MJ VS LEBRON VS WHOEVER THREAD

Moderators: PockyCandy, Prez, ken6199, bwgood77, Dirk, Domejandro, jamaalstar21, zimpy27, BombsquadSammy, GeorgeMarcus

lakerz12
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,945
And1: 6,535
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Contact:
     

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#241 » by lakerz12 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:30 pm

JN61 wrote:6/15>3/17 just saying.


Yup.

The only way LeBron apologists can frame this debate is by attributing RIDICULOUS value to Finals' losses/appearances.

Which is obviously dumb considering no one in the NBA community values a Finals' appearance as remotely similar to an actual Championship.

And, let's consider that some of those "appearances" are arguably fraudulent to begin with.

E.g. in 2018 the Houston Rockets were clearly better than the Cavs.

They took the Warriors to 7 games and might have won if CP3 didn't get hurt and miss 2 games.

The Warriors then go on to SWEEP the Cavs in the Finals.

But we're supposed to believe that making the Finals' was a grand accomplishment, almost up there with winning a Championship? Lol. They weren't even the 2nd best team in the league that year.
Roy The Natural
General Manager
Posts: 7,568
And1: 3,706
Joined: Nov 07, 2014

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#242 » by Roy The Natural » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:32 pm

Alatan wrote:
Roy The Natural wrote:
Alatan wrote:
The thing is you get exactly 0 points for losses.


While I disagree with that posts valuations, your retort is nonsense. Of course overall playoff success matters.

There is no trophy for 2nd place in the NBA so it is not nonsense.
Playoff success matters but the more removed you are from 1st place the more your success is tainted by favorable matchups, weak opponents, luck etc.


The NBA championship is a team award. Individual success and effectiveness is inferred from it, but Jordan isn't winning a single championship without a solid team around him. We're not talking about team accolades here though. We're talking about Jordan's legacy as it relates to playoff success, and the legacy of other greats as it relates to playoff success. There seems to be some confusion on these points.

Let's just say that one GOAT level player has a 4/10 finals record and made the playoffs 10 times. Let's say another GOAT level player has a 4/4 finals record and made the playoffs 10 times. Let's just say that there regular season accomplishments and level of play, and their level of competition was thought of as mostly equivalent, and that both runs were back to backs separated by a year of losing in the playoffs, so that we can eliminate some variables. It is COMPLETELY INARGUABLE that the first players success was more impressive, and/or better. There is NO ARGUMENT WHATSOEVER that gives player number 2 the upper hand here.

That is the entirety of my point. I'm Jordan over Lebron. But I also don't like to see the 6/6 finals record as a sort of bludgeon used against anybody who questions Jordan. If some great player in the future is 6/7 in the finals, We'll see the same ****. We'll see people use that against him as some sort of ridiculous implied statement that if you want to be the GOAT, make sure to exit the playoffs earlier than the finals if you're not the best team in the NBA.
JN61
Starter
Posts: 2,318
And1: 1,668
Joined: Jan 07, 2018
 

Re: Reminder: Russell is 11- Kareem is 6-4, MJ's only 6-0. 

Post#243 » by JN61 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:32 pm

AussieCeltic wrote:You’re right. Kareem and Russell are better than Lebron

Man, I bursted out laughing. Damn right!
lakerz12
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,945
And1: 6,535
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Contact:
     

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#244 » by lakerz12 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:34 pm

KyRo23 wrote:
Alatan wrote:
Green89 wrote:
I dn't have time ATM to look up each player's playoff history, but let's say each player gets:

1 point for first round playoff exit
2 points for second round playoff exit
3 points for Confernce Finals loss
4 points for Finals loss
5 points for Finals win

Who wins on points?


The thing is you get exactly 0 points for losses.


Getting 0 points for losses is good and all, but when LeBron's finals record is brought into discussion, he isn't getting 0 for his losses. He's getting negatives for finals losses over losing in earlier rounds lol that's the dumb part.


Incorrect:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1941297

Only 7 of 49 people in this poll voted that a Finals' loss has negative value.

And when it comes to LeBron, if anything he is given tremendous credit for his Finals' appearances.

Where is any evidence that "He's getting negatives for finals losses over losing in earlier rounds"?

Myself and others criticize him for having only 3 Championships, as as GOAT candidate. If he were 3/3 or 3/5 or 3/9 it wouldn't make a huge difference to me. If anything I give him more credit for the 3/9 than I would 3/4, for example.
Roy The Natural
General Manager
Posts: 7,568
And1: 3,706
Joined: Nov 07, 2014

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#245 » by Roy The Natural » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:35 pm

KyRo23 wrote:
Alatan wrote:
Green89 wrote:
I dn't have time ATM to look up each player's playoff history, but let's say each player gets:

1 point for first round playoff exit
2 points for second round playoff exit
3 points for Confernce Finals loss
4 points for Finals loss
5 points for Finals win

Who wins on points?


The thing is you get exactly 0 points for losses.


Getting 0 points for losses is good and all, but when LeBron's finals record is brought into discussion, he isn't getting 0 for his losses. He's getting negatives for finals losses over losing in earlier rounds lol that's the dumb part.


100%. There's a disconnect here with people inferring things from other posters. There's this weird and twisted notion that is implied by many that a 1st round exit is better on your resume than a finals loss. It's stupid, and obviously hasn't been thought through.
Roy The Natural
General Manager
Posts: 7,568
And1: 3,706
Joined: Nov 07, 2014

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#246 » by Roy The Natural » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:39 pm

lakerz12 wrote:
KyRo23 wrote:
Alatan wrote:
The thing is you get exactly 0 points for losses.


Getting 0 points for losses is good and all, but when LeBron's finals record is brought into discussion, he isn't getting 0 for his losses. He's getting negatives for finals losses over losing in earlier rounds lol that's the dumb part.


Incorrect:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1941297

Only 7 of 49 people in this poll voted that a Finals' loss has negative value.

And when it comes to LeBron, if anything he is given tremendous credit for his Finals' appearances.

Where is any evidence that "He's getting negatives for finals losses over losing in earlier rounds"?

Myself and others criticize him for having only 3 Championships, as as GOAT candidate. If he were 3/3 or 3/5 or 3/9 it wouldn't make a huge difference to me. If anything I give him more credit for the 3/9 than I would 3/4, for example.


I think what you say is true in theory. In theory people don't mean to hold Lebron's finals record against him. In practice his finals record is regularly decried. Other players are regularly not given negative marks for earlier playoff exits. I would argue that the 15% of people who gave Lebron's finals record negative value regularly turns out to be more like 40%-50% in threads and conversation.
User avatar
TOStateofMind
RealGM
Posts: 21,096
And1: 14,590
Joined: Jul 16, 2008
   

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#247 » by TOStateofMind » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:40 pm

I never really liked focusing on just the finals record either but, its hilarious how op tried to make 6/15 look bad but completely ignored if you did the same with Lebron it would make him look even worse with the 3/17 :lol:
Image
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 11,509
And1: 7,499
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Reminder: Russell is 11- Kareem is 6-4, MJ's only 6-0. 

Post#248 » by 70sFan » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:40 pm

KyRo23 wrote:Russell is better than LeBron according to people in this thread?

Lmfao mannnn yall need to stop taking your anger out today for not having Valentines, because that take is just silly.

You know that we're not talking about Russell Westbrook, right?
daswunderboy
Analyst
Posts: 3,129
And1: 2,128
Joined: May 28, 2007
     

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#249 » by daswunderboy » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:41 pm

What's with the Lebron and Kobe stans coming out with all these threads to try to recontextualize people's careers based on arbitrary metrics they are creating on the spot?

If you have to work this hard to prove your guys is better than Jordan (or in the Kobe case, Lebron), you already lost the debate. Jordan's 6 for 6 certainly help his case as "GOAT", but clearly it's his overall play, production, dominance that place him in that level (for most, I'm in the "rank against generations, anything else is pointless" camp.)

The reason Kobe can't be in this list though is simple - he was the best player in the league 1 year. In the years other than his MVP year, he only finished 2nd once, and that year Lebron ran away with the award. Duncan won 2 times, came in 2nd two other times. You can't call yourself the best when you were not even the best for a consistent run of years like Lebron and Jordan.
User avatar
KyRo23
Pro Prospect
Posts: 792
And1: 2,456
Joined: May 07, 2017
 

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#250 » by KyRo23 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:41 pm

lakerz12 wrote:
KyRo23 wrote:
Alatan wrote:
The thing is you get exactly 0 points for losses.


Getting 0 points for losses is good and all, but when LeBron's finals record is brought into discussion, he isn't getting 0 for his losses. He's getting negatives for finals losses over losing in earlier rounds lol that's the dumb part.


Incorrect:

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1941297

Only 7 of 49 people in this poll voted that a Finals' loss has negative value.

And when it comes to LeBron, if anything he is given tremendous credit for his Finals' appearances.

Where is any evidence that "He's getting negatives for finals losses over losing in earlier rounds"?

Myself and others criticize him for having only 3 Championships, as as GOAT candidate. If he were 3/3 or 3/5 or 3/9 it wouldn't make a huge difference to me. If anything I give him more credit for the 3/9 than I would 3/4, for example.


49 isn't a big enough sample size for me personally lol. I go by what I see on a daily basis and all I see is LeBron's finals record being used to bring him down a peg. It is definitely looked at as a negative. I find it hard to believe that you don't see it.
User avatar
KyRo23
Pro Prospect
Posts: 792
And1: 2,456
Joined: May 07, 2017
 

Re: Reminder: Russell is 11- Kareem is 6-4, MJ's only 6-0. 

Post#251 » by KyRo23 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:48 pm

70sFan wrote:
KyRo23 wrote:Russell is better than LeBron according to people in this thread?

Lmfao mannnn yall need to stop taking your anger out today for not having Valentines, because that take is just silly.

You know that we're not talking about Russell Westbrook, right?


Get with the times.
User avatar
Prokorov
RealGM
Posts: 34,924
And1: 11,121
Joined: Dec 06, 2013
       

Re: Reminder: Russell is 11- Kareem is 6-4, MJ's only 6-0. 

Post#252 » by Prokorov » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:51 pm

Fencer reregistered wrote:
Prokorov wrote:
freethedevil wrote:Surprisingly, basketball didn't begin in the 90's. This feels relevant, considering that outside of his team's achievements, he's just Lebron without the sustained excellence.


MJ never had the luxury of needing only 2 rounds to win a title, or getting to play a team with a losing record in the finals.

some of russells rings are less valuable then what you would get from a 25 cent vending machine


Every team that Russell ever played in the NBA Finals had recently won the Western Conference championship.


Is that supposed to be impressive? in 1957 there were 4 western conference teams, all with a losing record.

they beat a bad team who just beat a worst team.

this isnt to bash russell. he is an alltime great. it doesnt tarnsish him if some of his titles have less value, but you simply cant hold it against kareem or MJ or Lebron that they didnt win as much.

Im sure MJ and Lebron would both have more rings if they played in an 8 team league where most of the talent was concentrated onto 1 team.
My name is Prokorov and I don't know anything about basketball.

-2.14.2020
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 11,509
And1: 7,499
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Reminder: Russell is 11- Kareem is 6-4, MJ's only 6-0. 

Post#253 » by 70sFan » Fri Feb 14, 2020 8:56 pm

KyRo23 wrote:
70sFan wrote:
KyRo23 wrote:Russell is better than LeBron according to people in this thread?

Lmfao mannnn yall need to stop taking your anger out today for not having Valentines, because that take is just silly.

You know that we're not talking about Russell Westbrook, right?


Get with the times.

I do, but being further away from Russell's career doesn't make it any less impressive. You probably haven't even watched a single game of Russell and you laugh at this idea because you have no clue about him and how he stacks up to guys like Jordan or James.
mediocrityrules
Senior
Posts: 659
And1: 525
Joined: Nov 27, 2013
 

Re: Reminder: Russell is 11- Kareem is 6-4, MJ's only 6-0. 

Post#254 » by mediocrityrules » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:00 pm

freethedevil wrote:
mediocrityrules wrote:
marcush wrote:Magic with 5 rings. He’s better than Lebron. Who else?


According to this thread, isn't Robert Horry one of the greatest?

Read the OP again and try thinking this time.


Just trying to point out the idiocy of the OP using such simple measures, as Horry played 16 years for 7 championship rings and is considered one of the greatest ever clutch shooters, but no one puts him as one of the greatest players and rightfully so.

I'll try to be less obtuse next time so I don't go over so many people's heads.
70sFan
RealGM
Posts: 11,509
And1: 7,499
Joined: Aug 11, 2015
 

Re: Reminder: Russell is 11- Kareem is 6-4, MJ's only 6-0. 

Post#255 » by 70sFan » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:00 pm

Prokorov wrote:
Fencer reregistered wrote:
Prokorov wrote:
MJ never had the luxury of needing only 2 rounds to win a title, or getting to play a team with a losing record in the finals.

some of russells rings are less valuable then what you would get from a 25 cent vending machine


Every team that Russell ever played in the NBA Finals had recently won the Western Conference championship.


Is that supposed to be impressive? in 1957 there were 4 western conference teams, all with a losing record.

they beat a bad team who just beat a worst team.

this isnt to bash russell. he is an alltime great. it doesnt tarnsish him if some of his titles have less value, but you simply cant hold it against kareem or MJ or Lebron that they didnt win as much.

Im sure MJ and Lebron would both have more rings if they played in an 8 team league where most of the talent was concentrated onto 1 team.

More than 11 of 13? Yeah, seems very likely.
Jordan and James had the most of the talent on their teams too and the gap between their teams and average teams in 30 team league is significantly bigger than Celtic's gap against a team like Syracuse Nationals.
If it was so easy to win then, why none of Wilt, Baylor, West, Oscar or Pettit did that?
Russell also won a ring in 14 team league playing 3 series without HCA against 50+wins teams. Is this also an easy title for him?
When did Jordan beat as good team as 1968 Sixer?
VeggieBurger
Sophomore
Posts: 105
And1: 120
Joined: Jul 04, 2018

LeBron Vs. Jordan Debate - Scientific FACTS 

Post#256 » by VeggieBurger » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:08 pm

Everyone, I've gone ahead and figured this out. First, the hard part: I've taken the cosine of the hypothetical variable of 6 and multiplied that by the transitive inference of 15.04 - which is the representation of a negative swing over the congruence of a +/- vertical. Then, I took into account scheduling, injury, teammate variance, era, genetics, skillset, and a 2 plus tangent emphasized over a googol of instances. Woowee! Well, it wasn't easy, but here are the results of the computations:

Any mf that thinks LeBron is better than Jordan has lost their mind.

Wow. That's DIRECT from the computer folks. Don't see how we can argue much with that type of CONCRETE evidence.
Xherdan 23
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,325
And1: 1,534
Joined: Apr 07, 2016
   

Re: JORDAN 6/6??? 

Post#257 » by Xherdan 23 » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:14 pm

HomoSapien wrote:
Xherdan 23 wrote:
HomoSapien wrote:LeBron is great. No question about it, but if we are going to play this game then let’s stop talking about how he dragged a team that didn’t deserve it to the NBA finals. He played in the Eastern conference during it’s weakest era. Later on he benefited by joining forces with his two biggest conference rivals and benefited from an elite Bulls team being destroyed by Rose’s injury.

Also what blatant disrespect to Magic Johnson/Worthy, Drexler/Porter, Barkley/KJ, Kemp/Payton, and Malone/Stockton. None of those teams were as good as the Warriors but Jordan bulldozed through hall of famers to get his rings.


I'm not sure the East in the '90s was any stronger than it was in the 00's or 10's, and if it was it's certainly not by much.


The East certainly had its weak moments, especially towards the end of the 90s, but let's specifically examine the East in 2006-2007:

* The team with the best record was a 53-win Detroit Pistons who were severely weakened by the loss of Ben Wallace. Without Wallace the Pistons were eleven games worse than the previous season. The prior season, at full-strength the Pistons defeated the Cavs.

* The defending champions Miami Heat were no longer looking too impressive as Shaq had started his decline, and were swept in the first round by a questionalbe Chicago Bulls team.

*Speaking of the Bulls, the Gordon/Hinrich/Deng-era Bulls were the third-best team in the East that season. I loved that team. Super gutsy, I think Gordon was underappreciated and underrated, but none of these guys ever emerged as true stars, and all of them basically started to fizzle out a few years later. This team being as good as it was is a clear example of how weak the conference was.

So what was the Cavs path to the finals that year?

In the first round, they faced an Arenas Wizards team, a team that perpetually underachieved and has a well-documented history of their lack of seriousness towards the game. Washington was only 41-41 that year and had almost no bench.

In the second round, they faced a 41-41 NJ Nets team. The Nets were five years removed from their last NBA finals appearance. This Vince Carter-led Nets team had no front-court, and was forced to play a 40-year-old Cliff Robinson 19 minutes a game and start Jason Collins at center. Collins was absurdly bad and averaged 2ppg, 4 rpg, and 36% FG in 23 mpg. Mikki Moore was the other starting big man and Bostjan Nachbar was the 6th man.

Detroit was their first good team in the playoffs, and we've already covered why they were weakened. When they faced the Spurs, they were swept.

LeBron leading such a weak team to the finals is impressive on one hand, but it also speaks volumes to how weak the conference was. A team with Larry Hughes as its second-best player has no business in the NBA finals, and is a result of the "Leastern Conference" era.

Now lets look at what the 90s Bulls dealt with:

People keep bringing up that Jordan didn't face a tough East, but his Eastern conference was regularly tougher than LeBron's crop. I mean he swept a Shaq/Penny/Grant Orlando Magic team that looked like it was destined to become a dynasty. He defeated Patrick Ewing, a guy who is a bigger star than anyone James faced in the East that playoff run, regularly (and while admittedly the Knicks needed a second star, they were deep with tough role players). Someone brought up the Indiana Pacers as an example of a bad team, which just astonishes me. The Bulls only played the Pacers once in the playoffs, but that Pacers team was insanely tough, loaded with savvy vets, and was very deep. On top of that, Reggie Miller despite his somewhat so-so stats had an insane ability to just win games, anyone who saw him play in his prime knows that, and was certainly more dangerous than a guy like Vince Carter or even Gilbert Arenas. The Alonzo Mourning-Tim Hardaway-Jamal Mashburn Heat could have easily been a finals team, and in fact had a better record than those Cav teams. They were probably pretty close in terms of impact to the 2000-era Pistons team.

Also, by comparison the Bulls faced eight teams that won 50+ games in the playoffs during their final three-peat and five teams that won at least 60 games.


I like how you picked a single year for LeBron but listed every star MJ faced for a decade.
Mid 90's Patrick Ewing wasn't bigger than anyone LeBron had to face (KG, peak Howard) and the Reggie Pacers weren't significantly better than the PG13 Pacers if at all.
The Penny-Shaq Magic were legit title contenders but you're making it sound like they were matching up every season in the playoffs when in reality they met twice and MJ is 1-1 aginst them
The Mourning Heat team was also legit but again, short lived (they only got Mash for half of '97-'98 season and had a total of 2 elite years overlapping with MJ).
If you cherry pick who MJ faced and just go by name recognition, sure. But LeBron has faced the Celtics for many seasons, the Bad Boys 2 for a couple of years and faced some of the toughest Final opponents ever.
Not to mention that he faced an elite defensive player in his position on almost every Final (Kawhi,Iggy, KD) and also in his own conference his entire career (Prince, PP, PG). MJ had Craig Ehlo guard him for an entire series, I dare you to find a worse player guarding LeBron.
MJ won against these SGs: 6'3, 195 Byron Scott, Dan Majerle and twice against the combo of Bryon Russell and Honacek while having the second best perimeter defender and player on the court on his own team.
Now, I'll be honest and say he also won against Drexler, at the time arguably the second best SG in the league and Garry Payton, one of the best perimeter defenders ever but let's not pretend everything in the 90's was legendary and much tougher.

My point is, I think MJ is a better player than LeBron or at least more conducive to winning championships but I won't argue dishonestly. MJ was great but he also benefited greatly from the Lakers and Celtics dynasties getting older, the league being diluted by expansion and a lack of quality stars in his position and I don't believe he faced any major challenges that LeBron hasn't.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is.
- Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut
User avatar
SecondTake
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,442
And1: 636
Joined: Jun 03, 2017

Re: LeBron Vs. Jordan Debate - Scientific FACTS 

Post#258 » by SecondTake » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:25 pm

6-0 is the only fact you need. It ends any debate and will for the rest of time.
User avatar
Sofia
GOTB: Mean Girls
Posts: 22,292
And1: 17,369
Joined: Aug 03, 2008
Location: Formerly Mats272-Goat until I found Sofia The First...
 

Re: LeBron Vs. Jordan Debate - Scientific FACTS 

Post#259 » by Sofia » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:25 pm

Your computer has a virus.
Gus McCrae wrote:I’ll just say it... you’re a top 5 worst poster on this site

Mark K wrote: Wow, impressive ballet stance and tits
User avatar
Sgt Major
Sixth Man
Posts: 1,850
And1: 3,129
Joined: Nov 09, 2018
 

Re: LeBron Vs. Jordan Debate - Scientific FACTS 

Post#260 » by Sgt Major » Fri Feb 14, 2020 9:27 pm

FACTS
MJ is the GOAT

LeBron is right there in the discussions on who's the #2
Det. Frank Pembleton: You know, sometimes you're funny. Then there's now.

Return to The General Board