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

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

by LeoTrollstoy k

Very impressed with the minute sequence where LeBron clearly lost the ball headed to the rim, heat got the ball anyway and scored, then he elbows his defender in the chin, drawing a defensive foul and stern talking to from the official and hitting a 3.

It's these ref assisted 5 point swings in close games that truly bring out the best in great players.

Link to post of why Elon Musk is the true GOAT: https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showp...



The thread that will go on for years..........












vs.










) 4 Views 4
31 May 2013 at 02:31 PM
Reply...

5245 Replies

5
w


by SABR42 k

the very fact that he only takes bailout volume cannot be used to argue that he was actually a good 3-point shooter

Jordan didn't only take bailout volume, so that's where you're wrong - Jordan had numerous series and Finals with 4 and 5 attempts per game, or even entire title runs (93'), and also seasons at 3+ attempts - he always shot well at these non-bailout volumes.

So again, Lebron has many examples of him shooting like dog crap at 3+ attempts, while MJ doesn't - he always shot at today's standard when he had today's volume, while Lebron often craters at today's volumes..

So Lebron should take less threes because there's so many examples of him shooting horrifically at 3+ attempts, while MJ should've shot more because he always shot well at 3+ attempts.

by SABR42 k

If he was actually amazing at 3s why didn't he take them at all for most of his career?

because no one did - the entire league didn't shoot threes - teams had 3 attempts per game compared to today's 35+ attempts per game, while guys like Bird were taking 1 and 2 attempts per game for most of their careers just like Jordan.

Infact, during the 1980 to 1988 Playoffs (Bird's prime), he shot 35.3% on 1.4 attempts, which is worse than Jordan shooting 35.2% on 2.2 attempts for the 85-93' Playoffs.. aka the shot simply wasn't used in previous eras - even goat shooters like Bird and MJ didn't use the shot.

in addition to the entire league rebuking the shot, Jordan himself specifically said that "I don't want to be good at threes because I don't want to just spot-up - it takes away from other parts of my game" (video here)

by SABR42 k

And we can see from the stats that even when Jordan was willing to take 3s, he was just ok at them, not great.

36.4% when wide open is not great at all

NBA.com tracks how open today's players are on threes and 80% of today's threes or either "open" (4-6 feet from closest defender) or "wide open" (6+ feet) according to NBA.com.

So unlike mid-range shots that are highly-contested, most threes aren't, even today.. Maybe you don't realize but bball 101 dictates that you can just throw the ball to a great mid-range shooter like Dirk and expect him to make a mid-range shot with a defender draped all over his turnaround jumper.. Mid-range shots are supposed to be highly contested, while teams usually need a drive-and-kick or ball movement to get OPEN threes - they don't just throw it to Klay and expect him to make a turnaround... And the numbers show this (80% of threes are "open" or "wide open" according to NBA.com).

Infact, the spacing makes it impossible to contest threes today because defenders must execute complex rotations and scrambles to cover numerous shooters behind the line.. Otoh, there was no mad scramble by spaced-out defenders in previous eras, so guys like Reggie Miller had someone attached to him at all times and took contested threes more often than today's spaced-out open-shooting contest..

Of course Jordan has plenty of contested threes because most of his makes were "bailout" threes and highly-contested, yet he still shot 30-something percent on this "bailout" shot quality... And there's proof of this - here's a 12 minute video of Jordan shooting all "bailout" threes at the end of shot clock and most are highly-contested or even 30-50 footers and half-courters.. (video here)

In addition to contested bailouts, MJ also has tons of contested threes when he's hot, such as 54 points on all jumpers in Game 4 of the 93' ECF.. He had six threes that were ridiculously-contested because Starks was in his jersey, almost literally - he would foul out today by playing that way.. Jordan shot 39% on 5 attempts in that series and pretty much any series that he had 3+ attempts.. He shot 42% on 5 attempts in the 92' Finals, or 39% on 4 attempts for the entire 93' Playoffs (same in the Finals).


by fallguy k

Jordan didn't only take bailout volume, so that's where you're wrong - Jordan had numerous series and Finals with 4 and 5 attempts per game, or even entire title runs (93'), and also seasons at 3+ attempts - he always shot well at these non-bailout volumes.

Bruh, I was obviously talking about the seasons where Jordan shot under 20% on less than 1 attempt per game. He had many of those seasons.

LeBron as a Laker has shot 35.4% on almost 7 attempts per game. Jordan never attempted anywhere close to 7 attempts per game. When LeBron is able to be more selective, such as this season, he shoots significantly better (41% on 5 attempts).

Jordan has never shot 41% on 5 attempts, and teams were giving him that shot all day. You lose. It's over.


That should say, Jordan has never shot 41% on 3s on 5 attempts, in a reasonably large sample. Because once you cherry-pick individual series, which you tend to do, I can do the same with LeBron.


by SABR42 k

That should say, Jordan has never shot 41% on 3s on 5 attempts in a reasonably large sample.

We can only go by the information we have and if you're specifying 5 attempts, then let's look at the few series where MJ averaged 5 attempts - oh look - he did swimmingly...

Jordan never shot below today's standard in a series when he had 5 attempts per game and he actually never shot below today's standard when he had as little as 3+ attempts in a series or season.

So there's no record of MJ shooting below today's standard when he had above bailout volume (3+ attempts), while there's ton's of times when Lebron shot poorly at 3+ attempts.. Accordingly, MJ should've shot more threes and Lebron should shoot less 3's.. This is intuitive and obvious.

And the sample of regular season games where Jordan had 3+ attempts, or playoff series where he had 3+ attempts amounts to a large sample.. Specifically, Jordan was 196 for 539 on threes (36.4%) in games where he had 3+ attempts during the 85-93' regular seasons.. This figure was 53 for 135 in the playoffs (39.2%) in series where he had 3+ attempts (regular line only).

by SABR42 k

Because once you cherry-pick individual series, which you tend to do, I can do the same with LeBron.

You don't seem to understand the meaning of cherry-pick.

Jordan had bailout volume for most of his career - there's only a few seasons where MJ had more than 1.5 attempts and those were all 3+ attempts, so it doesn't really matter what cutoff we use to define "bailout volume" - we can use anything between 1.5 and 3.

So the point remains that there's no record of MJ shooting below today's standard when he had above bailout volume (3+ attempts), while there's ton's of times when Lebron shot poorly at 3+ attempts.. Accordingly, MJ should've shot more threes and Lebron should shoot less 3's.

This is intuitive and obvious even when you just look at their respective playing styles, FT percentages, shooting form, touch, footwork and elevation on jumper.. MJ was far superior in these areas that are conducive for 3-point shooting or jumpshooting in general, while also being the goat 2-point shooter, so that's the biggest feather in his cap that demonstrates jumpshooting form and dimension that LeBrick could never dream of.

by SABR42 k

Jordan never had 7 attempts per game in a series or season

Based on the positive correlation between Jordan's attempts and efficiency, we can assume that he would get in even better rhythm at 7 attempts than he already did at 5 attempts (43%) or 4 attempts (39%) or 3 attempts (38%).. goat form, touch and jumpshooting skill will get in rhythm more and generally have better efficiency at higher volume on threes..

Btw, today's game has high-screen roll that allows shooters to stand and wait for open kickout threes - Reggie Miller, Majerle, Ellis, Bird, MJ and other great jumpshooters from prior eras never had this luxury of waiting for kickouts because there was no high-screen roll in the 80's or 90's.. They had to shed defenders by running off ball to try and scrape a brief open look to get a shot off.. so threes from great shooters like Miller or Ellis were far better contested than today's players that get to stand out there and wait for kickouts all game long.

by SABR42 k

seasons where Jordan shot under 20% on less than 1 attempt per game.

Yeah the seasons where Jordan had less than 1 attempt were the super-duper bailouts - the highest-contested and lowest efficiency threes possible, hence the lowest efficiency in those years.. Otoh, as his attempts increased, his efficiency increased because great form, touch and jumpshooting skill gets in rhythm with more attempts.. Jordan was shooting 43% at 5 attempts and you would think a garbage jumpshooter like Jordan would be like Giannis or Zion and have no such demonstrations of long range competency lol smh
.
here's a 12 minute video of Jordan shooting all "bailout" threes at the end of shot clock and most are highly-contested or even 30-50 footers and half-courters.. (video here).. it's probably half the threes from the seasons where he had less than 1 attempt - the biggest bailouts.


by LuckyLloyd k

How could it not be? Playing pool, money and interest level is so much higher.

The kids on TikTok are right.

Pool of potential players has more than doubled. First Europe as a whole was added. Second, much better talent evaluation even in the USA. Probably fair to say there's been a five fold increase in available talent since Jordan times.

Additionally there's been increased professionalization.

Lebron, jokic, Durant, Steph, Giannis, Luka, probably ant, etc. all as good as Jordan or better. Embiid is. A bigger stronger Shaq. Old heads just can't see through the smoke.


Jordan was like ant but he was a chucker like ai and Kobe. Ai wouldn't start in the modern NBA because he couldn't shoot and couldn't play d. Kobe would be in the doghouse all the time for inefficient play - he needed Shaq/pau anyway. MJ would be a star but he'd have to adopt a mindset adapted to his skillset - defense and passing - and learn to shoot. Can't imagine him taking stepback 3s like harden or lukA, much less making them.


by SABR42 k

Hey fallguy what was Jordan's TS% in 2002?

Yes TS% seem have come into fashion .
Why not care about PER as well ?

Fwiw , mj finish at 17 in the league in PER rating equal to Nash at 18 !
And that is with 60 games … pretty sure MJ had a higher PER pre-injury right ?
U keep focusing solely on TS% and saying it’s all that matters …

Again , look at Allen inversion, PER of 21.9 (11 in the league) and guess what a TS% of only .489 , below league average , that didn’t prevent AI to be All-NBA second team ?

TS% might the only stats mj sucked pre injury but when you look about all the others he just seem to be comparable to all those players that got in All-NBA shrug .


.





by nucularburro k

Jordan was like ant

I read this post and decided to watch some Ant footage.. One thing became apparent - nearly every field goal was either a layup/dunk or three-pointer - he never NEEDED to make tough paint or mid-range shots like the ones shown by MJ above.

So why was MJ and everyone in the 80's and 90's forced to make all these tough paint shots and mid-range, while Ant and everyone in today's era gets all the way to the rim every time?

This confirms that today's spaced-out, hands-off format is a complete cupcake, mickey mouse garbage crap that allows layups and dunks all game long - actual tough shots in the 5-10 foot range are rarely needed because the resistance simply isn't there - Silver made sure of this with rule changes that make penetration automatic and remove defenders from the paint (defenders must vacate the paint within 3 seconds if there aren't offensive players standing right next to them, aka within "armslength").

Given the superior contested shot-making ability and touch of Jordan and previous eras compared to Ant and this era, coupled with similar quickness/hops package for Jordan but bigger body & hands - it's clear that Jordan was on another level to Ant.

Ant takes so many dribbles to get dunks, while MJ required zero or 1 dribbles for many of the same dunks because he could cover more ground easier and with less steps, while having vastly superior drop-step power (one-step vertical) and superior hands to hang and mitigate defenders.. MJ made everything look so much easier, so he didn't feel the need to pound his chest as much as Ant, who is making it look like a herculean effort to make the same plays - it reminds me of Westbrook with it's intensity and how hard they make it look.. He's forced to c*ck the ball back further every time because of baby hands (can't palm ball or can't palm it well).

by nucularburro k

Lebron, jokic, Durant, Steph, Giannis, Luka, probably ant, etc. all as good as Jordan or better. Embiid is. A bigger stronger Shaq. Old heads just can't see through the smoke.

Luka.................. Magic
Embiid.............. Shaq
Lebron.............. MJ
Giannis............. Robinson
Jokic.................. Hakeem
Curry................. Isiah
Durant.............. Bird
Ant.................... Drexler or Dominique (both were #2 for MVP to MJ & Bird, respectively)

So previous eras had the same great players except these guys could actually make those tough, contested shots in the 5-10 foot range and then also mid-range, while today's players are bad at those shots or unspaced/high-traffic spots that require quicker/better instinct - these things (weaker contested shot-making ability and weaker instinct in high traffic spots) gets exposed in international play when our team of All-NBA players loses to a team with maybe 1 star NBA player on it (1-man team compared to Team USA).


by fidstar-poker k

I don't even know if the term "true shooting" existed in 2002.

Imo that is a good point and the mistake people makes today is to make judgment using todays statistic to evaluate players while the game and role are vastly differently played from 20 years ago right ?
And what probably used at well to evaluate players at that time too …

Let’s go back at TS% and the claims that stat of mj was so bad at .468 never he would have made all nba despite all the other positive stats he produce for himself and the team until he was injured …..’

With only .021 more , AI got voted second all nba team in TS% .
And imo an equally interesting stats eFG% , MJ at the end of the season had a .420 rating which obviously got cripple by his last 14 games being injured .
But regardless, let’s keep MJ rating in eFG% at .420 with many claiming he sucked too much in TS% or eFG% to be allnba caliber :

AI had a rating in eFG% of 422 , only .002 more than MJ rating and still got elected allnba second team !

people here are focusing way too much on shooting efficient at the expense of many other important stats imo …

Seem yes efficiency is important but at the end of the day making buckets and your team wins seem more important then simply focusing on efficiency if you keep losing ?


So lol to watch those clips of Jordan taking these low percentage long 2s with the defense collapsed while shooters are wide open in acres of space behind the 3 point line for the easy kick out. Such an inferior era of the game.


by fallguy k

Based on the positive correlation between Jordan's attempts and efficiency, we can assume that he would get in even better rhythm at 7 attempts than he already did at 5 attempts (43%) or 4 attempts (39%) or 3 attempts (38%).. goat form, touch and jumpshooting skill will get in rhythm more and generally have better efficiency at higher volume on threes..

That's literally not how it works.

Sure, up to a certain point (like from 1-3 attempts per game), your 3-point % should go up because you're more in rhythm, but it will quickly drop off after that as teams expect you to shoot more 3s and are more prepared for it, and you're taking tougher shots at that point. It's why we don't consider Steve Kerr to be a better shooter than Reggie Miller. If Jordan went up to 7-8 3s a game his efficiency would quickly drop off.

Old LeBron as a Laker is shooting 35.4% on nearly 7 attempts a game. This season he's cut down his attempts to 5 and his efficiency went way up to 40%.

by fallguy k

Yeah the seasons where Jordan had less than 1 attempt were the super-duper bailouts - the highest-contested and lowest efficiency threes possible, hence the lowest efficiency in those years..

Yes, that's exactly my point. For the majority of his career, including at the very end of it where he should have been a better shooter, Michael Jordan simply refused to shoot 3s. This fact cannot be used to argue that Jordan was actually a great 3 point shooter. For most of his career he never even shot them.


by Montrealcorp k

Imo that is a good point and the mistake people makes today is to make judgment using todays statistic to evaluate players while the game and role are vastly differently played from 20 years ago right?
And what probably used at well to evaluate players at that time too …

People back then still understood inefficient chucking even if TS% itself wasn't a thing. It's why Jerry Stackhouse didn't make all-NBA for chucking his way to 30 ppg on mediocre efficiency.

by Montrealcorp k

Let’s go back at TS% and the claims that stat of mj was so bad at .468 never he would have made all nba despite all the other positive stats he produce for himself and the team until he was injured …..’

.468 TS% is awful no matter how you slice it. It's why fallguy dodged the question so many times when I asked him what Jordan's TS% was.

by Montrealcorp k

With only .021 more , AI got voted second all nba team in TS% .
And imo an equally interesting stats eFG% , MJ at the end of the season had a .420 rating which obviously got cripple by his last 14 games being injured .
But regardless, let’s keep MJ rating in eFG% at .420 with many claiming he sucked too much in TS% or eFG% to be allnba caliber :

First of all, Allen Iverson himself was very overrated.

Secondly, the injury didn't do much to crater Jordan's efficiency. If you cut out the last 14 games his eFG% was .426, not exactly good either.

by Montrealcorp k

AI had a rating in eFG% of 422 , only .002 more than MJ rating and still got elected allnba second team !

Do you understand how eFG% works? eFG% is the same as TS%, without free throws. Allen Iverson himself is very overrated, but he was amazing at getting free throws. Jordan at that age wasn't. That's where the difference in TS% comes from. Iverson getting to line a lot more made his offense more efficient than Jordan's in 2002.

Saying their eFG% was equal is a disingenuous argument. You are literally ignoring the primary difference between them that year (free throws).

by Montrealcorp k

people here are focusing way too much on shooting efficient at the expense of many other important stats imo …

Seem yes efficiency is important but at the end of the day making buckets and your team wins seem more important then simply focusing on efficiency if you keep losing ?

Or here's an idea. Score more efficiently and you'll win more games.


by SABR42 k

That's literally not how it works.

Sure, up to a certain point (like from 1-3 attempts per game), your 3-point % should go up because you're more in rhythm, but it will quickly drop off after that as teams expect you to shoot more 3s and are more prepared for it, and you're taking tougher shots at that point. It's why we don't consider Steve Kerr to be a better shooter than Reggie Miller. If Jordan went up to 7-8 3s a game his efficiency would quickly drop off.

The stats tell the story.

According to the NBA, Lebron has 0.0 three-point attempts per game where the defender is 0-2 feet away ("very tight"), and 0.7 attempts where the defender is 2-4 feet away ("tight"), and 3.1 attempts where the defender is 4-6 feet away ("open"), and 1.6 attempts per game where the defender is 6+ feet away ("wide open").. Overall, 87.1% of Lebron's threes are taken either "open" or "wide open" according to the NBA.

Accordingly, similar to Jordan, defenders fear Lebron's drive, while today's format also yields open looks on 80% of threes for all players combined (so Lebron's 87% number is above-average, aka defenders leave LeBrick open because he shoots 37% outside of 5 feet for his career).

So you have a complete misapprehension of what is going on.. Teams do anticipate shots from 3-point shooters but for many reasons they might still not guard them such as seeing if a streaky shooter is cold, or sagging off to protect the drive (MJ/Bron), or the modern spacing strategy and drive-kick format yielding open looks as designed 80% of the time (87% for LeBrick).

Btw, your post above compared Kerr to Jordan as a jumpshooter when they couldn't be further apart since Kerr is just a spot-up shooter, while MJ is much more obviously (the goat shooting guard).. High volume should be expected from MJ just like it is for any deluxe jumpshooter in today's game, and MJ's great form/mechanics would allow him to get in rhythm given that most shots are open as today's spacing format allows.. His driving threat and open paints would make his long-ball attempts even more open, so they would basically be FT's that he would get very hot shooting... It would be a shrug game every night.

One more thing you're missing - Jordan is the greatest contested jumpshooter ever by virtue of his goat volume and efficiency from mid-range - no one was more accustomed to shooting well on contested jumpshots than MJ or more equipped (goat elevation on jumpers), which explains why he was also a good contested 3-point shot-maker... But the shot simply wasn't taken back then (again, Bird had 1 or 2 attempts for most of his career), so Jordan rarely got to display his capacity from long-range.
.


Yeah except we have plenty of evidence of Bird being a better shooter than Jordan.

Bird had much higher 3p percentages than Jordan even on small samples, plus Bird won multiple 3p shooting contests.

Jordan literally had the worst ever performance in a 3p contest.


I'm also taking Dirk over Jordan as the greatest contested jump shooter ever. Durant too.

Jordan probably Top 5 though, which is pretty good.


by SABR42 k

Bird had much higher 3p percentages than Jordan even on small samples


^^^ Categorically false - Jordan shot better than Bird for their playoff careers on nearly twice the attempts, and this is also true when we look at Bird's prime only:

3-point shooting in Playoffs

80-88' BIRD.................... 35.3% on 1.4 attempts
85-93' JORDAN.............. 35.2% on 2.2 attempts

So Mj shot better in the playoffs, while the regular season shows Bird shooting badly at less than 1.5 attempts (bailout volume) just like Jordan did, and then he shot great above 1.5 attempts, just like Jordan..

However, Bird has less seasons of low-efficiency bailout volume, so his overall percentage in the regular season is higher than Jordan's despite both players basically shooting the same, aka both shot poorly at bailout volume and great when above bailout volume.

Accordingly, Bird was better at long-distance shooting mainly because he actually worked on it - long-balls were a massive part of Bird's game, while "Air" Jordan didn't care for them yet still matched Bird's efficiency in the Playoffs and also the regular season... Again, the numbers show that Bird had lower 3-point shooting in the playoffs (efficiency and attempts)l, while the only reason he had higher regular season efficiency was from having less seasons of low-efficiency bailout volume than MJ did.

So this response and my last one (which you ignored) have been complete corrections (with linked documentation) of the false information that you posted.. It's almost like you haven't looked at the numbers at all and are just vague thoughts from your brain that you think are likely true lol.

by SABR42 k

Yeah except we have plenty of evidence of Bird being a better shooter than Jordan.

No we don't.

Jordan shot better in the playoffs on threes and Bird's regular season percentage was higher only because he has less seasons of low-efficiency bailout volume.

Furthermore, people don't realize that in 1987, Jordan averaged 37 ppg and the vast majority of his made field goals were jumpshots - this means he made more jumpshots in 87' than anyone ever made in a season.. He was infact a goat jumpshooter on 2-pointers from 87' onwards.. However, he almost never had games where he took multiple 3-point attempts (he only took bailout volume), so his 3-point percentage didn't show until 1990 when he finally had numerous games with multiple 3-point attempts.

Btw, Jordan's ability to exceed some of Bird's 3-point shooting numbers despite not practicing the shot demonstrates goat talent for the game of basketball, and we saw this with passing too - he was a 1st time point guard at 26 years old in 1989 and he was instantly a 30/9/11 point guard - everyone said he was already better than Magic, Isiah and Stockton - that's goat talent for the game of basketball.



by fidstar-poker k

I'm also taking Dirk over Jordan as the greatest contested jump shooter ever. Durant too.

Jordan probably Top 5 though, which is pretty good.

I don't mind saying Dirk, Bird or Durant were better long-range shooters than Jordan, but it's a small gap due mostly to Jordan not getting the reps in from that distance, aka practice

Regarding contested jumpers however, I must disagree due to MJ's goat mid-range volume and efficiency, shown above..

From 96' to 98', the stats confirm that Jordan led the league in scoring via mostly contested (mid-range) jumpshooting at a volume and efficiency that no one is close to touching..

For example, Jordan made over 700 jumpshots in 1997, which is twice as many as Lebron's highest-volume jumpshooting season, while having far higher efg% on those jumpshots (effective FG %).. This is also nearly twice as many jumpshots as Curry ever made in a season, albiet with lower efg... So Jordan was giving his team far more positive possessions and this was via jumpshooting, aka ball movement that broke defenders backs at the end of shot-clock (So Jordan won the attrition battle - his jumpshooting and zippy ball movement wore down defenses, so they have less capacity for offense, whereas Lebron's ball-dominance lets defense rest, so they have more capacity to "get hot" offensively).


Twog on MJ carrying high usage at low efficiency: bailout volume artificially lowering his efficiency. Makes things easier for his teammates that don't have to take as many shots, so can be more efficient

Twog on MJ taking very few 3s per game: bailout volume artificially lowering his efficiency. It's hard to be efficient when you take too few shots.

Of course twog is too stupid to understand that these literally contradict each other. There's also evidence that MJ disproportionately took bailout volume in a way that makes his efficiency numbers look worse. In fact, how the Bulls performed without MJ in 93-94 and 94-95 strongly suggests that MJ wasn't particularly impactful on his teammates' efficiency. Either way, this is important to understand:

by candybar k

This is kind of relevant to the Beal discussion earlier as well but we can't evaluate basketball players based on box stats that easily. Westbrook did a great job of exposing this but individual rebounding is often a function of role rather than ability or even value - you can't have everyone try to grab offensive rebounds and the marginal value of individual defensive rebounds is low because most are uncontested. Defensive rebounds often go to the players with the more advantageous positionin

A huge part of the reason why MJ scored a ton in the NBA is that his teams correctly funneled a lot of possessions to him because he's an efficient-enough scorer, which means this maximizes team offense. But MJ's offensive impact beyond his own scoring efficiency does not seem particularly impressive compared to other superstars. MJ also at times seems to have dominated usage in a way that led to his teammates being out of rhythm as far as scoring is concerned.

You can also easily see this in other ways - consider MJ's numbers in college, on the Dream Team and so on, which are fairly underwhelming. When MJ's asked to carry a scoring burden, it doesn't result in some crazy efficiency. MJ actually had the worst FG% on the Dream Team of anyone that took at least 30 shots. And took somehow 30 more shots than Barkley while scoring 25 points less.

Also, twog is weirdly blaming teenage Lebron that barely played for the 2004 Olympic Team's failure, but a huge part of the reason why that team failed is due to the MJ-inspired reliance on iso-ball by the veterans on the team simply not working against international competition that hasn't been tactically hampered by years of illegal defense rule. Given that MJ also struggled offensively against god-awful competition in 92. it makes sense that a bunch of MJ-wannabes would struggle offensively against more advanced international competition. It's a weird thing to bring up because what we saw in international competition (again, assuming some understanding of basketball) is fairly strong evidence that MJ would've had some issues with hybrid-zone defenses of the type that Lebron often faced from 2008 or so when the NBA teams started to figure out how to best take advantage of the rule changes.


by fallguy k

The 2009 and 2010 Cavs had better defenses than the 1st three-peat Bulls and more scoring options

Mainly due to the singular brilliance of the one Lebron James.

by fallguy k

Actually, my basketball lineage is elite, beginning in high school with the late, great Bill Green and continuing in college with Jim Molinari and the late, great "Shakey" Rodriquez

So you don't think I know about defensive positioning? I played in Green's matchup zone that won 6 titles

This is incredible, so despite having these coaches, you still don't know anything. That's quite an accomplishment. Is that why your college coaches didn't give you any playing time?


Before moving further sabr42, because I feel we go all over the place with stats ,which stats we should use ?
Since It seem u disregard any merits in pure stats ppg, PER and others , which stats u preferably want to use :
FG%, eFG% or TS% ?


Of those 3 obviously TS%.

eFG% is just FG% with 3s properly weighted, and TS% adds free throws to eFG%.

I'm not all over the place with stats, so don't say "we." You were using whatever you could to try to make 2002 Jordan look better. He wasn't good that year.


.
EFFICIENCY AT HIGH VOLUME - PLAYERS WITH 25 FGA AND 45% FG:

Regular Season:

Michael Jordan....................... 1987, 1993
Rick Barry.................................1967, 1975
Bob McAdoo........................... 1975
George Gervin........................ 1982
Kobe Bryant............................ 2006
Elgin Baylor............................. 1963
Tiny Archibald........................ 1973
Dominique.............................. 1988


Playoffs (10 game min):

*Michael Jordan......................1988, 1990, 1992, 1993, 1997, 1998
Elgin Baylor............................. 1960, 1961, 1968
Bob McAdoo........................... 1974, 1975
George Gervin........................ 1975, 1982
Jerry West................................ 1966
Rick Barry................................. 1977
Hakeem Olajuwon.................. 1995
Kobe Bryant............................ .2007
Dominique............................... 1988
Allen Iverson............................ 2005
Kareem Jabbar......................... 1975

* MJ averaged 25.1 FGA and 48.7 FG% for his playoff career

by candybar k

Twog on MJ carrying high usage at low efficiency: bailout volume artificially lowering his efficiency. Makes things easier for his teammates that don't have to take as many shots, so can be more efficient

Twog on MJ taking very few 3s per game: bailout volume artificially lowering his efficiency. It's hard to be efficient when you take too few shots.

Of course the bolded isn't what I said - I said it's hard to be efficient when you're taking "bailout volume"... Bailout volume means the player didn't want to take the shot but is forced to because the shot clock is winding down - these shots are usually highly-contested shots, which produces low efficiency and the volume on these unwanted shots is low.. So your notion that simply taking low volume produces low efficiency is obviously wrong and a misstatement of what I said.. It's the degree of contest on the shot and high-pressure of clock winding down that produces less efficiency.. Essentially, Steph Curry would shoot poorly from 3 if he could only take 1 highly-contested "bailout" three at the end of a shot clock, per game.. Of course he would never decide to do this unless he decided that he didn't want to shoot the three-ball altogether, like Jordan did until 1990.

by candybar k

There's also evidence that MJ disproportionately took bailout volume in a way that makes his efficiency numbers look worse. In fact, how the Bulls performed without MJ in 93-94 and 94-95 strongly suggests that MJ wasn't particularly impactful on his teammates' efficiency. Either way, this is important to understand:

don't get it twisted - Jordan's teammates didn't see material changes either way in their efficiency and it's certainly good that he didn't increase his teammates' efficiency by turning them into lower-producing, spot-up shooters like Lebron does with his reliance on ball-dominance and lack of expert jumpshooting skill, or overall inability to play off teammates at an elite level (off-ball).

So the efficiency of Jordan's teammates matters little compared to their ability to develop alongside him and play to capacity (near career highs), which allows the TEAM can achieve full capacity and higher team ceilings/Finals records.. This is far more important than being reduced to higher-efficiency spot-up roles by Lebron-ball, which doesn't get as much actual production or chemistry from teammates and therefore wins far less.

Ultimately, you minimize Jordan's effect on teammates even though he's the one with sufficient scoring diversity to fit well with all player types and allow them to play to capacity.. In addition to having better chemistry, Jordan's skillset has a massive track record of single-digit rookies growing into meaningful -producers on his watch (young player development), while Lebron's imposition of spot-up roles has zero young player development in 21 years.. Lebron's deficit in these areas (player development and playing to capacity) prevented his teams from reaching the dynasty-caliber or all-time regular season records and perennial favorite status that Jordan's teams reached despite less all-star teammates.

by candybar k

efficiency of teammates (spot-up roles) vs raw production of teammates (teammates playing to capacity so the TEAM can play to capacity)

Indeed, raw production has always won more than higher efficiency - teams need higher points to win, not necessarily higher efficiency..

We saw this in the 2014 Playoffs where the Heat had the best efficiency of any Spurs' opponent but lost by the most, while opponents fared better in order of their PPG (so Dallas averaged the most PPG and lost by the least, followed by OKC and Portland, while Miami's efficiency-hunting and low PPG lost by the most).. This is why Lebron fared to much better in 2015 against a superior opponent - he doubled his shot attempts and pursued a production approach over efficiency.. This forced the Warriors to defend his volume, thus producing a viable attrition battle that kept his undermanned team close for a while.. Jordan was doing this his entire career (winning with volume/carry-jobs due to weak scoring-help).


by candybar k

A huge part of the reason why MJ scored a ton in the NBA is that his teams correctly funneled a lot of possessions to him because he's an efficient-enough scorer, which means this maximizes team offense. But MJ's offensive impact beyond his own scoring efficiency does not seem particularly impressive compared to other superstars.

^^^ This is obviously a dig at MJ's passing, but You can't knock Jordan for not playing in Curry's spacing era that made offense easier for everyone (2015 onwards):

FIRST 9 YEARS OF PLAYOFF CAREER (pre-Curry era):

85-93' Jordan.......... 34.7... 6.2... 6.6.. 2.3.. 1.0
06-14' Lebron......... 28.0... 8.4... 6.4.. 1.7.. 0.9

If Jordan was never tasked with being the primary playmaker and elite-assist guy for his team, then why did he average more assists than Lebron for the first 9 years of their playoff careers (thru half their chips), until Curry's spacing era made offense easier for everyone from 2015 onwards - only then did Lebron start averaging more assists than Jordan in the playoffs.. Jordan averaged less turnovers as well while averaging more assists (3.3 to 3.4).

And why did Jordan lead the Bulls in assists for 6 of 9 playoff runs alongside Pippen (3 title runs), while being the only player with elite-assist capability on the team?.. If the Bulls needed elite assists and playmaking, Jordan was the only option such as the 91' Finals (11 apg) or his 25 games at point guard in 89' (30/9/11), and various other series of 8-10 apg.. Pippen did not have a breakdown handle - only Jordan did - only Jordan routinely broke his man down, drove the lane and "tossed dimes".. Only Jordan had sophisticated forays of consistently manipulating the defense, setting up teammates and controlling the game.

The greater assist load for Jordan shown above was coupled with doubling his sidekick's scoring average (carrying scoring load, aka defeating maximum defensive attention) - the greatest scoring burden of all-time.. In contrast to Jordan carrying the scoring load and defeating max defensive attention, Lebron had equal-scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention - his sidekicks matched or led him in scoring for entire playoff runs and outplayed league MVP's (curry, jokic, dirk).. In addition to a greater assist load and goat scoring load, only Jordan was tasked with using the most possessions in the league to win titles (usage champ) - completely unprecedented - and he did this 5 times (won titles as usage champ).. Jordan is also the only guy to win the title as scoring champ, except for peak Shaq in 2000 and peak Kareem in 71' - so their peak burden was Jordan's standard burden.

by candybar k

MJ also at times seems to have dominated usage in a way that led to his teammates being out of rhythm as far as scoring is concerned.

^^^ proven incorrect and pure nonsense because the Bulls were known for goat chemistry, aka teammates being in rhythm, while Jordan has a massive track record of young player development (teammates growing alongside him) and teammates playing to capacity (near career highs).. All of these things refute the idea that teammates were "out of rhythm" alongside Jordan, since they literally played to capacity, grew alongside him and had all-time chemistry with many #1 offenses.

Btw, Jordan achieved these goat offenses with no 3rd scoring option, a sidekick that frequently had all-time low efficiency, and 4 on 5 lineups (Rodman).

Since Jordan had all-time offenses despite weak scoring help, we know the chemistry was all-time goat.

by candybar k

When MJ's asked to carry a scoring burden, it doesn't result in some crazy efficiency.

One of the biggest misconceptions about Jordan's career is that you can compare other guys' scoring burden to his... There's no level like MJ's - he carried the scoring burden at a level that no one else can compare.. Everyone in history needed teammates to lead in scoring for entire playoff runs, while MJ led every SERIES by 10-30 ppg over all teammates.. Everyone in history had great scoring help at various times during their career, except the GOAT.

The reality is that ONLY JORDAN shot well as a standard at 25+ FGA's - see stats at the top

by candybar k

It's a weird thing to bring up because what we saw in international competition (again, assuming some understanding of basketball) is fairly strong evidence that MJ would've had some issues with hybrid-zone defenses of the type that Lebron often faced from 2008 or so when the NBA teams started to figure out how to best take advantage of the rule changes.

Jordan was POY in college over Hakeem against full zone defenses, while Lebron's lack of expert jumpshooting skill to shoot over defenses and need to rely on spacing for drives is why he suffers against zones that encourage shooting over the top (bricklaying for bron).. It's just another reason that the best expert jumpshooters (MJ, Curry) are better than the best ball-dominators (Magic, Lebron) - jumpshooters can get off a shot regardless and don't need spacing like ball-dominators.. Jumpshooters can just get off ad-hoc, off-the-cuff shots and see them regularly go in - they're unstoppable and instill fear, while LeBrick never gets hot so defenders are saying "what... must... i... do...".............. so no one fears him, which is what literally everyone says.


Twog, did you score *any* points in college ball? I'm starting to think the answer is no.


Twog, why did MJ average 17.7 PPG on okay efficiency in college and 14.9 PPG on terrible efficiency on the Dream Team?

Also, this whole bailout thing, do you have any evidence whatsoever or are you just making stuff up? Because I looked at the numbers and it looked like Lebron was consistently one of the better bailout guys and my recollection was that MJ tended to dump the ball to his teammates in those situations. The only evidence we have was that he wasn't a big bailout guy - if he was, why were his teammates' efficiency mostly unaffected by his presence?


by Montrealcorp k

Before moving further sabr42, because I feel we go all over the place with stats ,which stats we should use ?
Since It seem u disregard any merits in pure stats ppg, PER and others , which stats u preferably want to use :
FG%, eFG% or TS% ?

Stats aren't breakfast cereals, JFC, I mean how low can you go? You don't randomly prefer to use certain stats, you should use stats that are relevant to what you're trying to measure.

Reply...