Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger?

Moderators: Doctor MJ, penbeast0, PaulieWal, Quotatious, Clyde Frazier, trex_8063

User avatar
NO-KG-AI
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 37,753
And1: 9,518
Joined: Jul 19, 2005
Location: The city of witch doctors, and good ol' pickpockets

Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#41 » by NO-KG-AI » Sat Oct 10, 2020 6:04 am

This will sound weird, but I’d probably take LeBron if Jordan doesn’t exist on the same timeline, for the added years... but if they played their years side by side, I honestly think I’d have the better player for all the years until Jordan retires. So as long as I don’t blow it as a GM, I probably have the best chances.

If there is no Jordan, I probably want the extra years of LeBron vs the 13 or whatever Bulls years from MJ.
Doctor MJ wrote:I don't understand why people jump in a thread and say basically, "This thing you're all talking about. I'm too ignorant to know anything about it. Lollerskates!"
User avatar
SeniorWalker
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,288
And1: 1,133
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Location: at the event horizon and well on my way in, but you're wondering when i'll get there

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#42 » by SeniorWalker » Sat Oct 10, 2020 12:55 pm

People talk about value added but LeBron is not going to stay with the team for his entire career. When the roster weakens, hes going to leave for better shores.

On top of that, he will dictate things and force the team to build in a certain way and leave the roster gutted and depleted when he inevitably does leave within a few years. This is not my opinion, its david Griffin's. If youre a GM, undoubtedly LeBron will bring a ton of value to your franchise in the short run but in the long run its highly questionable if you wouldnt rather have a number of others players that wont leave you high and dry.

LeBron has kept in incredible shape for a 17 year athlete but hes also had far more freedom and power to assemble his own teams than anyone and leave when he sees a better situation. I think that should be taken into account when one talls better career. If I'm a GM and owner, tbh LeBron is not even in my top 5 of players I want for career because i know for sure im not getting all of it and I have to deal with all of the above and the headaches of his passive aggressive personality. I want someone who is going to be committed to winning at all costs, not interfere with my job, and not leave when a better situation comes up somewhere else. There are a number of ATG that have done better than Bron on that front evem though Bron is a better individual talent.
"And always remember: one fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish, knick knack, paddy whack, give a dog a bone, two thousand, zero, zero, party, oops! Out of time, my bacon smellin' fine."
Owly
Analyst
Posts: 3,114
And1: 1,600
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#43 » by Owly » Sat Oct 10, 2020 2:23 pm

SeniorWalker wrote:People talk about value added but LeBron is not going to stay with the team for his entire career. When the roster weakens, hes going to leave for better shores.

On top of that, he will dictate things and force the team to build in a certain way and leave the roster gutted and depleted when he inevitably does leave within a few years. This is not my opinion, its david Griffin's. If youre a GM, undoubtedly LeBron will bring a ton of value to your franchise in the short run but in the long run its highly questionable if you wouldnt rather have a number of others players that wont leave you high and dry.

LeBron has kept in incredible shape for a 17 year athlete but hes also had far more freedom and power to assemble his own teams than anyone and leave when he sees a better situation. I think that should be taken into account when one talls better career. If I'm a GM and owner, tbh LeBron is not even in my top 5 of players I want for career because i know for sure im not getting all of it and I have to deal with all of the above and the headaches of his passive aggressive personality. I want someone who is going to be committed to winning at all costs, not interfere with my job, and not leave when a better situation comes up somewhere else. There are a number of ATG that have done better than Bron on that front evem though Bron is a better individual talent.

I have to wonder how you can make an informed decision on who would "leave you high and dry" across eras. A large chunk of history is pre-free agency. Then without an individual player max you can pay wild amounts to keep guys until the late 90s (at the extreme MJ using 1.240329218 x the salary cap in 1997). Even after that longer contracts were available than are now so movement was less likely. You can maybe get some indication from trade demands (Magic, Olajuwon) but can't really compare fairly because situations are so unalike.
User avatar
SeniorWalker
Assistant Coach
Posts: 4,288
And1: 1,133
Joined: Jan 14, 2009
Location: at the event horizon and well on my way in, but you're wondering when i'll get there

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#44 » by SeniorWalker » Sat Oct 10, 2020 9:11 pm

Owly wrote:
SeniorWalker wrote:People talk about value added but LeBron is not going to stay with the team for his entire career. When the roster weakens, hes going to leave for better shores.

On top of that, he will dictate things and force the team to build in a certain way and leave the roster gutted and depleted when he inevitably does leave within a few years. This is not my opinion, its david Griffin's. If youre a GM, undoubtedly LeBron will bring a ton of value to your franchise in the short run but in the long run its highly questionable if you wouldnt rather have a number of others players that wont leave you high and dry.

LeBron has kept in incredible shape for a 17 year athlete but hes also had far more freedom and power to assemble his own teams than anyone and leave when he sees a better situation. I think that should be taken into account when one talls better career. If I'm a GM and owner, tbh LeBron is not even in my top 5 of players I want for career because i know for sure im not getting all of it and I have to deal with all of the above and the headaches of his passive aggressive personality. I want someone who is going to be committed to winning at all costs, not interfere with my job, and not leave when a better situation comes up somewhere else. There are a number of ATG that have done better than Bron on that front evem though Bron is a better individual talent.

I have to wonder how you can make an informed decision on who would "leave you high and dry" across eras. A large chunk of history is pre-free agency. Then without an individual player max you can pay wild amounts to keep guys until the late 90s (at the extreme MJ using 1.240329218 x the salary cap in 1997). Even after that longer contracts were available than are now so movement was less likely. You can maybe get some indication from trade demands (Magic, Olajuwon) but can't really compare fairly because situations are so unalike.

Its interesting that you bring up free agency history. Many ATG played before free agency but it also didn't start with LeBron.

In actuality, it is no exaggeration to say that LeBron essentially created this environment with the decision in 2010. That will unquestionably be the biggest part of his legacy, the player empowerment era. There has never, ever been anything remotely resembling that before LeBron and none since. There are a large number of things that we have only seen during the LeBron era, most importantly the very significant klutch sports influence that even GMs around the league openly admit is problematic for them. This is well beyond "hakeem never had a chance to do this!" I have to ask if you're blind here, no disrespect to you, but when has this even been so much as attempted with anyone else? Seriously. No one has to speculate with LeBron. The conditions exist because he and his team created them. And because he created them we have to evaluate it as part of his legacy, not try to pretend like a Hakeem would've done this in another timeline. Its just not applicable. LeBron is the chosen one of the corporate world, nobody else ever had a shot at his position.

And thats why one had to question career value with LeBron because he played with such an enormous advantage over his peers on the ATG lists. LeBron playing for 3 different franchises and getting to the finals would be a remarkable achievement compared to others, if it were along similar conditions where the teams built organically. But, in the words of david griffin, these teams 'did not build organically', they were mashed together, recruited, and stolen away from other franchises to fit LeBron with what was essentially "skipping the line" to contend for a title in a narrow window. What if in LeBrons likely 20 year career, he doesnt get to switch teams 4 times while ensuring each time that he immediately gets access to elite talent to contend with? He didnt just take random assortments of players to the finals 10 times, he was gifted rosters through his league influence. Any honest assessment takes this into consideration when looking at his career value. You have to.

The better question is, how did LeBron amass so much league influence in the first place? I suspect you may want to ask Disney and Nike those questions, since they have handled LeBron's career since before he entered the league.
"And always remember: one fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish, knick knack, paddy whack, give a dog a bone, two thousand, zero, zero, party, oops! Out of time, my bacon smellin' fine."
tihsad
Junior
Posts: 305
And1: 109
Joined: Dec 23, 2007
     

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#45 » by tihsad » Sat Oct 10, 2020 10:23 pm

Bidofo wrote:
tihsad wrote:It's concept basis, if I'm not mistaken, is that a player that adds a 5% of winning a title over 20 years is superior to a player adding a 20% chance of winning over 9 years.

I think it's the other way around actually. He adds the championship-odds improvement for every season, so in this comparison it would be like 0.05*20 = 1 vs 0.2*9 = 1.8, which obviously favors the latter player. Then I think he creates tiers/ranges and ranks players within them how he sees fit, if it's close enough. In the end, no one can escape from the subjectivity of GOAT rankings though.


Clearly my numbers were off, but if you prefer = 0.1 x 20 > 0.2 x9, or simply 2 > 1.8. I have no problem with Elgee opting to rank players in the manner in which he did, I just don't like it considered as a default. The examples I used were not designed to favor any particular player - rather to point out the futility of any exact science. GOAT rankings are mostly subjective, as I believe we both agree. There are no silver bullets, magic formulas, lack of bias, or deepthroat vids. Have fun and argue to your hearts content, and just enjoy it for what it is without malice.
The Rodzilla wrote:He has all the ingredients of a superstar, he banged the Madonna, he is in the movies, he is in the hall of fame, he grabs all the rebounds etc
Owly
Analyst
Posts: 3,114
And1: 1,600
Joined: Mar 12, 2010

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#46 » by Owly » Sun Oct 11, 2020 8:26 am

SeniorWalker wrote:
Owly wrote:
SeniorWalker wrote:People talk about value added but LeBron is not going to stay with the team for his entire career. When the roster weakens, hes going to leave for better shores.

On top of that, he will dictate things and force the team to build in a certain way and leave the roster gutted and depleted when he inevitably does leave within a few years. This is not my opinion, its david Griffin's. If youre a GM, undoubtedly LeBron will bring a ton of value to your franchise in the short run but in the long run its highly questionable if you wouldnt rather have a number of others players that wont leave you high and dry.

LeBron has kept in incredible shape for a 17 year athlete but hes also had far more freedom and power to assemble his own teams than anyone and leave when he sees a better situation. I think that should be taken into account when one talls better career. If I'm a GM and owner, tbh LeBron is not even in my top 5 of players I want for career because i know for sure im not getting all of it and I have to deal with all of the above and the headaches of his passive aggressive personality. I want someone who is going to be committed to winning at all costs, not interfere with my job, and not leave when a better situation comes up somewhere else. There are a number of ATG that have done better than Bron on that front evem though Bron is a better individual talent.

I have to wonder how you can make an informed decision on who would "leave you high and dry" across eras. A large chunk of history is pre-free agency. Then without an individual player max you can pay wild amounts to keep guys until the late 90s (at the extreme MJ using 1.240329218 x the salary cap in 1997). Even after that longer contracts were available than are now so movement was less likely. You can maybe get some indication from trade demands (Magic, Olajuwon) but can't really compare fairly because situations are so unalike.

Its interesting that you bring up free agency history. Many ATG played before free agency but it also didn't start with LeBron.

In actuality, it is no exaggeration to say that LeBron essentially created this environment with the decision in 2010. That will unquestionably be the biggest part of his legacy, the player empowerment era. There has never, ever been anything remotely resembling that before LeBron and none since. There are a large number of things that we have only seen during the LeBron era, most importantly the very significant klutch sports influence that even GMs around the league openly admit is problematic for them. This is well beyond "hakeem never had a chance to do this!" I have to ask if you're blind here, no disrespect to you, but when has this even been so much as attempted with anyone else? Seriously. No one has to speculate with LeBron. The conditions exist because he and his team created them. And because he created them we have to evaluate it as part of his legacy, not try to pretend like a Hakeem would've done this in another timeline. Its just not applicable. LeBron is the chosen one of the corporate world, nobody else ever had a shot at his position.

And thats why one had to question career value with LeBron because he played with such an enormous advantage over his peers on the ATG lists. LeBron playing for 3 different franchises and getting to the finals would be a remarkable achievement compared to others, if it were along similar conditions where the teams built organically. But, in the words of david griffin, these teams 'did not build organically', they were mashed together, recruited, and stolen away from other franchises to fit LeBron with what was essentially "skipping the line" to contend for a title in a narrow window. What if in LeBrons likely 20 year career, he doesnt get to switch teams 4 times while ensuring each time that he immediately gets access to elite talent to contend with? He didnt just take random assortments of players to the finals 10 times, he was gifted rosters through his league influence. Any honest assessment takes this into consideration when looking at his career value. You have to.

The better question is, how did LeBron amass so much league influence in the first place? I suspect you may want to ask Disney and Nike those questions, since they have handled LeBron's career since before he entered the league.

You say free agency didn't start with LeBron but seem ignore the rest.

No individual player max (nor a cap on length meant) again MJ could be offered a contract 1.24x the cap. Magic could be offered a 25 year contract extension. Nor a rookie scale. A smart team could structure contracts such to ensure a player they had the rights to had neither the means nor the desire to leave.

You ask when this has been attempted by others and ask if I'm blind and I have to ask if you read the above. Few if any great players had the capacity to make vaguely close to as much money on contracts by transferring teams* (and of course LeBron has been willing to leave money on the table to play for a good team, a boon to a GM). It's the player (not "LeBron") empowerment era because of how CBAs (in concert with more players being independent [from salary]-ly wealthy) implicitly encouraged this (fwiw, probably at least the second player empowerment era, the first perhaps being the early-to-mid 90s where the top rookies held huge financial leverage and got monster contracts sometimes adjacent to franchise valuations before ever playing and even with stuff like a one year opt out [C Webb], and again Jordan could get more than the cap - players had different types of leverage at different times).

Spoiler:
Arguably this is changing in the 2000s once the individual max is in place. e.g. If Shaq is doing "pay me" stuff and Kobe's demanding you make a choice, between them the stars can demand a split. But Shaq and Garnett were signed before the individual max's and rookie scale came in so could always make far more by signing with Bird rights and demanding a trade than actually leaving via FA. Kobe and Duncan are I think the first guys to to have had somewhat of a choice (where finances weren't radically lopsided towards remaining), and both flirted with moves (Orlando 2000 for Duncan, Clippers 2004 for Kobe) and Kobe also made trade demands. But even so they weren't as systematically encouraged to consider leaving as players since the 2011 CBA where contract lengths were shortened.

Maybe one could argue that whilst the ABA existed (with no cap) superstars such as Jabbar had location and financial leverage.


If there's a specific move or set of moves you want to discuss fine, but with the "stolen" teams, "inevitable" leaving, "skipping the line" (which also somewhat ignores the point that, say, Magic didn't have to be concerned that secondary level stars would have the leverage to demand to leave their teams, historically if you had a good cast it tended to stay that way) suggest you're invested in a moralistic perspective in which what was done was inevitable and wrong.

If your assessment is based on finals runs of course you would have to take supporting talent into account (and arguably as importantly in this case, conference [im]balance). Fwiw, I don't think LeBron's were exceptional in general (Cleveland 1: good fit, pedestrian talent; Miami: exceptional top end talent [initially, less so with Wade slipping], Wade a poor fit, 4-10 weak especially the early years ...). Off the top of my head I think I'd prefer Jordan (once built up), Magic or Bird's casts in their eras. As implied above the East has been very weak (though, otoh, not as much as the Showtime Lakers' West).

I don't think your Disney Nike stuff is a better question than how you apply this criteria across wildly different circumstances (and with differing levels of [but generally limited] information), but given it's the one you wanted to answer I think I'll leave it there.
freethedevil
Head Coach
Posts: 6,335
And1: 2,891
Joined: Dec 09, 2018
         

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#47 » by freethedevil » Tue Oct 13, 2020 8:37 am

SeniorWalker wrote:
Owly wrote:
SeniorWalker wrote:People talk about value added but LeBron is not going to stay with the team for his entire career. When the roster weakens, hes going to leave for better shores.

On top of that, he will dictate things and force the team to build in a certain way and leave the roster gutted and depleted when he inevitably does leave within a few years. This is not my opinion, its david Griffin's. If youre a GM, undoubtedly LeBron will bring a ton of value to your franchise in the short run but in the long run its highly questionable if you wouldnt rather have a number of others players that wont leave you high and dry.

LeBron has kept in incredible shape for a 17 year athlete but hes also had far more freedom and power to assemble his own teams than anyone and leave when he sees a better situation. I think that should be taken into account when one talls better career. If I'm a GM and owner, tbh LeBron is not even in my top 5 of players I want for career because i know for sure im not getting all of it and I have to deal with all of the above and the headaches of his passive aggressive personality. I want someone who is going to be committed to winning at all costs, not interfere with my job, and not leave when a better situation comes up somewhere else. There are a number of ATG that have done better than Bron on that front evem though Bron is a better individual talent.

I have to wonder how you can make an informed decision on who would "leave you high and dry" across eras. A large chunk of history is pre-free agency. Then without an individual player max you can pay wild amounts to keep guys until the late 90s (at the extreme MJ using 1.240329218 x the salary cap in 1997). Even after that longer contracts were available than are now so movement was less likely. You can maybe get some indication from trade demands (Magic, Olajuwon) but can't really compare fairly because situations are so unalike.

Its interesting that you bring up free agency history. Many ATG played before free agency but it also didn't start with LeBron.

In actuality, it is no exaggeration to say that LeBron essentially created this environment with the decision in 2010. That will unquestionably be the biggest part of his legacy, the player empowerment era. There has never, ever been anything remotely resembling that before LeBron and none since. There are a large number of things that we have only seen during the LeBron era, most importantly the very significant klutch sports influence that even GMs around the league openly admit is problematic for them. This is well beyond "hakeem never had a chance to do this!" I have to ask if you're blind here, no disrespect to you, but when has this even been so much as attempted with anyone else? Seriously. No one has to speculate with LeBron. The conditions exist because he and his team created them. And because he created them we have to evaluate it as part of his legacy, not try to pretend like a Hakeem would've done this in another timeline. Its just not applicable. LeBron is the chosen one of the corporate world, nobody else ever had a shot at his position.

And thats why one had to question career value with LeBron because he played with such an enormous advantage over his peers on the ATG lists. LeBron playing for 3 different franchises and getting to the finals would be a remarkable achievement compared to others, if it were along similar conditions where the teams built organically. But, in the words of david griffin, these teams 'did not build organically', they were mashed together, recruited, and stolen away from other franchises to fit LeBron with what was essentially "skipping the line" to contend for a title in a narrow window. What if in LeBrons likely 20 year career, he doesnt get to switch teams 4 times while ensuring each time that he immediately gets access to elite talent to contend with? He didnt just take random assortments of players to the finals 10 times, he was gifted rosters through his league influence. Any honest assessment takes this into consideration when looking at his career value. You have to.

The better question is, how did LeBron amass so much league influence in the first place? I suspect you may want to ask Disney and Nike those questions, since they have handled LeBron's career since before he entered the league.

any honest assessment is going to recognize that on a normal franchise for an atg, 40 win lifts get you b2b titles/

Similarly this "enourmous advantage ober his peers" rings extremely hollow when you ignore how the teams his competition was drafted by started out with vastly more taltented or favorable situations. IE: Getting a superstat for the entirety of your prime at his best on a vet minimum.


Finally, i'm not sure why you think value shared between multiple teams is somehow worth less than value shared between one. Team loyalty is code for "entitlement".
The Realist
Starter
Posts: 2,091
And1: 1,496
Joined: Jun 12, 2014

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#48 » by The Realist » Tue Oct 13, 2020 11:20 am

After the 1st season
meh
Gregoire
Veteran
Posts: 2,856
And1: 336
Joined: Jul 29, 2012

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#49 » by Gregoire » Tue Oct 13, 2020 4:05 pm

I think interesting view of it was on Backpicks in 2019 (without 2020 Lebron) -Jordan and Leborn seasons evaluated like that:

CORP values:
MJ 89-91 - 31
MJ 92 - 29
Lebron 13, 12 - 28
MJ 88 - 27,5
MJ 93, Lebron 09 - 27
Lebron 16 - 26,5
Lebron 10, 14 - 26
Lebron 17 - 24,5
Lebron 11, MJ 96 - 24
MJ 97 - 22,5
MJ 98 - 20,5
Lebron 15, 18 - 20
Lebron 08, MJ 87 - 16
Lebron 19 - 14
nate33 wrote:

Yeah, when ever I make all time comparisons, I pretty much ignore the pre-3PT-line era. The game was so different then. It's apples and oranges. Those guys may be better or may be worse, we're never really going to know.
rand
Senior
Posts: 543
And1: 470
Joined: Jun 28, 2013

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#50 » by rand » Sat Oct 17, 2020 8:47 am

Let's say MJ and LeBron are tied at peak value, removing the need to litigate which was better. We'll rate all of each player's seasons by what percentage of their peak value they offered at that year, with an emphasis on post-season value. For convenience, we'll round it off at 5%.

Michael Jordan
Spoiler:
1985 75%
1986 90%
1987 90%
1988 90%
1989 95%
1990 95%
1991 100%
1992 95%
1993 95%
1995 80%
1996 90%
1997 90%
1998 90%
2002 30%
2003 30%

Top-12 season average (Bulls seasons): 90.4%


LeBron James
Spoiler:
2004 30%
2005 65%
2006 70%
2007 75%
2008 75%
2009 90%
2010 85%
2011 80%
2012 90%
2013 90%
2014 90%
2015 85%
2016 95%
2017 100%
2018 100%
2019 80%
2020 95%

Season average: 81.6%
Top-12 season average: 87.7%


Note: I didn't tinker with ratings to get a result that reflects my feeling that if the Wizards seasons are properly excluded, the average Jordan season is better than the average LeBron season, it just worked out that way. I tried to evaluate the statistics from the various seasons taking into account as best I could circumstances like team, quality of competition and injury. Of course this process is very prone to biases and arbitrary choices and is highly fallible.

Not counting the Wizards seasons, LeBron probably surpassed Jordan in total value at the end of 2018. In that sense, I think he's the greatest NBA player of all-time. But I think Jordan gave a few more seasons at 90% or more of their peak value. But that too could still change. LeBron was amazing this season and could be just as good next season. At some point he'll fall off but it'll be fun seeing how many great seasons he has left.
Gregoire
Veteran
Posts: 2,856
And1: 336
Joined: Jul 29, 2012

Re: Jordan vs Lebron: when Lebron's value became bigger? 

Post#51 » by Gregoire » Sun Oct 18, 2020 8:35 am

rand wrote:Let's say MJ and LeBron are tied at peak value, removing the need to litigate which was better. We'll rate all of each player's seasons by what percentage of their peak value they offered at that year, with an emphasis on post-season value. For convenience, we'll round it off at 5%.

Michael Jordan
Spoiler:
1985 75%
1986 90%
1987 90%
1988 90%
1989 95%
1990 95%
1991 100%
1992 95%
1993 95%
1995 80%
1996 90%
1997 90%
1998 90%
2002 30%
2003 30%

Top-12 season average (Bulls seasons): 90.4%


LeBron James
Spoiler:
2004 30%
2005 65%
2006 70%
2007 75%
2008 75%
2009 90%
2010 85%
2011 80%
2012 90%
2013 90%
2014 90%
2015 85%
2016 95%
2017 100%
2018 100%
2019 80%
2020 95%

Season average: 81.6%
Top-12 season average: 87.7%


Note: I didn't tinker with ratings to get a result that reflects my feeling that if the Wizards seasons are properly excluded, the average Jordan season is better than the average LeBron season, it just worked out that way. I tried to evaluate the statistics from the various seasons taking into account as best I could circumstances like team, quality of competition and injury. Of course this process is very prone to biases and arbitrary choices and is highly fallible.

Not counting the Wizards seasons, LeBron probably surpassed Jordan in total value at the end of 2018. In that sense, I think he's the greatest NBA player of all-time. But I think Jordan gave a few more seasons at 90% or more of their peak value. But that too could still change. LeBron was amazing this season and could be just as good next season. At some point he'll fall off but it'll be fun seeing how many great seasons he has left.


Excellent post, thanks! So, basically best 12 seasons of MJ are better, but from 13th season Lebron pulled ahead... MJ actually have 11 full seasons without Wizards years.
nate33 wrote:

Yeah, when ever I make all time comparisons, I pretty much ignore the pre-3PT-line era. The game was so different then. It's apples and oranges. Those guys may be better or may be worse, we're never really going to know.

Return to Player Comparisons