Will the real Superman please stand up

[KingOfRulers]

You cannot boil down Jordan in statistics. That's all I will say. I never said he was the best a this or that, I only said after he left the NBA, I stopped watching.

 

 

 

-slym

 

This is correct.

 

In the 1990's there were people that NEVER watched basketball but they would watch Jordan.

 

He was bigger than the game.

 

He also took athletes pitching products to new heights (for better or for worse)

 

 

Being a great businessman and a great basketball player are not the same thing. Being a great businessman does not make him any better of a player.

[lookwhoitis]

LARRY BIRD > JORDAN!

[slym2none]

mess on toast! All I said was I stopped watching NBA when Jordan left (I grew up watching him play at UNC, and have been a UNC fan long before MJ ever attended) and here comes the hater.

 

Stop arguing with him and he'll go away, hopefully.

 

 

 

-slym

[Billy the Kidd]

I'll tell you who Superman is :

 

[james_c]

Dwight Howard is a slightly better center than Shaq was in his prime. Today's Howard and a young Shaq had pretty much the same field goal percentage, blocks per game and rebounds per game. However, even with Howard's dismal free throw percentage, he is a significantly better free throw shooter than Shaq has been.

 

I don't even know why Shaq is trying to contend with Howard, in the present. Today's Shaq is nowhere near as dominant as Howard is, in any aspect of the game.

 

 

I dont like Shaq but I would have to totally disagree with this statement. No way after 5 years in the league can you say that he is better than Prime Shaq. I mean he averages 24-29pts per game for a solid 10 years. Dwight might one day be better than Prime Shaq but he has along way to go.

 

The only thing I can see he would have over Prime Shaq is he might be a slightly better rebounder.

[james_c]

Dwight Howard is a slightly better center than Shaq was in his prime. Today's Howard and a young Shaq had pretty much the same field goal percentage, blocks per game and rebounds per game. However, even with Howard's dismal free throw percentage, he is a significantly better free throw shooter than Shaq has been.

 

I don't even know why Shaq is trying to contend with Howard, in the present. Today's Shaq is nowhere near as dominant as Howard is, in any aspect of the game.

Hakeem in his prime would destroy Howard and did destroy Shaq.

 

I approve of this statement.

[sckao]

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

 

 

Championships are irrelavent when talking about an individual player. Jordan did not win the championships--the Bulls did.

 

When all of the stars align, and you have the good fortune to be on a good team, you win championships. Jordan did not win them by himself. If Jordan were on the Clippers, instead of the Bulls, I'd say that he would have 0 championships to his name.

 

Steve Nash is one of the greatest players ever. Yet, he plays on a mediocre team, which is why they are having trouble even making a playoff spot.

 

 

Now you're really stretching it... Larry Bird had Kevin McHale and Robert Parish on his team, that's THREE of the Top 50 NBA players of all time.

 

As much as I hate the Lakers, the Lakers of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Magic Johnson, and James Worthy exceeded the 80's Celtics. They won five titles to Boston's three.

They also have three of the Top 50 Greatest NBA players.

 

Meanwhile, there was Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen. Dennis Rodman has five rings himself (5x NBA Champion (1989, 1990, 1996, 1997, 1998) but was only there for the LAST THREE.

 

The two years that Jordan (and Rodman) was not with the Bulls, they did not win a championship.

 

 

I don't know if you lived in Massachusetts in the 80's... but I was there for basically the entire run. Bird didn't take care of himself. He was known as the "hick from French Lick." He drove around with his MVP trophy on the floor of his battered old truck. That's part of why we all loved him. That's why the Lakers and "Showtime" was such a contrast. The lack of conditioning is probably why his body started breaking down toward the end of his career and he started missing a lot of games. Don't get me wrong, Bird deserves to be one of the 50 best NBA players in history and in the top three. (thumbs u

 

 

 

 

 

[sakaridis]

Dwight Howard is a slightly better center than Shaq was in his prime. Today's Howard and a young Shaq had pretty much the same field goal percentage, blocks per game and rebounds per game. However, even with Howard's dismal free throw percentage, he is a significantly better free throw shooter than Shaq has been.

 

I don't even know why Shaq is trying to contend with Howard, in the present. Today's Shaq is nowhere near as dominant as Howard is, in any aspect of the game.

Hakeem in his prime would destroy Howard and did destroy Shaq.

To be fair, Shaq was pretty much a baby when that happened.

 

Not that I'm trying to take anything away from Hakeem, whom I definitely consider the top big man I've seen in my lifetime (along with Kareem, perhaps).

[sd2416]

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

 

 

Steve Nash is one of the greatest players ever. Yet, he plays on a mediocre team, which is why they are having trouble even making a playoff spot.

 

I stopped reading after seeing this post. Its getting knee deep in here.

 

 

[KingOfRulers]

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

[KingOfRulers]

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

 

 

Meanwhile, there was Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen. Dennis Rodman has five rings himself (5x NBA Champion (1989, 1990, 1996, 1997, 1998) but was only there for the LAST THREE.

 

The two years that Jordan (and Rodman) was not with the Bulls, they did not win a championship.

 

 

Yet, when Jordan was not on a championship caliber team, he did not win a championship.

[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.

[Foolkiller]

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 think it really comes down to who would you rather have? It's unfair to compare assists, since Nash and Stockton are point guards and MJ was a 2 guard.

 

MJ was the scoring leader and MVP for a reason, Nash is certainly not a better player (offensive or otherwise) than MJ. Stockton isn't either but at least it's a little closer. The reason why championships are some measure is because you are looking to have your best player make the other players around them better. MJ certainly did that.

 

Stockton should be in the conversation for greatest PG of all time absolutely. Greatest player? No.

[Foolkiller]

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

 

 

Championships are irrelavent when talking about an individual player. Jordan did not win the championships--the Bulls did.

 

When all of the stars align, and you have the good fortune to be on a good team, you win championships. Jordan did not win them by himself. If Jordan were on the Clippers, instead of the Bulls, I'd say that he would have 0 championships to his name.

 

Steve Nash is one of the greatest players ever. Yet, he plays on a mediocre team, which is why they are having trouble even making a playoff spot.

 

How about when Nash played with the Suns in the mid 2000s... they were great force then but couldn't get by the Lakers or Spurs. Plenty of talent around him then.

[LloydJBailey]

KingOfRules just gained points in my books.

Everything you said was greatly put bro!

[MrBedrock]

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.

 

 

[fantastic_four]

Dwight Howard is a slightly better center than Shaq was in his prime. Today's Howard and a young Shaq had pretty much the same field goal percentage, blocks per game and rebounds per game. However, even with Howard's dismal free throw percentage, he is a significantly better free throw shooter than Shaq has been.

 

Dwight Howard is more skilled, but he's not better. Shaq took three different teams to the Finals and won with two...Howard can't score well enough to carry that kind of load yet. Shaq had two things Howard doesn't--the ability to push ANYBODY over to get a dunk, and a craftier low-post game with more accuracy on hooks, turnarounds, and up-and-under fakes.

 

I really don't get why Howard isn't a better post player...he works on it so much in practice, but when he gets into the game, he looks stiff in the post and frequently prefers to face up and pump fake and drive, which isn't all that effective since he's not a consistent outside shooter. He's got the physical gifts to be the best post player ever, but none of the actual post skills. He should work out with Kevin McHale, that guy had the widest arsenal of quick, smooth post moves I've ever seen...if McHale were half the athelete Howard is, he'd have been scoring 35 points a game instead of 25.

[fantastic_four]

Statistics don't lie. He was a great player, but there are plenty of others who were (are) better. Steve Nash, John Stockton and Larry Bird to name a few.

 

Err, you're right, they don't--Jordan won the title every single one of his last full six seasons with the Bulls, none of those other guys have done that. Ask all three of those players who was better, and you'll have your answer. As Bird said, Jordan is "God in basketball shoes"...at his prime, there's never been a more unstoppable player on both ends of the court. Lebron is the closest I've seen in terms of overall dominance on both O and D, but he doesn't have the same ability to score at complete and total will with aerial acrobatics like Jordan had. The only other acrobatic penetrators I've seen that came close to Jordan are David Thompson and Julius Erving, but even they weren't as good at just destroying anybody, any number of defenders, anytime.

[james_c]

Nash is certainly not a better player (offensive or otherwise) than MJ.

 

(thumbs u

[lookwhoitis]

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!

 

Chicago's measley 6 championships pales in comparison to the Boston Celtics who with 17 championships are the best team in the history of the game.

 

Jordan is the He deserves a spot in the Hall of Fame polishing Bill Russell's 11 rings