Greatest of All-Time Debate Thread

[jordan23]

I found it:

https://twitter.com/espnstatsinfo/st...769664?lang=en

5 for 47 on game-winning or game-tying shots.

You can't be the greatest in NBA history and be that inefficient and winning games on your big shots.

You just can't.

The sheer weight of the obstacles that Michael had to battle to get to the top is what people remember. That's the Jordan mystique, something James cannot top with the way he has decided with his career always choosing the easier road to success.

Even if LeBron can match MJs number of titles many will see him as the lesser player. This is because to win LeBron needed to surround himself with not just star players but other Superstar players. LeBron needed Wade and Bosh in Miami, both of them are Franchise players. Then he needed Irving and Love who are also franchise players.

Nobody could influence and take games over as consistently as MJ. The above stats 5 for 47 on game-winning or game-tying shots shows exactly why LeBron cannot be mentioned in the same breath as MJ.

[Jameis1of1]

The sheer weight of the obstacles that Michael had to battle to get to the top is what people remember. That's the Jordan mystique, something James cannot top with the way he has decided with his career always choosing the easier road to success.

Even if LeBron can match MJs number of titles many will see him as the lesser player. This is because to win LeBron needed to surround himself with not just star players but other Superstar players. LeBron needed Wade and Bosh in Miami, both of them are Franchise players. Then he needed Irving and Love who are also franchise players.

Nobody could influence and take games over as consistently as MJ. The above stats 5 for 47 on game-winning or game-tying shots shows exactly why LeBron cannot be mentioned in the same breath as MJ.

The above is complete nonsense.

LeBron took a Cavs squad with Boobie Gibson and Sasha Pavlovic to the Finals as a young pup ... Jordan NEVER won anything without Pippen, a top 50 NBA legend and Phil the GOAT coach ...

At the age of 32 Jordan had 3 conference titles and 3 rings ... LeBron will have at least 3 rings but EIGHT conference titles and both his career and playoff stats will OBLITERATE Jordan's stats at the same age.

As for Wade, Bosh, Kyrie and Love ... none of them come close to Pippen. Wade is the closest but LeBron only had 4 years with him ... again Jordan NEVER won anything without Pip and had around a decade with him.

MJ was a bad man but the revisionist history of Jordanairre's drives me nuts ... some of us lived through Jordan's career and actually remember it ...

The only sensible way to compare MJ and LeBron is to compare their achievements at the same age as LeBron could play another 7-8 years and if you just compare them both at the same age MJ pales in comparison to LeBron ... and it's not even close.

[WilyWestbrook0]

Your counter-point to the star and superstar teammates has some weight. However, some of your other sub-points could use some critiquing.

Did you really just say Wade and Kyrie don't come close to Pippen? I may grant you that defensively (particularly Kyrie, who is horrid on defense), but offensively, they are far superior players. Pippen couldn't create shots the way Wade and Kyrie do. He was athletic around the rim and had a nice bank shot, but he couldn't take over games offensively the way either of those could/can in their prime. He had nowhere near Kyrie's handles, Wade's jump shot, etc.

Jordan never played with a player like Love (or Bosh for that matter); stretch fours were unheard-of in his day. He did have Rodman for his final three rings, who was a rebounding and defensive phenom, and a huge upgrade over the mediocre Horace Grant on Jordan's first three rings team, but Love's a completely different player. He spaces the floor, has a good outside shot, and still rebounds quite well. This is where comparing superstars of different eras can get sketchy because we can't say for 100% how much different playing styles and player skill sets of teammates help feed or hinder these superstars.

Also, few agree with you that LeBron dwarfs Jordan. The vast majority of us who saw both players believe Jordan was better for all the contextual reasons already listed, even when compared at the same ages. We appreciate what LeBron has done, but he has not dominated individually the way Jordan did. You dodge the 5 of 47 stat. It may not be everything, but it is still a very important stat. It's more important at gauging the individual player vs. team conference titles. This is similar to why a guy like Jon Niednagel gets pseudo-religious indignation when people compare Tom Brady to Peyton Manning. Brady was the perfect qb for Belichick's system, but individually, Peyton Manning had far superior individual qb skills. Although to be fair to LeBron, he's much closer to MJ individually than Brady is to Manning. Nonetheless, the same basic argument applies -- one cannot take team accomplishments and give them greater weight than individual ones when the thesis is who the greatest individual player is, and why.

[Jameis1of1]

Your counter-point to the star and superstar teammates has some weight. However, some of your other sub-points could use some critiquing.

Did you really just say Wade and Kyrie don't come close to Pippen?

I said Wade comes closer to Pip than the others but Kyrie? No, Kyrie doesn't even come close ... he's a one-way, one-dimensional player ... the kid can score but that's it ... Pip did EVERYTHING.

I may grant you that defensively (particularly Kyrie, who is horrid on defense), but offensively, they are far superior players. Pippen couldn't create shots the way Wade and Kyrie do. He was athletic around the rim and had a nice bank shot, but he couldn't take over games offensively the way either of those could/can in their prime. He had nowhere near Kyrie's handles, Wade's jump shot, etc.

Wade was a better all-around offensive player though he can't shoot 3s which Pip could ... Kyrie is a scorer of course, that's his "one trick". Pip did EVERYTHING.

Jordan never played with a player like Love (or Bosh for that matter); stretch fours were unheard-of in his day. He did have Rodman for his final three rings, who was a rebounding and defensive phenom, and a huge upgrade over the mediocre Horace Grant on Jordan's first three rings team, but Love's a completely different player. He spaces the floor, has a good outside shot, and still rebounds quite well. This is where comparing superstars of different eras can get sketchy because we can't say for 100% how much different playing styles and player skill sets of teammates help feed or hinder these superstars.

Rodman was a far better player than Love or Bosh ... Rodman is a HOF'er and Bosh and Love may never get in and if they do it will ONLY be because of LeBron whereas Rodman starred on the Pistons (and won 2 rings there as well) and Spurs without Jordan ... Rodman is perhaps the greatest all-around defender and rebounder in the history of the NBA ... Love and Bosh don't compare at all.

Also, few agree with you that LeBron dwarfs Jordan.

Than few have any common sense ... it's not even debatable, it's a fact ... compare both numbers and achievements of each player at 32 and you will see there is no comparison ... LeBron dwarfs MJ, period.

The vast majority of us who saw both players believe Jordan was better for all the contextual reasons already listed, even when compared at the same ages. We appreciate what LeBron has done, but he has not dominated individually the way Jordan did.

That is absurd ... Jordan was known for his first SEVEN YEARS in the league to be a shot-chucking, ball-hogging, jerk of a teammate that couldn't "win" ... LeBron was drafted as an 18 year old baby to be the savior of a franchise and has always been viewed as a team-carrying, unselfish, great leader and teammate ... and as the "best player in the world" for around a decade ... and he could play another 7-8 years!

You dodge the 5 of 47 stat. It may not be everything, but it is still a very important stat.

It's not important at all. And I'd need to see Jordan's stats as well, but regardless, it's not an important stat at all ... Joe Johnson could be said to be "more clutch" than anyone in the NBA based on last second shots, who cares .. it's a silly stat.

It's more important at gauging the individual player vs. team conference titles. This is similar to why a guy like Jon Niednagel gets pseudo-religious indignation when people compare Tom Brady to Peyton Manning. Brady was the perfect qb for Belichick's system, but individually, Peyton Manning had far superior individual qb skills.

Everyone with a brain knows Manning was the better QB but that Brady had the greater career due to team success ... it's the same with Russell and Chamberlain, but it's not at all the same with Lebron and Jordan ... again LeBron took GARBAGE to a Finals as a young pup and after this year will have been to EIGHT Finals at the age of 32 while Jordan had been to just 3 ... and Jordan had BETTER TEAMS than LeBron by far! Those Bulls teams were amazingly well put together.

Although to be fair to LeBron, he's much closer to MJ individually than Brady is to Manning.

Hahahaha you think? LeBron is a better passer, shooter, rebounder and defender than Jorda ever was ... the ONLY thing Jordan was better at was free-throw shooting.

Nonetheless, the same basic argument applies -- one cannot take team accomplishments and give them greater weight than individual ones when the thesis is who the greatest individual player is, and why.

I agree with you 100%, yet you don't seem to sense the absurdity of your statement as the ONLY reason Jordan is even in the GOAT debate is because of the TEAM SUCCESS he experienced and that was due to Pip, PJ and Rodman/Grant. Jordan was a shot-chucking, ball-hogging punk until PJ and Pip came along and he started to "win" at the age of 28 ... LeBron was an unselfish leader and savior of a franchise at 18 years of age and carried perhaps the worst supporting cast in NBA history to the Finals as a young pup.

Again, I really despise "revisionist history" ...

[WilyWestbrook0]

it's not even debatable, it's a fact

OK, I'm going to bow out of the discussion on this note. Believe whatever hyperbole you wish; just remember that claiming an opinion as fact, does not necessarily make it so.

[WilyWestbrook0]

Jordan at 32, per game stats lifetime:
32.2 ppg, 51.4% field goal, 30.7% 3p, 84.5% ft, 6.3 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.7 spg, 1.0 bpg

LeBron at 32, per game stats lifetime:
27.1 ppg, 50.1% field goal, 34.2% 3p, 74% ft, 7.3 rpg, 7.0 apg, 1.6 spg, 0.8 bpg

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...jamesle01.html

So LeBron's points per game are FIVE PPG worse (in an era with increased scoring!), his field goal percent is worse, his free throw percent is worse, his steals are worse, and his blocks are worse than the guy he supposedly "dwarfs" statistically. Only his 3 point percentage, rebounds, and assists are better. I've granted he's the better passer, and I sure hope he would outrebound MJ given that LeBron plays in a small-ball league, is two inches taller, and outweighs Jordan by about 50 lbs. But that's it.

This is why I'm done discussing with you. You distort data and take it out of context to try and fit your arguments, like the Joe Johnson example (no one would argue Joe as the greatest; we're discussing LeBron and MJ here, and between them, game winning shots matter in the context of a greatest discussion). It's tiresome. Sometimes these discussions can be good, but when someone starts making claims that they cannot back up (statistical dwarfing, which I just showed is a gross overstatement on your part), and discards important data like game winning shots, it's no longer a productive discussion. I mean, I like LeBron -- my first username reflected him, I'm rooting for the Cavs right now, I collect some of his stuff, and so forth. But I'm not gonna act like it's some obvious "fact" that he's better than MJ, when he isn't. He's better at some things. I suppose one could make a case for him being the greatest. But it's not a dwarfing, an engulfing, or a fact, whether statistically, contextually, or otherwise. Most still think MJ is better, and we have lots of well-informed reasons for thinking so. If you could back off the hyperbole, it would help your case a lot.

One more bit of explanation. Jordan's first three rings were without Rodman. Please don't tell me Horace Grant is better than Kevin Love. And Pippen hadn't even reached his prime yet. Jordan's early years, he was on bad teams as well. He still made them competitive. To say he was just a chucker, when in some of those years he was getting up to EIGHT assists per game, is just nonsense. Again, hyperbole.

All right, that's all. Anyone else want to discuss this, feel free.

[jordan23]

I would also like to mention that the game is different than it was in the 90s and prior. Players are now no longer to hand-check, defensive lane violations, defenders can no longer use their forearm or hands to impede the progress of an offensive player in the backcourt or frontcourt (unless below the free throw line in the front court). All of these rule changes were made to open the game up. There is no more physical defense. That is why you see more dunks today and why the league average in Field Goal Percentages and Three-Point Percentages have risen since rules were changed.

[WilyWestbrook0]

Yep, and yet MJ still averaged 5 more ppg and had a better fg% than LeBron despite those things. lol 'statistical dwarfing.' Only if you take his totals against MJ out of context, because LeBron has played more games due to coming out of high school (which is why I used averages instead, out of objectivity and fairness). But even in that limited 'totals' statistical context, Kareem is still the best until LeBron plays more. But we all know that statistical totals, out of context, aren't the only way to measure a player. It's everything together -- total stats, averages, context, individual vs individual, and so on. Both analysis and synthesis. If we just used totals, or records, Wilt or Kareem would be the best, for their 'totals' and records dwarf even LeBron's and MJ's.

I like LeBron, he's doing great tonight, I love seeing the Cavs win tonight...but I have to be objective and say MJ was still the best. If LeBron can get a few more rings, keep up the way he's playing now for awhile...then we can have a better discussion. Until then, most agree MJ is better. LeBron has a case, but not enough of one. Time will either be for or against him in this regard. We'll see.

[pwaldo]

Jordan at 32, per game stats lifetime:
32.2 ppg, 51.4% field goal, 30.7% 3p, 84.5% ft, 6.3 rpg, 5.9 apg, 2.7 spg, 1.0 bpg

LeBron at 32, per game stats lifetime:
27.1 ppg, 50.1% field goal, 34.2% 3p, 74% ft, 7.3 rpg, 7.0 apg, 1.6 spg, 0.8 bpg

People can say somebody was helped or played in a different era so the scoring was different or that you played against better defenders (and all of that is true) but they haven't changed the free throw line.

Also are we really using getting to the NBA Finals in the Eastern Conference as an achievement? I mean let's ignore the NBA basically conspiring with the Cavs to somehow get all these #1 picks and just talk about how crappy it has been ever since Shaq left for the Lakers. I mean toward the end of Jordan's career with the Bulls the East was getting awful and it still hasn't recovered. If Lebron was drafted by the Kings instead of the Cavs do you think he'd even have one title by now?

I don't think I've ever seen a conference so bad for so long in ANY sport. I mean if you removed Lebron James from the NBA, let's say he just never existed, who in the East would be challenging the teams in the West? The answer is nobody. So you can argue other stuff for Lebron in his favor but I honestly think nobody should be arguing that point.

[WilyWestbrook0]

lol yep I didn't even get to that point. That one year earlier in his career when he did lead the Cavs team to the Finals, the West Spurs embarrassed them 4-0. I mean they utterly destroyed the Cavs, LeBron included. Meanwhile MJ had to get through the Pistons, a repeat champ team, in his earlier years. Tougher competition in that conference in those days.

There's so much folks can overlook in this process.