What's the strongest data-driven argument for Michael Jordan as GOAT?

[Bergmaniac]

The problem is you guys ignore the arguments for Jordan over James because you dont like them

The words pot, kettle and black come to mind...

[MyUniBroDavis]

Conserving in the RS lol. Can you imagine being conservative with his energy level during the RS to save himself for the playoffs? Bird, Magic either lol?

There’s no incentive to go all in, in the RS if ur both a top seed level team or if it’s not realistic to get the top seed in the overall league if ur #1 in ur conference. Everyone does this now lol

Well i guess not everyone is built in the mold of a Jordan, Bird, or Magic. Those guys didnt conserve energy just cause its a RS game lol. If they were on the court they gave full effort.

Or maybe contextually getting first seed in the nba for the finals wasn’t a realistic goal because of the warriors? It’s called being smart lol

[MavsDirk41]

The problem is you guys ignore the arguments for Jordan over James because you dont like them

The words pot, kettle and black come to mind...

Then put James stuff on here….

[MavsDirk41]

There’s no incentive to go all in, in the RS if ur both a top seed level team or if it’s not realistic to get the top seed in the overall league if ur #1 in ur conference. Everyone does this now lol

Well i guess not everyone is built in the mold of a Jordan, Bird, or Magic. Those guys didnt conserve energy just cause its a RS game lol. If they were on the court they gave full effort.

Or maybe contextually getting first seed in the nba for the finals wasn’t a realistic goal because of the warriors? It’s called being smart lol

Is that what you young guys call it lol? Playing for second is goat stuff isnt it? Nobody is saying James isnt an all time great but some of the stuff you guys put on here is hilarious man. Well im gonna coast in the RS and save myself for the playoffs is a pitiful excuse man.

[dautjazz]

Also Lebron's been injured more times in one year than Jordan was his ENTIRE career. Just like work, you're not getting the job done when you don't show up for work. This is why I rank Jordan and Kobe higher than Lebron.

The true greats play through pain. The rest are racking up stats through the greatest travesty in NBA history (yes worse than the malice in the palace) is the so call total BS "pain management."

That makes players weak, thus Lebron is weaker than Jordan in every way imaginable. At least Jordan showed up when it mattered. Lebron can never touch that. You just got to be a witness.

This is dumb, Lebron's injuries happened during his Lakers years 17-20 career, while MJ played 15 seasons, one where he missed most of the season due to an injury, and another where he hardly played since he played baseball. So MJ didn't put anywhere near the same mileage on his body as Lebron. BTW Jordan was got hurt in his first year as a Wizard, so he was fragile himself when he was old, so there goes your argument.

[Gregoire]

Conserving in the RS lol. Can you imagine being conservative with his energy level during the RS to save himself for the playoffs? Bird, Magic either lol?

There’s no incentive to go all in, in the RS if ur both a top seed level team or if it’s not realistic to get the top seed in the overall league if ur #1 in ur conference. Everyone does this now lol

Why don't they go all-in? Because it is more difficult. No incentive? Aside from impressing people looking at their accomplishments afterward. But that is exactly what we are doing.

Yes, I think Lebron lack of RS success or "trying" is other part of his "longevity". If he was all-in in RS his wear-and-tear would be much bigger.

[70sFan]

3 hours is pretty quick on a forum………….
I was refering to the guy who voted for Jordan. The other guy wasnt attacking.


There is a diffrence in questioning one thing and then just going out of your way to scrutinize a vote in a voting thread….

Sometimes the conversation is quite heated, but it wasn't a personal attack, everything in that response was related to the Jordan's voter post. I'm not a fan of aggressive discussions, but the most important thing is presented argumentation and throughout the first thread the discussion was on a very high level.

I wasnt meaning as a personal attack.
One poster even made up stats to disprove Jordan or lied about it.

What stat? Provide the quote.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Well i guess not everyone is built in the mold of a Jordan, Bird, or Magic. Those guys didnt conserve energy just cause its a RS game lol. If they were on the court they gave full effort.

Or maybe contextually getting first seed in the nba for the finals wasn’t a realistic goal because of the warriors? It’s called being smart lol

Is that what you young guys call it lol? Playing for second is goat stuff isnt it? Nobody is saying James isnt an all time great but some of the stuff you guys put on here is hilarious man. Well im gonna coast in the RS and save myself for the playoffs is a pitiful excuse man.

No lol it’s called having functioning brain cells and realizing that you aren’t gonna get more wins than the warriors lol, players do this now because it’s smarter lmao

[MyUniBroDavis]

[gfycat][/gfycat]

Sometimes the conversation is quite heated, but it wasn't a personal attack, everything in that response was related to the Jordan's voter post. I'm not a fan of aggressive discussions, but the most important thing is presented argumentation and throughout the first thread the discussion was on a very high level.

I wasnt meaning as a personal attack.
One poster even made up stats to disprove Jordan or lied about it.

What stat? Provide the quote.

Bro why are we being serious on the general board rn there’s like one brain cell split among every person we’re talking to rn

Poster is on vacation for numerous personal attacks. No need to respond or report.

[Gregoire]

Look at the first thread of the top 100. First page.
1 guy voted for Jordan instantly gets attacked, why would anyone spend time trying to participate in these if he gets attacked for his vote?

It wasn't "instantly" and it wasn't an "attack". By the same criteria, actually the first poster got "attacked" by having LeBron over Kareem. So much about bias...

3 hours is pretty quick on a forum………….
I was refering to the guy who voted for Jordan. The other guy wasnt attacking.

You're rewarding LeBron and downgrading Kareem (and others) due to the amount of information available.
Just doesn't seem fair to rank one player better than another partly due to the amount of information available.

There is a diffrence in questioning one thing and then just going out of your way to scrutinize a vote in a voting thread….

Because it became Lebron forum and there absolutely no credibility in this voting. The discussion is sometimes still great due to unbiased old (or new) posters like Doc, lessthanshake (and they are all not pro-Lebron) and some others, but for one good poster there are 2 Lebron fanboys who give they motivated arguments or just splitting facts to favor his idol. Actually in all world it became more and more consensus that MJ is GOAT the more Lebron career go to its finish line, but on PC we see reverse picture

Actually they need to vote MJ at number 2 and not go berserk because in this case voting would resemble to the true voting more, but they didnt aware of their emotions....

[twyzted]

I wasnt meaning as a personal attack.
One poster even made up stats to disprove Jordan or lied about it.

What stat? Provide the quote.

In the playoffs they played like a +8 team, boosting their srs from +4.7 to +5 for the season. Aka, a 58-win pace. Then without Grant(who would see the Magic jump from first-round outs to finalists), the Bulls won at a 52-win pace:

A what +team.? But the math doesnt compute.
Rs srs 2.87 not 4.7
Playoffs srs 2.8.

Then you asked this earlier

Yeahq, do it and provide the reasons why you think these posts are biased and unreasonable.

Why don't we start with the large-samples which are not "limited"? We have 82 games telling us the Bulls were a 28-win team in 1984. They were a 30-win team without Jordan in 1986.

Wrong, Jordan played 18 games, bulls record was 9-9 so the bulls were a 21 win team without him, he doubled down when confronted.

From voting thread.

That team then got better with additions such as oakley.

the real-world Jordan's team was unaffected by his defensive depature, In the real world Lebrons' teams have consistently collapsed on that end without him. In the real-world the Bulls were defensively average or below average save for one-year with oakley where that defense collapsed in the playoffs and then turned elite with...Pippen and Grant.

My response earlier in this thread.
“Right so the bulls jumping from 107.6(11th) to 105.5(3rd) is because of 7th and 8th player in the rotation. Then why did it take until 90/91 to the bulls defense to “elite”?
Can you also explain how the knicks defense got worse by adding Oakley?

the 94 Bulls were a Much better offense with Pippen and Grant then the Cavs with Kyrie and Kevin.

Really guys who have played for 5-6 years together perform better then guys who played 13 games together over 3 years? Amazing

The 2015 Cavs played a system(which Lebron actually made his teammates buy into) and went 42-5 with a big-three with worse co-stars than Pippen/Grant(both in terms of "talent" and "fit"). That "system" than saw them sweep the 60-win Hawks

Grant is definetly not better then Kevin Love.
Kyrie is better then pippen on offense and vice versa.

Lebron never played with Jordan's level of help

That is just false.

This is just a small sample of the bias.

Ive never seen a guy go so out of his way to disprove a vote in a voting thread.

He would be a billionare if he could collect rent from Jordan.

[70sFan]

In the playoffs they played like a +8 team, boosting their srs from +4.7 to +5 for the season. Aka, a 58-win pace. Then without Grant(who would see the Magic jump from first-round outs to finalists), the Bulls won at a 52-win pace:

A what +team.? But the math doesnt compute.
Rs srs 2.87 not 4.7
Playoffs srs 2.8.

He used healthy team SRS provided by Ben Taylor for RS, which I'm not sure I agree with but it's not "made up".

For the playoffs, he used Net Rating adjusted for opponents, which is a common way to evaluate teams in the playoffs. There is nothing wrong with that.

Why don't we start with the large-samples which are not "limited"? We have 82 games telling us the Bulls were a 28-win team in 1984. They were a 30-win team without Jordan in 1986.

Wrong, Jordan played 18 games, bulls record was 9-9 so the bulls were a 21 win team without him, he doubled down when confronted.

Yeah, it doesn't work that way. If the Bulls won 21 games in 64 games without Jordan, it's expected for them to win 6 games in 18 games left - giving us 27 games pace. The difference between the numbers is dependent on whether you use raw record or SRS to calculate expected wins.

That team then got better with additions such as oakley.

the real-world Jordan's team was unaffected by his defensive depature, In the real world Lebrons' teams have consistently collapsed on that end without him. In the real-world the Bulls were defensively average or below average save for one-year with oakley where that defense collapsed in the playoffs and then turned elite with...Pippen and Grant.

My response earlier in this thread.
“Right so the bulls jumping from 107.6(11th) to 105.5(3rd) is because of 7th and 8th player in the rotation. Then why did it take until 90/91 to the bulls defense to “elite”?
Can you also explain how the knicks defense got worse by adding Oakley?

I don't think I understand your point here. He talked that Oakley was the most impactful defender in 1988 Bulls team (can be questioned, but not completely unreasonable) and then they didn't become elite defensively until Grant and Pippen reached their primes. We have seem Bulls being great defensively without Jordan in 1994, I think it's fair to say that Bulls were not heavily depended on Jordan's defense.

the 94 Bulls were a Much better offense with Pippen and Grant then the Cavs with Kyrie and Kevin.

Really guys who have played for 5-6 years together perform better then guys who played 13 games together over 3 years? Amazing

You can contextualize, but he stated a fact. Don't see anything wrong with that.

The 2015 Cavs played a system(which Lebron actually made his teammates buy into) and went 42-5 with a big-three with worse co-stars than Pippen/Grant(both in terms of "talent" and "fit"). That "system" than saw them sweep the 60-win Hawks

Grant is definetly not better then Kevin Love.
Kyrie is better then pippen on offense and vice versa.

Why do you think Love is better than Grant?
Kyrie certainly isn't on Pippen level, we have seen both playing as the main guys.

These are not false statements, these are reasonable opinions you can disagree with.

Lebron never played with Jordan's level of help

That is just false.

Provide evidences then.

I mean, I don't see any false statements here. You can argue some of these statements don't tell the whole story and you can have a valuable discussion to disprove them, but you didn't provide any examples of "biased James fanboys making up facts".

[zimpy27]

It wasn't "instantly" and it wasn't an "attack". By the same criteria, actually the first poster got "attacked" by having LeBron over Kareem. So much about bias...

3 hours is pretty quick on a forum………….
I was refering to the guy who voted for Jordan. The other guy wasnt attacking.

You're rewarding LeBron and downgrading Kareem (and others) due to the amount of information available.
Just doesn't seem fair to rank one player better than another partly due to the amount of information available.

There is a diffrence in questioning one thing and then just going out of your way to scrutinize a vote in a voting thread….

Because it became Lebron forum and there absolutely no credibility in this voting. The discussion is sometimes still great due to unbiased old (or new) posters like Doc, lessthanshake (and they are all not pro-Lebron) and some others, but for one good poster there are 2 Lebron fanboys who give they motivated arguments or just splitting facts to favor his idol. Actually in all world it became more and more consensus that MJ is GOAT the more Lebron career go to its finish line, but on PC we see reverse picture

Actually they need to vote MJ at number 2 and not go berserk because in this case voting would resemble to the true voting more, but they didnt aware of their emotions....

It's not biased to any player though. It's just a bunch of guys that write very detailed and well considered posts with reasoning for how they rank players by whole career, peak season, prime, etc.

There are plenty of people that vote for Jordan or Kareem or Russell or LeBron. It's not about pushing one forward, it's about having a syst of what you value and saying true to that system to produce a consistent ranking from 1 to 50 or 1 to 100.

Jordan was number 1 for peak season for instance. How does he become number 1 if everyone loves LeBron and hates Jordan?

You guys are just so Jordan focused that you perceive the most objective rankings on this site as being biased. Which ironically makes you the source of the bias.

[twyzted]

Bro why are we being serious on the general board rn there’s like one brain cell split among every person we’re talking to rn

This thread was made by a guy from the Lebron board.
Then a bunch of you come here, like some einsteins and dismiss any data if it shows Jordan better, but provide no data that is valid. Just dissmiss dismiss, then when pressed for data. The same guy has been coming here copy pasteing the same essay over and over but when asked for a source.


Poof gone.

[twyzted]

In the playoffs they played like a +8 team, boosting their srs from +4.7 to +5 for the season. Aka, a 58-win pace. Then without Grant(who would see the Magic jump from first-round outs to finalists), the Bulls won at a 52-win pace:

A what +team.? But the math doesnt compute.
Rs srs 2.87 not 4.7
Playoffs srs 2.8.

He used healthy team SRS provided by Ben Taylor for RS, which I'm not sure I agree with but it's not "made up".

For the playoffs, he used Net Rating adjusted for opponents, which is a common way to evaluate teams in the playoffs. There is nothing wrong with that.

No he said boosted their srs.
Healthy srs holy moly

Why don't we start with the large-samples which are not "limited"? We have 82 games telling us the Bulls were a 28-win team in 1984. They were a 30-win team without Jordan in 1986.

Wrong, Jordan played 18 games, bulls record was 9-9 so the bulls were a 21 win team without him, he doubled down when confronted.

Yeah, it doesn't work that way. If the Bulls won 21 games in 64 games without Jordan, it's expected for them to win 6 games in 18 games left - giving us 27 games pace. The difference between the numbers is dependent on whether you use raw record or SRS to calculate expected wins.

Yes 27 is not 30 games won.

That team then got better with additions such as oakley.

the real-world Jordan's team was unaffected by his defensive depature, In the real world Lebrons' teams have consistently collapsed on that end without him. In the real-world the Bulls were defensively average or below average save for one-year with oakley where that defense collapsed in the playoffs and then turned elite with...Pippen and Grant.

My response earlier in this thread.
“Right so the bulls jumping from 107.6(11th) to 105.5(3rd) is because of 7th and 8th player in the rotation. Then why did it take until 90/91 to the bulls defense to “elite”?
Can you also explain how the knicks defense got worse by adding Oakley?

I don't think I understand your point here. He talked that Oakley was the most impactful defender in 1988 Bulls team (can be questioned, but not completely unreasonable) and then they didn't become elite defensively until Grant and Pippen reached their primes. We have seem Bulls being great defensively without Jordan in 1994, I think it's fair to say that Bulls were not heavily depended on Jordan's defense.

No he was not the most impactful defender, im sure a guy was the dpoy that year his name wasnt Oakley.

Also at 38 jordan joined a 19-63 wizards team 30th drtg the year before. -6.75srs.
Went to 37-45 up to 22nd drtg and -1.58 srs.
Last 10 games before Jordans injury they were playing at 4,5 srs 54 win pace.
That would be a lift of +10 srs and +35 wins from a 38 year old.

I could point to a drop of 1.5 in drtg when Lebron joined the lakers.

the 94 Bulls were a Much better offense with Pippen and Grant then the Cavs with Kyrie and Kevin.

Really guys who have played for 5-6 years together perform better then guys who played 13 games together over 3 years? Amazing

You can contextualize, but he stated a fact. Don't see anything wrong with that.

13 game sample of 3 seasons 6% vs guy who had played 300+ games together. No bias ofcourse though.

The 2015 Cavs played a system(which Lebron actually made his teammates buy into) and went 42-5 with a big-three with worse co-stars than Pippen/Grant(both in terms of "talent" and "fit"). That "system" than saw them sweep the 60-win Hawks

Grant is definetly not better then Kevin Love.
Kyrie is better then pippen on offense and vice versa.

Why do you think Love is better than Grant?
Kyrie certainly isn't on Pippen level, we have seen both playing as the main guys.

These are not false statements, these are reasonable opinions you can disagree with.

They are not worse co stars. Any Lebron didnt get them to buy into a system he didnt even buy into the system himself. Hawks played at 55 win srs pace. Lead by Jeff Teague. The east was called the Leastern conference for a reason.

Lebron never played with Jordan's level of help

That is just false.

Provide evidences then.

I mean, I don't see any false statements here. You can argue some of these statements don't tell the whole story and you can have a valuable discussion to disprove them, but you didn't provide any examples of "biased James fanboys making up facts".

Yeah bosh, wade, allen, ben wallace, love, kyrie, ad are all useless compared to the mighty Luc longley and steve kerr
He has stacked the deck so hard that its funny how little he has won.
Mayby trust the coach others did with great success.

If you cant see the obvious bias when 30% of thread goes into argueing with the few guys who voted for Jordan.

[MyUniBroDavis]

Bro why are we being serious on the general board rn there’s like one brain cell split among every person we’re talking to rn

This thread was made by a guy from the Lebron board.
Then a bunch of you come here, like some einsteins and dismiss any data if it shows Jordan better, but provide no data that is valid. Just dissmiss dismiss, then when pressed for data. The same guy has been coming here copy pasteing the same essay over and over but when asked for a source.


Poof gone.

Ceiling raiser isn’t a bron fan from what I know although he has posted on the bron board, altho he has bron as his peak

I do not care about the person that post essays because I don’t know who you are talking about.

It’s not my fault if you don’t understand basketball data and I haven’t argued bron over jordan in this thread at all lol.

Comparing data for post 1997 and pre 1997 guys suck, and they look about the same if you take their best years in the data that does suck. I do not want to waste my time explaining my why raw box score composite data sucks lol, I do not care who it supports, I do not care that the advanced data section of bbref overall says 09 bron is the goat peak either, because that data sucks. Most of us actually know what goes on with the data rather than just throwing out crap hoping it sticks lol

The PC board is biased against jordan, y’all 3 are biased against bron, it is what it is, I personally don’t really care, but I’m pointing out, yeah the data people are throwing out pro jordan sucks, the data people throw out for pro bron assuming it’s the same kind of box score composite stuff, also sucks. I’m assuming it’s probably AUPM or something, which is fine post 1997 but before impact data existed and when the net rtg is estimated so it’s essentially a box score composite? Yeah means nothing to me either. technically it’s better than stuff like Win shares, but I still don’t really care to be honest.

This idea that I’m being this giant bron fanatic solely because I’m saying the data people are using to compare them here regardless of who they support has sucked in the little I have read is wild.

I just wanted to make fun of gregoire for being a literal npc because bro has the smallest fraction of that brain cell

Strike for personal attack.

[twyzted]

3 hours is pretty quick on a forum………….
I was refering to the guy who voted for Jordan. The other guy wasnt attacking.


There is a diffrence in questioning one thing and then just going out of your way to scrutinize a vote in a voting thread….

Because it became Lebron forum and there absolutely no credibility in this voting. The discussion is sometimes still great due to unbiased old (or new) posters like Doc, lessthanshake (and they are all not pro-Lebron) and some others, but for one good poster there are 2 Lebron fanboys who give they motivated arguments or just splitting facts to favor his idol. Actually in all world it became more and more consensus that MJ is GOAT the more Lebron career go to its finish line, but on PC we see reverse picture

Actually they need to vote MJ at number 2 and not go berserk because in this case voting would resemble to the true voting more, but they didnt aware of their emotions....

It's not biased to any player though. It's just a bunch of guys that write very detailed and well considered posts with reasoning for how they rank players by whole career, peak season, prime, etc.

There are plenty of people that vote for Jordan or Kareem or Russell or LeBron. It's not about pushing one forward, it's about having a syst of what you value and saying true to that system to produce a consistent ranking from 1 to 50 or 1 to 100.

Jordan was number 1 for peak season for instance. How does he become number 1 if everyone loves LeBron and hates Jordan?

You guys are just so Jordan focused that you perceive the most objective rankings on this site as being biased. Which ironically makes you the source of the bias.

No its biased, at one point 40% of the thread was guys going nuts at a guy for voting for Jordan.

A guy even rage quit because of all the pestering from lbj stans.

I liked how Lebron got all the credit for everything his teams have done then we had people talking about luc longley, bj and kerr as gods. But wade bosh kyrie or love lucky that they got picked from the g league.

Good satire never the less but cant recommend.

[MyUniBroDavis]

The PC board is biased a bit for sure and takes itself too seriously sometimes but the discussion is usually fine if you know when some posters are just being biased or agendaing or not/you can sift through when people have a point vs when they miss it entirely, while the general board is stupid with lower level discussion but doesn’t take itself seriously and is funnier and more relaxed

I think it’s dumb for someone to say the PC board isn’t biased at all, everyone’s biased in their own way and that’s fine the discussion is still usually fine, it just happens there are more bron fans now, at the same time it’s not as if it’s this blind bad faith argument for bron his argument is very clear regardless of if it’s something you agree with or not

It’s dumber to say the general board is where serious basketball discussion is at when the 2/3 (or 4? WarriorsGM and gregoire, I remember the mavs guy was pretty slow too though) people active in this thread on that side are the bottom of the barrel of the PC board that basically got yeeted lol

[Gregoire]

Because it became Lebron forum and there absolutely no credibility in this voting. The discussion is sometimes still great due to unbiased old (or new) posters like Doc, lessthanshake (and they are all not pro-Lebron) and some others, but for one good poster there are 2 Lebron fanboys who give they motivated arguments or just splitting facts to favor his idol. Actually in all world it became more and more consensus that MJ is GOAT the more Lebron career go to its finish line, but on PC we see reverse picture

Actually they need to vote MJ at number 2 and not go berserk because in this case voting would resemble to the true voting more, but they didnt aware of their emotions....

It's not biased to any player though. It's just a bunch of guys that write very detailed and well considered posts with reasoning for how they rank players by whole career, peak season, prime, etc.

There are plenty of people that vote for Jordan or Kareem or Russell or LeBron. It's not about pushing one forward, it's about having a syst of what you value and saying true to that system to produce a consistent ranking from 1 to 50 or 1 to 100.

Jordan was number 1 for peak season for instance. How does he become number 1 if everyone loves LeBron and hates Jordan?

You guys are just so Jordan focused that you perceive the most objective rankings on this site as being biased. Which ironically makes you the source of the bias.

No its biased, at one point 40% of the thread was guys going nuts at a guy for voting for Jordan.

A guy even rage quit because of all the pestering from lbj stans.

I liked how Lebron got all the credit for everything his teams have done then we had people talking about luc longley, bj and kerr as gods. But wade bosh kyrie or love lucky that they got picked from the g league.

Good satire never the less but cant recommend.

And thats more painfull that this fanboyism on PC reveals itself under the guise of numbers, thoughtful knowledge, with a claim to analytics, while in reality this "analytics" is biased and is done only for exaltation their idol -LeChoke.

[70sFan]

No he said boosted their srs.
Healthy srs holy moly

Ok, but SRS is adjusted for opponents and schedule anyway.
What's wrong with taking team's SRS from games when their starters played?

Yes 27 is not 30 games won.

Ok, but if you use SRS instead of wins you can get slightly different expected wins value.

No he was not the most impactful defender, im sure a guy was the dpoy that year his name wasnt Oakley.

You are sure because he won the award, or because you have some evidences behind it?

I don't agree with his evaluation of Jordan's defense, but we have questions regarding his defense from the signals we have.

Also at 38 jordan joined a 19-63 wizards team 30th drtg the year before. -6.75srs.
Went to 37-45 up to 22nd drtg and -1.58 srs.

Ok, that's a good argument for Jordan being relevant player in Wizards years. Of course, it should be contextualized to the rosters changes etc.

Last 10 games before Jordans injury they were playing at 4,5 srs 54 win pace.
That would be a lift of +10 srs and +35 wins from a 38 year old.

Nobody uses random 10 games from RS to estimate the value of a player.

I could point to a drop of 1.5 in drtg when Lebron joined the lakers.

You could and probably should. We should use the same criteria for all players.

13 game sample of 3 seasons 6% vs guy who had played 300+ games together. No bias ofcourse though.

By itself, it's not biased. You can contextualize it, but you can't just ignore it because you don't like it.

They are not worse co stars. Any Lebron didnt get them to buy into a system he didnt even buy into the system himself.

That's just a lazy attempt to disprove the statement with no evidences. If you feel the top 100 project has a low level of discussion, you shouldn't use such a banal arguments yourself.

Hawks played at 55 win srs pace. Lead by Jeff Teague. The east was called the Leastern conference for a reason.

So contextualize it and present LeBron numbers against WC teams for example.

Yeah bosh, wade, allen, ben wallace, love, kyrie, ad are all useless compared to the mighty Luc longley and steve kerr
He has stacked the deck so hard that its funny how little he has won.
Mayby trust the coach others did with great success.

That's troll level response.

If you cant see the obvious bias when 30% of thread goes into argueing with the few guys who voted for Jordan.

This is a discussion for the best player ever, of course you have a lot of discussion around one of the best players ever. I really don't understand the criticism.