Jordan v Lebron - A civilised conversation

[twyzted]

regular season defensive rating, i couldnt find their allowed true shooting so i used def rating as a proxy (1%ts as aproximate to 2% in defensive rating)

if you have the full exact numbers i would love to see them

Ahh ok thank you.
But seattle had 102.1 drtg league avg was 107.6 wouldnt that be a diffrence of 5.5?

I just went and googled: calculate ts% found this site then found on bbref how many pts, fga and fta teams got vs sonics in the playoffs
Which are 1947 pts, 1626fga and 585fta = 51.69ts%*

*Im not trying to make a fool or any bad intensions with this explaination.

checked it out and you are right i made a mistake there, thanks a lot for catching it

this improves jordan true shooting a bit from my original calc

i would still stand for my point tho, 2010 lebron has nearly idéntical scoring volume/efficiency with more assists than 96 jordan making both fairly comparable series

I cant really argue against you on this. Its a fair assesment imo. Not that i was doing it with my question

[Djoker]

I can't believe we are really discussing comparisons of Lebron in 2010 against the Celtics and Jordan in 1996 against the Sonics. It's quite frankly ridiculous. Lebron took a 2-1 lead and then quit in that series while LOSING. Jordan took a 3-0 lead and then had a couple of bad shooting games and still WON the series. In what universe are those two similar? Lebron showed mental weakness and Jordan showed nothing of that sort.

As VanWest82 said, pre-2012 Lebron didn't even look necessarily capable of leading a team to a championship. That's not the GOAT standard. That's why seasons like 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 do close to nothing for Lebron as far as furthering his GOAT case. This is a guy who couldn't shoot outside of 3 feet, had no post game, and was mentally fragile coming apart in big moments. That last point literally made him the antithesis of Jordan.

so both started winning, took their foot off the gas then struggled later as the other team adapted but jordan had better teammates so he avoided defeat?

was 2 defeats not enough to wake up jordan? he still was limited in game 6 which was definitely not "leave your foot off the gas" time

Lebron QUIT in that series. He showed DEFEATIST body language. His team LOST.

Jordan just SHOT POORLY. He showed COMPETITIVE body language. His team WON.

I can't believe I have to spell it out.

Besides if Jordan putting up 27.3/5.3/4.2 on -0.8 rTS with 3.0 topg while playing good defense too in a series win against a 64-win team... is the worst series he ever had; then that clearly shows that this debate was never a debate to begin with.

MJ had black marks too. He played mediocre vs. the 1997 Hawks. That series doesn't look much different than LeBron vs the Celtics in 2010.

Jordan vs 97 Hawks: 27/10/5, .506 TS%, 21 Game Score
LeBron vs 10 Celtics: 27/9/7, .556 TS%, 22 Game Score

What about MJ's series vs the Heat in 1997? In a 5 game series he had 3 bad shooting games of 4-15 shooting, 11-31 shooting, and 9-35 shooting. Is 9-35 shooting any good?

How it can it be a black mark if you win the series? Seriously... The Bulls won both of those series in 5 games including quite a few blowouts. If those series are black marks than Lebron's 2013 Finals is a black mark and lots of other series where he won but played subpar statistically. That doesn't make sense. If you win it can't be a black mark.

[falcolombardi]

I can't believe we are really discussing comparisons of Lebron in 2010 against the Celtics and Jordan in 1996 against the Sonics. It's quite frankly ridiculous. Lebron took a 2-1 lead and then quit in that series while LOSING. Jordan took a 3-0 lead and then had a couple of bad shooting games and still WON the series. In what universe are those two similar? Lebron showed mental weakness and Jordan showed nothing of that sort.

As VanWest82 said, pre-2012 Lebron didn't even look necessarily capable of leading a team to a championship. That's not the GOAT standard. That's why seasons like 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 do close to nothing for Lebron as far as furthering his GOAT case. This is a guy who couldn't shoot outside of 3 feet, had no post game, and was mentally fragile coming apart in big moments. That last point literally made him the antithesis of Jordan.

so both started winning, took their foot off the gas then struggled later as the other team adapted but jordan had better teammates so he avoided defeat?

was 2 defeats not enough to wake up jordan? he still was limited in game 6 which was definitely not "leave your foot off the gas" time

Lebron QUIT in that series. He showed DEFEATIST body language. His team LOST.

Jordan just SHOT POORLY. He showed COMPETITIVE body language. His team WON.

I can't believe I have to spell it out.

Besides if Jordan putting up 27.3/5.3/4.2 on -0.8 rTS with 3.0 topg while playing good defense too in a series win against a 64-win team... is the worst series he ever had; then that clearly shows that this debate was never a debate to begin with.

MJ had black marks too. He played mediocre vs. the 1997 Hawks. That series doesn't look much different than LeBron vs the Celtics in 2010.

Jordan vs 97 Hawks: 27/10/5, .506 TS%, 21 Game Score
LeBron vs 10 Celtics: 27/9/7, .556 TS%, 22 Game Score

What about MJ's series vs the Heat in 1997? In a 5 game series he had 3 bad shooting games of 4-15 shooting, 11-31 shooting, and 9-35 shooting. Is 9-35 shooting any good?

How it can it be a black mark if you win the series? Seriously... The Bulls won both of those series in 5 games including quite a few blowouts. If those series are black marks than Lebron's 2013 Finals is a black mark and lots of other series where he won but played subpar statistically. That doesn't make sense. If you win it can't be a black mark.

i never said 96 finals was jordan worst series. he. may have worse (or maybe not, dunno) i didnt look through every series

it was just a quick example brought in response to the criticism of pre 2012 lebron as a not good enough first option. cause if 2010 (who had esaentially the same results against a similar defense) lebron was not good enough as proved by his celtics series (thst was the argument) neither should 96 jordan be who had an idéntical series

another problem is how circular your logic is, if a player won then it is impossible he underperformed which makes no sense

if i see 2010 lebron vs boston and 96 jordan vs seattle i see two nearly idéntical performances, down to which games they were good or bad at (great 1-3, bad 4-6) with the only tangible difference being thst jordan had better teammates so when he struggled bulls could still close the deal

[colts18]

How the hell did Lebron quit in Game 6 vs the 2010 Celtics if he had 21 shot attempts, 12 Free Throw attempts, 19 rebounds, 10 assists, 9 turnovers, 3 steals, 1 blocks while holding Paul Pierce to 13 points on 4-13 shooting? Who gets 19 rebounds in a game they quit? That doesn't sound like the effort level of a "quit".

[falcolombardi]

How the hell did Lebron quit in Game 6 vs the 2010 Celtics if he had 21 shot attempts, 12 Free Throw attempts, 19 rebounds, 10 assists, 9 turnovers, 3 steals, 1 blocks while holding Paul Pierce to 13 points on 4-13 shooting? Who gets 19 rebounds in a game they quit? That doesn't sound like the effort level of a "quit".

i feel that same doubt, how is a bricking 3 game streak so differently perceived (and described) in both cases

with jordan is excuse because he stopped trying after game 3 which is apparently not a bad thingh because jumpshots were not a fundamental flaw of his game and because he did it with a winning attitude (?)

with lebron is a example of him being a flawed first option, quitting on his team and losing attitude

another point "jordan won so there is nothingh that can be criticized about his play"

i dont think is a reasonable approach to evaluate players performance (win = totally without criticisms)

[DCasey91]

Djoker in a civilized discussion emotional/subjective biases must be taken aside or else your point isn’t credible.

Do you have a degree in psychology? No so you can’t attach emotive language to one person with zero clue of what’s going inside a persons head.

Earlier someone literally said Jordan was celebrating and taking the foot off the pedal vs the Sonics.

1. Is MJ that player to do that? All evidence points to squarely at no. That’s like saying an F1 driver decided to go at half gear for half the race. That doesn’t work at all

2. Once again double standard. Lebron didn’t play as good... mentally weak, Jordan didn’t play as good ... “celebrating”. It’s illogical

How about this to MJ fans, just say he played like crap compared to what he usually always produces.

That would be fair more acceptable and accurate.

I mean the cognitive dissonance is why a serious discussion becomes comprised and from my poi it always comes from MJ’s side of the net.

I never could and will not accept thorough examination on both parties without logical discourse. It’s makes for better and more sound cases for both not just one.

Sometimes it’s like discussing with an imaginary pedestal that’s completely off limits and anything to examine will be brought as taboo and slandering against towards the other side.

That’s literally the definition of a religion or occult. That phenomena is exactly to me what the overall narrative is for him.

Little to zero admittance into or close to blasphemy makes discussions like this null invoid before they even begin to take any shape/form. Because as soon as you or a side gets somewhere the net disappears.

[falcolombardi]

Djoker in a civilized discussion emotional/subjective biases must be taken aside or else your point isn’t credible.

Do you have a degree in psychology? No so you can’t attach emotive language to one person with zero clue of what’s going inside a persons head.

Earlier someone literally said Jordan was celebrating and taking the foot off the pedal vs the Sonics.

1. Is MJ that player to do that? All evidence points to squarely at no. That’s like saying an F1 driver decided to go at half gear for half the race. That doesn’t work at all

2. Once again double standard. Lebron didn’t play as good... mentally weak, Jordan didn’t play as good ... “celebrating”. It’s illogical

How about this to MJ fans, just say he played like crap compared to what he usually always produces.

That would be fair more acceptable and accurate.

I mean the cognitive dissonance is why a serious discussion becomes comprised and from my poi it always comes from MJ’s side of the net.

I never could and will not accept thorough examination on both parties without logical discourse. It’s makes for better and more sound cases for both not just one.

Sometimes it’s like discussing with an imaginary pedestal that’s completely off limits and anything to examine will be brought as taboo and slandering against towards the other side.

That’s literally the definition of a religion or occult. That phenomena is exactly to me what the overall narrative is for him.

Little to zero admittance into or close to blasphemy makes discussions like this null invoid before they even begin to take any shape/form. Because as soon as you or a side gets somewhere the net disappears.

in fairness it happens "both ways" i have felt at times i get too emotionally invested in these discussions which is somethingh i hope to avoid

lebron vs jordan debates always tend to get toxic and usually that happens with people on both sides of a discission

we all should try to avoid unnecesarry agresiveness and avoid the discussion getting toxic

[Djoker]

It's not an identical series though... not even close. Jordan didn't visibly quit and look dejected. Jordan played better defense.
And the bottom line is his team won the series which means he did his job. Did he underperform? Sure. But that series is closer to Lebron's 2013 Finals... underperforming in a win is a far smaller transgression than underperforming in a loss.

By the way never did I ever claim that Jordan stopped trying after Game 3. He just shot poorly in a couple of games. It happens but he didn't show mental weakness.

How the hell did Lebron quit in Game 6 vs the 2010 Celtics if he had 21 shot attempts, 12 Free Throw attempts, 19 rebounds, 10 assists, 9 turnovers, 3 steals, 1 blocks while holding Paul Pierce to 13 points on 4-13 shooting? Who gets 19 rebounds in a game they quit? That doesn't sound like the effort level of a "quit".

He quit in Game 5 and then in the closing minutes of Game 6. He stood there and watched as the Celtics scored.

Djoker in a civilized discussion emotional/subjective biases must be taken aside or else your point isn’t credible.

Do you have a degree in psychology? No so you can’t attach emotive language to one person with zero clue of what’s going inside a persons head.

Earlier someone literally said Jordan was celebrating and taking the foot off the pedal vs the Sonics.

1. Is MJ that player to do that? All evidence points to squarely at no. That’s like saying an F1 driver decided to go at half gear for half the race. That doesn’t work at all

2. Once again double standard. Lebron didn’t play as good... mentally weak, Jordan didn’t play as good ... “celebrating”. It’s illogical

How about this to MJ fans, just say he played like crap compared to what he usually always produces.

That would be fair more acceptable and accurate.

I mean the cognitive dissonance is why a serious discussion becomes comprised and from my poi it always comes from MJ’s side of the net.

I never could and will not accept thorough examination on both parties without logical discourse. It’s makes for better and more sound cases for both not just one.

Sometimes it’s like discussing with an imaginary pedestal that’s completely off limits and anything to examine will be brought as taboo and slandering against towards the other side.

That’s literally the definition of a religion or occult. That phenomena is exactly to me what the overall narrative is for him.

Little to zero admittance into or close to blasphemy makes discussions like this null invoid before they even begin to take any shape/form. Because as soon as you or a side gets somewhere the net disappears.

There are no subjective biases on my part. Jordan wasn't some god who couldn't have a bad game. He had plenty of bad games...

BUT

He simply never had the kind of blackmarks that Lebron had. A blackmark is something that is difficult to define or quantify but this is a generally accepted fact. Lebron's lows were lower than Jordan's lows. Even falcolombardi admitted that.

I never claimed (another poster did) that Jordan stopped trying after Game 3. He had three poor shooting games. I said that in the very first post about it. He had three mediocre games... but his team won so it doesn't define his legacy the way a loss would. That's just the reality.

And no I'm not a psychologist but I know what I've seen from Lebron in 2010. And I've never ever seen it from Jordan. That dejected look... Jordan would be angry but never dejected.

Anyways this discussion has gone to an uninteresting direction. I've explained why I think the Career Value methodology, which is integral to any Lebron argument, is flawed. The most important reason is scarcity.

[DCasey91]

Djoker in a civilized discussion emotional/subjective biases must be taken aside or else your point isn’t credible.

Do you have a degree in psychology? No so you can’t attach emotive language to one person with zero clue of what’s going inside a persons head.

Earlier someone literally said Jordan was celebrating and taking the foot off the pedal vs the Sonics.

1. Is MJ that player to do that? All evidence points to squarely at no. That’s like saying an F1 driver decided to go at half gear for half the race. That doesn’t work at all

2. Once again double standard. Lebron didn’t play as good... mentally weak, Jordan didn’t play as good ... “celebrating”. It’s illogical

How about this to MJ fans, just say he played like crap compared to what he usually always produces.

That would be fair more acceptable and accurate.

I mean the cognitive dissonance is why a serious discussion becomes comprised and from my poi it always comes from MJ’s side of the net.

I never could and will not accept thorough examination on both parties without logical discourse. It’s makes for better and more sound cases for both not just one.

Sometimes it’s like discussing with an imaginary pedestal that’s completely off limits and anything to examine will be brought as taboo and slandering against towards the other side.

That’s literally the definition of a religion or occult. That phenomena is exactly to me what the overall narrative is for him.

Little to zero admittance into or close to blasphemy makes discussions like this null invoid before they even begin to take any shape/form. Because as soon as you or a side gets somewhere the net disappears.

in fairness it happens "both ways" i have felt at times i get too emotionally invested in these discussions which is somethingh i hope to avoid

lebron vs jordan debates always tend to get toxic and usually that happens with people on both sides of a discission

we all should try to avoid unnecesarry agresiveness and avoid the discussion getting toxic

Fully agree there, it seems that way for most “hot topics” nowadays that will inevitably go south the longer it goes on. Also the internet context, wording and zero real respite to hand in hand.

I’ll admit the celebration comment did throw me in a loop lol.

I just don’t want it to turn into a point scoring see I told you so I win sort of vibe. It doesn’t help the discussion progress further

Your conclusion of the Peaks did actually pause my thinking. Means to say I always had Jordan peak wise over James in due parts to continuity from top to bottom and less extremes but as you rightfully pointed out the overall sub sections of seasonal play for James it isn’t far out the realms at all. Now once was concrete can begin to examine again.

Kudos to you!

[DCasey91]

It's not an identical series though... not even close. Jordan didn't visibly quit and look dejected. Jordan played better defense.
And the bottom line is his team won the series which means he did his job. Did he underperform? Sure. But that series is closer to Lebron's 2013 Finals... underperforming in a win is a far smaller transgression than underperforming in a loss.

By the way never did I ever claim that Jordan stopped trying after Game 3. He just shot poorly in a couple of games. It happens but he didn't show mental weakness.

How the hell did Lebron quit in Game 6 vs the 2010 Celtics if he had 21 shot attempts, 12 Free Throw attempts, 19 rebounds, 10 assists, 9 turnovers, 3 steals, 1 blocks while holding Paul Pierce to 13 points on 4-13 shooting? Who gets 19 rebounds in a game they quit? That doesn't sound like the effort level of a "quit".

He quit in Game 5 and then in the closing minutes of Game 6. He stood there and watched as the Celtics scored.

Djoker in a civilized discussion emotional/subjective biases must be taken aside or else your point isn’t credible.

Do you have a degree in psychology? No so you can’t attach emotive language to one person with zero clue of what’s going inside a persons head.

Earlier someone literally said Jordan was celebrating and taking the foot off the pedal vs the Sonics.

1. Is MJ that player to do that? All evidence points to squarely at no. That’s like saying an F1 driver decided to go at half gear for half the race. That doesn’t work at all

2. Once again double standard. Lebron didn’t play as good... mentally weak, Jordan didn’t play as good ... “celebrating”. It’s illogical

How about this to MJ fans, just say he played like crap compared to what he usually always produces.

That would be fair more acceptable and accurate.

I mean the cognitive dissonance is why a serious discussion becomes comprised and from my poi it always comes from MJ’s side of the net.

I never could and will not accept thorough examination on both parties without logical discourse. It’s makes for better and more sound cases for both not just one.

Sometimes it’s like discussing with an imaginary pedestal that’s completely off limits and anything to examine will be brought as taboo and slandering against towards the other side.

That’s literally the definition of a religion or occult. That phenomena is exactly to me what the overall narrative is for him.

Little to zero admittance into or close to blasphemy makes discussions like this null invoid before they even begin to take any shape/form. Because as soon as you or a side gets somewhere the net disappears.

There are no subjective biases on my part. Jordan wasn't some god who couldn't have a bad game. He had plenty of bad games...

BUT

He simply never had the kind of blackmarks that Lebron had. A blackmark is something that is difficult to define or quantify but this is a generally accepted fact. Lebron's lows were lower than Jordan's lows. Even falcolombardi admitted that.

I never claimed (another poster did) that Jordan stopped trying after Game 3. He had three poor shooting games. I said that in the very first post about it. He had three mediocre games... but his team won so it doesn't define his legacy the way a loss would. That's just the reality.

And no I'm not a psychologist but I know what I've seen from Lebron in 2010. And I've never ever seen it from Jordan. That dejected look... Jordan would be angry but never dejected.

Anyways this discussion has gone to an uninteresting direction. I've explained why I think the Career Value methodology, which is integral to any Lebron argument, is flawed. The most important reason is scarcity.

Sweet no worries here black marks can’t be erased that is for sure. And for me Jordan played mediocre compared to what he’s usually capable of it happens that’s sports.

Yeah I thought it was someone else I just couldn’t take it seriously lol.

Just quickly to touch on the scarcity value (which I agree with) is it not that LBJ falls under the same grouping as MJ of the rarest echelon of player? The assigning value overall is wrong to me on player by player (Miller 4x to MJ’s one) but I can’t quite understand the why it would be flawed in assigning value in LBJ’s case.

MJ/LBJ should be more exponential and less linear because of how scarce that player really is. So for me Jordan could possibly % wise be even higher but because of how absurdly long LBJ has played at the very top lvl the %s would be very comparable and could sway each way depending on certain concrete criteria before the valuation process begins.

It would very hard to get an exact formula, some basis have to be agree upon before beginning:

1. Lowest metric standard for real championship 1# player equity
2. Peer by peer case (What the team was, who did they verse?, age, exp, regression/progression, accolades etc etc.)
3. Injury
4. %exponential dividends per 1 equity player (I believe that is a must to all multiple chip winners as the best player, most rare = greater dividends).

Plenty of other stuff to account for to try and get a realistic outcome but it would take ages and be difficult.

A lot of metric/impact systems look at one aspect rather than multiple because even those ones are flawed .

[Stalwart]

So you guys think Bron’s shooting deficiencies were just something that popped up out of nowhere in 2011 Finals? C’mon.

It was a problem in all his previous years up to that point and showed up numerous times in the playoffs and specifically in the series I mentioned.

RE MJ vs. Sonics, Bulls were already up 3-0 and the season was effectively over. He started celebrating a little early. His struggles in games 4 and 6 weren’t because of an obvious deficiency in his game.

That’s that proper MJ BS I’m talking about

Cmon man how can you have credible discussion when you make a statement like that.

Game 6 took place on his father's birthday. Its awful poetic that Michael Jordan won his first championship since returning from baseball on his fathers birthday. "This is for Daddy".

Its pretty incredible that it worked out that way. All it took was for Jordan to have uncharacteristically bad games back to back. Coincidence? If you believe in that sorta of thing.

[jalengreen]

So you guys think Bron’s shooting deficiencies were just something that popped up out of nowhere in 2011 Finals? C’mon.

It was a problem in all his previous years up to that point and showed up numerous times in the playoffs and specifically in the series I mentioned.

RE MJ vs. Sonics, Bulls were already up 3-0 and the season was effectively over. He started celebrating a little early. His struggles in games 4 and 6 weren’t because of an obvious deficiency in his game.

That’s that proper MJ BS I’m talking about

Cmon man how can you have credible discussion when you make a statement like that.

Game 6 took place on his father's birthday. Its awful poetic that Michael Jordan won his first championship since returning from baseball on his fathers birthday. "This is for Daddy".

Its pretty incredible that it worked out that way. All it took was for Jordan to have uncharacteristically bad games back to back. Coincidence? If you believe in that sorta of thing.

Bro..

[Texas Chuck]

I'm convinced.

All it takes is interpreting everything in the most favorable way possible for one guy--including making it a positive that he would intentionally tank two Finals games just so he could win on his dad's birthday(can you imagine the outrage if Lebron did this btw?) and interpreting everything in the most negative way for the other(MVP seasons are negative, LEbron was not a 1st option until 2012, etc).

[falcolombardi]

I'm convinced.

All it takes is interpreting everything in the most favorable way possible for one guy--including making it a positive that he would intentionally tank two Finals games just so he could win on his dad's birthday(can you imagine the outrage if Lebron did this btw?) and interpreting everything in the most negative way for the other(MVP seasons are negative, LEbron was not a 1st option until 2012, etc).

i think only 1 poster said that, not a common opinion

[Texas Chuck]

I'm convinced.

All it takes is interpreting everything in the most favorable way possible for one guy--including making it a positive that he would intentionally tank two Finals games just so he could win on his dad's birthday(can you imagine the outrage if Lebron did this btw?) and interpreting everything in the most negative way for the other(MVP seasons are negative, LEbron was not a 1st option until 2012, etc).

i think only 1 poster said that, not a common opinion

I cited multiple posters' takes in the above actually. And sadly.

But even if it were only one poster, when the arguments are this compelling I have to be open-minded enough to re-consider my position.

[Stalwart]

I'm convinced.

All it takes is interpreting everything in the most favorable way possible for one guy--including making it a positive that he would intentionally tank two Finals games just so he could win on his dad's birthday(can you imagine the outrage if Lebron did this btw?) and interpreting everything in the most negative way for the other(MVP seasons are negative, LEbron was not a 1st option until 2012, etc).

My post was tongue n cheek, kinda. You guys got to relax.

In regards to negative interpretations, do you believe its possible that Lebron's career offers quite a bit more to negatively interpret than Jordan does?

[Texas Chuck]

I'm convinced.

All it takes is interpreting everything in the most favorable way possible for one guy--including making it a positive that he would intentionally tank two Finals games just so he could win on his dad's birthday(can you imagine the outrage if Lebron did this btw?) and interpreting everything in the most negative way for the other(MVP seasons are negative, LEbron was not a 1st option until 2012, etc).

My post was tongue n cheek, kinda. You guys got to relax.

In regards to negative interpretations, do you believe its possible that Lebron's career offers quite a bit more to negatively interpret than Jordan does?

I'm relaxed mate, no worries. But it fits your pattern of posting on the topic and even now, you acknowledge you are serious about it.

And its possible sure. Is it possible that everything about Mike has a positive interpretation and everything about Lebron has a negative one? No, that's not possible, but its happening itt.

[Stalwart]

I'm relaxed mate, no worries. But it fits your pattern of posting on the topic and even now, you acknowledge you are serious about it.

Im half serious. And its not because I think Jordan is so amazing that he couldn't possible lose two games in a row. Its because I'm a conspiracy theorist in general. And I have an entirely different view of pro athletes than you do. But thats a whole nother topic. Just don't try and use my tongue and cheek post as an example of Jordan bias or fanboyism.

And its possible sure. Is it possible that everything about Mike has a positive interpretation and everything about Lebron has a negative one? No, that's not possible, but its happening itt.

Sure, there are Jordan cultists out there but I dont see many of them in this thread. What I see more of are pro-Lebron posters using that as a crunch and a strawman to avoid legitimate arguments.

[Djoker]

It's not an identical series though... not even close. Jordan didn't visibly quit and look dejected. Jordan played better defense.
And the bottom line is his team won the series which means he did his job. Did he underperform? Sure. But that series is closer to Lebron's 2013 Finals... underperforming in a win is a far smaller transgression than underperforming in a loss.

By the way never did I ever claim that Jordan stopped trying after Game 3. He just shot poorly in a couple of games. It happens but he didn't show mental weakness.

How the hell did Lebron quit in Game 6 vs the 2010 Celtics if he had 21 shot attempts, 12 Free Throw attempts, 19 rebounds, 10 assists, 9 turnovers, 3 steals, 1 blocks while holding Paul Pierce to 13 points on 4-13 shooting? Who gets 19 rebounds in a game they quit? That doesn't sound like the effort level of a "quit".

He quit in Game 5 and then in the closing minutes of Game 6. He stood there and watched as the Celtics scored.

Djoker in a civilized discussion emotional/subjective biases must be taken aside or else your point isn’t credible.

Do you have a degree in psychology? No so you can’t attach emotive language to one person with zero clue of what’s going inside a persons head.

Earlier someone literally said Jordan was celebrating and taking the foot off the pedal vs the Sonics.

1. Is MJ that player to do that? All evidence points to squarely at no. That’s like saying an F1 driver decided to go at half gear for half the race. That doesn’t work at all

2. Once again double standard. Lebron didn’t play as good... mentally weak, Jordan didn’t play as good ... “celebrating”. It’s illogical

How about this to MJ fans, just say he played like crap compared to what he usually always produces.

That would be fair more acceptable and accurate.

I mean the cognitive dissonance is why a serious discussion becomes comprised and from my poi it always comes from MJ’s side of the net.

I never could and will not accept thorough examination on both parties without logical discourse. It’s makes for better and more sound cases for both not just one.

Sometimes it’s like discussing with an imaginary pedestal that’s completely off limits and anything to examine will be brought as taboo and slandering against towards the other side.

That’s literally the definition of a religion or occult. That phenomena is exactly to me what the overall narrative is for him.

Little to zero admittance into or close to blasphemy makes discussions like this null invoid before they even begin to take any shape/form. Because as soon as you or a side gets somewhere the net disappears.

There are no subjective biases on my part. Jordan wasn't some god who couldn't have a bad game. He had plenty of bad games...

BUT

He simply never had the kind of blackmarks that Lebron had. A blackmark is something that is difficult to define or quantify but this is a generally accepted fact. Lebron's lows were lower than Jordan's lows. Even falcolombardi admitted that.

I never claimed (another poster did) that Jordan stopped trying after Game 3. He had three poor shooting games. I said that in the very first post about it. He had three mediocre games... but his team won so it doesn't define his legacy the way a loss would. That's just the reality.

And no I'm not a psychologist but I know what I've seen from Lebron in 2010. And I've never ever seen it from Jordan. That dejected look... Jordan would be angry but never dejected.

Anyways this discussion has gone to an uninteresting direction. I've explained why I think the Career Value methodology, which is integral to any Lebron argument, is flawed. The most important reason is scarcity.

Sweet no worries here black marks can’t be erased that is for sure. And for me Jordan played mediocre compared to what he’s usually capable of it happens that’s sports.

Yeah I thought it was someone else I just couldn’t take it seriously lol.

Just quickly to touch on the scarcity value (which I agree with) is it not that LBJ falls under the same grouping as MJ of the rarest echelon of player? The assigning value overall is wrong to me on player by player (Miller 4x to MJ’s one) but I can’t quite understand the why it would be flawed in assigning value in LBJ’s case.

MJ/LBJ should be more exponential and less linear because of how scarce that player really is. So for me Jordan could possibly % wise be even higher but because of how absurdly long LBJ has played at the very top lvl the %s would be very comparable and could sway each way depending on certain concrete criteria before the valuation process begins.

It would very hard to get an exact formula, some basis have to be agree upon before beginning:

1. Lowest metric standard for real championship 1# player equity
2. Peer by peer case (What the team was, who did they verse?, age, exp, regression/progression, accolades etc etc.)
3. Injury
4. %exponential dividends per 1 equity player (I believe that is a must to all multiple chip winners as the best player, most rare = greater dividends).

Plenty of other stuff to account for to try and get a realistic outcome but it would take ages and be difficult.

A lot of metric/impact systems look at one aspect rather than multiple because even those ones are flawed .

It would be very difficult to model this. It would definitely have to be an exponential model where higher CORP's are worth progressively more and to a very noticeable extent. For instance if peak Jordan is 32% CORP and peak Lebron is 27% CORP than each peak Jordan season may be 1.5 - 2 times as valuable as opposed to 1.2 times. Why so drastic? Because even high level players like pre-2012 Lebron or 2004 Garnett, historically good basketball players in fact, are unable to lead teams to championship.

Anyways there is still another factor that affects why I can't get behind the Career Value approach beside scarcity and salary caps... I can't get behind emphasizing longevity so much when longevity is sometimes not even a result of basketball attributes of a player. MJ retired the first time because his dad got murdered... In an alternate universe where MJ's dad doesn't get killed and MJ stays and plays through 1994 and 1995, is his GOAT case suddenly a lot stronger because of two extra seasons as best player in the league? Likewise if he came into the NBA straight out of high school and played three additional seasons even as a mere all-star level player, his GOAT case would get stronger too right? If we rank GOAT's based on longevity then we are basically victims of circumstances to a huge extent. Kind of like saying "Kareem/Lebron is the GOAT but if Jordan came to the NBA straight out of high school and his dad never got killed, it's he who would have been far and away the GOAT instead." If that quote is true, then I think it shows the flaws of the Career Value approach even more.

When Larry Bird or Bill Walton's body breaks down playing basketball, that's relevant and they should be penalized for the lack of longevity. But in the case of say Jordan (father killed) or Magic (HIV), it makes a lot less sense. Their retirements had arguably nothing to do with basketball. And what if Duncan came into the NBA out of high school and gave 3 more all-star level seasons? He becomes a strong GOAT candidate no? What if Kareem came into the NBA from high school and played 24 years in the NBA? Kareem would be the unanimous GOAT using the Career Value approach.

So long story short, the Career Value approach ignores:
- scarcity of higher peak players
- salary caps (mere all-star often make the same salary as GOAT's)
- non-basketball factors that affect longevity (entering NBA out of high school, non-injury related retirements)

[VanWest82]

So you guys think Bron’s shooting deficiencies were just something that popped up out of nowhere in 2011 Finals? C’mon.

It was a problem in all his previous years up to that point and showed up numerous times in the playoffs and specifically in the series I mentioned.

RE MJ vs. Sonics, Bulls were already up 3-0 and the season was effectively over. He started celebrating a little early. His struggles in games 4 and 6 weren’t because of an obvious deficiency in his game.

That’s that proper MJ BS I’m talking about

Cmon man how can you have credible discussion when you make a statement like that.

You don't think game 4 was at least partially a result of a little extra-curricular behavior by the Bulls players? I think those guys let loose in Seattle a little bit and were running in quicksand that game.

Game 5 MJ tried to close them out but Scottie tanked the game. Game 6 was Father's Day. I believe MJ's mom who described him as an emotional wreck that day. Presumably it had some impact.

I also give credit to George Karl for moving Payton off ball starting in game 4 when McMillan came back. They ran MJ through 100 screens the next three games and Phil didn't make any adjustments. That as much as anything is why he got gassed.

But mainly, it's just so hard to take those three games seriously after Bulls went 72-10 and then 14-1 to get within one game of the season being over. It was done. It's not BS to suggest those guys started celebrating a little early and took their foot off the pedal.