Will the real Superman please stand up

[TheWatcher]

Jordan was a filthy tongue-wagger. I often wished he would bite it off as it lolled out of his mouth.

 

Sure he could beat Bugs Bunny, but the Bird? never!

 

He put up 63 on Bird and the Celtics. Nuff said

[sckao]

Jordan was a filthy tongue-wagger. I often wished he would bite it off as it lolled out of his mouth.

 

Sure he could beat Bugs Bunny, but the Bird? never!

 

He put up 63 on Bird and the Celtics. Nuff said

 

1986 was when you really saw Michael Jordan and what he could become. It was his second year. Pippen would not arrive until next year's draft.

 

His Chicago Bulls lost 3-0 to the Celtics in the first round of the playoffs, but Jordan scored 63 in double overtime in Game 2. What happened the 1st game was also interesting though as Jordan scored (I think) somewhere around 49 points.

 

This led Larry Bird to say after Game 2's 63 point effort, "If he scores 77 points next game, I'll retire."

 

 

Added: This is an interesting chart.

 

http://www.michaeljordansworld.com/comparison_nba_stars.htm

 

Note: Jordan steps up his game in the playoffs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[hockey&comicsguy]

You conveniently left out 6 NBA Championships versus 3 NBA Championships.

 

This is why Steve Nash and John Stockton are not even in this conversation.

 

 

And, there are many great players who have 0 championships. Sure, championships mean something--just not the individual talent of the player.

 

Nash and Stockton were better offensive players than Jordan. Both have a higher field goal percentage, both blow him out in 3-point percentage, both blow him out in assist percentage and Stockton was around the same in free throws, while Nash blows him out in free throw percentage. Jordan, however, was an overall better defender by quite a bit.

 

Yet because their championship count does not match up with Jordan's, they are left out.

 

Sounds like the typical Jordan golden child promotions have paid off over the last 20 years.

I'm not going to say you don't have a right to your opinion, I'm just going to say that if you asked Steve Nash or John Stockton their opinion on who the best player is/was I imagine they would each say Jordan. If you asked Jordan his opinion he would also say Jordan. And in direct comparisons, the one time Chicago faced Utah in a series that mattered the Bulls won because of Jordan. I'm pretty sure Stockton and Malone played in that series. I'm pretty sure neither of them has a ring.

 

I'm not a big Bulls fan, or Jordan fan for that matter, but I despise the Jazz. And the third greatest basketball moment for me (behind the Rocket's two championships) was watching Jordan steal the Stockton pass and then stick that last second jumper to ice the Jazz in the '98 Finals.

 

 

 

+1 to this and what Foolkiller and everybody else not of the same mind as KoR. Nash and Stockton better offensive players?

 

Basing greatness on something like a raw stat such as FG% or FT% is bad science imo.

 

If so, one might as well say that player x, who played 1 career nba game and took 1 shot and made it, was the best shooter in NBA history.

 

Jordan took over 3000 MORE FT attempts than Stockton. Why? Because he could get to places on the court a guy like Stockton never could. Because he could bang and bust double teams and flat out create offense like very few players could.

 

I don't really follow basketball closely but I imagine comparing Stockton to Jordan is about as tarded as it gets.

[KingOfRulers]

You conveniently left out 6 NBA Championships versus 3 NBA Championships.

 

This is why Steve Nash and John Stockton are not even in this conversation.

 

 

And, there are many great players who have 0 championships. Sure, championships mean something--just not the individual talent of the player.

 

Nash and Stockton were better offensive players than Jordan. Both have a higher field goal percentage, both blow him out in 3-point percentage, both blow him out in assist percentage and Stockton was around the same in free throws, while Nash blows him out in free throw percentage. Jordan, however, was an overall better defender by quite a bit.

 

Yet because their championship count does not match up with Jordan's, they are left out.

 

Sounds like the typical Jordan golden child promotions have paid off over the last 20 years.

I'm not going to say you don't have a right to your opinion, I'm just going to say that if you asked Steve Nash or John Stockton their opinion on who the best player is/was I imagine they would each say Jordan. If you asked Jordan his opinion he would also say Jordan. And in direct comparisons, the one time Chicago faced Utah in a series that mattered the Bulls won because of Jordan. I'm pretty sure Stockton and Malone played in that series. I'm pretty sure neither of them has a ring.

 

I'm not a big Bulls fan, or Jordan fan for that matter, but I despise the Jazz. And the third greatest basketball moment for me (behind the Rocket's two championships) was watching Jordan steal the Stockton pass and then stick that last second jumper to ice the Jazz in the '98 Finals.

 

 

 

+1 to this and what Foolkiller and everybody else not of the same mind as KoR. Nash and Stockton better offensive players?

 

Basing greatness on something like a raw stat such as FG% or FT% is bad science imo.

 

If so, one might as well say that player x, who played 1 career nba game and took 1 shot and made it, was the best shooter in NBA history.

 

Jordan took over 3000 MORE FT attempts than Stockton. Why? Because he could get to places on the court a guy like Stockton never could. Because he could bang and bust double teams and flat out create offense like very few players could.

 

I don't really follow basketball closely but I imagine comparing Stockton to Jordan is about as tarded as it gets.

 

I'd say that this entire post is about as 'tarded as it gets.

 

If a player plays one NBA game and shoots one 3-pointer, and makes it, just because he is a 100% 3-point shooter does not mean he is a better three point shooter than someone else.

 

If you have been in the league long enough, and taken enough shots, the statistics will be representative though. All players being discussed have enough attempts that the numbers are representative.

[KingOfRulers]

Jordan was a filthy tongue-wagger. I often wished he would bite it off as it lolled out of his mouth.

 

Sure he could beat Bugs Bunny, but the Bird? never!

 

He put up 63 on Bird and the Celtics. Nuff said

 

And, yet the Bulls still lost that game.

[HouseofComics.Com]

You do realize that the frenetic style that the Suns were playing greatly enhanced Nash's stats don't you? While Jordan's team was playing the slow it down style that was forced on the league by the Pistons and then the Knicks.

 

Realize also that Bird got a lot of easy defensive rebounds.

 

Something to think about--What's more demoralizing to a team? Seeing Larry Bird box out his man and get a rebound that comes right to him or having Jordan take off towards the basket just as his own teammate shoots a free throw and dunk the rebound?

 

Something else to think about--What's harder to do, score when the other team's best 2 or 3 is on you or shoot open jumpers when your pick and roll partner is Karl Malone?

 

Final bit of nostalgia--Remember Isiah not being named to the dream team and absolutely torching Stockton the next time the Pistons played the Jazz? Part of being the premiere offensive player is being able to still score against the best defenders. If Jordan or Pippen switched onto Stockton for a long stretch of the game, can he still be effective?

[KingOfRulers]

My point is that Jordan is not clearly the singular "great" looking down on so many other players. He is a great, along with many others. Some aspects he is superior to others in and some he is not.

 

Jordan was on the Bulls for being able to make his own shot--a high volume scorer (rather than a shooter). That's what he was great at.

 

As for the Howard vs. Shaq, debate. Howard has more speed than Shaq has ever had. That is a certainty. Howard is also the superior free throw shooter. Shaq was a higher scorer than Howard, when Shaq was in his prime (however their field goal percentage is similar). However, I think that goes hand in hand with the team's individual strategy. The Magic are a jump shooting team...that's just the way it is. They shoot more 3-pointers than any other team in the NBA. Shaq has historically been used as a primary scorer, while Howard has not. Howard may be the higher scorer in some games, but the Magic are a balanced team in that one or two players are not likely to be the high scorer every night. There are about 7 or 8 Magic players that rotate as "high scorer".

[sckao]

My point is that Jordan is not clearly the singular "great" looking down on so many other players. He is a great, along with many others. Some aspects he is superior to others in and some he is not.

 

Jordan was on the Bulls for being able to make his own shot--a high volume scorer (rather than a shooter). That's what he was great at.

 

 

Again, ridiculous. High volume or not, their Field Goal Percentage is almost the same. (Jordan's is actually better than Bird's.) His FGP is higher than Bird's in the Playoffs and his 3-Point % is also better.

 

Bird is a better pure shooter. (He was less mobile, had less dunks, more offensive rebound putbacks, was better at free throws.) Michael Jordan took a TOTAL of 1778 three point shots in his entire career. Bird actually took even LESS even though he played in 2 fewer seasons and was injured for a lot of his final years.. (1727)

 

Meanwhile, a guy like Reggie Miller finished with 6486 3-point attempts in his career.

 

That does not equate to being the "best" or the "greatest."

 

There are intangibles to playing... Take Shane Battier, for instance.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html?_r=1&em

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[KingOfRulers]

My point is that Jordan is not clearly the singular "great" looking down on so many other players. He is a great, along with many others. Some aspects he is superior to others in and some he is not.

 

Jordan was on the Bulls for being able to make his own shot--a high volume scorer (rather than a shooter). That's what he was great at.

 

 

Again, ridiculous. High volume or not, their Field Goal Percentage is almost the same. (Jordan's is actually better than Bird's.) His FGP is higher than Bird's in the Playoffs and his 3-Point % is also better.

 

Bird is a better pure shooter. (He was less mobile, had less dunks, more offensive rebound putbacks, was better at free throws.) Michael Jordan took a TOTAL of 1778 three point shots in his entire career. Bird actually took even LESS even though he played in 2 fewer seasons and was injured for a lot of his final years.. (1727)

 

Meanwhile, a guy like Reggie Miller finished with 6486 3-point attempts in his career.

 

That does not equate to being the "best" or the "greatest."

 

There are intangibles to playing... Take Shane Battier, for instance.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/15/magazine/15Battier-t.html?_r=1&em

 

 

If you want to go lace up your Jordan's, I'm not going to stop you.

 

Nonetheless, both are better in certain aspects of the game, than the other. Bird was a better shooter, and Jordan a better scorer. Oh, and Bird was only 1% lower than Jordan in playoff 3-point percent. Jordan, however, was 5% lower throughout the entire career. Bird was a significantly better rebounder as well.

 

And if you want to go with the whole "making the team better" aspect, than I would say assists is the best statistic to reflect that. And Bird averaged more assists per game than Jordan did.

[sckao]

No.. "making the team better" = winning 6 championships in six straight years when he played.

 

* Michael Jordan also won 6 straight NBA Finals MVP awards when he played a full season.

 

 

Are you really going to compare a 6' 6" guard to a 6' 9" forward for rebounds? Bird was a Point Forward.

 

Scottie Pippen was the Bull's Point Forward and he was 6' 8". Jordan was the Shooting Guard/Small Forward.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[conditionfreak]

Shaq was twice the player as Howard, at the same age.

I am a huge Larry Bird fan but I have to give it to Jordan. He was better.

The measure of greatness in sports is how good you do, no matter who your team mates are.

 

I can't stand Kobe, but he is one of the best. LeBron is great but he takes too many bad shots. Watch him sometime, fire several up during a game, from almost half court. With plenty of time left on the clock.

 

A little tidbit of interesting info concerning basketball. As I understand it, Moses Malone was the only NBA center in the history of the sport, that could not palm a basketball. When he dunked the ball (which was always from a standing jump), he always dunked with two hands. I don't remember ever seeing him dunk from a running start, nor with one hand.

[james_c]

Howard has more speed than Shaq has ever had.

 

 

I would not agree with this...early shaq was just as fast and agile as howard. After he was in the league awhile he decided to go for bulk and that is where he lost his speed/agility.

 

 

The Magic are a jump shooting team...that's just the way it is. They shoot more 3-pointers than any other team in the NBA. Shaq has historically been used as a primary scorer, while Howard has not.

 

That is because Shaq could be the primary scorer. Howard has no moves in the paint (other than a running hook that is still under developed) and he cant over power every center (each time he touched the ball) in the league like Shaq could.

[james_c]

LeBron is great but he takes too many bad shots.

 

He loves to shoot the jumper after dribbling the clock down....I dunno why he doesn't just drive to the basket he is almost undefendable.

[HouseofComics.Com]

I dunno why he doesn't just drive to the basket he is almost undefendable.

 

Near the end of the game against the Pistons in Game 7 that led to the first Cavs NBA Finals, the Pistons just got out of his way when he drove the lane for a must have bucket. It was shocking--they wanted no part of it.

[hockey&comicsguy]

 

I'd say that this entire post is about as 'tarded as it gets.

 

 

This from the guy who puked up this piece of genius, "Statistics don't lie. He was a great player, but there are plenty of others who were (are) better. Steve Nash, John Stockton"

 

 

 

If an opinion can be completely and utterly incorrect, this is one of those times.

 

(thumbs u

[james_c]

I dunno why he doesn't just drive to the basket he is almost undefendable.

 

Near the end of the game against the Pistons in Game 7 that led to the first Cavs NBA Finals, the Pistons just got out of his way when he drove the lane for a must have bucket. It was shocking--they wanted no part of it.

 

 

He really torched the Pistons that year. I remember watching that series live and Lebron put on an awesome performance.

[KingOfRulers]

 

I'd say that this entire post is about as 'tarded as it gets.

 

 

This from the guy who puked up this piece of genius, "Statistics don't lie. He was a great player, but there are plenty of others who were (are) better. Steve Nash, John Stockton"

 

 

 

If an opinion can be completely and utterly incorrect, this is one of those times.

 

(thumbs u

 

If that notion helps you get through the day or makes you feel any better about yourself, basketball and/or sentient life, than lets go with it.

[c-mack]

basketball sucks now...i miss the 90's NBA

[hockey&comicsguy]

 

I'd say that this entire post is about as 'tarded as it gets.

 

 

This from the guy who puked up this piece of genius, "Statistics don't lie. He was a great player, but there are plenty of others who were (are) better. Steve Nash, John Stockton"

 

 

 

If an opinion can be completely and utterly incorrect, this is one of those times.

 

(thumbs u

 

If that notion helps you get through the day or makes you feel any better about yourself, basketball and/or sentient life, than lets go with it.

 

 

Actually, I hate basketball. But as a "sports fan" in general, I like to have at least a passing knowledge of what's up so as to not look or say something completely and utterly ridiculous. John Stockton > Jordan. See what I mean.

 

You'll have to excuse me looking up these statistics. But I know you are fond of them so:

 

Championships

Jordan = 6

Stockton = 0

 

Finals MVP

Jordan = 6

Stockton = 0

 

NBA MVP

Jordan = 5

Stockton = 0

 

NBA Defensive player of the year

Jordan = 1

Stockton = 0

 

All-NBA 1st Team

Jordan = 10

Stockton = 2

 

All-NBA 1st Team Defense

Jordan = 9

Stockton = 0

 

Of course Stockton does have that assists thing going for him. Although my hunch is if Jordan were a point guard, he'd have been better at it than Stockton. But who knows.

[HouseofComics.Com]

Jordan was the point guard for a year in there IIRC and he had a monster year.