What impact metrics show MJ as a GOAT candidate?

[AEnigma]

You must realize you're comparing what is essentially Jordan's entire career (minus first 7 games) vs. Lebron's prime...

… It is literally twelve postseasons for both of them, across thirteen years, for their age 24-35 postseasons.

I have said before the Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative. Glad to see that continues to hold true.

And MJ still has a lead in BPM which is the best aggregate box stat.

Yeah that is why I do all my assessments by glancing at the BPM leaderboards. Really makes analysis easy. 11.2 > 10.6 wrap it up boys, Basketball-Reference has spoken.

No, but you only pick playoffs so you don't have to contend with the fact that MJ played hard all the time whereas Lebron didn't. Also, nice job with the cutoff points so you didn't have to include either MJ's ridiculous 86 Celtics series or Lebron's lackluster 08 playoffs.

Just saw your edit. Another great example of how “Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative.”

You are right, it was deeply unfair of me to ignore a “ridiculous” series where Jordan suffered a -13 net rating sweep against a 9.06 SRS championship Celtics team, because Jordan put up a lot of points! Much more impressive than Lebron’s “lacklustre” efforts going +1.3 over seven games against a… 9.3 SRS championship Celtics team.

I thought you cared about defence?

[VanWest82]

… It is literally twelve postseasons for both of them, across thirteen years, for their age 24-35 postseasons.

I have said before the Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative. Glad to see that continues to hold true.


Yeah that is why I do all my assessments by glancing at the BPM leaderboards. Really makes analysis easy. 11.2 > 10.6 wrap it up boys, Basketball-Reference has spoken.

No, but you only pick playoffs so you don't have to contend with the fact that MJ played hard all the time whereas Lebron didn't. Also, nice job with the cutoff points so you didn't have to include either MJ's ridiculous 86 Celtics series or Lebron's lackluster 08 playoffs.

Just saw your edit. Another great example of how “Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative.”

You are right, it was deeply unfair of me to ignore a “ridiculous” series where Jordan suffered a -13 net rating sweep against a 9.06 SRS championship Celtics team, because Jordan put up a lot of points! Much more impressive than Lebron’s “lacklustre” efforts going +1.3 over seven games against a… 9.3 SRS championship Celtics team.

I thought you cared about defence?

If you had been comparing on/offs or something you might have an argument, but you were comparing box. Nice try. You know what you did just like you knew what you were doing trying to frame it as playoffs only. It was a lamer effort than Lebron's regular season defense in 14, 15, 17, 18, and 19.

[AEnigma]

No, but you only pick playoffs so you don't have to contend with the fact that MJ played hard all the time whereas Lebron didn't. Also, nice job with the cutoff points so you didn't have to include either MJ's ridiculous 86 Celtics series or Lebron's lackluster 08 playoffs.

Just saw your edit. Another great example of how “Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative.”

You are right, it was deeply unfair of me to ignore a “ridiculous” series where Jordan suffered a -13 net rating sweep against a 9.06 SRS championship Celtics team, because Jordan put up a lot of points! Much more impressive than Lebron’s “lacklustre” efforts going +1.3 over seven games against a… 9.3 SRS championship Celtics team.

I thought you cared about defence?

If you had been comparing on/offs or something you might have an argument,

Oh, so you would be interested in Lebron’s on/off? Well do I have news for you!

but you were comparing box. Nice try. You know what you did just like you knew what you were doing trying to frame it as playoffs only. It was a lamer effort than Lebron's regular season defense in 14, 15, 17, 18, and 19.

Yeah, I was taking their primes. Was 1986 Jordan prime Jordan? All this outrage over a three game blowout sample. You do not actually care about three games from Jordan; you know it barely affects his averages because of how short a series it was. What you want is to paint Lebron going a full seven games against a -8.6 relative defence as a failing because his box numbers dipped. You already are getting 20 games of bad back 2015 Lebron going up against a tougher defensive slate than the average Jordan run, but that does not quite hamper him enough for your tastes. Frankly, I am shocked you did not push for 2007 too; after all, Jordan had good BPM in a four-game first-round loss, while Lebron struggled to put up the same BPM as part of a Finals run. NiCE tRy, too bad.

However, as always, I appreciate the transparency with which you Jordan stans promote raw box production above all else, with zero regard for any analysis beyond that.

[VanWest82]

These exchanges are so stupid.

You: here's box showing Lebron just as good as Jordan
Me: your box analysis is flawed
You: well look at the plus /minus!
Me: ok, but you were doing box analysis and you left out the majority of the analysis
You: you Jordan stans promote raw box above all else

Everyone is definitely dumber from having read that. Good night.

[DraymondGold]

Of course and there is enough roster continuity to include neighboring seasons in some cases. For instance the 1994 Bulls season w/o MJ is often compared to the 1993 season with MJ which is logical because they are consecutive seasons but the 1993 season is the Bulls worst season of all of their title runs. The lack of motivation during that regular season is well documented whereas the 1994 Bulls had a chip on their shoulder to prove they were good without Jordan. There is reasonable roster continuity to pool say 1991/1992/1993 together and compare vs. 1994. That may give a better picture of MJ's WOWY during that period.

Yeah, great point about the limitations of just looking at 93 vs 94 in isolation!

That's one of the concerns I have with single samples of raw WOWY -- your sample is more limited, and there's no adjustment for any context... e.g. if your team was coasting one year, but weren't the year prior.

What if we just compare 93 vs 94 Bulls? Per OhayoKD/70sFan:
1993 Bulls with MJ: +6.2 SRS, 57 wins
1994 Bulls without MJ: +2.9 SRS, 55 wins
Change: +3.3 SRS, +2 wins

But! What if we add broader context?
1992 Bulls: +10.07 SRS, 66 Wins
1993 Bulls Playoffs : +10.08 SRS
So when they Bulls aren't coasting, they're pretty consistently a 10+ SRS team. In fact they look significantly better still if you look at the 92 playoffs or 91 team (which again is why Jordan looks better in 10-year WOWY and WOWYR samples).

Change from 94 Bulls without Jordan to non-coasting 92/93-Playoffs Bulls with Jordan: +7.2 SRS
Change from 94 Bulls without Jordan to half-coasting 92/93 average Bulls with Jordan: +4.8 SRS

So in both cases, whether we take the semi-coasting average of 92 or 93 or just look at when the Bulls weren't coasting, Jordan gets a higher individual raw WOWY sample than 75–76 Kareem (though they're lower than 1970 Kareem). Of course, the 1975-76 sample involved other moves which would change the value (another limit of looking at unadjusted WOWY), 1970 sample doesn't account for SRS inflation with the rapid expansion of the league (which would overrate 1970 Kareem), while Jordan's sample doesn't account for the fact that you can get diminishing returns at the upper end of SRS (which would cause us to underrate Jordan if we just looked at the 92/93-playoff Bulls' SRS).

It has been a while taking a break off real gm for career stuff and first thingh i hop into is a lebron vs jordan debate, nice

Being serious tho, this is a interesting debate but i have some thinghs to question here

Welcome back!

Jordan's adjusted WOWYR and GPM both put him over Kareem for their best 10 years

This is somethingh i am gonna talk about quickly, but i am not a big fan of wowyr for similar reasons to those exposed by other posters in older threads.

The small tiny samples across multiple years are incredibly noisy when aggregated together so the "sample" part of sample size is fairly questionable and for most players the "size" part is still way too small compared to single season worth of wowy (read somethingh like 93 vs 94 bulls which gives me way better and bigger data to evaluate 93 jordan to the point i see wowyr as a bit worthless in comparision)

I covered this in the past few pages with OhayoKD, but the samples for 10-year adjusted WOWYR are larger than the other single samples for MJ, e.g. just looking at raw WOWY in 93 vs 94.

To be specific, when just looking at 93 vs 94, we have:
-78 games for Jordan's on sample
-86 games for Jordan's off sample

Compared to the 10 -year adjusted WOWY sample when we have:
-666 on-games for Jordan,
-154 off-games for Jordan,
-555 off-games for Jordan's various teammates (479 if you exclude rookie Pippen, maybe off slightly if I miscounted Grant's game numbers?)
- ~thousands of data points for each of Jordan's teammates' on-games
- ~thousands of data points for each of Jordan's opponents' off/on-games

So the 10 year sample is indeed bigger (and therefore less statistically noisy) than the 1 year sample.

Adding individual smaller samples from each year (e.g. adding Jordan's 1 game missed in 89 to his off sample) does *not* make the stat noisier, since that's not how the calculation works for adjusting WOWY.

It's like adjusting raw plus minus data to Adjusted Plus Minus data. Let's say you have one game where a player misses a full quarter (12 mins) and the next game they miss a smaller stretch (e.g. only 3 minutes). If you want to be more confident that your sample has less noise, you should include both! The 12 minutes get weighted more inherently since it's greater than 3, but you also don't want to throw out the 3 minutes either... since 12 + 3 = 15 minutes > 12 minutes.

You might still prefer looking at raw WOWY in individual large samples -- but the reason to prefer it isn't that 10 year adjusted WOWYR is noisier than a 1 year adjusted WOWYR. That's not how the math works out! A 10 year sample is a bigger sample and is less noisy than a 1 year sample (to say nothing of the fact that the 10 year sample might include Jordan's peak while the 1 year sample might not ).

What if we just compare 93 vs 94 Bulls? Per OhayoKD/70sFan:
1993 Bulls with MJ: +6.2 SRS, 57 wins
1994 Bulls without MJ: +2.9 SRS, 55 wins
Change: +3.3 SRS, +2 wins

How does this account for pippen amd grant missing 10 games each in 94? The difference is also even smaller if you look at post season srs in 94 vs 93 or 91-93

Great question! No clue. My guess (?) would be it doesn't consider this, but I haven't checked the database or calculated it myself... I was only replying to this sample specifically since OhayoKD brought it up.

Jordan gets a higher individual raw WOWY sample than 75–76 Kareem (though they're lower than 1970 Kareem). Of course, the 1975-76 sample involved other moves which would change the value (another limit of looking at unadjusted WOWY)

The lakers sold out to get kareem so comparing their lift as if they had addes him outright is a fair bit misleading here.

Also as you notice yourself, rookie kareem has a -higher- wowy than peak jordan,why not compare kareem actual best wowy signal to jordan best rather than putting jordan best signal against one that is not kareem best?

rookie kareem beating out peak jordan wowy is very relevant in a wowy discussion. The actual player here with the best wowy year is kareem

Also remember than a year like 76 kareem was -not- straight up addition of kareem being added without any loss (lakers sold out their team to get kareem) which muds the 76 as a wowy sample

As he is not actually being added to the 75 lakers straight up, but to a much more weak and dismantled team than the 75 lakers

Well I did mention that 76 Kareem was involved in a trade. But yes you're right that 70 Kareem has a higher raw WOWY sample.

Does this mean 70 Kareem >> 93 Jordan? Well, not necessarily. For example, using this methodology, 70 Kareem (+9.4 SRS) > 2011 LeBron + 2011 Bosh (4.77 SRS). I wouldn't take rookie Kareem over either prime Jordan or prime LeBron, and I'd be quite surprised if you would. Single WOWY samples are famously noisy, and there's no reason to consider this an exception. (for the record, looks like non-coasting 92/93/94 Jordan has a higher raw SRS change than 2010/11 LeBron/Bosh).

What makes individual WOWY sample so noisy? Well, let's take this 1970 sample as an example.

For starters, they didn’t just get Kareem: they also got Bob Deandridge, who was probably the Bucks’ 3rd best player after Oscar in 71. You don’t get to +11.9 SRS without a good 3rd best player. Rookie-year Bob Deandridge was still a good addition.

Additionally, the expansion of the league likely buffs the SRS numbers. As Sansterre (among others) pretty thoroughly documented in the Top 100 Teams project, years following league expansion have inflated SRS: the worse teams are worse than normal and the better teams get to buff their numbers against the worse teams. In 1970, the league was in the middle of expanding, and the Bucks had the second best SRS in the league — that suggests their numbers were slightly inflated by league context, making Kareem’s arrival seem slightly better than it otherwise would have been.

Expansion also makes the 69 pre-Kareem bucks seem worse than they otherwise would have been. 1969 was literally the very first year of the Bucks’ existence. As a stereotypical expansion team, they had the 2nd worst SRS in the league. So the context of being an expansion team likely inflates how bad they were prior to Kareem. Some reasons why: Their coach was a first year coach, having just retired as a player the previous season… not exactly the experienced coach and established culture you’d want to start a team with. In fact, you’d expect most coaches to have growing pains in their very first coaching season. One of their best players (power forward Greg Smith) was a rookie. Their backup center (Zaid Abdul-Aziz, 5th in minutes) was only 22 years old and came in halfway through the season. Their point guard and one of their three best players (Flynn Robinson) also came in part way through the season. The mid-season additions, particularly adding a new point guard, will cause full-season SRS to overrate how bad the 69 Bucks were by the end of the season. Further, it seems natural for a first year coach, rookie Power Forward, and rookie Backup Center, to all improve in their second year. It seems even more likely that an expansion team with no prior history together might struggle to figure things out at first, then have more of a culture and chemistry and practice together to help them in their second year. All these factors might contribute to the poor SRS in 69 and improved SRS in 70, even without Kareem’s arrival.

Obviously rookie Kareem’s one of the greatest rookies ever. He’s the main event for the 70 Bucks. But this is the problem with just using a single raw WOWY sample as a player ranker: you risk underrating certain players (93 Jordan, per my previous post) and overrating certain players (70 Kareem), without any contextual adjustment.



Since you're new to the thread, just thought I'd reiterate my thesis for this thread: I'm not trying to argue that the data says you Must take Jordan over Kareem or LeBron or Russell. I'm just trying to answer the original question: Are there impact metrics that support Jordan being GOAT tier? (which to me means Top ~4 in peak/prime/career, along with ~ Russell, Kareem, LeBron). That's an easy yes, and I've been providing links/explanations to the various GOAT-tier stats Jordan has throughout this thread. Post #3 has most of the stats listed.

[OhayoKD]

Jordan has unequivocally much less of a “box score edge” than Lebron has an impact edge, especially when it matters — and that is with the box score metrics severely falling short of capturing defence and obviously being affected by the quality of opponent defences (where Lebron generally had much tougher opposition than Jordan).

Playoff Jordan, 1987-98: 11.2 BPM, .258 WS/48 over 172 games at 41.7 minutes per game
Playoff Lebron, 2009-20: 10.6 BPM, .261 WS/48 over 214 games at 40.9 minutes per game

Maybe by “box scores” you meant “points per game.”

You must realize you're comparing what is essentially Jordan's entire career (minus first 7 games) vs. Lebron's prime...

And MJ still has a lead in BPM which is the best aggregate box stat.

Per also favors playoff Lebron so even taking the consecutive approach the box-score favors lebron in the playoffs. For a 10 year span, dpending on how you approach things, it goes to a split ot favors lebron.

If you take the "average the best years" approach, Lebron's "Playoff edge" becaomes pretty substantial, certainly bigger than mj's rs one.

So yeah, not really sure what "jordan dominates the box-score" is coming from. Lebron is the postseason box-score king in most frames and Jordan has an rs edge while Kareem is competitive in both despite being at a massive disadvantage in those types of metrics.

You must realize you're comparing what is essentially Jordan's entire career (minus first 7 games) vs. Lebron's prime...

… It is literally twelve postseasons for both of them, across thirteen years, for their age 24-35 postseasons.

I have said before the Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative. Glad to see that continues to hold true.

And MJ still has a lead in BPM which is the best aggregate box stat.

Yeah that is why I do all my assessments by glancing at the BPM leaderboards. Really makes analysis easy. 11.2 > 10.6 wrap it up boys, Basketball-Reference has spoken.

No, but you only pick playoffs so you don't have to contend with the fact that MJ played hard all the time whereas Lebron didn't. Also, nice job with the cutoff points so you didn't have to include either MJ's ridiculous 86 Celtics series or Lebron's lackluster 08 playoffs.

If it's because jordan played hard, why does Jordan look much worse than Lebron in the regular season per metrics/data that account for defense better

[AEnigma]

These exchanges are so stupid.

You: here's box showing Lebron just as good as Jordan
Me: your box analysis is flawed
You: well look at the plus /minus!
Me: ok, but you were doing box analysis and you left out the majority of the analysis
You: you Jordan stans promote raw box above all else

Everyone is definitely dumber from having read that. Good night.

A fascinating look into the mind of the average Jordan backer (and the people who apparently think similarly). I am sure everyone will read your meltdown over the absence of a meaningless three game sweep, transparently so you could attach longer and more successful Lebron series against substantially better defences, and conclude that I “left out the majority”.

Once again, I encourage you let me know when you care to talk about the sport rather than reformulations of a statsheet.

[VanWest82]

These exchanges are so stupid.

You: here's box showing Lebron just as good as Jordan
Me: your box analysis is flawed
You: well look at the plus /minus!
Me: ok, but you were doing box analysis and you left out the majority of the analysis
You: you Jordan stans promote raw box above all else

Everyone is definitely dumber from having read that. Good night.

A fascinating look into the mind of the average Jordan backer (and the people who apparently think similarly). I am sure everyone will read your meltdown over the absence of a meaningless three game sweep, transparently so you could attach longer and more successful Lebron series against substantially better defences, and conclude that I “left out the majority”.

Once again, I encourage you let me know when you care to talk about the sport rather than reformulations of a statsheet.

You left out 82 games per year, every year.

[AEnigma]

I do not believe I ever disputed that if I need someone to put up big regular season box scores on teams schematically funnelling the bulk of scoring opportunities to a player, Jordan has a better track record of fulfilling that very essential basketball task. But if we want to start throwing out those tepid regular season SRS impact indicators with disingenuous injury frames and insistence that Michael “never took a play off” Jordan should be judged more by his postseason results than his regular season results (while also ignoring any postseason results that occurred without him), then yes, I am going to highlight the postseason. And forgive me if I interpret the continued oscillation between whichever frame happens to seem most favourable in the moment more as a desperation to find some way to keep Jordan at the top rather than as a sincere commitment to any coherent process or analysis.

[Djoker]

Jordan has unequivocally much less of a “box score edge” than Lebron has an impact edge, especially when it matters — and that is with the box score metrics severely falling short of capturing defence and obviously being affected by the quality of opponent defences (where Lebron generally had much tougher opposition than Jordan).

Playoff Jordan, 1987-98: 11.2 BPM, .258 WS/48 over 172 games at 41.7 minutes per game
Playoff Lebron, 2009-20: 10.6 BPM, .261 WS/48 over 214 games at 40.9 minutes per game

Maybe by “box scores” you meant “points per game.”

You must realize you're comparing what is essentially Jordan's entire career (minus first 7 games) vs. Lebron's prime...

… It is literally twelve postseasons for both of them, across thirteen years, for their age 24-35 postseasons. The fact that essentially constitutes Jordan’s entire postseason career (including a notably larger sample of games) is to Lebron’s credit, not Jordan’s.

I have said before the Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative. Glad to see that continues to hold true.

And MJ still has a lead in BPM which is the best aggregate box stat.

Yeah that is why I do all my assessments by glancing at the BPM leaderboards. Really makes analysis easy. 11.2 > 10.6 wrap it up boys, Basketball-Reference has spoken.

Let's take what we actually know as prime Jordan.

Playoff Prime - Basic Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 34.9 ppg, 6.7 rpg (1.6 o), 6.6 apg, 2.3 spg, 1.0 bpg on 58.1 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 3.3 topg in 41.8 mpg
2012-2018 Lebron: 29.5 ppg, 9.2 rpg (1.6 o), 7.1 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.9 bpg on 59.0 %TS (+4.9 rTS) with 3.6 topg in 41.1 mpg

Playoff Prime - Advanced Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 12.2 BPM, 0.261 WS/48, 29.8 PER
2012-2018 Lebron: 10.4 BPM, 0.258 WS/48, 29.6 PER

Jordan has a major edge in basic box and a hefty edge in BPM. I think the basic box pretty much wraps it up. I've never been a huge fan of aggregate stats like BPM but some like them.

[AEnigma]

You must realize you're comparing what is essentially Jordan's entire career (minus first 7 games) vs. Lebron's prime...

… It is literally twelve postseasons for both of them, across thirteen years, for their age 24-35 postseasons. The fact that essentially constitutes Jordan’s entire postseason career (including a notably larger sample of games) is to Lebron’s credit, not Jordan’s.

I have said before the Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative. Glad to see that continues to hold true.

And MJ still has a lead in BPM which is the best aggregate box stat.

Yeah that is why I do all my assessments by glancing at the BPM leaderboards. Really makes analysis easy. 11.2 > 10.6 wrap it up boys, Basketball-Reference has spoken.

Let's take what we actually know as prime Jordan.

Playoff Prime - Basic Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 34.9 ppg, 6.7 rpg (1.6 o), 6.6 apg, 2.3 spg, 1.0 bpg on 58.1 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 3.3 topg in 41.8 mpg
2012-2018 Lebron: 29.5 ppg, 9.2 rpg (1.6 o), 7.1 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.9 bpg on 59.0 %TS (+4.9 rTS) with 3.6 topg in 41.1 mpg

Playoff Prime - Advanced Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 12.2 BPM, 0.261 WS/48, 29.8 PER
2012-2018 Lebron: 10.4 BPM, 0.258 WS/48, 29.6 PER

Jordan has a major edge in basic box and a hefty edge in BPM. I think the basic box pretty much wraps it up. I've never been a huge fan of aggregate stats like BPM but some like them.

Well his “major edge” in basic box is just shot volume, but I suppose none of you have ever made a secret of putting that on the pedestal.

The choice of years here though is worth exploring. See, 1986-93 is Jordan’s athletic prime. But no one serious actually thinks 1986 Jordan is better than 1996-98 Jordan (remains to be seen whether you do with your love for point production). The box scores might be reduced, but the player quality is improved. I might even be able to make a playoff argument for those years over 1987 too, but at least 1987 is the start of his regular season prime.

Still, that would be fine if you wanted to be consistent. But no, instead we cut out 2009-11 Lebron. Why? Well, some have argued that Lebron had flaws in his game revealed in 2011 and that all years after provide a more resilient Lebron, even if later years like 2018 lack the same athletic advantages. I am inclined in this direction to an extent; 2009 was special in any light, but even 2015 or 2018 Lebron probably go farther than 2010 Lebron did in the postseason (hand health permitting, I suppose). I can also excuse the lack of inclusion of 2020, for which that principle also applies, as you trying to be equitable and not use “old” Lebron.

However… that was not your Jordan standard. Maybe you do firmly believe 1986/87 Jordan were better versions of Jordan than 1996-98, but then to me it seems pretty damning if true prime Jordan could not even muster a single win in seven tries even as the Celtics fell off from their 1986 level. Then again, the main advantage I would give second threepeat Jordan over those years is defence (and I suppose midrange scoring resiliency), which we know you do not really value when it conflicts with superficial box score production, so maybe this is your serious interpretation of his career arc after all.

Here is another hypothesis though: you wanted to avoid 1995. Hey, fair enough, it is an out of shape Jordan and by far the least impressive playoff box score of his career. The problem is, Lebron has runs like that too, except with back issues rather than “have not played in a while” issues. So here is my suggestion: we take them at their best, while acknowledging that Jordan has no equivalent box score blemish on par with the 2011 Finals or ever struggled with his shot the way Lebron did throughout most of 2015. Personally I think the value of longevity like Lebron’s is weaker box score runs make up a smaller percentage of your overall history, but I recognise plenty of you love to highlight the “consistency” of a man who missed the bulk of the season three times in fourteen years.

Anyway, with this approach…

Lebron’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 17.5 (2009), 12.7 (2018), 11.5 (2010), 11 (2016), 10.7 (2020), 10.5 (2012), 10.4 (2013), 10.3 (2014), 10.1 (2008), 9.8 (2017), 9.2 (2021), 8.1 (2007)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 14.6 (1991), 13.7 (1990), 12.7 (1987), 12.2 (1988), 12.1 (1989), 11.9 (1986), 11.6 (1993), 10.7 (1996), 9.9 (1992), 9.9 (1997), 9.5 (1985), 9.0 (1998).

Lebron’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .399 (2009), .284 (2012), .275 (2017), .274 (2016), .269 (2018), .269 (2020), .269 (2014), .260 (2013), .242 (2010), .200 (2007), .198 (2011), .187 (2008)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .333 (1991), .306 (1996), .284 (1990), .270 (1989), .270 (1993), .265 (1998), .235 (1997), .234 (1988), .216 (1992), .198 (1985), .165 (1987), .161 (1986)

Oh, look at that, no 2015 to be found (but of course that does highlight the many limitations of looking at nothing else beyond the box score, because for me that is contextually still one of the most impressive Finals runs ever). Not much new insight beyond that, though. Jordan is generally the BPM king, although 2009 is on its own mountain. Lebron has an advantage in WS/48, although not as consistently as Jordan has with BPM.

Now we can have some fun with this. You used a seven-year stretch for Lebron and an eight-year stretch for Jordan, so we can start there.

Best Seven Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12
Best Seven Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.7

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .291
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .280

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .287
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .279

Best Eight Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 11.8
Best Eight Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.4

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .287
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .275

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .283
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .275

I can manually scale BPM by hand with this data, but it is pretty annoying, so I would prefer to do that with smaller samples if you are curious. I can also give you average basic box scores for those years, although that too is more tedious.

Your claim was that Jordan “dominates” the box score. He does not. And certainly nowhere to the degree that Lebron constantly and consistently (even in down box score years) puts up some of the biggest impact we have seen from any player, including comfortably the best of the past 25 years, exceeding other top raw impact contenders like Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Paul, etc. by pretty much any frame you care to use — and then generally building on that lead in the postseason, including over Jordan. And unless you think basketball is something “solved” by BPM or its ilk, that should always be a lot more pertinent.

[Djoker]

… It is literally twelve postseasons for both of them, across thirteen years, for their age 24-35 postseasons. The fact that essentially constitutes Jordan’s entire postseason career (including a notably larger sample of games) is to Lebron’s credit, not Jordan’s.

I have said before the Jordan stans just blurt out the first thought that pops into their heads to explain away any inconveniences to their preferred narrative. Glad to see that continues to hold true.


Yeah that is why I do all my assessments by glancing at the BPM leaderboards. Really makes analysis easy. 11.2 > 10.6 wrap it up boys, Basketball-Reference has spoken.

Let's take what we actually know as prime Jordan.

Playoff Prime - Basic Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 34.9 ppg, 6.7 rpg (1.6 o), 6.6 apg, 2.3 spg, 1.0 bpg on 58.1 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 3.3 topg in 41.8 mpg
2012-2018 Lebron: 29.5 ppg, 9.2 rpg (1.6 o), 7.1 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.9 bpg on 59.0 %TS (+4.9 rTS) with 3.6 topg in 41.1 mpg

Playoff Prime - Advanced Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 12.2 BPM, 0.261 WS/48, 29.8 PER
2012-2018 Lebron: 10.4 BPM, 0.258 WS/48, 29.6 PER

Jordan has a major edge in basic box and a hefty edge in BPM. I think the basic box pretty much wraps it up. I've never been a huge fan of aggregate stats like BPM but some like them.

Well his “major edge” in basic box is just shot volume, but I suppose none of you have ever made a secret of putting that on the pedestal.

The choice of years here though is worth exploring. See, 1986-93 is Jordan’s athletic prime. But no one serious actually thinks 1986 Jordan is better than 1996-98 Jordan (remains to be seen whether you do with your love for point production). The box scores might be reduced, but the player quality is improved. I might even be able to make a playoff argument for those years over 1987 too, but at least 1987 is the start of his regular season prime.

Still, that would be fine if you wanted to be consistent. But no, instead we cut out 2009-11 Lebron. Why? Well, some have argued that Lebron had flaws in his game revealed in 2011 and that all years after provide a more resilient Lebron, even if later years like 2018 lack the same athletic advantages. I am inclined in this direction to an extent; 2009 was special in any light, but even 2015 or 2018 Lebron probably go farther than 2010 Lebron did in the postseason (hand health permitting, I suppose). I can also excuse the lack of inclusion of 2020, for which that principle also applies, as you trying to be equitable and not use “old” Lebron.

However… that was not your Jordan standard. Maybe you do firmly believe 1986/87 Jordan were better versions of Jordan than 1996-98, but then to me it seems pretty damning if true prime Jordan could not even muster a single win in seven tries even as the Celtics fell off from their 1986 level. Then again, the main advantage I would give second threepeat Jordan over those years is defence (and I suppose midrange scoring resiliency), which we know you do not really value when it conflicts with superficial box score production, so maybe this is your serious interpretation of his career arc after all.

Here is another hypothesis though: you wanted to avoid 1995. Hey, fair enough, it is an out of shape Jordan and by far the least impressive playoff box score of his career. The problem is, Lebron has runs like that too, except with back issues rather than “have not played in a while” issues. So here is my suggestion: we take them at their best, while acknowledging that Jordan has no equivalent box score blemish on par with the 2011 Finals or ever struggled with his shot the way Lebron did throughout most of 2015. Personally I think the value of longevity like Lebron’s is weaker box score runs make up a smaller percentage of your overall history, but I recognise plenty of you love to highlight the “consistency” of a man who missed the bulk of the season three times in fourteen years.

Anyway, with this approach…

Lebron’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 17.5 (2009), 12.7 (2018), 11.5 (2010), 11 (2016), 10.7 (2020), 10.5 (2012), 10.4 (2013), 10.3 (2014), 10.1 (2008), 9.8 (2017), 9.2 (2021), 8.1 (2007)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 14.6 (1991), 13.7 (1990), 12.7 (1987), 12.2 (1988), 12.1 (1989), 11.9 (1986), 11.6 (1993), 10.7 (1996), 9.9 (1992), 9.9 (1997), 9.5 (1985), 9.0 (1998).

Lebron’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .399 (2009), .284 (2012), .275 (2017), .274 (2016), .269 (2018), .269 (2020), .269 (2014), .260 (2013), .242 (2010), .200 (2007), .198 (2011), .187 (2008)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .333 (1991), .306 (1996), .284 (1990), .270 (1989), .270 (1993), .265 (1998), .235 (1997), .234 (1988), .216 (1992), .198 (1985), .165 (1987), .161 (1986)

Oh, look at that, no 2015 to be found (but of course that does highlight the many limitations of looking at nothing else beyond the box score, because for me that is contextually still one of the most impressive Finals runs ever). Not much new insight beyond that, though. Jordan is generally the BPM king, although 2009 is on its own mountain. Lebron has an advantage in WS/48, although not as consistently as Jordan has with BPM.

Now we can have some fun with this. You used a seven-year stretch for Lebron and an eight-year stretch for Jordan, so we can start there.

Best Seven Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12
Best Seven Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.7

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .291
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .280

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .287
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .279

Best Eight Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 11.8
Best Eight Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.4

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .287
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .275

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .283
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .275

I can manually scale BPM by hand with this data, but it is pretty annoying, so I would prefer to do that with smaller samples if you are curious. I can also give you average basic box scores for those years, although that too is more tedious.

Your claim was that Jordan “dominates” the box score. He does not. And certainly nowhere to the degree that Lebron constantly and consistently (even in down box score years) puts up some of the biggest impact we have seen from any player, including comfortably the best of the past 25 years, exceeding other top raw impact contenders like Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Paul, etc. by pretty much any frame you care to use — and then generally building on that lead in the postseason, including over Jordan. And unless you think basketball is something “solved” by BPM or its ilk, that should always be a lot more pertinent.

Shot volume... yea!

Jordan maintains the same relative efficiency while scoring 5+ ppg more. That's no small feat.

For reference, the gap in scoring volume between prime Jordan and prime Lebron is roughly the same as the gap between prime Duncan and prime Shaq.

[ceiling raiser]

Regarding NPI RAPM, something I'm wondering...

If we look at players in their age 33, 34, 38, 39 seasons, what does that tell us about their age 21-29, 31 seasons? Obviously data is scarce in the top half of the bucket, but can't we get a good idea of aging curves among top players based on this kind of extrapolation?

I think J.E. kind of was getting at this with his 2022 age adjusted study, however I think players at different points in the distribution will have wildly different aging outcomes (though perhaps I'm overestimating this effect).

[AEnigma]

Let's take what we actually know as prime Jordan.

Playoff Prime - Basic Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 34.9 ppg, 6.7 rpg (1.6 o), 6.6 apg, 2.3 spg, 1.0 bpg on 58.1 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 3.3 topg in 41.8 mpg
2012-2018 Lebron: 29.5 ppg, 9.2 rpg (1.6 o), 7.1 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.9 bpg on 59.0 %TS (+4.9 rTS) with 3.6 topg in 41.1 mpg

Playoff Prime - Advanced Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 12.2 BPM, 0.261 WS/48, 29.8 PER
2012-2018 Lebron: 10.4 BPM, 0.258 WS/48, 29.6 PER

Jordan has a major edge in basic box and a hefty edge in BPM. I think the basic box pretty much wraps it up. I've never been a huge fan of aggregate stats like BPM but some like them.

Well his “major edge” in basic box is just shot volume, but I suppose none of you have ever made a secret of putting that on the pedestal.

The choice of years here though is worth exploring. See, 1986-93 is Jordan’s athletic prime. But no one serious actually thinks 1986 Jordan is better than 1996-98 Jordan (remains to be seen whether you do with your love for point production). The box scores might be reduced, but the player quality is improved. I might even be able to make a playoff argument for those years over 1987 too, but at least 1987 is the start of his regular season prime.

Still, that would be fine if you wanted to be consistent. But no, instead we cut out 2009-11 Lebron. Why? Well, some have argued that Lebron had flaws in his game revealed in 2011 and that all years after provide a more resilient Lebron, even if later years like 2018 lack the same athletic advantages. I am inclined in this direction to an extent; 2009 was special in any light, but even 2015 or 2018 Lebron probably go farther than 2010 Lebron did in the postseason (hand health permitting, I suppose). I can also excuse the lack of inclusion of 2020, for which that principle also applies, as you trying to be equitable and not use “old” Lebron.

However… that was not your Jordan standard. Maybe you do firmly believe 1986/87 Jordan were better versions of Jordan than 1996-98, but then to me it seems pretty damning if true prime Jordan could not even muster a single win in seven tries even as the Celtics fell off from their 1986 level. Then again, the main advantage I would give second threepeat Jordan over those years is defence (and I suppose midrange scoring resiliency), which we know you do not really value when it conflicts with superficial box score production, so maybe this is your serious interpretation of his career arc after all.

Here is another hypothesis though: you wanted to avoid 1995. Hey, fair enough, it is an out of shape Jordan and by far the least impressive playoff box score of his career. The problem is, Lebron has runs like that too, except with back issues rather than “have not played in a while” issues. So here is my suggestion: we take them at their best, while acknowledging that Jordan has no equivalent box score blemish on par with the 2011 Finals or ever struggled with his shot the way Lebron did throughout most of 2015. Personally I think the value of longevity like Lebron’s is weaker box score runs make up a smaller percentage of your overall history, but I recognise plenty of you love to highlight the “consistency” of a man who missed the bulk of the season three times in fourteen years.

Anyway, with this approach…

Lebron’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 17.5 (2009), 12.7 (2018), 11.5 (2010), 11 (2016), 10.7 (2020), 10.5 (2012), 10.4 (2013), 10.3 (2014), 10.1 (2008), 9.8 (2017), 9.2 (2021), 8.1 (2007)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 14.6 (1991), 13.7 (1990), 12.7 (1987), 12.2 (1988), 12.1 (1989), 11.9 (1986), 11.6 (1993), 10.7 (1996), 9.9 (1992), 9.9 (1997), 9.5 (1985), 9.0 (1998).

Lebron’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .399 (2009), .284 (2012), .275 (2017), .274 (2016), .269 (2018), .269 (2020), .269 (2014), .260 (2013), .242 (2010), .200 (2007), .198 (2011), .187 (2008)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .333 (1991), .306 (1996), .284 (1990), .270 (1989), .270 (1993), .265 (1998), .235 (1997), .234 (1988), .216 (1992), .198 (1985), .165 (1987), .161 (1986)

Oh, look at that, no 2015 to be found (but of course that does highlight the many limitations of looking at nothing else beyond the box score, because for me that is contextually still one of the most impressive Finals runs ever). Not much new insight beyond that, though. Jordan is generally the BPM king, although 2009 is on its own mountain. Lebron has an advantage in WS/48, although not as consistently as Jordan has with BPM.

Now we can have some fun with this. You used a seven-year stretch for Lebron and an eight-year stretch for Jordan, so we can start there.

Best Seven Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12
Best Seven Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.7

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .291
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .280

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .287
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .279

Best Eight Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 11.8
Best Eight Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.4

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .287
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .275

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .283
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .275

I can manually scale BPM by hand with this data, but it is pretty annoying, so I would prefer to do that with smaller samples if you are curious. I can also give you average basic box scores for those years, although that too is more tedious.

Your claim was that Jordan “dominates” the box score. He does not. And certainly nowhere to the degree that Lebron constantly and consistently (even in down box score years) puts up some of the biggest impact we have seen from any player, including comfortably the best of the past 25 years, exceeding other top raw impact contenders like Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Paul, etc. by pretty much any frame you care to use — and then generally building on that lead in the postseason, including over Jordan. And unless you think basketball is something “solved” by BPM or its ilk, that should always be a lot more pertinent.

Shot volume... yea!

Jordan maintains the same relative efficiency while scoring 5+ ppg more. That's no small feat.

For reference, the gap in scoring volume between prime Jordan and prime Lebron is roughly the same as the gap between prime Duncan and prime Shaq.

Relative efficiency in what capacity. How are you analysing his opponents? How are you factoring in Lebron schematically shouldering less of a scoring load (and what happens whenever that scheme changes)? And how are you factoring the defensive disparity or the disparity of their pass quality? There is so much more to the sport if you care to look.

[AEnigma]

Regarding NPI RAPM, something I'm wondering...

If we look at players in their age 33, 34, 38, 39 seasons, what does that tell us about their age 21-29, 31 seasons? Obviously data is scarce in the top half of the bucket, but can't we get a good idea of aging curves among top players based on this kind of extrapolation?

I think J.E. kind of was getting at this with his 2022 age adjusted study, however I think players at different points in the distribution will have wildly different aging outcomes (though perhaps I'm overestimating this effect).

I do not think there is a clear rule.

DARKO has the most comprehensive approach I have seen to aging curves, but it is not a formula you can just follow on its own. Some players maintain athleticism better, or make-up for loss of athleticism in other ways through playing time (e.g. Garnett and Duncan) or changes in shot profile (Paul, Malone, Durant, and Jordan all shifted to taking more midrange shots, while Lebron has made constant gradual improvements to his post play). Occasionally you even see late breakouts like with Nash. There are patterns — most top players peak somewhere in their mid-20s and exit their primes in their early 30s — but nothing to follow as a true principle.

[Homer38]

Let's take what we actually know as prime Jordan.

Playoff Prime - Basic Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 34.9 ppg, 6.7 rpg (1.6 o), 6.6 apg, 2.3 spg, 1.0 bpg on 58.1 %TS (+4.5 rTS) with 3.3 topg in 41.8 mpg
2012-2018 Lebron: 29.5 ppg, 9.2 rpg (1.6 o), 7.1 apg, 1.8 spg, 0.9 bpg on 59.0 %TS (+4.9 rTS) with 3.6 topg in 41.1 mpg

Playoff Prime - Advanced Box
1986-1993 Jordan: 12.2 BPM, 0.261 WS/48, 29.8 PER
2012-2018 Lebron: 10.4 BPM, 0.258 WS/48, 29.6 PER

Jordan has a major edge in basic box and a hefty edge in BPM. I think the basic box pretty much wraps it up. I've never been a huge fan of aggregate stats like BPM but some like them.

Well his “major edge” in basic box is just shot volume, but I suppose none of you have ever made a secret of putting that on the pedestal.

The choice of years here though is worth exploring. See, 1986-93 is Jordan’s athletic prime. But no one serious actually thinks 1986 Jordan is better than 1996-98 Jordan (remains to be seen whether you do with your love for point production). The box scores might be reduced, but the player quality is improved. I might even be able to make a playoff argument for those years over 1987 too, but at least 1987 is the start of his regular season prime.

Still, that would be fine if you wanted to be consistent. But no, instead we cut out 2009-11 Lebron. Why? Well, some have argued that Lebron had flaws in his game revealed in 2011 and that all years after provide a more resilient Lebron, even if later years like 2018 lack the same athletic advantages. I am inclined in this direction to an extent; 2009 was special in any light, but even 2015 or 2018 Lebron probably go farther than 2010 Lebron did in the postseason (hand health permitting, I suppose). I can also excuse the lack of inclusion of 2020, for which that principle also applies, as you trying to be equitable and not use “old” Lebron.

However… that was not your Jordan standard. Maybe you do firmly believe 1986/87 Jordan were better versions of Jordan than 1996-98, but then to me it seems pretty damning if true prime Jordan could not even muster a single win in seven tries even as the Celtics fell off from their 1986 level. Then again, the main advantage I would give second threepeat Jordan over those years is defence (and I suppose midrange scoring resiliency), which we know you do not really value when it conflicts with superficial box score production, so maybe this is your serious interpretation of his career arc after all.

Here is another hypothesis though: you wanted to avoid 1995. Hey, fair enough, it is an out of shape Jordan and by far the least impressive playoff box score of his career. The problem is, Lebron has runs like that too, except with back issues rather than “have not played in a while” issues. So here is my suggestion: we take them at their best, while acknowledging that Jordan has no equivalent box score blemish on par with the 2011 Finals or ever struggled with his shot the way Lebron did throughout most of 2015. Personally I think the value of longevity like Lebron’s is weaker box score runs make up a smaller percentage of your overall history, but I recognise plenty of you love to highlight the “consistency” of a man who missed the bulk of the season three times in fourteen years.

Anyway, with this approach…

Lebron’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 17.5 (2009), 12.7 (2018), 11.5 (2010), 11 (2016), 10.7 (2020), 10.5 (2012), 10.4 (2013), 10.3 (2014), 10.1 (2008), 9.8 (2017), 9.2 (2021), 8.1 (2007)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff BPM runs in order: 14.6 (1991), 13.7 (1990), 12.7 (1987), 12.2 (1988), 12.1 (1989), 11.9 (1986), 11.6 (1993), 10.7 (1996), 9.9 (1992), 9.9 (1997), 9.5 (1985), 9.0 (1998).

Lebron’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .399 (2009), .284 (2012), .275 (2017), .274 (2016), .269 (2018), .269 (2020), .269 (2014), .260 (2013), .242 (2010), .200 (2007), .198 (2011), .187 (2008)
Jordan’s 12 best playoff WS/48 runs in order: .333 (1991), .306 (1996), .284 (1990), .270 (1989), .270 (1993), .265 (1998), .235 (1997), .234 (1988), .216 (1992), .198 (1985), .165 (1987), .161 (1986)

Oh, look at that, no 2015 to be found (but of course that does highlight the many limitations of looking at nothing else beyond the box score, because for me that is contextually still one of the most impressive Finals runs ever). Not much new insight beyond that, though. Jordan is generally the BPM king, although 2009 is on its own mountain. Lebron has an advantage in WS/48, although not as consistently as Jordan has with BPM.

Now we can have some fun with this. You used a seven-year stretch for Lebron and an eight-year stretch for Jordan, so we can start there.

Best Seven Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12
Best Seven Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.7

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .291
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .280

Best Seven Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .287
Best Seven Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .279

Best Eight Lebron BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 11.8
Best Eight Jordan BPM Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): 12.4

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .287
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Unscaled): .275

Best Eight Lebron WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .283
Best Eight Jordan WS/48 Postseasons, Averaged (Scaled): .275

I can manually scale BPM by hand with this data, but it is pretty annoying, so I would prefer to do that with smaller samples if you are curious. I can also give you average basic box scores for those years, although that too is more tedious.

Your claim was that Jordan “dominates” the box score. He does not. And certainly nowhere to the degree that Lebron constantly and consistently (even in down box score years) puts up some of the biggest impact we have seen from any player, including comfortably the best of the past 25 years, exceeding other top raw impact contenders like Shaq, Duncan, Garnett, Paul, etc. by pretty much any frame you care to use — and then generally building on that lead in the postseason, including over Jordan. And unless you think basketball is something “solved” by BPM or its ilk, that should always be a lot more pertinent.

Shot volume... yea!

Jordan maintains the same relative efficiency while scoring 5+ ppg more. That's no small feat.

For reference, the gap in scoring volume between prime Jordan and prime Lebron is roughly the same as the gap between prime Duncan and prime Shaq.

Jordan has 5 PPG per game more that LBJ and also 5 more FGA more that LBJ in the playoffs....LBJ had several playoffs run of 30 PPG or more(6 to be exact)....If you consider the load for the passing and on defense,the load of LBJ has always been bigger for LBJ since he was always the best players of his team for that(outside of 2020 with Davis on defense).....MJ had Pippen who was a very good playmaker and a great defender,so Jordan could focused what he was doing the best(scoring)

[ceiling raiser]

I do not think there is a clear rule.

DARKO has the most comprehensive approach I have seen to aging curves, but it is not a formula you can just follow on its own. Some players maintain athleticism better, or make-up for loss of athleticism in other ways through playing time (e.g. Garnett and Duncan) or changes in shot profile (Paul, Malone, Durant, and Jordan all shifted to taking more midrange shots, while Lebron has made constant gradual improvements to his post play). Occasionally you even see late breakouts like with Nash. There are patterns — most top players peak somewhere in their mid-20s and exit their primes in their early 30s — but nothing to follow as a true principle.

RE:DARKO - That makes sense, but my hesitation with these box+impact hybrids (including XRAPM, RPM, etc), is that box score stats are a lot more stable year-to-year. I might be on an island on this, but I think box score and +/- (or WOWY) type metrics are most useful when orthogonal.

With regards to Jordan, from the data we have he looks like a top 10 all-time guy, but seems to be clearly worse than the best players of the true databall era (LeBron, Garnett, Duncan, Steph/Dray depending on how you parse multicollinearity, more recently Jokic). Some of this is due to data availability bias, but at some point it is completely implausible for him to have the impact profile of a top player.

Haven't heard from Squared2020 in a while (hope he's doing well), but when I spoke with him via email a few months back, he mentioned that there is some stint data that NBA teams have. There was some delta, but I think something is better than nothing (and from my conversations with Pollack before he passed away, his source of truth was the stint data, so we have some stuff from the 93-94 through 95-96 regular season +/-). I don't know how we can get ahold of this data from the NBA, but I would be extremely interested in having this aggregated going back to at least the beginning of Jordan's career, if not the beginning of the three-point era.

All that said, there are ways to parse by cohorts -- classifying players by primary (size/age/length/minutes played) and secondary (playstyle etc) characteristics, but it could conceivably dilute the dataset if we are overly granular.

[AEnigma]

I do not think there is a clear rule.

DARKO has the most comprehensive approach I have seen to aging curves, but it is not a formula you can just follow on its own. Some players maintain athleticism better, or make-up for loss of athleticism in other ways through playing time (e.g. Garnett and Duncan) or changes in shot profile (Paul, Malone, Durant, and Jordan all shifted to taking more midrange shots, while Lebron has made constant gradual improvements to his post play). Occasionally you even see late breakouts like with Nash. There are patterns — most top players peak somewhere in their mid-20s and exit their primes in their early 30s — but nothing to follow as a true principle.

RE:DARKO - That makes sense, but my hesitation with these box+impact hybrids (including XRAPM, RPM, etc), is that box score stats are a lot more stable year-to-year. I might be on an island on this, but I think box score and +/- (or WOWY) type metrics are most useful when orthogonal.

With regards to Jordan, from the data we have he looks like a top 10 all-time guy, but seems to be clearly worse than the best players of the true databall era (LeBron, Garnett, Duncan, Steph/Dray depending on how you parse multicollinearity, more recently Jokic). Some of this is due to data availability bias, but at some point it is completely implausible for him to have the impact profile of a top player.

Haven't heard from Squared2020 in a while (hope he's doing well), but when I spoke with him via email a few months back, he mentioned that there is some stint data that NBA teams have. There was some delta, but I think something is better than nothing (and from my conversations with Pollack before he passed away, his source of truth was the stint data, so we have some stuff from the 93-94 through 95-96 regular season +/-). I don't know how we can get ahold of this data from the NBA, but I would be extremely interested in having this aggregated going back to at least the beginning of Jordan's career, if not the beginning of the three-point era.

All that said, there are ways to parse by cohorts -- classifying players by primary (size/age/length/minutes played) and secondary (playstyle etc) characteristics, but it could conceivably dilute the dataset if we are overly granular.

In general agreement with you on all of that. Personally, I tend to see less of a strict aging curve among the all-time greats than most — perhaps because I do not wallow as much in the box score values lol. It actually makes it a bit frustrating when talking Jordan because his older years are too often assumed to be this major step down in overall impact from his peak, when I think he maintained his individual impact pretty impressively. And that even extends to his Wizards seasons, which a lot of people like to pretend never happened but which I think reflect very well for him on an aging curve (albeit likely not quite as well as for Lebron or a couple of others).

Interesting read on the trouble with aging curves, lifted from the DARKO site:
http://blog.philbirnbaum.com/2019/11/why-you-cant-calculate-aging.html?m=1

[ceiling raiser]

In general agreement with you on all of that. Personally, I tend to see less of a strict aging curve among the all-time greats than most — perhaps because I do not wallow as much in the box score values lol. It actually makes it a bit frustrating when talking Jordan because his older years are too often assumed to be this major step down in overall impact from his peak, when I think he maintained his individual impact pretty impressively. And that even extends to his Wizards seasons, which a lot of people like to pretend never happened but which I think reflect very well for him on an aging curve (albeit likely not quite as well as for Lebron or a couple of others).

Interesting read on the trouble with aging curves, lifted from the DARKO site:
http://blog.philbirnbaum.com/2019/11/why-you-cant-calculate-aging.html?m=1

Four notes on Jordan:

(1) I actually prefer his offensive game to LeBron's, because he was able to turn low percentage shots (long 2s and post ups) into game theoretical anomalies. That said, so was Adrian Dantley. So my belief is, LeBron is the clearly better floor raiser, Jordan is (probably) the better ceiling raiser.

(2) From Ben's research using Squared2020's data, there isn't really a next level for MJ in the playoffs. Jordan is a known quantity who will give you consistent performance (with minor caveats for 93 and 98, though I think both of those were due to injuries from the rest of the Bulls' supporting casts).

(3) There is this belief that 96 and 97 were big steps down from 88-93, but I don't think that's necessarily the case at all. He was still extremely athletic, put on more muscle, had a similar motor. There isn't reason to believe that first threepeat Jordan was on another level from the second threepeat, and it's a bit of a stretch from Jordan proponents given they know that the data doesn't fully exist.

(4) I think it's very, very likely that if we do eventually have more data from the 80s/early 90s, we'll see that Jordan's biggest rival/peer isn't a ghost from another era, but Magic Johnson. Squared2020's data (again, very limited sample) portrays Johnson in a very strong light. Jordan and Johnson are very close offensively, and not far off defensively. I would be fascinated in data on Magic's +/- in playoffs in his career, as I think he compares very favorably to Jordan.

[ty 4191]

In general agreement with you on all of that.

Hi AEnigma,
Is LeBron the greatest player of all time, in your opinion? Is he well ahead of Jordan?

(If you rank players between eras), who are your top 10?

Was just genuinely curious. Thanks for your time!