The argument for Peak LeBron > Peak MJ

[OhayoKD]

This is an extremely thorough overview of LeBron’s and Jordan’s defense, based on film analysis:

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/k11s3h/who_was_a_better_defender_lebron_james_or_michael/

Of course there’s always room to disagree with film analysis and with the conclusions thereof, but FWIW the conclusion that that poster comes to is that (1) comparing prime to prime, LeBron has a “slight edge” over Jordan as a defender; but that (2) Jordan had a better overall defensive career.

Only Jordan hagiographers on Reddit conducting “film analysis” can come up with “slight edge” on defense or that Jordan had a “ better overall career” defensively.

There is really no data backed argument that Jordan had a better overall defensive career nor really is anything closer than a tier down or a tier and a half defensively.

The person who wrote the post literally has LeBron as the GOAT with Kareem being #2 all-time...

Boardman is a pretty good all-time drafter, knows more ball than most, and hails from Canada. They definitely aren't a jordan hagiographer. That post also comes from a few years back. I'm pretty sure some of the posters on this board who now strongly disagree with that take actually agreed with it less than a year ago. You don't have to cape for Jordan to think that. Just like you don't have to cape for Lebron to think otherwise.

Many a non-jordan hagiographer have come to "jordan worse peak, better career". That doesn't make it a good take. Nor does it necessarily make it a bad one.

For that, we'd need to actually look at the actual reasoning and see if it
A. logically arrives at "jordan better defensive career"
B. is consistent with itself
C. consider what the counter-cases would be(and what has been omitted

Heej argued there were gaps in the film-analysis(tbf, these are gaps we almost always see even in the work of professional analysts), and I'd agree with most of that. While HCL says there is no "data backed argument", data is provided...






...it just doesn't track with what boardman is arguing.

Boardman leaves it at "lebron declined earlier" which, well, is technically supported above. The issue is Lebron jumps right back up and then jumps back up again. Over his career Lebron posts 3 marks higher than Jordan's highest and 2 of those marks come after 09-13.

Lebron's defensive rating gets worse in miami even though Bordman says Lebron got better.

It's not that Miami Lebron can't be better despite his defensive rating getting worse or that Jordan can't be better defensive despite his DPIPM being worse, but when the data you choose to use doesn't support your conclusions and you don't address that, it's hard to say the argument is functional, never mind "very comprehensive"

It also just lacks basic connective tissue. Why does the collection of advantages/disadvantages he notes for each player lead to "lebron better peak by a hair, jordan better career?".

It might be more productive if you(lessthanjake) were to cite which parts of that reddit post you found compelling(and maybe even elaborate on why). Plenty of analysis and data(and analysis of said data) has been offered comparing Lebron's defense post-2013 to Micheal's. None of those arguments or points are really addressed here beyond "lebron was not as good as he used to be".

You guys are fighting over a post written by a high-schooler.

A high-schooler who understood 2019 Toronto's defensive scheme better than Zach Lowe or Nate Silver tbf

[rk2023]

A high-schooler who understood 2019 Toronto's defensive scheme better than Zach Lowe or Nate Silver tbf

Nate Duncan or Silver?

[OhayoKD]

A high-schooler who understood 2019 Toronto's defensive scheme better than Zach Lowe or Nate Silver tbf

Nate Duncan or Silver?

Silver. Literally the sparkplug for raptor was nate silver and his 538 friends deciding Kawhi leonard was the best defender in the league because him guarding giannis was the main catalyst of the bucks offense stalling. Zach Lowe, Doris Burke and all the "reaosnable" analysts thought so too. The only people paid to know basketball i remember even acknowleding what actually was happening schematically at the time were...Ben Taylor, Max Kellerman, and...Ryan Hollins. And of course only one of those people actually bothered to check the data before deciding who the most valuable defender was.

Shockingly, as hcl showed, RAPTOR's defensive box wildly fluctuates from it's on/off component. Also shockingly, RAPTOR performs worse than metrics with the same tech that directly input RAPM because it sucks at guaging defense. Who could have guessed mr. "well i talked to front offices and they say bigs are overrated" had no idea what they were talking about.

[MrVorp]

Only Jordan hagiographers on Reddit conducting “film analysis” can come up with “slight edge” on defense or that Jordan had a “ better overall career” defensively.

There is really no data backed argument that Jordan had a better overall defensive career nor really is anything closer than a tier down or a tier and a half defensively.

The person who wrote the post literally has LeBron as the GOAT with Kareem being #2 all-time...

Boardman is a pretty good all-time drafter, knows more ball than most, and hails from Canada. They definitely aren't a jordan hagiographer. That post also comes from a few years back. I'm pretty sure some of the posters on this board who now strongly disagree with that take actually agreed with it less than a year ago. You don't have to cape for Jordan to think that. Just like you don't have to cape for Lebron to think otherwise.

Many a non-jordan hagiographer have come to "jordan worse peak, better career". That doesn't make it a good take. Nor does it necessarily make it a bad one.

For that, we'd need to actually look at the actual reasoning and see if it
A. logically arrives at "jordan better defensive career"
B. is consistent with itself
C. consider what the counter-cases would be(and what has been omitted

Heej argued there were gaps in the film-analysis(tbf, these are gaps we almost always see even in the work of professional analysts), and I'd agree with most of that. While HCL says there is no "data backed argument", data is provided...






...it just doesn't track with what boardman is arguing.

Boardman leaves it at "lebron declined earlier" which, well, is technically supported above. The issue is Lebron jumps right back up and then jumps back up again. Over his career Lebron posts 3 marks higher than Jordan's highest and 2 of those marks come after 09-13.

Lebron's defensive rating gets worse in miami even though Bordman says Lebron got better.

It's not that Miami Lebron can't be better despite his defensive rating getting worse or that Jordan can't be better defensive despite his DPIPM being worse, but when the data you choose to use doesn't support your conclusions and you don't address that, it's hard to say the argument is functional, never mind "very comprehensive"

It also just lacks basic connective tissue. Why does the collection of advantages/disadvantages he notes for each player lead to "lebron better peak by a hair, jordan better career?".

It might be more productive if you(lessthanjake) were to cite which parts of that reddit post you found compelling(and maybe even elaborate on why). Plenty of analysis and data(and analysis of said data) has been offered comparing Lebron's defense post-2013 to Micheal's. None of those arguments or points are really addressed here beyond "lebron was not as good as he used to be".

You guys are fighting over a post written by a high-schooler.

A high-schooler who understood 2019 Toronto's defensive scheme better than Zach Lowe or Nate Silver tbf

Nice touch cropping out Jordan’s career D-PIPM

[f4p]

Kawhi 2017

Defensive Play type

Hand off: .57, 94th percentile
P&R ball handler: .83, 63rd
Spot up: 1.02 45th
ISO: .93, 44th
P&R Roll man: not enough data
Post Up: 1.00, 36th
Off screens: 1.04, 32nd

Team DRTg ON court: 105.1
Team DRtg OFF court: 96.1
DRAPM: 278 in the NBA

the spurs had a -12.7 defense, far surpassing the greatest defense of bill russell's celtics, when kawhi wasn't on the court? that feels like an...unusual result.

[lessthanjake]

You guys are fighting over a post written by a high-schooler.

Doesn’t really strike me as odd, since unfortunately I think a lot of posting here is literally fighting directly with high-schoolers (or maybe college kids). Not naming any names, but you can kind of just tell from the terminology and phrasing certain posters use that they’re young.

[OhayoKD]

The person who wrote the post literally has LeBron as the GOAT with Kareem being #2 all-time...

Boardman is a pretty good all-time drafter, knows more ball than most, and hails from Canada. They definitely aren't a jordan hagiographer. That post also comes from a few years back. I'm pretty sure some of the posters on this board who now strongly disagree with that take actually agreed with it less than a year ago. You don't have to cape for Jordan to think that. Just like you don't have to cape for Lebron to think otherwise.

Many a non-jordan hagiographer have come to "jordan worse peak, better career". That doesn't make it a good take. Nor does it necessarily make it a bad one.

For that, we'd need to actually look at the actual reasoning and see if it
A. logically arrives at "jordan better defensive career"
B. is consistent with itself
C. consider what the counter-cases would be(and what has been omitted

Heej argued there were gaps in the film-analysis(tbf, these are gaps we almost always see even in the work of professional analysts), and I'd agree with most of that. While HCL says there is no "data backed argument", data is provided...






...it just doesn't track with what boardman is arguing.

Boardman leaves it at "lebron declined earlier" which, well, is technically supported above. The issue is Lebron jumps right back up and then jumps back up again. Over his career Lebron posts 3 marks higher than Jordan's highest and 2 of those marks come after 09-13.

Lebron's defensive rating gets worse in miami even though Bordman says Lebron got better.

It's not that Miami Lebron can't be better despite his defensive rating getting worse or that Jordan can't be better defensive despite his DPIPM being worse, but when the data you choose to use doesn't support your conclusions and you don't address that, it's hard to say the argument is functional, never mind "very comprehensive"

It also just lacks basic connective tissue. Why does the collection of advantages/disadvantages he notes for each player lead to "lebron better peak by a hair, jordan better career?".

It might be more productive if you(lessthanjake) were to cite which parts of that reddit post you found compelling(and maybe even elaborate on why). Plenty of analysis and data(and analysis of said data) has been offered comparing Lebron's defense post-2013 to Micheal's. None of those arguments or points are really addressed here beyond "lebron was not as good as he used to be".

You guys are fighting over a post written by a high-schooler.

A high-schooler who understood 2019 Toronto's defensive scheme better than Zach Lowe or Nate Silver tbf

Nice touch cropping out Jordan’s career D-PIPM

+ .98

Not an intentional touch(or paticularly relevant to who declined earlier), but if you want to champion Micheal for a slightly higher career average(over alot less minutes) by all means. The career average swings to Lebron without 04(2.6/17= .15), but don't let me slow your roll.

You guys are fighting over a post written by a high-schooler.

Doesn’t really strike me as odd, since unfortunately I think a lot of posting here is literally fighting directly with high-schoolers (or maybe college kids). Not naming any names, but you can kind of just tell from the terminology and phrasing certain posters use that they’re young.

I have reason to believe three of the posters you like to accuse of not having watched the games are older than you. Of course saying it is "unfortunate" that you are engaging with young people right after citing a conclusion from one of their even younger friends is pretty funny.

[homecourtloss]

Kawhi 2017

Defensive Play type

Hand off: .57, 94th percentile
P&R ball handler: .83, 63rd
Spot up: 1.02 45th
ISO: .93, 44th
P&R Roll man: not enough data
Post Up: 1.00, 36th
Off screens: 1.04, 32nd

Team DRTg ON court: 105.1
Team DRtg OFF court: 96.1
DRAPM: 278 in the NBA

the spurs had a -12.7 defense, far surpassing the greatest defense of bill russell's celtics, when kawhi wasn't on the court? that feels like an...unusual result.

Not sure what this post means.

[lessthanjake]

You guys are fighting over a post written by a high-schooler.

Doesn’t really strike me as odd, since unfortunately I think a lot of posting here is literally fighting directly with high-schoolers (or maybe college kids). Not naming any names, but you can kind of just tell from the terminology and phrasing certain posters use that they’re young.

I have reason to believe three of the posters you like to accuse of not having watched the games are older than you. Of course saying it is "unfortunate" that you are engaging with young people right after citing a conclusion from one of their even younger friends is pretty funny.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

[OhayoKD]

Doesn’t really strike me as odd, since unfortunately I think a lot of posting here is literally fighting directly with high-schoolers (or maybe college kids). Not naming any names, but you can kind of just tell from the terminology and phrasing certain posters use that they’re young.

I have reason to believe three of the posters you like to accuse of not having watched the games are older than you. Of course saying it is "unfortunate" that you are engaging with young people right after citing a conclusion from one of their even younger friends is pretty funny.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks.

Says the piñata

[Peregrine01]

My sense is that Lebron's a better defender when he's engaged simply because being 6'9", 260 and possibly the greatest all-around athlete of all-time allows him to do more things. But I always felt like MJ was more frequently engaged and here he has a physical advantage over Bron - he's leaner and, in my view, has a GOAT-level motor. In his age 33-35 seasons, MJ was still playing 38-39 minutes a game and didn't miss a single game whereas Bron started load managing beginning in his second Cavs stint.

[f4p]

Kawhi 2017

Defensive Play type

Hand off: .57, 94th percentile
P&R ball handler: .83, 63rd
Spot up: 1.02 45th
ISO: .93, 44th
P&R Roll man: not enough data
Post Up: 1.00, 36th
Off screens: 1.04, 32nd

Team DRTg ON court: 105.1
Team DRtg OFF court: 96.1
DRAPM: 278 in the NBA

the spurs had a -12.7 defense, far surpassing the greatest defense of bill russell's celtics, when kawhi wasn't on the court? that feels like an...unusual result.

Not sure what this post means.

i meant that the on/off makes kawhi look bad, but that's because the off includes the spurs sans kawhi somehow playing the greatest defense in nba history, by several points per 100. it seems like a fluky result, made more fluky when we see the absolute defensive collapse in the playoffs when they play the warriors without kawhi.

[AEnigma]

Jordan’s age 33-35 seasons he ranked 12th, 18th, and 9th in minutes played. He also took a sabbatical after he turned 30. After Lebron’s age 30 season, he ranked 18th, 10th, 1st, (injury year,) and 13th. Stars are rested more now.

And to whatever extent we can say Jordan was more “active”, that does not inherently make him more valuable. Steph and Klay are both hyperactive, but that did not make them the league’s best defensive guards, and it certainly did not make them on par with “less active” forwards like Kawhi or Lebron.

[Peregrine01]

I'm not making a statement about who's more or less valuable on defense, just pointing out the pros and cons of each. I feel like Jordan provided more consistent effort even in his older years than Bron did during his post-Heat years. Though Bron has greater versatility.

The Bulls were able to regularly anchor top-5 defenses during the 90s without a traditional shot-blocking big and the perimeter defensive pressure they were able to apply in the backcourt had a lot to do with that. Incidentally, they were similar to the Heatles in that way except that they sustained it for a longer period even as their core aged.

[Jaivl]

You guys are fighting over a post written by a high-schooler.

I mean, 95% of the "this is REALLY IMPORTANT TO ME" LeBron vs Jordan discussion is high-schoolers vs people that peaked at high school 30 years ago.

[CzBoobie]

My sense is that Lebron's a better defender when he's engaged simply because being 6'9", 260 and possibly the greatest all-around athlete of all-time allows him to do more things. But I always felt like MJ was more frequently engaged and here he has a physical advantage over Bron - he's leaner and, in my view, has a GOAT-level motor. In his age 33-35 seasons, MJ was still playing 38-39 minutes a game and didn't miss a single game whereas Bron started load managing beginning in his second Cavs stint.

LeBron had already played 200 more games than Jordan by that time. Few games here and there (he missed total 27 games during his 2nd Cavs stint, 8 and 0 during his last two seasons) should not matter at all when comparing them.

[Peregrine01]

My sense is that Lebron's a better defender when he's engaged simply because being 6'9", 260 and possibly the greatest all-around athlete of all-time allows him to do more things. But I always felt like MJ was more frequently engaged and here he has a physical advantage over Bron - he's leaner and, in my view, has a GOAT-level motor. In his age 33-35 seasons, MJ was still playing 38-39 minutes a game and didn't miss a single game whereas Bron started load managing beginning in his second Cavs stint.

LeBron had already played 200 more games than Jordan by that time. Few games here and there (he missed total 27 games during his 2nd Cavs stint, 8 and 0 during his last two seasons) should not matter at all when comparing them.

Yes, he started his career earlier and didn't have a sabbatical in the middle of his prime. IMO, that MJ played full seasons year after year during his prime and after it should signal something about the consistency of his effort compared to Bron.

[RCM88x]

My sense is that Lebron's a better defender when he's engaged simply because being 6'9", 260 and possibly the greatest all-around athlete of all-time allows him to do more things. But I always felt like MJ was more frequently engaged and here he has a physical advantage over Bron - he's leaner and, in my view, has a GOAT-level motor. In his age 33-35 seasons, MJ was still playing 38-39 minutes a game and didn't miss a single game whereas Bron started load managing beginning in his second Cavs stint.

LeBron had already played 200 more games than Jordan by that time. Few games here and there (he missed total 27 games during his 2nd Cavs stint, 8 and 0 during his last two seasons) should not matter at all when comparing them.

Yes, he started his career earlier and didn't have a sabbatical in the middle of his prime. IMO, that MJ played full seasons year after year during his prime and after it should signal something about the consistency of his effort compared to Bron.

When it comes to games played we should compare these guys to their peers, just like anything else, not across eras. MJ playing 81-82 games every year is only impressive if he is the only one doing it. Just like penalizing Lebron for playing 70 is only fair if others weren't also doing it.

You don't know for sure if Jordan would have played the same % of games if he played in Lebron's era, and vice versa. Those things are just as much a league environment/team thing as they are an individual thing.

Now, if they're missing playoff games, that's an entirely different situation.

[Peregrine01]

LeBron had already played 200 more games than Jordan by that time. Few games here and there (he missed total 27 games during his 2nd Cavs stint, 8 and 0 during his last two seasons) should not matter at all when comparing them.

Yes, he started his career earlier and didn't have a sabbatical in the middle of his prime. IMO, that MJ played full seasons year after year during his prime and after it should signal something about the consistency of his effort compared to Bron.

When it comes to games played we should compare these guys to their peers, just like anything else, not across eras. MJ playing 81-82 games every year is only impressive if he is the only one doing it. Just like penalizing Lebron for playing 70 is only fair if others weren't also doing it.

You don't know for sure if Jordan would have played the same % of games if he played in Lebron's era, and vice versa. Those things are just as much a league environment/team thing as they are an individual thing.

Now, if they're missing playoff games, that's an entirely different situation.

That's fair. Stars today are making a trade-off though - they're playing less games but more seasons and are purposefully managing their effort levels more for the playoffs. I guess it depends on how much you weigh - impact when engaged during the most crucial moments or consistency.

Edit: I was also making an argument that MJ's body type also allowed him to play with more consistent effort. Lebron is after all 260 and it's hard to have a comparable motor when you're carrying that much more size.

[CzBoobie]

Yes, he started his career earlier and didn't have a sabbatical in the middle of his prime. IMO, that MJ played full seasons year after year during his prime and after it should signal something about the consistency of his effort compared to Bron.

What does playing few more games a year tell you about consistency of effort? LeBron played 82 games in 17/18...was he suddenly more consistent than seasons earlier? Its not like he was missing chunks of season just because he didnt feel like playing.