What impact metrics show MJ as a GOAT candidate?

[AEnigma]

Its not about added value or latest Lebrons failures but about how much more (or less) Lebron fanboys are now in this board.

Or how few people refuse to progress from what they thought in 1998.

25 years later and your analysis of the sport has not changed at all.

[CzBoobie]

I have no idea where you get that from. Show me someone in this thread arguing that MJ is not in GOAT tier. But apparently anyone arguing in favor of LBJ are now anti-MJ people making up fantasies...nice.

It's interesting that you see it only as hostility on one side. The other is always perfectly reasonable I guess.

Post #7 appearently no impact metric shows him as GOAT candidate.

Since mj-topics tend to boil over, i'd like to preface this with a request that we all try our best to be nice to each other

Now, to jump into the deep end...

Do any?

My short answer is no.

1. That's not the whole post...it's like 1/40 of the post.
2. Nothing in the post indicates that he thinks MJ is not a GOAT tier player.
3. Even if this was somehow his position, it's ONE poster, not "half of the board"

[Dutchball97]

I have no idea where you get that from. Show me someone in this thread arguing that MJ is not in GOAT tier. But apparently anyone arguing in favor of LBJ are now anti-MJ people making up fantasies...nice.

It's interesting that you see it only as hostility on one side. The other is always perfectly reasonable I guess.

Post #7 appearently no impact metric shows him as GOAT candidate.

Since mj-topics tend to boil over, i'd like to preface this with a request that we all try our best to be nice to each other

Now, to jump into the deep end...

My short answer is no.

1. That's not the whole post...it's like 1/40 of the post.
2. Nothing in the post indicates that he thinks MJ is not a GOAT tier player.
3. Even if this was somehow his position, it's ONE poster, not "half of the board"

1. It's still in the post though and there's nothing in the other 39/40 that gives a different spin on it.
2. OhayoKD says only box metrics show Jordan as having GOAT tier impact, a group of metrics OhayoKD believes to be near useless. Nothing indicates he does see Jordan as a GOAT tier player.
3. There is a very dedicated group of people that +1 a lot of these anti-Jordan posts and join in on the conversation whenever possible. It's very possible a bunch of them are just LeBron fans who enjoy anything negative about Jordan but otherwise they do seem to be very agreeable with talk putting Jordan outside the GOAT conversation.

[twyzted]

I have no idea where you get that from. Show me someone[/b[in this thread arguing that MJ is not in GOAT tier. But apparently anyone arguing in favor of LBJ are now anti-MJ people making up fantasies...nice.

It's interesting that you see it only as hostility on one side. The other is always perfectly reasonable I guess.

Post #7 appearently no impact metric shows him as GOAT candidate.

Since mj-topics tend to boil over, i'd like to preface this with a request that we all try our best to be nice to each other

Now, to jump into the deep end...

My short answer is [b]no.

1. That's not the whole post...it's like 1/40 of the post.
2. Nothing in the post indicates that he thinks MJ is not a GOAT tier player.
3. Even if this was somehow his position, it's ONE poster, not "half of the board"

You asked for someone. And he says short answer is NO then goes and lists reasons why NO impact metric shows Jordan as a GOAT candidate.

[CzBoobie]

And if we consider being elite the same as being a goat candidate, then there's no metric I'm aware of that suggests he isn't. However, the G in "GOAT" stands for greatest not elite.

I don't think there are impact metrics which generally suggest Jordan as "the greatest."

These quotes are right there at the beginning of the same post. To me it obviously means he talks about GOAT as the "No.1" player. And he only talks about impact metrics, there sure are other parts of evaluating players that are not mentioned.

[homecourtloss]

The real issue is u, eni, and kd got beef, so whenever kd and eni make posts, no matter how good or bad the arg, u side with whoever is goin against em, even when they pullin a seppeku. like bro be real, did u even read the posts u complainin about?

I wouldn't say we have beef. We have very different approaches to player evaluation and even more different approaches to how we prefer to discuss these things. I've found myself agreeing with them on occassions and they've agreed with me on certain topics as well but that's seemingly only possible if Jordan isn't directly involved or even indirectly implied in a discussion.

Jordan even being among the top group of all-time players is now suddenly controversial and it's what I've been calling an "overcorrection" for a while now since I see it as a response to the mainstream overrating Jordan (even though I also have him #1 I disagree with the undisputed/by far the best myth they regard him with) but going a bit too far by attacking everyone who still has MJ in the GOAT conversation. To me the biggest indication of how toxic this stuff has gotten is that I'm somehow seen as a MJ stan who can't handle people having other players as their GOAT when I don't even like Jordan.

It strikes me as odd that “someone who does not even like Jordan” has consistently felt the need to come to his defence. “Someone who does not even like Jordan” enters a thread, says one side is an “anti-MJ cartel” “frothing at the mouth”, “[making] up fantasies”, and “[seeming] to have something personal against Jordan and/or people who have Jordan ranked higher than them,” all while “the most reasonable guy in the discussion” is the one who openly did make up fantasies and did the closest thing I have seen to “frothing” when told his numbers objectively did not match the process or data he was supposedly trying to replicate.

And you complain about hostility.

This is nothing new, although it has been some time since you did it; I had hoped that meant your approach had changed. However, in 2022, you saw a post that compared 1991 Jordan’s scoring to 2014 Lebron’s scoring and proceeded to accuse everyone of “clawing to talk Jordan down”, having an “emotional meltdown”, and “spewing venom” in an “echo chamber” of uninteresting and meaningless discussions “without bringing up comparative arguments” — which is of course more your move, as it has been here. Rather than engage with the thread topic (admittedly this one is pretty close to running dry, but then why try to fan the flames?), it always comes back to your half-baked meta analysis of “hostility” or whatever. But you do not really make use of impact metrics, or at least not the ones to which we have generally referred, so why do you even care?

This is not really restricted to Jordan either. I was also described by you as part of a “ranting vocal minority” when it came to Shaq! The thread topic is Jordan, though, so I will stick to that. Six weeks ago, you derailed a thread because Ohayo offhandedly said 1985-87 Hakeem had a performance advantage over 1985-87 Jordan. You have this pattern where you say people should be free to believe what they want — and I will note that does not mean everyone is obliged to never push people on their beliefs — but when it comes to Jordan, you always need to come in and complain about the ranting mobs without actually engaging with the argument itself.

I recognise that the approach to these discussions can come across as aggressive, but strong stances should be able to hold against strict scrutiny, and if the move is instead to attack character, what does that say about your ability to defend the stance itself? I generally understand your position, Dutchball, although to me it is not thoroughly based on anything real. I cannot make you reframe how you see something as abstracted as “dominance” or whatever, but dominance is not an impact metric, so that leaves the question of why you are here in a thread that has little to nothing to do with your own player assessments, defending a player (whom you claim to not like) by hurling epithets at everyone questioning the data you do not use?

Perfect post.

In perhaps the one forum on all the internet that dares to question accepted truths and looks to data to tease out granular understandings, daring to postulate that there might be other GOAT candidates while consistently keeping Jordan as one is being classified as “Jordan even being among the top group of all-time players is now suddenly controversial.”

[magicman1978]

This was a great thread that is now heading in the direction of the usual MJ / LeBron threads because some feel the need to declare one side or other winners or losers and can't help but demean or outright insult each other. Even worse when people who have added no value to the thread that seem to want to confirm their bias do so. The only winner here should have been seen as valuable analytical basketball discussion in general. But those types of discussions are rare as even the better posters are unable to remain civil duein some cases it seems. I often found myself trying to figure out why there were condenscending, accusatory, or otherwise uncivil tones in certain posts. Maybe I'm lacking context from other discussions. For those that made it a good discussion, first kudos - I've learned a lot from this discussion, but alsoaybe take a look back at some of the posts to see how things may have devolved. Because I'd like to see more discussions like this - it's a great value to this community.

[CzBoobie]

And to add 4: If someone views that OKDs post as "hostile" should not probably be posting on an internet forum.

[Taj FTW]

I'm inviting Mavsdirk41 to the PC forum to provide some expert analysis on this topic, folks

[The Explorer]

And if we consider being elite the same as being a goat candidate, then there's no metric I'm aware of that suggests he isn't. However, the G in "GOAT" stands for greatest not elite.

I don't think there are impact metrics which generally suggest Jordan as "the greatest."

These quotes are right there at the beginning of the same post. To me it obviously means he talks about GOAT as the "No.1" player. And he only talks about impact metrics, there sure are other parts of evaluating players that are not mentioned.

Post #137 in this thread. Another post implying that Jordan may not have a case to be a candidate for GOAT using impact metrics. And the post after this one agrees with it.

With regards to Jordan, from the data we have he looks like a top 10 all-time guy, but seems to be clearly worse than the best players of the true databall era (LeBron, Garnett, Duncan, Steph/Dray depending on how you parse multicollinearity, more recently Jokic). Some of this is due to data availability bias, but at some point it is completely implausible for him to have the impact profile of a top player.

[CzBoobie]

That quote is in the post relating to DARKO stat only, I believe, since the whole convo before and after was mentioning that.

[OhayoKD]

Well, look at y'all, civilly discussing the merits of my...

Post #7 appearently no impact metric shows him as GOAT candidate.

1. That's not the whole post...it's like 1/40 of the post.
2. Nothing in the post indicates that he thinks MJ is not a GOAT tier player.
3. Even if this was somehow his position, it's ONE poster, not "half of the board"

1. It's still in the post though and there's nothing in the other 39/40 that gives a different spin on it.
2. OhayoKD says only box metrics show Jordan as having GOAT tier impact, a group of metrics OhayoKD believes to be near useless. Nothing indicates he does see Jordan as a GOAT tier player.

...oh

You're right Dutch, I don't. I don't think he has strong arguments against Lebron, Kareem, or Russell for peak, prime, or career, so he sits a notch below with Wilt, Hakeem, and Duncan.

Now if we're done with the theatrics, let's get to the substance

My Stance

Spoiler:

My argument was never that it was impossible to find a specific comparison where Jordan comes out ahead. It was that these metrics all generally favored Lebron. Lebron has the best individual years in all of these adjusted metrics including AUPM. He also has a higher average over a majority of time-frames. You chose one specific frame where AUPM favors Jordan. Considering what I'm actually arguing(and have reiterated numerous times to no avail), that Jordan's "3-year AUPM" comes out a bit ahead of Lebron(while still not ranking #1) does not suffice as a rebuttal.

Summary of how Impact Metrics view Jordan and Lebron

Spoiler:

JORDAN VS LEBRON IMPACT BREAKDOWN

WOWY/Indirect/Raw(there are various degrees of adjustment to some of these samples but they do not use "10 years" of data like WOWYR) - Best Years - Lebron(Big Gap) MJ looks fringe top-10
WOWY/Indirect/Raw - Averages - Lebron(Big Gap) MJ looks solidly top-10

10-year/prime WOWYR/GPM/ALT- Averages(there is no "best year") - Jordan(Marginal Gap) MJ's range is 4-7 depending on if you use raw wins or championships/relative SRS as your onException: Lebron has a decent advantage in ALT-scaled WOWYR

PIPM - Average - Lebron(big gap) - Jordan is 2nd-4th(no data pre-1977)
PIPM - Best Years - Lebron(bigger gap) - Jordan is 2(no data pre-1977)

AUPM - Average - Lebron Exception: Jordan has slight edge in 3-year(4 year?), MJ comes 2nd(Duncan has better 1-3 but Jordan advantage otherwise, no data pre-1997 except for MJ)
AUPM - Best Years[/b] - Lebron(big gap) - Jordan comes 3rd(no data pre-1997 except for MJ)

RAPM - Average - Lebron(Big gap) - Jordan looks somewhere between 2-5, is 8th overall(different creators/scales, partial data, ect make things really tricky, no data-pre 1997 except for MJ)
RAPM - Best Years - Lebron(Big Gap) - Ditto with above

ON/OFF PLAYOFFS - Average - Lebron(Big Gap) - Exceptions: 1-year tied, 8-year tied, 2-year and 3-year favor MJ - MJ ranks? No **** clue. Duncan, KG, Shaq, Curry are probably the candidates. I am not hand-calcing all that
ON/OFF PLAYOFFS - Best Years -Lebron(Gigantic Gap) - Exceptions: 1-year tied, ditto for his overall rank

ON/OFF REGULAR SEASON - Best Years and Average - Lebron(Big Gap), since only 97 and 98 are the only mj regular seasons, i'm specifically comparing it to non-peak lebron seasons here. TLDR: 97 is worse than seventeen of Lebron's 20 rs scores, 98 is worse than eighteen. Not exactly "peak", but it is a clobbering when we compare 97-98 MJ to low-end Bron stuff - MJ ranks at? No **** clue

BONUS: NON IMPACT
Summary: RS leans MJ, Postseason favors lebron. The margin in the playoffs varies depending on how much you lean towards "best years" and how much you lean towards "consecutive".

CONCLUSION
Excluding the bonus we get 1 type of signal favoring Jordan(over Lebron) that places him somewhere between 4 and 7. That signal happens to have the smallest possible "off sample"(per season for Jordan though it's also tiny overall for Russell/Lebron, and currently not accurate for Kareem. Keep in mind it's also miniscule for Jordan unless Dray's assumptions regarding the sample, which he's admitted he isn't sure of, are correct).

Overall Lebron has a 5-1 advantage. 3-0 with Line-up adjustment, 2-1 with no Lineup adjustment. In terms of impact(or at least the metrics me and dray agreed to consider "impact" for this discussion), Jordan has nothing that generally puts him #1. It is possible there is a specific type of comparative frame he scores the best(i am too lazy to hand-track more on/off for other players and maybe 4-year AUPM does the trick), but, I always caveated my initial answer("no") with "most comparative frames" and "generally". Dray just completely ignored that distinction, but whatever.

Honestly, I feel like I've been walking on egg-shells since I've been here. Olive branch, friendly emoji, cushioning most everything I say so you guys don't get offended. But tbh, I've probably been too passive.

You wanna say Jordan is the greatest thing ever? Go ahead. You wanna tell me ricky rubio would cook Giannis? I'm down. All I ask is when I say what I want to say, making the points I want to make, you hit me on the merits of what I'm pushing, not how "reasonable" you think it is. You wanna say it's unreasonable? Cool. But trying to flop for a charge cause you aren't playing defense is bulls--t. If I'm being unreasonable, then prove it. Show your f--cking work.

PS: When people pull what you think is bulls--t, saying you think it's bulls--t and then explaining why should be encouraged. To that end...

I guess this is kind of what I mean. To me Dray is by far the most reasonable participant in this thread but half the board thinks he's "lying" for some reason. Dray isn't a "general board ****" either, he's not mad MJ is "getting smoked", just again more and more fantasies by people who seem to have something personal against Jordan and/or people who have Jordan ranked higher than them.

Dray accusing a poster of lying before lying about what they said:

Spoiler:

Prologue: Dray the Adult
You:

Possibility 4: Enigma just lied.

You, actually lying:
[spoiler]

Takeaway: I’m not to here to accuse another poster of outright trying. But Heej, if you’re going to accuse some poster of making up false numbers, you think it would be the one who claimed they manually tracked 253 LeBron games on their own and are refusing to show work

Dray intentionally or unintentionally distorting data with various questionable practices

Spoiler:

But it's with this next misreading we get to the heart of the matter:

However…. you accuse me of being emotionally biased for throwing out “every stat that disagrees with my priors”, simply because I say that I trust adjusted impact metrics more than raw impact metrics.... a claim is supported by the multitude of NBA analysts who agree with me above (more on this below!).

No, I accused you of being emotionally biased because you applied an argument that could be made against every metric mentioned(adjusted or otherwise), to one that preferred Lebron:

Is your position that every stat that disagrees with your priors isn't valuable? All metrics produce wonky results.

You cherrypicked a bunch of outputs you found questionable, something that I could do to every statistic mentioned on this thread. You then proceeded to throw out data, so that the other "better' stats which also generally favor Lebron would look good for MJ

The years which "murk" would be 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2015 and 2016. As in, they are all higher than any Jordan RAPM score. Both averages dray uses exclude 3 of those scores.

Without this bit of cherrypicking:

2009-2017 Lebron scores an average of +8.15. 2009-2013 Lebron scores an average of +8.6. The very best single-year score available for Jordan has him at +7.47.

Lebron's average RAPM(including a plethora of pre and post-prime years) is higher. Lebron's prime RAPM(1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 4-year, 5-year...8-year) is much higher, and most damningly, I can cherrypick Jordan's very best regular season(at least per rapm), and it would not match any of these averages.(well okay, it would probably match the career one )

This was actually explained in a post you directly quoted:

1. Lebron is, generally, playing significantly more minutes and games over the stretches we're comparing. Averages tend to go down, the longer someone plays.
2. Lebron generally staggered more with his co-stars than Jordan did. Typically this would depress a player's on/off. All things considered, "team context" probably juices Jordan, not Lebron.

Maybe #2 is why lineup-adjustment puts Lebron's 8-year average higher than the very best 1-year signal we have for Mike. Truly inconsistent.

This is off course, not the first time in this thread, you've tossed out data to make a stat that predominantly favors Lebron...

But he doesn't. You specifically chose a favorable frame of comparison for Jordan(3-years consecutive), and Lebron has, not one, but two better stretches when we utilize that frame. Going off the data RK listed, Lebron has the 2 highest scoring years(with 2009 being far ahead of anything else), and 5 of the best scoring 7. I could literally chuck the best scoring year by far, and Lebron would still look better. Jordan does not look comparable, and he does not rank 3rd-all time, he ranks 3rd among the players we actually have data for. PIPM dates back to 1977. That leaves at least 2 players with consistently better impact indicators completely out of the room.

...look "arguable" for Jordan:

3rd all time.* Jordan's ahead of Miami LeBron, which is usually considered LeBron's peak (although LeBron has other samples that creep ahead).

And that if Jordan looks comparable to LeBron

And it seems even the "not-stat" guys are noticing:

rapm, pippm, onoff, all that wowwy **** or whatver clearly favors bron. aupm favors bron mostly. if u gotta ignore a guy's best scores to make your arg, you prob dont have an arg.

Still tho, don't think Jordan had that in him to really be able to orchestrate on both ends of the floor; and that's partly why he needed Pippen and Phil more than people like to admit. Also seems to contribute to why a lot of these impact numbers need to be heavily massaged in order to prop Jordan up vs LeBron lol

Some of these DraymondGold posts are starting to give off some serious "I cooka da Pasta (data)" vibes and we need to start a dialogue

See Dray, this might work with people less familiar with these types of numbers, but the PC Board is littered with posters with at least some statistical literacy. This means that when you try and bulls--t this blatantly, some of us might notice.

Worth noting, that a major source of the inaccuracy with your on/off data wasn't your method of calculation. Rather it was you tossing out 1995 thereby inflating Jordan's averages. You say you weigh on/off less, but that didn't stop you from "cooking". Fortunately not one, not two, not three, not four, but five different posters immediately noticed something was amiss. And the worst part is, instead of acknowledging you messed up, you implied the one guy who didn't assume it was intentional was lying...by lying yourself to make them look bad. I used "f---ed" instead of "messed" because to my ear it sonically flows better. If that was perceived as a tantrum, that's on me, but you're really in no position to give a lecture on civility.

If these "accusations" are "unreasonable", and only motivated by our singular hatred for Jordan, then it shouldn't be too hard to find where I(or the various other members of the "brigade") messed up.

It's one thing to say "Idk" and step to the side. But when you're saying a bunch of posters are an irrationally biased monolith, "I'm a neutral who doesn't want to get involved" doesn't work.

For those that made it a good discussion, first kudos - I've learned a lot from this discussion, but alsoaybe take a look back at some of the posts to see how things may have devolved. Because I'd like to see more discussions like this - it's a great value to this community.

Well ya see Magicman...

PS: Y'all might be seeing me less. I'm taking my talents to GB

[Jaivl]

Ricky Rubio would cook Giannis. A full-course meal, as he's the nicest player in the NBA.

[Squared2020]

I have every Jordan playoff game on tape.

Total aside: Of the 1126 playoff games from 1975 through 1996, I have 918 of those on tape. If you know anyone who has any complete games from the 1980 Rockets-Celtics eastern conference series, I'd be happy to have a conversation with them.

I have only short clip (around 10 min) from 1980 Rockets vs Celtics series, but I don't think you will be interested in it.

That's extremely impressive collection. I wonder if you counted your pre-1975 playoff games as well. I'd appreciate it if you give us even an estimated number.

I have a few clips from that series, but I'd be happy to get full games.

Pre-1975... maybe 40 games, tops. The earliest is a Hawks-Celtics game from 1958, but the video itself was given under stipulation of never sharing it. Instead, I converted it into a play-by-play.

[Blackmill]

The lineup data we have doesn't show anything unusual. By that, I mean it's clear that MJ is a strong GOAT candidate, but not the only strong GOAT candidate, provided you've watch his games. The overall data, which I see has already been linked on the first page, isn't shockingly low or shockingly high given this. That said, I honestly don't think much can be gained from metrics or lineup data.

[OhayoKD]

The lineup data we have doesn't show anything unusual. By that, I mean it's clear that MJ is a strong GOAT candidate, but not the only strong GOAT candidate, provided you've watch his games. The overall data, which I see has already been linked on the first page, isn't shockingly low or shockingly high given this. That said, I honestly don't think much can be gained from metrics or lineup data.

So what bar are you applying for "strong GOAT candidate"?

As outlined above, none of the metrics that have been discussed as "Impact" over the last 12 pages have Jordan at #1, lineup-adjusted or otherwise(generally speaking)

[magicman1978]

For those that made it a good discussion, first kudos - I've learned a lot from this discussion, but alsoaybe take a look back at some of the posts to see how things may have devolved. Because I'd like to see more discussions like this - it's a great value to this community.

Well ya see Magicman...

PS: Y'all might be seeing me less. I'm taking my talents to GB

Hope you've got your one liners and unsubstantiated assertions ready to go.

[OhayoKD]

For those that made it a good discussion, first kudos - I've learned a lot from this discussion, but alsoaybe take a look back at some of the posts to see how things may have devolved. Because I'd like to see more discussions like this - it's a great value to this community.

Well ya see Magicman...

PS: Y'all might be seeing me less. I'm taking my talents to GB

Hope you've got your one liners and unsubstantiated assertions ready to go.

Well actually I was thinking of spamming your(pc board, general) posts with a-copy and a-paste

Or i can just say "no u" a bunch

[Blackmill]

The lineup data we have doesn't show anything unusual. By that, I mean it's clear that MJ is a strong GOAT candidate, but not the only strong GOAT candidate, provided you've watch his games. The overall data, which I see has already been linked on the first page, isn't shockingly low or shockingly high given this. That said, I honestly don't think much can be gained from metrics or lineup data.

So what bar are you applying for "strong GOAT candidate"?

As outlined above, none of the metrics that have been discussed as "Impact" over the last 12 pages have Jordan at #1, lineup-adjusted or otherwise(generally speaking)

I don't think current metrics are strong evidence for being or not being the GOAT. The "why" is such an old and tired topic that I'm not really interested in discussing it here. But I say that as someone whose background is mathematics. My point is, I don't need Jordan to be #1 on impact metrics for me to consider those metrics generally congruent with him being a strong GOAT candidate.

[OhayoKD]

The lineup data we have doesn't show anything unusual. By that, I mean it's clear that MJ is a strong GOAT candidate, but not the only strong GOAT candidate, provided you've watch his games. The overall data, which I see has already been linked on the first page, isn't shockingly low or shockingly high given this. That said, I honestly don't think much can be gained from metrics or lineup data.

So what bar are you applying for "strong GOAT candidate"?

As outlined above, none of the metrics that have been discussed as "Impact" over the last 12 pages have Jordan at #1, lineup-adjusted or otherwise(generally speaking)

I don't think current metrics are strong evidence for being or not being the GOAT. The "why" is such an old and tired topic that I'm not really interested in discussing it here. But I say that as someone whose background is mathematics. My point is, I don't need Jordan to be #1 on impact metrics for me to consider those metrics generally congruent with him being a strong GOAT candidate.

This reads to my non-mathematical mind as an eloquent way of saying "they may not help him, but they don't rule him out". Is that a fair representation?