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

It isn't about who is the "better passer"... It's the fact that Jordan can be all-time level at that skillset if he wants to, while Lebron can't be elite at what Jordan did - jumpshooting or playing off-teammates, aka off-ball.

Lebron can't run a ball movement offense like the warriors, spurs, or triangle.. he can only run a version of luka-ball, SGA-ball, harden-ball, westbrook-ball - anyone can do that and Jordan did that in the 91' Finals (without dominating the ball) or the 89' regular season..

If the Bulls needed elite APG or playmaking, Jordan was the only option.. He was instantly the best point guard in the league as a 1st-time point guard at 26 years old in 1989.. So Jordan can do what Lebron does (high assists), but Lebron can't do what Jordan does (ball movement, elite chemistry/fits, #1 offenses... being unbeatable with just 1 other star).

And he was lucky to have the goat scorer that could carry the scoring load so he could just surround him with cheap defenders (a GM's dream), while Lebron can't carry the scoring load and therefore needs expensive star help (a GM's nightmare).

Jordan allowed Krause to have build the only dynasty that wasn't an all-star team or a team-up of the league's top 2 players (shaq/kobe)

Ultimately, Jordan was unbeatable with 1 other star, while Lebron mostly lost with 2.. There's no getting past this..

Pippen , Grant , and Armstrong were in their prime having their best year all at the same time that year .
Grant with Armstrong made AS that year , the only time in their career .
U had 3 all stars plus Kerr seem to be in his prime too ….

And that is one year !
Year after what happened ?
They barely made .500 until mj came back and the team changed dramatically.
13W-4L is a hell lot better then .500?
(Not mentioning the rusty MJ 95 regular season was almost equally good as ….2002 MJ .)
At least paint the whole picture imo .

They just had one great year in 1994 and loss in the second round vs the knicks .
The last year all-inmclovin was happy :p !

Fwiw , take that 1994 team with those players at their prime and put it in 1990 and MJ gets easily another ring and maybe even 1989 ….
Those players did progress throughout the years .

Btw when I hear competition sucks during MJ finals and yet they praise the 94 bulls teams being great already without MJ .
How come it took prime MJ with an amazing final performance to beat the suns if they sucked so much and 94 bulls without MJ was so great ?

For funsies: Jokic led the NBA in BPM/VORP for the 4th straight season this year. Only other guys to do it in NBA history are Lebron, Jordan, and Bird.

Jokic is bad bc he has a high assist count. Stop cherry picking stats. /s

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you ever think things through? MJ's supporting cast couldn't have been possibly that great since MJ barely beat the Suns who weren't that great with his supporting cast, isn't exactly an argument in MJ's favor. I mean, most people on your side are terrible posters, but you might be multiple levels below even the bottom of the barrel here.

Also, you're confusing some arguments that are about era-comparison with arguments that are fundamentally about era-relative ability. The Suns were a great team for the time, but the fact that the Suns were that good relative to the time is certainly an indictment of the era. Likewise, the 1994 Bulls were a very good team, but that doesn't mean they were good relative to today's teams, it's just that basketball wasn't nearly as competitive back then.

From today's perspective, sure, that MJ putting up a .558 TS against the likes of Dan Majerle, Danny Ainge and Kevin Johnson is considered an amazing final performance is somewhat amusing, but MJ was, for sure, an MVP-caliber player, and for the purposes of comparing players across eras, we should lean heavily on how they did against their competition.

The only reason I've always said that high assists are bad is because 10+ assists was always accompanied by ball-domination (which requires more help) - literally always - Jokic is the first player that achieves 10+ assists with low time of possession (low ball-domination)..

So Jokic is breaking the mold just like Jordan broke the mold about scoring champs being unable to play championship brand of ball (win titles), or SG's not being viable franchise players that can build a champion..

Phil told MJ that he wouldn't be scoring champ in the "equal-opportunity" triangle and MJ proved superior than Phil thought he was by being scoring champ every year.. It proves that Phil overestimated the triangle because the Bulls still needed 41 ppg from MJ in the 93' Finals or the highest percentage of team points ever in 98', or 34/7/7 fdr the 91-93' Playoffs..

MJ invented the footwork required for a perimeter player to dominate post position in the triangle, and Kobe copied it - Phil and the triangle have zero chips without MJ or his clone (kobe).

1993 Finals

SUNS............ 106.7 ppg.... 113.0 ortg
BULLS'.......... 106.7 ppg.... 113.0 ortg

How could a cast be considered good if it's CONFIRMED that it needed 41 ppg from the 1st option?

Of course Pippen had 46.9 true shooting (0% from three), so he couldn't handle additional load.

Btw, the path to the Finals is much easier when there's only 2 stacked teams in the league that make the Finals every year and you're on one of those teams... This kind of "top-heavy" league contrasts with a league where the talent is more spread out and there are MANY finals-caliber teams - this is a much harder path where everyone plays opponents of relatively-equal on-paper talent.. this is how the 90's were, especially in the West where the winner had defeated all the other long-standing organic juggernauts and was a battle-tested unit having their banner year - they were freight trains that made it through the gauntlet and had everything going for them.. So the 93' Suns were a complete juggernaut and battle-tested.... These kinds of long-standing organic juggernauts that came out of the 90's West every year are similar to the organic teams that beat Lebron, aka Spurs, Nuggets, Warriors, Magic or Mavs..

And the 94' Bulls were the best example of a one-off that there's ever been - a team flying under the radar that no one gave a crap about and got exposed once everyone took notice in the 94' Playoffs and following season.

btw, Jordan's 56 true shooting is amazing considering he was facing max defensive attention (carrying scoring load on championship level), which Lebron has never done.. Lebron always had equal-scoring partners to attract equal defensive attention and never defeated max defensive attention (never carried scoring load on championship level) - Lebron averaged 2-5 more points than sidekicks in his Finals wins compared to 10-20 for MJ.,.

Clearly, this greater defensive attention (carrying the scoring load) has always put downward pressure on Jordan's shooting efficiency compared to Lebron's, along with Jordan's greater jumpshooting/ball movement, which yields better fits, strategy and winning.. However, shooting efficiency falls under the umbrella of efficiency per possession, where MJ's is higher because Lebron is the #1 all-time turnover kingpin - LeButterFingers

You're probably trolling here, even though very few on Lebron's side cares whether Wemby takes over (newsflash: Lebron isn't that popular, most people on Lebron's side aren't fanboys like you, most of us just think this is the most logical position) but either way, the chance that Wemby will overtake Lebron in the same way Lebron overtook MJ are fairly low. Wemby has a reasonable shot at surpassing Lebron's peak purely as a basketball player in a vacuum, but Lebron did that to MJ probably like back in 2006, but it took a long time for him to be seen as the GOAT even by a substantial minority.

Wemby will be up against much tougher competition than even Lebron, so his peak relative to his peers might come far below Lebron's even if he becomes objectively way better as a player than peak Lebron. Given that Lebron's career completely dwarfs MJ's, yet people like you come out of the woodwork every day to say moronic things, it's going to take a long time for Wemby as well, even if he does end up having a legit GOAT career.

I kind of disagree with this on a few levels, 1) Wemby is a good passer and isn't really comparable to young AD in that sense, I also don't think they are really comparable as players and Wemby has potential to be far better at basically everything, 2) Wemby I think has significant GOAT equity even without developing into an elite passer because he could easily develop into an all-time level defender, 3) I don't think Jokic has significant GOAT equity at this point; he will certainly be an all-time great, but his ceiling at this point is more like Curry/Bird rather than Lebron/Kareem.

I'm also happy to elaborate on the Jokic case as well if anyone's interested.

This is definitely one of those limitations for BPM, because players with Jokic's statistical profile tend to be elite defenders, but Jokic isn't an elite defender and is merely adequate (and can be a poor matchup against certain teams). Yet Jokic led the league in *defensive* BPM 3 years in a row.

AD > Murray

D-Lo was an all-star compared to nothing for Porter

Reaves vs Gordon is a wash and everyone else is a wash too - it's splitting hairs.. the Lakers cast is better by virtue of advantages at the 2nd and 3rd option (AD and D-Lo)

Yet Lebron-ball is an underdog because Lebron-ball often has bad regular seasons that underachieve the team's on-paper talent and initial favored expectation.. Lebron is just bad at chemistry and brand of ball, so he produces perennial underdogs regardless of cast or preseason favorite status.

twog, I thought you don't watch the NBA? How do you know how good any of these players are? Why do you have an opinion on Curry and Jokic at all?

twog: 90's basketball = best basketball
also twog: jumpshooting is the most important thing
also twog: today's basketball is beginner format because of spacing
also twog: 90's basketball was tough and physical and hard and i quit basketball because everyone's so soft
also twog: lebron lacks jumpshooting and has to clumsily bully his way to score

Has it ever occurred to you that spacing is a byproduct of today's players being far better at, uhm, jumpshooting? Has it also ever occurred to you that jumpshooting is a fairly soft way to play the game? Are you aware that MJ and the Bulls were complaining about how the game was being played back then was "not basketball" because it was too physical and they literally got the rules changed to make the game softer?

Or did you perhaps lose all of your brain cells while scoring 4 points in college basketball?

Also you never answered - are you this loser or do you follow online self-help gurus like him because your life has never recovered from your basketball failures?

I think this lopsided general consensus is far less about people being slow to recognise someone new/clinging to eras and far more about MJ vs LeBron specifically. LeBron is super unlikable (like don't get me wrong, he seems a good enough human, but he's cringe AF and that's like the cardinal sin for a sports idol), while the insane hero worship for MJ is possibly unmatched in all of sports. Just don't think LeBron GOATers will be anywhere near as attached to their guy.

Biggest barrier for Wemby IMO is that his GOAT argument will come a lot from the D side, which has always been massively underrated.

yeah, labald is a dork ass loser. stat-padding carlton banks

DBPM seems particularly useless to me. Some function of defensive rebounds, steals and blocks isn't remotely going to tell you who the best defenders are

This is a good point. I guess Kareem and Bill Russell are good examples as well - people were quick to crown MJ even though I don't think he realistically ever passed Kareem or Russell (and if he did, certainly not in any kind of convincing way). MJ being the only one not being outspoken about politics probably helps him a ton here.

I guess this might have been a big issue for Lebron vs MJ as well - frankly a lot of people just don't see past scoring.

Even if a center has GOAT value, his game (at least historically) has never had the beauty and skill of a guard. Like Shaqs peak was easily better than Kobes, but would anybody ever want to sat that Shaq is better at basketball than Kobe? At some point deriving so much value from your size is less impressive. A guy like Jordan looks better considering he was just basically average size (for an NBA player)

MJ played with trash for a few years. Then they got Pippen. The bulls front office was so much better than the Cavs front office. Comparing the 2 is a joke.

Remind me when Jordan played with garbage for 7 years,then left and had the team win 20 games without him.

Oh let's right he quit on his team under contract, and then they won 55 without him. But LeBron is the devil for actually playing out his entire contract and then leaving a team with an inept front office. Got it.

LeBron gets so much **** for playing out entire contracts,not demanding to be traded or anything like that before getting to play with talented teammates. Imagine the vitriol he'd get if he quit on his team under contract,or demanded a trade to play with shaq on draft night /demanded a trade under contract (the latter 2 Kobe moves) after running Shaq and PJ out of town. It would actually be pretty incredible.

I'm curious - how long exactly was he supposed to rot in Cleveland just bc he was from there and they happened to have the number 1 pick when he was a no brainer #1.

10 years? 15 years? 20 years?

I mean it's fine if you think Jordan on the court was the better player but you want to shackle LeBron ,give Jordan and other greats hall of fame teammates and then say "see LeBron can't win without help". It's completely clown ****.

Oh wait I forgot LeBron had 100 year old Shaq and Antoine Jamison for 25 games hahaha . Then Jamison led them to that legendary 20 win season when LeBron left.

Yeah, kind of like these were excellent players who got their chance to shine when a guy who took 25 shots a game was removed from the team.

The front office was so great in Chicago ,it took 6 years of mj to have an AS caliber player which he personally develop into because he just wanted to win so badly (pippen) .
When the bulls was ever a powerhouse and great management without mj ?
1995 ?
Post 1998?
Pre 1984 ?

As if only LeBron left Cleveland to explain such a bad record ?
Some key players got injured and traded too .
And what so special about it anyway , we know Lebron is an impact player like MJ is for their team ?
When MJ broke is foot , the bulls only made 21 wins in 64 games shrug.
Ps: actually but more games since mj only played only like 10m in many games …

That claim mj quit on his team is so funny , Especially after giving them 3 titles .
but hey if u believe it’s ok .
Ps: that’s probably why he came back to his old team when they struggle …strange quitting )

Did mj ever ask much of the management too?
Demand be traded or w.e when the bull sucked ?
What’s point u try to make here ?

He had the right to leave , no problem there for me .
I’m not sure what u try to say here .

Shaq was old but was he really worst then Grant pre 1991 ?

Modified thread title is unacceptable. Lechoke can rack up all the stats he wants any intelligent man drafts prime MJ before prime LBJ. Longevity doesn't close the gap.

So why couldn’t they repeat their great performance elsewhere like just the year after or afterwards in their career at all ?
Please don’t tell me the story of the piston Detroit they were old at 28 ….

U got 3 guy that peak the same 1 year , only 1 year , never could repeat anything close elsewhere but it’s because mj they couldn’t repeat it ?
It’s probably more about the lasting work ethic mj had bring to the team ….discoceribg yeah even hard practice do not garantes winning without a MJ .