re: Phil Jackson: "LeBron needs to takeover like Michael did"

he was doing that on local BR radio long before he ever posted on this site

quote:

---

The debate is if bron can hold Jordan's jock. And the answer is NO!!!!!! There is ZERO debate.

---

Well the game is different.

If Bron did have the steel balls to go all Jordan, could he do it with elimination of illegal defense?

I will say, that having watched Magic growing up...it's an insult to Magic to say LeBron is like Magic.

Magic was a killer. He'd rather die than lose a game.

LeBron is the most talented basketball player, but he's a product of his generation...

You can tell there is something missing when he plays...

He goes home to a sweet pad, probably watches some reality TV, bangs a few chicks, drinks some Kombucha, takes a snore, wakes up, has PF Changs delivered, plays Call of Duty, bangs another chick, eats a few Slim Jims, goes to the gym for a few layups, sleeps in the locker room...goes out and nails a few jumpers, slaps some high fives, signs a few autographs, goes back to the locker room, snaps into another Slim Jim, hops in his customized Lincoln and drives the frick home to watch Celebrity Chef.

Wtf

quote:

---

Anyone wanna make the full list... Pistons 2007, game 6 and 7 against the Celtics. Games 6 and 7 against San Antonio. And so on and so forth.

---

Game 7 against the Celtics in 2008 and the entire 2009 playoffs (> 37 PER was absurd).

Only Magic and Jordan were killers though. Or they were just great players like LeBron; MJ just happened to be better.

But I just love generational product arguments. By that logic, Magic being a baby boomer should have been a product of whatever negative attributes Baby Boomers have.

And since MJ was born right before birth rates dipped to lows in the last half century, and LeBron was born right before birth rates rose to near highs, should that factor into the argument if one's generation is important?

quote:

---

it's an insult to Magic to say LeBron is like Magic.

---

BOOM...FACT................


Magic>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bron... And its not even close..............

quote:

---

And I was RIGHT way more than I was wrong... And YOU know this......

---

But were they non sequitors like you've had in this thread?

quote:

---

Magic>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bron... And its not even close..............

---

Bron >>>>>>>>>>> Magic. No need for evidence since you don't seem to value it in your emotional arguments.

quote:

---

Bron >>>>>>>>>>> Magic. No need for evidence since you don't seem to value it in your emotional arguments.

---

You are too young to have even seen Magic play... So GFY...little boy.........

quote:

---

You are too young to have even seen Magic play... So GFY...little boy.........

---

Believe it or not, they invented this thing called film before Magic started playing.

Besides, one can never watch a game of basketball and determine that MJ is the greatest of all time. So whether some irrational person who can't follow a basic conversation watched a game 30 years ago is hardly compelling evidence.

quote:

---

frick that. Not legitimately.

---

Yes legitimately. In fact, there is a reason that science attempts to blind the observer. The subjectivity only diminishes objectivity. Of course, that doesn't allow us all to feel like we are some genius basketball analyst, which is what I've sensed about your "immeasurable" argument. We interject our biases, whether intentional or not. Our belief that we can subjectively analyze something better than the objective measurement is an illusion, but it makes us feel mighty special.