The LeBron Thread 2021 Off-Season Edition

[GSP]

Ppl always talk about the best possible fit with Bron among current players whether its Steph, Ad, Dame etc. and its easily Kd. The next best player and a great fit on both ends specially offense. Obviously the ceiling is lower on defense than an Ad pairing but man can you imagine if these 2 were on the same team in the Nba? We saw flashes of it in the Allstar game and Olympics and it was terrifying

[homecourtloss]

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet by anyone, but this will be the 1st year since 2010 that neither Lebron or Curry will be in the finals. Just something i thought about.

1st year since 2010 that neither Lebron or Kawhi will be in the finals

1st year since 2010 that neither Lebron or Lowry will be in the finals

lowry has been exactly in 1 finals, using him for this example is a bit random

The point is that it’s basically Lebron. Lebron has been in every finals since 2010 other than 2019 which Curry was in. I get it that Curry has been in 5 finals but GSP is literally correct.

[FC93]

Also, I can't seem to find your original quote but i'll address it here in regards to Luka being better than 09 Lebron:

Luka averaged 36/8/10/1 and 5 turnovers on 57 TS% against the 8th best defence in the league whilst playing meh defence. Alternatively, averaged 47/10/13/2/1 and 6 turnovers on -0.2 rTS%.

Lebron averaged 35/9/7/2/1 and 3 turnovers on 62 TS% against the #1 defence in the league whilst playing great defence. Alternatively, averaged 48/12/10/2/1 and 4 turnovers on +7.4 rTS%.

If you just meant in terms of skills then yeah probably, but in terms of as an overall player nah fam haha, he's got a loooooong way to go.

For there record I said better than any version of lebron before 09, meaning is first mvp season. I think that was 08/09 so whatever year you call that.

I’m not saying Lukas better than that lebron.

Talent wise pre-2007 I might have leaned towards Luka but on another hand Lebron had done more with his limited repertoire so it's tough to gauge. It hurts to say but Luka really should have closed out the series when the chance was right there. Lebron closed out the Pistons scoring something like 28 of the last 29 points for the Cavs and he's supposedly the one who is the less clutch of the two, just a reference to put into perspective how insane Lebron's standards are.

On a semi-related note I do find it odd how Luka's clutchness seems to swing up and down every now and then. I remember staunch critics citing how he had awful clutch time stats last regular season but turned it around and absolutely tore it up in the 4th quarters of the playoffs, this year was the opposite. He was clutch as hell in the regular season. Granted I haven't actually verified any of these numbers out of laziness, this part is all anecdotal. but it kind of reminds me how Lebron also used to have clutch and unclutch moments when younger

I think the takeaway from that is that "clutchness" really does not exist to nearly the extent that we like to pretend it does. I think players can be all nerves and perform worse under high pressure, but it's much harder for me to believe that under certain circumstances players can outperform their normal play because of some kind of increase in skill or talent that occurs under pressure. Put another way, Jordan being legendarily clutch is mostly just good luck. He didn't shrink and is a good shooter anyway and happened to shoot, IDK, 80% over a very small sample. Lots of people perform a lot better in small samples.

LeBron had "clutch" moments where he happened to make shots when it was crunch time, and "unclutch" moments when he happened to miss them. Luka's "swung up and down" because sometimes things worked and sometimes they didn't. That's just...playing basketball. Sometimes you make the shot or make the right play and sometimes you don't. Take a small number of possessions and of course someone can seem to be way better or way worse in the situation, but I would imagine that clutch variance isn't going to be any bigger than variance on, say, taking a shot in a game when you're down more than 3 but less than 6 points in the 8th minute of the second quarter, or when you're up by double digits in the 3rd minute of the 3rd quarter (at least insofar as these samples are comparably small).

There are, I think, some exceptions that can move the needle a bit, but I don't think a player possessing "clutchness" can explain even a significant part of variance. It's all just tautological. It's fine to bring up when talking about what happened (e.g. "Jordan is better than LeBron because he was more clutch") but not in predicting outcomes (e.g. "if LeBron and Jordan were both reincarnated and draft-eligible next year, you should take Jordan because he's more clutch.")

[donnieme]

For there record I said better than any version of lebron before 09, meaning is first mvp season. I think that was 08/09 so whatever year you call that.

I’m not saying Lukas better than that lebron.

Talent wise pre-2007 I might have leaned towards Luka but on another hand Lebron had done more with his limited repertoire so it's tough to gauge. It hurts to say but Luka really should have closed out the series when the chance was right there. Lebron closed out the Pistons scoring something like 28 of the last 29 points for the Cavs and he's supposedly the one who is the less clutch of the two, just a reference to put into perspective how insane Lebron's standards are.

On a semi-related note I do find it odd how Luka's clutchness seems to swing up and down every now and then. I remember staunch critics citing how he had awful clutch time stats last regular season but turned it around and absolutely tore it up in the 4th quarters of the playoffs, this year was the opposite. He was clutch as hell in the regular season. Granted I haven't actually verified any of these numbers out of laziness, this part is all anecdotal. but it kind of reminds me how Lebron also used to have clutch and unclutch moments when younger

I think the takeaway from that is that "clutchness" really does not exist to nearly the extent that we like to pretend it does. I think players can be all nerves and perform worse under high pressure, but it's much harder for me to believe that under certain circumstances players can outperform their normal play because of some kind of increase in skill or talent that occurs under pressure. Put another way, Jordan being legendarily clutch is mostly just good luck. He didn't shrink and is a good shooter anyway and happened to shoot, IDK, 80% over a very small sample. Lots of people perform a lot better in small samples.

LeBron had "clutch" moments where he happened to make shots when it was crunch time, and "unclutch" moments when he happened to miss them. Luka's "swung up and down" because sometimes things worked and sometimes they didn't. That's just...playing basketball. Sometimes you make the shot or make the right play and sometimes you don't. Take a small number of possessions and of course someone can seem to be way better or way worse in the situation, but I would imagine that clutch variance isn't going to be any bigger than variance on, say, taking a shot in a game when you're down more than 3 but less than 6 points in the 8th minute of the second quarter, or when you're up by double digits in the 3rd minute of the 3rd quarter (at least insofar as these samples are comparably small).

There are, I think, some exceptions that can move the needle a bit, but I don't think a player possessing "clutchness" can explain even a significant part of variance. It's all just tautological. It's fine to bring up when talking about what happened (e.g. "Jordan is better than LeBron because he was more clutch") but not in predicting outcomes (e.g. "if LeBron and Jordan were both reincarnated and draft-eligible next year, you should take Jordan because he's more clutch.")

This is a lot but I'm really just referring to public perception not the concept of the term or its existence. That's an entirely different philosophical discussion. As for Luka he really did suffer a factual drop in efficiency and volume in the 4th quarters in the entire series but It's believed it was due to fatigue. From physical fatigue to mental resilience to random variance ,whatever one might use to explain why he suffered said decline is up to them. The belief of its existence is something I try not to wade into as it seems everyone has their position on it. Reason I labelled it as anecdotal

Was a good post though

[Baski]

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet by anyone, but this will be the 1st year since 2010 that neither Lebron or Curry will be in the finals. Just something i thought about.

1st year since 2010 that neither Lebron or Kawhi will be in the finals

1st year since 2010 that neither Lebron or Lowry will be in the finals

Lmao I had the exact same thought. This is too much of a LeBron stat to include anyone else.

LeBron has as many Finals appearances over Curry as Curry has over Kawhi and Lowry.

[Baski]

Ppl always talk about the best possible fit with Bron among current players whether its Steph, Ad, Dame etc. and its easily Kd. The next best player and a great fit on both ends specially offense. Obviously the ceiling is lower on defense than an Ad pairing but man can you imagine if these 2 were on the same team in the Nba? We saw flashes of it in the Allstar game and Olympics and it was terrifying

I've always felt that it just has to be a big man who can lock down the other team and isn't completely useless on offense. LeBron's teams have always failed due to defense not offense. A high-powered offense is nice, but even the KD Warriors had to rely on their defense to survive certain games. It's not a coincidence to me that LeBron's easiest title was the one where his team's defense didn't collapse without him.

As a 2nd option to LeBron, a healthy AD is awesome, a Giannis slightly worse or equal and a Duncan or Kareem would make us question everything we know about Basketball.

About KD specifically, if you're going offense then you might as well just go with Curry or Nash who are similar caliber players with higher impact on players 3-10.

[Djoker]

For there record I said better than any version of lebron before 09, meaning is first mvp season. I think that was 08/09 so whatever year you call that.

I’m not saying Lukas better than that lebron.

Talent wise pre-2007 I might have leaned towards Luka but on another hand Lebron had done more with his limited repertoire so it's tough to gauge. It hurts to say but Luka really should have closed out the series when the chance was right there. Lebron closed out the Pistons scoring something like 28 of the last 29 points for the Cavs and he's supposedly the one who is the less clutch of the two, just a reference to put into perspective how insane Lebron's standards are.

On a semi-related note I do find it odd how Luka's clutchness seems to swing up and down every now and then. I remember staunch critics citing how he had awful clutch time stats last regular season but turned it around and absolutely tore it up in the 4th quarters of the playoffs, this year was the opposite. He was clutch as hell in the regular season. Granted I haven't actually verified any of these numbers out of laziness, this part is all anecdotal. but it kind of reminds me how Lebron also used to have clutch and unclutch moments when younger

I think the takeaway from that is that "clutchness" really does not exist to nearly the extent that we like to pretend it does. I think players can be all nerves and perform worse under high pressure, but it's much harder for me to believe that under certain circumstances players can outperform their normal play because of some kind of increase in skill or talent that occurs under pressure. Put another way, Jordan being legendarily clutch is mostly just good luck. He didn't shrink and is a good shooter anyway and happened to shoot, IDK, 80% over a very small sample. Lots of people perform a lot better in small samples.

LeBron had "clutch" moments where he happened to make shots when it was crunch time, and "unclutch" moments when he happened to miss them. Luka's "swung up and down" because sometimes things worked and sometimes they didn't. That's just...playing basketball. Sometimes you make the shot or make the right play and sometimes you don't. Take a small number of possessions and of course someone can seem to be way better or way worse in the situation, but I would imagine that clutch variance isn't going to be any bigger than variance on, say, taking a shot in a game when you're down more than 3 but less than 6 points in the 8th minute of the second quarter, or when you're up by double digits in the 3rd minute of the 3rd quarter (at least insofar as these samples are comparably small).

There are, I think, some exceptions that can move the needle a bit, but I don't think a player possessing "clutchness" can explain even a significant part of variance. It's all just tautological. It's fine to bring up when talking about what happened (e.g. "Jordan is better than LeBron because he was more clutch") but not in predicting outcomes (e.g. "if LeBron and Jordan were both reincarnated and draft-eligible next year, you should take Jordan because he's more clutch.")

This is true and a good post.

However there are some players whose games are more suited to clutch situations. For example, MJ being a much better jumpshooter from midrange than Lebron makes him a better option in the clutch. In the last minute or two in a close game it's hard to get a foul call and defenses will generally pack the paint against star finishers anyways so it's much tougher to get a field goal at the rim. Making that 15+ foot jumpshot becomes that much more important because often times that's the only shot you get. And thus MJ is a better clutch player than Lebron. It's not luck.

[Colbinii]

Talent wise pre-2007 I might have leaned towards Luka but on another hand Lebron had done more with his limited repertoire so it's tough to gauge. It hurts to say but Luka really should have closed out the series when the chance was right there. Lebron closed out the Pistons scoring something like 28 of the last 29 points for the Cavs and he's supposedly the one who is the less clutch of the two, just a reference to put into perspective how insane Lebron's standards are.

On a semi-related note I do find it odd how Luka's clutchness seems to swing up and down every now and then. I remember staunch critics citing how he had awful clutch time stats last regular season but turned it around and absolutely tore it up in the 4th quarters of the playoffs, this year was the opposite. He was clutch as hell in the regular season. Granted I haven't actually verified any of these numbers out of laziness, this part is all anecdotal. but it kind of reminds me how Lebron also used to have clutch and unclutch moments when younger

I think the takeaway from that is that "clutchness" really does not exist to nearly the extent that we like to pretend it does. I think players can be all nerves and perform worse under high pressure, but it's much harder for me to believe that under certain circumstances players can outperform their normal play because of some kind of increase in skill or talent that occurs under pressure. Put another way, Jordan being legendarily clutch is mostly just good luck. He didn't shrink and is a good shooter anyway and happened to shoot, IDK, 80% over a very small sample. Lots of people perform a lot better in small samples.

LeBron had "clutch" moments where he happened to make shots when it was crunch time, and "unclutch" moments when he happened to miss them. Luka's "swung up and down" because sometimes things worked and sometimes they didn't. That's just...playing basketball. Sometimes you make the shot or make the right play and sometimes you don't. Take a small number of possessions and of course someone can seem to be way better or way worse in the situation, but I would imagine that clutch variance isn't going to be any bigger than variance on, say, taking a shot in a game when you're down more than 3 but less than 6 points in the 8th minute of the second quarter, or when you're up by double digits in the 3rd minute of the 3rd quarter (at least insofar as these samples are comparably small).

There are, I think, some exceptions that can move the needle a bit, but I don't think a player possessing "clutchness" can explain even a significant part of variance. It's all just tautological. It's fine to bring up when talking about what happened (e.g. "Jordan is better than LeBron because he was more clutch") but not in predicting outcomes (e.g. "if LeBron and Jordan were both reincarnated and draft-eligible next year, you should take Jordan because he's more clutch.")

This is true and a good post.

However there are some players whose games are more suited to clutch situations. For example, MJ being a much better jumpshooter from midrange than Lebron makes him a better option in the clutch. In the last minute or two in a close game it's hard to get a foul call and defenses will generally pack the paint against star finishers anyways so it's much tougher to get a field goal at the rim. Making that 15+ foot jumpshot becomes that much more important because often times that's the only shot you get. And thus MJ is a better clutch player than Lebron. It's not luck.

Have you ever actually seen what LeBron has done in the clutch or are you just speaking about what you believe with no evidence backing it up?

[Djoker]

I think the takeaway from that is that "clutchness" really does not exist to nearly the extent that we like to pretend it does. I think players can be all nerves and perform worse under high pressure, but it's much harder for me to believe that under certain circumstances players can outperform their normal play because of some kind of increase in skill or talent that occurs under pressure. Put another way, Jordan being legendarily clutch is mostly just good luck. He didn't shrink and is a good shooter anyway and happened to shoot, IDK, 80% over a very small sample. Lots of people perform a lot better in small samples.

LeBron had "clutch" moments where he happened to make shots when it was crunch time, and "unclutch" moments when he happened to miss them. Luka's "swung up and down" because sometimes things worked and sometimes they didn't. That's just...playing basketball. Sometimes you make the shot or make the right play and sometimes you don't. Take a small number of possessions and of course someone can seem to be way better or way worse in the situation, but I would imagine that clutch variance isn't going to be any bigger than variance on, say, taking a shot in a game when you're down more than 3 but less than 6 points in the 8th minute of the second quarter, or when you're up by double digits in the 3rd minute of the 3rd quarter (at least insofar as these samples are comparably small).

There are, I think, some exceptions that can move the needle a bit, but I don't think a player possessing "clutchness" can explain even a significant part of variance. It's all just tautological. It's fine to bring up when talking about what happened (e.g. "Jordan is better than LeBron because he was more clutch") but not in predicting outcomes (e.g. "if LeBron and Jordan were both reincarnated and draft-eligible next year, you should take Jordan because he's more clutch.")

This is true and a good post.

However there are some players whose games are more suited to clutch situations. For example, MJ being a much better jumpshooter from midrange than Lebron makes him a better option in the clutch. In the last minute or two in a close game it's hard to get a foul call and defenses will generally pack the paint against star finishers anyways so it's much tougher to get a field goal at the rim. Making that 15+ foot jumpshot becomes that much more important because often times that's the only shot you get. And thus MJ is a better clutch player than Lebron. It's not luck.

Have you ever actually seen what LeBron has done in the clutch or are you just speaking about what you believe with no evidence backing it up?

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

[Gooner]

This is true and a good post.

However there are some players whose games are more suited to clutch situations. For example, MJ being a much better jumpshooter from midrange than Lebron makes him a better option in the clutch. In the last minute or two in a close game it's hard to get a foul call and defenses will generally pack the paint against star finishers anyways so it's much tougher to get a field goal at the rim. Making that 15+ foot jumpshot becomes that much more important because often times that's the only shot you get. And thus MJ is a better clutch player than Lebron. It's not luck.

Have you ever actually seen what LeBron has done in the clutch or are you just speaking about what you believe with no evidence backing it up?

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

Jordan had that killer instinct.

[Colbinii]

This is true and a good post.

However there are some players whose games are more suited to clutch situations. For example, MJ being a much better jumpshooter from midrange than Lebron makes him a better option in the clutch. In the last minute or two in a close game it's hard to get a foul call and defenses will generally pack the paint against star finishers anyways so it's much tougher to get a field goal at the rim. Making that 15+ foot jumpshot becomes that much more important because often times that's the only shot you get. And thus MJ is a better clutch player than Lebron. It's not luck.

Have you ever actually seen what LeBron has done in the clutch or are you just speaking about what you believe with no evidence backing it up?

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

Isn't that a 108 minute sample size in the post-season?

[Colbinii]

This is true and a good post.

However there are some players whose games are more suited to clutch situations. For example, MJ being a much better jumpshooter from midrange than Lebron makes him a better option in the clutch. In the last minute or two in a close game it's hard to get a foul call and defenses will generally pack the paint against star finishers anyways so it's much tougher to get a field goal at the rim. Making that 15+ foot jumpshot becomes that much more important because often times that's the only shot you get. And thus MJ is a better clutch player than Lebron. It's not luck.

Have you ever actually seen what LeBron has done in the clutch or are you just speaking about what you believe with no evidence backing it up?

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

All stats per-100

2007 LeBron Post-Season clutch:
47.9/6.6/11.6 (3.3 steals) on 61.7 TS%

2009 LeBron Post-Season clutch:
67.4/8.7/15.3 (2.2 steals) on 66.2 TS%

Both comparable or better than 1997 and 1998 Jordan

[Mazter]

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

Probably the biggest example of selective memory would be the last 6 jump shots of Jordan's career:
6:06.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 13 ft 74-73
5:52.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 17 ft 74-73
5:31.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 18 ft 74-75
3:02.0 M. Jordan misses 3-pt jump shot from 25 ft 79-81
1:30.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 14 ft 81-83
0:05.0 M. Jordan makes 2-pt jump shot from 17 ft +2 87-86

I don't need to ask how many remembered that last shot, but how many people would remember those 5 other mentioned shots, but hey, who cares, Jordan is clutch

[falcolombardi]

Have you ever actually seen what LeBron has done in the clutch or are you just speaking about what you believe with no evidence backing it up?

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

All stats per-100

2007 LeBron Post-Season clutch:
47.9/6.6/11.6 (3.3 steals) on 61.7 TS%

2009 LeBron Post-Season clutch:
67.4/8.7/15.3 (2.2 steals) on 66.2 TS%

Both comparable or better than 1997 and 1998 Jordan

2009 Jesus christ, outlier shooting or not. that season may low key be lebron real peak

[FC93]

Another problem that comes up, and I think is starting to come up right here, is how exactly the available statistics define "clutch." Is it the last 5 minutes when the game is within 5 points? The last 2 minutes within 5 points? 4th quarter and OT within 5 points? The last minute within 3 points? What if you make a shot just outside that time window that puts it into the point window? Is not every possession of an elimination game clutch to some degree (at least until you get to garbage time)? There are people who say LeBron wasn't clutch in 2016 game 7 despite the fact that he was clearly fouled on one drive where it was stuck 89-89, and that the only reason there was a game 7 stuck on 89-89 at all is because LeBron played like a man possessed for the first 43 minutes of that game as well as the previous two games. Surely that's clutch?

I do, however, tend to agree that it's harder to get a foul call finishing at the rim at the end of close games, so having a better jump shot might set someone up a bit better to succeed in crunch time.

[homecourtloss]

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

Probably the biggest example of selective memory would be the last 6 jump shots of Jordan's career:
6:06.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 13 ft 74-73
5:52.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 17 ft 74-73
5:31.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 18 ft 74-75
3:02.0 M. Jordan misses 3-pt jump shot from 25 ft 79-81
1:30.0 M. Jordan misses 2-pt jump shot from 14 ft 81-83
0:05.0 M. Jordan makes 2-pt jump shot from 17 ft +2 87-86

I don't need to ask how many remembered that last shot, but how many people would remember those 5 other mentioned shots, but hey, who cares, Jordan is clutch

A friendly 8 free throws granted to Jordan on midrange fadeaways also helped nicely.

For the bolded—“playoff career,” right? He went on to miss quite a few in Washington that many people (not you) don’t count for whatever reason.

[nzahir]

You guys think CJ McCollum would be a fit?

Say Trez opts in and no takers for Dennis (so he comes back and goes to bench)

Trez, Kuz, Alfonzo, our 1st, and protected 2027 1st

Maybe a 3 teamer

Is value fair?

[Djoker]

Have you ever actually seen what LeBron has done in the clutch or are you just speaking about what you believe with no evidence backing it up?

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

Isn't that a 108 minute sample size in the post-season?

Of course the sample size is tiny... but it's still better than relying on memory.

Crunch-Time Stats - Playoffs

1997 to 1998 Jordan
Per 48: 57.8 pts, 7.1 reb, 5.3 ass, 2.7 stl, 1.8 blk on 47.2 %FG/20.0 %3P/78.9 %FT with 4.9 tov; 57.0 %TS
Totals: 130 pts, 16 reb, 12 ass, 6 stl, 4 blk on 42-89 FG/2-10 3P/45-57 FT with 11 turnovers in 108 minutes

2006 to 2021 Lebron
Per 48: 42.7 pts, 10.9 reb, 7.9 ass, 1.8 stl, 1.8 blk on 40.7 %FG/35.3 %3P/76.0 %FT with 4.6 tov; 54.6 %TS
Totals: 469 pts, 120 reb, 87 ass, 20 stl, 20 blk on 139-340 FG/36-102 3P/155-205 FT with 51 turnovers in 530 minutes

Source: NBA.com/stats
**You have to add up the stats for every postseason of their career.



By the way Dipper 13 compiled MJ's crunch-time stats for his entire career as well. Call these unofficial stats...

1985 to 1998 Jordan
Per 48: 61.1 pts, 7.8 reb, 4.8 ass, 3.9 stl, 1.4 blk on 52.0 %FG/25.0 %3P/83.0 %FT with 3.3 tov; 62.5 %TS
Totals: 519 pts, 66 reb, 41 ass, 33 stl, 12 blk on 166-319 FG/6-24 3P/181-218 FT with 28 turnovers in 408 minutes

Source: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1297293

Jordan is quite simply the crunch-time king. It's not just the extraordinary volume but the efficiency...

If you want to boil it down to luck, go ahead. I'd rather credit his incredible crunch time stats to being an amazing midrange jumpshooter, good free throw shooter and having the assassin's mentality.

[Colbinii]

I have indeed but I don't want to be a victim of selective memory. We have crunch-time stats and Lebron is very good but Jordan is clearly better and that's just taking MJ's 1997 and 1998 postseasons which are the arguably the two worst of his career.

Isn't that a 108 minute sample size in the post-season?

Of course the sample size is tiny... but it's still better than relying on memory.

Crunch-Time Stats - Playoffs

1997 to 1998 Jordan
Per 48: 57.8 pts, 7.1 reb, 5.3 ass, 2.7 stl, 1.8 blk on 47.2 %FG/20.0 %3P/78.9 %FT with 4.9 tov; 57.0 %TS
Totals: 130 pts, 16 reb, 12 ass, 6 stl, 4 blk on 42-89 FG/2-10 3P/45-57 FT with 11 turnovers in 108 minutes

2006 to 2021 Lebron
Per 48: 42.7 pts, 10.9 reb, 7.9 ass, 1.8 stl, 1.8 blk on 40.7 %FG/35.3 %3P/76.0 %FT with 4.6 tov; 54.6 %TS
Totals: 469 pts, 120 reb, 87 ass, 20 stl, 20 blk on 139-340 FG/36-102 3P/155-205 FT with 51 turnovers in 530 minutes

Source: NBA.com/stats
**You have to add up the stats for every postseason of their career.



By the way Dipper 13 compiled MJ's crunch-time stats for his entire career as well. Call these unofficial stats...

1985 to 1998 Jordan
Per 48: 61.1 pts, 7.8 reb, 4.8 ass, 3.9 stl, 1.4 blk on 52.0 %FG/25.0 %3P/83.0 %FT with 3.3 tov; 62.5 %TS
Totals: 519 pts, 66 reb, 41 ass, 33 stl, 12 blk on 166-319 FG/6-24 3P/181-218 FT with 28 turnovers in 408 minutes

Source: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=1297293

Jordan is quite simply the crunch-time king. It's not just the extraordinary volume but the efficiency...

If you want to boil it down to luck, go ahead. I'd rather credit his incredible crunch time stats to being an amazing midrange jumpshooter, good free throw shooter and having the assassin's mentality.

Are you accounting for variables like double teams, defensive ratings faced, ect?

[Mos_Heat]

You guys think CJ McCollum would be a fit?

Say Trez opts in and no takers for Dennis (so he comes back and goes to bench)

Trez, Kuz, Alfonzo, our 1st, and protected 2027 1st

Maybe a 3 teamer

Is value fair?

Gotta be very light protection in 27 for Blazers to make this deal. Even then, doesn't make a lot of sense if they wanna be competitive in the next couple of years.

Anyways, how LA suppose to compete with healthy Nets? Durant is just better in GMing game than Lebron