NightlyPoe said:
Longevity is a positive trait and should be factored in. Particularly when there was no physical reason why Jordan retired. We probably lost four prime years from Jordan's career because of his mental fragility. We would have lost more if Chicago hadn't remained a championship level team (Jordan said he wouldn't have come back from his first retirement if Pippen had been traded for Kemp as had been proposed). That is a definite negative and should be penalized. The fact that Kareem and Lebron remained dominant players for so long isn't something to just brush off. Jordan being unable to play without a deck stacked in his favor is not something to overlook. Toronto's likely to win the championship, so let's put aside the idea that they only made it because the East is weak. Especially if you're still insisting that the Warriors are as good as they were three years ago. They're an excellent team with a lot of quality pieces beyond Kawhi, who is obviously a beast in his own right, and will be deserving champs if they win. You also forget that Lebron dragged the Cavs to the Finals in 2007. Like I said, if I had to start a team, I would take Bird and Curry over Jordan. There's just so much more you can do because of what they bring to the table. They were/are glitches in the system. Jordan, particularly in the first half of his career was very much a singular sensation that left his teammates just watching him play. It took Phil Jackson to figure out how to make Jordan work on a team. I'm not sure how many other coaches could have figured out how to do that, but there aren't many. I think that pretty much any coach could figure out how to make Curry, Bird, or Lebron work. Heck, I've lost track of how many mediocre coaches Lebron's had. |
I think i should stop after reading you would start a team with bird or curry over jordan. Thats the craziest stuff i read in a while. I would start a team with a guy whos best at scoring and defending over anyone
