MJ VS LEBRON VS WHOEVER THREAD

[lakerz12]

Michael Jordan.

The most impressive and impeccable resume of individual stats combined with team leadership/success.

Played against great players and a strong era but topped them all: Hakeem, Malone, Robinson, Barkley, Magic, Bird, Shaq, Stockton, Drexler, Ewing, Kemp, Miller, Motumbo, Mourning, Payton, Richmond, Penny Hardaway, Grant Hill, Dumars, Mullin, etc . etc.

He was a winner. He was extremely extremely extremely competitive. He didn't tolerate mediocrity. He wouldn't tolerate losing. He cared more about winning than individual accolades and fame.

People don't talk enough about winning anymore. People just look at stats because that's easy to do. But how do you quantify the effect incredible will, work ethic, competitiveness, etc. has on one's team?

Michael Jordan had no weaknesses. And his mind and spirit were superior to his opponents.

Mike Tyson talks about how his fights were over before they even started because of the spiritual/mental victory he had over his opponents.

Michael Jordan had that spiritual/mental superiority over his opponents.

There are guys with nice stats but they don't win when it matters most because they don't have that.

If you had to choose one guy to start your team with to win a Championship that year, for your life, you take Michael Jordan. Because you know he is going to bring 100% and he is going to raise the level of everyone around him simply by his presence and how he approaches every practice and every game. You know that he will never cower in the big moment. And he was absolutely elite at both ends of the floor.

[LesGrossman]

I can only laugh at the younglings here writing lengthly essays about why LeBron should be considered G.O.A.T.. Why are we talking about stats shooting or passing here? MJ would simply DOMINATE LeBron. Lets not act like we didnt see LeBron getting intimidated by Pat Beverley only a few weeks ago. He stopped him, and blocked him, while giving up some 60 lbs. What do you think would happen if prime MJ would show up to guard Bron? He'd crap his shorts, then resort to flopping as usual.

Jordan got blocked by Muggsy...

Thats not what i was talking about, you missed the point. Michael Jordan, in his prime, was not intimidated by anyone, or anything, on earth. LeBron is scared of many things, and many people. Mentally MJ is a killer, while Bron is a victim.

[KungFuJoe]

Michael Jordan and I honestly think that people that picked Lebron (or really anyone else) just wasn't around to see him when he actually played.

When he played, the question of "Who is the GOAT?" didn't even exist. No one asked it. It was like asking "Is water wet?". EVERYONE knew the answer was Michael Jordan. And they were saying this during his first threepeat.

You could simply take his on court achievements and he would be the clear cut goat just based on that. But when you add in all the other stuff...the flair, the style, the dunks, the airtime, the grace, the commercials, the baggy shorts, every kid wanting to be Like Mike....it just further separates him from the rest of the pack.

I can say that you simply weren't around to see older players than Jordan... how weak is this argument now?
Plenty of people had Kareem, Russell, Wilt or Bird over Jordan when he played.

"Plenty of people" is very subjective. I'm sure some people had them over Jordan just like some people have Kobe as GOAT, even though I think that's a ridiculous notion.

But, there's no denying that the general consensus back then was that Jordan was the GOAT and this was actually early in his career. Even after being proclaimed the GOAT, he went on to win even more championships.

And it really comes down to the fact that he's pretty untouchable...regarding almost every aspect of the game. You could take every criteria that makes someone great and Jordan is either at the top or undeniably the best. Almost any other potential GOAT, you could find some pretty glaring negatives to hold them back. Wilt/Lebron lost more than they won. Russell didn't score enough. Kareem wasn't the best player on some championship runs. Hakeem only won because Jordan retired. But Jordan doesn't have any...other than people that troll with 1-9 or that he wasn't a great 3 point shooter...as if that wasn't a part of the game like it is now. But even then, Jordan STILL set a Finals 3 point record of 6 in the first half...as if to say "just in case...let me do this one, too".

[In SVG We Trust]

Jordan played in one of the weakest eras ever. He's one of the GOATs for sure but he being clearly the best player on the planet during the 90s was due to the LOW quality guards and wings it was at that time.

[RB34]

I vote we merge all the GOAT threads and then sticky it!

[KungFuJoe]

Jordan played in one of the weakest eras ever. He's one of the GOATs for sure but he being clearly the best player on the planet during the 90s was due to the LOW quality guards and wings it was at that time.

The 80s and 90s are widely regarded as the BEST eras in the NBA.

[freethedevil]

Russel was playing in a time when guys were smoking at the half.

Jordan played against weaker talent and in expansion, He too is irrelevant.

/quote]

Wrong, Jordan played against comparable talent (maybe a bit less) but on the

Lol what? Forget expansion. The talent pool is significantly bigger now, and basketball is significantly more organized. If we can assume the 90's are>60's, assuming the 10's are>the 90's is frankly just common sense.

flip side carried one of the worst championship teams ever to 6 championships.

What? Jordans' teams were decent without him, that's not at all "one of the worst championship teams ever." Several of those teams, were significantly above average for a championsjip level cast. **** take, ngl.

super team

Cherrypicking talent at 1-3 doesn't really change that Lebron's cast ceased to have an argument for "Best in the league" after 2011. Furthermore, "talent" doesn't happen in a vaccum. Lebron's teammates can be better than jordan's, if the field of contenders has more talent, it renders that irrelevant. Fact of the matter is, k-love and kyrie's injuries during the 15 playoffs, bosh and wade's injuries from 12-14, and the warriors, thunder, and spurs emergence renders the "superteam" point moot. Maybe if I squint I can see 2012 as a "best cast in the league" kind of thing, but Lebron's casts were almost never as good relative to the rest of the league as Jordan's, as reflected both by how they fared without him, their health issues/drop of play in the playoffs, and how they compared to the other contenders around.

Also, this "supporting cast" thing really, really falls apart once we consider lebron had multiple seasons as the best in the league before he ever went to Miami. The 09 cavs, who lebron had the goat stastical playoffs with, destroyed the best defense in the league with, had arguably the goat stastical rs with, and carried to 67 wins, were the worst team in the league when Lebron didn't play. The same applies to the less impressive, but still ridiculous 61 win 10 cavs(the less impressive bit is largely because of lebron's elbow injiry).

The 09-10 cavs basically destroy any sort of supporting cast argument you can make for mj. And once you account for playoff health the other arguments fall aside rather quickly.

And we haven't even gotten into fit/coaching/organizational stability...

[LakerLegend]

Jordan played against weaker talent and in expansion, He too is irrelevant.

/quote]

Wrong, Jordan played against comparable talent (maybe a bit less) but on the

Lol what? Forget expansion. The talent pool is significantly bigger now, and basketball is significantly more organized. If we can assume the 90's are>60's, assuming the 10's are>the 90's is frankly just common sense.

flip side carried one of the worst championship teams ever to 6 championships.

What? Jordans' teams were decent without him, that's not at all "one of the worst championship teams ever." Several of those teams, were significantly above average for a championsjip level cast. **** take, ngl.

super team

. Fact of the matter is, k-love and kyrie's injuries during the 15 playoffs, bosh and wade's injuries from 12-14, and the warriors, thunder, and spurs emergence renders the "superteam" point moot.

No it doesn't. That's just LeBron and Wade not being as good as people thought they were.

[freethedevil]

This thread is so silly.

Yet you commented. Probably because your idol's been debunked.

Lebron is jordan+longetivty and kareem+peak

Jordan is

Russell with half the winning and accolades
Kareem with less winning
and
Lebron without longetivty.


Jordan is the bootleg version of all the other goat candidates. Lebron is the hybrid. One has a compelling case, the other's only works when you act like half of nba history didn't happen.

+ having gsw type of of success.

The bulls you mean?

A shame the bulls were never close to russell's celtics. Jordan didn't even win as much as Kareem.

I'm sorry you dont know history. Obsessesing over Lebron doesn't change that GOAT is an argument over everyone. He doesn't have the team success for russ/kareem, and he doesn't have the longetivty for Lebron.

Sorry to rain on your parade.

[freethedevil]

Vote, then post your explanation...

Where's russell lmao.

[freethedevil]

Jordan played in one of the weakest eras ever. He's one of the GOATs for sure but he being clearly the best player on the planet during the 90s was due to the LOW quality guards and wings it was at that time.

The 80s and 90s are widely regarded as the BEST eras in the NBA.

By nolstalgic fanboys yes.

[freethedevil]

Michael Jordan and I honestly think that people that picked Lebron (or really anyone else) just wasn't around to see him when he actually played..

How insecure must one be to resort to ad-hominem before even making an argument?


There's plenty of older ppl who have lebron>jordan.

Being uninformed really isn't an excuse for gatekeeping.

[freethedevil]

Really there are 5 players who have an argument (1 of which was omitted from the poll):
Wilt, MJ, LeBron, Kareem, Russell

Why does Wilt have an argument instead of KG, Duncan, Shaq, or Hakeem?

How can you have an argument when you're the clear second fiddle of your era?

[Joao Saraiva]

It depends on your criteria.
Guys with a fair shot given a fair criteria:

1. Bill Russell

They guy kept on winning while his cast changed a lot. He had absurd impact as a big and revolutionized the big guys' defense. He could score and was the major scorer for his team on more than one NBA finals. His ts% seems low, but in big times in the playoffs he was actually good. For example in the 62 finals vs Lakers he scored 22.9 PPG to lead the squad on 54.3 FG%. He also shot 46/62 at the FT line. So he was efficient. There are more examples on very good scoring series from him when it mattered the most.

Very good passer for a big man. 4.3 APG for a big man is a good number. His TRB% is among the best in history. Super elite.

An also very interesting fact is that the Celtics were a below average team on offense. So when you want to credit him for his defense you're absolutely right. Winning that much while being, as a team, below average on offense is almost impossible. I think this is one of biggest arguments, that his D was so great that his team won so much without even being average on offense.

Doesn't seem to have a black mark in his career like LBJ 11 vs Dallas, Kobe 04 or Tragic Johnson.

To sum it up: biggest winner of all time, great argument for GOAT defender and that defense having more impact than any offensive player ever had because it really made him win his entire career.

2. Wilt Chamberlain

It's still crazy to think about the things he did. So many crazy records like the 50 PPG season, the 100 point game, super elite rebounding numbers, super durability minute wise... he was literally super man.

And even if he didn't win as much... it can be argued that the Celtics had the better team. Stats wise, records wise, there is no one bigger than Wilt. He also delivered a ton of assists once people said all he could do was score. He proved later in his career he could be an elite defender. So you can say he dominated all aspects of the game.

To sum it up: unbreakable records, absurd durability, great athlete that might have ever walked the earth, dominated all aspects of the game even if not all at once.

3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Stupid good peak. Great longevity. More MVP awards than anyone else. 6 rings, so he was definitely a winner. If you want you can add that even before the NBA this guy was already a winner. Won FMVP with 14 years apart. That gives you a clue for how long he was a great player and winner.

To sum it up: more MVP awards. Greatest longevity at least so far. Winner for a big part of his career.

4. Michael Jordan

6 rings. Best scorer ever in the NBA. 6 FMVPs, 5 MVPs. You can argue he had the greatest peak of all time. Closest thing to Russell winning wise. Dominated as a wing when that had never been done before: all the other GOAT candidates until him were bigs. Lacks a bit of longevity, but does he really need it when in a relatively short career achieved as much or more than all the others? This is a question that has to be well thought, and there it goes it depends on your criteria.

He's also probably the guy who has no black mark in his career. At least nothing like Kobe 04 vs Pistons, LeBron 11 vs Dallas or Tragic Johnson. You get the point.

To sum it up: GOAT scorer. Won a lot even if he doesn't have the longevity of others. Won and dominated an era that wasn't supposed to be a wing era.

5. LeBron James

Coming up for the biggest longevity ever in the league and ready to knock KAJ. Most top 3 finishes ever in the MVP race. 4 MVPs, 3 FMVPs. Arguably the GOAT performance in the finals of all time (2016). Elite in all aspects of the game. Scoring wise he's up there and ready to take the most points ever in the NBA. Most assists by a non guard ever in the NBA. Best peak ever case (in my point of view against MJ, Wilt, Hakeem and Shaq). Has already a ton of records in the playoffs (most points, etc). He just hasn't won as much as Russell, KAJ or MJ. But Wilt didn't too and he is a GOAT candidate. However he seems to be the guy that is flawless from an individual point of view: has the peak, has the prime, has the longevity.

To sum it up: He might come up with the best combo available with peak, prime and longevity. He'll end up having a case for GOAT in all those. Dominated all aspects of the game and all at once like nobody ever done before. And for a long long time.

Any of them can be the legit GOAT. Outside those 5 with a fair criteria players might go up and down, but they don't end up as the GOAT.

[ThaRegul8r]

Now here's an original question.

Michael Jordan and I honestly think that people that picked Lebron (or really anyone else) just wasn't around to see him when he actually played.

When he played, the question of "Who is the GOAT?" didn't even exist.

This is true, but not for the reasons you gave.

The question "Who is the GOAT?" didn't even exist when Jordan played as a Bull because the acronym GOAT "didn't even exist" yet. "Goat" was short for "scapegoat," and was a bad thing (e.g., Bill Buckner, but I don't expect many people to get the reference) until the beginning of this century, when rapper LL Cool J released his eighth album, titled G.O.A.T.



He coined the acronym, then everyone started using it, and it became a part of popular culture. Before him, the term didn't exist, and a "goat" was a bad thing to be.

[freethedevil]

writing lengthly essay

You laugh at people ho can articulate their points?

Is that how you cope with the pain?

[freethedevil]

It depends on your criteria.
Guys with a fair shot given a fair criteria:

1. Bill Russell

They guy kept on winning while his cast changed a lot. He had absurd impact as a big and revolutionized the big guys' defense. He could score and was the major scorer for his team on more than one NBA finals. His ts% seems low, but in big times in the playoffs he was actually good. For example in the 62 finals vs Lakers he scored 22.9 PPG to lead the squad on 54.3 FG%. He also shot 46/62 at the FT line. So he was efficient. There are more examples on very good scoring series from him when it mattered the most.

Very good passer for a big man. 4.3 APG for a big man is a good number. His TRB% is among the best in history. Super elite.

An also very interesting fact is that the Celtics were a below average team on offense. So when you want to credit him for his defense you're absolutely right. Winning that much while being, as a team, below average on offense is almost impossible. I think this is one of biggest arguments, that his D was so great that his team won so much without even being average on offense.

Doesn't seem to have a black mark in his career like LBJ 11 vs Dallas, Kobe 04 or Tragic Johnson.

To sum it up: biggest winner of all time, great argument for GOAT defender and that defense having more impact than any offensive player ever had because it really made him win his entire career.

2. Wilt Chamberlain

It's still crazy to think about the things he did. So many crazy records like the 50 PPG season, the 100 point game, super elite rebounding numbers, super durability minute wise... he was literally super man.

And even if he didn't win as much... it can be argued that the Celtics had the better team. Stats wise, records wise, there is no one bigger than Wilt. He also delivered a ton of assists once people said all he could do was score. He proved later in his career he could be an elite defender. So you can say he dominated all aspects of the game.

To sum it up: unbreakable records, absurd durability, great athlete that might have ever walked the earth, dominated all aspects of the game even if not all at once.

3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Stupid good peak. Great longevity. More MVP awards than anyone else. 6 rings, so he was definitely a winner. If you want you can add that even before the NBA this guy was already a winner. Won FMVP with 14 years apart. That gives you a clue for how long he was a great player and winner.

To sum it up: more MVP awards. Greatest longevity at least so far. Winner for a big part of his career.

4. Michael Jordan

6 rings. Best scorer ever in the NBA. 6 FMVPs, 5 MVPs. You can argue he had the greatest peak of all time. Closest thing to Russell winning wise. Dominated as a wing when that had never been done before: all the other GOAT candidates until him were bigs. Lacks a bit of longevity, but does he really need it when in a relatively short career achieved as much or more than all the others? This is a question that has to be well thought, and there it goes it depends on your criteria.

He's also probably the guy who has no black mark in his career. At least nothing like Kobe 04 vs Pistons, LeBron 11 vs Dallas or Tragic Johnson. You get the point.

To sum it up: GOAT scorer. Won a lot even if he doesn't have the longevity of others. Won and dominated an era that wasn't supposed to be a wing era.

5. LeBron James

Coming up for the biggest longevity ever in the league and ready to knock KAJ. Most top 3 finishes ever in the MVP race. 4 MVPs, 3 FMVPs. Arguably the GOAT performance in the finals of all time (2016). Elite in all aspects of the game. Scoring wise he's up there and ready to take the most points ever in the NBA. Most assists by a non guard ever in the NBA. Best peak ever case (in my point of view against MJ, Wilt, Hakeem and Shaq). Has already a ton of records in the playoffs (most points, etc). He just hasn't won as much as Russell, KAJ or MJ. But Wilt didn't too and he is a GOAT candidate. However he seems to be the guy that is flawless from an individual point of view: has the peak, has the prime, has the longevity.

To sum it up: He might come up with the best combo available with peak, prime and longevity. He'll end up having a case for GOAT in all those. Dominated all aspects of the game and all at once like nobody ever done before. And for a long long time.

Any of them can be the legit GOAT. Outside those 5 with a fair criteria players might go up and down, but they don't end up as the GOAT.

Yeah, I'm not sure why Wilt would be above the "players might go up and down" thing, when KG and Duncan had similar peaks stastically with much better longetivty. Hakeem has the best peak case outside of lebron, mj, and shaq, and there's a long slew of greater winners.

[LesGrossman]

writing lengthly essay

You laugh at people ho can articulate their points?

Is that how you cope with the pain?

Calm down man. You have like five posts on one page...you ok? The world doesnt end if not everyone is a LeBron fanboy.

[Joao Saraiva]

It depends on your criteria.
Guys with a fair shot given a fair criteria:

1. Bill Russell

They guy kept on winning while his cast changed a lot. He had absurd impact as a big and revolutionized the big guys' defense. He could score and was the major scorer for his team on more than one NBA finals. His ts% seems low, but in big times in the playoffs he was actually good. For example in the 62 finals vs Lakers he scored 22.9 PPG to lead the squad on 54.3 FG%. He also shot 46/62 at the FT line. So he was efficient. There are more examples on very good scoring series from him when it mattered the most.

Very good passer for a big man. 4.3 APG for a big man is a good number. His TRB% is among the best in history. Super elite.

An also very interesting fact is that the Celtics were a below average team on offense. So when you want to credit him for his defense you're absolutely right. Winning that much while being, as a team, below average on offense is almost impossible. I think this is one of biggest arguments, that his D was so great that his team won so much without even being average on offense.

Doesn't seem to have a black mark in his career like LBJ 11 vs Dallas, Kobe 04 or Tragic Johnson.

To sum it up: biggest winner of all time, great argument for GOAT defender and that defense having more impact than any offensive player ever had because it really made him win his entire career.

2. Wilt Chamberlain

It's still crazy to think about the things he did. So many crazy records like the 50 PPG season, the 100 point game, super elite rebounding numbers, super durability minute wise... he was literally super man.

And even if he didn't win as much... it can be argued that the Celtics had the better team. Stats wise, records wise, there is no one bigger than Wilt. He also delivered a ton of assists once people said all he could do was score. He proved later in his career he could be an elite defender. So you can say he dominated all aspects of the game.

To sum it up: unbreakable records, absurd durability, great athlete that might have ever walked the earth, dominated all aspects of the game even if not all at once.

3. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar

Stupid good peak. Great longevity. More MVP awards than anyone else. 6 rings, so he was definitely a winner. If you want you can add that even before the NBA this guy was already a winner. Won FMVP with 14 years apart. That gives you a clue for how long he was a great player and winner.

To sum it up: more MVP awards. Greatest longevity at least so far. Winner for a big part of his career.

4. Michael Jordan

6 rings. Best scorer ever in the NBA. 6 FMVPs, 5 MVPs. You can argue he had the greatest peak of all time. Closest thing to Russell winning wise. Dominated as a wing when that had never been done before: all the other GOAT candidates until him were bigs. Lacks a bit of longevity, but does he really need it when in a relatively short career achieved as much or more than all the others? This is a question that has to be well thought, and there it goes it depends on your criteria.

He's also probably the guy who has no black mark in his career. At least nothing like Kobe 04 vs Pistons, LeBron 11 vs Dallas or Tragic Johnson. You get the point.

To sum it up: GOAT scorer. Won a lot even if he doesn't have the longevity of others. Won and dominated an era that wasn't supposed to be a wing era.

5. LeBron James

Coming up for the biggest longevity ever in the league and ready to knock KAJ. Most top 3 finishes ever in the MVP race. 4 MVPs, 3 FMVPs. Arguably the GOAT performance in the finals of all time (2016). Elite in all aspects of the game. Scoring wise he's up there and ready to take the most points ever in the NBA. Most assists by a non guard ever in the NBA. Best peak ever case (in my point of view against MJ, Wilt, Hakeem and Shaq). Has already a ton of records in the playoffs (most points, etc). He just hasn't won as much as Russell, KAJ or MJ. But Wilt didn't too and he is a GOAT candidate. However he seems to be the guy that is flawless from an individual point of view: has the peak, has the prime, has the longevity.

To sum it up: He might come up with the best combo available with peak, prime and longevity. He'll end up having a case for GOAT in all those. Dominated all aspects of the game and all at once like nobody ever done before. And for a long long time.

Any of them can be the legit GOAT. Outside those 5 with a fair criteria players might go up and down, but they don't end up as the GOAT.

Yeah, I'm not sure why Wilt would be above the "players might go up and down" thing, when KG and Duncan had similar peaks stastically with much better longetivty. Hakeem has the best peak case outside of lebron, mj, and shaq, and there's a long slew of greater winners.

Because unlike Wilt they don't provide stupid statistical outlier seasons. That's why. They didn't lead the league in scoring, FG%, minutes, hadn't crazy TRB% like Wilt... Should I carry on?

[KungFuJoe]

Michael Jordan and I honestly think that people that picked Lebron (or really anyone else) just wasn't around to see him when he actually played..

How insecure must one be to resort to ad-hominem before even making an argument?


There's plenty of older ppl who have lebron>jordan.

Being uninformed really isn't an excuse for gatekeeping.

Do you even know what ad hominem means? First of all, there's no dash in ad hominem. And second of all, if you had half a brain, I wouldn't need to explain this to you.

BTW...THAT was ad hominem.