RealGM

Three all-time greats,who was truly better at elevating their teams and making teammates better?? Give reasons down below

MJ
Lebron

gap

Kobe

LeBron > MJ >>>>>> Kobe

LeBron raising the floor of the 2009, 2014 and 2018 teams is ahead of 2006 and 1989 and 1990 for me.

Lebron as a floor-raiser is my pick. His work as in first stint Cleveland is often revered but his 2nd stint as some huge impact indicators.

LeBron's impact on the '16 and '17 Cavaliers...

▫️ When he played: 136-53 (59-win pace)
▫️ When he sat out: 1-13 (6-win pace)

▫️ Regular season: +16.4 on/off
▫️ Postseason: +27.7 on/off
▫️ Finals: +45.2 on/off
[no garbage time]

In a career sense, I think he has the most impressive instances of floor-raising.

Pretty rarely would 'floor raiser' meaningfully adjust my orders on this type of thing.

So I'll stick with LeBron>MJ>Kobe here.

I feel like this is LeBron by default due to his playmaking. Heliocentric guys like LeBron are notriously good floor raisers with questions about how well they mesh with other ball dominant stars. LeBron's size also gives him an advantage defensively over MJ and Kobe.

Though I also have to agree with some of the other posters here that LeBron vs MJ as floor raisers is at least worth a discussion but Kobe feels out of place here.

Yeah, I'm not really sure about how one will quantify this when all 3 players never had the same instances.

I'd go MJ first and solely because the 94 Bulls continued playing at a very good level, even without MJ. Raising everyone's bar goes beyond simply statisical data for me.

LBJ
Kobe

I think LBJ does get overhyped to a degree here. I actually view the drop off of his teams as more of a negative because it basically tells me that he was the sole and only system, which in a way is no differen than hero ball, even if you are getting more assists and rebounds.

I actually think that MJ/Kobe through being pricks created a culture, even if not the most friendly and ultra-competitive, that their teams did more with less.

LeBron is the best floor raiser ever, so him, comfortably.

MacGill wrote:Yeah, I'm not really sure about how one will quantify this when all 3 players never had the same instances.

I'd go MJ first and solely because the 94 Bulls continued playing at a very good level, even without MJ. Raising everyone's bar goes beyond simply statisical data for me.

LBJ
Kobe

I think LBJ does get overhyped to a degree here. I actually view the drop off of his teams as more of a negative because it basically tells me that he was the sole and only system, which in a way is no differen than hero ball, even if you are getting more assists and rebounds.

So... By your assessment you believe everyone who played with MJ elevates their playing level in a way that is resistant to him not being there later. By that logic MJ must have been responsible for Oakley and Grant becoming better players.. For teams that were direct rivals to MJ's Bulls?

Idk how that conflates to being a good 'floor-raiser' for the team in question.

This is incredible. The logic being used is:

Player A leaves Team
Team does good without Player A on Team for a full season
Credit Player A with teams level of play in season without Player A

I mean, come on.

theonlyclutch wrote:

MacGill wrote:Yeah, I'm not really sure about how one will quantify this when all 3 players never had the same instances.

I'd go MJ first and solely because the 94 Bulls continued playing at a very good level, even without MJ. Raising everyone's bar goes beyond simply statisical data for me.

LBJ
Kobe

I think LBJ does get overhyped to a degree here. I actually view the drop off of his teams as more of a negative because it basically tells me that he was the sole and only system, which in a way is no differen than hero ball, even if you are getting more assists and rebounds.

So... By your assessment you believe everyone who played with MJ elevates their playing level in a way that is resistant to him not being there later. By that logic MJ must have been responsible for Oakley and Grant becoming better players.. For teams that were direct rivals to MJ's Bulls?

Idk how that conflates to being a good 'floor-raiser' for the team in question.

Lol, why does everyone get so upset when someone goes against the grain? Lol, by your assessment.....like this is the first time I've ever watched basketball or an all-time great.

You think that any of the said players couldn't have done the same as LBJ? It's like saying LBJ couldn't have won many more scoring titles if that's all he was asked to do. My assessment was simply that just because a team completely falls off it doesn't mean that the star player gets nothing but praise. These are all pro athletes but that doesn't mean they still can't get better. And that doesn't mean by having someone pass them the ball.

Or do you think LBJ was extending everyone's career like Magic did with KAJ. When any team gets a superstar talent a hiarchy is established. And when you compare personalities, it's no surprise why the 'pricks' would demand more, hence not being satisfied with they're current level of play and demanding more. We know LBJ himself did this but we also saw the limits of his leadership as well.

I think LeBron raises your franchise’s floor the most as a) he has the best on court impact for playing with mediocre role players and b) he will push for trades or roster reshuffling if it isn’t working, but if the roster had to be fixed and completely unchanging, it might be MJ.

Bron, Jordan
———
Kobe

Lebron
MJ
Kobe

The MJ/Kobe angle is easy enough to see: Kobe basically played like Mike Lite anyway, so it's a fairly straightforward comparison to make. Kobe was extremely good, but Jordan had superior physical tools and a more efficient approach to things, so that one isn't a challenge.

And IMHO, I don't think it's a challenge to look at Lebron as the #1 guy here, especially since we're looking at floor-raising in particular. He's the best defender of the bunch, the best rebounder, the most efficient scorer apart from Jordan's peak few seasons in the late 80s and the super-early 90s. And he is far and away the best passer/playmaker of the group. So from the POV of raising the floor of bad teams, he just does a lot more for the sake of impact, and with less. Once we start speaking of on better teams, that conversation tonally shifts a bit, but for this? I think it's pretty clear.

While an elite floor raiser I don’t consider Kobe in the GOAT conversation. Kareem would be a better option.

1. Lebron
2. Jordan
3. Kobe

In raising the floor of a potentially mediocre roster, LeBron no question.

MJ and Lebron had the same trajectory in there first few seasons in the league in lifting there mediocre teams in the regular seasons (if we exclude MJs broken foot season).

The only thing is we do have is more scenarios to judge with for LeBron due to the amount of seasons he has been in the league and the amount of teams he has joined....if we also onky judge it purely on the respective era they played in.

So I think it's fair to say Lebron takes this one over MJ, but in my opinion its is a little bit subjective and not as clear cut as what some might think it is

But I'm not clear on OPs question....is it specifically floor raising mediocre teams? Everyteam has a floor, good or bad

MacGill wrote:Yeah, I'm not really sure about how one will quantify this when all 3 players never had the same instances.

I'd go MJ first and solely because the 94 Bulls continued playing at a very good level, even without MJ. Raising everyone's bar goes beyond simply statisical data for me.

LBJ
Kobe

I think LBJ does get overhyped to a degree here. I actually view the drop off of his teams as more of a negative because it basically tells me that he was the sole and only system, which in a way is no differen than hero ball, even if you are getting more assists and rebounds.

I actually think that MJ/Kobe through being pricks created a culture, even if not the most friendly and ultra-competitive, that their teams did more with less.

Amazing, simply amazing.

MacGill wrote:Yeah, I'm not really sure about how one will quantify this when all 3 players never had the same instances.

I'd go MJ first and solely because the 94 Bulls continued playing at a very good level, even without MJ. Raising everyone's bar goes beyond simply statisical data for me.

LBJ
Kobe

I think LBJ does get overhyped to a degree here. I actually view the drop off of his teams as more of a negative because it basically tells me that he was the sole and only system, which in a way is no differen than hero ball, even if you are getting more assists and rebounds.

I actually think that MJ/Kobe through being pricks created a culture, even if not the most friendly and ultra-competitive, that their teams did more with less.

Overhyped to a degree its very.... soft word. You seems to have had hiatus from this forums and will soon recognize what going on here....