See Red

Without Kobe, the Lakers would probably be the worst team in the league. As it is, they're better than the Sixers

Like when he pushed off of B-Russ, pulled up and hit the game winner for Championship #6

Give me a good point as to why he's not and we'll talk. The numbers are better and Jordan never had to compete for rings against the Celtics dynasty (see: 8 hall of famers over 13 seasons). Oh yeah, I forgot, according to you, Jordan got all his points on 3 pointers, which, in his best scoring years, he made once every ten games. Your past posts in this thread have ruined any credibility you might have when it comes to the NBA.

Yes, because now I don't have to bring up the same, correct point over and over again, show my proof, and still be called wrong.

How many titles does Jordan have without Pippen? Oh ok thanks. You've been saying this entire time he PLAYED the '93-94 season. I put that to prove you incorrect.

I think you deleted your post, seeing it was incorrect, but regardless... You say Jordan played the '93-94 season in which the Bulls went 55-27, correct? Well, NBA.com disagrees with you. Now, who knows more... you? Or the league in which he played? http://www.nba.com/playerfile/michael_jordan/

You, sir, are a moron. Jordan missed almost two whole seasons. One he missed completely, and another he played on 17 regular season games of, plus the playoffs. The first, the season that he missed completely, the Bulls finished 55-27 and lost in the Eastern Conference Semi's to the eventual Eastern Conference Champion Knicks. During this season, in which they, I'll repeat, went 55-27, their 5 leading scorers were Scottie Pippen, Horace Grant, B.J. Armstrong, Tony Kukoc, and Steve Kerr. NO JORDAN. The season you're referring to happened after this season. Jordan played 17 regular season games. http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CHI/1994.html

The season I brought up ('94), the Bulls were 55-27, and the five leading scorers were... Scottie Pippen (22.0) Horace Grant (15.1) B.J. Armstrong (14.8) Toni Kukoc (10.9) Steve Kerr (8.6) The season before that ('93), they were 57-25 with Jordan (2 games better than the next year without him). I don't know why you're disputing me, my points were spot on. Even in that 'bad' season without Jordan, they were a #5 seed in the playoffs. You add one of the 2 or 3 greatest players to any #5 seed and they're going to be the best team in the league. Edit: I should add that Scottie Pippen made the all NBA first team both years, so any arguments that Pippen was nothing without Jordan is wrong.

55-27... within two games of winning the Eastern Conference You were saying they weren't any good?

Yeah, I'd lay the 4.5 here and take Duke.

I know, I didn't mean to say it to anybody in particular, just anybody that says that he raped the girl as though it's a proven fact.

Kobe raped some girl? Funny, I don't remember that being proven. In fact, I remember a substantial amount of information that pointed to his innocence. Say what you want about his infidelity, but Jordan wasn't exactly a saint in that regard. Besides, guys, that has absolutely no place in a basketball debate.

I'll contribute to the off-topic chatter and add Jerry Stackhouse and Rasheed Wallace to the list of successful UNC alumni.

Wow, didn't even notice it. Thank you, kind sir.

I was saying that in reference to Manny Goes Boom's post.

Didn't Penny Hardaway have something similar? We've seen what that's done to his career. I hope Amare makes a full recovery.

More or less, yes, but since that answer is fairly obvious, I'm debating those that feel MJ is the best ever. I've read a lot of things in this thread about rings and championships and that's why he's the greatest. I didn't bring up Bill Russell to say he's the greatest ever -- he's not. Some feel that deciding who the greatest of all-time was consists of counting Championships. it doesn't.

I should add... Those of you that like to think in terms of Championships (and ignore the team surrounding a player), where's the love for Bill Russell and his 11 Championships in 13 seasons? Or do Championships only apply in some cases?

I don't know if he's saying Amare is better as much as he's saying that Amare's abilities and style match up favorable against somebody like Duncan. If he is saying he's better than Duncan, then I can't bring myself to agree. Give him time, though, and he will be.

Yeah, on the tail end of their careers. And he certainly didn't have them for ten years. Then again, I'm not the one saying that team accomplishments can be attributed to one person. Jordan didn't win any Championships until they got Scottie Pippen and some damn good roleplayers around him. And, like I said, Chamberlain had to compete with the Celtics rivalry -- teams that one could argue are better than any teams the Bulls assembled. And there was no Scottie Pippen before Jordan, he was drafted to the Bulls in '88. Regardless, the NBA considers him one of the 50 Greatest Players ever to play in the league. So... what exactly did Jordan win before Scottie Pippen got there? 108 wins as compared to 138 losses. Fade-away 3's? surely you're not talking about the Jordan that averaged .5 3-Pointers per game over his career, are you? .1 in his highest scoring years. Surely one could argue that Chamberlain's numbers are a littler lower because of the 8 shots per game he took over his last 2 seasons. You don't think Jordan got some easy points in his career? 12 free throws a game during his best scoring year. Here's an interesting stat... Jordan's career high is 8 assists per game over a season. Wilt managed to get 8.6 in '68. Not bad for a big man, eh? Let's not act like working down low is easy points. I never said I expect a guard to get 26 rebounds -- but Jordan didn't exactly match his 50 points, either.

Jordan also had another one of the NBA 50 Greatest Players wearing that Bulls jersey when he did. Wilt had to compete with the Celtics dynasty (8 Hall of Famers throughout the 13 years in which they won 11 Titles), in which the playoff losses were hardly his fault, having average 30 points and 28 rebounds per game -- both better than Bill Russell. Still managed two titles. Who cares who scored more total points? They both averaged 30.1 PPG, so Jordan's career total can be attributed to longevity. At his best... Jordan's numbers couldn't touch Wilt's. 50 PPG, 26 RBG. In the shadow of his 100 point game is his record of 55 Rebounds in a single game against Bill Russell.

Walt Bellamy of the Knicks was 6'11" -- how often do you hear about his dominance? I take it you discount all players because of physical advantages? Shaq isn't as good because there's nobody that can match him in terms of strength? The NBA put rules into place to try and make Wilt Chamberlain less dominant... when did they EVER do that for Jordan? The bottomline is that Wilt Chamberlain dominated the game like nobody else ever has. That makes him the best.

Wilt Chamberlain is the best ever. The day somebody else averages 50 points and 26 rebounds in a season in an age in which rules are put in place to prevent their domination, rather than to promote it, like with Jordan, then they we can talk about who's the best ever.

Actually, I jus rethought about it (for about the 4th time), and decided I'd take Chauncey everytime over Nash. The guy's already proven that he can D up, unlike Nash who's a complete defensive liability,

Actually, after taking some time to think it over... I'd take Earl Boykins over anyone... ever. (Those that take me seriously need to go back a few pages to where the Nuggets were on a losing streak.)