Where would ‘97 MJ rank today?

[Ron Swanson]

Are a lot of you guys confusing '97 Jordan with '98 Jordan? Because only voting him Top-10 is downright laughable. I'd have 1996-97 Jordan as no worse than Top-3 and even "comfortably best player in the league" is pretty defensible. The efficiency and historically great offensive floor + ceiling raising combo were still there.

[AEnigma]

A fringe all-defensive guard with scoring numbers like Luka but who lacks Luka’s playmaking value would clearly be a top player, and I would be willing to give him a bonus for playoff resilience, but I do not really see that as an automatic top two or three case, no.

[tsherkin]

Are a lot of you guys confusing '97 Jordan with '98 Jordan? Because only voting him Top-10 is downright laughable. I'd have 1996-97 Jordan as no worse than Top-3 and even "comfortably best player in the league" is pretty defensible. The efficiency and historically great offensive floor + ceiling raising combo were still there.

Probably the big question comes from adaptability to the modern game. He was certainly +3.1% rTS / 106 TS+ in his actual 1997 season, but he was a 56.7% TS guy who has stated numerous times that he avoided making a big deal out of 3pt shooting in his career. So you have to change who he was as a player some to see him hit that next-level plateau that would allow him to replicate that efficiency in today's era, at that age. Remember too that the 97 Bulls played at 90 possessions per game, and league average is 99.4 so far this season. The tempo of the game pushes against an older player. Whether or not you agree with the idea that he might have trouble adapting is sort of immaterial next to the notion that there are a bunch of variables which people are legitimately considering when they evaluate how Jordan would translate.

Remember too, he was playing a lot more of his post game and a lot less of his driving game from pre-retirement, so the pressure he was putting on a defense was a little different. More and more off-ball, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it does change his overall profile compared to what people remember from his peak seasons, particularly without the assumption that he'd be taking 5 or 6 3PA/g.

Player value in-era doesn't always translate forward as the league changes. That's as true for Jordan as it would be for someone like Wilt or Russell. THere's a lot of "if" and "providing that" and so forth when you project a player forward. If he played literally as he'd done in his own time, he'd be a -0.9% TS player and we wouldn't be talking about him as top 10 at all, you know what I mean?

[Ron Swanson]

Are a lot of you guys confusing '97 Jordan with '98 Jordan? Because only voting him Top-10 is downright laughable. I'd have 1996-97 Jordan as no worse than Top-3 and even "comfortably best player in the league" is pretty defensible. The efficiency and historically great offensive floor + ceiling raising combo were still there.

Probably the big question comes from adaptability to the modern game. He was certainly +3.1% rTS / 106 TS+ in his actual 1997 season, but he was a 56.7% TS guy who has stated numerous times that he avoided making a big deal out of 3pt shooting in his career. So you have to change who he was as a player some to see him hit that next-level plateau that would allow him to replicate that efficiency in today's era, at that age. Remember too that the 97 Bulls played at 90 possessions per game, and league average is 99.4 so far this season. The tempo of the game pushes against an older player. Whether or not you agree with the idea that he might have trouble adapting is sort of immaterial next to the notion that there are a bunch of variables which people are legitimately considering when they evaluate how Jordan would translate.

I see this a lot and I'm not quite sure where the concerns are. We've seen various degrees of poorer man's versions of the Jordan archetype like Butler, Kawhi, Middleton, DeRozan etc. suffer no such limitations in a "modern" context (the 3PT shot's affect on team and league average RS efficiency is well documented, but its affect on things like individual player efficiency and postseason scoring resiliency is vastly overstated IMO). I can only imagine '97 Jordan being a more helio-centric 29/7/7 type offensive fulcrum in "today's" league with how many teams run the entire offense through star wings. Though I think it would certainly regress his defense further, so its affect on winning could be debated. I mean, how many wing scorers current or in the history of the game would be as well suited to modern switching and attacking mismatches than Jordan? I think the number is somewhere between a handful (Durant? T-Mac?) and zero.

But I don't see how the impact was debatable (league best 114.2 on court offense, +23.6 postseason on/off, #1 RPM, #2 RAPM). I also think it's fair to assume to a reasonable extent that all-time greats from yesteryear would adjust their game accordingly to modern rules, because if not, then what are we doing other than penalizing in-era dominance and giving quite literally every current/modern player a bump in these comparisons? I don't see any reasonable argument for anything outside the Top-5.

[colts18]

We've seen Demar Derozan play the same exact way as the late 90s MJ and average 28 PPG in this modern on 60 TS%. He averages just 1.3 3 pointers per game. And he's 33 years old also. Are you telling me that MJ can't do the same exact same thing but average 30-32 PPG?

[tsherkin]

I see this a lot and I'm not quite sure where the concerns are. We've seen various degrees of poorer man's versions of the Jordan archetype like Butler, Kawhi, Middleton, DeRozan etc. suffer no such limitations in a "modern" context (the 3PT shot's affect on team and league average RS efficiency is well documented, but its affect on things like individual player efficiency and postseason scoring resiliency is vastly overstated IMO). I can only imagine '97 Jordan being a more helio-centric 29/7/7 type offensive fulcrum in "today's" league with how many teams run the entire offense through star wings. Though I think it would certainly regress his defense further, so its affect on winning could be debated. I mean, how many wing scorers current or in the history of the game would be as well suited to modern switching and attacking mismatches than Jordan? I think the number is somewhere between a handful (Durant? T-Mac?) and zero.

Oh, I agree. I think Jordan's FTr would change, I suspect it's possible his raw FG% under the arc would change... there are lots of ways to look at him and see if he could translate forward. YOUNGER MJ, I'd have far less hesitation in mentioning. Older MJ was slower, aggressively attacked the rim less, benefited from the slower tempo of the league at the time and relied heavily on mid-range shooting which wasn't magically more efficient. I mean, he was also arguably the greatest mid-range shooter in league history during that phase of his career, so that shouldn't be overlooked either. My point was more to highlight the idea of why there is some hesitation instead of instant, universal acceptance of his crown.

But I don't see how the impact was debatable (league best 114.2 on court offense, +23.6 postseason on/off, #1 RPM, #2 RAPM). I also think it's fair to assume to a reasonable extent that all-time greats from yesteryear would adjust their game accordingly to modern rules, because if not, then what are we doing other than penalizing in-era dominance and giving quite literally every current/modern player a bump in these comparisons? I don't see any reasonable argument for anything outside the Top-5.

I see your point. I just don't make the automatic assumption that everything would translate properly, you know? I am actually not a fan of cross-era comparisons for precisely this sort of reason.

We've seen Demar Derozan play the same exact way as the late 90s MJ and average 28 PPG in this modern on 60 TS%. He averages just 1.3 3 pointers per game. And he's 33 years old also. Are you telling me that MJ can't do the same exact same thing but average 30-32 PPG?

Yes, we have. Except that DeRozan has also drawn at an FTr across his career better than anything we saw from Jordan since he was 25 years old in 1989, and the early 90s were not a period of swallowed whistles or him slowing down. It is possible that older MJ could somewhat replicate what DeRozan was doing, or that his shooting ability, post play, off-ball game and overall savvy would help him adapt, etc. There is even a good chance of that, but to deny the idea that it's possible that it wouldn't work out beautifully for 97 Jordan specifically is to overlook some key details. Also relevant is that DeRozan is a better FT shooter than was MJ, by around 5 or 6 percent compared to 97 Jordan.

That also matters to specific efficiency.

Don't think it really is a problem at all, just kind of counterarguing the OP who wants to make the "its like they are playing a whole quarter extra" which is ironic considering Iverson literally was playing an entire extra 12 minutes over some guys nowadays.

Sure, it isn't the largest deal. Iverson's Sixers played at 90.6 and 88.9 possessions per game in 01 and 02, with him playing 42.0 and 43.7 mpg. That's something like 79 and 81 possessions per game for AI in those seasons. Someone like Luka this year is playing 36.8 mpg on a Mavs team at 96.2 possessions per game, which is something like 74 possessions per game for him specifically. There's a difference which impacts volume... but then you add in AI's shooting efficiency and the actual amount that it changed his scoring average isn't quite as exaggerated as "playing a whole extra quarter" in the end, for sure.

Also the "Jordan scoring 40ppg in this era is realistic) is just a hilarious comment considering his peak was already 37ppg, in 40 minutes per game, in an era that actually had a higher pace than today. MJ would benefit from shooting some 3's today than he did in 1987, but he also would not play 40mpg.

It's possible. Jordan played 40 mpg on a 95.8 possession-per-game Chicago team in 87. League average was 100.8 possessions per game against 2023's 99.4. Similar pace, and Jordan was playing on a slow team, so the league average matters less. 36, 37 mpg is about the top for the league's best at the moment and the general way stars are approached, for sure. We haven't seen even 39 mpg since 2012 and 40 since 2011 (Monta Ellis was the last one to do it), but there's also the trade-off in raw efficiency which can be expected that can help mitigate that a little. Young MJ with his full measure of athleticism? It's within the realm of possibility. It wouldn't be any more of a winning strategy now than it would have been then, though.

[Jaivl]

(voted top 5)

We've seen Demar Derozan play the same exact way as the late 90s MJ and average 28 PPG in this modern on 60 TS%. He averages just 1.3 3 pointers per game. And he's 33 years old also. Are you telling me that MJ can't do the same exact same thing but average 30-32 PPG?

Does it really matter? Was DeRozan anything more than a top 15-20 player?

[mysticOscar]

I see this a lot and I'm not quite sure where the concerns are. We've seen various degrees of poorer man's versions of the Jordan archetype like Butler, Kawhi, Middleton, DeRozan etc. suffer no such limitations in a "modern" context (the 3PT shot's affect on team and league average RS efficiency is well documented, but its affect on things like individual player efficiency and postseason scoring resiliency is vastly overstated IMO). I can only imagine '97 Jordan being a more helio-centric 29/7/7 type offensive fulcrum in "today's" league with how many teams run the entire offense through star wings. Though I think it would certainly regress his defense further, so its affect on winning could be debated. I mean, how many wing scorers current or in the history of the game would be as well suited to modern switching and attacking mismatches than Jordan? I think the number is somewhere between a handful (Durant? T-Mac?) and zero.

Oh, I agree. I think Jordan's FTr would change, I suspect it's possible his raw FG% under the arc would change... there are lots of ways to look at him and see if he could translate forward. YOUNGER MJ, I'd have far less hesitation in mentioning. Older MJ was slower, aggressively attacked the rim less, benefited from the slower tempo of the league at the time and relied heavily on mid-range shooting which wasn't magically more efficient. I mean, he was also arguably the greatest mid-range shooter in league history during that phase of his career, so that shouldn't be overlooked either. My point was more to highlight the idea of why there is some hesitation instead of instant, universal acceptance of his crown.

But I don't see how the impact was debatable (league best 114.2 on court offense, +23.6 postseason on/off, #1 RPM, #2 RAPM). I also think it's fair to assume to a reasonable extent that all-time greats from yesteryear would adjust their game accordingly to modern rules, because if not, then what are we doing other than penalizing in-era dominance and giving quite literally every current/modern player a bump in these comparisons? I don't see any reasonable argument for anything outside the Top-5.

I see your point. I just don't make the automatic assumption that everything would translate properly, you know? I am actually not a fan of cross-era comparisons for precisely this sort of reason.

We've seen Demar Derozan play the same exact way as the late 90s MJ and average 28 PPG in this modern on 60 TS%. He averages just 1.3 3 pointers per game. And he's 33 years old also. Are you telling me that MJ can't do the same exact same thing but average 30-32 PPG?

Yes, we have. Except that DeRozan has also drawn at an FTr across his career better than anything we saw from Jordan since he was 25 years old in 1989, and the early 90s were not a period of swallowed whistles or him slowing down. It is possible that older MJ could somewhat replicate what DeRozan was doing, or that his shooting ability, post play, off-ball game and overall savvy would help him adapt, etc. There is even a good chance of that, but to deny the idea that it's possible that it wouldn't work out beautifully for 97 Jordan specifically is to overlook some key details. Also relevant is that DeRozan is a better FT shooter than was MJ, by around 5 or 6 percent compared to 97 Jordan.

That also matters to specific efficiency.

Don't think it really is a problem at all, just kind of counterarguing the OP who wants to make the "its like they are playing a whole quarter extra" which is ironic considering Iverson literally was playing an entire extra 12 minutes over some guys nowadays.

Sure, it isn't the largest deal. Iverson's Sixers played at 90.6 and 88.9 possessions per game in 01 and 02, with him playing 42.0 and 43.7 mpg. That's something like 79 and 81 possessions per game for AI in those seasons. Someone like Luka this year is playing 36.8 mpg on a Mavs team at 96.2 possessions per game, which is something like 74 possessions per game for him specifically. There's a difference which impacts volume... but then you add in AI's shooting efficiency and the actual amount that it changed his scoring average isn't quite as exaggerated as "playing a whole extra quarter" in the end, for sure.

Also the "Jordan scoring 40ppg in this era is realistic) is just a hilarious comment considering his peak was already 37ppg, in 40 minutes per game, in an era that actually had a higher pace than today. MJ would benefit from shooting some 3's today than he did in 1987, but he also would not play 40mpg.

It's possible. Jordan played 40 mpg on a 95.8 possession-per-game Chicago team in 87. League average was 100.8 possessions per game against 2023's 99.4. Similar pace, and Jordan was playing on a slow team, so the league average matters less. 36, 37 mpg is about the top for the league's best at the moment and the general way stars are approached, for sure. We haven't seen even 39 mpg since 2012 and 40 since 2011 (Monta Ellis was the last one to do it), but there's also the trade-off in raw efficiency which can be expected that can help mitigate that a little. Young MJ with his full measure of athleticism? It's within the realm of possibility. It wouldn't be any more of a winning strategy now than it would have been then, though.

Watching DeRozen now vs Jordan in his 2nd 3peat, the quickness and athleticism advantage Jordan has is just very visible.

Jordan settled a lot on the post, because it was just the right play with his effeciency in the mid range with a crowded paint in that era and the Bulls triangle offense.

But it doesnt take too much to see Jordan's fundamentals, his quick decision in offense once he has the ball and IQ advantage is just much greater than DeRozen.

Sure there's a very small chance that for some reason, Jordan is unwilling or unable to take advantage in more opportunities in driving to more open lanes or taking the best shot that's available to him. But I don't think we really saw that from MJ.

2nd 3oeat MJ was greater than any prime Kobe. Does anyone really think prime Kobe can't be a MVP candidate today?

[CharityStripe34]

No brainer Top 5 player in the league, at worst.

Generally, I think the greatest players of all time could be great in pretty much any era if they were born in it and learned how to play according to the way the game is governed/officiated.

I also think it's fair to assume to a reasonable extent that all-time greats from yesteryear would adjust their game accordingly to modern rules, because if not, then what are we doing other than penalizing in-era dominance and giving quite literally every current/modern player a bump in these comparisons? I don't see any reasonable argument for anything outside the Top-5.

Preach! Dude, Ron, stop reading my mind

[YogurtProducer]

Don't think it really is a problem at all, just kind of counterarguing the OP who wants to make the "its like they are playing a whole quarter extra" which is ironic considering Iverson literally was playing an entire extra 12 minutes over some guys nowadays.

Sure, it isn't the largest deal. Iverson's Sixers played at 90.6 and 88.9 possessions per game in 01 and 02, with him playing 42.0 and 43.7 mpg. That's something like 79 and 81 possessions per game for AI in those seasons. Someone like Luka this year is playing 36.8 mpg on a Mavs team at 96.2 possessions per game, which is something like 74 possessions per game for him specifically. There's a difference which impacts volume... but then you add in AI's shooting efficiency and the actual amount that it changed his scoring average isn't quite as exaggerated as "playing a whole extra quarter" in the end, for sure.

Also the "Jordan scoring 40ppg in this era is realistic) is just a hilarious comment considering his peak was already 37ppg, in 40 minutes per game, in an era that actually had a higher pace than today. MJ would benefit from shooting some 3's today than he did in 1987, but he also would not play 40mpg.

It's possible. Jordan played 40 mpg on a 95.8 possession-per-game Chicago team in 87. League average was 100.8 possessions per game against 2023's 99.4. Similar pace, and Jordan was playing on a slow team, so the league average matters less. 36, 37 mpg is about the top for the league's best at the moment and the general way stars are approached, for sure. We haven't seen even 39 mpg since 2012 and 40 since 2011 (Monta Ellis was the last one to do it), but there's also the trade-off in raw efficiency which can be expected that can help mitigate that a little. Young MJ with his full measure of athleticism? It's within the realm of possibility. It wouldn't be any more of a winning strategy now than it would have been then, though.

My point is that the OP is making strange arguments and obviously did not dive as deep into it as you have. Ignoring pace, AI is actually the one who was playing an extra quarter every game, and the 90s is when dudes were almost scoring 40ppg (well one dude).

The arguments just fall apart as soon as you do any sort of looking into pace, minutes played, etc. The truth is that AI would not be able to play 42mpg in this league for an entire season. There are just way to many possessions and his efficiency would tank due to added workload. 42mpg is the equivalent to like what, 50mpg in 2001?

[No-more-rings]

Yes, we have. Except that DeRozan has also drawn at an FTr across his career better than anything we saw from Jordan since he was 25 years old in 1989, and the early 90s were not a period of swallowed whistles or him slowing down. It is possible that older MJ could somewhat replicate what DeRozan was doing, or that his shooting ability, post play, off-ball game and overall savvy would help him adapt, etc. There is even a good chance of that, but to deny the idea that it's possible that it wouldn't work out beautifully for 97 Jordan specifically is to overlook some key details. Also relevant is that DeRozan is a better FT shooter than was MJ, by around 5 or 6 percent compared to 97 Jordan.

That also matters to specific efficiency.

I mean putting the older MJ versions aside, do you not believe early 90s MJ specifically 90 and 91 wouldn’t have one of the higher free throw rates among perimeter players today?

Or even if not, do you not think he’d easily be a top 3 offensive player along with Curry and Jokic, and easily the best player in the league when considering defense and postseason resilience?

Like idk, to me your recent posts on Jordan to me make it sound like you think he’s going to struggle or something.

[YogurtProducer]

We've seen Demar Derozan play the same exact way as the late 90s MJ and average 28 PPG in this modern on 60 TS%. He averages just 1.3 3 pointers per game. And he's 33 years old also. Are you telling me that MJ can't do the same exact same thing but average 30-32 PPG?

Does it really matter? Was DeRozan anything more than a top 15-20 player?

And not to mention I think a lot of teams employ the "let Demar get his" strategy knowing he not a real superstar threat. Let Demar score his 30, shut down everyone else cause Demar just is not a guy who is gonna go for 50 or playmake effectively

[RCM88x]

Jokic, Giannis and Curry are probably the only guys I'd say have a good argument to be over him.

[AEnigma]

2nd 3oeat MJ was greater than any prime Kobe. Does anyone really think prime Kobe can't be a MVP candidate today?

I might take 1996 Jordan over peak Kobe, but I would heavily consider taking peak Kobe over 1997/98 Jordan. Especially in the modern league.

And of course then that raises the question of how peak Kobe would compare to Curry and Giannis…

[mysticOscar]

MJ was an outlier in terms of athleticsm.

It seems some ppl here thinks that MJ was some average athletic player in his 2nd 3peat

Even on his 2nd 3peat he was still more athletic than majority of the SG in the league.

You can see in this 10 min clip highlights from his '98 season how athletic he still was.

Also from the highlights, you can just see how crowded the paint was compared to any modern perimeter player highlights you see today, and with his high usage role in the Bulls, its understandable why he settled a lot more on post game especially how effective he was at it.

Watch on YouTube

[Pick And Roll]

We've seen Demar Derozan play the same exact way as the late 90s MJ and average 28 PPG in this modern on 60 TS%. He averages just 1.3 3 pointers per game. And he's 33 years old also. Are you telling me that MJ can't do the same exact same thing but average 30-32 PPG?

Indeed the logic of these people astonishes me sometimes. So discount Jordan can average 28 but Jordan himself wouldn't average 30.

[tsherkin]

I mean putting the older MJ versions aside, do you not believe early 90s MJ specifically 90 and 91 wouldn’t have one of the higher free throw rates among perimeter players today?

I answered this question in my post.

Or even if not, do you not think he’d easily be a top 3 offensive player along with Curry and Jokic, and easily the best player in the league when considering defense and postseason resilience?

No, I don't think that's a guarantee. I believe it's a possibility, but I don't think it's a guarantee.

Like idk, to me your recent posts on Jordan to me make it sound like you think he’s going to struggle or something.

That's your interpretation. I have explicitly been playing Devil's Advocate because everyone is assuming that he'd just magically be a 60%+ player in his 97 incarnation, which is, again, not a guarantee. Things have to change in order for that to occur, they wouldn't just materialize because Reasons (TM). It's possible that even older MJ would find a way to make it happen, but not an inevitability.

Watching DeRozen now vs Jordan in his 2nd 3peat, the quickness and athleticism advantage Jordan has is just very visible.

Jordan settled a lot on the post, because it was just the right play with his effeciency in the mid range with a crowded paint in that era and the Bulls triangle offense.

It worked for him in-era. It was efficient in-era, particularly with his ball protection. The offensive environment has changed to the point where that level of efficiency would be inefficient. Him attempting to drive more would be more exhausting on his older body, so it's something I question if he'd be able to maintain at that particular age. People are assuming he'd just suddenly be efficient enough relative to contemporary league average to be a top-3 player, but a lot would have to go into that.

My point is that the OP is making strange arguments and obviously did not dive as deep into it as you have. Ignoring pace, AI is actually the one who was playing an extra quarter every game, and the 90s is when dudes were almost scoring 40ppg (well one dude).

In the 90s, the highest single-season scoring average posted was 33.6, and besides Jordan, there was only one other player-season of 60+ GP and 30+ ppg, which was 1990 Karl Malone. It was actually not an era of high-end volume scoring at all. You'll want to revisit that one.

In the 80s, there were only 12 such player-seasons, of which, 3 were Jordan, 3 were Dantley, and then 1 apiece from World B Free, Nique and Moses, plus a pair from George Gervin. Jordan was the only one to score over 33.1 ppg.

So no, era-shaming isn't really going to help here. Jordan was the first person to post 35+ ppg since Rick Barry in 1967.... which was one of 6 player-seasons of 35+ ppg prior to MJ (5 of which were from Wilt Chamberlain).

[mysticOscar]

Watching DeRozen now vs Jordan in his 2nd 3peat, the quickness and athleticism advantage Jordan has is just very visible.

Jordan settled a lot on the post, because it was just the right play with his effeciency in the mid range with a crowded paint in that era and the Bulls triangle offense.

It worked for him in-era. It was efficient in-era, particularly with his ball protection. The offensive environment has changed to the point where that level of efficiency would be inefficient. Him attempting to drive more would be more exhausting on his older body, so it's something I question if he'd be able to maintain at that particular age. People are assuming he'd just suddenly be efficient enough relative to contemporary league average to be a top-3 player, but a lot would have to go into that.

I think it's almost a given MJs effeciency would just be greater today than his era with the amount of open driving lanes and emphasis on hands off defense from the perimeter by the officials.

In terms of MJ being exhausted from constant driving into the lane, I think that's nothing compared to having to grapple more for position in the paint. Also I think we both agree in terms of stamina, MJ was an outlier there too. And the focus now on time management.. I'm not sure why you think that would be a problem for MJ.

If we contrast thr game of MJ and DeRozen, any one can see that even tho there game has some similarities, MJ is more visibly athletic, quicker, more fluid and have a greater array of shots in his arsenal.

Derozan '22 Highlightd

Watch on YouTube

MJ '97 Highlights

Watch on YouTube

Observe the contrast in the bodies in the paint in MJs era vs Derozen.

If Derozen can average 28ppg at 60% ts then its not hard to see MJ averaging 32+ ppg with 63%+ ts in today's league with great defense (although adjustment would have to be made from him in where he places his hand when defending from perimeter).

[OhayoKD]

Yes, we have. Except that DeRozan has also drawn at an FTr across his career better than anything we saw from Jordan since he was 25 years old in 1989, and the early 90s were not a period of swallowed whistles or him slowing down. It is possible that older MJ could somewhat replicate what DeRozan was doing, or that his shooting ability, post play, off-ball game and overall savvy would help him adapt, etc. There is even a good chance of that, but to deny the idea that it's possible that it wouldn't work out beautifully for 97 Jordan specifically is to overlook some key details. Also relevant is that DeRozan is a better FT shooter than was MJ, by around 5 or 6 percent compared to 97 Jordan.

That also matters to specific efficiency.

I mean putting the older MJ versions aside, do you not believe early 90s MJ specifically 90 and 91 wouldn’t have one of the higher free throw rates among perimeter players today?

Or even if not, do you not think he’d easily be a top 3 offensive player along with Curry and Jokic, and easily the best player in the league when considering defense and postseason resilience?

Like idk, to me your recent posts on Jordan to me make it sound like you think he’s going to struggle or something.

I'd be skeptical of any jordan keeping up with curry in terms of o-value in the modern league, especially given his reluctance to shoot in his own time. And I'll remind you, that what matters here is outpacing everyone else, not outpacing your own granulars from when you originally played. Jordan having higher free-throw rates now doesn't help him if the gap between how often he wins free-throws and everyone else does, doesn't increase

Honestly, saying he'd "easily be the best" in a league with two players who led 70 win teams with less help seems wildly optimistic. Sure you're not confusing box-production with goodness again?

We've seen Demar Derozan play the same exact way as the late 90s MJ and average 28 PPG in this modern on 60 TS%. He averages just 1.3 3 pointers per game. And he's 33 years old also. Are you telling me that MJ can't do the same exact same thing but average 30-32 PPG?

Indeed the logic of these people astonishes me sometimes. So discount Jordan can average 28 but Jordan himself wouldn't average 30.

Is Demar Derozan a top 3 player in the nba?

What exactly is "mj will be better than demar derozan" supposed to prove?

[No-more-rings]

I'd be skeptical of any jordan keeping up with curry in terms of o-value in the modern league, especially given his reluctance to shoot in his own time.

Why? And what do you mean his reluctance to shoot? Jordan was one of the highest volume shooters ever.

And I'll remind you, that what matters here is outpacing everyone else, not outpacing your own granulars from when you originally played. Jordan having higher free-throw rates now doesn't help him if the gap between how often he wins free-throws and everyone else does, doesn't increase

Yeah but not everyone plays the same either. If you don't think softer whistles don't benefit a super athlete who drives relentlessly to the hole, you aren't really being honest about the topic. If we're talking about those older Jordan versions who shot more jumpers that's a different story but I was referencing him when he was at or near his athletic peak.

Honestly, saying he'd "easily be the best" in a league with two players who led 70 win teams with less help seems wildly optimistic. Sure you're not confusing box-production with goodness again?

Umm, a past peak MJ also led a 70+ win team, and Giannis never did that so not sure what you're talking about there.

We can talk about regular season performance all we want, but that's going to ignore that Jordan particularly peak Jordan was significantly more resilient in the postseason than either Steph or Giannis.

I mean honestly, i'm not sure i'll really get an objective or rational response to that. You've made it clear for a while now that you have a bit of a bias against Jordan for one reason or another. I'm unsure if it's because you need it to help prop up some of your favorite players(Lebron and Curry) or what. And it's not because you pick some other players over him, it's because almost every time he is being comapared, your takes on him are overwhelmingly negative, and you resort to your usual condescending "hehe, boxscores" remarks(see above) like Jordan was this empty box stat stuffer or something. I think you're too smart to know that's not the case, which is what leads me to believe you have an agenda when it comes to him.

Overall, it does sort of seem there's like an active coalition of a few posters who are openly trying to knock Jordan down and prop Lebron up.

The response by another poster in that thread sort of summed it up, when he said lets not turn this into a Lebron stan forum, or something along those lines.

You think Giannis and Curry are better than Jordan, I get it. Don't think you'll find anyone who's really going to agree with that not even Warrior or Bucks fans.