People who don't have Jordan as GOAT: What metric(s) would make you change your mind?

[falcolombardi]

Jordan played alongside teammates that were a good fit for him but it's starting to sound like this was a roster on a level we've never seen before.

Not at all, people just underrate the value of good fit.

Of course LeBron didn't have teams as optimal for him because he chose to join other stars, which left less room to fill the team with high level roleplayers. Now sure it isn't an out there suggestion to say LeBron would be able to keep up his 09 impact on a stronger team that fit his skillset better but we've never actually seen it happen. It's still just projection at this point, while we have seen Jordan posting all-time individual seasons regardless of good or bad teammates.

Wait, but we have seen LeBron doing that. How can you call 2013 any differently?

I value proving something a lot, even if that sometimes leans into things like winning bias. LeBron equals MJ as a floor raiser but I value MJ more on strong teams.

LeBron doesn't equal Jordan as a floor raiser, he surpass him quite clearly.

It's somewhat of a similar story with Kareem and Duncan for me. They were at their best individually on bad teams and then took a step back on offense when surrounded with better talent.

Duncan had arguably his best season in 2007. He took a step back on offense, so what? His impact remained top tier level.

Kareem had some of his best seasons next to elite rosters - 1971, 1972, 1980... Kareem also didn't take step back on offense at all - he had his highest usage in Milwaukee next to Oscar/Dandridge.

Russell is the opposite as he is probably the GOAT at elevating strong teams to almost unbeatable status but I do think it's fair to question whether he'd be able to take a mid 80s Bulls or mid-late 00s Cavs team as far as MJ and LeBron were able to do.

Well, we know that past prime Russell was capable of winning the title with ~35 wins level team without him. 1986 Bulls were only slightly worse than that and Jordan didn't elevate them to even close level.

I guess we just disagree on a lot of things here. I'd agree LeBron was a better player in 2013 than in 2009 but he didn't keep up the same level of individual impact due to having to share the ball more with the likes of Wade and Bosh. Jordan also did have to adapt his playstyle when Phil Jackson introduced the triangle and he did just fine. Duncan taking a step back on offense meant he didn't do as much as he did in 02 and 03, while my entire point is Jordan did maintain that individual dominance once he got better teammates around him.

In any case I was under the wrong assumption that this was the peak thread and I believe 91 MJ is the best peak ever due to his level of individual production alongside team success but that's not what this thread is about. I personally am not really a fan of using portability as an important factor for career comparisons as it is mostly speculative. Someone who stayed with the same team for his career could be very portable but we can't say for sure and moves to other teams not going well might be due to circumstances outside of a player's personal portability.

You think jordan kept the same impact in 91 than he had in 88 or 89 with worse teammates?

We have plus-minus playoffs data on prime jordan and his on-off predictably plummets as his teams get better and specially better talent who can play well with him on the bench

This is not a bad thingh, is natural for your impact numbers to be less the bettee your team is, but it seems only lebro gets criticized for that

[70sFan]

I would buy that argument if jordan showed better defensive impact signals than lebron did or raised his teams offense results to higher heights than lebron but instead is the opposite

Criticizing lebron offensive portability alongside other offensive talent when his teams peaked so high (higher than jordan teams) and were all time great over a long strecht of time makes no sense.

This is wrong, at least in RS. Bulls were clearly better offensively in terms of relative offenses than James best teams.

[70sFan]

I guess we just disagree on a lot of things here. I'd agree LeBron was a better player in 2013 than in 2009 but he didn't keep up the same level of individual impact due to having to share the ball more with the likes of Wade and Bosh. Jordan also did have to adapt his playstyle when Phil Jackson introduced the triangle and he did just fine.

What makes you believe that James didn't have the same level of individual impact in 2013 vs 2009? Are you talking about impact or raw production? These are two different things.

Do you think Jordan would keep his production next to Wade?

Duncan taking a step back on offense meant he didn't do as much as he did in 02 and 03, while my entire point is Jordan did maintain that individual dominance once he got better teammates around him.

Duncan didn't take as many shots, it doesn't make him weaker or less impactful. Jordan also took less shots after he got better teammates. It seems that you don't account for that only because Jordan's volume was still high.

You also didn't touch Kareem - do you still think his production/impact got worse with better teammates compared to Jordan?

[falcolombardi]

I would buy that argument if jordan showed better defensive impact signals than lebron did or raised his teams offense results to higher heights than lebron but instead is the opposite

Criticizing lebron offensive portability alongside other offensive talent when his teams peaked so high (higher than jordan teams) and were all time great over a long strecht of time makes no sense.

This is wrong, at least in RS. Bulls were clearly better offensively in terms of relative offenses than James best teams.

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

[70sFan]

I would buy that argument if jordan showed better defensive impact signals than lebron did or raised his teams offense results to higher heights than lebron but instead is the opposite

Criticizing lebron offensive portability alongside other offensive talent when his teams peaked so high (higher than jordan teams) and were all time great over a long strecht of time makes no sense.

This is wrong, at least in RS. Bulls were clearly better offensively in terms of relative offenses than James best teams.

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

[OhayoKD]

Jordan played alongside teammates that were a good fit for him but it's starting to sound like this was a roster on a level we've never seen before.

Not at all, people just underrate the value of good fit.

Of course LeBron didn't have teams as optimal for him because he chose to join other stars, which left less room to fill the team with high level roleplayers. Now sure it isn't an out there suggestion to say LeBron would be able to keep up his 09 impact on a stronger team that fit his skillset better but we've never actually seen it happen. It's still just projection at this point, while we have seen Jordan posting all-time individual seasons regardless of good or bad teammates.

Wait, but we have seen LeBron doing that. How can you call 2013 any differently?

I value proving something a lot, even if that sometimes leans into things like winning bias. LeBron equals MJ as a floor raiser but I value MJ more on strong teams.

LeBron doesn't equal Jordan as a floor raiser, he surpass him quite clearly.

It's somewhat of a similar story with Kareem and Duncan for me. They were at their best individually on bad teams and then took a step back on offense when surrounded with better talent.

Duncan had arguably his best season in 2007. He took a step back on offense, so what? His impact remained top tier level.

Kareem had some of his best seasons next to elite rosters - 1971, 1972, 1980... Kareem also didn't take step back on offense at all - he had his highest usage in Milwaukee next to Oscar/Dandridge.

Russell is the opposite as he is probably the GOAT at elevating strong teams to almost unbeatable status but I do think it's fair to question whether he'd be able to take a mid 80s Bulls or mid-late 00s Cavs team as far as MJ and LeBron were able to do.

Well, we know that past prime Russell was capable of winning the title with ~35 wins level team without him. 1986 Bulls were only slightly worse than that and Jordan didn't elevate them to even close level.

In any case I was under the wrong assumption that this was the peak thread and I believe 91 MJ is the best peak ever due to his level of individual production alongside team success

??
We're strictly talking about how good the players are, nto how well they sustained their goodness.

And 91 MJ was less imapctfu, effecient, and productive across the board than his 90 or 89 interations, so any "best peak ever" argument is going to have to square jordan's team results/cast from that period

[70sFan]

And 91 MJ was less imapctfu, effecient, and productive across the board than his 90 or 89 interations, so any "best peak ever" argument is going to have to square jordan's team results/cast from that period

I wouldn't go that far. He was slightly less productive (mostly because of minutes played), but he was just as efficient (in RS). Less impactful - why do you think so?

To me, Jordan was on the same level in 1990 and 1991.

[OhayoKD]

This is wrong, at least in RS. Bulls were clearly better offensively in terms of relative offenses than James best teams.

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

that tracks I think. Their slashlines seem to be simialrly impressive as well and box-score aggregates have them tied(jordan edges in the rs for the most part, lebron's best years edge in the ps for the most part).

The gap comes defensively where lebron's teams collapse(defensively) without him and tank(defensively) as he gets worse while jordan's teams don't collapse without him(defensively) and got better as he got worse(between 89 and 91). People put a lot of focus on the "offensive port" here, but that's where the impact/"floor riasing" gap probably comes.

[OhayoKD]

And 91 MJ was less imapctfu, effecient, and productive across the board than his 90 or 89 interations, so any "best peak ever" argument is going to have to square jordan's team results/cast from that period

I wouldn't go that far. He was slightly less productive (mostly because of minutes played), but he was just as efficient (in RS). Less impactful - why do you think so?

To me, Jordan was on the same level in 1990 and 1991.

I may be mixing the regular season and the postseason here. I know in the postseason jordan's effiency and volume dropped despite facing weaker defenses. I've also seen filmtracking asserting that his "rate of defensive breakdowns" went up and the "number of plays" he made at the rim and the perimiter went down.

Additionally, per filmtracking, and this seems obvious from when i've watched it(and this seems to be a widely accepted phenomenon), jordan's usage as a ball-handler/creator went down yet his turnover rate didn't.

Impact stuff also says he was worse in 91 than 90

Maybe that doesn't all apply to the regular season though ben himself notes that jordan's footspeed and defense declines between 90 and 91.

[70sFan]

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

that tracks I think. Their slashlines seem to be simialrly impressive as well and box-score aggregates have them tied(jordan edges in the rs for the most part, lebron's best years edge in the ps for the most part).

The gap comes defensively where lebron's teams collapse(defensively) without him and tank(defensively) as he gets worse while jordan's teams don't collapse without him(defensively) and got better as he got worse(between 89 and 91). People put a lot of focus on the "offensive port" here, but that's where the impact/"floor riasing" gap probably comes.

I think that's fair, defensive advantage is certainly a thing in James favor. For peaks, it's thr biggest argument for James to me. Jordan doesn't seem to have a huge impact on defensive end, which is understandable because in the end, he's just a guard.

For careers or primes, I don't have a clear answer with this case, as James has been quite inconsistent defensively after 2013.

Defense is always ignored in such discussions, which is probably why other top tier candidates (mostly bigs) don't have as many supporters.

[falcolombardi]

This is wrong, at least in RS. Bulls were clearly better offensively in terms of relative offenses than James best teams.

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

You are missing 2016 here by relative to rival playoffs offense

2017 cavs +13.7
2016 cavs +12.5
1991 bulls +11.7
2014 heat +10.6
1993 bulls +9.8
2012 heat +8.8
1996 bulls +8.6
2009 cavs + 8.3
2013 heat +7.2
1998 bulls +6.5
1992 bulls +6.5
1997 bulls +6.0

This is their best 6 years each. Lebron best 6-year average is 10.2, jordan best 6-year average is 8.2

10.2 vs 8.2 is close, but leaning to better offenses in lebron case, which is really my whole point

Lebron offense results are too good for him to be dismissed as a player who cannot mesh with other offensive talent (which is always the theory used against him) when picking someone else over him

[70sFan]

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

You are missing 2016 here by relative to rival playoffs offense

2017 cavs +13.7
2016 cavs +12.5
1991 bulls +11.7
2014 heat +10.6
1993 bulls +9.8
2012 heat +8.8
1996 bulls +8.6
2009 cavs + 8.3
2013 heat +7.2
1998 bulls +6.5
1992 bulls +6.5
1997 bulls +6.0

This is their best 6 years each

Is close but leaning to better offenses in lebron case, which is really my whole point

Lebron offense results are too good for him to be dismissed as a player who cannot mesh with other offensive talent (which is always the theory used against him) when picking someone else over him

To avoid the outlier results, we should compare their averages across their primes (say, 1989-98 vs 2009-18).

I agree with the last part, it's not reasonable to say that about James. I don't think Ben really does that, he just really thinks Jordan meshed better (I don't think we have any evidences for that).

[letskissbro]

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

You are missing 2016 here by relative to rival playoffs offense

2017 cavs +13.7
2016 cavs +12.5
1991 bulls +11.7
2014 heat +10.6
1993 bulls +9.8
2012 heat +8.8
1996 bulls +8.6
2009 cavs + 8.3
2013 heat +7.2
1998 bulls +6.5
1992 bulls +6.5
1997 bulls +6.0

This is their best 6 years each

Is close but leaning to better offenses in lebron case, which is really my whole point

Lebron offense results are too good for him to be dismissed as a player who cannot mesh with other offensive talent (which is always the theory used against him) when picking someone else over him

To avoid the outlier results, we should compare their averages across their primes (say, 1989-98 vs 2009-18).

I agree with the last part, it's not reasonable to say that about James. I don't think Ben really does that, he just really thinks Jordan meshed better (I don't think we have any evidences for that).

Jordan 88-98

1991CHI +11.7
1993CHI +9.8
1996CHI +8.6
1998CHI +6.5
1992CHI +6.5
1997CHI +6.0
1995CHI +4.6
1990CHI +4.0
1989CHI +3.9
1988CHI -2.6
AVG +5.90

Lebron 09-18

2017CLE +13.7
2016CLE +12.5
2014MIA +10.6
2012MIA +8.8
2009CLE +8.3
2013MIA +7.2
2015CLE +5.5
2011MIA +4.7
2010CLE +4.1
2018CLE +4.0
AVG +7.94

Some more guys just for fun

Magic 84-91: +8.34
Bird 81-88: +4.44
Kobe 01-12: +5.00
Curry 13-22: +6.41 (+5.24 minus the Durant years)
Durant 12-21: +6.75 (+5.78 minus the Curry years)

[falcolombardi]

You are missing 2016 here by relative to rival playoffs offense

2017 cavs +13.7
2016 cavs +12.5
1991 bulls +11.7
2014 heat +10.6
1993 bulls +9.8
2012 heat +8.8
1996 bulls +8.6
2009 cavs + 8.3
2013 heat +7.2
1998 bulls +6.5
1992 bulls +6.5
1997 bulls +6.0

This is their best 6 years each

Is close but leaning to better offenses in lebron case, which is really my whole point

Lebron offense results are too good for him to be dismissed as a player who cannot mesh with other offensive talent (which is always the theory used against him) when picking someone else over him

To avoid the outlier results, we should compare their averages across their primes (say, 1989-98 vs 2009-18).

I agree with the last part, it's not reasonable to say that about James. I don't think Ben really does that, he just really thinks Jordan meshed better (I don't think we have any evidences for that).

Jordan 88-98

1991CHI +11.7
1993CHI +9.8
1996CHI +8.6
1998CHI +6.5
1992CHI +6.5
1997CHI +6.0
1995CHI +4.6
1990CHI +4.0
1989CHI +3.9
1988CHI -2.6
AVG +5.90

Lebron 09-18

2017CLE +13.7
2016CLE +12.5
2014MIA +10.6
2012MIA +8.8
2009CLE +8.3
2013MIA +7.2
2015CLE +5.5
2011MIA +4.7
2010CLE +4.1
2018CLE +4.0
AVG +7.94

Some more guys just for fun

Magic 84-91: +8.34
Bird 81-88: +4.44
Kobe 01-12: +5.00
Curry 13-22: +6.41 (+5.24 minus the Durant years)
Durant 12-21: +6.75 (+5.78 minus the Curry years)

But somehow is magic and lebron who sometimes are the ones criticized for their ball dominance leading to a lower ceiling offense

[70sFan]

You are missing 2016 here by relative to rival playoffs offense

2017 cavs +13.7
2016 cavs +12.5
1991 bulls +11.7
2014 heat +10.6
1993 bulls +9.8
2012 heat +8.8
1996 bulls +8.6
2009 cavs + 8.3
2013 heat +7.2
1998 bulls +6.5
1992 bulls +6.5
1997 bulls +6.0

This is their best 6 years each

Is close but leaning to better offenses in lebron case, which is really my whole point

Lebron offense results are too good for him to be dismissed as a player who cannot mesh with other offensive talent (which is always the theory used against him) when picking someone else over him

To avoid the outlier results, we should compare their averages across their primes (say, 1989-98 vs 2009-18).

I agree with the last part, it's not reasonable to say that about James. I don't think Ben really does that, he just really thinks Jordan meshed better (I don't think we have any evidences for that).

Jordan 88-98

1991CHI +11.7
1993CHI +9.8
1996CHI +8.6
1998CHI +6.5
1992CHI +6.5
1997CHI +6.0
1995CHI +4.6
1990CHI +4.0
1989CHI +3.9
1988CHI -2.6
AVG +5.90

Lebron 09-18

2017CLE +13.7
2016CLE +12.5
2014MIA +10.6
2012MIA +8.8
2009CLE +8.3
2013MIA +7.2
2015CLE +5.5
2011MIA +4.7
2010CLE +4.1
2018CLE +4.0
AVG +7.94

Some more guys just for fun

Magic 84-91: +8.34
Bird 81-88: +4.44
Kobe 01-12: +5.00
Curry 13-22: +6.41 (+5.24 minus the Durant years)
Durant 12-21: +6.75 (+5.78 minus the Curry years)

Thank you for the numbers.

So Magic = offensive GOAT finally confirmed?

[Dutchball97]

To avoid the outlier results, we should compare their averages across their primes (say, 1989-98 vs 2009-18).

I agree with the last part, it's not reasonable to say that about James. I don't think Ben really does that, he just really thinks Jordan meshed better (I don't think we have any evidences for that).

Jordan 88-98

1991CHI +11.7
1993CHI +9.8
1996CHI +8.6
1998CHI +6.5
1992CHI +6.5
1997CHI +6.0
1995CHI +4.6
1990CHI +4.0
1989CHI +3.9
1988CHI -2.6
AVG +5.90

Lebron 09-18

2017CLE +13.7
2016CLE +12.5
2014MIA +10.6
2012MIA +8.8
2009CLE +8.3
2013MIA +7.2
2015CLE +5.5
2011MIA +4.7
2010CLE +4.1
2018CLE +4.0
AVG +7.94

Some more guys just for fun

Magic 84-91: +8.34
Bird 81-88: +4.44
Kobe 01-12: +5.00
Curry 13-22: +6.41 (+5.24 minus the Durant years)
Durant 12-21: +6.75 (+5.78 minus the Curry years)

But somehow is magic and lebron who sometimes are the ones criticized for their ball dominance leading to a lower ceiling offense

It's not that their ball dominance leads to low ceiling offenses, it's that it creates diminishing returns when pairing them with other ball dominant players. Either you have to take the ball out of the hands of LeBron/Magic more and reduce their playmaking impact or you don't and not properly utilize the other ball dominant players.

[70sFan]

Jordan 88-98

1991CHI +11.7
1993CHI +9.8
1996CHI +8.6
1998CHI +6.5
1992CHI +6.5
1997CHI +6.0
1995CHI +4.6
1990CHI +4.0
1989CHI +3.9
1988CHI -2.6
AVG +5.90

Lebron 09-18

2017CLE +13.7
2016CLE +12.5
2014MIA +10.6
2012MIA +8.8
2009CLE +8.3
2013MIA +7.2
2015CLE +5.5
2011MIA +4.7
2010CLE +4.1
2018CLE +4.0
AVG +7.94

Some more guys just for fun

Magic 84-91: +8.34
Bird 81-88: +4.44
Kobe 01-12: +5.00
Curry 13-22: +6.41 (+5.24 minus the Durant years)
Durant 12-21: +6.75 (+5.78 minus the Curry years)

But somehow is magic and lebron who sometimes are the ones criticized for their ball dominance leading to a lower ceiling offense

It's not that their ball dominance leads to low ceiling offenses, it's that it creates diminishing returns when pairing them with other ball dominant players. Either you have to take the ball out of the hands of LeBron/Magic more and reduce their playmaking impact or you don't and not properly utilize the other ball dominant players.

Why does it matter if you don't get better results? We shouldn't maximize individual production of every player on the court, but team results.

Besides, you only look at that from one point of view. There are situations when off-ball player also lose value in comparison to on-ball creators. Jordan almost certainly would lose more value playing next to Kobe Bryant or Kyrie Irving than LeBron would.

[MyUniBroDavis]

This is wrong, at least in RS. Bulls were clearly better offensively in terms of relative offenses than James best teams.

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

2016 as well, the cavs offense was +8.8 facing pretty solid defensive competition I think, which I’m pretty sure is historically good and not too far off the 2017 I think

I wouldn’t say his defense was inconsistent after miami, as much as his effort wasn’t constant every year (although I guess that’s the same thing lol).

I feel he had his best defensive postseason in 2016, and 2020 he was pretty elite defensively in more of a rotator/helper/linebacker role on that end, and it’s technically his most impactful year defensively. The only years he’s been bad post Miami are 2018, and 2022 imo, which both I feel are fair

[70sFan]

I meant playoffs were lebron teams reached clearly higher heights and not just in a one-off way but ovet a long stretch of time

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

2016 as well, the cavs offense was +8.8 facing pretty solid defensive competition I think, which I’m pretty sure is historically good and not too far off the 2017 I think

I wouldn’t say his defense was inconsistent after miami, as much as his effort wasn’t constant every year (although I guess that’s the same thing lol).

I feel he had his best defensive postseason in 2016, and 2020 he was pretty elite defensively in more of a rotator/helper/linebacker role on that end, and it’s technically his most impactful year defensively. The only years he’s been bad post Miami are 2018, and 2022 imo, which both I feel are fair

2016 is comparable to 1991, it isn't on another level though.

I don't care if the reason of defensive inconsistency is caused by effort or lack of abilities, to me results matter. James was elite defensively in 2016 and 2015 playoffs, but he certainly wasn't in 2017 and wasn't good at all in 2018. Then he was very good in 2020 and not so good in 2019 and 2022 (2021 was quite good when he played). That's perfect example of inconsistency.

[MyUniBroDavis]

He did in 2017, the rest isn't better. I think their playoff results are similar and people generally underrate pre-2016 James postseason offenses (they are full of +8 runs). This means that the idea of Jordan being a better offensive player doesn't have much reasons behind it, unless you think that Jordan played with significantly worse offensive teammates - but that's not Ben's argument.

I wouldn't go that far that James teams were clearly better on offense though, even in postseason. Sample of size is small for single postseason runs and if you do an 8 years run averages, they look similar. There is no clear edge either way.

2016 as well, the cavs offense was +8.8 facing pretty solid defensive competition I think, which I’m pretty sure is historically good and not too far off the 2017 I think

I wouldn’t say his defense was inconsistent after miami, as much as his effort wasn’t constant every year (although I guess that’s the same thing lol).

I feel he had his best defensive postseason in 2016, and 2020 he was pretty elite defensively in more of a rotator/helper/linebacker role on that end, and it’s technically his most impactful year defensively. The only years he’s been bad post Miami are 2018, and 2022 imo, which both I feel are fair

2016 is comparable to 1991, it isn't on another level though.

I don't care if the reason of defensive inconsistency is caused by effort or lack of abilities, to me results matter. James was elite defensively in 2016 and 2015 playoffs, but he certainly wasn't in 2017 and wasn't good at all in 2018. Then he was very good in 2020 and not so good in 2019 and 2022 (2021 was quite good when he played). That's perfect example of inconsistency.

I agree with that, I just think it also stands out with 2017 (not shoulder to shoulder to it ofc) as part of that second Cleveland run when he did have a good cast, in terms of finals/championship runs it’s probably in the upper echelon right? +8.8 I think is the second highest mark ever for a finals/championship team, behind the 2017 cavs team and ahead of the 17 Warriors/87 Lakers/01 lakers, for example. (Obv I’m not saying they were better on offense than the 17 Warriors or anything though)

My recollection was 2017 was good in the playoffs right? And 2019 being pretty darn good as well, more so that his mistakes looked really dumb but overall his impact and play was pretty decent

The only year he was blatantly a negative on D was 2018 I think

I feel if it’s like

2015 great
2016 great
2017 bleh in the RS, good in the playoffs
2018 bad
2019 good
2020 great
2021 good
2022 bleh

I wouldn’t call that inconsistent, 1 bad defensive year and 1 average one at the end of that 7 year stretch isn’t too bad to me (I feel if his playoff defense was good 2017 I don’t really care about his regular season then)