RGM GOAT Debate Thread

[One Last Shot]

Why do we have to downplay Wade and Bosh to elevate LeBron? Wade finished 3rd and 5th in MVP prior to teaming up with LeBron. You claim LeBron's team in his first 7 years is not stacked. I completely agree with you, but LeBron had better teammates than Bosh during his time in Toronto in comparison to LeBron's Cavs. Anthony Parker is the 2nd best player when Toronto made the playoffs twice. Anthony Parker wasn't even the 4th best player in Cavs when he joined in 2010. LeBron had enough talent to beat Mavs in 2011. He just choked and it's okay to admit that.

"The 98 bulls wouldn't get out of the 2nd round of the West today". This is just hypothetical but I'll play along. LeBron wouldn't make 8 straight Finals if his Miami and Cavs (2nd stint) was playing in the West as well.

Wade is a top 20-25 all-timer, and Bosh is a fine 3rd star. Nobody is downplaying them at all. People are downplaying the ridiculous comments that 'Lebron had unprecedented super team support' as though teams like the Showtime Lakers didn't exist.

I actually don't care how many finals Lebron makes. He's still the best ever. Finals, like titles, are a team accomplishment. Lebron lost in 2011 because his team was worse, though it's also true he had a subpar series. It's Kobe who should be embarrassed losing to the Mavs that year, most had them as the favourites heading into the year and they were brutally swept.

But LeBron did have a super team in Miami. He had Bosh and Wade who were both top 5 in their respectable position prior to joining together. LeBron's 4 years in Miami was actually underwhelming. Yes, he won 2 but he should've won at least 3 out of 4. I agree with you, LeBron lost in 2011 because his team was worse than Dallas and majority of the blame is on him. He choked and underperformed really bad. Wade and Bosh couldn't make up for his shortcoming. This is the LeBron who already won 2 MVP the prior 2 seasons. You cannot ask for a better 2nd option and 3rd option with Wade and Bosh. You cannot deny that Miami Heat was the heavy favorite coming into the 2011 Finals. LeBron just needed to outplay Jason Terry and he would have 5 rings and 4 FMVP today.

Why should Kobe be embarrassed for losing to Mavs in 2011? Should LeBron be embarrassed for losing to Spurs in 2014? Because that is an identical situation. Lakers were the back to back champion before they lost to Mavs. Miami were also the back to back champion when they lost to Spurs and were the heavy favorites to win after beating the same exact Spurs the previous year. Kobe lost to Prime Dirk at 32 years old. LeBron lost to Duncan at 37 years old and Manu at 36 years old. Tony Parker was the only one in his Prime and Kawhi wasn't the Kawhi we know today.

I don't criticize LeBron for losing to Warriors in 2015, 2017, and 2018, but he also made it easier for KD to go to GSW because of what he did with the Miami Heat. LeBron started it but KD was the one who really benefitted the most.

Why you keep saying "heavy favorites" when it seems like you don't even understand what it means.

Here are the odds of the 3 playoffs series you are talking about

2011 Semifinals Lakers vs. Mavs
Lakers odds -370
Mavs odds +285

2011 Finals Heat vs. Mavs
Heat odds -180
Mavs odds +160

2014 Finals Heat vs. Spurs
Spurs odds -126
Heat odds +106

I will briefly explain to you what it means so you can use "heavy favorites" properly in the future

The Lakers are a -370 favorite to take the series meaning a bettor would have to wager $370 on the Lakers to win $100. The Mavericks are at +285 to take the series, meaning a $100 bet would win $285 if Dallas were to win the series.

So in the 3 playoffs series above, Lakers are heavily favored against the Mavericks while the Heat are slightly favored against the Mavs. In 2014 Finals, Spurs are actually favored to beat the Heat contrary to what you said that Miami was the heavy favorites in the Finals series.

[michaelm]

Jordan is downgraded because he is a less impactful player. That is the only factor worth considering. This other stuff about rings and who was a worse 'leader' etc is irrelevant.

No it isn’t. You appear not to have noticed that it is a team game. LeBron very publicly declared that his objective was rings for that matter, which seems to have morphed into statistical dominance when he (and his fans) realised he wasn’t going to match Jordan for team achievements.

Sure it is multi factorial and a dynasty may have been more easily achievable in Jordan’s time, but being the leading player of teams which were built around him and won 6 titles is not negligible. Tim Duncan managed 5 titles with the same franchise with teams which were built around him in a career which significantly overlapped LeBron’s, including a title in his mid 30s on a team which beat LeBron’s Heatles, imo significantly because the Spurs played a team game and Duncan accepted being coached. KD and LeBron would have doubtless won titles with even an average supporting cast, but I can’t see a team playing LeBron ball being as good as the 2017 GSW team was playing a team game that year, nor KD being as good as he was, and definitely couldn’t see KD being facilitated somewhat to the detriment of his own game including counting statistics by LeBron as he was by Curry.

For me what counts the most in a team game is how good a team can be built around a player. There is a ceiling with LeBron ball, only imo of course.

All I see here are a bunch of selective narratives that have nothing to do with who is better at playing basketball.

It is very simple, in a team game individual statistics are meant to be in the service of winning games and not an end in themselves, something to which you have just declared you have no answer.

[One_and_Done]

No it isn’t. You appear not to have noticed that it is a team game. LeBron very publicly declared that his objective was rings for that matter, which seems to have morphed into statistical dominance when he (and his fans) realised he wasn’t going to match Jordan for team achievements.

Sure it is multi factorial and a dynasty may have been more easily achievable in Jordan’s time, but being the leading player of teams which were built around him and won 6 titles is not negligible. Tim Duncan managed 5 titles with the same franchise with teams which were built around him in a career which significantly overlapped LeBron’s, including a title in his mid 30s on a team which beat LeBron’s Heatles, imo significantly because the Spurs played a team game and Duncan accepted being coached. KD and LeBron would have doubtless won titles with even an average supporting cast, but I can’t see a team playing LeBron ball being as good as the 2017 GSW team was playing a team game that year, nor KD being as good as he was, and definitely couldn’t see KD being facilitated somewhat to the detriment of his own game including counting statistics by LeBron as he was by Curry.

For me what counts the most in a team game is how good a team can be built around a player. There is a ceiling with LeBron ball, only imo of course.

All I see here are a bunch of selective narratives that have nothing to do with who is better at playing basketball.

It is very simple, in a team game individual statistics are meant to be in the service of winning games and not an end in themselves, something to which you have just declared you have no answer.

Lebron's stats support winning more than any other player.

[ninjamilk23]

Wade is a top 20-25 all-timer, and Bosh is a fine 3rd star. Nobody is downplaying them at all. People are downplaying the ridiculous comments that 'Lebron had unprecedented super team support' as though teams like the Showtime Lakers didn't exist.

I actually don't care how many finals Lebron makes. He's still the best ever. Finals, like titles, are a team accomplishment. Lebron lost in 2011 because his team was worse, though it's also true he had a subpar series. It's Kobe who should be embarrassed losing to the Mavs that year, most had them as the favourites heading into the year and they were brutally swept.

But LeBron did have a super team in Miami. He had Bosh and Wade who were both top 5 in their respectable position prior to joining together. LeBron's 4 years in Miami was actually underwhelming. Yes, he won 2 but he should've won at least 3 out of 4. I agree with you, LeBron lost in 2011 because his team was worse than Dallas and majority of the blame is on him. He choked and underperformed really bad. Wade and Bosh couldn't make up for his shortcoming. This is the LeBron who already won 2 MVP the prior 2 seasons. You cannot ask for a better 2nd option and 3rd option with Wade and Bosh. You cannot deny that Miami Heat was the heavy favorite coming into the 2011 Finals. LeBron just needed to outplay Jason Terry and he would have 5 rings and 4 FMVP today.

Why should Kobe be embarrassed for losing to Mavs in 2011? Should LeBron be embarrassed for losing to Spurs in 2014? Because that is an identical situation. Lakers were the back to back champion before they lost to Mavs. Miami were also the back to back champion when they lost to Spurs and were the heavy favorites to win after beating the same exact Spurs the previous year. Kobe lost to Prime Dirk at 32 years old. LeBron lost to Duncan at 37 years old and Manu at 36 years old. Tony Parker was the only one in his Prime and Kawhi wasn't the Kawhi we know today.

I don't criticize LeBron for losing to Warriors in 2015, 2017, and 2018, but he also made it easier for KD to go to GSW because of what he did with the Miami Heat. LeBron started it but KD was the one who really benefitted the most.

Why you keep saying "heavy favorites" when it seems like you don't even understand what it means.

Here are the odds of the 3 playoffs series you are talking about

2011 Semifinals Lakers vs. Mavs
Lakers odds -370
Mavs odds +285

2011 Finals Heat vs. Mavs
Heat odds -180
Mavs odds +160

2014 Finals Heat vs. Spurs
Spurs odds -126
Heat odds +106

I will briefly explain to you what it means so you can use "heavy favorites" properly in the future

The Lakers are a -370 favorite to take the series meaning a bettor would have to wager $370 on the Lakers to win $100. The Mavericks are at +285 to take the series, meaning a $100 bet would win $285 if Dallas were to win the series.

So in the 3 playoffs series above, Lakers are heavily favored against the Mavericks while the Heat are slightly favored against the Mavs. In 2014 Finals, Spurs are actually favored to beat the Heat contrary to what you said that Miami was the heavy favorites in the Finals series.

Thank you for explaining it. I'm not much of a gambler. So let me get this straight with my new limited knowledge on how favorites work thanks to your explanation.

2011 (Lakers vs Mavs) - Lakers should have won because they are the heavy favorite by 370. (I also picked Lakers to win against Mavs before the series started. Obviously I was wrong. I still don't think Kobe should be embarrassed since he already won 5 at this point.)

2011 (Heat vs Mavs) - So the Miami Heat is the favorite to win this series by being -180. This means Miami should've won right? But how come we are giving LeBron James so much pass and saying "It's not his fault why they lost. " when they were the "bigger" favorite to win in 2011 in comparison to Spurs against Heat in 2014?

2014 (Heat vs Spurs) - Spurs is the favorite to win and they did. So no surprise there. No need to blame LeBron right?

So my question is, when can we put blame on LeBron? If we can't blame him for 2011 even though his team was the favorite to win according to your odds, then when can we criticize him? Since, you're very knowledgeable about the odds. Can you post the odds for Cleveland vs Orlando in 2009 and Cleveland vs Boston in 2010? Because I have a gut feeling that Cleveland is the favorite to win in those series but again, we cannot blame LeBron even if his team is the favorite right?

Like I said from my previous post. LeBron should've won 3 out of 4 during his time in Miami. Just to be clear, I don't fault LeBron for losing in 2007, 2015, 2017, and 2018. I definitely fault him for 2011 and I'm 50/50 with 2014. Some days I think he should've won that series to make up for 2011 but sometimes I give him a pass because he did play well and Wade wasn't the same.

[MavsDirk41]

All I see here are a bunch of selective narratives that have nothing to do with who is better at playing basketball.

It is very simple, in a team game individual statistics are meant to be in the service of winning games and not an end in themselves, something to which you have just declared you have no answer.

Lebron's stats support winning more than any other player.

If all we care about are stats then Wilt is the goat. Glad we finally got that figured out thanks to your superior analysis.

[One_and_Done]

It is very simple, in a team game individual statistics are meant to be in the service of winning games and not an end in themselves, something to which you have just declared you have no answer.

Lebron's stats support winning more than any other player.

If all we care about are stats then Wilt is the goat. Glad we finally got that figured out thanks to your superior analysis.

No, because Wilt's stats don't impact winning in the same way.

[lessthanjake]

Wade is a top 20-25 all-timer, and Bosh is a fine 3rd star. Nobody is downplaying them at all. People are downplaying the ridiculous comments that 'Lebron had unprecedented super team support' as though teams like the Showtime Lakers didn't exist.

I actually don't care how many finals Lebron makes. He's still the best ever. Finals, like titles, are a team accomplishment. Lebron lost in 2011 because his team was worse, though it's also true he had a subpar series. It's Kobe who should be embarrassed losing to the Mavs that year, most had them as the favourites heading into the year and they were brutally swept.

But LeBron did have a super team in Miami. He had Bosh and Wade who were both top 5 in their respectable position prior to joining together. LeBron's 4 years in Miami was actually underwhelming. Yes, he won 2 but he should've won at least 3 out of 4. I agree with you, LeBron lost in 2011 because his team was worse than Dallas and majority of the blame is on him. He choked and underperformed really bad. Wade and Bosh couldn't make up for his shortcoming. This is the LeBron who already won 2 MVP the prior 2 seasons. You cannot ask for a better 2nd option and 3rd option with Wade and Bosh. You cannot deny that Miami Heat was the heavy favorite coming into the 2011 Finals. LeBron just needed to outplay Jason Terry and he would have 5 rings and 4 FMVP today.

Why should Kobe be embarrassed for losing to Mavs in 2011? Should LeBron be embarrassed for losing to Spurs in 2014? Because that is an identical situation. Lakers were the back to back champion before they lost to Mavs. Miami were also the back to back champion when they lost to Spurs and were the heavy favorites to win after beating the same exact Spurs the previous year. Kobe lost to Prime Dirk at 32 years old. LeBron lost to Duncan at 37 years old and Manu at 36 years old. Tony Parker was the only one in his Prime and Kawhi wasn't the Kawhi we know today.

I don't criticize LeBron for losing to Warriors in 2015, 2017, and 2018, but he also made it easier for KD to go to GSW because of what he did with the Miami Heat. LeBron started it but KD was the one who really benefitted the most.

Why you keep saying "heavy favorites" when it seems like you don't even understand what it means.

Here are the odds of the 3 playoffs series you are talking about

2011 Semifinals Lakers vs. Mavs
Lakers odds -370
Mavs odds +285

2011 Finals Heat vs. Mavs
Heat odds -180
Mavs odds +160

2014 Finals Heat vs. Spurs
Spurs odds -126
Heat odds +106

I will briefly explain to you what it means so you can use "heavy favorites" properly in the future

The Lakers are a -370 favorite to take the series meaning a bettor would have to wager $370 on the Lakers to win $100. The Mavericks are at +285 to take the series, meaning a $100 bet would win $285 if Dallas were to win the series.

So in the 3 playoffs series above, Lakers are heavily favored against the Mavericks while the Heat are slightly favored against the Mavs. In 2014 Finals, Spurs are actually favored to beat the Heat contrary to what you said that Miami was the heavy favorites in the Finals series.

I think this is fair in terms of making clear exactly how big of betting favorites teams were. But I think it is worth noting that LeBron has also lost series as an even bigger favorite than the Lakers were against the Mavs in 2011. For instance, LeBron’s Cavs were massive -480 favorites against the Celtics in 2010. They were also even more massive -700 favorites against the Magic in 2009. You seem to want to excuse criticism of the 2011 and 2014 losses by saying that LeBron’s team either wasn’t a massive favorite or was actually not quite the favorite in those series, and you also seem to support the idea that Kobe should be criticized for losing to the Mavs as a significant favorite in 2011. But if you think betting odds tell us how much a star should be criticized or not for a loss, then you’d have to believe LeBron should be *massively* criticized for losing in 2009 and 2010. I suspect you don’t think that, though. I’m sure you think that, despite the overwhelming betting odds, LeBron shouldn’t be criticized for losing those years because you don’t think his team was very good. However, if you think that, then you must also understand how people think LeBron should be criticized a lot for 2011 despite the betting odds not being overwhelming, because that time around LeBron’s team really *was* very good. It can’t just be that betting odds are completely dispositive when you think they can absolve LeBron of criticism but are also to be disregarded when they would suggest criticism of LeBron is due.

[lessthanjake]

Lebron's stats support winning more than any other player.

If all we care about are stats then Wilt is the goat. Glad we finally got that figured out thanks to your superior analysis.

No, because Wilt's stats don't impact winning in the same way.

How do you know “LeBron’s stats support winning more than any other player”? We don’t have virtually any impact data going further back than 1997. The RAPM and RAPM-like data we have for Jordan looks incredibly good, but it’s sparse data. And we have even less for players further back in history, like Kareem, Russell, etc. The only impact data we actually have for everyone is WOWYR stuff and WOWY stuff. Both have massive flaws to them. And LeBron genuinely does not look the best at all in WOWYR-type analysis (including Thinking Basketball’s WOWRY as well as Moonbeam’s similar analysis). For instance, he’s 7th in WOWYR, including being below Jordan. Meanwhile, LeBron looks really good in WOWY, but doesn’t even look better than non-GOAT-candidates Steph Curry and Larry Bird (see: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2310915). And, in any event, we know that the variance on WOWY is so high that on average the noise is bigger than the signal (which should basically tell us it’s not a particularly helpful mode of analysis). So what is the basis for your claim here? There is not actually any mode of impact analysis that exists prior to 1997 that LeBron actually looks the best in.

[ScrantonBulls]

It is very simple, in a team game individual statistics are meant to be in the service of winning games and not an end in themselves, something to which you have just declared you have no answer.

Lebron's stats support winning more than any other player.

If all we care about are stats then Wilt is the goat. Glad we finally got that figured out thanks to your superior analysis.

Nah, not if you have a basic understanding of pace and adjusting statistics per possession. Multiple players have had seasons where they score more points per possession or points per 100 possessions than Wilt did during his 61-62 season (50 PPG season).

Of course, you aren't willing to look that deep or apply any context because it doesn't fit your agenda.

[ScrantonBulls]

If all we care about are stats then Wilt is the goat. Glad we finally got that figured out thanks to your superior analysis.

No, because Wilt's stats don't impact winning in the same way.

How do you know “LeBron’s stats support winning more than any other player”? We don’t have virtually any impact data going further back than 1997. The RAPM and RAPM-like data we have for Jordan looks incredibly good, but it’s sparse data. And we have even less for players further back in history, like Kareem, Russell, etc. The only impact data we actually have for everyone is WOWYR stuff and WOWY stuff. Both have massive flaws to them. And LeBron genuinely does not look the best at all in WOWYR-type analysis (including Thinking Basketball’s WOWRY as well as Moonbeam’s similar analysis). For instance, he’s 7th in WOWYR, including being below Jordan. Meanwhile, LeBron looks really good in WOWY, but doesn’t even look better than non-GOAT-candidates Steph Curry and Larry Bird (see: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2310915). And, in any event, we know that the variance on WOWY is so high that on average the noise is bigger than the signal (which should basically tell us it’s not a particularly helpful mode of analysis). So what is the basis for your claim here? There is not actually any mode of analysis that exists prior to 1997 that LeBron actually looks the best in.

LeBron's carry jobs for the Cavs during his first stint were incredible. It's simple - looks at the Cavs' record the year before he left than the year after. And their record was looking even WORSE before they traded pieces off on 2010-2011.

Compare that to the Bulls in 92-93 and 93-94... only a 2 game difference. Nobody can carry a team like LeBron could. Not even close.

[michaelm]

No, because Wilt's stats don't impact winning in the same way.

How do you know “LeBron’s stats support winning more than any other player”? We don’t have virtually any impact data going further back than 1997. The RAPM and RAPM-like data we have for Jordan looks incredibly good, but it’s sparse data. And we have even less for players further back in history, like Kareem, Russell, etc. The only impact data we actually have for everyone is WOWYR stuff and WOWY stuff. Both have massive flaws to them. And LeBron genuinely does not look the best at all in WOWYR-type analysis (including Thinking Basketball’s WOWRY as well as Moonbeam’s similar analysis). For instance, he’s 7th in WOWYR, including being below Jordan. Meanwhile, LeBron looks really good in WOWY, but doesn’t even look better than non-GOAT-candidates Steph Curry and Larry Bird (see: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2310915). And, in any event, we know that the variance on WOWY is so high that on average the noise is bigger than the signal (which should basically tell us it’s not a particularly helpful mode of analysis). So what is the basis for your claim here? There is not actually any mode of analysis that exists prior to 1997 that LeBron actually looks the best in.

LeBron's carry jobs for the Cavs during his first stint we're incredible. It's simple - looks at the Cavs' record the year before he left than the year after. And their record was looking even WORSE before they traded pieces off on 2010-2011.

Compare that to the Bulls in 92-93 and 93-94... only a 2 game difference. Nobody can carry a team like LeBron could. Not even close.

He in all likelihood is the GOAT floor raiser. GOAT ceiling raiser I am not so sure about.

[lessthanjake]

No, because Wilt's stats don't impact winning in the same way.

How do you know “LeBron’s stats support winning more than any other player”? We don’t have virtually any impact data going further back than 1997. The RAPM and RAPM-like data we have for Jordan looks incredibly good, but it’s sparse data. And we have even less for players further back in history, like Kareem, Russell, etc. The only impact data we actually have for everyone is WOWYR stuff and WOWY stuff. Both have massive flaws to them. And LeBron genuinely does not look the best at all in WOWYR-type analysis (including Thinking Basketball’s WOWRY as well as Moonbeam’s similar analysis). For instance, he’s 7th in WOWYR, including being below Jordan. Meanwhile, LeBron looks really good in WOWY, but doesn’t even look better than non-GOAT-candidates Steph Curry and Larry Bird (see: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2310915). And, in any event, we know that the variance on WOWY is so high that on average the noise is bigger than the signal (which should basically tell us it’s not a particularly helpful mode of analysis). So what is the basis for your claim here? There is not actually any mode of analysis that exists prior to 1997 that LeBron actually looks the best in.

LeBron's carry jobs for the Cavs during his first stint we're incredible. It's simple - looks at the Cavs' record the year before he left than the year after. And their record was looking even WORSE before they traded pieces off on 2010-2011.

Compare that to the Bulls in 92-93 and 93-94... only a 2 game difference. Nobody can carry a team like LeBron could. Not even close.

You’re skirting the point here. It cannot be the argument that LeBron failing in 2011 is absolved because the Heat weren’t overwhelming betting favorites, but also that LeBron losing as an overwhelming betting favorite in 2009 and 2010 doesn’t matter. Either betting odds are important indicators or they’re not. And either way, LeBron is due for criticism for something.

As for the 1992-93 Bulls and the 1993-94 Bulls, I think you might be able to spot a really major and very obvious difference between the success those two teams had. It’s also worth noting that the Bulls weren’t built around Jordan in the same way that LeBron’s Cavs were. The Bulls’ offensive system was very team-oriented and was implemented specifically to give the supporting cast a good structure on which to make decisions and produce decent offense, rather than being built to maximize Jordan’s impact. Indeed, Phil Jackson has specifically said as much. It is really not a surprise that, if two teams are without their superstar player, you’d see less of a dip from a team that was built to function well without their star than from a team that was built to be highly reliant on their star.

[michaelm]

No, because Wilt's stats don't impact winning in the same way.

How do you know “LeBron’s stats support winning more than any other player”? We don’t have virtually any impact data going further back than 1997. The RAPM and RAPM-like data we have for Jordan looks incredibly good, but it’s sparse data. And we have even less for players further back in history, like Kareem, Russell, etc. The only impact data we actually have for everyone is WOWYR stuff and WOWY stuff. Both have massive flaws to them. And LeBron genuinely does not look the best at all in WOWYR-type analysis (including Thinking Basketball’s WOWRY as well as Moonbeam’s similar analysis). For instance, he’s 7th in WOWYR, including being below Jordan. Meanwhile, LeBron looks really good in WOWY, but doesn’t even look better than non-GOAT-candidates Steph Curry and Larry Bird (see: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2310915). And, in any event, we know that the variance on WOWY is so high that on average the noise is bigger than the signal (which should basically tell us it’s not a particularly helpful mode of analysis). So what is the basis for your claim here? There is not actually any mode of analysis that exists prior to 1997 that LeBron actually looks the best in.

LeBron's carry jobs for the Cavs during his first stint we're incredible. It's simple - looks at the Cavs' record the year before he left than the year after. And their record was looking even WORSE before they traded pieces off on 2010-2011.

Compare that to the Bulls in 92-93 and 93-94... only a 2 game difference. Nobody can carry a team like LeBron could. Not even close.

He in all likelihood is the GOAT floor raiser. GOAT ceiling raiser I am not so sure about.

[ScrantonBulls]

How do you know “LeBron’s stats support winning more than any other player”? We don’t have virtually any impact data going further back than 1997. The RAPM and RAPM-like data we have for Jordan looks incredibly good, but it’s sparse data. And we have even less for players further back in history, like Kareem, Russell, etc. The only impact data we actually have for everyone is WOWYR stuff and WOWY stuff. Both have massive flaws to them. And LeBron genuinely does not look the best at all in WOWYR-type analysis (including Thinking Basketball’s WOWRY as well as Moonbeam’s similar analysis). For instance, he’s 7th in WOWYR, including being below Jordan. Meanwhile, LeBron looks really good in WOWY, but doesn’t even look better than non-GOAT-candidates Steph Curry and Larry Bird (see: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2310915). And, in any event, we know that the variance on WOWY is so high that on average the noise is bigger than the signal (which should basically tell us it’s not a particularly helpful mode of analysis). So what is the basis for your claim here? There is not actually any mode of analysis that exists prior to 1997 that LeBron actually looks the best in.

LeBron's carry jobs for the Cavs during his first stint we're incredible. It's simple - looks at the Cavs' record the year before he left than the year after. And their record was looking even WORSE before they traded pieces off on 2010-2011.

Compare that to the Bulls in 92-93 and 93-94... only a 2 game difference. Nobody can carry a team like LeBron could. Not even close.

He in all likelihood is the GOAT floor raiser. GOAT ceiling raiser I am not so sure about.

LeBron has shown that he can raise the ceiling of a team as good as anybody. He carried sorry ass Cavs teams to the finals multiple times. He took down the 73-9 Warriors with a concussed Kevin Love who was just awful. I don't think any other player wins that series. That's the ultimate example of raising a ceiling.

[One_and_Done]

Nobody is arguing the betting odds are always right.

[lessthanjake]

LeBron's carry jobs for the Cavs during his first stint we're incredible. It's simple - looks at the Cavs' record the year before he left than the year after. And their record was looking even WORSE before they traded pieces off on 2010-2011.

Compare that to the Bulls in 92-93 and 93-94... only a 2 game difference. Nobody can carry a team like LeBron could. Not even close.

He in all likelihood is the GOAT floor raiser. GOAT ceiling raiser I am not so sure about.

LeBron has shown that he can raise the ceiling of a team as good as anybody. He carried sorry ass Cavs teams to the finals multiple times. He took down the 73-9 Warriors with a concussed Kevin Love who was just awful. I don't think any other player wins that series. That's the ultimate example of raising a ceiling.

I don’t quite understand this argument. Did the ceiling really have to be raised all that high to beat the 2016 Warriors? Sure, they won 73 games in the regular season, but Curry had gotten injured in the playoffs, and the team had barely won in the prior round, winning a 7-game series that they were outscored in. They were still a very good team, but after Curry came back from injury, they played at a 6.18 SRS level in the playoffs before meeting the Cavs. Of course, a team playing at that level is still a worthy finalist, and it was a very tough series for the 5.45 SRS Cavs team. But it should be pretty obvious to anyone who paid essentially any attention to basketball that year that the 2016 Warriors were not playing at their regular-season level in the latter stages of the playoffs. Beating them at that point was great, but is not proof of some high level of ceiling raising that was otherwise not manifested by how those 2016 Cavs played in the regular season. The 2016 Cavs were a 57-win, 5.45 SRS team that easily beat weak conference opponents and then won a very close finals against a team that had had a great regular season but was only really playing at about a 6 SRS level due to playoff injury to their superstar. That was great and obviously was enough to win the title, but it isn’t historic ceiling raising of the type that someone like Jordan has done. The 2016 Cavs won the title but were not a top-tier all-time great team.

[lessthanjake]

Nobody is arguing the betting odds are always right.

Then why should we care what the betting odds were for the 2011 Mavs against the Lakers and Heat? Obviously those odds were heavily influenced by the Lakers being the two-time defending champs while fairly or not LeBron was at the time seen as a bit of a playoff disappointment (or at least as unproven in the playoffs). But, of course, we know what happened after these years, and the Lakers weren’t very good after this while the Heat won the next two titles. The information we know from after those betting odds makes the Lakers’ 2011 loss look much less bad than it did at the time and makes the Heat’s 2011 loss look worse. So yeah, betting odds are not always right, but I really don’t think that that operates in favor of the points you are trying to make here.

[One_and_Done]

Nobody is arguing the betting odds are always right.

Then why should we care what the betting odds were for the 2011 Mavs against the Lakers and Heat? Obviously those odds were heavily influenced by the Lakers being the two-time defending champs while fairly or not LeBron was at the time seen as a bit of a playoff disappointment (or at least as unproven in the playoffs). But, of course, we know what happened after these years, and the Lakers weren’t very good after this while the Heat won the next two titles. The information we know from after those betting odds makes the Lakers’ 2011 loss look much less bad than it did at the time and makes the Heat’s 2011 loss look worse. So yeah, betting odds are not always right, but I really don’t think that that operates in favor of the points you are trying to make here.

I mostly care as a rebuttal to people claiming 'such and such were the favourites'. However, I explained the Mavs should not have been underdogs and were being greatly underrated. I went into some depth about the reasons for that, and why the Heat were flawed (see previous page).

[michaelm]

He in all likelihood is the GOAT floor raiser. GOAT ceiling raiser I am not so sure about.

LeBron has shown that he can raise the ceiling of a team as good as anybody. He carried sorry ass Cavs teams to the finals multiple times. He took down the 73-9 Warriors with a concussed Kevin Love who was just awful. I don't think any other player wins that series. That's the ultimate example of raising a ceiling.

I don’t quite understand this argument. Did the ceiling really have to be raised all that high to beat the 2016 Warriors? Sure, they won 73 games in the regular season, but Curry had gotten injured in the playoffs, and the team had barely won in the prior round, winning a 7-game series that they were outscored in. They were still a very good team, but after Curry came back from injury, they played at a 6.18 SRS level in the playoffs before meeting the Cavs. Of course, a team playing at that level is still a worthy finalist, and it was a very tough series for the 5.45 SRS Cavs team. But it should be pretty obvious to anyone who paid essentially any attention to basketball that year that the 2016 Warriors were not playing at their regular-season level in the latter stages of the playoffs. Beating them at that point was great, but is not proof of some high level of ceiling raising that was otherwise not manifested by how those 2016 Cavs played in the regular season. The 2016 Cavs were a 57-win, 5.45 SRS team that easily beat weak conference opponents and then won a very close finals against a team that had had a great regular season but was only really playing at about a 6 SRS level due to playoff injury to their superstar. That was great and obviously was enough to win the title, but it isn’t historic ceiling raising of the type that someone like Jordan has done. The 2016 Cavs won the title but were not a top-tier all-time great team.

Exactly. The current Cavs are on 72 win pace and are obviously a very good team, but if they don’t win the title they won’t rate with the 71 win Bulls team either.

If LeBron wanted to accomplish an historic ceiling raising feat he should have beaten the 2017 GSW team, obviously much better than the 2016 GSW team despite winning fewer regular season games. And LeBron fans -are the one fanbase who can’t call the KD warriors unfair, given LeBron since 2010 has shown absolutely no limitations in regard to assembling his own super teams. KD was in the exact situation for which the FA rule was devised and had at least fulfilled all contractual obligations to OKC, and wasn’t a client of any player agency owned by a player on the team he was joining, as opposed to AD for instance.

[MavsDirk41]

Lebron's stats support winning more than any other player.

If all we care about are stats then Wilt is the goat. Glad we finally got that figured out thanks to your superior analysis.

Nah, not if you have a basic understanding of pace and adjusting statistics per possession. Multiple players have had seasons where they score more points per possession or points per 100 possessions than Wilt did during his 61-62 season (50 PPG season).

Of course, you aren't willing to look that deep or apply any context because it doesn't fit your agenda.

Pace and adjusting statistics huh? Interesting Taj

I know San Antonio had 17 consecutive 50 win seasons with Tim Duncan

I know Bill Russell won 11 championships with Boston

I know Boston improved by 32 games Birds for year in Boston

And you are the last person who should be calling someone out on here for having an agenda. You are the biggest James stan on here.