomaly and extreme exception.
It counts in the record books, but isn’t as impressive nor definitive as other titles won.
Reason 4: Curry‘s presence on the floor scares opponents and changes defenses in a way LBJ doesn’t. For all his athletic greatness, opponents don’t rue the ball in LBJ’s hands at the end of games as they did the likes of Jordan, Kobe, Bird, and now Steph.
Defenses are worried about LBJ creating for others more than him making the clutch shot. And they surely aren’t scared of LBJ 30-35 feet from the basket.
I can list more reasons, but I’ll stop there.
You may be feeling it, but it ain’t real.
Take away the 2 titles that KD was part of and Steph has still got 2 as the undisputed alpha and closer. And not under any odd circumstances.
In my view, LBJ only has 1 legit title as the undisputed alpha and closer and that was the 2016 title over the Warriors when he led Cleveland. He still needed Kyrie to hit the big shot, but he was still the undisputed alpha of that team.
Even if I concede to the 2020 title being legit, that’s 2-2 with Steph being far younger and having played 7 less seasons.
Steph’s accomplishments in less time and greater impact on changing how the game is played is more impressive than anything LBJ has done.
Steph built his own dynasty and legacy while LBJ had to hop from org to org picking and choosing other star players to win with. And even then he had to rely on those other star players to bail him out far more than any other “transcendent“ player.
LBJ apologists seem to suffer from a bad case of amnesia. They seem to always forget how unclutch LBJ was prior to 2012-13. Passing up shots, cramping up in big games and bricking clutch free throws. He shriveled up like a prune against Boston in the ECF’s, against Dallas in the Finals and was about lose yet again against San Antonio after bricking the game-tying 3 in game 6 only to have Ray Allen drain one of the biggest shots in Finals history.
But, yeah, he’s as great as Jordan, Magic, Bird, etc. SMH.
He’s not even definitively greater than his contemporaries. Steph has already proven to be more impactful and a better closer, and KD also has an argument for being as good a player.
Again, no cognitive dissonance going on here except in your imagination.
Last edited:
The Durant thing says more about KD than it says about Steph and Klay and anyone on the Warriors core that has remained with the club that drafted them.
I don't like LeBron and I don't love the path he took outside of his return to Cleveland. His tenure with the Lakers with only a COVID tainted title and multiple missed playoff berths is about the only joy I've found in the past few seasons.
He still has 4 titles. He's still a legit contender for GOAT. He's still first ballot HOF. He'll enjoy a very lucrative post playing career second life.
Meanwhile we haven't been to the playoffs since his third season. So let's just stfu.
I don't like LeBron and I don't love the path he took outside of his return to Cleveland. His tenure with the Lakers with only a COVID tainted title and multiple missed playoff berths is about the only joy I've found in the past few seasons.
He still has 4 titles. He's still a legit contender for GOAT. He's still first ballot HOF. He'll enjoy a very lucrative post playing career second life.
Meanwhile we haven't been to the playoffs since his third season. So let's just stfu.
No, you actually can't. At least, not in the context of whose championships are "more impressive." Dirk is an all-time great, and he didn't have to beat himself to win a championship, but he did have to beat a prime LeBron, who was better than he was. Tim Duncan never had to beat Tim Duncan, but he did have to beat Prime LeBron once, and he had to beat Shaq twice, not in the Finals, but en route to two of his championships. The point of saying "LeBron never had to beat LeBron" is that LeBron never won a championship in a season where he had to play a playoff series at any point where the best player on the court was on the other team. And Curry can't say that.
There's that cognitive dissonance again. You say that Curry's championships are more impressive than James' championships. But you also think that James is overrated, and three of Curry's championships came against James. So, if James is overrated, what makes Curry's wins impressive? Is it Oochie Wally, or is it One Mic? Is LeBron That Dude? Or is LeBron not That Dude, which would mean that Curry never beat anybody?
But Curry didn't "build his own dynasty," Bob Meyers did. You can talk about James "picking and choosing" his teammates if you want to, but Curry didn't win those championships by himself, either. You can give Curry extra credit for his Hall of Fame teammates being drafted, rather than acquired via trade/free agency, but that doesn't mean I have to. That's essentially saying that Curry is better than James because he played for a competent organization. Curry was not a "can't miss" star going into the draft: if he gets drafted by the Kings, we're not having this conversation.
You can't possibly believe that there's a useful definition of the term "undisputed alpha" that does not apply to LeBron James in 2012 or 2013. You can split hairs over whether James is a "closer" or not with someone who's more interested in that conversation than I am. To me, "closing" only matters when the game is close. In the 2012 Finals, only one game was decided by five points or less, and the Heat led that game wire-to-wire. In the final five minutes of that game, the Thunder only got to within five points or less three times, and all three times, LeBron James was the player who responded by scoring to extend Miami's lead. Again, you can split hairs over whether that counts as "closing" with someone who's interested. And it's funny to me how people who love to point out how Ray Allen "bailed out" LeBron James with the shot that sent Game 6 of the 2013 Finals to overtime conveniently ignore the fact that James is the one who gave Miami the lead for good in the overtime period. For some reason, one of those is "clutch," but the other one isn't. Whatever.
You say that Stephen Curry proved that he didn't need Durant to win championships, but you know who doesn't believe that? Stephen Curry. Because he was part of the crew who went to the Hamptons to recruit Kevin Durant after they lost in the Finals to LeBron: Draymond Green didn't go by himself; if he had, they probably wouldn't have got Kevin Durant. And furthermore:
If Kevin Durant has an argument for being as good a player as LeBron James, then that's another point against Curry's championships being more impressive. Because you know who doesn't have an argument for being as good a player as LeBron James? Kyrie Irving. So, if you believe that Curry > James, and you also believe that Durant ≥ James, then you can't possibly believe that a team that won a championship with Curry and Durant is in any way impressive.
There's that cognitive dissonance again. You say that Curry's championships are more impressive than James' championships. But you also think that James is overrated, and three of Curry's championships came against James. So, if James is overrated, what makes Curry's wins impressive? Is it Oochie Wally, or is it One Mic? Is LeBron That Dude? Or is LeBron not That Dude, which would mean that Curry never beat anybody?
But Curry didn't "build his own dynasty," Bob Meyers did. You can talk about James "picking and choosing" his teammates if you want to, but Curry didn't win those championships by himself, either. You can give Curry extra credit for his Hall of Fame teammates being drafted, rather than acquired via trade/free agency, but that doesn't mean I have to. That's essentially saying that Curry is better than James because he played for a competent organization. Curry was not a "can't miss" star going into the draft: if he gets drafted by the Kings, we're not having this conversation.
You can't possibly believe that there's a useful definition of the term "undisputed alpha" that does not apply to LeBron James in 2012 or 2013. You can split hairs over whether James is a "closer" or not with someone who's more interested in that conversation than I am. To me, "closing" only matters when the game is close. In the 2012 Finals, only one game was decided by five points or less, and the Heat led that game wire-to-wire. In the final five minutes of that game, the Thunder only got to within five points or less three times, and all three times, LeBron James was the player who responded by scoring to extend Miami's lead. Again, you can split hairs over whether that counts as "closing" with someone who's interested. And it's funny to me how people who love to point out how Ray Allen "bailed out" LeBron James with the shot that sent Game 6 of the 2013 Finals to overtime conveniently ignore the fact that James is the one who gave Miami the lead for good in the overtime period. For some reason, one of those is "clutch," but the other one isn't. Whatever.
You say that Stephen Curry proved that he didn't need Durant to win championships, but you know who doesn't believe that? Stephen Curry. Because he was part of the crew who went to the Hamptons to recruit Kevin Durant after they lost in the Finals to LeBron: Draymond Green didn't go by himself; if he had, they probably wouldn't have got Kevin Durant. And furthermore:
If Kevin Durant has an argument for being as good a player as LeBron James, then that's another point against Curry's championships being more impressive. Because you know who doesn't have an argument for being as good a player as LeBron James? Kyrie Irving. So, if you believe that Curry > James, and you also believe that Durant ≥ James, then you can't possibly believe that a team that won a championship with Curry and Durant is in any way impressive.
Championships are a significant part of a star players' legacy, but I don't think that the story about how star players' championship teams were assembled will or should in the long run have much impact on their individual legacies. On that score, KD joining the Warriors doesn't seem very different to me than the Miami Heat situation. (I didn't like either at the time, but in 20 years most will not distinguish a difference, or even care about the story at all)
- Status