The Jokic vs. SGA "Debate" Settles LeBron vs. MJ

[letskissbro]

When talking about the modern NBA, the debate between Jokic and SGA isn’t much of a debate at all. Jokic is widely recognized as the better offensive player, and better player overall despite the defensive gap—and for good reason. Jokic dictates an offense at elite efficiency, while SGA, for all his scoring talent, doesn’t carry the same playmaking burden.

Apply that same standard to LeBron vs. MJ. MJ was the better pure scorer, but LeBron created offense for an entire team while still being an elite scorer himself. Statistically, LeBron is arguably the closest comparison to Jokic when it comes to combining elite scoring, playmaking, and efficiency—something that has also been true for SGA in recent seasons and for MJ in his era. If Jokic over SGA offensively is clear, why wouldn’t LeBron over MJ be the same?

To illustrate the comparison:

2025 Jokic:
29.8 pts/75 | 10.2 ast/75 | 66.6 TS%

2013 LeBron (adjusted for inflation):
30.3 pts/75 | 8.7 ast/75 | 68.7 TS%

2025 Shai:
34.7 pts/75 | 6.3 ast/75 | 64.3 TS%

1991 Jordan (adusted for inflation):
33.8 pts/75 | 5.9 ast/75 | 65.1 TS%

Obviously the analogy isn’t perfect stylistically. Jokic operates from the post, using high-post passing and providing 5-out spacing, while LeBron applies more consistent pressure from the perimeter with his downhill gravity. MJ was more explosive, thriving in the high post and attacking off-ball actions, while SGA leans more on pick-and-roll play and being a better three-point threat.

But in both cases, one functions more as an offensive hub, constantly picking apart coverages and creating for others, while the other is more of a self-generated offensive force, breaking down defenses and applying scoring pressure at all times. Which begs the question: if playmaking and offensive impact are what separate Jokic and SGA, why wouldn’t the same logic apply to LeBron and MJ?

[EmpireFalls]

Because Jokic isn’t LeBron and Jordan isn’t SGA.

[letskissbro]

Because Jokic isn’t LeBron and Jordan isn’t SGA.

Just saying 'they’re different players' doesn’t refute the reasoning behind the analogy. I made it pretty clear that the point isn’t that Jokic is LeBron or that SGA is MJ, it’s that the offensive dynamics in both comparisons share a ton of similarities. If playmaking and overall offensive creation are what separate Jokic and SGA, why wouldn’t the same apply to LeBron and MJ? There are also plenty of people who consider Luka a better offensive player than Shai for these same reasons, even though he doesn't match up to LeBron from an efficiency standpoint.

[OhayoKD]

Because Jokic isn’t LeBron and Jordan isn’t SGA.

Just saying 'they’re different players' doesn’t refute the reasoning behind the analogy. I made it pretty clear that the point isn’t that Jokic is LeBron or that SGA is MJ, it’s that the offensive dynamics in both comparisons share a ton of similarities. If playmaking and overall offensive creation are what separate Jokic and SGA, why wouldn’t the same apply to LeBron and MJ? There are also plenty of people who consider Luka a better offensive player than Shai for these same reasons, even though he doesn't match up to LeBron from an efficiency standpoint.

But aren't you forgetting that the player who couldn't co-exist with rip hamilton is actually a better fit next to other high-volume scorers?

[TheGOATRises007]

At least you're not using Messi and Ronaldo for the comparison.

[Djoker]

The gap in playmaking between Jokic and SGA is much bigger than that between Lebron and Jordan. Not to mention that SGA at this point also hasn't proven a whole lot in the PS.

[lessthanjake]

I think this is a weird analogy. SGA and MJ is not actually a crazy comparison. They’re not the same when we drill down into details, but there’s definitely parallels in a more general sense. The way they play is broadly similar, even if the way they do it athletically is a bit different (Jordan was more athletic and stronger and has the huge hands, but SGA has his brand of weird herky-jerky movement that is obviously effective).

Jokic and LeBron are just really different though. You can broadly say they’re both good playmakers, but the way that they playmake is very different, so it naturally leads to different types of looks for the offense and fits with different types of teammates. Meanwhile, you can say they’re both good scorers who are efficient, but again, the way they score is really different and so their strengths and weaknesses as scorers are pretty different. Furthermore, in contrast to LeBron, Jokic derives a significant amount of offensive value from his offensive rebounding. His defensive rebounding is even more valuable, but his offensive rebounding and boxing out is still a significant part of his value as an offensive player. Jokic also derives significant offensive value from being a great screen setter, which is something LeBron just doesn’t do much. They’re also obviously very different defenders, with Jokic being a very unique defender who is a center that is a weak rim protector but has GOAT-level defensive rebounding impact and good hands and discipline. LeBron is just a completely different player defensively. It’s all just very different, unless you’re looking at it from the most basic possible perspective.

I’d also note that even if the two analogies (i.e. Jordan/SGA and LeBron/Jokic) were good ones, an opinion about SGA vs. Jokic wouldn’t logically have much bearing on an opinion about Jordan vs. LeBron. That’s because even if SGA/Jordan are similar or Jokic/LeBron are similar, one could easily think one of them in each of those analogies is simply a better version of the same type of player. So, for instance, even if one totally bought the analogies and thought those duos are genuinely similar types of players, one could easily think Jokic > SGA *and* Jordan > LeBron, if for instance one thinks Jokic is as good or better than LeBron and Jordan is better than SGA. To put this in some perspective, I think we can all agree that Kobe is a really similar type of player to Jordan. And we might say, for instance, that Duncan is a similar type of player to Kareem (though that’s not as good an analogy). Would anyone really say that if we think Duncan > Kobe that we *must* think Kareem > Jordan? No, because I think most of us would say that there’s pretty clearly a bigger gap between Jordan and Kobe than there is between Kareem and Duncan. Basically, even if these analogies made sense, all this type of thing would tell us is that it is possible for a player of LeBron’s archetype to be better than a player of Jordan’s archetype (or vice versa). But that basically tells us nothing, since that’s basically always going to be true of any two archetypes of player.

[OhayoKD]

The gap in playmaking between Jokic and SGA is much bigger than that between Lebron and Jordan. Not to mention that SGA at this point also hasn't proven a whole lot in the PS.

Wrong:

Spoiler:

For comparison...

.44 edtos per possession
0.61 TEDA (total extra defenders affected) per possession

During the first 40 possessions of game 1 of this finals, Lebron averaged, per possession:
.425 EDTOs and .775 TEDAs

During the first 40 possessions of game 5 vs the Lakers in 91, MJ averaged, per possession,
.225 EDTOs, and .5 TEDAs

(Also, I only conned you on the first half to be fair. Rest was your own doing. )

The playmaking gap between 22 Year Old Lebron and "Djoker says he's a Lebron-level playmaker" Michael Jordan was bigger than the gap between Jokic and Shai

Lebron at 21 had 50 percent more creations in the playoffs than peak MJ averaged with Lebron taking out and affected more defenders per creation.

Lebron vs Jordan is only a debate for box-watchers

[falcolombardi]

More than anythingh else it shows that jordan statistical profile (lots of scoring, 6 assists/rebounds per gane or thereabout) is less "sexy" at first glance to people these days

[lessthanjake]

The gap in playmaking between Jokic and SGA is much bigger than that between Lebron and Jordan. Not to mention that SGA at this point also hasn't proven a whole lot in the PS.

Wrong:

Spoiler:

For comparison...

.44 edtos per possession
0.61 TEDA (total extra defenders affected) per possession

During the first 40 possessions of game 1 of this finals, Lebron averaged, per possession:
.425 EDTOs and .775 TEDAs

During the first 40 possessions of game 5 vs the Lakers in 91, MJ averaged, per possession,
.225 EDTOs, and .5 TEDAs

(Also, I only conned you on the first half to be fair. Rest was your own doing. )

The playmaking gap between 22 Year Old Lebron and "Djoker says he's a Lebron-level playmaker" Michael Jordan was bigger than the gap between Jokic and Shai

Lebron at 21 had 50 percent more creations in the playoffs than peak MJ averaged with Lebron taking out and affected more defenders per creation.

Lebron vs Jordan is only a debate for box-watchers

Even if we accepted the premise/results of your analysis—which is a really big “even if” since, as I’ve pointed out many times before, it’s analysis by an ideologue who admittedly “like[s] creating narratives” and that analysis uses really vague, subjective, and underinclusive criteria on extremely small and non-random samples—I don’t really see how you think this could logically render Djoker’s statement “wrong.” There’s no analysis here about Jokic or SGA, so it doesn’t tell us anything at all about the gap between those two, and therefore can’t tell us anything about whether Djoker’s statement was correct.

[lessthanjake]

More than anythingh else it shows that jordan statistical profile (lots of scoring, 6 assists/rebounds per gane or thereabout) is less "sexy" at first glance to people these days

There’s perhaps some truth to this. But it’s hard to really know, since there wasn’t someone with Jokic’s statistical profile in Jordan’s era (or ever, before Jokic himself). And, in any event, SGA is actually the prohibitive MVP favorite over Jokic, so that profile does still seem pretty sexy to people! To the extent that SGA isn’t seen in the same way as Jordan was, I think that’s a function of the fact that he hasn’t been playing at this level for years and years and hasn’t won titles or even gotten far in the playoffs. SGA just still has a lot to prove to people, even if so far this year he’s been playing at an all-time level.

[Jaqua92]

The gap in playmaking between Jokic and SGA is much bigger than that between Lebron and Jordan. Not to mention that SGA at this point also hasn't proven a whole lot in the PS.

Also SGA has done is lose when he's expected to win in every meaningful opportunity he's had.

Like, legitimately every single opportunity he's had.

Don't understand why one of the most unique offensive players we've ever seen has such a massive group of childish haters.

[Jaqua92]

The gap in playmaking between Jokic and SGA is much bigger than that between Lebron and Jordan. Not to mention that SGA at this point also hasn't proven a whole lot in the PS.

Wrong:

Spoiler:

For comparison...

.44 edtos per possession
0.61 TEDA (total extra defenders affected) per possession

During the first 40 possessions of game 1 of this finals, Lebron averaged, per possession:
.425 EDTOs and .775 TEDAs

During the first 40 possessions of game 5 vs the Lakers in 91, MJ averaged, per possession,
.225 EDTOs, and .5 TEDAs

(Also, I only conned you on the first half to be fair. Rest was your own doing. )

The playmaking gap between 22 Year Old Lebron and "Djoker says he's a Lebron-level playmaker" Michael Jordan was bigger than the gap between Jokic and Shai

Lebron at 21 had 50 percent more creations in the playoffs than peak MJ averaged with Lebron taking out and affected more defenders per creation.

Lebron vs Jordan is only a debate for box-watchers

I've legitimately never seen you post in a single thread that doesn't involve MJ, and ive never seen you post anything other than attempts to devalue MJ.

I don't care about your arguments or stats, or anything but I really do want to know why you feel this way about MJ. This isnt about basketball

[EmpireFalls]

SGA and Jordan are actually eerily similar. I can do a deeper breakdown of the differences in their game and physical makeup (Jordan was more of a rim attacker, got more separation, truly had no tendency for defenders to key onto, played off ball more, obviously more explosive and likely to dunk, SGA more of an off ball defender in OKC scheme)

But in terms of the way they impact the game and get their buckets it’s eerily similar. I picked two random games to try to confirm this and was shocked at how Jordan-esque some of SGA’s moves look. Just hyper-decisive, efficient move, pull up, shot, easy. Don’t think there’s that big of a playmaking gap either. 24-25 SGA can actually be comparable to good versions of Jordan imo, doesn’t mean he’s as good, but there are undeniable similarities. Like, clearly more similar than someone like DeRozan or Kawhi who are frequently called Jordan disciples.

Jokic and LeBron on the other hand are so wholly different it’s like comparing an apple and a slice of pizza. Not even in the same genus.

[OhayoKD]

The gap in playmaking between Jokic and SGA is much bigger than that between Lebron and Jordan. Not to mention that SGA at this point also hasn't proven a whole lot in the PS.

Wrong:

Spoiler:

For comparison...

.44 edtos per possession
0.61 TEDA (total extra defenders affected) per possession

During the first 40 possessions of game 1 of this finals, Lebron averaged, per possession:
.425 EDTOs and .775 TEDAs

During the first 40 possessions of game 5 vs the Lakers in 91, MJ averaged, per possession,
.225 EDTOs, and .5 TEDAs

(Also, I only conned you on the first half to be fair. Rest was your own doing. )

The playmaking gap between 22 Year Old Lebron and "Djoker says he's a Lebron-level playmaker" Michael Jordan was bigger than the gap between Jokic and Shai

Lebron at 21 had 50 percent more creations in the playoffs than peak MJ averaged with Lebron taking out and affected more defenders per creation.

Lebron vs Jordan is only a debate for box-watchers

Even if we accepted the premise/results of your analysis—which is a really big “even if” since, as I’ve pointed out many times before, it’s analysis by an ideologue who “like[s] creating narrative,”.

My tracking gives more opportunity to peer-review than pretty much anyone's and you batted 1/6 trying to find issues. And now you're roping in tracking that involves two whole other "idealogues" who found even more "narrative-friendly" results.

An airtight narrative makes for a better one and as you as well as the other posters who have started recreating this process are showing, there is nowhere near as much "room for interpretation" here as box-score watchers want there to be.

I gave Jordan the 2 most generous PPs I've ever credited someone with in 88 and the most generous set of edtos in a possession in 91. I'm almost done tracking the best half of the best defensive game he had vs New York in 93 according to Djoker. For the same reason why Konr chose a 12-year average over a higher-scoring 8-year one for Lebron in his WOWY post. And for the same reason Falco used 92 instead of 93 to derive a signal for three-peat MJ.

Biasing the data/film towards your narrative is easy. Biasing it against and still being right? That's impressive.

One could gerrymander a favorable 2019 sample using injury as an excuse...or they can just show that even biased data heavily favors Lebron. I think the latter approach is more effective.

I've legitimately never seen you post in a single thread that doesn't involve MJ, and ive never seen you post anything other than attempts to devalue MJ.

I don't care about your arguments or stats, or anything but I really do want to know why you feel this way about MJ. This isnt about basketball

Because helping annihilate the mythos of the biggest fraud in team sport history is a cause worthy of my talents. As well as my Noblesse oblige.

(There are also myriad side-benefits like easy prose/world-building/logical reasoning practice, networking, and now even financial compensation).

Low opportunity cost, high reward, and makes the world better. Pretty good deal all considered.

[lessthanjake]

Wrong:

Spoiler:

For comparison...

.44 edtos per possession
0.61 TEDA (total extra defenders affected) per possession

During the first 40 possessions of game 1 of this finals, Lebron averaged, per possession:
.425 EDTOs and .775 TEDAs

During the first 40 possessions of game 5 vs the Lakers in 91, MJ averaged, per possession,
.225 EDTOs, and .5 TEDAs

(Also, I only conned you on the first half to be fair. Rest was your own doing. )

The playmaking gap between 22 Year Old Lebron and "Djoker says he's a Lebron-level playmaker" Michael Jordan was bigger than the gap between Jokic and Shai

Lebron at 21 had 50 percent more creations in the playoffs than peak MJ averaged with Lebron taking out and affected more defenders per creation.

Lebron vs Jordan is only a debate for box-watchers

Even if we accepted the premise/results of your analysis—which is a really big “even if” since, as I’ve pointed out many times before, it’s analysis by an ideologue who “like[s] creating narrative,”.

My tracking gives more opportunity to peer-review than pretty much anyone's and you batted 1/6 trying to find issues. And now you're roping in tracking that involves two whole other "idealogues" who found even more "narrative-friendly" results.

An airtight narrative makes for a better one and as you as well as the other posters who have started recreating this process are showing, there is nowhere near as much "room for interpretation" here as box-score watchers want there to be.

I gave Jordan the 2 most generous PPs I've ever credited someone with in 88 and the most generous set of edtos in a possession in 91. I'm almost done tracking the best half of the best defensive game he had vs New York in 93 according to Djoker. For the same reason why Konr chose a 12-year average over a higher-scoring 8-year one for Lebron in his WOWY post. And for the same reason Falco used 92 instead of 93 to derive a signal for three-peat MJ.

Biasing the data/film towards your narrative is easy. Biasing it against and still being right? That's impressive.

I see you cut off the rest of what I said so that you could avoid addressing the primary point I was making here. We’ve gone over the gaping flaws in your analysis many times before and nothing you wrote above negates or even meaningfully addresses those flaws at all, but that wasn’t my primary point. As I said, even if we assumed that your wildly flawed analysis was actually 100% correct, it does not logically allow you to say that Djoker’s statement was “wrong,” because the analysis does not include Jokic and SGA. You failed to address that point, and actually cut off your quote of me mid-sentence in order to not include it.

Given this obvious logical flaw in your prior post, perhaps you really are in need of the “logical reasoning practice” that you mention posting about Jordan helps you practice. So keep getting those reps, kid!

I've legitimately never seen you post in a single thread that doesn't involve MJ, and ive never seen you post anything other than attempts to devalue MJ.

I don't care about your arguments or stats, or anything but I really do want to know why you feel this way about MJ. This isnt about basketball

Because helping annihilate the mythos of the biggest fraud in team sport history is a cause worthy of my talents. As well as my Noblesse oblige.

This is actually incredibly funny, and I really hope you’re being sarcastic. Just utterly wild stuff otherwise.

[OhayoKD]

Even if we accepted the premise/results of your analysis—which is a really big “even if” since, as I’ve pointed out many times before, it’s analysis by an ideologue who “like[s] creating narrative,”.

My tracking gives more opportunity to peer-review than pretty much anyone's and you batted 1/6 trying to find issues. And now you're roping in tracking that involves two whole other "idealogues" who found even more "narrative-friendly" results.

An airtight narrative makes for a better one and as you as well as the other posters who have started recreating this process are showing, there is nowhere near as much "room for interpretation" here as box-score watchers want there to be.

I gave Jordan the 2 most generous PPs I've ever credited someone with in 88 and the most generous set of edtos in a possession in 91. I'm almost done tracking the best half of the best defensive game he had vs New York in 93 according to Djoker. For the same reason why Konr chose a 12-year average over a higher-scoring 8-year one for Lebron in his WOWY post. And for the same reason Falco used 92 instead of 93 to derive a signal for three-peat MJ.

Biasing the data/film towards your narrative is easy. Biasing it against and still being right? That's impressive.

I see you cut off the rest of what I said so that you could avoid addressing the primary point I was making here. We’ve gone over the gaping flaws in your analysis many times before and nothing you wrote above negates or even meaningfully addresses those flaws at all, but that wasn’t my primary point. As I said, even if we assumed that your wildly flawed analysis was actually 100% correct, it does not logically allow you to say that Djoker’s statement was “wrong,” because the analysis does not include Jokic and SGA. You failed to address that point, and actually cut off your quote of me mid-sentence in order to not include it.

True.

I've legitimately never seen you post in a single thread that doesn't involve MJ, and ive never seen you post anything other than attempts to devalue MJ.

I don't care about your arguments or stats, or anything but I really do want to know why you feel this way about MJ. This isnt about basketball

Because helping annihilate the mythos of the biggest fraud in team sport history is a cause worthy of my talents. As well as my Noblesse oblige.

This is actually incredibly funny, and I really hope you’re being sarcastic. Just utterly wild stuff otherwise.

Glad you're entertained.

[70sFan]

This board is obsessed with MJ Vs LBJ, I can't stand reading any of these silly talks recently...

[OhayoKD]

This board is obsessed with MJ Vs LBJ, I can't stand reading any of these silly talks recently...

True. MJ vs Steph would be more interesting.

[70sFan]

This board is obsessed with MJ Vs LBJ, I can't stand reading any of these silly talks recently...

True. MJ vs Steph would be more interesting.

Yet you keep talking about the former. You're wasting your talents