Jordan v Lebron - A civilised conversation

[Djoker]

wat!? you think 2009 was a bad defensive performance?

also on your topic about 2017, are you sure warriors were not simply that good?, i mean, warriors were the league second best defense and still got shredded. thst was a series between all time high levels of offense where nobody could stop the other team

warriors just had better defensive talent and depth to withstand it which is why they won in 5

He was pretty bad defensively in the Orlando series in 2009. The Cavs as a team let the Magic torch them from 3pt land in that series which is the main reason they lost. Apart from that series it was a pretty strong defensive season for Lebron.

Anyways why is it so hard to admit that Lebron's defense was terrible in the 2017 finals?

you ideally need 4 players and a rim protector to defend the perimeter, specially against a pick and roll and 4 shooters offense, even dpoy rudy gobert couldnt stop the clippers by himself and the jazz got shredded by hot shooting lineups. one perimeter player cannot defend the whole perimeter against a team with multiple initiators amd shooters

were not you who said those cavs were stacked defensively so lebron can be criticized for not doing more with them? (or was it someone else?)

cause if they were such a great defensive cast why they got shredded to that extent ? cannot have it both ways (give lebron full blame/responsability for the whole defense while saying he got a great supporting cast thlse years because of having great defenders )

and because warriors were not a normal team, they were a order of magnitude more talented than the usual championship team
there is just so much Energy to spend in defense while trying to keep up with them in offense (which the cavs actually im relative offense despite lesser talent overall as a testament to lebron ceiling raising offensively*)

cavs with lebron on court played those warriors very close but got shredded in bench lineups which is about as good as it can be realistically demanded considering the talent gap

In the 2009 ECF the entire Cavs' defense was unable to stop the Magic, Lebron included. I'm not absolving others from the blame (ex. Varejao, Wallace, Delonte) either but we are discussing Lebron on this thread. His defense in that series wasn't good.

When you said the Cavs played the Warriors very close with Lebron on the court that's not true. The cumulative series +/- is misleading because of a Game 4 blowout win by the Cavs.

Game 1: -22 with Lebron
Game 2: -11 with Lebron
Game 3: +7 with Lebron
Game 4: +32 with Lebron
Game 5: -13 with Lebron

Same story in the 2018 finals by the way. The Cavs with Lebron on the court were -13, -8, -18 and -21 in the four games. That isn't very competitive if you ask me...

[Djoker]

On the mental side, it's well-documented that Jordan's break from the game helped him recharge mentally. Not only are there direct quotes from Jordan about this but it's also been observed by other people as well (I believe this is covered in The Last Dance).

Also, I'm not a baseball expert but I don't think it's a controversial opinion that the physical toll of playing basketball is considerably worse than that of playing baseball (assuming you don't get nailed by a pitch or something). There's a reason the baseball season has twice as many games as the basketball season. I'd definitely be interested to hear from more knowledgeable people though, and am honestly curious to learn about this.

Sure. He recharged mentally for basketball but how much did not practicing basketball and completely reforming his body for baseball hurt him? Which factor comes out ahead I'm really not sure. One could make an argument that if his father never got killed and MJ never left and just played through that he would have been better off. Note that I'm not making that argument because it's an irrelevant hypothetical as is the opposite argument. But an argument can be made...

I'd be interested in hearing from an expert in the field. I honestly don't know for sure. However, I will say that I'd be pretty shocked if Jordan's route (three straight NBA Finals, baseball, partial NBA season, three straight NBA Finals) was as physically grueling for basketball as LeBron's route (eight straight NBA Finals). Maybe I'm just being way too disrespectful towards baseball.

Three finals, then baseball, then three more finals all in eight seasons may well have been as grueling as Lebron's eight straight finals. But regardless I don't know much about baseball but I do know that Jordan had to train differently for baseball and actually came back out of basketball shape. How that balances vs. his mental state or whatever I'm not sure.

[falcolombardi]

He was pretty bad defensively in the Orlando series in 2009. The Cavs as a team let the Magic torch them from 3pt land in that series which is the main reason they lost. Apart from that series it was a pretty strong defensive season for Lebron.

Anyways why is it so hard to admit that Lebron's defense was terrible in the 2017 finals?

you ideally need 4 players and a rim protector to defend the perimeter, specially against a pick and roll and 4 shooters offense, even dpoy rudy gobert couldnt stop the clippers by himself and the jazz got shredded by hot shooting lineups. one perimeter player cannot defend the whole perimeter against a team with multiple initiators amd shooters

were not you who said those cavs were stacked defensively so lebron can be criticized for not doing more with them? (or was it someone else?)

cause if they were such a great defensive cast why they got shredded to that extent ? cannot have it both ways (give lebron full blame/responsability for the whole defense while saying he got a great supporting cast thlse years because of having great defenders )

and because warriors were not a normal team, they were a order of magnitude more talented than the usual championship team
there is just so much Energy to spend in defense while trying to keep up with them in offense (which the cavs actually im relative offense despite lesser talent overall as a testament to lebron ceiling raising offensively*)

cavs with lebron on court played those warriors very close but got shredded in bench lineups which is about as good as it can be realistically demanded considering the talent gap

In the 2009 ECF the entire Cavs' defense was unable to stop the Magic, Lebron included. I'm not absolving others from the blame (ex. Varejao, Wallace, Delonte) either but we are discussing Lebron on this thread. His defense in that series wasn't good.

When you said the Cavs played the Warriors very close with Lebron on the court that's not true. The cumulative series +/- is misleading because of a Game 4 blowout win by the Cavs.

Game 1: -22 with Lebron
Game 2: -11 with Lebron
Game 3: +7 with Lebron
Game 4: +32 with Lebron
Game 5: -13 with Lebron

Same story in the 2018 finals by the way. The Cavs with Lebron on the court were -13, -8, -18 and -21 in the four games. That isn't very competitive if you ask me...

so lets assume lebron suddendly became a bad defender against orlando despite being dominant all year long, thst already is a much bigger assumption than just assuming the cavs as a whole couldnt stop a red hot orlando

even ir he was "bad" how come the "stacked defensively" cavs couldnt make cavs at least decent to good defense without lebron help. if the cavs needed lebron to not be bad defensively then maybe that supporting cast was not that good or reliable ?

about the warriors i am not sure what more can be "demanded" from thw cavs, cavs with lebron on outscored the warriors 2 of 5 games and dont forget there is a blowout outlier in warriors side too

that series WAS close when the starters were playing on both sides despite warriors having more overall talent in both sides of the court

[jalengreen]

Somewhat unrelated but I wonder what the next RealGM GOAT voting will look like. LeBron was ranked #1 pretty soon after the 2020 Finals win - maybe he benefited from recency bias in that regard? Or maybe the voting gap will actually increase if he puts in a few more All-NBA seasons.

[Cavsfansince84]

Three finals, then baseball, then three more finals all in eight seasons may well have been as grueling as Lebron's eight straight finals. But regardless I don't know much about baseball but I do know that Jordan had to train differently for baseball and actually came back out of basketball shape. How that balances vs. his mental state or whatever I'm not sure.

Of course he came back out of bb shape, that was a given. What he got though was far less stress on his knees and joints by virtue of playing baseball which is what usually breaks down on nba players as they get into their early 30's. Especially a guy who plays an uber athletic version of bb like MJ did and who was leading the league in minutes played in most of his regular seasons and then adding on 15-20 playoff games year after year. I don't know how any one could think his body didn't benefit from that time away. Which isn't to say that playing minor league baseball is easy. It's just that it was hard in different ways imo which allowed other parts of his body to have less wear and tear for 18 months. In hindsight, MJ played in 82 games every year from 96-98 and was able to complete 3 straight title runs while Pippen's body basically started breaking down in 98 when he was 32 and had lots of injury issues until he retired.

[VanWest82]

I tried in vain to explain why I thought pre-2012 Lebron wasn't on MJ's level but I really should've just let Lebron explain it. It doesn't matter how good you are statistically if you're flawed enough to allow teams to game plan you out of the last games of the year.

Read on Twitter

[Cavsfansince84]

I tried in vain to explain why I thought pre-2012 Lebron wasn't on MJ's level but I really should've just let Lebron explain it. It doesn't matter how good you are statistically if you're flawed enough to allow teams to game plan you out of the last games of the year.

Read on Twitter

That's a fair video to bring up though that also had to do with friction between LeBron and Wade as well as LeBron's own coach not making adjustments. This all was factored into changes that Spoelstra made after 2011 and conversations between LeBron and Wade. I could also point out games MJ had against Det in 89 which are similar though where MJ essentially got game planned out of it and which led to Phil and his triangle coming in making it harder for teams to do that. Here are 5 games MJ had from the 89 ecf:

game 1: 10-29, 10-13, 11 reb, 4 ast, 32 pts
game 2: 9-20, 9-11, 4 reb, 4 ast, 27 pts
game 4: 5-15, 12-17, 2 reb, 4 ast, 23 pts
game 5: 4-8, 10-11, 5 reb, 9 ast, 18 pts
game 6: 13-26, 5-12, 4 reb, 13 ast, 8 tov, 32 pts

The only great game he had in that series was game 2 with 46 pts. All in all, that's a very bad series from MJ. In 1990 he had a better series but still struggled a lot in 2 of the games. This is almost never held against MJ though while with LeBron it's used as definitive proof that he wasn't ready to win a ring yet. That's an issue for me. The truth isn't so black and white and context needs to be used.

[VanWest82]

Would you mind elaborating on the coaching change?

To a peasant like me, I'd think "After the 2007 Finals, it became fairly apparent what defenses needed to try to do to stop LeBron." And I'd also think "The 2010 Celtics had already played LeBron in 2008, so they probably had a good grasp of how to stop him." Can you help me understand how the Celtics 'discovered' how to stop LeBron late in the 2010 series after having played him only two years before, and after seeing what the Spurs did in 2007?

I'm not saying it's wrong, I'm just saying that I'm not enough of an x's and o's person to have an intuitive grasp of how this would work.

To your first question, I'd suggest it's pretty common that as series play out teams make adjustments. 2010 Celtics started by playing Lebron straight up. Most teams don't go into game one showing all their cards. But part way through that series they started bringing a third defender into the lane (Perk, Big Baby, Sheed) to wall off Lebron's driving lanes. He didn't have a good counter and wound up turning it over a bunch.

Also, 07 Spurs, 10 Celtics, and 11 Mavs all had different game plans. 07 Spurs tried to use the Steve Nash game plan by guarding him one on one with Bowen and daring him to take a bunch of jumpers knowing Duncan was there waiting for him at the rim. The problem was that Nash was a much better player than Lebron and so he missed (a lot).

Mavs had the best game plan throwing in the most wrinkles. They used a lot of 1-3-1 zone and mixed up the looks. But mainly, the goal was to turn Lebron into a jump shooter. There were counters available had his post game been better but he wasn't good enough giving it up and getting position (and then using it). Heat would have won had he been able to do to Mavs what he did to Raptors out of the pinch post.

[VanWest82]

That's a fair video to bring up though that also had to do with friction between LeBron and Wade as well as LeBron's own coach not making adjustments. This all was factored into changes that Spoelstra made after 2011 and conversations between LeBron and Wade. I could also point out games MJ had against Det in 89 which are similar though where MJ essentially got game planned out of it and which led to Phil and his triangle coming in making it harder for teams to do that. Here are 5 games MJ had from the 89 ecf:

game 1: 10-29, 10-13, 11 reb, 4 ast, 32 pts
game 2: 9-20, 9-11, 4 reb, 4 ast, 27 pts
game 4: 5-15, 12-17, 2 reb, 4 ast, 23 pts
game 5: 4-8, 10-11, 5 reb, 9 ast, 18 pts
game 6: 13-26, 5-12, 4 reb, 13 ast, 8 tov, 32 pts

The only great game he had in that series was game 2 with 46 pts. All in all, that's a very bad series from MJ. In 1990 he had a better series but still struggled a lot in 2 of the games. This is almost never held against MJ though while with LeBron it's used as definitive proof that he wasn't ready to win a ring yet. That's an issue for me. The truth isn't so black and white and context needs to be used.

I don't see these series as the same at all. Those Pistons teams won (primarily) because NBA allowed them to physically assault the Bulls. That was the game plan. They're on record as that being the game plan. It's completely different from Spurs, Celtics, and Mavs game planning against the basketball related weaknesses in Lebron's game. MJ had no weaknesses 88-90. Averaging 30/6/5 on +2.4 rTS vs. an ATG Pistons defense is not a "very bad series from MJ."

I can point to a bunch of subpar playoff games Lebron had post 2011. So what? It's about how complete your game is and the reasons why you lost. Bulls never lost because of MJ. Lebron lost because his game was flawed.

[falcolombardi]

That's a fair video to bring up though that also had to do with friction between LeBron and Wade as well as LeBron's own coach not making adjustments. This all was factored into changes that Spoelstra made after 2011 and conversations between LeBron and Wade. I could also point out games MJ had against Det in 89 which are similar though where MJ essentially got game planned out of it and which led to Phil and his triangle coming in making it harder for teams to do that. Here are 5 games MJ had from the 89 ecf:

game 1: 10-29, 10-13, 11 reb, 4 ast, 32 pts
game 2: 9-20, 9-11, 4 reb, 4 ast, 27 pts
game 4: 5-15, 12-17, 2 reb, 4 ast, 23 pts
game 5: 4-8, 10-11, 5 reb, 9 ast, 18 pts
game 6: 13-26, 5-12, 4 reb, 13 ast, 8 tov, 32 pts

The only great game he had in that series was game 2 with 46 pts. All in all, that's a very bad series from MJ. In 1990 he had a better series but still struggled a lot in 2 of the games. This is almost never held against MJ though while with LeBron it's used as definitive proof that he wasn't ready to win a ring yet. That's an issue for me. The truth isn't so black and white and context needs to be used.

I don't see these series as the same at all. Those Pistons teams won (primarily) because NBA allowed them to physically assault the Bulls. That was the game plan. They're on record as that being the game plan. It's completely different from Spurs, Celtics, and Mavs game planning against the basketball related weaknesses in Lebron's game. MJ had no weaknesses 88-90. Averaging 30/6/5 on +2.4 rTS vs. an ATG Pistons defense is not a "very bad series from MJ."

I can point to a bunch of subpar playoff games Lebron had post 2011. So what? It's about how complete your game is and the reasons why you lost. Bulls never lost because of MJ. Lebron lost because his game was flawed.

if that pistons physical defense was such a issue why didnt it lead to better defensive results? not that they were bad, they were fantastic, but lebron played some equal or even better defenses by results and still is criticized for his efficiency in some of them (boston 2008 comes to mind)

[IG2]

I tried in vain to explain why I thought pre-2012 Lebron wasn't on MJ's level but I really should've just let Lebron explain it. It doesn't matter how good you are statistically if you're flawed enough to allow teams to game plan you out of the last games of the year.

Read on Twitter

2011 was more of a deer-in-headlights gag job than anything special Dallas did defensively though. Yeah, he was better from 2012 onward, but that's not saying a whole lot. Literally any version of LeBron is better than what he showed in that 2011 series.

The question should be, what specifically did LeBron improve on post-2011 that supplants him over.....say, 2009 or 2010? Besides more willingness to play in the post in 2012, not a damn thing. He shot 30% outside of 15 feet in the 2012 playoffs. Compared to 41% in 2009 and 39% in 2010. So it's not like he was a better shooter. Better penetrator/finisher? He had bulked up quite a bit in Miami, so his slashing ability had notably regressed. Better mentality? Hell no. 2011-2013 are easily LeBron's most passive, self-doubting years. I know what the reason is - RANGZZZZ. The whole he-won-so-he-must-have-been-better-or-figured-something-out. Right, he figured out it's way easier to win with Wade/Bosh as opposed to Mo Williams and Shaq's corpse. That's what he figured out.

In reality, no serious LeBron fan with a clue about his game would take 2012-2013 over 2009-2010. If you ever wanna see a joke, watch LeBron's playoff series' against Boston in 2008/2010 and then follow it up with his series' against 'em in 2011/2012. Heat-LeBron didn't see 25% of the defensive pressure he did in 2008/2010. He might as well have been a different human being. And there are a couple of reasons for this: 1) 08/10 LeBron was essentially the GOAT slasher+finisher and could pressure defenses in a way chunkier Miami-LeBron never could. Boston considered him way more of a threat in Cleveland 2) LeBron played with much better talent in Miami, so Boston couldn't really afford to go all out on him defensively. Although I do believe they could've done more than the single coverage they mostly threw at him. But that's more a reflection on Boston not finding Heat-LeBron that dangerous.

[Cavsfansince84]

I don't see these series as the same at all. Those Pistons teams won (primarily) because NBA allowed them to physically assault the Bulls. That was the game plan. They're on record as that being the game plan. It's completely different from Spurs, Celtics, and Mavs game planning against the basketball related weaknesses in Lebron's game. MJ had no weaknesses 88-90. Averaging 30/6/5 on +2.4 rTS vs. an ATG Pistons defense is not a "very bad series from MJ."

I can point to a bunch of subpar playoff games Lebron had post 2011. So what? It's about how complete your game is and the reasons why you lost. Bulls never lost because of MJ. Lebron lost because his game was flawed.

You can point to what he averaged as proof that he had no weaknesses or had a strong series but I clearly laid out where 3 of those games were terrible by MJ/LeBron type standards and in game 6 despite having a solid game he had 8 tov's. I don't think you can say he had a great series when he was flat out bad in half of those games. That just isn't possible. Sure the Pistons played very physical tough defense but they did lack an elite rim protector and it's not like they had great size or athleticism on defense outside of Rodman. MJ simply struggled and part of that is the Pistons knew he hated to pass. MJ's approach to playing bb changed under Phil. Even in 1990 against them he had two very bad games. Coaching and ability to make adjustments also factors into how superstars play.

[VanWest82]

2011 was more of a deer-in-headlights gag job than anything special Dallas did defensively though. Yeah, he was better from 2012 onward, but that's not saying a whole lot. Literally any version of LeBron is better than what he showed in that 2011 series.

Try convincing Lebron of that. Or the Mavericks. Or Mavs fans.

The question should be, what specifically did LeBron improve on post-2011 that supplants him over.....say, 2009 or 2010? Besides more willingness to play in the post in 2012, not a damn thing. He shot 30% outside of 15 feet in the 2012 playoffs. Compared to 41% in 2009 and 39% in 2010. So it's not like he was a better shooter. Better mentality? Hell no. 2011-2013 are easily LeBron's most passive, self-doubting years. I know what the reason is - RANGZZZZ. The whole he-won-so-he-must-have-been-better-or-figured-something-out. Right, he figured out it's way easier to win with Wade/Bosh as opposed to Mo Williams and Shaq's corpse. That's what he figured out.

In reality, no serious LeBron fan with a clue about his game would take 2012-2013 over 2009-2010. If you ever wanna see a joke, watch LeBron's playoff series' against Boston in 2008/2010 and then follow it up with his series' against 'em in 2011/2012. Heat-LeBron doesn't see 25% of the defensive pressure he did in 2008/2010. He might as well have been a different human being. And there are a couple of reasons for it: 1) 08/10 LeBron was essentially the GOAT slasher+finisher and could pressure defenses in a way chunkier Miami-LeBron couldn't dream of 2) He played with much better talent in Miami so Boston simply couldn't afford to guard him like they did before.

Shooting (3-10 feet): 45.9% (11), 48.4% (12), 49.4% (13), 55.4% (14)
Shooting (10-16 feet): 28.6% (09), 34.4% (10), 43.4% (11), 48.1% (12)
Shooting (3FG%): 33.0% (11), 36.2% (12), 40.6% (13)

It's clear he got better as a shooter in Miami and you can actually see what he was working on year-to-year. You can also try to use 09 playoffs to suggest he was always a good shooter but most agree that was just an outlier. Using playoff samples and not taking into account opponents or injuries is a bad way to judge this stuff.

You're kidding yourself if you think winning in 2012 didn't have a huge impact on Lebron. I judge this based on anyone who's ever won anything at the highest level ever. You're way discounting getting that monkey off his back. Also, if it was so easy to win with Wade and Bosh why didn't he win with the best versions of Wade and Bosh?

Heat Lebron was a much better off ball player than his earlier self because he could not only shoot better but post up (which you acknowledge). These were things he didn't do as well in first Cavs run. He'd also seen more. Don't discount that added knowledge.

[VanWest82]

I don't see these series as the same at all. Those Pistons teams won (primarily) because NBA allowed them to physically assault the Bulls. That was the game plan. They're on record as that being the game plan. It's completely different from Spurs, Celtics, and Mavs game planning against the basketball related weaknesses in Lebron's game. MJ had no weaknesses 88-90. Averaging 30/6/5 on +2.4 rTS vs. an ATG Pistons defense is not a "very bad series from MJ."

I can point to a bunch of subpar playoff games Lebron had post 2011. So what? It's about how complete your game is and the reasons why you lost. Bulls never lost because of MJ. Lebron lost because his game was flawed.

You can point to what he averaged as proof that he had no weaknesses or had a strong series but I clearly laid out where 3 of those games were terrible by MJ/LeBron type standards and in game 6 despite having a solid game he had 8 tov's. I don't think you can say he had a great series when he was flat out bad in half of those games. That just isn't possible. Sure the Pistons played very physical tough defense but they did lack an elite rim protector and it's not like they had great size or athleticism on defense outside of Rodman. MJ simply struggled and part of that is the Pistons knew he hated to pass. MJ's approach to playing bb changed under Phil. Even in 1990 against them he had two very bad games. Coaching and ability to make adjustments also factors into how superstars play.

To you game 5 (the infamous triple team game) was a bad game because his box score was lackluster. MJ should've had 20 assists that game. Go watch it. Same thing happened in game 6 but Scottie got hurt in the first min and they had no other ball handlers. Pistons trapped him all over the floor. And the reason they didn't need a great rim protector was because they took his legs out from under him mid air in highly dangerous collisions so they wouldn't have to block his shot. Also, Dumars was a terrific defender. So was Laimbeer. You're not getting anywhere trying to discredit those guys.

Bulls played with triangle in 90 but you're using games from that series as proof of his inability to pass and need for coaching to change his approach?? The reason Bulls played so much better after the switch was because MJ was a great off ball player and Scottie was much better on ball than off ball. It's kind of like when Warriors gave the keys to Draymond. It's not a knock on Steph that Warriors got better - it was just a better allocation of resources.

[VanWest82]

if that pistons physical defense was such a issue why didnt it lead to better defensive results? not that they were bad, they were fantastic, but lebron played some equal or even better defenses by results and still is criticized for his efficiency in some of them (boston 2008 comes to mind)

Because they weren't that level of dirty in the regular season. This is the same reason 92 Knicks were merely good defensively but then looked like world beaters in the playoffs. They upped the physicality.

Edit: check out what 88 Pistons (ranked 2nd in DRTG) did to the #1 Celtics offense which had a 115 ORTG in the regular season. Pistons held them to 101 in the playoffs. They were better in the post season because for whatever reason NBA decided it was ok to allow them to hurt people.

[Cavsfansince84]

To you game 5 (the infamous triple team game) was a bad game because his box score was lackluster. MJ should've had 20 assists that game. Go watch it. Same thing happened in game 6 but Scottie got hurt in the first min and they had no other ball handlers. Pistons trapped him all over the floor. And the reason they didn't need a great rim protector was because they took his legs out from under him mid air in highly dangerous collisions so they wouldn't have to block his shot. Also, Dumars was a terrific defender. So was Laimbeer. You're not getting anywhere trying to discredit those guys.

Bulls played with triangle in 90 but you're using games from that series as proof of his inability to pass and need for coaching to change his approach?? The reason Bulls played so much better after the switch was because MJ was a great off ball player and Scottie was much better on ball than off ball. It's kind of like when Warriors gave the keys to Draymond. It's not a knock on Steph that Warriors got better - it was just a better allocation of resources.

First, I'm not trying to discredit any of the bad boys, I watched a ton of their rs and ps games in that period and they had great team defense but Laimbeer was not a great defensive player imo. He was solid and dirty so he got the job done. Dumars was a very good defender but at the same time was not close to being on MJ's level in terms of size or athleticism. Which is what I said above. The Pistons slowed it down and played rough and played smart. I didn't bring up 1990 as proof of his inability to pass. I brought it up as proof that he wasn't losing despite playing goat level bb every time. He was still having bad games in series that his team lost despite being at near his peak. I already know I'm not going to sway your opinion much but I'm just going off of how I view things. I also think the Pistons would have had a much harder time physically bullying 09 LeBron. Sure they could still do hard fouls but LeBron was so ridiculously strong by then. He was a man among boys compared to pretty much any wing player in the league. There's also no doubt that Phil made it easier for MJ to play his role in the offense.

[VanWest82]

To you game 5 (the infamous triple team game) was a bad game because his box score was lackluster. MJ should've had 20 assists that game. Go watch it. Same thing happened in game 6 but Scottie got hurt in the first min and they had no other ball handlers. Pistons trapped him all over the floor. And the reason they didn't need a great rim protector was because they took his legs out from under him mid air in highly dangerous collisions so they wouldn't have to block his shot. Also, Dumars was a terrific defender. So was Laimbeer. You're not getting anywhere trying to discredit those guys.

Bulls played with triangle in 90 but you're using games from that series as proof of his inability to pass and need for coaching to change his approach?? The reason Bulls played so much better after the switch was because MJ was a great off ball player and Scottie was much better on ball than off ball. It's kind of like when Warriors gave the keys to Draymond. It's not a knock on Steph that Warriors got better - it was just a better allocation of resources.

First, I'm not trying to discredit any of the bad boys, I watched a ton of their rs and ps games in that period and they had great team defense but Laimbeer was not a great defensive player imo. He was solid and dirty so he got the job done. Dumars was a very good defender but at the same time was not close to being on MJ's level in terms of size or athleticism. Which is what I said above. The Pistons slowed it down and played rough and played smart. I didn't bring up 1990 as proof of his inability to pass. I brought it up as proof that he wasn't losing despite playing goat level bb every time. He was still having bad games in series that his team lost despite being at near his peak. I already know I'm not going to sway your opinion much but I'm just going off of how I view things. I also think the Pistons would have had a much harder time physically bullying 09 LeBron. Sure they could still do hard fouls but LeBron was so ridiculously strong by then. He was a man among boys compared to pretty much any wing player in the league. There's also no doubt that Phil made it easier for MJ to play his role in the offense.

No one was on MJ's level in terms of athleticism. I'm not sure what point you're making there outside of the obvious. Pistons had enough size and athleticism (and more importantly toughness) to make things as difficult as they could be for him.

Bird was bigger than MJ and look what Pistons did to him the year before. That team was so smart I suspect they would've instead tried to turn Lebron into a jump shooter which given the way things worked for him vs. Spurs in 07, Celtics in 08 and 10, and Mavs in 11 it probably would've worked. Lebron would've had problems vs. Rodman.

Edit: to your point about losing while playing less than goat level basketball...I don't think that's a requirement to be goat. No one can meet that requirement. Again, I can point to bad games from Lebron in 14, 15, 17, and 18 playoffs but I'm not going to hold those against him because he wasn't the reason they lost those series. Teams weren't inventing game plans to force Lebron into doing something he couldn't do and that's why he didn't play well and lost. The Pistons weren't doing that to MJ 88-90 either outside of the physical stuff. In the series you've presented (89) they were specifically trying to get the ball out of his hands because they didn't think the other Bulls could beat them. This is fundamentally different from what happened to Lebron in 07, 08, 10, and 11.

[ice9]

Let's not discount how dominant the Pistons were in those two postseason runs either.
The beat the Celtics 3-0, Bucks 4-0, and Lakers 4-0 in 89. Bulls were the only team to win any games against them, losing 4-2.
90 saw a 3-0 win against Indy, 4-1 against NYK, and 4-1 against the Blazers. Bulls lost 4-3.

Overall in the two seasons the Bulls won 5 games against Detroit, the rest of the league two games. No, Jordan wasnt averaging 35/7/7 on great ts%, but he was still more than respectable considering the Pistons focused solely on him and the rest of the Bulls couldn't make them pay. Ultimately he went against a very physical defensive team, had sub par help, and managed to be more competitive than any other team anyway.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[twyzted]

Somewhat unrelated but I wonder what the next RealGM GOAT voting will look like. LeBron was ranked #1 pretty soon after the 2020 Finals win - maybe he benefited from recency bias in that regard? Or maybe the voting gap will actually increase if he puts in a few more All-NBA seasons.

The general board had this pole as you were having your voting and is a larger sample size then the 20ish who voted. So no Jordan is realgm GOAT

[IG2]

It's clear he got better as a shooter in Miami and you can actually see what he was working on year-to-year.

LeBron's efg% in the playoffs on shots outside 15 feet:

2006 38% on 12 FGA/G
2007 37% on 8.5 FGA/G
2008 34% on 11.2 FGA/G
2009 49% on 11.1 FGA/G
2010 49% on 9.5 FGA/G
2011 46% 8 FGA/G
2012 36% on 7.7 FGA/G
2013 51% on 7.5 FGA/G
2014 53% on 8 FGA/G
2015 33% on 10.4 FGA/G
2016 49% on 6.6 FGA/G
2017 58% on 8 FGA/G
2018 49% on 8.8 FGA/G
2020 49% on 7.3 FGA/G

You said LeBron was easily schemed pre-2012 and consider his 1st title winning season as his big improvement. You mainly cite his improved jumper for this. Except numbers don't indicate this at all. LeBron's jumper was awful in the 2012 playoffs. In fact, compared to 2009-2010 (LeBron's big leap was 2009), LeBron's jumper saw no notable improvement in the playoffs after he joined Miami. There was 1 year (2017) where he went nuts and 2 years (2012, 2015) where he was awful. Around 50% the other 8 seasons otherwise, which is solid.

But hey, you aren't alone. A lot of people think LeBron "changed" after 2011. It's all narrative-driven BS though. Classic case of winning-bias. Reality is, he was winning because he played on far better teams compared to his initial Cleveland run. Not because he somehow took another step individually after 2 historical seasons already under his belt (2009 & 2010). 2 seasons that I consider superior to any he had in Miami.

As far as his 2011 Finals are concerned, again, I consider that to be a massive mental breakdown on his part as opposed to Dallas devising something special. From a standpoint of intent, that series had nothing in common with how he went down in 2009 and 2010.

2009 vs Orlando (1st in DRTG): 26 FGA + 16 FTA per game
2010 vs Boston (5th in DRTG): 19 FGA + 12 FTA
2011 vs Dallas (8th in DRTG): 15 FGA + 3 FTA

I see the 2011 Finals as a standalone event that is not reflective of anything else that happened in his career. The improvement he made the following season was mostly in his head. And that was essentially deciding "gee, I'm in the Finals again, maybe I should actually compete this time around?".