LeBron > Jordan GOAT Super AIDS Containment, solved #22999 post by Matt R. (addendum #23174)

Please provide some. Note - Sarcastic answers do not count.

Did you know that good teams tend to have a player that has a 40%+ assisted rate, when the league average assisted rate is about 60% (and like 90% of players have an assisted rate of at least 40%)?

Bad teams typically have a player with an assisted rate of 40%+ too, because again, the vast majority of the league has an assisted rate over 40%. But no matter. Groundbreaking stuff I tell you.

Here's some first option players with "high" assist rates that never won a Championship as the first option.

• Ewing
  
• Malone
  
• Barkley
  
• Miller
  
• D Robinson
  
• Miller
  
• W Chamberlin (not in the playoffs)
  
• Mourning
  
• Ray Allen
  
• Drexler
  
• I think you get my point
  

Hmm so it looks like assisted rate of first option has literally zero explanatory power.

I wonder if:

- Curry+Durant+Klay+Draymond with Kerr as coach and elite offensive scheme
- Duncan+Ginobili+Parker+Kawhi+DRob with Popp as coach and elite offensive scheme
- Shaq+Kobe+Horry+multiple elite role players with Phil Jackson as coach and elite offensive scheme

had dominant playoff runs and dynasties because they had a lot of good players, a historically great coach, and an elite offensive scheme. I see a pattern but can’t be sure lmfao.

I have hundreds more ready to go... But we'll start with these.

Not every highly-assisted 1st option will produce a dynasty or dominant champion (the best basketball), but the best basketball requires highly-assisted 1st options, specifically bigs or jumpshooters, and never primary ballhandlers (low-assisted players)

If you can't understand that, then you should go back to elementary school where they teach this kind of basic logic.

Lebron had good teammates and HOF coaches, but elite schemes are impossible for high-scoring primary ballhandlers due to their high volume of unassisted buckets that leaves teammates standing around in spot-up roles (lowers their assists) - this causes low average rank in team assists and hinders the kind of historic ball movement or chemistry that every dynasty has.

The bolded 1st options are bigs or jumpshooters, as required for 12 of 12 instances of the best basketball...

Since bigs and jumpshooters produce the best basketball in 100% of the instances that it occurred, these are superior skillsets than ball-dominators, which means the best bigs and jumpshooters are better than the best ball-dominators.

Lebron is inferior to Jordan because primary ball-handlers cannot be the 1st option for dynasties or dominant champions (the best basketball), which required 1st options that were jumpshooters or bigs 12 of 12 times since possession-tracking began in 1997.

Since the best jumpshooters and bigs produced the best basketball 100% of the time, they're superior to the best ball-dominators, which easily puts guys like Lebron and Oscar out of the top 10 for anyone that doesn't want them to be there - primary ball-handlers cannot be 1st option for the best basketball, so they're inferior to the best of other skillsets that can.

The issue is that high-scoring primary ball-handlers like Luka, Lebron, Oscar, Westbrook and others have a high volume of unassisted buckets and a significant track record of weak chemistry, which produces weaker teams.

Passes lead to assists.

When a team is historically great, they will have multiple elite players, a great scheme to get the ball to those players in efficient spots, and an elite coach to implement the scheme. That scheme will often involve passing, leading to assists, and an assisted field goal for those taking the shot. This can lead to dominant playoff runs and dynasties if this happens at a high enough level over a long enough time. Therefore, because of the scheme, in the right circumstances, the first option will have some arbitrary number of assisted field goals.

Bad or mediocre teams, on the other hand, will not have one of: 1) elite roster construction, 2) elite offensive scheme, or 3) elite coach to implement said scheme. Therefore, if they have one elite player, who happens to play point, they will tend to have the ball in his hands a lot because it’s their most efficient option. For example, when Doug Collins had Michael Jordan play point in 1988-89.

This proves that it is scheme, coach, and roster construction that all affect assisted rate of first option. The first option does not cause the roster, coach, and scheme to grow out of the ether. That would be really stupid, and a completely backwards take. Luckily, no one in this thread is that stupid, which is why everyone agrees with us and the thread has been solved.

Note that if it was assisted rate of first option that caused scheme, coach, and roster to grow out of the ether, then all of these players would have rings, dominant playoff runs, and dynasties.

They do not. Therefore, assisted fg% has zero explanatory power. They were defeated by teams that had superior coaching, scheme, and roster construction. Thus, we have proven that it is all of: scheme, coaching, and roster construction that leads to dominant playoff runs and dynasties. An arbitrary assisted fg% is a result of this, not vice versa.

As we all know of course, which is why the thread has been solved.

Well none of them are correct. So I'll wait for your first one.

I thought this fan created a very innovative and apt name for Lebron, don't you??

I'm glad that I've corrected many people's misperceptions about how the game of basketball works.

You can't have elite roster construction with a primary ballhandler as the 1st option, since these rosters never produced the best basketball (dynasty or dominant champion) - see thread cliffs below for this historical record.

It's a statistical fact that all high-scoring primary ballhandlers have a high volume of unassisted buckets that reduces everyone's assists, role, and creates a long list of bad fits, thereby preventing the elite chemistry required of "elite rosters".. How can a team have "elite roster construction and chemistry" if the 1st option has a ton of unassisted buckets that impose spot-up roles and reduce everyone's assists (bad fits)?.. Their ball-dominance literally prevents elite roster construction - thanks for helping to simplify this.

.
.
Thread Cliffs

"DOMINANT CHAMPIONS" THAT AVERAGED 1 LOSS PER ROUND OR LESS (4 LOSSES MAX) AND THE 1ST OPTION FOR THAT RUN:

1. 2017 Warriors (16-1)......... DURANT

2. 2001 Lakers (15-1)............. SHAQ

3. 1999 Spurs (15-2)............... DUNCAN

4. 2024 Celtics (16-3)............. TATUM

5. 2023 Nuggets (16-4).......... JOKIC

6. 2007 Spurs (16-4)............... DUNCAN

7. 2002 Lakers (15-4).............. SHAQ

8. 1997 Bulls (15-4).................. JORDAN

"DYNASTIES" THAT MOSTLY WON FOR A MATERIAL STRETCH OF 5+ YEARS (I.E. 3 IN 5) AND THEIR 1ST OPTION:

1. Chicago Bulls....................... JORDAN

2. San Antonio Spurs.............. DUNCAN

3. Los Angeles Lakers............. SHAQ

4. Golden State Warriors........ CURRY

Since possession-tracking began in 1997, bigs or jumpshooters were required at 1st option for 8 of 8 "dominant champions" that averaged 1 loss or less per round for their title run (4 losses max), and 4 of 4 "dynasties" that mostly won for a material stretch of 5 years (i.e. 3 in 5).. So that's 12 of 12 instances of dynasties or dominant champions (the best basketball) where primary ball-handlers were NOT the 1st option in favor of bigs or jumpshooters.. Since the best bigs and jumpshooters produce the best basketball, they're superior to the best ball-dominators, which easily puts guys like Lebron and Oscar out of the top 10 for anyone that doesn't want them to be there - i.e. since primary ball-handlers cannot be 1st option for the best basketball, they're inferior to the best of other skillsets that can.

The issue is that high-scoring primary ballhandlers like Luka, Lebron or Harden score large amounts without being assisted by teammates (low assisted rates), so they have a large volume of unassisted buckets that hinders ball movement.. Otoh, highly-assisted 1st options like bigs and jumpshooters produce high assist teams and foster the great ball movement that every dynasty has.. Since 1997, players that averaged 25 ppg and above 50% assisted rate had top 5 assist teams 36 of 87 times (41%) and averaged 10th in team assists, while players that averaged 25 ppg and below 40% assisted rate (primary ballhandlers) produced top 5 assist teams 5 of 96 times (5%) and averaged 18th in team assists.
.

Full stop

^^^ there it is - fraud.. Enjoy the NBWWE

^^^ Here's Matt agreeing with me about how highly-assisted players allow greater assist opportunity for teammates, thereby allowing great ball movement and dynasty... So LeFraud even has fraudulent fans.

.
Matt was convinced by the historical record:

ASSISTS PER GAME AS A STARTER WITH AND WITHOUT MJ:

1993' BJ..................... 4.0
94-96' BJ.................... 3.9 (no MJ)

90-93' Pippen........... 6.2
94-95' Pippen........... 5.4 (no MJ)
96-98' Pippen........... 5.8
99-03' Pippen........... 5.1 (no MJ)

89-93' Horace........... 2.5
94-02' Horace........... 2.3 (no MJ)

90-95' Rodman......... 1.7 (no MJ)
96-98' Rodman......... 2.8
99-00' Rodman......... 1.3 (no MJ)

93-94' Longley.......... 1.2 (no MJ)
96-98' Longley.......... 2.4
99-00' Longley.......... 1.1 (no MJ)

80-87' Cartwright..... 1.6 (no MJ)
89-94' Cartwright..... 1.5

ASSISTS PER GAME AS A STARTER WITH AND WITHOUT LEBRON:

12-14' Kyrie............... 5.8 (no Lebron)
15-17' Kyrie............... 5.3
18-24' Kyrie............... 5.8 (no Lebron)

04-10' Bosh............... 2.2 (no Lebron)
11-14' Bosh............... 1.6
15-16' Bosh............... 2.3 (no Lebron)

11-14' Love................ 3.0 (no Lebron)
15-18' Love................ 2.1
19-21' Love................ 2.8 (no Lebron)

05-08' Mo................... 5.7 (no Lebron)
09-10' Mo................... 4.6
11-13' Mo................... 5.3 (no Lebron)

09-10' Chalmers........ 4.2 (no Lebron)
11-14' Chalmers........ 3.6

99-04' Snow................ 6.9 (no Lebron)
06-07' Snow................ 4.1

01-05' Hughes........... 3.8 (no Lebron)
06-08' Hughes........... 3.3

2018 Ingram.............. 3.9 (no Lebron)
2019 Ingram.............. 3.0
20-25' Ingram............ 5.2 (no Lebron

2019 Kuzma............... 2.5
22-25' Kuzma............. 3.8 (no Lebron)

2018 Ball..................... 7.2 (no Lebron)
2019 Ball..................... 5.4
20-22' Ball................... 6.1 (no Lebron)

00-09' Jamison........... 1.8 (no Lebron)
2010 Jamison............. 1.3
11-12' Jamison........... 1.9 (no Lebron)

04-10' Wade............... 6.6 (no Lebron)
11-14' Wade............... 4.7

19-22' D-Lo................. 6.7 (no Lebron)
23-25' D-Lo................. 6.2

09-21' Westbrook....... 8.5 (no Lebron)
2022 Westbrook..........7.1

15-18'' KCP.................. 2.0 (no Lebron)
19-21' KCP................... 1.6
22-25' KCP................... 2.2 (no Lebron)

Lebron lowered all his teammates' assists, with almost no exceptions, while MJ increased all his teammates' assists, with almost no exceptions...

All high-scoring, primary ball-handlers like Lebron, Luka, Lillard, etc have high volume of unassisted buckets that reduce assist opportunity for teammates, which produces lower average ranking in team assists.. Specifically, since possession-tracking began in 1997, players with 25 ppg and over 50% assisted rate produced top 5 assist teams 36 of 87 times (41%) with an average rank of 10th, while 25 ppg scorers with assisted rates below 40% produced top 5 assist teams 5 of 96 times and averaged 18th in team assists.. See full linked data earlier on this page.

In addition to reducing teammates' assists, high-scoring primary ballhandlers increase teammates' assisted rate (play-finishing, aka "spot-up roles), as shown in the next post below.

.
All high-scoring, primary ball-handlers like Lebron lower their teammates' APG (playmaking) and increase their assisted rate (play-finishing, aka "turning teammates into spot-up shooter"):

................................................................APG.................. ASSISTED RATE

wade BEFORE lebron (04'-10'):........... 6.6............................29.2%
wade WITH.... lebron (11'-14'):'.......... 4.7............................40.3%

irving BEFORE lebron (12'-14'):........... 5.8............................31.9%
irving WITH.... lebron.. (15-17'):.......... 5.3............................32.7%

bosh BEFORE lebron (04'-10'):............. 2.2............................55.8%
bosh WITH.... lebron (11'-14'):'............ 1.6............................71.6%

love BEFORE lebron (09'-14'):.............. 2.5.............................62.7%
love WITH.... lebron (15'-18'):.............. 2.1.............................78.3%

mo BEFORE lebron (05'-08'):................ 5.7.............................39.2%
mo WITH.... lebron (09'-10'):................ 4.6.............................47.6%


FYI...

pippen WITH... jordan 91'-93':............. 6.5
pippen W/OUT jordan 94'-95':............. 5.4
pippen WITH... jordan 96'-98':............. 5.8

Itt, we've developed numerous ways to quickly state the suboptimal nature of high-scoring, primary ball-handlers (ball-domination):

1) Primary ball-handlers "can't produce the best basketball" as 1st option (dynasty or dominant champion)

2) Teams have "lower ceilings" with primary ball-handlers as 1st option, since they're never a dominant champion or dynasty (0 for 12)

The issue is that teams cannot have elite roster construction with high-scoring, primary ballhandlers, since they turn everyone into spot-up shooter (see linked data in previous 2 posts).

This is intuitive, and it's why the rosters of Luka, Lebron and other ball-dominators need more help regardless of cast.. Their large volume of unassisted buckets = reduction of teammates' assist opportunity while increasing their assisted rate ("spot-up" or play-finishing opportunities).,. How can a team have elite roster construction when the biggest bucket-getter turns everyone into spot-up shooter as ALL high-scoring primary ball-handlers do?.. Accordingly, "mystery solved" of why high-scoring, primary ball-handlers always "need more help".

Hey mate. Still waiting on some evidence.

I have some evidence.

A while back, I explicitly showed that whenever LeBron James leaves a team, their total team assists are reduced. And every time LeBron James joins a team, their total team assists are increased. This is strong evidence that LeBron James improves his teams overall assist totals, not reduces them, because the data factually shows the assist totals improved, and that the "career" 40% assisted fg% threshold is arbitrary and irrelevant.

But you can actually calculate this more directly. When a player scores a field goal and it is assisted, this counts for one assist towards a team's assist total. When a player makes an assist, this also counts for one. So since we have field goals made data, assisted fg%, and assists, we can get assists contributed towards the team total. Here is what I found. These are per game averages, and numbers are ordered chronologically by season:

LeBron James

9.6367
11.6847
10.152
9.3957
10.8358
10.4592
12.2865
10.1008
9.94
11.3501
10.46
10.505
10.7188
12.4422
12.355
11.7441
12.9744
11.3156
11.273
11.7062
12.9944
13.2338

Kobe Bryant

2.5775
5.0333
6.7664
8.6632
9.3054
8.9968
10.14
8.8051
8.9754
9.8436
9.64
9.2
8.5554
8.969
8.084
8.9956
9.154
7.808
8.0016
5.5

Michael Jordan (limited data; but since we have been assuming Michael Jordan's assisted fg% was high early in his career with no data available, and making arguments about this data anyway, we must assume the rest of the data is similar too)

10.236
8.9463
9.3032
8.0911

One thing stands out immediately. LeBron James contributes far more to his team's assist totals than both Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant. He absolutely blows Kobe Bryant out of the water. This should have been intuitively obvious I suppose, because Kobe Bryant only has a career assisted fg% about 2% higher than LeBron, while LeBron has more field goals and far more assists. But it's still pretty striking seeing the numbers explicitly.

LeBron James has a career average of total assists per game contributed to team of 11.25. Kobe Bryant has a career average of 8.15. Michael Jordan has a partial career average of 9.14. LeBron James contributes 38% more team assists per game on average than Kobe Bryant. LeBron James contributes 23% more team assists per game on average than Michael Jordan.

So the narrative that any career assisted fg% below 40% (even if it's only 1.68% below) prevents high team assists is completely, unequivocally false. When we explicitly calculate each player's contribution to team assists, it is LeBron James (due to his assist totals, field goals made, and his relatively high assisted fg% for a hybrid point forward) that contributes most to ball movement and team assists. Therefore, we have proven conclusively that it is not an individual player's assisted fg% that has the largest effect on team assist totals and elite ball movement, it is offensive scheme, coach, and roster construction that matter most (and we now have the data, with explicit calculations, proving that a slightly lower assisted fg% does not inhibit team assist totals and ball movement, when its negligible effect is offset with elite playmaking and efficient shot selection).