If the Cavs win the NBA title this year, is LeBron the best ever?

[IsntLifeFunny]

Jordan might have the better midrange jumper but LeBron is a much better passer and rebounder.

They are pretty dead even from behind the arc career wise.

Might have? Man. What the hell are you guys watching? 

[IsntLifeFunny]

Back to the ridiculous zone argument: tell me a single team in the NBA that plays zone...ever, like any minute of any game? Tell me a time a player has been doubled without the basketball in their hands. The more I think of it it's one of the most retarded arguments I've ever heard on here to say the rules change actually helped defenses. 

[IsntLifeFunny]

 

 

Lebron has shot 40% from 3 point range for an entire season before, which is just fucking unfair. 

Jordan sucked from 3point range. The only time he shot a reasonable percentage outside of 1 year were those 3 years the line was shortened. 

Lebron is a solid shooter. Jordan isn't even that discernibly better mid range shooter than James and certainly isn't better from deep. 

The no zone/illegal defense rule trumps the hand checking emphasis by a wide, wide margin. Lebron would have most likely averaged MORE points and MORE assists due to those rules, than today especially when you couple that with the fact that the 90's teams were weak sauce, with talent spread out due to 6 expansion teams from 88-89 to 96.

 

With the illegal defense you couldn't double unless the guy had the ball. Lebron would absolutely pick apart teams with passing from the post the double came. 

Jordan was 42% in 96. STFU and get back to the OT section. I'll read up on my spot math while you go look up some stats. 

[NashvilleNinja]

I think some of the people talking shit in this thread are bitter fans of teams that Jordan routinely dominated. I'm not even a fucking fan of the Bulls of that time. My favorite team was Orlando. Shaq is my favorite player of all time. But I'm not stupid enough to let the bitterness of their defeats at the hand of Jordan cloud my vision.

Jordan could really bring the hate out of people, not because of who he was but because of what he did. Just by dominatinf on the court people hated him. The way he played the game. People act like the only thing Jordan did was shoot a pretty jump shot and score a ton of points, but that was only part of his game. It wasn't even the most important part. Michael was not the most athletically gifted person on the planet. He is the most complete player that has ever stepped out on the court. What made him stand so far apart was his knowledge of the game and his ability to out-think and out-maneuver his opponent. He was a defensive nightmare for opponents. The guy could strip the ball and be headed the other way before you even realized it.

It's just not even debatable, and for those who actually watched Jordan play whem he was in the league to try and argue otherwise... well, like I said. They're probably bitter old Knicks/Pacers/Pistons/etc fans. 

[NashvilleNinja]

I'll just leave this here... 

 

[Bink]

Man. I can't believe this, but 

The other day Skip Bayless said Jordan would beat James, TODAY

​Skip Bayless is the biggest jackass on the planet. 

[Bink]

I actually agree with Soxcat and Nashville Ninja (has hell frozen over?), but those two aren't trying to argue that LeBron's game wouldn't translate--just that Jordan is better. 

I think Jordan is better than LeBron--for me the way he transformed the game pushes him way over the edge, in that he's had more impact on the game and his victories were consecutive, dominant, and happened at the height of the NBA. He created the NBA culture LeBron inhabits. That is worth something in my book. 

Of the people on this board, I'd venture a guess that I've watched the most NBA. I watched a ton of Jordan games as a kid, as an adult I've watched a lot of LeBron. Both guys could dominate in any era--it's true, it's damn true. 

My main issue is the toxic level of dislike I see that characterizes the way many talk about LeBron--to me this comes from over exposure and over saturation. 

I think if Jordan played in this era of media coverage he would be one of the most hated athletes of all time. He's a winner in a an age where winners are villainous if they keep winning. Dynasties are objects of resentment, not infatuation. How would Jordan play over today, a guy who constantly threw his teammates under the bus, a guy who was always doing shit off the court? 

But this kind of hypothetical, all the hypothetical really take away from our ability to look at the game both objectively and in context. For this reason, I'd venture to say that I know too much about Jordan to not be convinced that he's the GOAT. Hell, Jordan would play 18 holes of golf before games, would stay up all hours of the night gambling, was a tireless, relentless force of will type player. He made the game what it is today. The LeBron witness banner, the Kobe Zoom IVs--those houses were built by Jordan. 

However, when LeBron enters the conversation, the weakest arguments surface because they are coming from haters--those who drink from the alter of Jordan without actually paying attention to him as a complete figure in the same manner as LeBron. 

 

Edited May 28, 2015 by Bink

[rns90]

Back to the ridiculous zone argument: tell me a single team in the NBA that plays zone...ever, like any minute of any game? Tell me a time a player has been doubled without the basketball in their hands. The more I think of it it's one of the most retarded arguments I've ever heard on here to say the rules change actually helped defenses. 

​I'm pretty sure the Spurs played zone for a few minutes during one of their playoff games vs the Clippers.   But anyway, even in today's modern basketball you still see some real stinkers put up by teams.  And I'd wager that most of that is not because of great defense but more or less that the other team just misses open shots.    Half the time all you see on the highlights are three pointers or dunks.  Most of the rule changes have helped offenses.  Here's one I haven't seen mentioned: the Charles Barkley/Mark Jackson five second back to the basket rule.  In the 90s, those guys just went into the post and backed guys down and just dribbled away the shot clock.  Now you actually have to do something with the ball within five seconds or it's a turnover.

I think Jordan is better than LeBron--for me the way he transformed the game pushes him way over the edge, in that he's had more impact on the game and his victories were consecutive, dominant, and happened at the height of the NBA. He created the NBA culture LeBron inhabits. That is worth something in my book. 

Of the people on this board, I'd venture a guess that I've watched the most NBA. I watched a ton of Jordan games as a kid, as an adult I've watched a lot of LeBron. Both guys could dominate in any era--it's true, it's damn true. 

My main issue is the toxic level of dislike I see that characterizes the way many talk about LeBron--to me this comes from over exposure and over saturation. 

I think if Jordan played in this era of media coverage he would be one of the most hated athletes of all time. He's a winner in a an age where winners are villainous if they keep winning. Dynasties are objects of resentment, not infatuation. How would Jordan play over today, a guy who constantly threw his teammates under the bus, a guy who was always doing shit off the court? 

 

 

​Yeah, that first run was very impressive.  Look at the teams they beat--Showtime Lakers, a Portland team that had been to the finals in 1990 and a Suns team that won 60+ games.  To be honest the East has been pretty weak for a while now even going back to when the Lakers won 3 straight championships.

Jordan in no way is worse than Kobe Bryant.  Bryant is far more crappier in terms of being a sociopath.  Consider these factors for Kobe:

-ratted out a teammate to the police (Shaq O' Neal during that entire rape saga)

-has run off more than one talented big man because of his selfish play (Gasol, O'Neal, and Bynum)

-sabotages team in games to make a point of refuting criticism (Game 7, 2006 vs PHX took only 7 shots to prove that he wasn't a ball hog who shot a lot).

-got sued by his parents

There's probably more out there but when I think about Jordan off the field there isn't anywhere as close to as many issues as there are with Bryant.  Oh yeah, his rep a late game "closer" is also laughable.  He's one of the worst when it comes to last second shots to take the lead or tie the game.

[abenjami]

I actually agree with Soxcat and Nashville Ninja (has hell frozen over?), but those two aren't trying to argue that LeBron's game wouldn't translate--just that Jordan is better. 

I think Jordan is better than LeBron--for me the way he transformed the game pushes him way over the edge, in that he's had more impact on the game and his victories were consecutive, dominant, and happened at the height of the NBA. He created the NBA culture LeBron inhabits. That is worth something in my book. 

Of the people on this board, I'd venture a guess that I've watched the most NBA. I watched a ton of Jordan games as a kid, as an adult I've watched a lot of LeBron. Both guys could dominate in any era--it's true, it's damn true. 

My main issue is the toxic level of dislike I see that characterizes the way many talk about LeBron--to me this comes from over exposure and over saturation. 

I think if Jordan played in this era of media coverage he would be one of the most hated athletes of all time. He's a winner in a an age where winners are villainous if they keep winning. Dynasties are objects of resentment, not infatuation. How would Jordan play over today, a guy who constantly threw his teammates under the bus, a guy who was always doing shit off the court? 

But this kind of hypothetical, all the hypothetical really take away from our ability to look at the game both objectively and in context. For this reason, I'd venture to say that I know too much about Jordan to not be convinced that he's the GOAT. Hell, Jordan would play 18 holes of golf before games, would stay up all hours of the night gambling, was a tireless, relentless force of will type player. He made the game what it is today. The LeBron witness banner, the Kobe Zoom IVs--those houses were built by Jordan. 

However, when LeBron enters the conversation, the weakest arguments surface because they are coming from haters--those who drink from the alter of Jordan without actually paying attention to him as a complete figure in the same manner as LeBron. 

 

​I agree there is no question Jordan is "better" if you are talking about the impact he had on the game, especially off the court.  I don't see any scenario where anyone can ever touch him in that regard.

However, that really is a separate topic and not the same thing as who was the better player on the court.

 

[NashvilleNinja]

However, that really is a separate topic and not the same thing as who was the better player on the court.

 

The cart didn't lead the horse, man. Everything that happened off the court was a direct result of what he did on the court.

[IsntLifeFunny]

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/j/lebron_james_vs_michael_jordan.htm

 

Yeah, he was better on the court in the regular season and especially in the playoffs. 

 

As for some notion that 'over saturation' causes the dislike: https://youtu.be/jwaaAqrGsrk. It couldn't just be because he's a gigantic douche on the court? No, that makes too much sense. It has to be some deep psychological reason instead. 

[abenjami]

Everything that happened off the court was a direct result of what he did on the court.

Absolutely, but it was also due to Jordan being in the right place at the right time.  The state of the NBA and marketing athletes was very different when Jordan burst onto the scene.

 

​

[abenjami]

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/j/lebron_james_vs_michael_jordan.htm

 

Yeah, he was better on the court in the regular season and especially in the playoffs. 

 

​

This article will look a lot different 5-6 years from now when LeBron is done.

[oldschool]

http://www.landofbasketball.com/player_comparison/j/lebron_james_vs_michael_jordan.htm

 

Yeah, he was better on the court in the regular season and especially in the playoffs. 

 

As for some notion that 'over saturation' causes the dislike: https://youtu.be/jwaaAqrGsrk. It couldn't just be because he's a gigantic douche on the court? No, that makes too much sense. It has to be some deep psychological reason instead. 

​

LOL. Jordan was a much bigger asshole than James. Your hate for the guy is borderline obsessive. Also, Lebron loses the scoring battle in the playoffs but his Rebound and Assist numbers are better. Thats to be expected though since he a pass first player that involved his teammates unlike Jordan who pulled his team behind him through force of will. It's laughable that you can't see James would be productive in any era. There isn't any reason he couldn't have done what Magic did in the 80's.

Edited May 28, 2015 by oldschool

[IsntLifeFunny]

​

This article will look a lot different 5-6 years from now when LeBron is done.

In overall stats? Sure, because he will have played a lot more games by that point. In terms of averages it will only get better for Jordan.