Jordan v Lebron - A civilised conversation

[Gregoire]

Peak: Jordan
Prime: Jordan
Career holistic approach: Jordan
Career additive approach: Lebron

[VanWest82]

I don't know if you are much of a career value person, but many people on this board value all a player's seasons, and don't just look at their top 8 or so seasons.

Spoiler:

I think there is strong evidence that Lebron has accumulated more career value than Jordan and therefore, those who value longevity have good reason to believe he should be higher all-time.

For example:

Lebron is #1 in RAPTOR WAR (goes since 76-77)-https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-michael-jordan-was-the-best/

Lebron is #1 in PIPM Wins Added (since 73-74)

Lebron is #1 in VORP (since 73-74) https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/vorp_career.html

#1 All-time in the Progressive GOAT rankings https://nbamath.com/progressive-goat-rankings/

#3 All-time in winshares https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_career.html

#1 All-time in Kevn Pelton's WAR Model https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23456720/is-lebron-james-michael-jordan-greatest-nba-player-all

#1 All-time in Value Shares https://matthewmurphy1.wordpress.com/2020/06/22/417/

Perhaps more impressive than anything I named, is that he is #1 in the PS for all the metrics I just named, which matters more than anything I would argue.

Yes, Lebron has played longer, but some people simply value a player's entire career arc, and how long they were able to sustained greatness. Also note Kareem, is ahead in some of these metrics. I have a feeling you might just have a different criteria than some of us on this board. That is fine, but I just wanted to pinpoint that I believe this is where the disagreeament is coming from on who has a GOAT argument over Jordan.

You have to look at both but peak should be weighed over longevity and if there's a material difference in peak then there's almost no amount of longevity that can overcome that imo. You can't tell me that Emmitt Smith > Jim Brown, Ray Bourque > Bobby Orr, Jack Nicholas > Tiger, etc. I think you guys have missed the forest for the trees on career value.

I'm not all that familiar with AuPM (is that Ben Taylor??) but I'd have some questions there like how does it account for substitution patterns on that 97 team in particular? Can we agree we probably need to give 20% of Scottie's AuPM to MJ? Given what we saw for most of their careers and looking at the off playoff numbers in 97 I think it's safe to say that when you split those guys up the value distribution becomes a lot more obvious.

I also notice you've seemingly managed to pit two of MJ's three worst years against four of Lebron's best years. Was that intentional? I'm not quite sure what to make of that.

My point about role context also remains unaddressed. Phil brought in an actual system so the team could function when MJ didn't have the ball or when he wasn't on the floor. Naturally that's going to help the statistical case for the supporting cast. Contrast that with Lebron dominating the ball and making all the decisions. Remove him and the team can't function because it has nothing to fall back on. That's naturally going to make Lebron look a lot better and his teammates worse than reality. I'd suggest we're going to find that Luka's career plays out similarly...something to keep an eye on.

[Texas Chuck]

Okay this is way off-topic but since it was brought up --- I'm amused as hell this assertion that Rick Carlisle of all coaches didn't have a system to fall back on. L O L. And as I recall they 19-20 Mavs under this terrible Lukaball that prevents teammates from flourishing had the most efficient offense of all-time to date.

These anti-Lebron arguments are weak as hell considering how great some of the team numbers are, but when you try and link it to Luka and Rick Carlisle it really shows its all narrative and nothing else. And the narrative doesn't match the reality at all.

Shame we can't ever compare Lebron, the player to Mike, the player. We end up comparing Lebron, the narrative to Mike, the Myth.

[sansterre]

My point about role context also remains unaddressed. Phil brought in an actual system so the team could function when MJ didn't have the ball or when he wasn't on the floor. Naturally that's going to help the statistical case for the supporting cast. Contrast that with Lebron dominating the ball and making all the decisions. Remove him and the team can't function because it has nothing to fall back on. That's naturally going to make Lebron look a lot better and his teammates worse than reality. I'd suggest we're going to find that Luka's career plays out similarly...something to keep an eye on.

I think that's a very fair point. And it's possible that you may be right, that his supporting cast's quality is overstated by VORP.

Instead of "Bulls = Jordan + Supporting Cast" it becomes "Bulls = Jordan + Supporting Cast + The System".

Let us stipulate to the idea that you are right.

Let us imagine, then, that Jordan's 14 VORP (random number) teammates are actually 8 VORP and 6 VORP from the system.

Doesn't that still mean that, in the aggregate, Jordan had a ton of support? It may not be from the players so much, but he certainly had an ATG coach and system that optimized his supporting cast.

I guess, I think your point could be effective against the assertion that Jordan had a better supporting cast than LeBron.

But I don't understand how it would be effective against the assertion that Jordan had more help (at least in his six championship years) than LeBron. It's simply that the nature of that help has changed.

[falcolombardi]

emmith Smith vs jim Brown seems a Extreme example of peak difference to lebron vs jordan. that is a weird comparision to make between arguably the highest position peak ever relative to era and a regular hall of fame peak.

even if we took it for granted that jordan peaked higher it was probably not by that Extreme

and with "peak > longevity" what do we mean by peak exactly, best single seasom? best 3 years?

in players who were great mvp level players or better for 10-13 years ranges valuing them heavily by their 3 year peak seems odd

like if we said that lebron peak is "9" value and his average prime is "8" value for 13 seasons

and jordan was "10" peak value (and 10 vs 9 already feels a bit too high to me for jordan over lebron) and "9" average prime value over 10 years

even with that kind of steep difference lebron 13 seasons at 8 (104) would fairly beat jordan 10 seasons at 9 (90) this already giving a tangible edge to jordan in what i are as a best case scenario

basically havung the best 1 year or even 2-3 year peak seems a weird thingh to evaluate if the objective is seeing who increases championship odds more

jordan himself won rings in non peak years for example, half of them, and didnt win in arguably half of his peak years

so i dont see how peak seasons are that much more important that overall prime

[Statlanta]

The real question is how much did Jordan decline after '93.

The team won 55 games without him and added probably the best European prospect of the decade to their team alongside Rodman. He joins the team and loses immediately in '95.

He didn't even do so well in the '96 NBA Finals either.

Was he really the best player in the league or did voters just give him that title out of respect for the team accomplishment?

Jordan really only bests LeBron in team accomplishment so if his team is doing more of the heavy lifting shouldn't he be re-evaluated based on that. It's not like we had the best impact evaluation analytics to evaluate him by in 1996-1998.

[LukaTheGOAT]

I don't know if you are much of a career value person, but many people on this board value all a player's seasons, and don't just look at their top 8 or so seasons.

Spoiler:

I think there is strong evidence that Lebron has accumulated more career value than Jordan and therefore, those who value longevity have good reason to believe he should be higher all-time.

For example:

Lebron is #1 in RAPTOR WAR (goes since 76-77)-https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-michael-jordan-was-the-best/

Lebron is #1 in PIPM Wins Added (since 73-74)

Lebron is #1 in VORP (since 73-74) https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/vorp_career.html

#1 All-time in the Progressive GOAT rankings https://nbamath.com/progressive-goat-rankings/

#3 All-time in winshares https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_career.html

#1 All-time in Kevn Pelton's WAR Model https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23456720/is-lebron-james-michael-jordan-greatest-nba-player-all

#1 All-time in Value Shares https://matthewmurphy1.wordpress.com/2020/06/22/417/

Perhaps more impressive than anything I named, is that he is #1 in the PS for all the metrics I just named, which matters more than anything I would argue.

Yes, Lebron has played longer, but some people simply value a player's entire career arc, and how long they were able to sustained greatness. Also note Kareem, is ahead in some of these metrics. I have a feeling you might just have a different criteria than some of us on this board. That is fine, but I just wanted to pinpoint that I believe this is where the disagreeament is coming from on who has a GOAT argument over Jordan.

You have to look at both but peak should be weighed over longevity and if there's a material difference in peak then there's almost no amount of longevity that can overcome that imo. You can't tell me that Emmitt Smith > Jim Brown, Ray Bourque > Bobby Orr, Jack Nicholas > Tiger, etc. I think you guys have missed the forest for the trees on career value.

I'm not all that familiar with AuPM (is that Ben Taylor??) but I'd have some questions there like how does it account for substitution patterns on that 97 team in particular? Can we agree we probably need to give 20% of Scottie's AuPM to MJ? Given what we saw for most of their careers and looking at the off playoff numbers in 97 I think it's safe to say that when you split those guys up the value distribution becomes a lot more obvious.

I also notice you've seemingly managed to pit two of MJ's three worst years against four of Lebron's best years. Was that intentional? I'm not quite sure what to make of that.

My point about role context also remains unaddressed. Phil brought in an actual system so the team could function when MJ didn't have the ball or when he wasn't on the floor. Naturally that's going to help the statistical case for the supporting cast. Contrast that with Lebron dominating the ball and making all the decisions. Remove him and the team can't function because it has nothing to fall back on. That's naturally going to make Lebron look a lot better and his teammates worse than reality. I'd suggest we're going to find that Luka's career plays out similarly...something to keep an eye on.

First off do you mean peak as in their best single year, or prime? Because it seems silly to look at only 1-3 years of a player's career and not the other 10+ years of production in my mind, if we are attempting to look at the most valuable career. And the metrics I shared are supposed to be attempting to measure total career value, but even outside of that, they tend to think Lebron had a higher single year peak on a rate basis.

I am not sure I get your point about about"giving" 20% of Scottie's value to MJ, considering the metric already attempts to divide up credit. Many people think 94, the year Jordan missed, was Scottie's arguable peak, and that he was a fringe MVP level player.

As noted in the original post, AuPM only goes back to 1996-97, which is why I used MJ's last 2 Bulls' season. You made the take that Lebron's help on championship teams was comparable to those Bulls championship teams, and I simply provided data that suggest otherwise. Those 4 years I provided for Lebron are the years he won championships, they are not even his best years per the metric.

You say Jordan carried that Bulls team in 98, but if what Jordan did was a carry job, what do you call what Lebron has been doing his entire career on his championship winning teams? Because the numbers don't suggest the casts were comparable.

Quick note-Those 12 and 13 Heat teams were not Lebron ball, as he had to siphon of usage with Wade. It is notable that his offensive load (a metric that is an estimate of the number of a player a player is “directly involved” in on offense every 100 possessions) those years are lower than his pre-Heat and post-Heat years, and his offensive value metrics in the Heat days tend to be lower and that is because he was not playing that Lebron ball style. Lebron's offensive load actually fell by more moving to Miami than Jordan's did with the introduction of the Triangle, so the idea that Jordan had to fit into some system and take the ball less isn't really sticking with me when you compare him to Lebron.

I would argue Lebron's teams malfunction because they simply weren't as good as Jordan's, but that is a philosophical point that I imagine we won't agree on. Also, I don't know how much it matters considering Lebron lead better PS offenses than Jordan ever did.

[VanWest82]

Okay this is way off-topic but since it was brought up --- I'm amused as hell this assertion that Rick Carlisle of all coaches didn't have a system to fall back on. L O L. And as I recall they 19-20 Mavs under this terrible Lukaball that prevents teammates from flourishing had the most efficient offense of all-time to date.

These anti-Lebron arguments are weak as hell considering how great some of the team numbers are, but when you try and link it to Luka and Rick Carlisle it really shows its all narrative and nothing else. And the narrative doesn't match the reality at all.

Shame we can't ever compare Lebron, the player to Mike, the player. We end up comparing Lebron, the narrative to Mike, the Myth.

I want you to try something for me. Next time you see one of my posts imagine it isn't Vanwest the anti-Lebron narrative guy (or however you see me) and instead just evaluate the core points. If we still disagree that's ok but characterizing everything I'm saying here as weak and narrative based is completely unfair.

Re Carlisle, I'm surprised you're disputing this one. Do you not agree that he gave up considerable decision making control to Luka? My impression of 19/20 was that Carlisle had a bigger imprint that year. Mavs also had healthy KP and Seth who carried some non-Luka line ups. Note that with KP injured and minus Seth last year Luka's ORTG on/off disparity grew considerably. But honestly, it's just common sense that as you lean more and more on one player to be the primary decision maker it becomes harder for the team to function when that player isn't in that role. We shouldn't need extensive evidence to support that thesis but I'd point to Nash/Suns as another example, or Harden/Rockets, etc. We should expect there to be some distortion of value in those cases even if it's hard to prove exactly how much.

[LukaTheGOAT]

The real question is how much did Jordan decline after '93.

The team won 55 games without him and added probably the best European prospect of the decade to their team alongside Rodman. He joins the team and loses immediately in '95.

He didn't even do so well in the '96 NBA Finals either.

Was he really the best player in the league or did voters just give him that title out of respect for the team accomplishment?

Jordan really only bests LeBron in team accomplishment so if his team is doing more of the heavy lifting shouldn't he be re-evaluated based on that. It's not like we had the best impact evaluation analytics to evaluate him by in 1996-1998.

I think Jordan very likely was the best player in the league in 96 and 97. In 98, on a per-posession basis, I feel pretty good about saying Shaq was the best player in the league that year, although he missed quite a few more games than Jordan.

[Texas Chuck]

.
Re Carlisle, I'm surprised you're disputing this one. Do you not agree that he gave up considerable decision making control to Luka?

Of course he did.

But your point was Lebron teams suck when he's off the court because there is no system and I guess everyone stands around like chickens with their heads cut off and farts and falls down until Lebron comes back and then they start playing again.

Then you suggested Luka's teams would be the same way. Except Luka as a 2nd year player led the best offense the league had ever seen. So either Luka was individually the best offensive player of all-time(something none of us think) or he elevates teammates AND when he is off the court one of the most controlling coaches in the league especially of every PG he ever coached save Kidd and Luka probably still has a pretty good plan for how to create offense. As evidenced by the Mavs offensive rating when Luka was off the court not completely cratering.


I don't know if you are anti-Lebron and don't really care. You are allowed to like and not like whomever you want. I'm just trying to respond to the content in your posts which have things like this:

Can we agree we probably need to give 20% of Scottie's AuPM to MJ? Given what we saw for most of their careers and looking at the off playoff numbers in 97 I think it's safe to say that when you split those guys up the value distribution becomes a lot more obvious.

I Contrast that with Lebron dominating the ball and making all the decisions. Remove him and the team can't function because it has nothing to fall back on. That's naturally going to make Lebron look a lot better and his teammates worse than reality.

Help me find a different way to describe an arbitrary Jordan bump of 20% for Pippen and an assertion that a lack of system(Which you haven't actually established fwiw) means all numbers automatically make Lebron look better and his teammates worse. I don't want to insult you. I like you as a poster. But to me this is a narrative and not one you can justify. Sorry.

[VanWest82]

First off do you mean peak as in their best single year, or prime? Because it seems silly to look at only 1-3 years of a player's career and not the other 10+ years of production in my mind, if we are attempting to look at the most valuable career. And the metrics I shared are supposed to be attempting to measure total career value, but even outside of that, they tend to think Lebron had a higher single year peak on a rate basis.

Peak is a little different for everyone. For some guys it's three years, some it's six, some it's 8-10. Whichever number you want to choose I'm going with MJ unless you tell me it needs to be 15+

I am not sure I get your point about about"giving" 20% of Scottie's value to MJ, considering the metric already attempts to divide up credit. Many people think 94, the year Jordan missed, was Scottie's arguable peak, and that he was a fringe MVP level player.

As noted in the original post, AuPM only goes back to 1996-97, which is why I used MJ's last 2 Bulls' season. You made the take that Lebron's help on championship teams was comparable to those Bulls championship teams, and I simply provided data that suggest otherwise. Those 4 years I provided for Lebron are the years he won championships, they are not even his best years per the metric.

Let's start by acknowledging that all these metrics are mostly crap, or at least don't accurately measure what they're purporting to be. I don't have the 97 Bulls line up data but if memory serves correct Mike and Scottie played a lot of mins together. Steph and Draymond have this issue so there are a bunch of years where Draymond looks like one of the best offensive players in the league based on +/- (e.g. RAPM) and Steph looks pretty credible defensively. We've clearly failed to distribute credit accurately and we know it. But again, we do have a mins discrepancy in the playoffs in 97 and can see Bulls were -15 per 100 minus MJ compared with -5 for Scottie. That's not good enough analysis either but it points closer to the truth imo. One day we'll get all the line up data and can have a better conversation.

You say Jordan carried that Bulls team in 98, but if what Jordan did was a carry job, what do you call what Lebron has been doing his entire career on his championship winning teams? Because the numbers don't suggest the casts were comparable.

Jordan did carry that team offensively (and got some help defensively) but it was also perhaps his worst year as a Bull outside of the years he missed due to injury. What's Lebron's worst season? Let's use that as a comparison. I'm not disputing that Lebron has carried some weak supporting casts. I'm disputing the notion that he hasn't enjoyed some excellent supporting casts.

Quick note-Those 12 and 13 Heat teams were not Lebron ball, as he had to siphon of usage with Wade. It is notable that his offensive load (a metric that is an estimate of the number of a player a player is “directly involved” in on offense every 100 possessions) those years are lower than his pre-Heat and post-Heat years, and his offensive value metrics in the Heat days tend to be lower and that is because he was not playing that Lebron ball style. Lebron's offensive load actually fell by more moving to Miami than Jordan's did with the introduction of the Triangle, so the idea that Jordan had to fit into some system and take the ball less isn't really sticking with me when you compare him to Lebron.

Fair point. Funnily enough I think Lebron displayed his best basketball self in Miami which further goes to show that you can't blindly trust these metrics. I'd argue Jordan spent more time in a system that robbed him somewhat of statistical dominance than Lebron did. Bron really only sacrificed the first three years in Miami. I thought he took his foot off the pedal that last year. It'll be interesting to see if there's slippage alongside Westbrook.

I would argue Lebron's teams malfunction because they simply weren't as good as Jordan's, but that is a philosophical point that I imagine we won't agree on. Also, I don't know how much it matters considering Lebron lead better PS offenses than Jordan ever did.

You're right - we don't agree on that. Lebron's post season dominance is surely his best case for GOAT. One could make the argument (I wouldn't) that his post season peak was either equal to or slightly above MJ which is a pretty big thorn in the side of MJ's case. I just think that once you account for how weak Lebron's playoff competition was (outside of Finals) for so many of those years and that fact that he wasn't exactly playing very hard in a bunch of those regular seasons (pretty much all of them 2014-2019) it's just not enough. It almost looks more like he figured out ways to game the numbers in his favour in certain areas whereas Mike was just playing, trying to win every night.

[falcolombardi]

.
Re Carlisle, I'm surprised you're disputing this one. Do you not agree that he gave up considerable decision making control to Luka?

Of course he did.

But your point was Lebron teams suck when he's off the court because there is no system and I guess everyone stands around like chickens with their heads cut off and farts and falls down until Lebron comes back and then they start playing again.

Then you suggested Luka's teams would be the same way. Except Luka as a 2nd year player led the best offense the league had ever seen. So either Luka was individually the best offensive player of all-time(something none of us think) or he elevates teammates AND when he is off the court one of the most controlling coaches in the league especially of every PG he ever coached save Kidd and Luka probably still has a pretty good plan for how to create offense. As evidenced by the Mavs offensive rating when Luka was off the court not completely cratering.


I don't know if you are anti-Lebron and don't really care. You are allowed to like and not like whomever you want. I'm just trying to respond to the content in your posts which have things like this:

Can we agree we probably need to give 20% of Scottie's AuPM to MJ? Given what we saw for most of their careers and looking at the off playoff numbers in 97 I think it's safe to say that when you split those guys up the value distribution becomes a lot more obvious.

I Contrast that with Lebron dominating the ball and making all the decisions. Remove him and the team can't function because it has nothing to fall back on. That's naturally going to make Lebron look a lot better and his teammates worse than reality.

Help me find a different way to describe an arbitrary Jordan bump of 20% for Pippen and an assertion that a lack of system(Which you haven't actually established fwiw) means all numbers automatically make Lebron look better and his teammates worse. I don't want to insult you. I like you as a poster. But to me this is a narrative and not one you can justify. Sorry.

curry is arguable the most valuable offensive off ball player ever and we all saw how trash the warriors offense was without him

if we took the lebron ball making teams bad without him argument we would have to be consistent with it and punish every player whose team is bad -without- and question curry if his style of play made his team dependant on him

or apply it to any player considered portable whenever their teams fall off without them

if having your team be bad without you is bad amd having them be good without you is also bad then what is supposed to be good?

like lets imagine a little exercise, if lebron heatles teams throttled along when he got injured and won playoffs series without him, was nearly as good without him playing as with him

would the narrative be that it is proof of lebron making them good or letting them conserve their playstyle? or would it be that lebron impact is questionable because his teams can be nearly as good without him

i am almost sure that if lebron teams were still great without him he would get shredded for it. so what is the aceptable result?

[Texas Chuck]

It almost looks more like he figured out ways to game the numbers in his favour in certain areas whereas Mike was just playing, trying to win every night.

Why would you put this at the end of an otherwise compelling post? Why? Do you not see how that sabotages everything else? I mean you can't possibly justify an assertion like this. Mike, the guy who when his opponent had a good half against him, would make a point of outscoring him individually in the 2nd half was only trying to win and never had any other motivations. Meanwhile Lebron drags his teams to the Finals for a decade straight, but he just lucked into that while he was busy trying to game the system to make advanced stats he may not even know exist paint him in the most favorable light?

[falcolombardi]

i also would question reducing 98 bulls sans jordan to "some defensive help"

which both underates the defensive help pippen, Harper and rodman provide (even out of their peaks) and makes it sound like the provided nothingh in offense

it would be like reducing 2016 cavs to "some offensive help"

[VanWest82]

It almost looks more like he figured out ways to game the numbers in his favour in certain areas whereas Mike was just playing, trying to win every night.

Why would you put this at the end of an otherwise compelling post? Why? Do you not see how that sabotages everything else? I mean you can't possibly justify an assertion like this. Mike, the guy who when his opponent had a good half against him, would make a point of outscoring him individually in the 2nd half was only trying to win and never had any other motivations. Meanwhile Lebron drags his teams to the Finals for a decade straight, but he just lucked into that while he was busy trying to game the system to make advanced stats he may not even know exist paint him in the most favorable light?

Lol. I do believe Lebron thinks about this stuff and I bet he's had people explain to him the kind of "pro MJ" statistical arguments like I'm making. I think Brady is the same way. We'd be naive to think these guys don't care about their place in history and probably get pretty granular to understand it.

The better way of saying it is it almost looks like Lebron figured out ways to game championship odds in his favour whereas Mike was more focused on trying to win every night as he believed the best way to win titles was to maintain dominance over people which is why he'd go nuts when someone got the best of him. Lebron has been smarter about it the last decade.

[DQuinn1575]

I don't know if you are much of a career value person, but many people on this board value all a player's seasons, and don't just look at their top 8 or so seasons.

Spoiler:

I think there is strong evidence that Lebron has accumulated more career value than Jordan and therefore, those who value longevity have good reason to believe he should be higher all-time.

For example:

Lebron is #1 in RAPTOR WAR (goes since 76-77)-https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-michael-jordan-was-the-best/

Lebron is #1 in PIPM Wins Added (since 73-74)

Lebron is #1 in VORP (since 73-74) https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/vorp_career.html

#1 All-time in the Progressive GOAT rankings https://nbamath.com/progressive-goat-rankings/

#3 All-time in winshares https://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/ws_career.html

#1 All-time in Kevn Pelton's WAR Model https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23456720/is-lebron-james-michael-jordan-greatest-nba-player-all

#1 All-time in Value Shares https://matthewmurphy1.wordpress.com/2020/06/22/417/

Perhaps more impressive than anything I named, is that he is #1 in the PS for all the metrics I just named, which matters more than anything I would argue.

Yes, Lebron has played longer, but some people simply value a player's entire career arc, and how long they were able to sustained greatness. Also note Kareem, is ahead in some of these metrics. I have a feeling you might just have a different criteria than some of us on this board. That is fine, but I just wanted to pinpoint that I believe this is where the disagreeament is coming from on who has a GOAT argument over Jordan.

You have to look at both but peak should be weighed over longevity and if there's a material difference in peak then there's almost no amount of longevity that can overcome that imo. You can't tell me that Emmitt Smith > Jim Brown, Ray Bourque > Bobby Orr, Jack Nicholas > Tiger, etc. I think you guys have missed the forest for the trees on career value.

I'm not all that familiar with AuPM (is that Ben Taylor??) but I'd have some questions there like how does it account for substitution patterns on that 97 team in particular? Can we agree we probably need to give 20% of Scottie's AuPM to MJ? Given what we saw for most of their careers and looking at the off playoff numbers in 97 I think it's safe to say that when you split those guys up the value distribution becomes a lot more obvious.

I also notice you've seemingly managed to pit two of MJ's three worst years against four of Lebron's best years. Was that intentional? I'm not quite sure what to make of that.

My point about role context also remains unaddressed. Phil brought in an actual system so the team could function when MJ didn't have the ball or when he wasn't on the floor. Naturally that's going to help the statistical case for the supporting cast. Contrast that with Lebron dominating the ball and making all the decisions. Remove him and the team can't function because it has nothing to fall back on. That's naturally going to make Lebron look a lot better and his teammates worse than reality. I'd suggest we're going to find that Luka's career plays out similarly...something to keep an eye on.

Huge difference between Nicklaus and other 2. Just huge, Smith or Borque were never even mvp of the league and neither is in Mount Rushmore of their sport.
Nicklaus won more majors than anyone, more top place finishes than anyone, etc. Nicklaus/Tiger is a true GOAT debate that Tiger would only settle if he wins more Grand Slams.
Just a bad analogy to include Nicklaus in with second level superstars.

[Cavsfansince84]

Okay this is way off-topic but since it was brought up --- I'm amused as hell this assertion that Rick Carlisle of all coaches didn't have a system to fall back on. L O L. And as I recall they 19-20 Mavs under this terrible Lukaball that prevents teammates from flourishing had the most efficient offense of all-time to date.

These anti-Lebron arguments are weak as hell considering how great some of the team numbers are, but when you try and link it to Luka and Rick Carlisle it really shows its all narrative and nothing else. And the narrative doesn't match the reality at all.

Shame we can't ever compare Lebron, the player to Mike, the player. We end up comparing Lebron, the narrative to Mike, the Myth.

That is all too often what it comes down to with Mike being the guy who hated to lose and was the ultimate competitor vs LeBron running away from the team that drafted him to form his hand picked super teams which is partly why I've given very little effort or energy into the LeBron/MJ debate all along. It just never really accomplishes anything imo.

[migya]

There's been many responses but noone has really touched on the stats and facts given in the first video, or stacked up Jordan's and Lebron's stats side by side.

I'll note some here, sure there's more, but what's relevant is quality not quantity, though very good quality in more quantity has much value also.



Career:

Jordan = 1072gms (RS) and 179gms (Playoffs)
Lebron = 1310gms (RS) and 266gms (Playoffs)


ADVANCED STATS (Regular Season and Playoffs separate)-

PER -
Jordan = 27.9 and 28.6
Lebron = 27.4

WS -
Jordan = 214 and 39.8
Lebron = 242

WS/48 -
Jordan = .250 and .255
Lebron = .232

BPM -
Jordan = 9.2 and 11.1
Lebron = 8.9

VORP -
Jordan = 116.1 and 24.7
Lebron = 137.3

Per 100 Poss -
Jordan = 118OR, 103DR and 118OR, 104DR
Lebron = 116OR, 104DR


RAW STATS (per gm) (Regular Season and Playoffs separate)-


12.2 25.1 .487 0.8 2.5 .332 11.4 22.6 .504 .503 8.2 9.9 .828 1.7 4.7 6.4 5.7 2.1 0.9 3.1 3.0 33.4


41.5 10.2 20.7 .495 1.6 4.8 .337 8.6 15.9 .543 .535 6.6 8.9 .740 1.5 7.5 9.0 7.2 1.7 0.9 3.7 2.3 28.7


Pts -
Jordan = 30.1 and 33.4
Lebron = 27.0 and 28.7

FG% -
Jordan = (11.4fgm, 22.9fga) 49.7fg% and (12.2fgm, 25.1fga) 48.7fg%
Lebron = (9.8fgm, 19.5fga) 50.4fg% and (10.2fgm, 20.7fga) 49.5fg%

FT% -
Jordan = (6.8ftm, 8.2fta) 83.5ft% and (8.2ftm, 9.9fta) 82.8ft%
Lebron = (5.8ftm, 7.9fta) 73.3ft% and (6.6ftm, 8.9fta) 74ft%

Rebs -
Jordan = (1.6oreb, 4.7dreb) 6.2reb and (1.7oreb, 4.7dreb) 6.4reb
Lebron = (1.2oreb, 6.3dreb) 7.4reb and (1.5oreb, 7.5dreb) 9reb

Ast -
Jordan = 5.3ast and 5.7ast
Lebron = 7.4ast and 7.2ast

Stl -
Jordan = 2.3stl and 2.1stl
Lebron = 1.6stl and 1.7stl

Blk -
Jordan = 0.8blk and 0.9blk
Lebron = 0.7blk and 0.9blk

TOs -
Jordan = 2.7tos and 3.1tos
Lebron = 3.5tos and 3.7tos


ACCOLADES -

Championships -
Jordan = (1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998) 6
Lebron = (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020) 4


MVP, votes and placings, age and team season record -
Jordan =
1988[0.831], 24 years old, 50-32
1991[0.928], 27 years old, 61-21
1992[0.938], 28 years old, 67-15
1996[0.986], 32 years old, 72-10
1998[]0.934), 34 years old, 62-20
Total = 5

1984-85, 0.172 (6), 21 years old, 38-44
1986-87, 0.576 (2), 23 years old, 40-42
1988-89, 0.704 (2), 25 years old, 47-35
1989-90, 0.613 (3), 26 years old, 55-27
1992-93, 0.577 (3), 29 years old, 57-25
1994-95, 0.011 (11), 31 years old, 47-35 [only played 17 games]
1996-97, 0.832 (2), 33 years old, 69-13
2001-02, 0.013 (13), 38 years old, 37-45


Lebron =
2008-09 [0.969], 24 years old, 66-16
2009-10 [0.980], 25 years old, 61-21
2011-12 [0.888], 27 years old, 46-20
2012-13 [0.998], 28 years old, 66-16
Total = 4

2003-04, 0.009 (9), 19 years old, 35-47
2004-05 0.073 (6), 20 years old, 42-40
2005-06 0.550 (2), 21 years old, 50-32
2006-07 0.142 (5), 22 years old, 50-32
2007-08 0.348 (4), 23 years old, 45-37
2010-11 0.431 (3), 26 years old, 58-24
2013-14 0.713 (2), 29 years old, 54-28
2014-15 0.425 (3), 30 years old, 53-29
2015-16 0.482 (3), 31 years old, 57-25
2016-17 0.330 (4), 32 years old, 51-31
2017-18 0.731 (2), 33 years old, 50-32
2018-19 0.001 (11), 34 years old, 37-45
2019-20 0.746 (2), 35 years old, 52-19
2020-21 0.001 (13), 36 years old, 42-30


Allnba and Defensive Teams-
Jordan =
1984-85 All-NBA (2nd)
1984-85 All-Rookie (1st)
1986-87 All-NBA (1st)
1987-88 All-Defensive (1st)
1987-88 All-NBA (1st)
1988-89 All-Defensive (1st)
1988-89 All-NBA (1st)
1989-90 All-Defensive (1st)
1989-90 All-NBA (1st)
1990-91 All-Defensive (1st)
1990-91 All-NBA (1st)
1991-92 All-Defensive (1st)
1991-92 All-NBA (1st)
1992-93 All-Defensive (1st)
1992-93 All-NBA (1st)
1995-96 All-Defensive (1st)
1995-96 All-NBA (1st)
1996-97 All-Defensive (1st)
1996-97 All-NBA (1st)
1997-98 All-Defensive (1st)
1997-98 All-NBA (1st)

Total = 10 Allnba 1st team and 1 Allnba 2nd team (as rookie), 9 Defensive 1st team

LeBron =
2003-04 All-Rookie (1st)
2004-05 All-NBA (2nd)
2005-06 All-NBA (1st)
2006-07 All-NBA (2nd)
2007-08 All-NBA (1st)
2008-09 All-Defensive (1st)
2008-09 All-NBA (1st)
2009-10 All-Defensive (1st)
2009-10 All-NBA (1st)
2010-11 All-Defensive (1st)
2010-11 All-NBA (1st)
2011-12 All-Defensive (1st)
2011-12 All-NBA (1st)
2012-13 All-Defensive (1st)
2012-13 All-NBA (1st)
2013-14 All-Defensive (2nd)
2013-14 All-NBA (1st)
2014-15 All-NBA (1st)
2015-16 All-NBA (1st)
2016-17 All-NBA (1st)
2017-18 All-NBA (1st)
2018-19 All-NBA (3rd)
2019-20 All-NBA (1st)
2020-21 All-NBA (2nd)

Total = 13 Allnba 1st team, 3 Allnba 2nd team and 1 Allnba 3rd team, 5 Defensive 1st team and 1 Defensive 2nd team


Statistical categories lead the nba -

Jordan =
Points - 10
Steals - 3

Lebron =
Points - 1
Assists - 1



By those statistics Michael Jordan looks superior, looks like the better player. People have brought up statistical information here, I admit I don't understand all of it and more importantly how some of that information was calculated and reached but the above information is straight from BBRef which most here use and are familiar with.

Would be interesting to have views on this and perhaps some information that may paint a different picture.

[Owly]

There's been many responses but noone has really touched on the stats and facts given in the first video, or stacked up Jordan's and Lebron's stats side by side.

I'll note some here, sure there's more, but what's relevant is quality not quantity, though very good quality in more quantity has much value also.



Career:

Jordan = 1072gms (RS) and 179gms (Playoffs)
Lebron = 1310gms (RS) and 266gms (Playoffs)


ADVANCED STATS (Regular Season and Playoffs separate)-

PER -
Jordan = 27.9 and 28.6
Lebron = 27.4

WS -
Jordan = 214 and 39.8
Lebron = 242

WS/48 -
Jordan = .250 and .255
Lebron = .232

BPM -
Jordan = 9.2 and 11.1
Lebron = 8.9

VORP -
Jordan = 116.1 and 24.7
Lebron = 137.3

Per 100 Poss -
Jordan = 118OR, 103DR and 118OR, 104DR
Lebron = 116OR, 104DR


RAW STATS (per gm) (Regular Season and Playoffs separate)-


12.2 25.1 .487 0.8 2.5 .332 11.4 22.6 .504 .503 8.2 9.9 .828 1.7 4.7 6.4 5.7 2.1 0.9 3.1 3.0 33.4


41.5 10.2 20.7 .495 1.6 4.8 .337 8.6 15.9 .543 .535 6.6 8.9 .740 1.5 7.5 9.0 7.2 1.7 0.9 3.7 2.3 28.7


Pts -
Jordan = 30.1 and 33.4
Lebron = 27.0 and 28.7

FG% -
Jordan = (11.4fgm, 22.9fga) 49.7fg% and (12.2fgm, 25.1fga) 48.7fg%
Lebron = (9.8fgm, 19.5fga) 50.4fg% and (10.2fgm, 20.7fga) 49.5fg%

FT% -
Jordan = (6.8ftm, 8.2fta) 83.5ft% and (8.2ftm, 9.9fta) 82.8ft%
Lebron = (5.8ftm, 7.9fta) 73.3ft% and (6.6ftm, 8.9fta) 74ft%

Rebs -
Jordan = (1.6oreb, 4.7dreb) 6.2reb and (1.7oreb, 4.7dreb) 6.4reb
Lebron = (1.2oreb, 6.3dreb) 7.4reb and (1.5oreb, 7.5dreb) 9reb

Ast -
Jordan = 5.3ast and 5.7ast
Lebron = 7.4ast and 7.2ast

Stl -
Jordan = 2.3stl and 2.1stl
Lebron = 1.6stl and 1.7stl

Blk -
Jordan = 0.8blk and 0.9blk
Lebron = 0.7blk and 0.9blk

TOs -
Jordan = 2.7tos and 3.1tos
Lebron = 3.5tos and 3.7tos


ACCOLADES -

Championships -
Jordan = (1991, 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 1998) 6
Lebron = (2012, 2013, 2016, 2020) 4


MVP, votes and placings, age and team season record -
Jordan =
1988[0.831], 24 years old, 50-32
1991[0.928], 27 years old, 61-21
1992[0.938], 28 years old, 67-15
1996[0.986], 32 years old, 72-10
1998[]0.934), 34 years old, 62-20
Total = 5

1984-85, 0.172 (6), 21 years old, 38-44
1986-87, 0.576 (2), 23 years old, 40-42
1988-89, 0.704 (2), 25 years old, 47-35
1989-90, 0.613 (3), 26 years old, 55-27
1992-93, 0.577 (3), 29 years old, 57-25
1994-95, 0.011 (11), 31 years old, 47-35 [only played 17 games]
1996-97, 0.832 (2), 33 years old, 69-13
2001-02, 0.013 (13), 38 years old, 37-45


Lebron =
2008-09 [0.969], 24 years old, 66-16
2009-10 [0.980], 25 years old, 61-21
2011-12 [0.888], 27 years old, 46-20
2012-13 [0.998], 28 years old, 66-16
Total = 4

2003-04, 0.009 (9), 19 years old, 35-47
2004-05 0.073 (6), 20 years old, 42-40
2005-06 0.550 (2), 21 years old, 50-32
2006-07 0.142 (5), 22 years old, 50-32
2007-08 0.348 (4), 23 years old, 45-37
2010-11 0.431 (3), 26 years old, 58-24
2013-14 0.713 (2), 29 years old, 54-28
2014-15 0.425 (3), 30 years old, 53-29
2015-16 0.482 (3), 31 years old, 57-25
2016-17 0.330 (4), 32 years old, 51-31
2017-18 0.731 (2), 33 years old, 50-32
2018-19 0.001 (11), 34 years old, 37-45
2019-20 0.746 (2), 35 years old, 52-19
2020-21 0.001 (13), 36 years old, 42-30


Allnba and Defensive Teams-
Jordan =
1984-85 All-NBA (2nd)
1984-85 All-Rookie (1st)
1986-87 All-NBA (1st)
1987-88 All-Defensive (1st)
1987-88 All-NBA (1st)
1988-89 All-Defensive (1st)
1988-89 All-NBA (1st)
1989-90 All-Defensive (1st)
1989-90 All-NBA (1st)
1990-91 All-Defensive (1st)
1990-91 All-NBA (1st)
1991-92 All-Defensive (1st)
1991-92 All-NBA (1st)
1992-93 All-Defensive (1st)
1992-93 All-NBA (1st)
1995-96 All-Defensive (1st)
1995-96 All-NBA (1st)
1996-97 All-Defensive (1st)
1996-97 All-NBA (1st)
1997-98 All-Defensive (1st)
1997-98 All-NBA (1st)

Total = 10 Allnba 1st team and 1 Allnba 2nd team (as rookie), 9 Defensive 1st team

LeBron =
2003-04 All-Rookie (1st)
2004-05 All-NBA (2nd)
2005-06 All-NBA (1st)
2006-07 All-NBA (2nd)
2007-08 All-NBA (1st)
2008-09 All-Defensive (1st)
2008-09 All-NBA (1st)
2009-10 All-Defensive (1st)
2009-10 All-NBA (1st)
2010-11 All-Defensive (1st)
2010-11 All-NBA (1st)
2011-12 All-Defensive (1st)
2011-12 All-NBA (1st)
2012-13 All-Defensive (1st)
2012-13 All-NBA (1st)
2013-14 All-Defensive (2nd)
2013-14 All-NBA (1st)
2014-15 All-NBA (1st)
2015-16 All-NBA (1st)
2016-17 All-NBA (1st)
2017-18 All-NBA (1st)
2018-19 All-NBA (3rd)
2019-20 All-NBA (1st)
2020-21 All-NBA (2nd)

Total = 13 Allnba 1st team, 3 Allnba 2nd team and 1 Allnba 3rd team, 5 Defensive 1st team and 1 Defensive 2nd team


Statistical categories lead the nba -

Jordan =
Points - 10
Steals - 3

Lebron =
Points - 1
Assists - 1



By those statistics Michael Jordan looks superior, looks like the better player. People have brought up statistical information here, I admit I don't understand all of it and more importantly how some of that information was calculated and reached but the above information is straight from BBRef which most here use and are familiar with.

Would be interesting to have views on this and perhaps some information that may paint a different picture.

As before many will be reluctant to watch such videos (again post 2 called them propaganda and you engaged with the post and didn't challenge that view at all).
1) Some LeBron numbers seem to be missing.

2) It is unclear why you think MJ looks superior, or how you have aggregated it etc.
For instance an interpretation of the above might be:
LeBron's 05-18 RS PER is higher than Jordan's career number and with slightly more minutes, and then everything else is gravy. Ditto BPM, whilst WS/48 becomes a tie.
Category leads mean literally nothing ((1) the numbers in that category lead go into other looks into production, (2) whether someone else on a different team playing different minutes at a different pace has 0.2 more steals or less steals than you doesn't tell you anything about the quality of your defense).
Even if you were into counting accolades (and fwiw, I think it's poor, very indirect, opinion based, often reputation and narrative-based measure), LeBron has more 1st team All-NBA (which includes both sides of the ball, and what we care about is net impact).

If you want to give a coherent, consistent process you that puts the above or any other factors together to bring you to your conclusions you might get the engagement you want with your argument.

but what's relevant is quality not quantity, though very good quality in more quantity has much value also.

Unbolded confuses the meaning here but ... focusing on the first half
This at least shows an angle you are coming from, but is only a personal preference, further emphasizing the need to be clear what exactly is being argued.

[KTM_2813]

By those statistics Michael Jordan looks superior, looks like the better player. People have brought up statistical information here, I admit I don't understand all of it and more importantly how some of that information was calculated and reached but the above information is straight from BBRef which most here use and are familiar with.

Would be interesting to have views on this and perhaps some information that may paint a different picture.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but your conclusion appears to be that Jordan is both the more accomplished player based on official NBA awards and that he has more impressive statistics per Basketball Reference. I don't think that this is an unreasonable conclusion. Actually, it's probably objectively true. However, there are some important things to consider.

[1a] The list of available NBA awards and honors was pretty much solidified in the 1970s (IIRC) and hasn't really been adjusted since then. Many people would argue that the list was lacking originally and is severely lacking now, mainly because it pretty much ignores the playoffs. If the NBA had a Ballon d'Or (Player of the Year) like soccer or a Conn Smythe (Playoff MVP) like hockey, it is possible (although ultimately unknowable) that LeBron would have eclipsed Jordan in those areas. In that case, perhaps his list of accomplishments would be more impressive. Or perhaps Jordan still wins more than LeBron and the gap only widens.

[1b] The ultimate point here has less to do with LeBron and Jordan specifically and more to do with the inherent flaws of the system. When one says "Player A has more awards than Player B and therefore Player A is greater" what one is really saying is "A handful of dudes sat down in a boardroom 50 years ago and decided on a list of official NBA awards that is not actually comprehensive enough but the league has just been rolling with it since then and Player A has more of those than Player B."

[1c] An award that didn't exist until 1969 is the Finals MVP Award. If that award had existed from the outset, then Bill Russell would likely have 6+ of them and he would be so obscenely accomplished that he would make even Jordan look cute by comparison.

[1 conclusion] To be clear, I'm not saying that awards don't matter. They do and are useful as an initial smell test. However, it's important to acknowledge that the what and when of those awards is significant. If certain awards existed earlier or existed at all, it would have a meaningful impact on the way players are perceived.

[2a] Statistics change over time. Three or four years ago, LeBron was actually the all-time leader in BPM on Basketball Reference but the formula was adjusted after Westbrook completely broke it in 2017. Now LeBron is second and Jordan is first. A similar thing happened with ESPN's RPM, which resulted in LeBron going from the league leader almost every year to almost never being the league leader. Maybe this is a good thing because the formulas are being improved over time. Or maybe it's a bad thing because the formulas are unstable and changing almost randomly. The takeaway is simply that a statistical comparison between Player A and Player B may yield different results depending on the timing of when you actually do the comparison.

[2b] There are way more advanced metrics available for LeBron than Jordan simply because of the eras in which they played. LeBron has extensive plus-minus data and therefore extensive RAPM numbers for his entire career, not to mention player tracking, whereas I believe that is only available for Jordan beginning in 1997. Per Ben Taylor, LeBron has "the best box and non-box statistical portfolio of the Databall era". It would be nice if we could compare him to Jordan but we can't because the data simply isn't available. In that case, what should we do? Do we give LeBron bonus points? Do we throw out LeBron's extensive statistical profile because Jordan doesn't have one? The only thing we know is that a true side-by-side comparison isn't really possible because Jordan's side is incomplete.

[2c] We know that one of the accuracy tests for PER, which was cited in your post, during its creation was having Jordan at number one on the list. This is something that its creator, John Hollinger, has explained on record. He didn't create the metric purely for Jordan's sake but he often tweaked it and used Jordan's top ranking as a litmus test. This doesn't necessarily mean that the metric stinks - on the contrary, I think it's a very useful metric because its pros and cons are well documented - but it's important context whenever Jordan's PER is being compared to anyone's.

[2 conclusion] Statistics are extremely useful in comparing NBA players but side-by-side comparisons without context have clear drawbacks. The most extensive statistics are not available on Basketball Reference and are generally not available for players prior to 1997 or so.