Jordan v Lebron - A civilised conversation

[VanWest82]

1998 MJ isn’t as athletic as he was during the first three peat but probably still the most athletic shooting guard. Wanting to see LeBron win with less athleticism is kinda random considering he’s not near what he was in his earlier days.

You clearly didn't watch and so I'm happy to help you here but MJ wasn't in the top 10 in wing athleticism rankings in 98. No chance. Maybe Lebron wasn't top 10 either the last couple of years but he had size/strength.

98 MJ was pretty strong too. Both of those guys lost a lot of athleticism compared to their younger days and both added a lot of skills and tricks to maintain their dominance as they aged and lost explosiveness.

Other than because of injury Lebron has never been as disadvantaged physically compared to the rest of the league as MJ was in 98 (and arguably from 95-98).

[jalengreen]

why is being physically inferior a good thing..

[TheGOATRises007]

You clearly didn't watch and so I'm happy to help you here but MJ wasn't in the top 10 in wing athleticism rankings in 98. No chance. Maybe Lebron wasn't top 10 either the last couple of years but he had size/strength.

98 MJ was pretty strong too. Both of those guys lost a lot of athleticism compared to their younger days and both added a lot of skills and tricks to maintain their dominance as they aged and lost explosiveness.

Other than because of injury Lebron has never been as disadvantaged physically compared to the rest of the league as MJ was in 98 (and arguably from 95-98).

I feel like you're underrating Jordan's athleticism in those years now.

He was no longer a GOAT caliber athlete, but he was still extremely athletic.

[LukaTheGOAT]

No. AD was the best player in the bubble and did you watch the 2018 playoffs??? Lebron dominated everyone including the Warriors (for one game) based on brute strength and athleticism. That was nothing like MJ's run in 98. Many people consider it Bron's peak.

No he didn’t. He did it with an expanded game, one that has allowed him to be in “best in the world” conversation for 12-13 years, and MVP consideration as well. He was even further athletically diminished in 2020.

As for the bubble, it was close but James was better. He was by far the best tier player and catalyst for their dominant regular season as well.

You know as well as I do that AD has the much stronger case in the bubble. Lebron was the best player in games 5 & 6 of the Finals. AD was pretty clearly the more impactful two way player before that.

2018 Lebron put up 51 on arguably a top 10 team of all time. He overpowered them. And then he punched a wall in the locker room and compromised the series. To be clear, I'm not trying to paint 2018 Lebron as some unskilled behemoth but that performance was of the "physically superior" variety. If we can't agree on that then there's not much to talk about.

Edit: MJ and Lebron both dominated the league in a physically superior kind of way. MJ did it in 98 when he wasn't that guy anymore. Lebron has yet to do that. In 2020 he was still physically dominant and AD was even more physically dominant. Bill Russell and Kareem are other good examples of guys who found a way to win when they weren't that guy anymore (though MJ was still the best player on his team; Russell and KAJ weren't).

I'm sorry but I am going to ignore you with some numbers, because saying "You know as well as I do that AD has the much stronger case in the bubble," doesn't sit right with me, when even before they won the chip, people were arguing who was the most valuable player on the Lakers in the PS.

Looking at their 2020 PS play

2020 Lebron
Inflation Adjusted 28 pts per 75, rTS% of 9.2%
AuPM/G-6
Backpicks BPM-9.37
RAPTOR-10.3
PIPM-6.5
BPM-10.6
S0ciety's metric (user on this board)-8.1


2020 AD
Inflation Adjusted 27.8 pts per 75, rTS% of 10.1%
AuPM/G-4.5
PIPM-5.9
Backpicks BPM-7.09
RAPTOR-12.5
BPM-8.7
S0ciety's metric-6.8

Those last two games two games didn't lead him to jumping ahead in many of these numbers. It is fine to say you think AD is better, but the phrasing that makes it seem like people were just picking Lebron almost because they feel bad he was getting old. A lot of these numbers match up well historically against any player there is plus-minus data of. I think it is fair to say AD scored a little better than Lebron, but I don't see how AD is far and away clear of Lebron. Lebron ran their offense and was arguably the best overall playmaker in the PS, along with being among the best scorers.

The gap between Lebron and AD in playmaking and overall creation for teammates is likely larger than the gap AD has over Lebron as a defender. Not only did Lebron lead the league in assists per game, but he was #1 in PlayVal (estimate of playmaking value) and had Ball Index‘s highest grade in playmaking for 2020. It was possibly an all-time playmaking season. Davis' offensive value largely came from 1 on 1 isolation, and him not warping defenses quite as much.

[Mos_Heat]

I respect that both sides playing all their hits

[DQuinn1575]

1998 MJ isn’t as athletic as he was during the first three peat but probably still the most athletic shooting guard. Wanting to see LeBron win with less athleticism is kinda random considering he’s not near what he was in his earlier days.

You clearly didn't watch and so I'm happy to help you here but MJ wasn't in the top 10 in wing athleticism rankings in 98. No chance. Maybe Lebron wasn't top 10 either the last couple of years but he had size/strength.

Jordan was 2nd in dunks in 98 to Eddie Jones for Shooting guards.
He was one of 3 shooting guards, along with Kerry Kittles and an older Clyde Drexler, to be in the top 10 in steals, blocks, and offensive rebounding %.
I'm not sure what you are talking about for rankings; MJ wasn't head and shoulders above virtually everybody in 98 like he was in 90, but he would still rank as an athletic player.

[falcolombardi]

another interesting thingh about 2020 is that lakers were defensively dominant in almost any combination of players, with and without lebron or davis

but their offense was heavily correlated to lebron being on court, much more than davis

plus-minus can be noisy of course, but the lakers success seemed more correlated to lebron than davis to an extent

[VanWest82]

I'm sorry but I am going to ignore you with some numbers, because saying "You know as well as I do that AD has the much stronger case in the bubble," doesn't sit right with me, when even before they won the chip, people were arguing who was the most valuable player on the Lakers in the PS.

Spoiler:

Looking at their 2021 PS play

202) Lebron
Inflation Adjusted 28 pts per 75, rTS% of 9.2%
AuPM/G-6
Backpicks BPM-9.37
RAPTOR-10.3
PIPM-6.5
BPM-10.6
S0ciety's metric (user on this board)-8.1


2020 AD
Inflation Adjusted 27.8 pts per 75, rTS% of 10.1%
AuPM/G-4.5
PIPM-5.9
Backpicks BPM-7.09
RAPTOR-12.5
BPM-8.7
S0ciety's metric-6.8

Those last two games two games didn't lead him to jumping ahead in many of these numbers. It is fine to say you think AD is better, but the phrasing that makes it seem like people were just picking Lebron almost because they feel bad he was getting old. A lot of these numbers match up well historically against any player there is plus-minus data of. I think it is fair to say AD scored a little better than Lebron, but I don't see how AD is far and away clear of Lebron. Lebron ran their offense and was arguably the best overall playmaker in the PS, along with being among the best scorers.

The gap between Lebron and AD in playmaking and overall creation for teammates is likely larger than the gap AD has over Lebron as a defender. Not only did Lebron lead the league in assists per game, but he was #1 in PlayVal (estimate of playmaking value) and had Ball Index‘s highest grade in playmaking for 2020. It was possibly an all-time playmaking season. Davis' offensive value largely came from 1 on 1 isolation, and him not warping defenses quite as much.

A bunch of flawed stats including an attempt to muddy the waters with 4-9 month old regular season data. For what, just to lawyer the other side of the argument? I have some flawed stats for you as well:

AD w/out Lebron: 114.6 ORTG, 109.7 DRTG
Lebron w/out AD: 110.9 ORTG, 110.4 DRTG

Lakers also used AD to take out every opposing star player except Butler in the Finals whom Lebron guarded and got smoked (edit: I doubled checked this and I guess AD switched onto Jimmy more than I remembered. He did better than Lebron though Butler had success against both guys).

Lebron was the better Laker in 2020 regular season but not playoffs. I don't know why we can't just admit that. There's a good discussion to be had about what that means and why it is or isn't important in debates like this.

[Owly]

another interesting thingh about 2020 is that lakers were defensively dominant in almost any combination of players, with and without lebron or davis

but their offense was heavily correlated to lebron being on court, much more than davis

plus-minus can be noisy of course, but the lakers success seemed more correlated to lebron than davis to an extent

Not necessarily absolutely incompatible with what you say but certainly casting a different impression ...

(and strong echo on the noise in such a tiny sample, with I'd imagine very little in the way of 1 on 1 off to distinguish themselves, also playoffs likely to have greater difference in opponent quality in on and especially the smaller off sample etc)

... but Davis's on-off for those playoffs leads the Lakers (+17.4), LeBron 3rd (+15.3) with Danny Green between them. A gap that small doesn't seem noteworthy (I'd say not significant, but am not using the technical term) though.

If that particular team's relevance is the title, then the playoffs should be the focus and tell a different story from the RS where LeBron does indeed have a very large advantage. (For me personally I'm very heavily tilted towards RS in player evaluation, but for recent years teams have treated it as less important and Davis does seem to save playing his best, most impactful position for the playoffs.)

Mind you this is a huge tangent to the notional topic here, I can (sort of) see the relevance of the "cast" as a whole as an awkward means of gauging impact but it's distribution seems less relevant and forcing the focus on one player seems less helpful (this at the general tangent, not specific to the quoted poster).

[LukaTheGOAT]

I'm sorry but I am going to ignore you with some numbers, because saying "You know as well as I do that AD has the much stronger case in the bubble," doesn't sit right with me, when even before they won the chip, people were arguing who was the most valuable player on the Lakers in the PS.

Spoiler:

Looking at their 2021 PS play

202) Lebron
Inflation Adjusted 28 pts per 75, rTS% of 9.2%
AuPM/G-6
Backpicks BPM-9.37
RAPTOR-10.3
PIPM-6.5
BPM-10.6
S0ciety's metric (user on this board)-8.1


2020 AD
Inflation Adjusted 27.8 pts per 75, rTS% of 10.1%
AuPM/G-4.5
PIPM-5.9
Backpicks BPM-7.09
RAPTOR-12.5
BPM-8.7
S0ciety's metric-6.8

Those last two games two games didn't lead him to jumping ahead in many of these numbers. It is fine to say you think AD is better, but the phrasing that makes it seem like people were just picking Lebron almost because they feel bad he was getting old. A lot of these numbers match up well historically against any player there is plus-minus data of. I think it is fair to say AD scored a little better than Lebron, but I don't see how AD is far and away clear of Lebron. Lebron ran their offense and was arguably the best overall playmaker in the PS, along with being among the best scorers.

The gap between Lebron and AD in playmaking and overall creation for teammates is likely larger than the gap AD has over Lebron as a defender. Not only did Lebron lead the league in assists per game, but he was #1 in PlayVal (estimate of playmaking value) and had Ball Index‘s highest grade in playmaking for 2020. It was possibly an all-time playmaking season. Davis' offensive value largely came from 1 on 1 isolation, and him not warping defenses quite as much.

A bunch of flawed stats including an attempt to muddy the waters with 4-9 month old regular season data. For what, just to lawyer the other side of the argument? I have some flawed stats for you as well:

AD w/out Lebron: 114.6 ORTG, 109.7 DRTG
Lebron w/out AD: 110.9 ORTG, 110.4 DRTG

Lakers also used AD to take out every opposing star player except Butler in the Finals whom Lebron guarded and got smoked.

Lebron was the better Laker in 2020 regular season but not playoffs. I don't know why we can't just admit that. There's a good discussion to be had about what that means and why it is or isn't important in debates like this.

I don't know what you mean by "attempt to muddy the waters with 4-9 month old regular season data."

All the numbers are the PS version of the stats. As Taylor states "Augmented Plus Minus (AuPM ), estimates value based on likely indicators by relying on a bit of regular season information. If you believe postseason basketball is wildly different than the regular season, than this stat is arguably too reliant regular season data... Regressing plus-minus data in the postseason helps most with stabilizing the off sample." But other than AuPM, no other stat I presented uses RS data. I'd appreciate you clear up this comment, otherwise, I don't appreciate the seemingly false accusations.

Just becase the stats go against your narrative, doesn't meant they aren't valuable data points. Some of thes stats are just the box-score, and others attempt to adjust for the teammates they play with other than looking at simple offensive and defensive ratings.

AD didn't guard Jamal Murray in 2020 down the stretch, that was Lebron. AD certainly didn't guard Lillard in the first round, that was a multitude of guys.

There is a great argument that AD was the best defensive player in the playoffs in 2020. I don't see anyone disputing that.

Yet you still have no explanation for Lebron rating as the best playmaker in the league in multiple metrics, as well as just simple assists

Lebron had the highest APG out of all the players to make it out the first round.

He had a 2.49 PlayVal, which was the highest of any player in the PS, and the 3rd highest mark ever (not double counting players) of players to ever make it out the first round...only Steve Nash and Magic Johnson had higher marks.

Lebron is estimated to have created 14.1 shots per 100 possessions, while AD is at 5.7 shots per 100. You don't think creating well over 2 times more shots per game for teammates matters in a team's overall offense?

If you didn't have an actual argument, other than seemingly making up stuff, you would have been better off just not responding not at all.

[VanWest82]

why is being physically inferior a good thing..

Lol. It's not other than in these silly GOAT debates where we're evaluating guys based on a bunch of different criteria to get the right answer. The "grizzled veteran star / former star who wins again even though he's not what he used to be" trope has played out in numerous sports over the years. Muhammad Ali is a good example. MJ's 98 title is another. Dirk sort of qualifies because he was such an underdog in the moment even though we could also argue 2011 was his peak. The perception that it was harder makes it more valuable.

Lebron was the best athlete in NBA in 2016 (i.e. best combination of athleticism, size, and strength). In 2020 playoffs AD was that guy so it's hard to give Lebron that credit just like it wouldn't have made sense to give MJ that credit had Scottie been the best player in 98 playoffs.

[VanWest82]

I don't know what you mean by "attempt to muddy the waters with 4-9 month old regular season data."

Your last paragraph on play making seemed to be looking at regular season. I see you've now qualified it to players who got out of the first round given both Brogdon and LeVert had higher APG numbers.

All the numbers are the PS version of the stats. As Taylor states "Augmented Plus Minus (AuPM ), estimates value based on likely indicators by relying on a bit of regular season information. If you believe postseason basketball is wildly different than the regular season, than this stat is arguably too reliant regular season data... Regressing plus-minus data in the postseason helps most with stabilizing the off sample." But other than AuPM, no other stat I presented uses RS data. I'd appreciate you clear up this comment, otherwise, I don't appreciate the seemingly false accusations.

Just becase the stats go against your narrative, doesn't meant they aren't valuable data points. Some of thes stats are just the box-score, and others attempt to adjust for the teammates they play with other than looking at simple offensive and defensive ratings.

I think all the all-in-ones are crap. None of them are accurate measures of anything. I highly doubt there's a team in the league that uses this stuff. Sometimes I check RAPTOR and EPM to get a general feel for something. Those guys are smart and they at least bake in tracking which improves the defensive numbers some but I can't agree that they're all that useful outside of speaking in generalities.

Yet you still have no explanation for Lebron rating as the best playmaker in the league in multiple metrics, as well as just simple assists

Lebron had the highest APG out of all the players to make it out the first round.

He had a 2.49 PlayVal, which was the highest of any player in the PS, and the 3rd highest mark ever (not double counting players) of players to ever make it out the first round...only Steve Nash and Magic Johnson had higher marks.

Lebron is estimated to have created 14.1 shots per 100 possessions, while AD is at 5.7 shots per 100. You don't think creating well over 2 times more shots per game for teammates matters in a team's overall offense?

If PlayVal is claiming that 2020 playoff Lebron was the best offensive creater ever I think it's safe to say we can throw it out too. He averaged 4 turnovers along with his 8 assists, and his potential assists were right in line with previous playoffs but behind some other stars in the tracking era.

But when your main target is peak Anthony Davis I think we have to be a little smarter about understanding who was actually "creating" those opportunities. Sometimes it was Lebron and sometimes it was just AD moving off ball, being athletic and playing above the rim, or carving out great position which not only led to baskets for him but also opened up opportunities for everyone. (edit: AD bumping his stats to 43/15/5 per 100 minus Lebron would seem to point in this direction).

If you didn't have an actual argument, other than seemingly making up stuff, you would have been better off just not responding not at all.

I might suggest my wowy stats are stronger evidence than anything you've presented here. At least I'm actually responding directly to your points.

[LukaTheGOAT]

I don't know what you mean by "attempt to muddy the waters with 4-9 month old regular season data."

Your last paragraph on play making seemed to be looking at regular season. I see you've now qualified it to players who got out of the first round given both Brogdon and LeVert had higher APG numbers.

All the numbers are the PS version of the stats. As Taylor states "Augmented Plus Minus (AuPM ), estimates value based on likely indicators by relying on a bit of regular season information. If you believe postseason basketball is wildly different than the regular season, than this stat is arguably too reliant regular season data... Regressing plus-minus data in the postseason helps most with stabilizing the off sample." But other than AuPM, no other stat I presented uses RS data. I'd appreciate you clear up this comment, otherwise, I don't appreciate the seemingly false accusations.

Just becase the stats go against your narrative, doesn't meant they aren't valuable data points. Some of thes stats are just the box-score, and others attempt to adjust for the teammates they play with other than looking at simple offensive and defensive ratings.

I think they're all crap. None of them are accurate measures of anything. I highly doubt there's a team in the league that uses this stuff. Sometimes I check RAPTOR and EPM to get a general feel for something. Those guys are smart and they at least bake in tracking which improves the defensive numbers some but I can't agree that they're all that useful outside of speaking in generalities.

Yet you still have no explanation for Lebron rating as the best playmaker in the league in multiple metrics, as well as just simple assists

Lebron had the highest APG out of all the players to make it out the first round.

He had a 2.49 PlayVal, which was the highest of any player in the PS, and the 3rd highest mark ever (not double counting players) of players to ever make it out the first round...only Steve Nash and Magic Johnson had higher marks.

Lebron is estimated to have created 14.1 shots per 100 possessions, while AD is at 5.7 shots per 100. You don't think creating well over 2 times more shots per game for teammates matters in a team's overall offense?

If PlayVal is claiming that 2020 playoff Lebron was the best offensive creater ever I think it's safe to say we can throw it out too. He averaged 4 turnovers along with his 8 assists, and his potential assists were right in line with previous playoffs but behind some other stars in the tracking era.

But when your main target is peak Anthony Davis I think we have to be a little smarter about understanding who was "creating" that opportunity. Sometimes it was Lebron and sometimes it was just AD moving off ball, being athletic and playing above the rim, or carving out great position.

If you didn't have an actual argument, other than seemingly making up stuff, you would have been better off just not responding not at all.

I might suggest my wowy stats are stronger evidence than anything you've presented here. At least I'm actually responding to your points.

You didn't address the difference in their shot creation, until this post, so no you really didn't answer my point. Your WOWY is a glimpse into the Lakers situation. It is noteworthy, but I don't know if that really beats the metrics I provided, that attempt to adjust for teammate combinations, especially when they are typically not as stable indicators in a small sample size such as the ones I provided.

How much teams value these NBA metrics, of course depends on the front office- https://hoopshype.com/lists/advanced-stats-nba-real-plus-minus-rapm-win-shares-analytics/

The whole point of my post was to say that Lebron has an argument for the best PS, and there is plenty of stuff to suggest it. You just made up arguments to suggest there is nothing noteworthy or no possible argument for Lebron being the best in the PS.

You say these stats are pointless, yet Taylor Snarr has worked for NBA teams. Jacob Goldstein, the creator of PIPM, now works for the Washington Wizards. No one is saying you have to take these numbers at face value, but when they are all pointing towards a similar conclusion, it at least is worth inspecting why.

You saying everyone is delusional for coming to a conclusion that is backed by stats is odd.

[sansterre]

Does LeBron playing in a generally weak conference actually matter that much?

Absolutely. It is paramount.

Lebron played in one of the weakest/most imbalanced conference ever, statistically speaking, for 16 years.

During those 16 years, his teams had a .695 winning percentage (637-279) in his career. They had a .601 winning percentage against the Western Conference (280-186).

That's a magnitude of difference. It's the difference. It's the difference between a 49 win team and a 57 win team, every year.

This is very, very similar to the 1960's disparity and the 1980's disparity in division/conference strength.

1960-1969, the East won 59.8% of their games against the West. That's a difference of 50 vs. 40 regular season wins, per year.

1980-1989, the East won 55.3% of their total games against the West.

So yes, these things are crucial. They matter a TON.

LeBron playing in a really weak conference for a decade is definitely a thing. But how significant is it?

If somebody is saying "LeBron is clearly the best because his teams made the Finals so many times", the East being weak is very relevant. Not many people make that argument.

If somebody says "LeBron is clearly the best because look at his team's records over his career" then it's clearly relevant, because the record is likely inflated.

If somebody says "LeBron is clearly the best because of his counting stats in the postseason" then this is somewhat relevant, because in a tougher conference he'd have been knocked out earlier more often which would have diminished his stats. This probably wouldn't swing the numbers by more than 5-10%, but it's still a consideration.

In a weird way, it almost hurts him. After all, a common anti-LeBron argument is the 3-6 Finals record when playing in the East. But, of course, it wasn't that hard for LeBron to make the Finals with an only pretty good team, because his conference sucked. Which meant that it was easy to get into the Finals and get pummeled by a dominant team from the West. If he'd played in a tougher conference, it's easy to imagine that his teams in 2007, 2014 and 2018 simply wouldn't have made the Finals. In which case his Finals record magically becomes 4-3 over his career which, to some (for reasons I don't understand) might actually make his resume better.

Imagine if there were no Pistons in '89 and '90. And Jordan magically pulled those two weak supporting casts (both +2 RSRS) into the Finals through sheer freaking magic. And his team immediately gets whipped by the Lakers and Blazers who, while not historically great, were definitely better than the '89 and '90 Bulls*. Now Jordan doesn't have a perfect Finals record, now he's 6-2. Has his resume improved because his team made the Finals two more times? Definitely not in the mainstream, though again, the people that think this way make no sense to me. I'm just saying; playing in a weak conference has weird downsides that you might not guess.

*And yes, the '89 Lakers are a bad example because of the injury to Magic. But you get my point.

[VanWest82]

You didn't address the difference in their shot creation, until this post, so no you really didn't answer my point.

Right because it looked like you were talking about regular season given Lebron didn't lead the playoffs in APG.

Your WOWY is a glimpse into the Lakers situation. It is noteworthy, but I don't know if that really beats the metrics I provided, that attempt to adjust for teammate combinations, especially when they are typically not as stable indicators in a small sample size such as the ones I provided.

How much teams value these NBA metrics, of course depends on the front office- https://hoopshype.com/lists/advanced-stats-nba-real-plus-minus-rapm-win-shares-analytics/

The whole point of my post was to say that Lebron has an argument for the best PS, and there is plenty of stuff to suggest it. You just made up arguments to suggest there is nothing noteworthy or no possible argument for Lebron being the best in the PS.

You say these stats are pointless, yet Taylor Snarr has worked for NBA teams. Jacob Goldstein, the creator of PIPM, now works for the Washington Wizards. No one is saying you have to take these numbers at face value, but when they are all pointing towards a similar conclusion, it at least is worth inspecting why.

You saying everyone is delusional for coming to a conclusion that is backed by stats is odd.

We can use good stats to say just about anything let alone bad ones. It doesn't make it a good argument.

For some reason I thought you had said recently that AD was better in the bubble. My bad.

Sorry, I just can't see Wizards making roster decisions based on PIPM. That'd be super funny though.

Here's my strongest argument for AD (which you're going to hate): eye test. AD expended so much more energy than Lebron with what he gave on both ends that I just don't think there's a great argument for Lebron even taking into account lopsided advantages in play making and leadership (hasn't been mentioned but I think it's an important check in his corner). The wowy numbers match my eye test. I don't get how anyone could've watched those playoffs and come away thinking they put in similar levels of work. Lebron's case seems overly reliant on flawed statistics that tilt toward offense. I know that's not very sophisticated but I don't see a great way to measure total expended energy.

[falcolombardi]

Does LeBron playing in a generally weak conference actually matter that much?

Absolutely. It is paramount.

Lebron played in one of the weakest/most imbalanced conference ever, statistically speaking, for 16 years.

During those 16 years, his teams had a .695 winning percentage (637-279) in his career. They had a .601 winning percentage against the Western Conference (280-186).

That's a magnitude of difference. It's the difference. It's the difference between a 49 win team and a 57 win team, every year.

This is very, very similar to the 1960's disparity and the 1980's disparity in division/conference strength.

1960-1969, the East won 59.8% of their games against the West. That's a difference of 50 vs. 40 regular season wins, per year.

1980-1989, the East won 55.3% of their total games against the West.

So yes, these things are crucial. They matter a TON.

LeBron playing in a really weak conference for a decade is definitely a thing. But how significant is it?

If somebody is saying "LeBron is clearly the best because his teams made the Finals so many times", the East being weak is very relevant. Not many people make that argument.

If somebody says "LeBron is clearly the best because look at his team's records over his career" then it's clearly relevant, because the record is likely inflated.

If somebody says "LeBron is clearly the best because of his counting stats in the postseason" then this is somewhat relevant, because in a tougher conference he'd have been knocked out earlier more often which would have diminished his stats. This probably wouldn't swing the numbers by more than 5-10%, but it's still a consideration.

In a weird way, it almost hurts him. After all, a common anti-LeBron argument is the 3-6 Finals record when playing in the East. But, of course, it wasn't that hard for LeBron to make the Finals with an only pretty good team, because his conference sucked. Which meant that it was easy to get into the Finals and get pummeled by a dominant team from the West. If he'd played in a tougher conference, it's easy to imagine that his teams in 2007, 2014 and 2018 simply wouldn't have made the Finals. In which case his Finals record magically becomes 4-3 over his career which, to some (for reasons I don't understand) might actually make his resume better.

Imagine if there were no Pistons in '89 and '90. And Jordan magically pulled those two weak supporting casts (both +2 RSRS) into the Finals through sheer freaking magic. And his team immediately gets whipped by the Lakers and Blazers who, while not historically great, were definitely better than the '89 and '90 Bulls*. Now Jordan doesn't have a perfect Finals record, now he's 6-2. Has his resume improved because his team made the Finals two more times? Definitely not in the mainstream, though again, the people that think this way make no sense to me. I'm just saying; playing in a weak conference has weird downsides that you might not guess.

*And yes, the '89 Lakers are a bad example because of the injury to Magic. But you get my point.

i always like to trial things against "if he didnt play or lost earlier would he be looked at better?"

for example, lebron finals record would look better if he lost to boston/ indiana in 2018, to detroit in 2007 or to pacers in 2014

the losing record in the finals becomes a situation where he is punished for winning more

other examples

draymond green was a worse defensive player in 2021 than gobert, gobert struggled relatively speaking in the playoffs but draymond didnt even play them

even if we completely believe draymond defense would have held better in the playoffs, would it make sense to reward him for a hypothetical like that in a season comparision ?

any situation where not playing/losing benefits a player legacy or valuatión has to be met with skepticism

[LukaTheGOAT]

You didn't address the difference in their shot creation, until this post, so no you really didn't answer my point.

Right because it looked like you were talking about regular season given Lebron didn't lead the playoffs in APG.

Your WOWY is a glimpse into the Lakers situation. It is noteworthy, but I don't know if that really beats the metrics I provided, that attempt to adjust for teammate combinations, especially when they are typically not as stable indicators in a small sample size such as the ones I provided.

How much teams value these NBA metrics, of course depends on the front office- https://hoopshype.com/lists/advanced-stats-nba-real-plus-minus-rapm-win-shares-analytics/

The whole point of my post was to say that Lebron has an argument for the best PS, and there is plenty of stuff to suggest it. You just made up arguments to suggest there is nothing noteworthy or no possible argument for Lebron being the best in the PS.

You say these stats are pointless, yet Taylor Snarr has worked for NBA teams. Jacob Goldstein, the creator of PIPM, now works for the Washington Wizards. No one is saying you have to take these numbers at face value, but when they are all pointing towards a similar conclusion, it at least is worth inspecting why.

You saying everyone is delusional for coming to a conclusion that is backed by stats is odd.

We can use good stats to say just about anything let alone bad ones. It doesn't make it a good argument.

For some reason I thought you had said recently that AD was better in the bubble. My bad.

Sorry, I just can't see Wizards making roster decisions based on PIPM. That'd be super funny though.

Here's my strongest argument for AD (which you're going to hate): eye test. AD expended so much more energy than Lebron with what he gave on both ends that I just don't think there's a great argument for Lebron even taking into account lopsided advantages in play making and leadership (hasn't been mentioned but I think it's an important check in his corner). The wowy numbers match my eye test. I don't get how anyone could've watched those playoffs and come away thinking they put in similar levels of work. Lebron's case seems overly reliant on flawed statistics that tilt toward offense. I know that's not very sophisticated but I don't see a great way to measure total expended energy.

" I don't get how anyone could've watched those playoffs and come away thinking they put in similar levels of work"

Offensive Load (Estimate of the number of plays a player is “directly involved” in on offense every 100 possessions.)

LBJ-54.1
AD-39.4

Because when you then consider their responsibilities on defense, they probably did have similar levels of work...But alright, I'll let it rest.

[LukaTheGOAT]

You didn't address the difference in their shot creation, until this post, so no you really didn't answer my point.

Right because it looked like you were talking about regular season given Lebron didn't lead the playoffs in APG.

Your WOWY is a glimpse into the Lakers situation. It is noteworthy, but I don't know if that really beats the metrics I provided, that attempt to adjust for teammate combinations, especially when they are typically not as stable indicators in a small sample size such as the ones I provided.

How much teams value these NBA metrics, of course depends on the front office- https://hoopshype.com/lists/advanced-stats-nba-real-plus-minus-rapm-win-shares-analytics/

The whole point of my post was to say that Lebron has an argument for the best PS, and there is plenty of stuff to suggest it. You just made up arguments to suggest there is nothing noteworthy or no possible argument for Lebron being the best in the PS.

You say these stats are pointless, yet Taylor Snarr has worked for NBA teams. Jacob Goldstein, the creator of PIPM, now works for the Washington Wizards. No one is saying you have to take these numbers at face value, but when they are all pointing towards a similar conclusion, it at least is worth inspecting why.

You saying everyone is delusional for coming to a conclusion that is backed by stats is odd.

We can use good stats to say just about anything let alone bad ones. It doesn't make it a good argument.

For some reason I thought you had said recently that AD was better in the bubble. My bad.

Sorry, I just can't see Wizards making roster decisions based on PIPM. That'd be super funny though.

Here's my strongest argument for AD (which you're going to hate): eye test. AD expended so much more energy than Lebron with what he gave on both ends that I just don't think there's a great argument for Lebron even taking into account lopsided advantages in play making and leadership (hasn't been mentioned but I think it's an important check in his corner). The wowy numbers match my eye test. I don't get how anyone could've watched those playoffs and come away thinking they put in similar levels of work. Lebron's case seems overly reliant on flawed statistics that tilt toward offense. I know that's not very sophisticated but I don't see a great way to measure total expended energy.

" I don't get how anyone could've watched those playoffs and come away thinking they put in similar levels of work"

Offensive Load (Estimate of the number of plays a player is “directly involved” in on offense every 100 possessions.)

LBJ-54.1
AD-39.4

Taking in their responsibilities defensively, they probably did have similar levels of work...But alright, I'll let it rest.

[VanWest82]

" I don't get how anyone could've watched those playoffs and come away thinking they put in similar levels of work"

Offensive Load (Estimate of the number of plays a player is “directly involved” in on offense every 100 possessions.)

LBJ-54.1
AD-39.4

Because when you then consider their responsibilities on defense, they probably did have similar levels of work...But alright, I'll let it rest.

What was Rip Hamilton's offensive load for the mid 00s Pistons based on your formula?

Believe it or not I'm a numbers guy too and I love that NBA has made so much available to us for free. Their website is a stats guy's dream come true but unless you're trying to answer simple questions...I feel like you're trolling me, no?? lol

I did check the speed and distance numbers FWIW and they're similar so I suppose that's an X against my theory. But looking at who they each guarded and add in all the screens and shoving matches and shot deterrents it gets lopsided pretty quick.

[LukaTheGOAT]

" I don't get how anyone could've watched those playoffs and come away thinking they put in similar levels of work"

Offensive Load (Estimate of the number of plays a player is “directly involved” in on offense every 100 possessions.)

LBJ-54.1
AD-39.4

Because when you then consider their responsibilities on defense, they probably did have similar levels of work...But alright, I'll let it rest.

What was Rip Hamilton's offensive load for the mid 00s Pistons based on your formula?

Believe it or not I'm a numbers guy too and I love that NBA has made so much available to us for free. Their website is a stats guy's dream come true but unless you're trying to answer simple questions...I feel like you're trolling me, no?? lol

I did check the speed and distance numbers FWIW and they're similar so I suppose that's an X against my theory. But looking at who they each guarded and add in all the screens and shoving matches and shot deterrents it gets lopsided pretty quick.

What is there to troll about? I didn't think it was contentious to suggest LBJ had to do a lot more offensively for the Lakers, while AD captained the defense.

It is clear that many of the people here view the game a bit differently than yourself, so most likely, we aren't go to reach a conclusion other than that we can't agree because of the level of belief in many of the stats we have. Nevermind. Just please, don't act like some of these conclusions are unfounded. There is a difference between you not accepting the numbers and "people just saying Lebron was better just because."