Did MJ really go against tougher competition?

[DingleJerry]

people act like penny hardaway-pg/sg, grant hil-sf, latrell sprewell-sg, mitch ritchmond-sg, clyde drexer-sg, scottie pippen-sf/sg, never existed. They had some pretty athletic wings back then as well infact alot of the current shooting guards are no more athletic than the shooting guards I listed.the top shooting guards outside of victor oladipo and andrew wiggins, are really not all that athletic. james harden, klay thompson, cj mccollum, j.hoilday are not more athletic than any of the sg or wings I listed. I can list role players like vernon maxwell aka mad max whose athletisism and speed was similar to victor oladipo. with his skillset he would be more than a role player in this era. there are even more guys I could list that werent allstars at the time. yes the athleticism has went up but it mostly with the big men but that doesnt really matter because at the end skill usually outweighs athleticism.well in basketball it does. just ask steph or jokic alot of these athletic guys people are drooling over cant even stay on the floor

IDK why this is getting rehashed but seriously go back and look at the rosters of playoff teams back then. In some other thread I listed out the starting Gs and guys who would've guarded him for teams he played in the finals and this held true. Really Drexler was the only one. And again, those were Finals opponents so imagine how the non playoff teams looked.

For sure you're not wrong that some guys existed in this size/athleticism combo. Each team probably even had one, but not several per team like now. To act like there was as many then as now is just wrong. There's multiple guys on every team now in this size range that play on the wing and have athleticism as opposed to playing as 'bigs'.

I agree its more athletism now but its over exaggerated to the point of being laughable because alot of guys dont even get playing time because of the short rotations teams run. and you said that he didnt face any athletic guards in the finals but I can name a few that he faced during the regular season and torched them pretty easily.

Size/Athleticism combo was the thing though. So take say a Byron Scott for the LAL in the first finals, 6'3. Payton for Seattle, 6'3/4 type. PHX had Johnson who's too short or Majerle who lacks athleticism. Utah had Russell but then white guys 64 or less. Whereas take Boston this playoffs, they start 3 guys in this size/athleticism range, then have Morris off the bench too. Then probably two guys who don't even play.

It's kinda like MJ started the trend and it trickled down since everyone wanted to be like Mike. I would agree it might be a generally overblown thing to act like guys 25 years ago aren't even in the same planet as now. I'm just saying there has become a trend for large/tall athletic wings the last 20 years and there is now more than there was back then.

[Hal14]

IDK why this is getting rehashed but seriously go back and look at the rosters of playoff teams back then. In some other thread I listed out the starting Gs and guys who would've guarded him for teams he played in the finals and this held true. Really Drexler was the only one. And again, those were Finals opponents so imagine how the non playoff teams looked.

For sure you're not wrong that some guys existed in this size/athleticism combo. Each team probably even had one, but not several per team like now. To act like there was as many then as now is just wrong. There's multiple guys on every team now in this size range that play on the wing and have athleticism as opposed to playing as 'bigs'.

I agree its more athletism now but its over exaggerated to the point of being laughable because alot of guys dont even get playing time because of the short rotations teams run. and you said that he didnt face any athletic guards in the finals but I can name a few that he faced during the regular season and torched them pretty easily.

Size/Athleticism combo was the thing though. So take say a Byron Scott for the LAL in the first finals, 6'3. Payton for Seattle, 6'3/4 type. PHX had Johnson who's too short or Majerle who lacks athleticism. Utah had Russell but then white guys 64 or less. Whereas take Boston this playoffs, they start 3 guys in this size/athleticism range, then have Morris off the bench too. Then probably two guys who don't even play.

It's kinda like MJ started the trend and it trickled down since everyone wanted to be like Mike. I would agree it might be a generally overblown thing to act like guys 25 years ago aren't even in the same planet as now. I'm just saying there has become a trend for large/tall athletic wings the last 20 years and there is now more than there was back then.

Larger and more athletic doesn't necessarily mean better.

[DingleJerry]

I agree its more athletism now but its over exaggerated to the point of being laughable because alot of guys dont even get playing time because of the short rotations teams run. and you said that he didnt face any athletic guards in the finals but I can name a few that he faced during the regular season and torched them pretty easily.

Size/Athleticism combo was the thing though. So take say a Byron Scott for the LAL in the first finals, 6'3. Payton for Seattle, 6'3/4 type. PHX had Johnson who's too short or Majerle who lacks athleticism. Utah had Russell but then white guys 64 or less. Whereas take Boston this playoffs, they start 3 guys in this size/athleticism range, then have Morris off the bench too. Then probably two guys who don't even play.

It's kinda like MJ started the trend and it trickled down since everyone wanted to be like Mike. I would agree it might be a generally overblown thing to act like guys 25 years ago aren't even in the same planet as now. I'm just saying there has become a trend for large/tall athletic wings the last 20 years and there is now more than there was back then.

Larger and more athletic doesn't necessarily mean better.

well good thing we were talking about larger and athletic then weren't we haha.

That said, if you really think the overall talent in 1995ish is on par with today you're just crazy. It's probably even more glaring if you specify down to wing/G talent

[Hal14]

Size/Athleticism combo was the thing though. So take say a Byron Scott for the LAL in the first finals, 6'3. Payton for Seattle, 6'3/4 type. PHX had Johnson who's too short or Majerle who lacks athleticism. Utah had Russell but then white guys 64 or less. Whereas take Boston this playoffs, they start 3 guys in this size/athleticism range, then have Morris off the bench too. Then probably two guys who don't even play.

It's kinda like MJ started the trend and it trickled down since everyone wanted to be like Mike. I would agree it might be a generally overblown thing to act like guys 25 years ago aren't even in the same planet as now. I'm just saying there has become a trend for large/tall athletic wings the last 20 years and there is now more than there was back then.

Larger and more athletic doesn't necessarily mean better.

well good thing we were talking about larger and athletic then weren't we haha.

That said, if you really think the overall talent in 1995ish is on par with today you're just crazy. It's probably even more glaring if you specify down to wing/G talent

I made a pretty convincing argument to the contrary on page 28 of this thread..and also check out the video JCool0 posted on page 28 if you're still not convinced..

[Capn'O]

Aha, another MJ Vs. LeBron thread. I think next perhaps I'll make a thread asking how many titles OKC would have won if they didn't trade Harden.

Every thread is, in fact, a proxy MJ vs. LeBron thread. You can't avoid it.

Oh? You have a question about whether Jokic stacks up to the centers of the 90s? Clearly an effort to prop up MJ by downplaying Jokic in order to sweep the Bulls' poor record vs. Hakeem's Rockets under the rug.

[DingleJerry]

Larger and more athletic doesn't necessarily mean better.

well good thing we were talking about larger and athletic then weren't we haha.

That said, if you really think the overall talent in 1995ish is on par with today you're just crazy. It's probably even more glaring if you specify down to wing/G talent

I made a pretty convincing argument to the contrary on page 28 of this thread..

you thought listing players back then was a convincing argument? As if one couldn't list players now just as easily. Frankly there is no clear cut convincing way for either side of the argument to make. There is no factual way to prove one way or the other. It's pure eye test.

I suppose best you could do is compile a bunch of data on height, verticals, shuttle times, etc but that data doesn't exist that long ago. then somehow look at FT and 3pt % but yea there is really no way

[freethedevil]

Lebron's literally played arguably just as well as mj vs a much better team in the warriors the last three seasons. It's **** hilarious using the fact that jordan won to dismiss that and then ignore that bill russel's won twce as many rings, made twice as many finals and would have twice as much of everything if the awards existed at the time because there were less teams and talent(even though there were less teams and talent in mj's time than lebron's)...

Jordan' being the goat is based on extreme cherrypicking. Lebron's peak regular season, playoff runs, and final can stand up to any of jordan's best. Kareem and Bill Russel both unquestionably had more team success. And Kareem and lebron have more mvp's and all star selections respectively.

Jordan cannot stand up to Lebron or Kareem's playoff or regular season longeitivity and he can't stand up to russel or kareem's winning. His case is honestly the weakest of the 4.

[Hal14]

well good thing we were talking about larger and athletic then weren't we haha.

That said, if you really think the overall talent in 1995ish is on par with today you're just crazy. It's probably even more glaring if you specify down to wing/G talent

I made a pretty convincing argument to the contrary on page 28 of this thread..

you thought listing players back then was a convincing argument? As if one couldn't list players now just as easily. Frankly there is no clear cut convincing way for either side of the argument to make. There is no factual way to prove one way or the other. It's pure eye test.

I suppose best you could do is compile a bunch of data on height, verticals, shuttle times, etc but that data doesn't exist that long ago. then somehow look at FT and 3pt % but yea there is really no way

You might want to re-read my post. I did a lot more than simply list players. The players I listed are all hall of famers..except for a few that are borderline hall of famers. It could have been much longer and was still a much longer list than the number of hall of famers/borderline hall of famers LeBron has gone against.

Also, you might want to check out the video that JCool0 posted on page 28 if you're still not convinced.

[Ben Simmons]

The toughest competition in NBA history was when Michael Jordan played for the Washington Wizards, because the NBA allowed zone defense while still allowing hand-checking
And Jordan still led the NBA in 40-point games in the 2001-02 season despite only playing 60 games.

[trueballer7]

Lebron's literally played arguably just as well as mj vs a much better team in the warriors the last three seasons. It's **** hilarious using the fact that jordan won to dismiss that and then ignore that bill russel's won twce as many rings, made twice as many finals and would have twice as much of everything if the awards existed at the time because there were less teams and talent(even though there were less teams and talent in mj's time than lebron's)...

Jordan' being the goat is based on extreme cherrypicking. Lebron's peak regular season, playoff runs, and final can stand up to any of jordan's best. Kareem and Bill Russel both unquestionably had more team success. And Kareem and lebron have more mvp's and all star selections respectively.

Jordan cannot stand up to Lebron or Kareem's playoff or regular season longeitivity and he can't stand up to russel or kareem's winning. His case is honestly the weakest of the 4.

Honestly I think Jordan has a weak case for top 30. I can think of at least 30 other players that played more years than he did.

[JonFromVA]

Comparing players across eras is pointless, but something you didn't mention was that the talent pool in the 90's was much smaller and the league having recently gone through expansion was watered down.

Until the 2008 Celtics, the general goal of the NBA was to find a superstar somehow, add an all-star and go win championships.

[lamscott]

Laimbeer and Mahorn are laughing at you guys downplaying Jordan.

[kulaz3000]

Lebron's literally played arguably just as well as mj vs a much better team in the warriors the last three seasons. It's **** hilarious using the fact that jordan won to dismiss that and then ignore that bill russel's won twce as many rings, made twice as many finals and would have twice as much of everything if the awards existed at the time because there were less teams and talent(even though there were less teams and talent in mj's time than lebron's)...

I'm not a fan of those that argue that Jordan never faced a dominate team like the Warriors, whereas, LeBron did, as some sort of argument in favour Lebron over Jordan. It's almost like it's a black mark against Jordan's legacy, that during his prime, that his team WAS THE DOMINATE team everyone was gunning for, and yet he stayed on top of the mountain for as long as he did. You should be favoured to win if you're the best player in the league.

That said, they are both great.

[RCM88x]

I definitely think the average team was weaker in the 90s due to expansion, I think that's pretty much a fact. Combined with rules that favored physical big men over skilled perimeter guys probably hurt the overall quality of the league too, from the late 80s to the mid 00s. A person of average physical statue is just able to have more impact in the game now than historically, which I think has certianly raised the talent level in the league. Especially when finite skills like shooting and passing are more valuable now, compared to the late 90s and early 00s which was more about strength and size, which are not thing that can be coached or practiced, atleast compared to shooting or ball handling.

However, I don't really like to consider these things when evaluating players unless it's an egregious situation. What matters is how you play vs you competition, not so much theoretical comparisons.

[tondi123]

Lebron's literally played arguably just as well as mj vs a much better team in the warriors the last three seasons. It's **** hilarious using the fact that jordan won to dismiss that and then ignore that bill russel's won twce as many rings, made twice as many finals and would have twice as much of everything if the awards existed at the time because there were less teams and talent(even though there were less teams and talent in mj's time than lebron's)...

Jordan' being the goat is based on extreme cherrypicking. Lebron's peak regular season, playoff runs, and final can stand up to any of jordan's best. Kareem and Bill Russel both unquestionably had more team success. And Kareem and lebron have more mvp's and all star selections respectively.

Jordan cannot stand up to Lebron or Kareem's playoff or regular season longeitivity and he can't stand up to russel or kareem's winning. His case is honestly the weakest of the 4.

Honestly I think Jordan has a weak case for top 30. I can think of at least 30 other players that played more years than he did.

Its pretty obvious that he should have never even been a starter on those Bulls teams. Good thing we have all these really smart Lebron fans, who I'm sure saw MJ play in tons of games, to remind us just how pathetic he was.

[fansinceforever]

No, of course not.

[HEAT33]

MJ would be about as good as DeRozan. Same type of player

[dho4ever]

He didn't have a rival or an obstacle in the 90s.
Russell Had Wilt
Magic had Bird
Lebron had the Spurs and the Warriors

[TheGOATRises007]

MJ would be about as good as DeRozan. Same type of player

https://www.basketball-reference.com/playoffs/1992-nba-eastern-conference-first-round-heat-vs-bulls.html

Probably still has nightmares over MJ did to the Heat in '92.

[nymets1]

Today's NBA players are definetly better than MJ'S era. Jordan would have a tough time if he was guarded by guys like Kawhi, Lebron, Durant, Giannis. Other guys like PJ Tucker, Marcus Smart, etc