LeBron James longevity

[NyKnicks1714]

"Statpadding" and "empty stats" have become the "woke" of the NBA. People throw it around but don't even know what it means.

[TheGeneral99]

Just incredible.

I do have wonders what MJ would have been able to do if he never retired in 1998 at the age of 34. That year he won MVP and FMVP. When he returned after 3 years off at age 38 he was still an all-star caliber player. I don't think it's out of the realm to think that MJ would have still been an elite player well into his late 30s had he not retired prematurely.

Small correction, Jordan turned 35 in February 1998 and retired at 35. Both him and the Bulls roster were clearly on the decline, both physically and mentally. I don't think him playing at 36 would have ended well, and him losing in 1999 would have really give his legacy a hit.

Code: Select all

         1996    1997    1998
PPG      30.4    29.6    28.7
TS%      .582    .567    .533
PER      29.4    27.8    25.2
TmOff    115.2   114.4   107.7
Ranked   1st     1st     9th 


But he could have kept playing at an elite level for a few years and significantly added to his all-time totals. In addition, as a free agent in 1998 he could have joined a contender like the Knicks, Pacers, Spurs, Blazers etc. and possibly won another title or MVP with a better supporting cast.

Also, without taking 3 years off, his body would not have deteriorated the way it did when he came back at 38. You can't just take 3 years off at that age and come back without significant rust and physical decline.

Had he not retired and played straight until 40 or so, he likely finishes with around 40,000 points, and possibly 500-600 more steals, which would put him in contention to maybe overtake Stockton on the all-time list.

Not sure how him losing in 1999 would have damaged his legacy at all, considering he would have been 36, at the end of his prime etc. Wayne Gretzky bounced around to a few teams in the last few years of his career and didn't win, but it never damaged his overall legacy. Lebron hasn't won anything in 5 years and has been bounced in the 1st round multiple times, but his legacy hasn't been damaged.

[NoStatsGuy]

Longevity like James brings me to an idea of mine - for all sports really but let’s stay within basketball.

The reason the greats need to retire is the grind of the regular season…which is different than playoffs. Some will say one is a marathon and other more of a sprint. The greats would love to still play playoff basketball but not suffer through the regular season.

What if NBA allowed for 1-2 players per roster to be deemed Legends. Said player(s) could play in playoffs and not be required to participate in regular season.

To accomplish, I think the regular season would need to be revamped. I think the ‘regular season’ would be 70-85% of total games played. Followed by an all-star break. Then a SOS/seeded Playoff Series for remaining games would be conducted. This is where Legends would jump in to start playing.

Based on a point system from Regular and Playoff season - Championship Series would commence with top 16 teams to determine NBA champion.

i dont see how championship contenders find a groove and the right lineups, etc. with the "legends" not playing in the regular season. but interesting idea nontheless.

practically you dont need to change anything. The teams are free to send their players home till april, there is no rule that would prevent that as far as im aware. I just dont think it will turn out great in the locker room for example or as i said, team figuring out how to win and play and then all of a sudden a lobron jumps in an everything changes, that cant be good.

just shorten the schedule to 40-50 games and think of some other interesting content, you can "sell" the fans on. like 3on3 and 1v1 tournaments. unrivaled was pretty fun to watch, ice cubes big3 league is fun to watch. and this is what legends could sit out. They wont just shorten the season, because of TV deal, etc. you cant just cut "content" which is already sold. And frankly the NBA and teams would lose an insane amount of money, if you took away 30 games. be it from TV revenue or just filling the arena selling tickets, jerseys, food, etc.

the nba needs a refresher of some sorts. and i think a shortened season would make the product so much better. Games mean more, players are in better condition and so on.

why am i yapping about this in a lebron thread? i dont know, but i thought your idea was interesting

[Lakers824]

Obvious GOAT and its honestly embarrassing that there is still a slight consensus in favor of MJ at this point.

Jordan was obviously better. The only embarrassing thing is thinking lebron is a better player and having your panties in a bunch because the consensus among players, coaches, GMs and everyone else in the basketball community is that Jordan is better.

It isn't "slight" either.

[Lakers824]

Just incredible.

I do have wonders what MJ would have been able to do if he never retired in 1998 at the age of 34. That year he won MVP and FMVP. When he returned after 3 years off at age 38 he was still an all-star caliber player. I don't think it's out of the realm to think that MJ would have still been an elite player well into his late 30s had he not retired prematurely.

Small correction, Jordan turned 35 in February 1998 and retired at 35. Both him and the Bulls roster were clearly on the decline, both physically and mentally. I don't think him playing at 36 would have ended well, and him losing in 1999 would have really give his legacy a hit.

Code: Select all

         1996    1997    1998
PPG      30.4    29.6    28.7
TS%      .582    .567    .533
PER      29.4    27.8    25.2
TmOff    115.2   114.4   107.7
Ranked   1st     1st     9th 


But he could have kept playing at an elite level for a few years and significantly added to his all-time totals. In addition, as a free agent in 1998 he could have joined a contender like the Knicks, Pacers, Spurs, Blazers etc. and possibly won another title or MVP with a better supporting cast.

Also, without taking 3 years off, his body would not have deteriorated the way it did when he came back at 38. You can't just take 3 years off at that age and come back without significant rust and physical decline.

Had he not retired and played straight until 40 or so, he likely finishes with around 40,000 points, and possibly 500-600 more steals, which would put him in contention to maybe overtake Stockton on the all-time list.

Not sure how him losing in 1999 would have damaged his legacy at all, considering he would have been 36, at the end of his prime etc. Wayne Gretzky bounced around to a few teams in the last few years of his career and didn't win, but it never damaged his overall legacy. Lebron hasn't won anything in 5 years and has been bounced in the 1st round multiple times, but his legacy hasn't been damaged.

Yeah pretty stupid post. Not even mentioning the fact that the poster (who thinks that Jordan finally losing after his 2nd 3 peat would hit his legacy) is comparing his 96 and 97 stats with his 98 season, seemingly unaware that Jordan was injured during that last season and couldn't have surgery until the off-season.

[The4thHorseman]

Small correction, Jordan turned 35 in February 1998 and retired at 35. Both him and the Bulls roster were clearly on the decline, both physically and mentally. I don't think him playing at 36 would have ended well, and him losing in 1999 would have really give his legacy a hit.

Code: Select all

         1996    1997    1998
PPG      30.4    29.6    28.7
TS%      .582    .567    .533
PER      29.4    27.8    25.2
TmOff    115.2   114.4   107.7
Ranked   1st     1st     9th 


But he could have kept playing at an elite level for a few years and significantly added to his all-time totals. In addition, as a free agent in 1998 he could have joined a contender like the Knicks, Pacers, Spurs, Blazers etc. and possibly won another title or MVP with a better supporting cast.

Also, without taking 3 years off, his body would not have deteriorated the way it did when he came back at 38. You can't just take 3 years off at that age and come back without significant rust and physical decline.

Had he not retired and played straight until 40 or so, he likely finishes with around 40,000 points, and possibly 500-600 more steals, which would put him in contention to maybe overtake Stockton on the all-time list.

Not sure how him losing in 1999 would have damaged his legacy at all, considering he would have been 36, at the end of his prime etc. Wayne Gretzky bounced around to a few teams in the last few years of his career and didn't win, but it never damaged his overall legacy. Lebron hasn't won anything in 5 years and has been bounced in the 1st round multiple times, but his legacy hasn't been damaged.

Yeah pretty stupid post. Not even mentioning the fact that the poster (who thinks that Jordan finally losing after his 2nd 3 peat would hit his legacy) is comparing his 96 and 97 stats with his 98 season, seemingly unaware that Jordan was injured during that last season and couldn't have surgery until the off-season.

What injury did Jordan suffer during the 98 season that needed surgery after?

[Rust_Cohle]

But he could have kept playing at an elite level for a few years and significantly added to his all-time totals. In addition, as a free agent in 1998 he could have joined a contender like the Knicks, Pacers, Spurs, Blazers etc. and possibly won another title or MVP with a better supporting cast.

Also, without taking 3 years off, his body would not have deteriorated the way it did when he came back at 38. You can't just take 3 years off at that age and come back without significant rust and physical decline.

Had he not retired and played straight until 40 or so, he likely finishes with around 40,000 points, and possibly 500-600 more steals, which would put him in contention to maybe overtake Stockton on the all-time list.

Not sure how him losing in 1999 would have damaged his legacy at all, considering he would have been 36, at the end of his prime etc. Wayne Gretzky bounced around to a few teams in the last few years of his career and didn't win, but it never damaged his overall legacy. Lebron hasn't won anything in 5 years and has been bounced in the 1st round multiple times, but his legacy hasn't been damaged.

Yeah pretty stupid post. Not even mentioning the fact that the poster (who thinks that Jordan finally losing after his 2nd 3 peat would hit his legacy) is comparing his 96 and 97 stats with his 98 season, seemingly unaware that Jordan was injured during that last season and couldn't have surgery until the off-season.

What injury did Jordan suffer during the 98 season that needed surgery after?

He cut his finger with a cigar cutter so they had to repair the tendon.

[The4thHorseman]

Yeah pretty stupid post. Not even mentioning the fact that the poster (who thinks that Jordan finally losing after his 2nd 3 peat would hit his legacy) is comparing his 96 and 97 stats with his 98 season, seemingly unaware that Jordan was injured during that last season and couldn't have surgery until the off-season.

What injury did Jordan suffer during the 98 season that needed surgery after?

He cut his finger with a cigar cutter so they had to repair the tendon.

That injury happened AFTER the 1998 season was over while in the Bahamas, not during.

[OriginalRed]

Obvious GOAT and its honestly embarrassing that there is still a slight consensus in favor of MJ at this point.

Spotted Nick Wright's burner.

[Braggins]

Obvious GOAT and its honestly embarrassing that there is still a slight consensus in favor of MJ at this point.

Jordan was obviously better.

No he wasn't, and very few people seriously trying to make a GOAT argument for MJ even actually try to argue he was a better player at this point. His GOAT case mostly revolve around the 6/6 argument and absurd nostalgia for awful 90s basketball.

[JinKaz69]

Huge spacing + 3 def sec rule + non-stop mismatch hunting.
It's easier than ever to get to the rim nowadays.

Still a good stat.

Yet the stats tell a different story. The biggest misconception is that spacing creates shots at the rim. It really doesn't. It creates open shots from 3 as defenses collapses in the paint. Any defense will choose a 40-45% shot from the arc over a 70-100% at the rim. And any offense chooses a 40-45% 3 point shot over a 50-60% challenged shot at the rim.

Code: Select all

        % of FGA     FG% by Dist.
Year   0--3   3-10   0--3    3-10
1997   .341   .142   .552   .437
1998   .286   .178   .628   .376
1999   .266   .188   .620   .365
2023   .245   .206   .701   .454
2024   .241   .211   .699   .452
2025   .226   .214   .696   .461


You really have to be explosive and/or strong to get to the rim in today games. While in the 90's you had to have vision and awareness (Stockton previously holding the record of most shots made at the rim by a 40-year old)

*the stats are from bbref

I'm not english native so I might miss a point but according to your stats close shots to the rim produce 8 to 15% better percentage in the last 3 years than the late 90's.

So it doesn't invalid my opinion.

[Worm Guts]

Obvious GOAT and its honestly embarrassing that there is still a slight consensus in favor of MJ at this point.

Jordan was obviously better.

No he wasn't, and very few people seriously trying to make a GOAT argument for MJ even actually try to argue he was a better player at this point. His GOAT case mostly revolve around the 6/6 argument and absurd nostalgia for awful 90s basketball.

More championships and more MVPs despite having a smaller window.

[hauntedcomputer]

Very impressive. Especially the way he committed to taking care of himself, adjusting his game as he aged and developing new skills, and largely staying out of trouble and controversy. Consummate pro. I can see him logging three or four more years easily, either as a true power forward or spot-up three shooter.

Things to remember: Longevity is increasing for athletes in all sports. NBA players were formerly considered washed in their early 30s. Now it's kind of expected you'll play until your late 30s.

Kareem with four extra years of NBA instead of college would still be a good distance ahead of Lebron on the all-time charts and probably even the GOAT debate (excluding recency bias.) He won a ring his second year in the league. True, he'd have been going against Russell, Wilt, and Thurmond, but he should easily have 8-10k more points. There's no doubt he was pro-ready as a college freshman.

Anyway, may we all have the longevity we deserve.

[pipfan]

Huge LBJ hater here (big Bulls' fan) but it's incredible what he's doing. The guy is, at worst, a top 15 player still.

[Dupp]

The talk was his game wouldn’t age well as his athleticism declined.

Didn’t really work out that way.

[Bankai]

MJ is still the goat. But LeBron from Highschool to now has so much mileage and games in his body, that its crazy he is still holding up well.

[Mephariel]

"Statpadding" and "empty stats" have become the "woke" of the NBA. People throw it around but don't even know what it means.

This. Everything Lebron does happens organically. That is opposite of stat padding.

If Lebron constantly jacks up shots just to get 25 points or pass for the sake of passing, then he is stat padding. But that is clearly not the case here.

[Edrees]

The day Lebron hangs it up will be rough for me, because as long as he plays young, that means I'm young too (i'm 2 days older than him)

[NyKnicks1714]

The day Lebron hangs it up will be rough for me, because as long as he plays young, that means I'm young too (i'm 2 days older than him)

So we always talk about how old LeBron is, and you're older than him? Damn you're old.

(kidding)

[NyKnicks1714]

The talk was his game wouldn’t age well as his athleticism declined.

Didn’t really work out that way.

That's because people oversimplify this and base it on athleticism and shooting ability, i.e. the less athletic and better a shooter you are, the more likely your game is to age well. There's a lot more to it than that, clearly.