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

[Gregoire]

But Jordan doesn't have as much accomplishements as Russell. What do you mean by "statistically dominant" - that he scored more points? That's not what makes player more dominant on the basketball court.

He doesnt quite as much, but he has best combination. Like Gretzky in hockey. And without "forcing" stats and "chasing" winning like Lebron for example. In which stats Lebron is more dominant? Scoring points is most important thing on the basketball court if you didnt know.

Team advantage over the opponent is more important than individual scoring, you know?

Important for comparing teams? Or players? Or its "all in all" theory?

[70sFan]

He doesnt quite as much, but he has best combination. Like Gretzky in hockey. And without "forcing" stats and "chasing" winning like Lebron for example. In which stats Lebron is more dominant? Scoring points is most important thing on the basketball court if you didnt know.

Team advantage over the opponent is more important than individual scoring, you know?

Important for comparing teams? Or players? Or its "all in all" theory?

Important in basketball, that's the only thing that matters in basketball - to outscore your opponent.

Individual scoring is important, but it's far from the only way to impact the final score. Equating scoring with dominance is incorrect.

[twyzted]

doesnt wowy say the celtics were worse than .500 during his 11 chips?

We aren’t talking about Bill Russell—who, by the way, is only 24th all time in prime WOWY.

boi u ain't slick. gold already tried that. the on in wowy is srs not chips. 11-chips with <.500 help is >>>>>>>> anyone else

Yes but also 6>4

[ty 4191]

No. The greatest international player ever in the NBA.

Probably Hakeem.

Why do you ask?

[CpttCanada]

And that isn't talking any crap about LeBron, most people think he is #2 of all time which is insane and impressive in its own right.

Actually, most experts, like people here, think LeBron is better than Jordan, now.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HWQLTqFcJdJJNvMFDAwikJXujuh75uajUPrE0eF2XXc/edit#gid=0

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2304930

Dude, there was just a thread of people voting on the GOAT and Michael had like 75% of the votes.

[ty 4191]

Dude, there was just a thread of people voting on the GOAT and Michael had like 75% of the votes.

The tide is shifting, my friend. Accelerating, too. The sand is moving under your complacent feet. Let's talk again 20 years from now. You'll see what happens.

[WarriorGM]

No. The greatest international player ever in the NBA.

Probably Hakeem.

Why do you ask?

If it's Hakeem, he played during Jordan's era. How much weaker was it really then?

[ty 4191]

No. The greatest international player ever in the NBA.

Probably Hakeem.

Why do you ask?

If it's Hakeem, he played during Jordan's era. How much weaker was it really then?

That's ONE player. Out of several hundred. What about the entire league? It was 2-7% international talent in the 80's and 90's and 25%+ the last 10 years.

[lessthanjake]

doesnt wowy say the celtics were worse than .500 during his 11 chips?

We aren’t talking about Bill Russell—who, by the way, is only 24th all time in prime WOWY.

boi u ain't slick. gold already tried that. the on in wowy is srs not chips. 11-chips with <.500 help is >>>>>>>> anyone else

That does not make any sense. But it also doesn’t matter because it has absolutely nothing to do with what I’d said about Steph Curry and the fact that it’s nonsensical for people to simultaneously extol LeBron beating the 2016 Warriors as the greatest ever accomplishment while downplaying Steph.

[DOT]

MJ's lucky Oscar Schmidt didn't want to play in America

Clear GOAT when you look at all the data imo.

[Taj FTW]

And that isn't talking any crap about LeBron, most people think he is #2 of all time which is insane and impressive in its own right.

Actually, most experts, like people here, think LeBron is better than Jordan, now.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1HWQLTqFcJdJJNvMFDAwikJXujuh75uajUPrE0eF2XXc/edit#gid=0

viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2304930

Dude, there was just a thread of people voting on the GOAT and Michael had like 75% of the votes.

You mean the thread that started in 2020?

[Taj FTW]

No. The greatest international player ever in the NBA.

Probably Hakeem.

Why do you ask?

If it's Hakeem, he played during Jordan's era. How much weaker was it really then?

LOL. Is this serious?

[CpttCanada]

Dude, there was just a thread of people voting on the GOAT and Michael had like 75% of the votes.

The tide is shifting, my friend. Accelerating, too. The sand is moving under your complacent feet. Let's talk again 20 years from now. You'll see what happens.

Dude, LeBron isn't going to become more popular as time goes on, he is going to fade. He is near the end of his career already. He had his chance to surpass Michael and that was during his playing prime, that time is over now. LeBron did amazing, most people think he is #2, and that is huge. But he didn't take the number one spot it is that simple.

[ShaqAttac]

We aren’t talking about Bill Russell—who, by the way, is only 24th all time in prime WOWY.

boi u ain't slick. gold already tried that. the on in wowy is srs not chips. 11-chips with <.500 help is >>>>>>>> anyone else

That does not make any sense. But it also doesn’t matter because it has absolutely nothing to do with what I’d said about Steph Curry and the fact that it’s nonsensical for people to simultaneously extol LeBron beating the 2016 Warriors as the greatest ever accomplishment while downplaying Steph.

wowy dont account for u needin lower srs to win chips in the 60's. it made sense to everyone but gold. but then again ur draycopper.

wowy say lebron had way less help and still won. its not like ppl are low on rs steph anyway

[ty 4191]

Dude, there was just a thread of people voting on the GOAT and Michael had like 75% of the votes.

The tide is shifting, my friend. Accelerating, too. The sand is moving under your complacent feet. Let's talk again 20 years from now. You'll see what happens.

Dude, LeBron isn't going to become more popular as time goes on, he is going to fade. He is near the end of his career already. He had his chance to surpass Michael and that was during his playing prime, that time is over now. LeBron did amazing, most people think he is #2, and that is huge. But he didn't take the number one spot it is that simple.

As I said, Jordan's aura has been exposed. He played in a weak expansion league against only American players. Very weak league comparative to this era.

And...the more we learn about actual impact on winning, the better LeBron looks, and the worse Jordan looks. And, I fully expect that evolution to continue.

He was/is an total **** as a person and teammate and just in general. And yes, I watched "The Last Dance", all of it, twice. I watched the entire 1990's; didn't miss a Bulls playoffs game. He was my hero as a young person.

That said? He's incredibly overrated by people 35, who pine for a time when they were far more relevant, successful, and had the best years of their lives ahead of them. Most hyped athlete of all time.

As I said earlier, wait 20 years, and see. You'll be wrong, I'll be proven right.

[Yank3525]

Dude, there was just a thread of people voting on the GOAT and Michael had like 75% of the votes.

The tide is shifting, my friend. Accelerating, too. The sand is moving under your complacent feet. Let's talk again 20 years from now. You'll see what happens.

Dude, LeBron isn't going to become more popular as time goes on, he is going to fade. He is near the end of his career already. He had his chance to surpass Michael and that was during his playing prime, that time is over now. LeBron did amazing, most people think he is #2, and that is huge. But he didn't take the number one spot it is that simple.

They are wish-casting.

US Presidents are the only group who get historical revisionism after they leave office, athletes do not. Also, unlike Kareem, Jordan's prime was during the peak of NBA's popularity and he is a fixture of 90s pop culture. LeBron has never had that kind of reach, he will fade into the realm of all time great players like many before him did, while another player will take his place to challenge Jordan.

[ty 4191]

They are wish-casting.

US Presidents are the only group who get historical revisionism after they leave office, athletes do not. Also, unlike Kareem, Jordan's prime was during the peak of NBA's popularity and he is a fixture of 90s pop culture. LeBron has never had that kind of reach, he will fade into the realm of all time great players like many before him did, while another player will take his place to challenge Jordan.

Now that is wish casting.

[lessthanjake]

boi u ain't slick. gold already tried that. the on in wowy is srs not chips. 11-chips with <.500 help is >>>>>>>> anyone else

That does not make any sense. But it also doesn’t matter because it has absolutely nothing to do with what I’d said about Steph Curry and the fact that it’s nonsensical for people to simultaneously extol LeBron beating the 2016 Warriors as the greatest ever accomplishment while downplaying Steph.

wowy dont account for u needin lower srs to win chips in the 60's. it made sense to everyone but gold. but then again ur draycopper.

wowy say lebron had way less help and still won. its not like ppl are low on rs steph anyway

I don’t know why you keep talking about Bill Russell. He’s not relevant to this discussion. And if you see some distinction between “rs steph” and playoff Steph, where playoff Steph is notably less good, then how is it the greatest accomplishment of all time to have beaten a team led by playoff Steph? It still makes no logical sense.

[ShaqAttac]

That does not make any sense. But it also doesn’t matter because it has absolutely nothing to do with what I’d said about Steph Curry and the fact that it’s nonsensical for people to simultaneously extol LeBron beating the 2016 Warriors as the greatest ever accomplishment while downplaying Steph.

wowy dont account for u needin lower srs to win chips in the 60's. it made sense to everyone but gold. but then again ur draycopper.

wowy say lebron had way less help and still won. its not like ppl are low on rs steph anyway

I don’t know why you keep talking about Bill Russell. He’s not relevant to this discussion. And if you see some distinction between “rs steph” and playoff Steph, where playoff Steph is notably less good, then how is it the greatest accomplishment of all time to have beaten a team led by playoff Steph? It still makes no logical sense.

bill russell is who warriorsgm was pushin steph vs.

ig i see your point but the warriors weren't in the playoffs without steph. the won a series n might have won a second. draymond was maybe their best playoff player and top 5. still beat okc which was impressive, but draymond was their best finals player and would have won fmvp if they beat lebron and the cavs.

[Gregoire]

Team advantage over the opponent is more important than individual scoring, you know?

Important for comparing teams? Or players? Or its "all in all" theory?

Important in basketball, that's the only thing that matters in basketball - to outscore your opponent.

Individual scoring is important, but it's far from the only way to impact the final score. Equating scoring with dominance is incorrect.

Like equating team record with individual dominance too. For team its fine - to outscore your opponent its most important. But for individual player scoring its most important obviously? but overall scoring+team record+other stats+ eye test+ era strenght= GOAT.