RealGM

its not about age..but if you are comparing to Jordan then yes but you have to put things into perspective and you cant have that unless you have put in hours of hard work and research other you dont have enough info not to mention that you never will but the bottom line is that it is pointless to answer questions like this unless you have identified a number of 38 year olds and see how they led their team and in what conditions. enough said

Rendei wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

Rendei wrote:Kareem: 5.4 BPM, 4.9 VORP, 10.8 WS, .197 WS/48, 60.3 TS%, 79 games, 61-18 when he played
Stockton: 6.7 BPM, 5.3 VORP, 10.8 WS, .216 WS/48, 61.0 TS% (league leader), 82 games, 53-29 when he played
Lebron: 6.1 BPM, 4.0 VORP, 5.6 WS, .138 WS/48, 58.3 TS%, 55 games, 30-25 when he played

Stockton is just ignored because he didn't score a lot. I'd put him first and Lebron third in this debate. The lack of games and all the losing really hurts Lebron, plus his worse efficiency and impact numbers.

What is next?
38 yr old Kareem was better than 2023 Curry because of records?

Interesting, for the purposes of the exercise even though he's not 38...
Curry: 7.6 BPM, 4.7 VORP, 7.8 WS, .192 WS/48, 65.6 TS%, 56 games, 30-26 when he played

Curry was better than Lebron this year, but 38 year old Kareem did have a better season. It's not just the record, it's the fewer total minutes than Lebron.

Curry wasn't better than LeBron this year. At least, not clearly better than him. Their team records were similar when they played. On top of that Curry had a championship team coming back for most of the season until Wiggins went out.
Kareem didn't have the responsibility that Curry and LeBron had. That alone makes their seasons better. There is a good chance that both LeBron would have played more games if he was asked to do less and was playing behind players that were clearly better than him.

Marrrcuss wrote:The pace is much faster than playing on a team with Magic Johnson?

League average pace in 2023 was 99.1, which correlates well with 88-91 LA. Prior, Magic's Lakers topped out at 104.1 (in his rookie year) and never reached above 103.8 thereafter. There were 7 teams (including the Warriors and Lakers) at 101+ this season, just to set some context.

Why even bother comparing?

2022/23 was almost a completely different sport than the others in that poll played.

tsherkin wrote:

Marrrcuss wrote:The pace is much faster than playing on a team with Magic Johnson?

League average pace in 2023 was 99.1, which correlates well with 88-91 LA. Prior, Magic's Lakers topped out at 104.1 (in his rookie year) and never reached above 103.8 thereafter. There were 7 teams (including the Warriors and Lakers) at 101+ this season, just to set some context.

Later career Magic Johnson teams were actually pretty slow. They even called it Slowtime.

The year they faced off versus Michael Jordan in the finals they did it with the third slowest team in the league. Still elite offense, just...slow.

Snakebites wrote:Later career Magic Johnson teams were actually pretty slow. They even called it Slowtime.

Yeah, it's actually a really good example of his ability to adapt styles. They were 12th (of 25) in pace in 89, then 20th (slower than what is now league average, at 96.3) and lastly 25th of 27 at 94.1 in 1991. Lots of Magic in the post, which I loved watching.

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

Rendei wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:What is next?
38 yr old Kareem was better than 2023 Curry because of records?

Interesting, for the purposes of the exercise even though he's not 38...
Curry: 7.6 BPM, 4.7 VORP, 7.8 WS, .192 WS/48, 65.6 TS%, 56 games, 30-26 when he played

Curry was better than Lebron this year, but 38 year old Kareem did have a better season. It's not just the record, it's the fewer total minutes than Lebron.

Curry wasn't better than LeBron this year. At least, not clearly better than him. Their team records were similar when they played. On top of that Curry had a championship team coming back for most of the season until Wiggins went out.
Kareem didn't have the responsibility that Curry and LeBron had. That alone makes their seasons better. There is a good chance that both LeBron would have played more games if he was asked to do less and was playing behind players that were clearly better than him.

I don't care one bit about "would have"s. I care about what actually happened, and neither Curry or Lebron managed to play even 60 games. And did so to middling results. That matters to me. This could all change with a deep playoff run, of course. That matters the most.

Phreak50 wrote:Why even bother comparing?

2022/23 was almost a completely different sport than the others in that poll played.

What? How is that so?

How many seasons can he play as a starter?

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

MavsDirk41 wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:Wouldn't that mean that 38 yr old Kareem was better than 24 yr old Doncic?
Doncic also put up "stats" according to you.

Im a huge Mavs fan and i want Luka to win a championship with the Mavs but yes, this year he put up stats on a bad team. He controls the ball too much, slows the pace down because he doesnt want to get out in transition and the Mavs offense is predictable because of it. 5 years from now nobody will remember Luka’s year with the Mavs cause they were bad.

And if 38 yr old Kareem was the first option on the Mavs then they would have an even worse record.
Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible.
Mavs were on their way to be a top 6 seed pretty easily before Mavs traded all the role players for more offense in Kyrie which Mavs didn't even need.
Same would be the case if 38 year old Kareem replaced LeBron as the first option on the Lakers when AD was down. They would have been out of the playoffs with no chance to climb back by the time AD came back.

That's why I have the guy on ignore. He's completely incapable of being objective when it comes to LeBron. He is so blinded by hate that it is unhealthy. He'll even trash his team's superstar (Luka) if it means taking LeBron down a peg, LOL.

Debate the post. Don't go after the poster. -b

Rendei wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

Rendei wrote:Interesting, for the purposes of the exercise even though he's not 38...
Curry: 7.6 BPM, 4.7 VORP, 7.8 WS, .192 WS/48, 65.6 TS%, 56 games, 30-26 when he played

Curry was better than Lebron this year, but 38 year old Kareem did have a better season. It's not just the record, it's the fewer total minutes than Lebron.

Curry wasn't better than LeBron this year. At least, not clearly better than him. Their team records were similar when they played. On top of that Curry had a championship team coming back for most of the season until Wiggins went out.
Kareem didn't have the responsibility that Curry and LeBron had. That alone makes their seasons better. There is a good chance that both LeBron would have played more games if he was asked to do less and was playing behind players that were clearly better than him.

I don't care one bit about "would have"s. I care about what actually happened, and neither Curry or Lebron managed to play even 60 games. And did so to middling results. That matters to me. This could all change with a deep playoff run, of course. That matters the most.

What actually happened is that LeBron and Curry were expected to carry their teams whereas Kareem wasn't.
You don't care about facts so stop hiding behind them.

Salieri wrote:

kbitboc wrote:

Kobe187 wrote:MJ cause we got to witness greatness at age 38. Out of shape MJ was still lighting up the league. Just too skilled.

MJ had like the 9th worst TS% in the whole nba.

That's how far the infatuation with MJ goes. For many posters, he wasn't a basketball player, he was a demigod.

Truth is, MJ kinda sucked at age 38. That's nothing to be ashamed of, by the way. 99% of players are retired at that age, sipping margaritas from their homes. He's just being compared to true titans of longevity.

If you were to post those boxscore stats without saying to whom they belong to, that scoring volume with that efficiency, everyone would be calling the mystery player a chucker.

There wasn't any greatness to witness. But nothing beats a good narrative, apparently. Oh well.

As for the topic at hand, I'm divided between LeBron for his raw stats and Kareem for his impact. Leaning on Kareem, I think.

Yeah MJ was a shadow of his former self at age 38, comment was tongue in cheek. Personally just to see him out there was huge.

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

MavsDirk41 wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:Wouldn't that mean that 38 yr old Kareem was better than 24 yr old Doncic?
Doncic also put up "stats" according to you.

Im a huge Mavs fan and i want Luka to win a championship with the Mavs but yes, this year he put up stats on a bad team. He controls the ball too much, slows the pace down because he doesnt want to get out in transition and the Mavs offense is predictable because of it. 5 years from now nobody will remember Luka’s year with the Mavs cause they were bad.

And if 38 yr old Kareem was the first option on the Mavs then they would have an even worse record.
Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible.
Mavs were on their way to be a top 6 seed pretty easily before Mavs traded all the role players for more offense in Kyrie which Mavs didn't even need.
Same would be the case if 38 year old Kareem replaced LeBron as the first option on the Lakers when AD was down. They would have been out of the playoffs with no chance to climb back by the time AD came back.

“Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible”? Can you not respond to me like a little snot nose kid??? If you dont agree with me thats fine but dont question my intelligence guy, you dont even know me…


Kareem was the Lakers leading scorer, averaged the most shot attempts per game for the team, averaged 33 minutes a game, while playing 79 games. Yea im more impressed with his play/durability than James. If you dont agree then ok. Mavs were 3 games above .500 when they traded for Kyrie. They traded DFS and Dinwiddie for Kyrie. Kyrie and Luka dont exactly fit together cause Dinwiddie is a better off the ball player than Kyrie. They miss DFSs defense for sure. Without the trade the Mavs probably make the play-in. They miss Brunson and that has nothing to do with the Kyrie trade or depth. Give the Mavs Brunson and DFS back and things would be better for sure. Lakers were .500 with James and actually played better when he missed a month cause other players got to touch/shoot the ball. Would they be worse with 38 year old Kareem? Maybe, maybe not.

He played in 54 games... that's not a great season for anyone, any year.

MavsDirk41 wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

MavsDirk41 wrote:

Im a huge Mavs fan and i want Luka to win a championship with the Mavs but yes, this year he put up stats on a bad team. He controls the ball too much, slows the pace down because he doesnt want to get out in transition and the Mavs offense is predictable because of it. 5 years from now nobody will remember Luka’s year with the Mavs cause they were bad.

And if 38 yr old Kareem was the first option on the Mavs then they would have an even worse record.
Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible.
Mavs were on their way to be a top 6 seed pretty easily before Mavs traded all the role players for more offense in Kyrie which Mavs didn't even need.
Same would be the case if 38 year old Kareem replaced LeBron as the first option on the Lakers when AD was down. They would have been out of the playoffs with no chance to climb back by the time AD came back.

“Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible”? Can you not respond to me like a little snot nose kid??? If you dont agree with me thats fine but dont question my intelligence guy, you dont even know me…


Kareem was the Lakers leading scorer, averaged the most shot attempts per game for the team, averaged 33 minutes a game, while playing 79 games. Yea im more impressed with his play/durability than James. If you dont agree then ok. Mavs were 3 games above .500 when they traded for Kyrie. They traded DFS and Dinwiddie for Kyrie. Kyrie and Luka dont exactly fit together cause Dinwiddie is a better off the ball player than Kyrie. They miss DFSs defense for sure. Without the trade the Mavs probably make the play-in. They miss Brunson and that has nothing to do with the Kyrie trade or depth. Give the Mavs Brunson and DFS back and things would be better for sure. Lakers were .500 with James and actually played better when he missed a month cause other players got to touch/shoot the ball. Would they be worse with 38 year old Kareem? Maybe, maybe not.

Kareem wasn't the best player on the Lakers by a long shot. I hope that helps you in understanding that simple thing.

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

MavsDirk41 wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:And if 38 yr old Kareem was the first option on the Mavs then they would have an even worse record.
Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible.
Mavs were on their way to be a top 6 seed pretty easily before Mavs traded all the role players for more offense in Kyrie which Mavs didn't even need.
Same would be the case if 38 year old Kareem replaced LeBron as the first option on the Lakers when AD was down. They would have been out of the playoffs with no chance to climb back by the time AD came back.

“Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible”? Can you not respond to me like a little snot nose kid??? If you dont agree with me thats fine but dont question my intelligence guy, you dont even know me…


Kareem was the Lakers leading scorer, averaged the most shot attempts per game for the team, averaged 33 minutes a game, while playing 79 games. Yea im more impressed with his play/durability than James. If you dont agree then ok. Mavs were 3 games above .500 when they traded for Kyrie. They traded DFS and Dinwiddie for Kyrie. Kyrie and Luka dont exactly fit together cause Dinwiddie is a better off the ball player than Kyrie. They miss DFSs defense for sure. Without the trade the Mavs probably make the play-in. They miss Brunson and that has nothing to do with the Kyrie trade or depth. Give the Mavs Brunson and DFS back and things would be better for sure. Lakers were .500 with James and actually played better when he missed a month cause other players got to touch/shoot the ball. Would they be worse with 38 year old Kareem? Maybe, maybe not.

Kareem wasn't the best player on the Lakers by a long shot. I hope that helps you in understanding that simple thing.

I never said he was guy, it was Magic…but Kareem was still the Lakers leading scorer and averaged about 2 blocks a game giving them rim protection. Kareem still played both sides of the court while playing 79 games at 38. We dont need to call Columbo to figure out the Laker issues are the health of James and Davis. Neither player can stay healthy throughout the year. If you want to praise James for keeping the Lakers afloat while Davis was out, what do you think Davis did when James was out? End of the day durability/availability matters to me, while also playing extremely well, so Kareem at 38 is more impressive

MavsDirk41 wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

MavsDirk41 wrote:

“Be objective and intelligent if that is even possible”? Can you not respond to me like a little snot nose kid??? If you dont agree with me thats fine but dont question my intelligence guy, you dont even know me…


Kareem was the Lakers leading scorer, averaged the most shot attempts per game for the team, averaged 33 minutes a game, while playing 79 games. Yea im more impressed with his play/durability than James. If you dont agree then ok. Mavs were 3 games above .500 when they traded for Kyrie. They traded DFS and Dinwiddie for Kyrie. Kyrie and Luka dont exactly fit together cause Dinwiddie is a better off the ball player than Kyrie. They miss DFSs defense for sure. Without the trade the Mavs probably make the play-in. They miss Brunson and that has nothing to do with the Kyrie trade or depth. Give the Mavs Brunson and DFS back and things would be better for sure. Lakers were .500 with James and actually played better when he missed a month cause other players got to touch/shoot the ball. Would they be worse with 38 year old Kareem? Maybe, maybe not.

Kareem wasn't the best player on the Lakers by a long shot. I hope that helps you in understanding that simple thing.

I never said he was guy, it was Magic…but Kareem was still the Lakers leading scorer and averaged about 2 blocks a game giving them rim protection. Kareem still played both sides of the court while playing 79 games at 38. We dont need to call Columbo to figure out the Laker issues are the health of James and Davis. Neither player can stay healthy throughout the year. If you want to praise James for keeping the Lakers afloat while Davis was out, what do you think Davis did when James was out? End of the day durability/availability matters to me, while also playing extremely well, so Kareem at 38 is more impressive

Durability question would only come into play if players being compared were asked to do carry the same amount of load.
Like KD had a better season that LeBron this year because they were asked to carry almost the same amount of load which means we can compare their on-court performance.

C3H6N6O6 wrote:

MavsDirk41 wrote:

C3H6N6O6 wrote:Kareem wasn't the best player on the Lakers by a long shot. I hope that helps you in understanding that simple thing.

I never said he was guy, it was Magic…but Kareem was still the Lakers leading scorer and averaged about 2 blocks a game giving them rim protection. Kareem still played both sides of the court while playing 79 games at 38. We dont need to call Columbo to figure out the Laker issues are the health of James and Davis. Neither player can stay healthy throughout the year. If you want to praise James for keeping the Lakers afloat while Davis was out, what do you think Davis did when James was out? End of the day durability/availability matters to me, while also playing extremely well, so Kareem at 38 is more impressive

Durability question would only come into play if players being compared were asked to do carry the same amount of load.
Like KD had a better season that LeBron this year because they were asked to carry almost the same amount of load which means we can compare their on-court performance.

So Kareem’s season at 38 isnt as impressive because he could play without requiring the ball to be in his hands all the time like James? Kareem’s defensive impact was greater so should that not count in Kareem’s favor since he was the Lakers rim protector on the Lakers?

Jordan was better. But recency bias is real.

Not sure how someone's season can be the best ever from any age perspective when they played lesser games than everyone else on the poll. Plus the teams has shown to be better without him while he's been out. Doesn't sound like much of an impact on the team to me.

I'll take 38 year old MJ and Kareem over Lebron.