Jordan v Lebron - A civilised conversation

[DQuinn1575]

So you can find statistics that will support either player.
But i think Jordan had a roster that could win a championship every year starting in 1990. They didn’t win in 90, but Pippen was an all-star and going into the season they were a title contender. They had the roster to win, and also did in 95. You can always find reasons, but basically in a position to win Jordan was 6 for 8.

LeBron had a roster good enough to win starting in 2007. He doesn’t in 2019, and with AD’s injury i won’t count 2021. By this count i get 13 chances, so he’s 4 for 13.

You can say it’s not about the rings, but MJ has the hasn’t won a championship talk until he won. And then once he won anything less was a disappointment.

[falcolombardi]

So you can find statistics that will support either player.
But i think Jordan had a roster that could win a championship every year starting in 1990. They didn’t win in 90, but Pippen was an all-star and going into the season they were a title contender. They had the roster to win, and also did in 95. You can always find reasons, but basically in a position to win Jordan was 6 for 8.

LeBron had a roster good enough to win starting in 2007. He doesn’t in 2019, and with AD’s injury i won’t count 2021. By this count i get 13 chances, so he’s 4 for 13.

You can say it’s not about the rings, but MJ has the hasn’t won a championship talk until he won. And then once he won anything less was a disappointment.

i am getting that your litmus test for "good enough" to compete is having a second all star or better level teammate?

cause in that case lebron didnt have one in 2007,2008, 2009,2010,2015* (he had but lost them in the finals),2018,2019 and considering davis injury, not 2021 either

you would have to be very high on mo Williams or Anderson varejao to consider them comparable to pippen or horace grant

and if i dig deeper 2017 was against a much, much (much) better team than any jordan ever beat for example, the only team approacing that level jordan ever faced (86 celtics) swept him

[Owly]

So you can find statistics that will support either player.
But i think Jordan had a roster that could win a championship every year starting in 1990. They didn’t win in 90, but Pippen was an all-star and going into the season they were a title contender. They had the roster to win, and also did in 95. You can always find reasons, but basically in a position to win Jordan was 6 for 8.

LeBron had a roster good enough to win starting in 2007. He doesn’t in 2019, and with AD’s injury i won’t count 2021. By this count i get 13 chances, so he’s 4 for 13.

You can say it’s not about the rings, but MJ has the hasn’t won a championship talk until he won. And then once he won anything less was a disappointment.

i am getting that your litmus test for "good enough" to compete is having a second all star or better level teammate?

cause in that case lebron didnt have one in 2007,2008, 2009,2010,2015* (he had but lost them in the finals),2018,2019 and considering davis injury, not 2021 either

you would have to be very high on mo Williams or Anderson varejao to consider them comparable to pippen or horace grant

and if i dig deeper 2017 was against a much, much (much) better team than any jordan ever beat for example, the only team approacing that level jordan ever faced (86 celtics) swept him

The "out of ..." line of reasoning also seems to imply that it's better to retire (with supporting cast good enough to win with) than to play really well but be on a team that does not ultimately win a title with a cast that a particular person might consider good enough to win with ...

[Stalwart]

So you can find statistics that will support either player.
But i think Jordan had a roster that could win a championship every year starting in 1990. They didn’t win in 90, but Pippen was an all-star and going into the season they were a title contender. They had the roster to win, and also did in 95. You can always find reasons, but basically in a position to win Jordan was 6 for 8.

LeBron had a roster good enough to win starting in 2007. He doesn’t in 2019, and with AD’s injury i won’t count 2021. By this count i get 13 chances, so he’s 4 for 13.

You can say it’s not about the rings, but MJ has the hasn’t won a championship talk until he won. And then once he won anything less was a disappointment.

i am getting that your litmus test for "good enough" to compete is having a second all star or better level teammate?

cause in that case lebron didnt have one in 2007,2008, 2009,2010,2015* (he had but lost them in the finals),2018,2019 and considering davis injury, not 2021 either

you would have to be very high on mo Williams or Anderson varejao to consider them comparable to pippen or horace grant

and if i dig deeper 2017 was against a much, much (much) better team than any jordan ever beat for example, the only team approacing that level jordan ever faced (86 celtics) swept him

The "out of ..." line of reasoning also seems to imply that it's better to retire (with supporting cast good enough to win with) than to play really well but be on a team that does not ultimately win a title with a cast that a particular person might consider good enough to win with ...

I think its better to have a higher win percentage plus a higher win total. Jordan played 6 full seasons with a championship level roster and he won every time. You can't get any better than that.

[falcolombardi]

championship level roster is relative to a lot of thinghs such as health and competition faced a team good enough to beat 2016 warriors may not be good enough ti beat 2017 warriors for very obvious reasons

the 98 bulls were good enough to win in 98 but would lose to the 2017 warriors

the 1990 bulls were good enough to win, quite literally since they almost did (they most likely beat portland in finals) get past pistons, and so were the 95 bulls

the 2015 cavs were good enough to win if healthy but not in the actual finals after their injuries

lebron still has some black marks like 2011 finals of course, and is perfectly valid to prefer jordan over him

but reducing it to "jordan always won except the times he didnt which dont count" and apply thst logic only to him is disingenous

if we are gonna be absolutist and use finals record or total rings, etc then be consistent with that.

if we are gonna excuse certain circunstances like jordan 95 season being coming back from retirement then be consistent and apply it to 2015 cavs injuries or 2021 lakers injuries too

[Stalwart]

Im just referring to championship level rosters. Jordan had 6 of them. He won everytime.

He played 11 full prime seasons total and won over 50% of the time.

Lebron lost in 2011, 2014, & 2017 with championship level rosters.

Lebron has played something like 17 full healthy seasons and only won 3 legitimate titles so far for a 17% winning pct.

I think its better to have a higher win pct and a higher win total. In fact its really tough to beat that no matter how you slice it.

[sansterre]

Im just referring to championship level rosters. Jordan had 6 of them. He won everytime.

He played 11 full prime seasons total and won over 50% of the time.

Lebron lost in 2011, 2014, & 2017 with championship level rosters.

Lebron has played something like 17 full healthy seasons and only won 3 legitimate titles so far for a 17% winning pct.

I think its better to have a higher win pct and a higher win total. In fact its really tough to beat that no matter how you slice it.

Bill Walton has a 100% win rate for all the seasons he was healthy in the playoffs (2/2).

And I think it's easy to argue that '95 was a championship level roster for Jordan.

[DQuinn1575]

So you can find statistics that will support either player.
But i think Jordan had a roster that could win a championship every year starting in 1990. They didn’t win in 90, but Pippen was an all-star and going into the season they were a title contender. They had the roster to win, and also did in 95. You can always find reasons, but basically in a position to win Jordan was 6 for 8.

LeBron had a roster good enough to win starting in 2007. He doesn’t in 2019, and with AD’s injury i won’t count 2021. By this count i get 13 chances, so he’s 4 for 13.

You can say it’s not about the rings, but MJ has the hasn’t won a championship talk until he won. And then once he won anything less was a disappointment.

i am getting that your litmus test for "good enough" to compete is having a second all star or better level teammate?

cause in that case lebron didnt have one in 2007,2008, 2009,2010,2015* (he had but lost them in the finals),2018,2019 and considering davis injury, not 2021 either

you would have to be very high on mo Williams or Anderson varejao to consider them comparable to pippen or horace grant

and if i dig deeper 2017 was against a much, much (much) better team than any jordan ever beat for example, the only team approacing that level jordan ever faced (86 celtics) swept him

So this is the team that Jordan won with in 1991:


Scottie Pippen, a 1x all-star in his 3rd year as a regular
Horace Grant, in his 3rd year as a regular
Bill Cartwright, who was a sub at the Knicks, in his 3rd yr as Bulls regular.
John Paxson, who was in his 3rd year as a regular.

The subs were B.J. Armstrong, Craig Hodges, and Will Perdue - none played 20 mpg in the playoffs and none
had played regular minutes in the last few years.

So one all-star level player, 3 guys who played regularly in the league.


Cleveland in 2010 had

Mo Williams, a 1x all-star who had been a regular for 5 yrs prior
Antwan Jamison, a 2x former all-star (05 and 08) who was a long-time regular
Anthony Parker - 3 yrs prior as a regular
Delonte West - 4 yrs prior as a regular
Anderson Varejaeo - 2 yrs prior as regular
Shaq - who was real old, but still had much better block %, rebound %, and shooting % than Cartwright.

So two all-star level players, and 4 guys who played regularly in the league (counting Shaq there).


I have a hard time saying that the 2010 Cleveland team isn't a roster that could win a championship.

[sansterre]

Cleveland in 2010 had

Mo Williams, a 1x all-star who had been a regular for 5 yrs prior
Antwan Jamison, a 2x former all-star (05 and 08) who was a long-time regular
Anthony Parker - 3 yrs prior as a regular
Delonte West - 4 yrs prior as a regular
Anderson Varejaeo - 2 yrs prior as regular
Shaq - who was real old, but still had much better block %, rebound %, and shooting % than Cartwright.

So two all-star level players, and 4 guys who played regularly in the league (counting Shaq there).


I have a hard time saying that the 2010 Cleveland team isn't a roster that could win a championship.

More or less the same roster (minus LeBron) won 19 games the next year. There were injuries . . . but I feel like if we take a team's best player away and they're a sub-25 win team, that probably isn't a "championship-capable supporting cast" in any meaningful way.

And I'll stipulate to the fact that they *could* have won a championship, the same way the Suns made the Finals in 76, the Heat made the Finals in 20, the Heat won the Finals in 06, the Rockets made the Finals in 81 . . . the entry requirement to teams that *could* have won the Finals is pretty low. It may not be the most reasonable standard.

[Owly]

i am getting that your litmus test for "good enough" to compete is having a second all star or better level teammate?

cause in that case lebron didnt have one in 2007,2008, 2009,2010,2015* (he had but lost them in the finals),2018,2019 and considering davis injury, not 2021 either

you would have to be very high on mo Williams or Anderson varejao to consider them comparable to pippen or horace grant

and if i dig deeper 2017 was against a much, much (much) better team than any jordan ever beat for example, the only team approacing that level jordan ever faced (86 celtics) swept him

The "out of ..." line of reasoning also seems to imply that it's better to retire (with supporting cast good enough to win with) than to play really well but be on a team that does not ultimately win a title with a cast that a particular person might consider good enough to win with ...

I think its better to have a higher win percentage plus a higher win total. Jordan played 6 full seasons with a championship level roster and he won every time. You can't get any better than that.

Leaving aside that it's a super crude measure of individual players (and the cast level required will be arbitrary and as outlined here, even those on the same side won't agree what constitutes and opponent levels will differ etc)

My post regarded the problem with "out of ..." measures, and your quote response is "have both", which rather misses the point. Bill Russell is not worse because he didn't retire in 1966, but his percentage is. MJ not risking loss on his CV in '94 isn't a benefit to his basketball career, or to the Bulls, but to percentage it would probably be (is, in your case as there is no potential upside). Players who are on teams that win in their first window year do neither themselves, their teams nor basketball a service by quitting immediately (nor players winning in their 2nd year if they don't think their team a better than 50% chance before the season starts).

[Stalwart]

Im just referring to championship level rosters. Jordan had 6 of them. He won everytime.

He played 11 full prime seasons total and won over 50% of the time.

Lebron lost in 2011, 2014, & 2017 with championship level rosters.

Lebron has played something like 17 full healthy seasons and only won 3 legitimate titles so far for a 17% winning pct.

I think its better to have a higher win pct and a higher win total. In fact its really tough to beat that no matter how you slice it.

Bill Walton has a 100% win rate for all the seasons he was healthy in the playoffs (2/2).

And I think it's easy to argue that '95 was a championship level roster for Jordan.

Jordan only played 17 games that season tho. Pretty hard to count that one. You'd almost have to be desperate to do something like that.

[sansterre]

Im just referring to championship level rosters. Jordan had 6 of them. He won everytime.

He played 11 full prime seasons total and won over 50% of the time.

Lebron lost in 2011, 2014, & 2017 with championship level rosters.

Lebron has played something like 17 full healthy seasons and only won 3 legitimate titles so far for a 17% winning pct.

I think its better to have a higher win pct and a higher win total. In fact its really tough to beat that no matter how you slice it.

Bill Walton has a 100% win rate for all the seasons he was healthy in the playoffs (2/2).

And I think it's easy to argue that '95 was a championship level roster for Jordan.

Jordan only played 17 games that season tho. Pretty hard to count that one. You'd almost have to be desperate to do something like that.

So your position is that it was a championship level roster. But that Jordan is what brought it down. But we shouldn't count that because of the circumstances?

[falcolombardi]

mo Williams was an all star as a injury replacement from a team rewarded by their 66 win team, the fact he didnt make the original all star despite cavs dominant record is not a great indictment of him as being a championship sidekick level player

he never played what is usually considered all star level of play before or after (or during) the 2009 season

are we gonna seriously compare him to scottie pippen?

[Stalwart]

The "out of ..." line of reasoning also seems to imply that it's better to retire (with supporting cast good enough to win with) than to play really well but be on a team that does not ultimately win a title with a cast that a particular person might consider good enough to win with ...

I think its better to have a higher win percentage plus a higher win total. Jordan played 6 full seasons with a championship level roster and he won every time. You can't get any better than that.

Leaving aside that it's a super crude measure of individual players (and the cast level required will be arbitrary and as outlined here, even those on the same side won't agree what constitutes and opponent levels will differ etc)

My post regarded the problem with "out of ..." measures, and your quote response is "have both", which rather misses the point. Bill Russell is not worse because he didn't retire in 1966, but his percentage is. MJ not risking loss on his CV in '94 isn't a benefit to his basketball career, or to the Bulls, but to percentage it would probably be (is, in your case as there is no potential upside). Players who are on teams that win in their first window year do neither themselves, their teams nor basketball a service by quitting immediately (nor players winning in their 2nd year if they don't think their team a better than 50% chance before the season starts).

The problem with this argument is that you're speculating and dealing with hypotheticals. We don't know what would have happened had Jordan not retired or played more years. All we know is when he stepped on the court he won everytime.

Also, if you want to discount winning pct then look at winning totals. Lebron doesn't just have a lower win pct he has a lower total. So even jordan played more years and lowered his pct he still has a higher win total. He's got him beat no matter how you sparse it.

[Stalwart]

Bill Walton has a 100% win rate for all the seasons he was healthy in the playoffs (2/2).

And I think it's easy to argue that '95 was a championship level roster for Jordan.

Jordan only played 17 games that season tho. Pretty hard to count that one. You'd almost have to be desperate to do something like that.

So your position is that it was a championship level roster. But that Jordan is what brought it down. But we shouldn't count that because of the circumstances?

Those are only championship level rosters when you add Jordan into the mix. Jordan only played 17 games that season. He didn't lower anything.

[sansterre]

Jordan only played 17 games that season tho. Pretty hard to count that one. You'd almost have to be desperate to do something like that.

So your position is that it was a championship level roster. But that Jordan is what brought it down. But we shouldn't count that because of the circumstances?

Those are only championship level rosters when you add Jordan into the mix. Jordan only played 17 games that season. He didn't lower anything.

So prime Jordan would have made that team championship level.
But '95 Jordan wasn't capable of playing at that level, so they weren't championship level.

... sounds like '95 Jordan not being at prime Jordan's level was the problem . . . right?

[falcolombardi]

Jordan only played 17 games that season tho. Pretty hard to count that one. You'd almost have to be desperate to do something like that.

So your position is that it was a championship level roster. But that Jordan is what brought it down. But we shouldn't count that because of the circumstances?

Those are only championship level rosters when you add Jordan into the mix. Jordan only played 17 games that season. He didn't lower anything.

practically all championship rosters or championship level rosters in history are only so when including their best player

none of lebron championship teams or contender teams is one without him either

hell, the only team that i would call a contender without their best player may be 2017 warriors and they probably lose to cavs if they were missing either of their mvps

[Stalwart]

So your position is that it was a championship level roster. But that Jordan is what brought it down. But we shouldn't count that because of the circumstances?

Those are only championship level rosters when you add Jordan into the mix. Jordan only played 17 games that season. He didn't lower anything.

So prime Jordan would have made that team championship level.
But '95 Jordan wasn't capable of playing at that level, so they weren't championship level.

... sounds like '95 Jordan not being at prime Jordan's level was the problem . . . right?

Jordan was coming off a 2 year layoff and wasn't himself. Everybody understands this. You have to be pretty desperate to hold that against him. But go ahead. Guess what? He still has a higher win pct and win total than Lebron so what's your point?

[Stalwart]

So your position is that it was a championship level roster. But that Jordan is what brought it down. But we shouldn't count that because of the circumstances?

Those are only championship level rosters when you add Jordan into the mix. Jordan only played 17 games that season. He didn't lower anything.

practically all championship rosters or championship level rosters in history are only so when including their best player

none of lebron championship teams or contender teams is one without him either

hell, the only team that i would call a contender without their best player may be 2017 warriors and they probably lose to cavs if they were missing either of their mvps

2011 Miami Heat

[falcolombardi]

Those are only championship level rosters when you add Jordan into the mix. Jordan only played 17 games that season. He didn't lower anything.

So prime Jordan would have made that team championship level.
But '95 Jordan wasn't capable of playing at that level, so they weren't championship level.

... sounds like '95 Jordan not being at prime Jordan's level was the problem . . . right?

Jordan was coming off a 2 year layoff and wasn't himself. Everybody understands this. You have to be pretty desperate to hold that against him. But go ahead. Guess what? He still has a higher win pct and win total than Lebron so what's your point?

there are two issues here

1 is that "won more rings" is not a irrefutable argument you are treating it as

2 is that you apply the reasonable disclaimers only on jordan side but dont accept it when lebron or his teams were unhealthy which is a lot more often than most realize