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

I will end the argument.

Muhammed Ali. Babe Ruth. Wayne Gretzky.

These are MJ's athlete equivalents.

Mj pushed basketball to a new level like those people did. He was the biggest superstar on the planet during his reign.

He's on the Mount Rushmore of atheletes while Lebron is not.

I'm not gonna continue if I keep getting passive-aggressively strawmanned into a position where I'm framed to believe that MJ isn't the GOAT. I've established many times that I believe MJ is the GOAT and that LeBron is #2. My argument is two-fold: that LeBron out of the top-10 is insane and that LeBron was better than Kobe.

MJ and Kobe had time to win without Phil and never did. MJ did nothing without Scottie. Kobe nothing without Shaq or Pau. I don't care about the small samples of those player not being perfect all the time. I hold this against MJ or Kobe. I'm saying that it's ridiculous to dwell on the "who had more help" argument by establishing how ridiculous it is when flipped back on MJ and Kobe.

I think it's actually ridiculous to reduce the Kobe vs. LeBron debate to a few playoff series that happened to be Finals series. They played many many games in the regular season to establish seeding and most of their playoff experiences were outside fo the Finals. Look at everything and LeBron is greater than Kobe.

These micro-deep dives on when Pippen had some bad games and such are ridiculous. I presented the career stats of Kobe and LeBron, using the stats you use most often to qualify and disqualify players. Address that.

This is the post I'm talking about:

I don't think LeBron being uncoachable has anything to do with his skill-set and probably has more to do with him as a human. But I'm just speculating, as it is very weird that no good coach other than Spo has ever wanted to coach him. Again, I think there is very little to do with basketball schemes or x's and o's.

People forget that Phil arrived at the same time that MJ got an all-star teammate in 1990 - MJ nearly beat the champs in 89' without Phil, so the all-star help was the primary reason MJ started winning and that's the reason that ANY player wins - all-star help - not Phil Jackson... Coaches have never been considered part of the "cast" and the only reason Phil has been used in that light is because haters don't see sufficient star power among the actual cast, so they throw Phil in there.

But history tells the story - everyone in history needed many all-star teammates except MJ - he's the only player that was unbeatable once he got a single all-star, so he never needed another one - he's then punished for this by new fans that say he "needed" this low-producing and choking mental case of a sidekick.. Ultimately, new fans criticize MJ without realizing that the years they're criticizing him for were years without all-star teammates and low seeding (of course the exception to low seeding was 88' when MJ won MVP/DPOY by achieving a high seed with zero cast).

Ultimately, Lebron had a really short peak of 6 years where he achieved all-defense or MVP's (09-14'), while MJ was all-defense and MVP throughout a 10-year period (88-98'), while also being scoring champ - this is the highest and longest peak of all-time (MVP, 1st-team defense & scoring champ throughout a 10-year period).

The "more help" argument applies to winning 6 chips and 40% win frequency with 1 star teammate, versus 4 chips and 20% win frequency with 2 star teammates (or being the 2nd-leading scorer in 2020)... For Lebron to win as 1st option, he needed 2 star teammates, which includes a sidekick that made the Finals without him (wade, kyrie) - that's objectively more help than MJ needed... or Kobe.

And if a player like Duncan, Curry or MJ is good enough to develop an unbeatable team so they never need another one, you'll use the fact that they played for 1 team to say they "needed" that team and are therefore inferior.. Meanwhile, the guy that can't develop an unbeatable team regardless of cast and hops around failing to have dynasties everywhere he goes is somehow comparable... This is an obvious misperception of the situation, or a flat-out lying/playing dumb... It isn't better to lose a bunch with an all-star and need more all-stars, than be unbeatable with the first all-star you receive and never need another one.

It might be different if the all-star sidekick was an elite producer that frequently took over and was "the man" like kareem or shaq, or a legit "1a/1b"... But there's never been bigger statistical gap between 1st and 2nd option than MJ and Pippen, or a lower-producing and more lane-clogging mental case than Pippen.. It's amazing how result-oriented fans can be though, so Pippen's bricklaying and ordinary numbers are inflated by the winning spotlight to all-time status and media accolade...

It isn't just a few bad games from Pippen - he averaged 17.6 on 41% for the entire 96-98' Playoffs and 19 on 42% in 6 Finals, which includes 2 Finals of 15.7 on 40% - imagine if AD did any of that - he would be destroyed... "Pandemic P" was destroyed for averaging 22 on 45%, which would be among the best series of Pippen's career - MJ won 6 titles with "Pandemic P" caliber from Pippen.. Heck, at least PG13 still hit some big shots and had some clutch moments, while Pippen never did because he was just a transition player/dunker and nothing outside the system (89' or 99').

not getting the sweep in the finals hurts tatum's goat argument

had a chance to do something lebron and jordan never did

Kobe
22.9 PER
4.6 BPM
80.1 VORP
.170 WS/48

LeBron
27.1 PER
8.7 BPM
151.9 VORP
.224 WS/48

Production rate stats aren't the entire story for 1st options because 1st options dictate brand of ball, playing style, fits/chemistry, strategic capacity/coaching, and teammate development, which ultimately determines a team's ceiling/Finals record.

Obviously, Kobe's goat scoring diversity (elite on-ball and off-ball) fit with any teammate or system, while also getting 40 while the ball moves, so he could develop the great chemistry over time to develop a great-performing cast - Kobe had goat fits with teammates due to his goat scoring diversity, and this great chemistry produced great teams with less help.

Of course, Kobe had already spent many years learning how to 3-peat and knew the blueprint in 2008, so it was instant when Pau joined - this is similar to Jordan quickly lifting a borderline .500 team in 95' to a 3-peat the next year.

In contrast to 1st options (who dictate brand of ball), sidekicks are more pure stat producers, so their production rates (PER, etc) can be directly compared - when we do this, we see that Pippen ranks outside the top 100 in PER and WS/48, while ranking below Kyrie, AD, and Wade in BPM.. VORP is an accumulation stat based on minutes played, but Pippen's peak VORP for a season is also outside the top 100.

Ultimately, due to their high-scoring ball-dominance and imposition of spot-up roles, Lebron and Luka can never develop great chemistry, so they can never develop the kind of seemingly unbeatable juggernaut that we see with these Celtics, or last year's Nuggets, or the 90's Bulls and other dynasties... Even a 50/20/20 player would crater teammate performance and need more help - the heliocentric brand of ball freezes out teammates, so it lacks chemistry and therefore needs more talent (more help).. Now I'm not saying Tatum > Lebron, but his brand of ball is, so other guys with similar brand of ball (expert jumpshooters) that are more talented than Tatum are infact better than Lebron, such as Curry, MJ, Kobe, and Bird.

Let’s check in on “excellent Jump Shooter” Jayson Tatum through 4 games of the NBA Finals:

Now let’s check in on cancer Luka, who doesn’t have the midrange jump shooting skillset that MJ and Tatum do, which leads to “organic chemistry”

The point with Tatum's jumpshooting is that it's often assisted, so teammates are involved even when he scores a lot of points (great fits) and the ball movement expends more energy from opponent's defenses, thus leaving less capacity for offense (less likely to "get hot"), aka winning the attrition battle..

And when the Celtics win in 5, no one will think that Game 4 was anything more than a game the Celtics mailed in.. Accordingly, thru 3 games (when the series was won), the Celtics have a 26 to 15 advantage in assists per game, and this ball movement has worn down the Mavs' defenders, which left them less capacity for offense and a 48 to 55 deficit in effective FG% (2's and 3's combined)..

So Luka's ball-dominance is losing the attrition battle and getting smashed on the Finals level just like Lebron did.. Surely if he was a player that facilitated great ball movement and chemistry the way high-assisted players do such as Jokic, Curry, Tatum, MJ or Kobe, he would develop dominant juggernauts like they do... Instead, his ball-dominance is repeatedly failing to develop juggernauts and dominant teams despite many star teammates like Brunson, Kyrie, or even Porzingas..

Luka might be better than Lebron, but I don't see a difference in results (winning) of his ball-dominant style of play - he's getting smashed by Finals teams just like Lebron did - this includes the 22' Warriors or these Celtics... Surely if he was a player that facilitated great ball movement and chemistry the way high-assisted players do such as Jokic, Curry, or Tatum, he would develop dominant juggernauts like they do... Instead, his ball-dominance is repeatedly failing to develop juggernauts and dominant teams despite many star teammates like Brunson, Kyrie, or even Porzingas..

Luka's team has a massive deficit in team assists through 3 games (26 to 15 per game) and this scrambling defensively from ball movement is leaving the Mavs less capacity for offense and shooting much worse than the Celtics (48 to 55 efg thru 3 games), aka losing the attrition battle.

All of this is just like Lebron, so even though Luka is better than Lebron, the results of this brand of ball is the same - it gets smashed on the championship level.. Lebron and his teammates are the only guys with a losing Finals record over a meaningful sample size (4+ Finals), since the beginning of 3-pointer basketball.. Luka and his teammates will become the 2nd group of guys that have a losing record in the Finals over a meaningful sample (once Luka has 4+ Finals)..

If there was a player that averaged a "heliocentric" 50/20/20, his teammates would always underperform in the obvious spot-up roles that they would have and the team would still have a losing record on the championship level.. The story would STILL be that his teammates stunk and he needs new ones - standard procedure for all high-scoring, ball-dominators.. Since they can't develop elite chemistry, they always need more talent (more help)..

Indeed, high-scoring ball-dominators never really learned effective basketball/how to win, aka chemistry development - Luka is struggling with that now - hopefully he will change his style of play instead of being like a fly hitting a window repeatedly like Lebron did with his high-scoring, ball-domination (unable to compete on championship level, aka 22-33).

Luka isn't near the defender LeBron was

Pau and Shaq won no titles without Kobe is the correct framing.

Tatum / Jordan Brand Ball 4 games into the finals so far:

20 / 8 / 6 on 36% FG, 30% from 3 and 3.5 TO.

Fraudball delivering fraud!

Well it's correct for one of them.

Assisted players like expert jumpshooters or fundamental bigs (Curry, MJ, Kobe, Bird, Tatum, Duncan, Jokic, Kareem) facilitate ball movement and the great chemistry required for great-performing casts, while ball-dominators like Luka and Lebron impose spot-up roles and lack the chemistry to develop a dynasty or dominant champion like what we see with these Celtics or Jokic's Nuggets, or the aforementioned assisted players.. And btw, these expert jumpshooters have a mix of elite assisted play (off-ball), but also elite on-ball as well, and this mix fits any player type or system, thereby allowing maximum fits and strategic capacity/coaching.

.
2005 Nash vs Stockton as a starter (88-03')

88-03' Stockton'..... 22.5 PER.. 7.3 BPM.. 0.217 WS/48.. 7.0 VORP... 14/3/11 on 62 TS... 2.2 spg.. 3.0 tov
2005 Nash.............. 22.0 PER.. 4.4 BPM.. 0.203 WS/48.. 4.7 VORP... 15/3/11 on 61 TS... 1.0 spg.. 3.3 tov

It should be noted that 22-year old Amare averaged 37/10 against the 05' Spurs in the playoffs - so Nash already had a Malone-type player, yet his 15 ppg and trash defense easily won MVP, while Stockton's 15 ppg and goat defense was never considered for MVP .

People simply had this weird group-think around Nash... But it wouldn't be the first time - since 1990, only 3 guys have won MVP without being top 10 in scoring - Nash, Dirk and Jokic...

Accordingly, it might seem to some people that white players are valued for their intelligence, while blacks need to average 30 and dance to get MVP.. It took a uniquely-charismatic player like Magic for a black person to get credit and win MVP without being a dominant scorer.

Nash replaced Stephon Marbury and Anfernee Hardaway and changed a 29 win team into a 62 win team. Amar'e, Marion, and Joe Johnson were already there.

The way he changed that team was MVP worthy and it went beyond his own stats.

And this is why team success matters. Stats, or eye test, can never tell the full story. You need to evaluate how those stats and fancy dribbles translate to wins (and rings at the highest levels).

Not dissing Stockton here either, I do think he’s hella underrated in general. Just giving Nash props. And other, ahem, unnamed players who had high team success in conjunction with elite stats and eye test.

The 23' Lakers had a great turnaround after getting rid of "cancer" Westbrook just like the Suns got rid of Marbury, while Amare went from nothing in 2004 to his breakout year in 2005 (All-NBA 2nd Team):

05' Amare...... 26.6 PER.. 0.243 WS/48.. 4.7 BPM.. 4.4 VORP... 26.0 on 62 TS... 7.6 +/-.. 10.4 net rating
05' Nash'........ 22.0 PER.. 0.203 WS/48.. 4.7 BPM.. 4.4 VORP... 15.5 on 61 TS... 8.9 +/-.. 12.9 net rating

* Amare averaged 37 vs Duncan in playoffs and faced max defensive attention (carried scoring load)

Don't forget that AD turned the Lakers from lottery to champion in 2020 by transforming their defense from worst to first and leading the team in scoring - so he turned the Lakers around more than Nash but didn't sniff any MVP consideration - apparently turning a team around doesn't mean much in MVP voting, so your point is poor..

And the 08' Cavs won 45 games before Mo arrived to provide the all-star spacing that Lebron's stiff arm needed - so Nash simply provided the spacing that Amare's stiff arm needed, while Amare and Lebron remained the franchise foundations, statistical foundations, and the "real" MVP's that averaged 38 in the playoffs against Duncan and Dwight, respectively.

Accordingly, the point remains that Lebron and his "genius" IQ could never win MVP with 15 ppg and 22 PER, so how did Nash do it?.. Again, it was one of those weird group-thinks where the media keeps saying one guy is great and eventually everyone believes it - the media settled on Nash, and didn't let go until everyone went along with it.

Congrats to LeBron for leading the Lakers to be the team that got beaten

. Effectively putting the Lakers last in the playoffs.

Quite the achievement.

After Fraudguy spends the last 2 months fellating Jayson Tatum to prop up "jump shooters", Jaylen Brown wins the FMVP award.

The voters have seen the evidence and did not reward the so called "expert jump shooter" the FMVP trophy.

The reason is Tatum played like crap for 4 out of 5 games and every one saw it besides fraudguy who needed to prop up jump shooters as much as possible. Why? Because Jordan was a jump shooter and not a playmaker.

Fraudguy delivering fraud and takes another L in this thread. Jordan brand ball does not deliver the FMVP trophy to Tatum.

LeBron still #1 all time.