Is there a reasonable argument that MJ was actually better at basketball than LeBron?

[DrCoach]

MJ is the most fierce competittor the gama has ever seen and he kept at least 15 HOFers from a ring

[MavsDirk41]

MJ better scorer,
LeBron is a better passer , rebounder, and defender, (while being close as a scorer)

James isnt a better defender than Jordan. Not sure where people get that

they're both elite defensively. What leads you to definitively saying one is better than the other?

Did you read my post? I said James isnt a better defender than Jordan was lol

Read the post next time before popping off

[ScrantonBulls]

James isnt a better defender than Jordan. Not sure where people get that

they're both elite defensively. What leads you to definitively saying one is better than the other?

Did you read my post? I said James isnt a better defender than Jordan was lol

Read the post next time before popping off

Yes, you're definitively saying one is better than the other on defense... Which part of that confused you? Read it slowly this time.

[MavsDirk41]

they're both elite defensively. What leads you to definitively saying one is better than the other?

Did you read my post? I said James isnt a better defender than Jordan was lol

Read the post next time before popping off

Yes, you're definitively saying one is better than the other on defense... Which part of that confused you? Read it slowly this time.

I said James isnt a better defender than Jordan…where did i say one is better….come on my little bff taj ftw….tell me where i said one is better….read it slowly kid

[NZB2323]

they're both elite defensively. What leads you to definitively saying one is better than the other?

Did you read my post? I said James isnt a better defender than Jordan was lol

Read the post next time before popping off

Yes, you're definitively saying one is better than the other on defense... Which part of that confused you? Read it slowly this time.

No, he’s saying Lebron isn’t better than Jordan at defense. That’s not the same thing as saying Jordan is better at defense than LeBron. For example:

“4 quarters isn’t greater than 1 dollar,” is a true statement and doesn’t mean that 1 dollar is greater than 4 quarters.

[IG2]

First of all, Hornacek was a better player and a better fit than Jeff Malone.

I agree, but his presence alone doesn't explain a near 10 game difference. Not when the team's 3 best players are all hitting their mid 30's and the rest of the roster is just fringe role players. This is clearly a boost from the ongoing talent dilution the league went through in the mid to late 90's.

That’s one game

There are a lot of games in the '97 and '98 Finals where Utah's play makes you wonder how they made it that far. And I'm sorry, if you can't beat a team at home whose 2nd best player is basically not there and MJ's running on fumes, then I'll always consider you frauds. There's a reason why they were perennial playoff choke artists prior to '97. Then snuck through once the other greats got old and the league lacked other great players below 30 beyond Shaq, who had no #2 on his Lakers.

They were not even remotely the same team the next year. Like look at the 2011 Cavaliers and think about how many games were actually played by guys who were major players on the 2010 Cavaliers.

Besides LeBron, 5 of Cleveland's Top 8 guys in MPG in 2010 were still on the team in 2011. That also includes the 4 highest guys in MPG after LeBron. They lost Shaq, Big Z and West. Both Shaq and Big Z retired after 2011, so you can't tell me they would've been of any use on the 2011 Cavs (they weren't in 2010 either, tbh). The only player of any significance they lost was West, who they replaced with an equivalent player in Sessions.

Now, there's this huge myth that most of the team's top guys were injured and that would explain their league-worst record. Except Cleveland already had far and away the worst record in the league long before those injuries struck. Let's look at their top 6 MPG guys and when they started missing games. Mo Williams didn't start missing games until Jan 19, by which point Cleveland had an 8-33 record. Jamison didn't start missing games until March 4, when they were 12-49. 8-25 when Varejao went down. The other 3 guys - Parker/Gibson/Hickson - played most of the season.

Bottom line: They had majority of the roster from the prior season intact before injuries/tanking took over and still had the worst record in the league. This is why people remember 2009 and 2010 as GOAT floor raising seasons as opposed to LeBron somehow blowing it. It just wasn't a championship level roster and the sole reason anybody thought differently was LeBron, who was just so good from 09-13 that he would've led pretty much any roster to a great regular season record.

You’re crazy if you think LeBron would’ve gotten as much criticism if the Cavs hadn’t been major title favorites the prior two years. That’s a huge part of the reason him “joining 2 other stars” was seen so negatively.

Dude, you're just grasping at straws here to paint this bogus narrative of LeBron ditching some great situation in Cleveland. NOBODY saw it like that. Nobody. The criticism was entirely due to WHO he joined and HOW he did it.

[NZB2323]

You have clips of Rodman guarding Jordan at times, but his primary defender was Dumars. Dumars was 6'3" and gave up a ton of size and strength to Jordan. Sorry if I'm not too impressed.

Paul Pierce is a tougher man defender to go up against than Dumars to be honest with you. He's 6'6", deceptively quick, and strong as hell. Also the type of guy that is allowed to get away with a ton of contact. With KG backing him up. LOL, you're really trying to use the Celtics as an example of a team that had weak defense?

It's not really close man, the Suns were using 6'1" Kevin Johnson on Jordan for crying out loud, because the apparently all-defensive Dan Majerle moved like his feet were stuck in cement and KJ was the only one with any hope of staying in front of Jordan.

The fact that A. Majerle made All-Defense, and B. KJ was the only one that could stay in front of Jordan really tells you how freaking weak perimeter defense was at the time. EVERY team now (at least every good one) has a 6'5-6'8 wing that is strong and athletic and can actually somewhat keep up with other great athletes, even freaks like Jordan and LeBron. And Majerle would be a defensive liability. A wing that has no lateral quickness and couldn't stay in front of an opposing wing with any sort of consistency making All-Defense is wild lol.

Another rubbish post by you as you
Know nothing about Dumars. Tony Allen was pretty short too by your logic he wasn’t as good as Paul pierce defensively

https://youtu.be/jI5rtKQD9GE?si=A98fbuYzbvQfFuZx

Tony Allen was 6'5, not that small.

But yes, I think a 6'6 forward who had quick enough feet to stay in front of you and was strong as an ox, and was as savvy as they come, is a tougher defensive matchup than a 6'3 guard who, to his credit, is also strong, quick, and smart as hell. But size matters.

Where are you getting these numbers from?

Tony Allen is 6’4”.
Gary Payton is 6’4”.
Joe Dumars is 6’3”.
Marcus Smart is 6’3”.

Paul Pierce is 3 inches shorter than LeBron, just like how Joe Dumars is 3 inches shorter than Jordan. Dennis Rodman is 3 inches taller than Jordan.

Paul Pierce never made an all-defensive team, but somehow Paul Pierce in the twilight of his career was this great defensive player.

[therealbig3]

Another rubbish post by you as you
Know nothing about Dumars. Tony Allen was pretty short too by your logic he wasn’t as good as Paul pierce defensively

https://youtu.be/jI5rtKQD9GE?si=A98fbuYzbvQfFuZx

Tony Allen was 6'5, not that small.

But yes, I think a 6'6 forward who had quick enough feet to stay in front of you and was strong as an ox, and was as savvy as they come, is a tougher defensive matchup than a 6'3 guard who, to his credit, is also strong, quick, and smart as hell. But size matters.

Where are you getting these numbers from?

Tony Allen is 6’4”.
Gary Payton is 6’4”.
Joe Dumars is 6’3”.
Marcus Smart is 6’3”.

Paul Pierce is 3 inches shorter than LeBron, just like how Joe Dumars is 3 inches shorter than Jordan. Dennis Rodman is 3 inches taller than Jordan.

Paul Pierce never made an all-defensive team, but somehow Paul Pierce in the twilight of his career was this great defensive player.

IDK why you keep bringing up Marcus Smart.

On BBR, Pierce is listed 6'7" and James is listed 6'9". From memory, pretty sure Pierce was listed 6'6 when he entered the league and LeBron was listed 6'8, and that they added an inch to both of their listed heights recently, since they like to exaggerate heights.

[NZB2323]

Tony Allen was 6'5, not that small.

But yes, I think a 6'6 forward who had quick enough feet to stay in front of you and was strong as an ox, and was as savvy as they come, is a tougher defensive matchup than a 6'3 guard who, to his credit, is also strong, quick, and smart as hell. But size matters.

Where are you getting these numbers from?

Tony Allen is 6’4”.
Gary Payton is 6’4”.
Joe Dumars is 6’3”.
Marcus Smart is 6’3”.

Paul Pierce is 3 inches shorter than LeBron, just like how Joe Dumars is 3 inches shorter than Jordan. Dennis Rodman is 3 inches taller than Jordan.

Paul Pierce never made an all-defensive team, but somehow Paul Pierce in the twilight of his career was this great defensive player.

IDK why you keep bringing up Marcus Smart.

On BBR, Pierce is listed 6'7" and James is listed 6'9". From memory, pretty sure Pierce was listed 6'6 when he entered the league and LeBron was listed 6'8, and that they added an inch to both of their listed heights recently, since they like to exaggerate heights.

Marcus Smart won DPOTY, in large part because he could switch onto bigger players and guard them well despite being shorter.

Would the Celtics be better off if they had Paul Pierce guarding Kyrie instead of White and Holiday?

[lessthanjake]

First of all, Hornacek was a better player and a better fit than Jeff Malone.

I agree, but his presence alone doesn't explain a near 10 game difference. Not when the team's 3 best players are all hitting their mid 30's and the rest of the roster is just fringe role players. This is clearly a boost from the ongoing talent dilution the league went through in the mid to late 90's.

A better 3rd-best-player that fits better with the team can make a big difference. And again, the role players were also very different, and having better and/or better fitting role players is absolutely the type of thing that would elevate a team a good bit. If this sort of thing wasn’t the case, then the best players in NBA history would just always be winning 60+ games every season anytime they had a good #2 player, but they actually don’t and it largely has to do with this sort of roster construction stuff.

That’s one game

There are a lot of games in the '97 and '98 Finals where Utah's play makes you wonder how they made it that far. And I'm sorry, if you can't beat a team at home whose 2nd best player is basically not there and MJ's running on fumes, then I'll always consider you frauds. There's a reason why they were perennial playoff choke artists prior to '97. Then snuck through once the other greats got old and the league lacked other great players below 30 beyond Shaq, who had no #2 on his Lakers.

You’re just avoiding giving credit to Jordan. Jordan rescued the Bulls when they were in a bad situation in 1998, and the whole premise of this discussion was someone saying that Jordan winning the title in 1998 was really impressive. And you basically said it wasn’t impressive because the Jazz weren’t very good. And your reasoning for why the Jazz weren’t very good is that…Jordan was able to rescue the Bulls from them. It’s basically a tautological argument. You’re essentially saying that what Jordan did wasn’t impressive because he was able to do it. I think most people reject that tautological sort of argument, and don’t tend to judge teams too harshly for Michael Jordan being able to barely get the better of them.

They were not even remotely the same team the next year. Like look at the 2011 Cavaliers and think about how many games were actually played by guys who were major players on the 2010 Cavaliers.

Besides LeBron, 5 of Cleveland's Top 8 guys in MPG in 2010 were still on the team in 2011. That also includes the 4 highest guys in MPG after LeBron. They lost Shaq, Big Z and West. Both Shaq and Big Z retired after 2011, so you can't tell me they would've been of any use on the 2011 Cavs (they weren't in 2010 either, tbh). The only player of any significance they lost was West, who they replaced with an equivalent player in Sessions.

Now, there's this huge myth that most of the team's top guys were injured and that would explain their league-worst record. Except Cleveland already had far and away the worst record in the league long before those injuries struck. Let's look at their top 6 MPG guys and when they started missing games. Mo Williams didn't start missing games until Jan 19, by which point Cleveland had an 8-33 record. Jamison didn't start missing games until March 4, when they were 12-49. 8-25 when Varejao went down. The other 3 guys - Parker/Gibson/Hickson - played most of the season.

Bottom line: They had majority of the roster from the prior season intact before injuries/tanking took over and still had the worst record in the league. This is why people remember 2009 and 2010 as GOAT floor raising seasons as opposed to LeBron somehow blowing it. It just wasn't a championship level roster and the sole reason anybody thought differently was LeBron, who was just so good from 09-13 that he would've led pretty much any roster to a great regular season record.

What about Mike Brown? The coach that had a huge hand in making them the great defense that they were? Was he there in 2011? Nope. And was the team ever doing anything but tanking? No, not really. A team that loses its best player and then also loses three of its other major rotation players and doesn’t really do much of anything to replace them is not trying to win a title. And when players know their team isn’t really trying to win, they don’t try as hard. It’s really not a mystery how this happens. That’s especially the case when the roster had been constructed around the guy who left—obviously a roster specifically constructed to work well with a heliocentric star is not going to work so well out of the box without a heliocentric guy there anymore. And again, the players know that and that leads to not trying as hard because they know the team isn’t aimed at succeeding anymore (and indeed that the organization itself probably doesn’t even want them to win games). It’s really not mutually exclusive for the 2009 and 2010 Cavs to have been a good supporting cast that was well capable of winning a title with LeBron and for the 2011 Cavs to have been very bad when they no longer had the star player the team was tailored around, no longer had multiple other significant roster pieces, no longer had the coach that had been a huge part of making them a great defensive team, and had every indication from the organization that they were not really wanting to contend. The idea that those are mutually exclusive is just bizarre to me.

You’re crazy if you think LeBron would’ve gotten as much criticism if the Cavs hadn’t been major title favorites the prior two years. That’s a huge part of the reason him “joining 2 other stars” was seen so negatively.

Dude, you're just grasping at straws here to paint this bogus narrative of LeBron ditching some great situation in Cleveland. NOBODY saw it like that. Nobody. The criticism was entirely due to WHO he joined and HOW he did it.

People absolutely did see it as LeBron leaving a situation as a title contender in Cleveland to go to an easier situation. I heard it constantly at the time (and was defending LeBron at the time!). So I can just tell you first-hand that people definitely did see it like that. And it was ultimately a fair thing for people to think. He was objectively on a major title contender, and he left that major title contender to play on a team that was universally thought to be even more stacked (including by LeBron himself, who famously suggested they’d win tons of titles).

[Slimjimzv]

Did you read my post? I said James isnt a better defender than Jordan was lol

Read the post next time before popping off

Yes, you're definitively saying one is better than the other on defense... Which part of that confused you? Read it slowly this time.

I said James isnt a better defender than Jordan…where did i say one is better….come on my little bff taj ftw….tell me where i said one is better….read it slowly kid

In fairness, in the post before the quoted post, you said Jordan was a better offensive and defensive player. This thread is so long though, that I'm too lazy to go quote it.

[mulamutti]

I always find it strange that people are so fiercely invested in another man's place in history, especially in comparison to other men. Why can't it be as simple as both of them are amongst the absolute greatest, in the same echelon of greatness?

exactly. the absurdity of these goat debates, is you literally take 2-3 people out of billions, who were the absolute best at something, and then denigrate one in relation to the other. if you instead compared those 2-3 as a collective against 1000s of peers (let alone billions) you will see the positive, awe-inspring and the inspirational, instead of the minuscule negatives.

[The Explorer]

I don't see Jordan's advantage on defense at all, outside of accolades.

He's been a poor defender for several years in his career. His teammates even had to push him to get in the right position. He offers very little on the defensive end for the past several seasons. Also around 75-80%% of his defensive rebounds are uncontested (tracking began in 2015), which for his size, is underwhelming.

I don't see Jordan's advantage on defense at all, outside of accolades. I think LeBron could do everything Jordan could do but better, just given his size and strength and overall defensive versatility. I also think LeBron played a crucial role especially on the Cavs and Heat and Cavs again in terms of quarterbacking the defense, probably in large part due to seeing what KG did for the Celtics. I've seen him consistently predict what the offense was trying to do and blow it up time and time again. Directing teammates to where they need to be, calling out when they need to switch and when they need to stay on their man, and then often times taking on the toughest defensive assignment himself and shutting them down. I never really saw that with Jordan, I think he was a great individual defender who tended to gamble a lot, but had defensive personnel around him that could cover for it. I don't think he really approached what LeBron did as far as team defense and actually being the anchor for the team. LeBron's playoff teams pretty consistently fell off hard defensively whenever he went to the bench. When Jordan left in the 90s, the Bulls were still a dominant defense and didn't really miss him in that regard. Without really having time to find an adequate replacement either.

+/- metrics over the years paint LeBron as one of the greatest perimeter defenders of all time.

James never lead the league in steals even once, let alone 3 times like MJ did. MJ achieved more than 2 spg in 10 seasons, Lebron only once achieved that. It's clear as day that Jordan had some of the best hands in NBA history.

Jordan also was a better shot blocker. He had 2 seasons in which he had 200 steals and 100 blocks, Lebron never did that despite being taller and bigger. And MJ achieved 1.5 bpg in 2 separate seasons, Lebron never did that either. Jordan is the only SG to have multiple 100 block seasons. Lebron is not even top 20 in his position to have 100 block seasons. What makes it even for impressive for Jordan was he did so while playing all 82 games in both of those seasons, he didn't take games off which would have helped preserve his stats. He blocked shots in basically any scenario - in transition, on the ball, putbacks, off-ball help. Also had a higher motor and more consistent than James, even in his later years.

Steals and blocks are not everything on defense, but it's clear his disruption caused great havoc on opposing offenses. There was less need for the Bulls bigs to protect the paint when Jordan was shutting them down on the perimeter.

[C64]

The real comparison should probably be between Kobe and LeBron, it's a darn shame that Kobe isn't in this discussion more. Jordan was better than both of them ... not by much ... but, Jordan was the best ever.

[ScrantonBulls]

The real comparison should probably be between Kobe and LeBron, it's a darn shame that Kobe isn't in this discussion more. Jordan was better than both of them ... not by much ... but, Jordan was the best ever.

No it shouldnt. Jordan was quite clearly better than Kobe. LeBron was also clearly better than Kobe. It isn't particularly close. Both are in another stratosphere than Kobe.

[madmaxmedia]

I always find it strange that people are so fiercely invested in another man's place in history, especially in comparison to other men. Why can't it be as simple as both of them are amongst the absolute greatest, in the same echelon of greatness?

Allow me to introduce you to http://nobodytouchesjordan.blogspot.com

(I think MJ was the GOAT, but haven't gone very deeply into that web site.)

[G35]

Arguments for LeBron:

Highest box and non-box statistical peak in a much, much more internationally competitive and sophisticated era against superior athletes and teams who actually mathematically understand how to play basketball

Far superior versatility and longevity


"Arguments" for MJ:

Romanticized sociopathy

Scored a lot of points (on worse efficiency even adjusted for era) on impossibly stacked teams against Kurt Rambis and John Stockton with the greatest coach ever while sticking his tongue out and being "feared"


I have no doubt whatsoever that Kawhi could have three-peated twice in MJ's situation.

The only metric that matters at who is better at basketball is winning. Whatever you do on the court, does it translate to winning.

How well does your team perform at the highest levels, the hardest opponents.

Anything else is just talking about manipulated numbers.....

[alebaba]

Jordan is like Curry, you can put him up with any superstars and they will mesh. He doesn't need a big that can shoot to win games.

[KembaWalker]

Arguments for LeBron:

Highest box and non-box statistical peak in a much, much more internationally competitive and sophisticated era against superior athletes and teams who actually mathematically understand how to play basketball

Far superior versatility and longevity


"Arguments" for MJ:

Romanticized sociopathy

Scored a lot of points (on worse efficiency even adjusted for era) on impossibly stacked teams against Kurt Rambis and John Stockton with the greatest coach ever while sticking his tongue out and being "feared"


I have no doubt whatsoever that Kawhi could have three-peated twice in MJ's situation.

The only metric that matters at who is better at basketball is winning. Whatever you do on the court, does it translate to winning.

How well does your team perform at the highest levels, the hardest opponents.

Anything else is just talking about manipulated numbers.....

Kawhi Leonard can’t even make it to the playoffs in 1 piece, how’s he gonna 3 peat lol. He’s closer to Scottie that MJ had to drag through the second 3peat

[stoo]

whatever. Bird and KAJ are the goats