MJ VS LEBRON VS WHOEVER THREAD

[freethedevil]

Sorry to rein on ur parade...but Jordan was even > than combining Lebron dominance individually + having gsw type of of success.

But I understand ur a Lebron fan

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.

MJ won 6 chips 6 finals mvp and the clear best player in his team.

So still a distant second best to Russell. If you have no issue with putting MJ over Russell, I don't see your issue with Lebron over MJ.

[Lala870]

Jokic > Bron or mj

[Dino353]

LeBron James, the speed,explosiveness,IQ,vision is surreal. Those rifle passes,unmatched acceleration to the hoop, and versatility godly.

[freethedevil]

/quote]

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.


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.

. 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.

Yes Lebron and an injured wade weren't as good as people thought. Acting like something didn't happen doesn't change that it did.

[JordansBulls]

Sorry to rein on ur parade...but Jordan was even > than combining Lebron dominance individually + having gsw type of of success.

But I understand ur a Lebron fan

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.

Kareem won 6 chips and less than half of that as finals MVP...in fact half of those chips I wouldn't say he was the main guy for lakers.

MJ won 6 chips 6 finals mvp and the clear best player in his team.

Russell was before my time....But I have no issue with ppl putting Russell as goat

Except Russell joined a team with the league mvp and ROY over him. Also was going 7 games and winning by 1 or 2 points vs a .500 win team or less. As well as only had to win 2 series for 8 titles and 3 series for 3 titles. No one else had that. From 1984 forward you had to win 4 series for a title.

[freethedevil]

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.

Kareem won 6 chips and less than half of that as finals MVP...in fact half of those chips I wouldn't say he was the main guy for lakers.

MJ won 6 chips 6 finals mvp and the clear best player in his team.

Russell was before my time....But I have no issue with ppl putting Russell as goat

Except Russell joined a team with the league mvp and ROY over him

RUssel's team was worse than .500 without him. Jordan's were contenders. Loooooooooooool

[JordansBulls]

Kareem won 6 chips and less than half of that as finals MVP...in fact half of those chips I wouldn't say he was the main guy for lakers.

MJ won 6 chips 6 finals mvp and the clear best player in his team.

Russell was before my time....But I have no issue with ppl putting Russell as goat

Except Russell joined a team with the league mvp and ROY over him

RUssel's team was worse than .500 without him. Jordan's were contenders. Loooooooooooool

Russell's team won 2 titles in 7 years after he retired and had guys who won league and/or finals mvp. Hondo for instance won finals mvp. Jordan's team's failed to even make the playoffs and took 7+ years to make the playoffs once he was gone.

[JordansBulls]

People like to talk about MJ like he was perfect because he went 6-0 in the Finals, but he was far from perfect in the 1996 and 1998 Finals, and he lost to a young Magic in the 2nd round in 1995. To me between what Lebron did in 2016 which tops anything MJ ever did in the playoffs, and his longevity, I have him over MJ. RINGZ aren't everything, if not Russell would be #1.

1. Lebron
2. MJ
3. Kareem
4. Wilt
5. Magic
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Olajuwon
10. Russell

I mean Lebron is good and all, but as soon as he went west he went from the finals all the time to missing the playoffs

Comparing player's 16th season who was **** by #14?

L.

If he were soo great how did he lose to Dwight Howard with HCA a guy who is considered a career loser? Or won 2 bronze medals in basketball?

[VanWest82]

People like to talk about MJ like he was perfect because he went 6-0 in the Finals, but he was far from perfect in the 1996 and 1998 Finals, and he lost to a young Magic in the 2nd round in 1995. To me between what Lebron did in 2016 which tops anything MJ ever did in the playoffs, and his longevity, I have him over MJ. RINGZ aren't everything, if not Russell would be #1.

1. Lebron
2. MJ
3. Kareem
4. Wilt
5. Magic
6. Bird
7. Shaq
8. Duncan
9. Olajuwon
10. Russell

I think Mike deserves criticism for partying like the Finals was over after they went up 3-0 on Sonics. It was disrespectful and took just a little bit of shine off the greatest team in NBA history because of it.

The 98 Finals and really that whole season, MJ was incredible. His stats sucked because he was running on fumes, and because Scottie's back was wrecked that year, Rodman was done, and they really didn't have much else. Jordan carried that team, refusing to let them lose. It was a lot like Lebron's first Warriors Finals, except Mike did it all year.

RINGZ aren't everything but when someone keeps winning over and over and over again, at some point it's not by accident. Mike won more than Lebron -- yes that matters. FWIW he also has an NCAA championship too. That never gets brought up with all the longevity stuff.

[nurseryc]

Michael Jordan........... with Lebron as a DISTANT second.

Here are MY reasons why Lebron is 2nd (you don't have to agree, but this is why MJ is #1 to me):

1) I only count 1 real ring (2016). The Heatles rings are like Durant's GSW rings. Heavy asterisks. Lebron couldn't get it done so he formed an all star team to win. GOAT? Nah. And even that team lost twice. They batted .500. If Lebron wins again this year, it'll have another asterisk. Run to the Lakers and get friggin Anthony Davis to join you? Bruh...he missed the playoffs last year.

2) Stats don't tell the whole story. Lebron's stats are very impressive. I think he's the 2nd best player of all time. However, ever since he joined the league, it was clear that Jordan (and to an extent, Kobe) were doing what they were doing based on SKILL. Lebron was mainly bulldozing over people. He couldn't shoot yet. But he was putting up impressive numbers. Watching the games, I always thought, well if Jordan had Lebron's body, he'd destroy even harder cuz of the skill. For nearly the first decade of Lebron's career, I wasn't impressed cuz he was just a bulldozer. Now I give him lots of respect cuz his skill started to match the hype.

3) 6 for 6 will always beat 3 for 9. Once Michael had a team good enough to go to the Finals, he got it done. Lebron had teams good enough to go to the Finals but has failed twice as much as he's won. And in my eyes, he's either 1 for 5 or 1+2* for 9. That's not better than Michael.

4) The Eastern conference Lebron had was weak sauce. He was playing on easy mode for most of his career. Which is probably why his Finals record sucks. Never should have made the Finals that often. In the Western Conference, he wouldn't have that many appearances.

When it's all said and done, Lebron will have some very impressive STATS. He might be a STAT goat in certain areas. But he's not the real GOAT.

That's Michael Jordan.




....and Lebron is #2 (still pretty damn good)

Best post I’ve ever read on realgm. I’ll be shocked if you don’t end up a moderator

[DirtyDez]

This ones tough. Jordan never beat a historic team in the Finals but also never got outscored by Jason Terry in a finals...

[Catchall]

MJ. He dominated his era like no other....well, other than Wilt. So Wilt second and then probably Lebron third.

[GeorgeMarcus]

He was the clear second fiddle both stastically over-time, in terms of accolades, and in terms of winning. His only argument vs russell is peak which is idientical to the argument shaq can make vs lebron or jordan(despite not being listed).

2nd fiddle statistically? Boy I'd love to hear that argument

Looking at overall play, the only real stat we have here is srs +/-. Looking at that, Russell has
-> more +6.5 seasons
-> more +6 seasons
-> more +5.5 seasons
-> more +5 seasons

and his peak was equal to wilt's.

If you want to simplify things and just look at it from a w-l perspective, Russell has won championships with teams that have won less without him than a couple of the laker teams Wilt has failed to win with. And Wilt's 6ers team was better without him than a couple of the teams Russell elevated far higher than any of wilt's.

THe only stastical approaches that favor wilt are entirely excluding defense or cherrypicking a specific part of the game. IOW, he doeesn't have a good argument against russell, stastically, or otherwise.

... No player in history even sniffs Wilt's statistical resume.

Lebron, Shaq, Jordan, and Hakeem all peaked higher looking at what we have available and Russell/KG/Curry/Bird/Kareem, and Ducan all have peaks that compare well statistically. You either have to delibarately use data that does an awful job(compariatively) of predicting winning or winning with roster turnover(iow, indiuvdial impact), and/or exlcude defense to make the argument. And even then, if you do that, Kareem still hard bodies wilt. Wilt has like zero stastical case for goat

Accolades? Again, no... Wilt cracked 1st team All-NBA 8 times compared to Russell's 3. Russell's 5 MVPS compared to Wilt's 4 is a reflection of the fact that Finals MVPs didn't exist at the time, so Finals performance was fused into the award.
/quote]
Russell had more mvp's and more importantly was literally voted GOAT. That should really ice the discussion. If you really do want to ignore that due to wilt's all-nba's, you should keep in mind that KG, Kareem, Kobe, Lebron all have more.

Literally by any sort of criterion, wilt was russ's second fiddle as an overall player.

You have to be pretty anti-Wilt (or maybe just uninformed?) to believe he doesn't have a case for GOAT.

You have to be pretty anti-duncan, anti-kg, and anti-Hakeem to believe they don't have cases for GOAT.

See how easy that is?

SRS +/- ? Idk what that is... We have plenty of data at our disposal so calling it the only "real" stat was a serious red flag out of the gate. There's no such thing as a reliable stand alone stat in any era.

The rest of your post was void of statistical evidence, despite saying things like "looking at what we have available" and "literally by any sort of criterion". The first is so nondescript that I can't respond to it while the second is patently and demonstrably untrue. Without even trying, we know Wilt averaged twice as many point on much better efficiency, more rebounds, more assists, and is believed to be the all-time blocks leader (which wasn't recorded at the time). He blows Russell out of the water in PER and WS, which personally I don't care about but there's more criterion to thwart your assertion. Is there even one metric in Russell's favor besides team wins? FYI Wilt is considered a top 3-5 defender of all time with a compelling argument for GOAT defensive peak.

Another part of your post that got me: "Russell had more mvp's and was literally voted the GOAT." Literally voted the GOAT by who? I have no idea what you're referencing or why I would take that into account.

You're fooling yourself if you really believe Wilt doesn't have an argument... The good news is, you're not fooling me.

[70sFan]

2nd fiddle statistically? Boy I'd love to hear that argument

Looking at overall play, the only real stat we have here is srs +/-. Looking at that, Russell has
-> more +6.5 seasons
-> more +6 seasons
-> more +5.5 seasons
-> more +5 seasons

and his peak was equal to wilt's.

If you want to simplify things and just look at it from a w-l perspective, Russell has won championships with teams that have won less without him than a couple of the laker teams Wilt has failed to win with. And Wilt's 6ers team was better without him than a couple of the teams Russell elevated far higher than any of wilt's.

THe only stastical approaches that favor wilt are entirely excluding defense or cherrypicking a specific part of the game. IOW, he doeesn't have a good argument against russell, stastically, or otherwise.

... No player in history even sniffs Wilt's statistical resume.

Lebron, Shaq, Jordan, and Hakeem all peaked higher looking at what we have available and Russell/KG/Curry/Bird/Kareem, and Ducan all have peaks that compare well statistically. You either have to delibarately use data that does an awful job(compariatively) of predicting winning or winning with roster turnover(iow, indiuvdial impact), and/or exlcude defense to make the argument. And even then, if you do that, Kareem still hard bodies wilt. Wilt has like zero stastical case for goat

Accolades? Again, no... Wilt cracked 1st team All-NBA 8 times compared to Russell's 3. Russell's 5 MVPS compared to Wilt's 4 is a reflection of the fact that Finals MVPs didn't exist at the time, so Finals performance was fused into the award.
/quote]
Russell had more mvp's and more importantly was literally voted GOAT. That should really ice the discussion. If you really do want to ignore that due to wilt's all-nba's, you should keep in mind that KG, Kareem, Kobe, Lebron all have more.

Literally by any sort of criterion, wilt was russ's second fiddle as an overall player.

You have to be pretty anti-Wilt (or maybe just uninformed?) to believe he doesn't have a case for GOAT.

You have to be pretty anti-duncan, anti-kg, and anti-Hakeem to believe they don't have cases for GOAT.

See how easy that is?

SRS +/- ? Idk what that is... We have plenty of data at our disposal so calling it the only "real" stat was a serious red flag out of the gate. There's no such thing as a reliable stand alone stat in any era.

The rest of your post was void of statistical evidence, despite saying things like "looking at what we have available" and "literally by any sort of criterion". The first is so nondescript that I can't respond to it while the second is patently and demonstrably untrue. Without even trying, we know Wilt averaged twice as many point on much better efficiency, more rebounds, more assists, and is believed to be the all-time blocks leader (which wasn't recorded at the time). He blows Russell out of the water in PER and WS, which personally I don't care about but there's more criterion to thwart your assertion. Is there even one metric in Russell's favor besides team wins? FYI Wilt is considered a top 3-5 defender of all time with a compelling argument for GOAT defensive peak.

Another part of your post that got me: "Russell had more mvp's and was literally voted the GOAT." Literally voted the GOAT by who? I have no idea what you're referencing or why I would take that into account.

You're fooling yourself if you really believe Wilt doesn't have an argument... The good news is, you're not fooling me.

I don't understand how Russell fans can be so critical to Wilt (and vice versa). If you are high on one of them, you have to be high on the other. They are as close as possible throughout their careers and they had the biggest rivaly in NBA history. Russell is the first man who'd tell you how amazing Wilt was and Bill knew game better than any of us. He would tell you that Wilt never was clear second fiddle.

Personally, I have Russell over Wilt. That doesn't mean that Chamberlain doesn't have a case for GOAT. Both have, it all depends on criteria.

[70sFan]

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".

Are we talking about the best player ever or the best scorer? Or player with most rings as the best player?


I can name plenty of aspects of game that Jordan never approached the best level.

Jordan is mediocre playmaker compared to Magic or James.
Jordan is not close to top 20 defensive player ever, his defense is not even close to Russell's.
Jordan has weak longevity compared to other GOAT candidates.
Jordan won only in one system with Jackson and Pippen, he never proved that he was multidimensional like James, Wilt or Kareem.
Jordan was prick as a teammate, unlike Russell or Duncan.
Jordan retired three times during his career, which makes him less impactful overall.
Jordan is below average rebounder compared to other GOAT candidates.
Jordan is not close to Russell in terms of rings and rings as the best player.
Jordan is not close to the leading NBA scorer - Kareem.

I can name more of these silly arguments, but the reality is that Jordan is not untouchable and all these weaknesses others have you mentioned are not important. Who cares that Russell didn't score a lot, he definitely scored enough when he won 11 rings.

Russell is perfect test for MJ fans because he has similar longevity, won more, was overall more impactful, was better teammate and had better intangibles - that's supposed to be MJ arguments. MJ fans decide then talking about "ppg" or "weak era".

[iggymcfrack]

LeBron

-Best individual peak (2009)
-Best team impact season (2016)
-Incredible longevity (best player in the league in 8 different seasons, top 5 in 14 different seasons)
-Best combination of skills (Top 5 all-time scorer, top 5-10 all-time passer, Top 10 all-time perimeter defender)

[iggymcfrack]

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".

Are we talking about the best player ever or the best scorer? Or player with most rings as the best player?


I can name plenty of aspects of game that Jordan never approached the best level.

Jordan is mediocre playmaker compared to Magic or James.
Jordan is not close to top 20 defensive player ever, his defense is not even close to Russell's.
Jordan has weak longevity compared to other GOAT candidates.
Jordan won only in one system with Jackson and Pippen, he never proved that he was multidimensional like James, Wilt or Kareem.
Jordan was prick as a teammate, unlike Russell or Duncan.
Jordan retired three times during his career, which makes him less impactful overall.
Jordan is below average rebounder compared to other GOAT candidates.
Jordan is not close to Russell in terms of rings and rings as the best player.
Jordan is not close to the leading NBA scorer - Kareem.

I can name more of these silly arguments, but the reality is that Jordan is not untouchable and all these weaknesses others have you mentioned are not important. Who cares that Russell didn't score a lot, he definitely scored enough when he won 11 rings.

Russell is perfect test for MJ fans because he has similar longevity, won more, was overall more impactful, was better teammate and had better intangibles - that's supposed to be MJ arguments. MJ fans decide then talking about "ppg" or "weak era".

Jordan’s not my GOAT, but I don’t get how you can say he’s “not close to top 20 defensive player”. He has a pretty good case as the best defensive guard of all-time. In the recent project here for best defender by position, he was the top shooting guard. Even if your top 20 is 19 big guys plus Scottie Pippen, he at least has to be “close”, right?

[70sFan]

LeBron

-Best individual peak (2009)

Arguable.

-Best team impact season (2016)

Arguable.

-Incredible longevity (best player in the league in 8 different seasons, top 5 in 14 different seasons)

I agree.

-Best combination of skills (Top 5 all-time scorer, top 5-10 all-time passer, Top 10 all-time perimeter defender)

Well, Wilt is top 10 all-time scorer, top 5 all-time big passer and top 10 all-time defender and top 5 all-time rebounder. It sounds even better than James.

[70sFan]

"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".

Are we talking about the best player ever or the best scorer? Or player with most rings as the best player?


I can name plenty of aspects of game that Jordan never approached the best level.

Jordan is mediocre playmaker compared to Magic or James.
Jordan is not close to top 20 defensive player ever, his defense is not even close to Russell's.
Jordan has weak longevity compared to other GOAT candidates.
Jordan won only in one system with Jackson and Pippen, he never proved that he was multidimensional like James, Wilt or Kareem.
Jordan was prick as a teammate, unlike Russell or Duncan.
Jordan retired three times during his career, which makes him less impactful overall.
Jordan is below average rebounder compared to other GOAT candidates.
Jordan is not close to Russell in terms of rings and rings as the best player.
Jordan is not close to the leading NBA scorer - Kareem.

I can name more of these silly arguments, but the reality is that Jordan is not untouchable and all these weaknesses others have you mentioned are not important. Who cares that Russell didn't score a lot, he definitely scored enough when he won 11 rings.

Russell is perfect test for MJ fans because he has similar longevity, won more, was overall more impactful, was better teammate and had better intangibles - that's supposed to be MJ arguments. MJ fans decide then talking about "ppg" or "weak era".

Jordan’s not my GOAT, but I don’t get how you can say he’s “not close to top 20 defensive player”. He has a pretty good case as the best defensive guard of all-time. In the recent project here for best defender by position, he was the top shooting guard. Even if your top 20 is 19 big guys plus Scottie Pippen, he at least has to be “close”, right?

No, he's not close to top 20. Who would you exchange with Jordan?

Bill Russell
Wilt Chamberlain
Nate Thurmond
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
Artis Gilmore
Dave Cowens
Wes Unseld
Elvin Hayes
Robert Parish
Marc Eaton
Hakeem Olajuwon
Patrick Ewing
David Robinson
Alonzo Mourning
Dikembe Mutombo
Tim Duncan
Kevin Garnett
Ben Wallace
Dwight Howard
Marc Gasol
Rudy Gobert

That's only bigs, then you have:

Dave DeBusschere
Bobby Jones
Dennis Rodman
Scottie Pippen
Ron Artest
Andre Iguodala
and a few others better forwards than him. Jordan is definitely top 20 perimeter defender ever, but he's not close to top 20 overall.

[iggymcfrack]

LeBron

-Best individual peak (2009)

Arguable.

-Best team impact season (2016)

Arguable.

-Incredible longevity (best player in the league in 8 different seasons, top 5 in 14 different seasons)

I agree.

-Best combination of skills (Top 5 all-time scorer, top 5-10 all-time passer, Top 10 all-time perimeter defender)

Well, Wilt is top 10 all-time scorer, top 5 all-time big passer and top 10 all-time defender and top 5 all-time rebounder. It sounds even better than James.

I guess I kinda include rebounding in other skills rather than making it its own category. I’d have LeBron as a better scorer than Wilt, I’d have his passing as roughly equal to Wilt’s defense, and I’d have his defense significantly ahead of Wilt’s passing. So I would have LeBron’s skills as better, but I can definitely see the argument for Wilt on pure skill and I’d agree they’re close.

Where Wilt really struggles though is his success in postseason matchups against good teams. A lot of his prime seasons, the only good team he saw in the the postseason would be Russell’s Celtics.