NYKMentality wrote:sidsanders wrote:why make comps to jordan at all? age 26 jordan had won or been: league mvp, dpoy, 4 time all nba 1st team, 3 time all def 1st team, 4 time scoring champ. his teams won over 20 playoff games and been to the ecf 2 straight times. you cherry picked to make the comp showing failures. you could do that for magic/bird/etc. i think all folks get it, you like randle. there is no real need to chop at other all time greats to try and elevate randle. his play and results will either do that or sink him.
Wasn't cherry picking. Just goes to show that even the greatest player of All-Time failed to win a Championship until his 7th year in the league @ 27 years old (after 3 years of NCAA developing @ UNC).
Yes. Michael Jordan lived through 3 1st round exits (1-3 and swept 2x).
Yes. Michael Jordan was eliminated by Detroit 3 out of 4 matchups (1-3).
No. Michael Jordan could never eliminate Larry Bird (0-2).
Great player. Greatest of All-Time. Awesome individual achievements throughout his first 6 years in the league but no. He couldn't get over the hump until his 7th season @ 27 years old. Before finally winning his 1st ring (of many).
And for all the talk on how Julius Randle is a "turnover machine"? Jordan averaged 3.3 turnovers throughout his first 6 NBA seasons and ended with a career average of 2.7 turnovers per game. Julius Randle? Career average of 2.7 turnovers per game (same as MJ). So hearing about his "low IQ" or turnover machine is laughable.
No. I'm not comparing the two. No one can compare to MJ. But not even MJ could lead his team to an NBA championship until year #7 @ 27 years old.
jordans ast/to ratio -- compare that since you bring up tos.
jodarn didnt beat the bird celtics -- so this means what for randle?
jordan didnt win a title till he was 27 -- so this means what for randle? "not a comparison" so whats the point of using it? why not just say players are not always going to dominate/win/etc. name dropping other all time greats in relation to randle doesnt help his cause. what does is actual success going forward.
bill russell wins a title during his age 22 season (rookie) -- and proceeds to win many times. bill was a poor shooter, ft and overall. randle is stat wise better in this area. why bring up bill? to show that using guys who won many mvps, titles and then comparing certain stats to randle is a false equivalent. does this comp mean anything of value -- not really.
randle goes out and wins actual league mvp, wins a title -- have at it with these comps. randles results will bury the guy or elevate him. comparisons before he has built up a sheet of awards/titles will not (mid season exhibition games i do not count). he got all nba 2nd team -- thats a start.
1/8/2022 7:27 PM