Jordan v Lebron - A civilised conversation

[The4thHorseman]

You can't seriously look at his numbers in the 95' ECSF and say he was rusty and out of shape. Like a another poster pointed out on page 8, he avg. close to the same in 96-98 playoffs as he did in the 95 playoffs.

How many other players have there been who retired after winning league MVP and FMVP? There's no such thing as a retirement age. The body and mind tells you when it's time, not an age.

Jordan in the playoffs in '95 was really good, but a +5.8 OBPM is actually the lowest of his whole career (+7.6 his rookie year was #2). And in the regular season his OBPM was closer to his first year with the Wizards than his next worst year (1985).

I think that there were advantages to taking the time off (especially mentally).

But I don't think you can look at those numbers and not appreciate that he was not at 100% in 1995.

This narrative that MJ was helped out physically by playing baseball needs to die. Both MJ and Tim Grover have gone on the record numerous times stating that he was materially hurt by switching to a baseball training regiment. He'd have been better off sticking with basketball and maintaining/building up those muscle groups.

So you think it's harder physically to be an outfielder in minor league baseball than making deep playoff runs in the NBA?

Baseball causes more wear and tear on the body?

[sansterre]

My argument is that Lebron's additional longevity brings relatively little value in the context of the GOAT debate. Let's just say that Lebron's first three years (2004, 2005, 2006) vs. Jordan's rookie year plus two Wizards years (1985, 2002, 2003) are a wash. Let's say 2019 and 2021 for Lebron vs. Jordan's 1986 and 1995 are a wash as well. Lebron did more in the regular season and Jordan had much better playoffs. Anyways that leaves 2007, 2008 and 2011 as that additional longevity, something Lebron gave on top of Jordan. Are those three top 5 level seasons enough to push Lebron over Jordan when Jordan's prime was significantly better, when MJ won more titles, more MVP's...? No way in my opinion.

Anyways a similar longevity analysis can be made with Jordan vs. Kareem. Funny enough, few people are willing to roll with Kareem even though I would strongly argue that Kareem's top 10 seasons are better than Lebron's top 10.

I think a lot of the discussion seems to stem from standards of consideration.

It seems like you feel (and please correct me if I'm misrepresenting you) that for GOAT consideration each season needs to be itself representative of a GOAT-level of performance. That a year as the #8 player in the league is of pretty much no value because nothing about that year would make you think "that player is the GOAT". Accordingly, it seems like your heuristic is "look at career value, but anything below a Top 75 season ever doesn't even count". It's like Value Over Replacement Player, but the cutoff is *way* higher. And by this standard, I think Jordan has a very strong case.

I, and most Career Value people, tend to simply think in terms of odds of winning a championship. GOAT-level seasons (like '91 Jordan) usually end up winning a championship (in the modern era) around 30% of the time. Really damned good seasons ('17 Durant, '87 Bird, '89 Magic) win about 20% of the time. Strong seasons ('19 Gobert, '74 Havlicek, '94 Reggie Miller, '89 Stockton) win around 10% of the time (I'm just pulling these off of backpicks.com's CORP evaluations, I'm not particularly wedded to these specific examples). To someone on this train the name of the game is probable rings, so four seasons at '94 Reggie Miller's level are more desirable than one season at '91 Jordan's level. And by this method, LeBron comes out fairly ahead of Jordan, as does Kareem (according to Ben Taylor's calculations, which are clearly not perfect).

Ultimately, I think the real source of disagreement is the baseline method. If you're interested in increased championship odds, LeBron has a very competitive argument. If you're looking at seasons evocative of GOATness, Jordan's fairly hard to beat.

[VanWest82]

Jordan in the playoffs in '95 was really good, but a +5.8 OBPM is actually the lowest of his whole career (+7.6 his rookie year was #2). And in the regular season his OBPM was closer to his first year with the Wizards than his next worst year (1985).

I think that there were advantages to taking the time off (especially mentally).

But I don't think you can look at those numbers and not appreciate that he was not at 100% in 1995.

This narrative that MJ was helped out physically by playing baseball needs to die. Both MJ and Tim Grover have gone on the record numerous times stating that he was materially hurt by switching to a baseball training regiment. He'd have been better off sticking with basketball and maintaining/building up those muscle groups.

So you think it's harder physically to be an outfielder in minor league baseball than making deep playoff runs in the NBA?

Baseball causes more wear and tear on the body?

I think when you start getting older it becomes impossible to get back everything you've lost once it's lost. This is why avoiding injuries becomes so important for older players. But again, don't take my word for it (or even MJ's), listen to Tim Grover. Listen to the countless professional sports trainers talk about this subject. There isn't really a debate here among the medical community.

FWIW I do think MJ benefitted mentally from the break just not physically where it basically killed young MJ forever and for always.

[falcolombardi]

I'm talking about seasons where the players in question aren't even the best players in the league and not even strong MVP candidates or they have terrible postseasons.. Half of Lebron's career namely 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2019 and 2021. For Jordan we can say 2002 and 2003.

Truthfully, I think this angle does a disservice to Jordan.

Jordan loses out on '85, '86 (injury), '94, '95 and obviously 2002 and 2003. So that leaves 1987-1993 and 1996-1998. Ten seasons.

I don't think LeBron's 2004-06 enters into an MVP discussion.

2007 is not quite so clear-cut. He finished #2 in RAPM but played considerably more minutes than the #1 (Duncan) and way more minutes than the #3 (Ginobili) and led the league in VORP by a solid margin. He didn't win the MVP but he probably should have. And his playoffs were pretty strong, averaging a 25/8/8 and a +8.1 BPM. His postseason was a mixed bag: he had a monster series against the Pistons (averaging a +11 BPM for the series and dragging his +3.3 SRS team into the Finals where they definitely didn't belong). But he also had a really bad series against the Spurs, where he had to do way too much against a way better (and smarter) team.

I think 2007 is an obvious MVP candidate season. And his playoffs weren't as strong as they'd be later (+5.7 OBPM is unusually low for playoff LeBron) but I don't really hold the Finals against him too much. His Cavs had zero business being matched up against the '07 Spurs. And the Cavs actually kept it close, only losing by 6 points a game. So, for me, I have no problem counting this as a "strong MVP candidate with a non-terrible postseason" but I can understand if you don't.

And here we are again in 2008. LeBron leads the league in VORP, leads the league in ESPN RPM Wins and while he finishes in the second tier in RAPM (it was KG, then a drop with LeBron, Duncan, Manu, Kobe, Nash and Dirk all together) he played more minutes than the others so, again, I think he's comfortably in "strong MVP candidate" territory. And in the playoffs LeBron puts together a +10 BPM and takes the eventual champion Celtics (one of the best defenses ever) to seven games, averaging above a +8 BPM and leading his Cavs to outscore the Celtics over the series, coming considerably closer to beating them than the Lakers did. 2008 meets your criteria easily.

You've already granted 2009.

In 2010 LeBron was the MVP by a mile; he led the league in every meaningful metric by a considerable margin. In the playoffs he put up an eye-bleeding +11.5 BPM and a +9 BPM against the defending champion Celtics. I don't for a second buy this as a "terrible" playoffs. Sure he had an awful Game 5, but he had two separate games over +20 BPM and had a +9.5 in Game 6. Yeah yeah, he looked "listless" in Game 5, but his overall series (against an ATG-level defense) was excellent. And he was the best player in the league by far. This gets in for me.

2011. LeBron leads the league in VORP, finishes a close second in ESPN's RPM (to Dwight Howard) and finishes a ways behind Dirk in RAPM (though LeBron played enough more minutes that it was close). Certainly a strong MVP case. LeBron's playoffs were really good (+7.1 BPM), but Wade was better and LeBron averages a mere +2 BPM against the Mavs in the Finals. While I don't think this was a "terrible" playoffs, I'm happy to ignore this season for these purposes.

You've conceded 2012-2018 and 2020.

I won't argue 2019.

2021? There's no real case for MVP there. His per-minute stats were certainly competitive, but his minutes were so low that it simply wasn't a thing. And in the playoffs, against the eventual champion of the West, he averaged a +9.2 BPM, certainly excellent. But I don't think he had an MVP case so we're not counting that.

So you've acknowledged nine seasons at this level. 2008 and 2010 seem like they aught to be in. I'll ignore 2007. So where Jordan has ten seasons at this level, LeBron has eleven. Plus more seasons at a sub-GOAT level (adding value). I don't actually think this approach makes Jordan look good. Even if you gave Jordan credit for an MVP-level season in 1985 (I'm not quite there) they'd still be tied, and LeBron has way more seasons to add value than Jordan at that point. Saying "who has the most MVP-level strong-playoff seasons" hurts Jordan, because it makes those seasons sound equivalent, and LeBron has a ton of them.

You're better off sticking to what I think is the stronger argument, that Jordan's best ten seasons were better than LeBron's best ten seasons (which I personally think they were). It doesn't invalidate the Career Value argument, but that was going to be uphill anyways.

But I think ignoring 2008 and 2010 isn't reasonable (both were MVP-level seasons or better and both were strong playoffs).

Good post. Those assessments are reasonable although I'm a fair bit lower on 2008 and 2010 Lebron than you are. He struggled mightily against the Celtics in both of those playoffs.

Jordan's ten best seasons are better than Lebron's ten best seasons. I'm glad we agree on that. The top 10 Lebron seasons are 2009-2020 (minus 2011 and 2019) and the top 10 Jordan seasons are 1987-1998 (minus 1995). And I don't think any season of Lebron except 2009 is close to Jordan's six best seasons which are 1988-1993.

My argument is that Lebron's additional longevity brings relatively little value in the context of the GOAT debate. Let's just say that Lebron's first three years (2004, 2005, 2006) vs. Jordan's rookie year plus two Wizards years (1985, 2002, 2003) are a wash. Let's say 2019 and 2021 for Lebron vs. Jordan's 1986 and 1995 are a wash as well. Lebron did more in the regular season and Jordan had much better playoffs. Anyways that leaves 2007, 2008 and 2011 as that additional longevity, something Lebron gave on top of Jordan. Are those three top 5 level seasons enough to push Lebron over Jordan when Jordan's prime was significantly better, when MJ won more titles, more MVP's...? No way in my opinion.

Anyways a similar longevity analysis can be made with Jordan vs. Kareem. Funny enough, few people are willing to roll with Kareem even though I would strongly argue that Kareem's top 10 seasons are better than Lebron's top 10.

the bolded is a lot more debatable that you make it out to be imo, for many the Gap in value between both is fairly small. enough that even if jordan has a slight gap it doesnt overcome the value of 3-4 extra mvp level seasons (fwiw i dont even think jordan peak is higher but that is a controversial opinion) i dont see any reasonable gap being big enough

2009 that you mebtion as the only lebron season in oar with jordan peak is not even the most common pick for lebron best season, 2012, 2013 and to smaller extent 2016/17 usually are in the mix alongside 2009

[falcolombardi]

lebron may not be telling marc where to stay but he may be doing it to schroeder, or javale or even caruso, players with worse basketball iq or much less experience

More like Marc was telling his PnR partners where to be or Dwight the year before. You have a team full of high defensive IQ communicators. Giving Lebron the lion's share of the credit for that isn't accurate or fair to the other guys involved.

and no, the best outcome of off ball and help defense is not putting yourself in position to block or steal shots

that can easily become block or steal hunting which leads to blown bys, fouls, open shots after passing etc

It can and it can also lead disrupting more plays, missed shots, turnovers, etc. There's a balance.

the idea of defense is to not allow the shot in the first place, being in the right place to make the offensive player abort the play or not find any openings as the shot clock is ending,

rotating off ball to a player who otherwise would be getting open for a easy 3 and by doing that stopping the pass to him altogether is not somethingh that appears as activity in defended field goals despite being more valuable

If you're consistently rotating over and deterring things from happening it should follow that you're also then putting yourself in position to block and contest more shots, deflect more passes, take more charges, create more havoc, etc. The idea that Lebron is mostly deterring things from happening but doesn't do the other stuff is illogical, and again, not supported when we look at the tape or tracking stats to compare his active games (post season) from his less active games (regular season).

overating defensive activity is how Marcus Camby won a dpoy over duncan by blocking more shots

It's unclear Duncan should have won DPOY in 07. Seems to me Bruce Bowen had a lot to do with that team's defense. I might've picked Ben Wallace though Bowen and Battier had good cases too. I'd love to see everyone's defensive on/offs. Tricky year.

or how players like Cooper, alvin roberson or even jordan and gary payton won dpoys over more deserving big men

I'm not a fan of this kind of generalization. Cooper and Robertson were arguably weak winners. Eaton and Hakeem definitely deserved recognition. But I also think Moncrief deserved the votes he got in 86. MJ absolutely deserved to be in the discussion in 88 and Payton deserved it 96. These awards are about individual success combined with team success, which is how it should be.

their great steal totals and being seen consisntently defending on ball are more impressive visually that a big man dissuading attempt at the rim with just positioning and size

Good big men actually contest shots though. Lebron doesn't. He's apparently only capable of dissuading attempts which doesn't even make sense. I guess he's the only example of this in the history of the league.

i am not giving the líon share of credit, just defending those thinghs are real and not made up. communication and positioning (yourself or other players) are part of defensive impact

lebron in defense is a 4 who plays a free safety role, he is not gonna be blockinh shots as often like a big nor is he gonna be defending on ball often as he is not put in the opposite teams ballhandlers, you are right there

doesnt mean that a role like that doesnt add value, ut definitely adds a factor of dissuation compared to a smaller wing
the small ball versatility of having a wing player who can play like a small power forward in defense is also very underated since it helps the offense without safcrificing too much rebounding, size or rim protection

i already agree with you that lebron spends more Energy in playoffs and is a better defensive player there so i am not sure what the disagrement there is, i see lakers lebron as a good defensive player who ramps it to very good in postseason, not much differently than i see second threepeat jordan

post miami he coasts defensively to varying degrees in regular season like practically all older players or high offensive load players do and saves Energy for playoffs.

jordan himself didnt have the same Energy for defense in the 80's as in the late 90's nor was he always on the opposite team ballhandler/star spending Energy or fouls in defense, that much i think we could agree on

players usually come into the league, specially now thst they come younger, with great athletism but lacking in experience and reads as well as with bodys not fully Developed (2004~2006 lebron, 84-87~ jordan before bulking up, etc) they peak defensively in their mid to late 20's and start gradually declining in their 30's

jordan in his peak (88-93) vs lebron in his defensive peak (09-13) are comparable although i like lebron more for the versatility as a 4

before that both were more flawed defensive players in spite of their athletism

since then lebron has had a mixed gag of seasons defensively with some stickers (2018) but in years like 2016 or 2020 has still (for me, you of course may ser it differently) had comparable or better defensive impact to second three peat jordan

[DCasey91]

Ok... If Jordan actually had these blemishes than you bet people would discuss them. However you are speculating that he would have these struggles. Considering that rookie Jordan had basically no trouble against a very strong defense Bucks, I don't see why it's a given that one year or two years younger MJ would struggle against strong defenses. He might have struggled but this hypothetical is just that; a hypothetical... And likewise after 1998. The notion that MJ would fall from best in the world to suddenly top 5 level is hypothetical. He might or he might remain as the best player for 2-3 more seasons. We don't know what would have happened...

And besides Lebron had these blemishes in the middle of his prime too

.. 2010, 2011, 2019... It would be like Jordan laying an egg in 1992 or something. It simply never happened.

The bottom line is that Lebron's longevity edge doesn't seem that big when you consider that about half of his seasons are worse than Jordan's worst Bulls' seasons and that Jordan's six year peak from 1988-1993 is better than any version of Lebron.

In what world do we consider a 16yr player still in his prime, regardless of the sport??

You don't think MJ walking away from the game "in his prime" didn't help him mentally and physically when he decided to return 22mos. later? He said himself he was gassed even before the 93 Finals was over. Him walking away in his prime is definitely a blemish as is after 1998. Strange that a player who was MVP and FMVP would walk away again after only 3 consecutive seasons, but we both know that Phil and Scottie were leaving and MJ had no chance to defende the Bulls title in 99'

Three or four months off every year is alot of time off. Jordan was rusty and out of shape when he returned in 95.He performed cost to his usual level in the playoffs. After 98 he was at retirement age.

Lebron taking games off in this load management farce is having a less load every year.

See another thing that I want to point out here very very clearly.

Was he rusty in 95? I don’t hold it against MJ but I do hold it against his fans not accepting the once again double standard.

Was there a huge difference between MJ 95-96? No there isn’t check the stats if you must.

MJ lost in 95’ (Poster mentioned Grant not being that great well Magic had Grant... Bull didn’t have Rodman, then Rodman went ham in 96 of course, Grant injured on the Magic in 96).

So here it is:

MJ 95 - It’s a testament to his greatness to be even to play at this absurd level

But he lost?

No he was rusty and getting back into shape. Okay what about 96 then? Ah yes more match fit.

But in 95 he was putting up MVP numbers? Doesn’t matter was rusty doesn’t count.

You can’t have a civilized discussion between the two because both sides can’t admit flawed logic lol.

Flip the scenario to Lebron. The narrative would be a lot worse

Which player is more heavily scrutinized? Pretty clear to me. Micro hammered at every opportunity

Now let’s go back pre 91

So fans want to admit the media’s certain L word tag to Mj as it was to LBJ?

Now look at the media today. Those things in the past would be brought up so much more in any of these discussions but they barely do.

It’s called narrative.

Lebron is literally the last player to talk about longevity. He is going to trounce everybody on quality bar Kareem and is certainly right there already.

He already has a case now per value at the greatest ever accrued. And he hasn’t even started the Duncan/Garnett/Kareem/Wilt backend transition. He was the best player in the 2020 finals ffs.

MJ burned the candles at both ends. You have about 11.5 seasons to work off from as his body of work.

At some point in time you can rightfully question MJ’s longevity.... it’s 11.5 seasons!

Is it just me or is there fallacies in both paragraphs.

[The4thHorseman]

This narrative that MJ was helped out physically by playing baseball needs to die. Both MJ and Tim Grover have gone on the record numerous times stating that he was materially hurt by switching to a baseball training regiment. He'd have been better off sticking with basketball and maintaining/building up those muscle groups.

So you think it's harder physically to be an outfielder in minor league baseball than making deep playoff runs in the NBA?

Baseball causes more wear and tear on the body?

I think when you start getting older it becomes impossible to get back everything you've lost once it's lost. This is why avoiding injuries becomes so important for older players. But again, don't take my word for it (or even MJ's), listen to Tim Grover. Listen to the countless professional sports trainers talk about this subject. There isn't really a debate here among the medical community.

FWIW I do think MJ benefitted mentally from the break just not physically where it basically killed young MJ forever and for always.

Does eye test suggest that baseball training was severely detrimental to MJ's NBA game when he returned?

If so, what clearly stood out when he was on the court that was so noticeable?

[DCasey91]

Three or four months off every year is alot of time off. Jordan was rusty and out of shape when he returned in 95.He performed cost to his usual level in the playoffs. After 98 he was at retirement age.

Lebron taking games off in this load management farce is having a less load every year.

MJ put up 55pts his 5th game back against the number 1 defense in the league NYK. The talk after that was how he hadn't missed a beat after being off for 22mos. Only when they lost in the ECSF is when people like you did a 180 and said he was rusty etc..etc..

You can't seriously look at his numbers in the 95' ECSF and say he was rusty and out of shape. Like a another poster pointed out on page 8, he avg. close to the same in 96-98 playoffs as he did in the 95 playoffs.

How many other players have there been who retired after winning league MVP and FMVP? There's no such thing as a retirement age. The body and mind tells you when it's time, not an age.

99 jordan would be equivalent in age to 2021 lebron (and with much less ganes in his legs too) and we all saw how much criticism lebron got for that season despite him and his team dealing with injuries

basically it would saying that anythingh after 2020 should be extra credit for lebron career

otherwise if 36years one lebron can be criticized for not winning how much more can 36 years jordan be criticized for not playing?

Jordan doesn’t get criticized a lot from what I’ve accounted consistently.

I agree about Jordan playing in 99’ though it was a weaker run to the chip, that has to be taken into account, but the fact is we have no data on it.

Lebron gets unfair criticism. A lot of people somehow gut him for the 2019 season when he was injured then literally last season in 21 when he was injured again. His team was firmly in the box seat both times lol 2019 big no on winning but 2021? Finals sure I can buy that with both fit.

[Homer38]

Longevity is now so underrated by some, especially when it comes to the MVP caliber year like LeBron in 2006-2008,2010 and 2020 ... I mean it's very hard to be so dominant for so long and to make the first all-nba team almost every year for around 15 years in the years that he was healthy,we cannot penalize a player who has been great for so long ....

Rather,he deserves so much credit for that,especially he make the finals for so many years, so he had a very short offseason every of his years,so less rest.

[DCasey91]

Truthfully, I think this angle does a disservice to Jordan.

Jordan loses out on '85, '86 (injury), '94, '95 and obviously 2002 and 2003. So that leaves 1987-1993 and 1996-1998. Ten seasons.

I don't think LeBron's 2004-06 enters into an MVP discussion.

2007 is not quite so clear-cut. He finished #2 in RAPM but played considerably more minutes than the #1 (Duncan) and way more minutes than the #3 (Ginobili) and led the league in VORP by a solid margin. He didn't win the MVP but he probably should have. And his playoffs were pretty strong, averaging a 25/8/8 and a +8.1 BPM. His postseason was a mixed bag: he had a monster series against the Pistons (averaging a +11 BPM for the series and dragging his +3.3 SRS team into the Finals where they definitely didn't belong). But he also had a really bad series against the Spurs, where he had to do way too much against a way better (and smarter) team.

I think 2007 is an obvious MVP candidate season. And his playoffs weren't as strong as they'd be later (+5.7 OBPM is unusually low for playoff LeBron) but I don't really hold the Finals against him too much. His Cavs had zero business being matched up against the '07 Spurs. And the Cavs actually kept it close, only losing by 6 points a game. So, for me, I have no problem counting this as a "strong MVP candidate with a non-terrible postseason" but I can understand if you don't.

And here we are again in 2008. LeBron leads the league in VORP, leads the league in ESPN RPM Wins and while he finishes in the second tier in RAPM (it was KG, then a drop with LeBron, Duncan, Manu, Kobe, Nash and Dirk all together) he played more minutes than the others so, again, I think he's comfortably in "strong MVP candidate" territory. And in the playoffs LeBron puts together a +10 BPM and takes the eventual champion Celtics (one of the best defenses ever) to seven games, averaging above a +8 BPM and leading his Cavs to outscore the Celtics over the series, coming considerably closer to beating them than the Lakers did. 2008 meets your criteria easily.

You've already granted 2009.

In 2010 LeBron was the MVP by a mile; he led the league in every meaningful metric by a considerable margin. In the playoffs he put up an eye-bleeding +11.5 BPM and a +9 BPM against the defending champion Celtics. I don't for a second buy this as a "terrible" playoffs. Sure he had an awful Game 5, but he had two separate games over +20 BPM and had a +9.5 in Game 6. Yeah yeah, he looked "listless" in Game 5, but his overall series (against an ATG-level defense) was excellent. And he was the best player in the league by far. This gets in for me.

2011. LeBron leads the league in VORP, finishes a close second in ESPN's RPM (to Dwight Howard) and finishes a ways behind Dirk in RAPM (though LeBron played enough more minutes that it was close). Certainly a strong MVP case. LeBron's playoffs were really good (+7.1 BPM), but Wade was better and LeBron averages a mere +2 BPM against the Mavs in the Finals. While I don't think this was a "terrible" playoffs, I'm happy to ignore this season for these purposes.

You've conceded 2012-2018 and 2020.

I won't argue 2019.

2021? There's no real case for MVP there. His per-minute stats were certainly competitive, but his minutes were so low that it simply wasn't a thing. And in the playoffs, against the eventual champion of the West, he averaged a +9.2 BPM, certainly excellent. But I don't think he had an MVP case so we're not counting that.

So you've acknowledged nine seasons at this level. 2008 and 2010 seem like they aught to be in. I'll ignore 2007. So where Jordan has ten seasons at this level, LeBron has eleven. Plus more seasons at a sub-GOAT level (adding value). I don't actually think this approach makes Jordan look good. Even if you gave Jordan credit for an MVP-level season in 1985 (I'm not quite there) they'd still be tied, and LeBron has way more seasons to add value than Jordan at that point. Saying "who has the most MVP-level strong-playoff seasons" hurts Jordan, because it makes those seasons sound equivalent, and LeBron has a ton of them.

You're better off sticking to what I think is the stronger argument, that Jordan's best ten seasons were better than LeBron's best ten seasons (which I personally think they were). It doesn't invalidate the Career Value argument, but that was going to be uphill anyways.

But I think ignoring 2008 and 2010 isn't reasonable (both were MVP-level seasons or better and both were strong playoffs).

Good post. Those assessments are reasonable although I'm a fair bit lower on 2008 and 2010 Lebron than you are. He struggled mightily against the Celtics in both of those playoffs.

Jordan's ten best seasons are better than Lebron's ten best seasons. I'm glad we agree on that. The top 10 Lebron seasons are 2009-2020 (minus 2011 and 2019) and the top 10 Jordan seasons are 1987-1998 (minus 1995). And I don't think any season of Lebron except 2009 is close to Jordan's six best seasons which are 1988-1993.

My argument is that Lebron's additional longevity brings relatively little value in the context of the GOAT debate. Let's just say that Lebron's first three years (2004, 2005, 2006) vs. Jordan's rookie year plus two Wizards years (1985, 2002, 2003) are a wash. Let's say 2019 and 2021 for Lebron vs. Jordan's 1986 and 1995 are a wash as well. Lebron did more in the regular season and Jordan had much better playoffs. Anyways that leaves 2007, 2008 and 2011 as that additional longevity, something Lebron gave on top of Jordan. Are those three top 5 level seasons enough to push Lebron over Jordan when Jordan's prime was significantly better, when MJ won more titles, more MVP's...? No way in my opinion.

Anyways a similar longevity analysis can be made with Jordan vs. Kareem. Funny enough, few people are willing to roll with Kareem even though I would strongly argue that Kareem's top 10 seasons are better than Lebron's top 10.

the bolded is a lot more debatable that you make it out to be imo, for many the Gap in value between both is fairly small. enough that even if jordan has a slight gap it doesnt overcome the value of 3-4 extra mvp level seasons (fwiw i dont even think jordan peak is higher but that is a controversial opinion) i dont see any reasonable gap being big enough

2009 that you mebtion as the only lebron season in oar with jordan peak is not even the most common pick for lebron best season, 2012, 2013 and to smaller extent 2016/17 usually are in the mix alongside 2009

Bolded part I’d be really interested to see how you came to this conclusion. I like your thorough thinking on both sides to this. Is there a method to the madness?

It’s a bold statement to make but if anyone can sway me it’s you lol

I have Jordan’s peak as higher than LBJ’s though LBJ’s accrued career value is getting too much to ignore.

Call a spade a spade but LBJ has a serious total career value edge over MJ that’s shouldn’t be overlooked. These are MVP seasons of play that some posters so easily dismiss which is astounding to me.

[jalengreen]

the bolded is a lot more debatable that you make it out to be imo, for many the Gap in value between both is fairly small. enough that even if jordan has a slight gap it doesnt overcome the value of 3-4 extra mvp level seasons (fwiw i dont even think jordan peak is higher but that is a controversial opinion) i dont see any reasonable gap being big enough

2009 that you mebtion as the only lebron season in oar with jordan peak is not even the most common pick for lebron best season, 2012, 2013 and to smaller extent 2016/17 usually are in the mix alongside 2009

Bolded part I’d be really interested to see how you came to this conclusion. I like your thorough thinking on both sides to this. Is there a method to the madness?

It’s a bold statement to make but if anyone can sway me it’s you lol

I have Jordan’s peak as higher than LBJ’s though LBJ’s accrued career value is getting too much to ignore.

Call a spade a spade but LBJ has a serious total career value edge over MJ that’s shouldn’t be overlooked. These are MVP seasons of play that some posters so easily dismiss which is astounding to me.

I don't think it's a crazy take if you're high on LeBron's defensive value over Jordan's. While Jordan certainly has the edge as an individual scorer, I also don't think it's crazy to prefer LeBron's blend of all-time great scoring & playmaking.

I think it's quite close between the two in terms of peak - I'm not confident in which one I'd take. But ofc when you factor in longevity/total career value.. it becomes more one-sided IMO

[VanWest82]

So you think it's harder physically to be an outfielder in minor league baseball than making deep playoff runs in the NBA?

Baseball causes more wear and tear on the body?

I think when you start getting older it becomes impossible to get back everything you've lost once it's lost. This is why avoiding injuries becomes so important for older players. But again, don't take my word for it (or even MJ's), listen to Tim Grover. Listen to the countless professional sports trainers talk about this subject. There isn't really a debate here among the medical community.

FWIW I do think MJ benefitted mentally from the break just not physically where it basically killed young MJ forever and for always.

Does eye test suggest that baseball training was severely detrimental to MJ's NBA game when he returned?

If so, what clearly stood out when he was on the court that was so noticeable?

Yes certainly you only need eye test to tell the difference imo. The fact that he could no longer just beat guys off the dribble and get to the rim whenever he wanted was a pretty big red flag. Everything looked harder; more jumps off two legs, more jump shots period.

But then MJ went into the lab that summer and emerged with the GOAT postgame so it all worked out in the end.

[DCasey91]

Longevity is now so underrated by some, especially when it comes to the MVP caliber year like LeBron in 2006-2008,2010 and 2020 ... I mean it's very hard to be so dominant for so long and to make the first all-nba team almost every year for around 15 years in the years that he was healthy,we cannot penalize a player who has been great for so long ....

Rather,he deserves so much credit for that,especially he make the finals for so many years, so he had a very short offseason every of his years,so less rest.

It’s the reason I have 4 GOAT standard (5 recently with Russell but his case I can’t get past 2x Finals with sub 10 ppg his overdrive on defense doesn’t make up for his sub par offensive play to me fwiw) players.

Winning - Russell/MJ
Peak - Wilt/MJ
Longevity - Kareem/LBJ

(All of them peaked at a GOAT level and won multiple times).

Kind of like paper, scissors, rock. At some point in NBA history they were GOAT standard for a large enough period of time to draw information from.

This isn’t like other sports where there is a clear undisputed and that’s that. It’s not clear to me as there isn’t a humungous galaxy’s wide outlier (unless your talking about Wilt then fair enough).

For me it’s fair to say if you gave them the same team each with players that have the same production on metric/stats per age the results and outcome would be very similar.

[Djoker]

My argument is that Lebron's additional longevity brings relatively little value in the context of the GOAT debate. Let's just say that Lebron's first three years (2004, 2005, 2006) vs. Jordan's rookie year plus two Wizards years (1985, 2002, 2003) are a wash. Let's say 2019 and 2021 for Lebron vs. Jordan's 1986 and 1995 are a wash as well. Lebron did more in the regular season and Jordan had much better playoffs. Anyways that leaves 2007, 2008 and 2011 as that additional longevity, something Lebron gave on top of Jordan. Are those three top 5 level seasons enough to push Lebron over Jordan when Jordan's prime was significantly better, when MJ won more titles, more MVP's...? No way in my opinion.

Anyways a similar longevity analysis can be made with Jordan vs. Kareem. Funny enough, few people are willing to roll with Kareem even though I would strongly argue that Kareem's top 10 seasons are better than Lebron's top 10.

I think a lot of the discussion seems to stem from standards of consideration.

It seems like you feel (and please correct me if I'm misrepresenting you) that for GOAT consideration each season needs to be itself representative of a GOAT-level of performance. That a year as the #8 player in the league is of pretty much no value because nothing about that year would make you think "that player is the GOAT". Accordingly, it seems like your heuristic is "look at career value, but anything below a Top 75 season ever doesn't even count". It's like Value Over Replacement Player, but the cutoff is *way* higher. And by this standard, I think Jordan has a very strong case.

I, and most Career Value people, tend to simply think in terms of odds of winning a championship. GOAT-level seasons (like '91 Jordan) usually end up winning a championship (in the modern era) around 30% of the time. Really damned good seasons ('17 Durant, '87 Bird, '89 Magic) win about 20% of the time. Strong seasons ('19 Gobert, '74 Havlicek, '94 Reggie Miller, '89 Stockton) win around 10% of the time (I'm just pulling these off of backpicks.com's CORP evaluations, I'm not particularly wedded to these specific examples). To someone on this train the name of the game is probable rings, so four seasons at '94 Reggie Miller's level are more desirable than one season at '91 Jordan's level. And by this method, LeBron comes out fairly ahead of Jordan, as does Kareem (according to Ben Taylor's calculations, which are clearly not perfect).

Ultimately, I think the real source of disagreement is the baseline method. If you're interested in increased championship odds, LeBron has a very competitive argument. If you're looking at seasons evocative of GOATness, Jordan's fairly hard to beat.

I do indeed have a problem with the Career Value approach. For example you said that four 94 Reggie Miller seasons are better than one 91 Michael Jordan season. That completely ignores the issue of scarcity. It's relatively easy for a team to find a player on Reggie Miller's level and have him for four years. After all there may have been 200 or so players in NBA history that were all-stars/top 20 players for four seasons. It's extremely difficult to find a player of peak Michael Jordan's level for even one season. Extremely high level players are valuable because they are scarce. Not to mention that when constructing a real team, salary cap is a factor as well. Would you rather give peak Michael Jordan a maximum contract or a mere all-star like Reggie Miller a max contract or near max contract because that's what it usually comes down to? Reggie Miller isn't good enough to lead a team to a championship about but he eats the same.

Thus I believe the Career Value people are using a flawed methodology. A 30% CORP season is a lot more than three times as valuable as three 10% CORP seasons. I love Ben Taylor's analyses but I completely disagree with how he approaches player rankings. Maybe if he developed a new formula where CORP scaled in a more progressive way towards higher CORP seasons I could get behind it...

Seasons evocative of GOATness isn't a bad way of representing my way of looking at it.

[falcolombardi]

I think when you start getting older it becomes impossible to get back everything you've lost once it's lost. This is why avoiding injuries becomes so important for older players. But again, don't take my word for it (or even MJ's), listen to Tim Grover. Listen to the countless professional sports trainers talk about this subject. There isn't really a debate here among the medical community.

FWIW I do think MJ benefitted mentally from the break just not physically where it basically killed young MJ forever and for always.

Does eye test suggest that baseball training was severely detrimental to MJ's NBA game when he returned?

If so, what clearly stood out when he was on the court that was so noticeable?

Yes certainly you only need eye test to tell the difference imo. The fact that he could no longer just beat guys off the dribble and get to the rim whenever he wanted was a pretty big red flag. Everything looked harder; more jumps off two legs, more jump shots period.

But then MJ went into the lab that summer and emerged with the GOAT postgame so it all worked out in the end.

wouldnt that be the natural loss of explosivity of a player who goes into his 30's?

if you told me baseball messed up jordan in some way i easily would believe it, but i would expect it to be somethingh related to his upper body muscles amd ligaments, maybe affect his jumpshot by changing his upper body muscles

not his explosivity or first step which is a natural loss with aging

[Cavsfansince84]

I think when you start getting older it becomes impossible to get back everything you've lost once it's lost. This is why avoiding injuries becomes so important for older players. But again, don't take my word for it (or even MJ's), listen to Tim Grover. Listen to the countless professional sports trainers talk about this subject. There isn't really a debate here among the medical community.

FWIW I do think MJ benefitted mentally from the break just not physically where it basically killed young MJ forever and for always.

I agree in the sense that it killed his peak level of play and I don't think he ever got his conditioning fully back(still well conditioned by nba standards just not prime MJ level). Also agree that he absolutely needed it mentally and physically to some degree. So on one hand he lost his top end ability but on the other it may have allowed him to play in his mid 30's without breaking down physically the way he might have without it. Just because there is a certain degree of grind that comes into play when athletes do something at a world class level year after year after year.

[VanWest82]

Does eye test suggest that baseball training was severely detrimental to MJ's NBA game when he returned?

If so, what clearly stood out when he was on the court that was so noticeable?

Yes certainly you only need eye test to tell the difference imo. The fact that he could no longer just beat guys off the dribble and get to the rim whenever he wanted was a pretty big red flag. Everything looked harder; more jumps off two legs, more jump shots period.

But then MJ went into the lab that summer and emerged with the GOAT postgame so it all worked out in the end.

wouldnt that be the natural loss of explosivity of a player who goes into his 30's?

if you told me baseball messed up jordan in some way i easily would believe it, but i would expect it to be somethingh related to his upper body muscles amd ligaments, maybe affect his jumpshot by changing his upper body muscles

not his explosivity or first step which is a natural loss with aging

The movements and things you work on as a baseball player are different from that as a basketball player. I agree with your comment about upper body which is more important in basketball. But the bigger loss was in his legs where he went 1.5 years not jumping, squatting, cutting, exploding with the ball. Basketball players do things like split squat jumps, lateral skater and heel slide, line hops,etc. They work with weights. Instead he was working primarily on his swing and flexibility. Some of it might've been due to natural aging but once you lose that lifelong muscle build up in your legs it's not coming back past a certain age, not all the way anyway. Baseball training definitely hurt him beyond whatever he lost due to age.

[falcolombardi]

My argument is that Lebron's additional longevity brings relatively little value in the context of the GOAT debate. Let's just say that Lebron's first three years (2004, 2005, 2006) vs. Jordan's rookie year plus two Wizards years (1985, 2002, 2003) are a wash. Let's say 2019 and 2021 for Lebron vs. Jordan's 1986 and 1995 are a wash as well. Lebron did more in the regular season and Jordan had much better playoffs. Anyways that leaves 2007, 2008 and 2011 as that additional longevity, something Lebron gave on top of Jordan. Are those three top 5 level seasons enough to push Lebron over Jordan when Jordan's prime was significantly better, when MJ won more titles, more MVP's...? No way in my opinion.

Anyways a similar longevity analysis can be made with Jordan vs. Kareem. Funny enough, few people are willing to roll with Kareem even though I would strongly argue that Kareem's top 10 seasons are better than Lebron's top 10.

I think a lot of the discussion seems to stem from standards of consideration.

It seems like you feel (and please correct me if I'm misrepresenting you) that for GOAT consideration each season needs to be itself representative of a GOAT-level of performance. That a year as the #8 player in the league is of pretty much no value because nothing about that year would make you think "that player is the GOAT". Accordingly, it seems like your heuristic is "look at career value, but anything below a Top 75 season ever doesn't even count". It's like Value Over Replacement Player, but the cutoff is *way* higher. And by this standard, I think Jordan has a very strong case.

I, and most Career Value people, tend to simply think in terms of odds of winning a championship. GOAT-level seasons (like '91 Jordan) usually end up winning a championship (in the modern era) around 30% of the time. Really damned good seasons ('17 Durant, '87 Bird, '89 Magic) win about 20% of the time. Strong seasons ('19 Gobert, '74 Havlicek, '94 Reggie Miller, '89 Stockton) win around 10% of the time (I'm just pulling these off of backpicks.com's CORP evaluations, I'm not particularly wedded to these specific examples). To someone on this train the name of the game is probable rings, so four seasons at '94 Reggie Miller's level are more desirable than one season at '91 Jordan's level. And by this method, LeBron comes out fairly ahead of Jordan, as does Kareem (according to Ben Taylor's calculations, which are clearly not perfect).

Ultimately, I think the real source of disagreement is the baseline method. If you're interested in increased championship odds, LeBron has a very competitive argument. If you're looking at seasons evocative of GOATness, Jordan's fairly hard to beat.

I do indeed have a problem with the Career Value approach. For example you said that four 94 Reggie Miller seasons are better than one 91 Michael Jordan season. That completely ignores the issue of scarcity. It's relatively easy for a team to find a player on Reggie Miller's level and have him for four years. After all there may have been 200 or so players in NBA history that were all-stars/top 20 players for four seasons. It's extremely difficult to find a player of peak Michael Jordan's level for even one season. Extremely high level players are valuable because they are scarce. Not to mention that when constructing a real team, salary cap is a factor as well. Would you rather give peak Michael Jordan a maximum contract or a mere all-star like Reggie Miller a max contract or near max contract because that's what it usually comes down to? Reggie Miller isn't good enough to lead a team to a championship about but he eats the same.

Thus I believe the Career Value people are using a flawed methodology. A 30% CORP season is a lot more than three times as valuable as three 10% CORP seasons. I love Ben Taylor's analyses but I completely disagree with how he approaches player rankings. Maybe if he developed a new formula where CORP scaled in a more progressive way towards higher CORP seasons I could get behind it...

Seasons evocative of GOATness isn't a bad way of representing my way of looking at it.

i think hr already does that to an extent when giving those championship odds, he has a table somewhere in his site about it about how a superexponential curve and a completely linear Curve would look like in comparision

the superexponential curve i think gets jordan a lot closer to the top but still not quite there

as for your point...it depends, someone in the top 100 Project made a Extreme comparision about your point

it was imagining bill walton switching places with horace grant, where both team would get worse (portland doesnt win their ring, bulls destroy the league in 91 but may Miss 92 or 93 instead as they lose walton and are missing horace

your reggie miller vs jordan is a good example too, imagine bulls had jordan for only until 91 amd he retired afterwards for whatever reason, lets say health problems and he gave them "only" 1 ring

while Miller was with them from 91-94 amd they won 1 ring too and a few conference finals or finals Ein

under that Extreme difference Miller 4 years with bulls would arguably be more valuable than jordan 1

that is a fairly Extreme example, but so is comparing a jordan vs lebron Gap to a jordan vs Miller Gap

with lebron your comparision would be a lot less extreme in both the longevity and peak ends

more like "ok, i think jordan 10 best seasons are better than lebron 10 best by x amount, do these 4 other "mere" mvp level seasons enough to close that gap?"

[DCasey91]

My argument is that Lebron's additional longevity brings relatively little value in the context of the GOAT debate. Let's just say that Lebron's first three years (2004, 2005, 2006) vs. Jordan's rookie year plus two Wizards years (1985, 2002, 2003) are a wash. Let's say 2019 and 2021 for Lebron vs. Jordan's 1986 and 1995 are a wash as well. Lebron did more in the regular season and Jordan had much better playoffs. Anyways that leaves 2007, 2008 and 2011 as that additional longevity, something Lebron gave on top of Jordan. Are those three top 5 level seasons enough to push Lebron over Jordan when Jordan's prime was significantly better, when MJ won more titles, more MVP's...? No way in my opinion.

Anyways a similar longevity analysis can be made with Jordan vs. Kareem. Funny enough, few people are willing to roll with Kareem even though I would strongly argue that Kareem's top 10 seasons are better than Lebron's top 10.

I think a lot of the discussion seems to stem from standards of consideration.

It seems like you feel (and please correct me if I'm misrepresenting you) that for GOAT consideration each season needs to be itself representative of a GOAT-level of performance. That a year as the #8 player in the league is of pretty much no value because nothing about that year would make you think "that player is the GOAT". Accordingly, it seems like your heuristic is "look at career value, but anything below a Top 75 season ever doesn't even count". It's like Value Over Replacement Player, but the cutoff is *way* higher. And by this standard, I think Jordan has a very strong case.

I, and most Career Value people, tend to simply think in terms of odds of winning a championship. GOAT-level seasons (like '91 Jordan) usually end up winning a championship (in the modern era) around 30% of the time. Really damned good seasons ('17 Durant, '87 Bird, '89 Magic) win about 20% of the time. Strong seasons ('19 Gobert, '74 Havlicek, '94 Reggie Miller, '89 Stockton) win around 10% of the time (I'm just pulling these off of backpicks.com's CORP evaluations, I'm not particularly wedded to these specific examples). To someone on this train the name of the game is probable rings, so four seasons at '94 Reggie Miller's level are more desirable than one season at '91 Jordan's level. And by this method, LeBron comes out fairly ahead of Jordan, as does Kareem (according to Ben Taylor's calculations, which are clearly not perfect).

Ultimately, I think the real source of disagreement is the baseline method. If you're interested in increased championship odds, LeBron has a very competitive argument. If you're looking at seasons evocative of GOATness, Jordan's fairly hard to beat.

I do indeed have a problem with the Career Value approach. For example you said that four 94 Reggie Miller seasons are better than one 91 Michael Jordan season. That completely ignores the issue of scarcity. It's relatively easy for a team to find a player on Reggie Miller's level and have him for four years. After all there may have been 200 or so players in NBA history that were all-stars/top 20 players for four seasons. It's extremely difficult to find a player of peak Michael Jordan's level for even one season. Extremely high level players are valuable because they are scarce. Not to mention that when constructing a real team, salary cap is a factor as well. Would you rather give peak Michael Jordan a maximum contract or a mere all-star like Reggie Miller a max contract or near max contract because that's what it usually comes down to? Reggie Miller isn't good enough to lead a team to a championship about but he eats the same.

Thus I believe the Career Value people are using a flawed methodology. A 30% CORP season is a lot more than three times as valuable as three 10% CORP seasons. I love Ben Taylor's analyses but I completely disagree with how he approaches player rankings. Maybe if he developed a new formula where CORP scaled in a more progressive way towards higher CORP seasons I could get behind it...

Seasons evocative of GOATness isn't a bad way of representing my way of looking at it.

That’s one thing I put separately in my est.

Actually getting the best player on a championship team is a lot rarer and much more valuable than a player that wouldn’t be if we are being completely honest and clear. That is intrinsic value add in itself based on rarity as you say.

More players have All/Stars All NBA’s but less have MVP’s, multiple MVP’s and GOAT like seasons.

That top shelf player actually begins the conversation of championship winning %’s...without that player the championship %’s never begins at all. So trying to put chip equity est. to someone like Gobert is a fruitless exercise personally.

In regards to LBJ it’s much different because he most certainly is that prequalified and definite A++ tier championship equity player which are the most valuable and rarest to get bar none.

There is flaws In Taylor’s examination but having Kareem/LBJ grade out as the GOAT doesn’t seem far fetched.

Having extremely high chip equity in LBJ’s case for let’s say 15 seasons should be admired and not ostracized.

[falcolombardi]

Good post. Those assessments are reasonable although I'm a fair bit lower on 2008 and 2010 Lebron than you are. He struggled mightily against the Celtics in both of those playoffs.

Jordan's ten best seasons are better than Lebron's ten best seasons. I'm glad we agree on that. The top 10 Lebron seasons are 2009-2020 (minus 2011 and 2019) and the top 10 Jordan seasons are 1987-1998 (minus 1995). And I don't think any season of Lebron except 2009 is close to Jordan's six best seasons which are 1988-1993.

My argument is that Lebron's additional longevity brings relatively little value in the context of the GOAT debate. Let's just say that Lebron's first three years (2004, 2005, 2006) vs. Jordan's rookie year plus two Wizards years (1985, 2002, 2003) are a wash. Let's say 2019 and 2021 for Lebron vs. Jordan's 1986 and 1995 are a wash as well. Lebron did more in the regular season and Jordan had much better playoffs. Anyways that leaves 2007, 2008 and 2011 as that additional longevity, something Lebron gave on top of Jordan. Are those three top 5 level seasons enough to push Lebron over Jordan when Jordan's prime was significantly better, when MJ won more titles, more MVP's...? No way in my opinion.

Anyways a similar longevity analysis can be made with Jordan vs. Kareem. Funny enough, few people are willing to roll with Kareem even though I would strongly argue that Kareem's top 10 seasons are better than Lebron's top 10.

the bolded is a lot more debatable that you make it out to be imo, for many the Gap in value between both is fairly small. enough that even if jordan has a slight gap it doesnt overcome the value of 3-4 extra mvp level seasons (fwiw i dont even think jordan peak is higher but that is a controversial opinion) i dont see any reasonable gap being big enough

2009 that you mebtion as the only lebron season in oar with jordan peak is not even the most common pick for lebron best season, 2012, 2013 and to smaller extent 2016/17 usually are in the mix alongside 2009

Bolded part I’d be really interested to see how you came to this conclusion. I like your thorough thinking on both sides to this. Is there a method to the madness?

It’s a bold statement to make but if anyone can sway me it’s you lol

I have Jordan’s peak as higher than LBJ’s though LBJ’s accrued career value is getting too much to ignore.

Call a spade a spade but LBJ has a serious total career value edge over MJ that’s shouldn’t be overlooked. These are MVP seasons of play that some posters so easily dismiss which is astounding to me.

mostly i see lebron as the player with the (slightly) higher highs and (less slightly admiteddly) lower lows in his prime/healthy seasons

i think his best defense (2009-2013) is a bit better than jordan best defense, and for me his best offense (16,17, maybe 14 or 09 but i wouldnt fight too strongly about those last two) is a bit better than jordan best offense

lebron however has also the lowest lows in either a series (2011 finals, maybe 2010 vs boston) or a season (2018 defensively)

when his offense and defense, and reg and post season are both there at the same time i think he is as good as jordan if not a bit better, and i think it happened in 09 (Albeit thanks in part to flukey jumpshooting which some people "punish" ) 12, 13 which i think are just as good as 89-90-91 jordan overall (usual picks for jordan peak)

if we relax the standards for regular season and focus on playoffs more thoroughly which i often do to an extent i would tell you his 16/17 playoffs qualify too

basically lebron offense had a higher grade of variance in his 20's than jordan in his 20's which is why there ja a mich more noticiable offensive drop from 09 to 11 compared with 88 to 90

tldr, lebron is more inconsistent as a overall player in both sides of the court for a multitude of reasons (streak junpshooting early in his prime, health some years, constant role changes, etc) but thanks to a longer career he has collected enough "goat level" years to Match jordan

his best years are more scattered but i dont think they lose in quantity/quality, or not by anythingh but a really small degree, to jordan more continous peak in the late 80's/early 90's

were the question "best -continuous- stretch" i would give it to jordan