Whats the next best moment/series MJ has to Bron's '16 Finals Heroics?

[ArbitraryWater]

And what is the next best opponent he faced compared to LeBron's 2014 and 2016 finals opponents, or the most adversity (balance between help/opposition) as LeBron's 2015 finals?

[fourkicks44]

And what is the next best opponent he faced compared to LeBron's 2014 and 2016 finals opponents, or the most adversity (balance between help/opposition) as LeBron's 2015 finals?

41 points per game in the 93 Finals.

[BigKAT]

And what is the next best opponent he faced compared to LeBron's 2014 and 2016 finals opponents, or the most adversity (balance between help/opposition) as LeBron's 2015 finals?

I don't know.
I mean, I don't think he had such a moment.

But he was never the underdog, can we really hold that against him?

Lebron's heroics were well.. Heroic.
But Jordan had a great team, coach and everything in place. Not his fault.
As opposed to Lebron who had a new coach, playoff virgins and even a new GM. (14')

You can only get up if you fall.
MJ didn't fall.

[ClipperRevival]

I don't know.
I mean, I don't think he had such a moment.

But he was never the underdog, can we really hold that against him?

Lebron's heroics were well.. Heroic.
But Jordan had a great team, coach and everything in place. Not his fault.
As opposed to Lebron who had a new coach, playoff virgins and even a new GM. (14')

You can only get up if you fall.
MJ didn't fall.

Please. This is a load of crap. In hindsight, it's so EASY to say MJ had it all in place but the REALITY was, he was viewed as a great individual talent that didn't know how to win like Magic/Bird before he started winning. He was drafted by what was then a joke franchise in the Bulls. He had like 4 coaches in his first 5 seasons. So there was always that talk, "yeah, he scores a lot and dunks but alot but he doesn't win like Magic/Bird." And that did eat at him. He didn't win his first title until his 7th season at the age of 28. He had to battle the great Bucks, Celtics and Pistons teams with no help. That's why he broke down after winning his 1st titles because he had finally climed that mountain.

All MJ needed was some help. And once he figured out how to win, he never let go of his throne. The hardest thing to do is to make greatness look easy/normal. And that's when people can sometimes start to question the legitimacy of his era.

[BigKAT]

Please. This is a load of crap. In hindsight, it's so EASY to say MJ had it all in place but the REALITY was, he was viewed as a great individual talent that didn't know how to win like Magic/Bird before he started winning. He was drafted by what was then a joke franchise in the Bulls. He had like 4 coaches in his first 5 seasons. So there was always that talk, "yeah, he scores a lot and dunks but alot but he doesn't win like Magic/Bird." And that did eat at him. He didn't win his first title until his 7th season at the age of 28. He had to battle the great Bucks, Celtics and Pistons teams with no help. That's why he broke down after winning his 1st titles because he had finally climed that mountain.

All MJ needed was some help. And once he figured out how to win, he never let go of his throne. The hardest thing to do is to make greatness look easy/normal. And that's when people can sometimes start to question the legitimacy of his era.

Prime Jordan didn't fail man.
Prime Jordan got to the top and stayed there.

The biggest 'Controversy' I can think of is Barkley getting MVP and Jordan making him regret it.

Lebron had to overcome obstacles throughout this prime. A huge hurdle in the form of the GOAT regular season team.

The fact that Jordan did not does not deminish his greatness, it's just what it is.

[Akrazotile]

41 points per game in the 93 Finals.


Hold on right there, Mister.


That Suns team was defensive garbage.


They were not a #1 ranked defense, a la the GS Warriors

[ClipperRevival]

As for the answer to this question, LeBron might've had the most eye popping finals. Say an A+ in grade. Well, MJ had like 5 A grade finals and 1 B grade.

1991 - Beat Magic in what was an amazingly all-around and GOAT level efficient series.
1992 - The shrug game 1. Big hype about him and Drexler. And MJ shutting up all doubters.
1993 - 41ppg on 50% for the series. His team needed almost all of those points.
1996 - His worst finals. But he was great when the series was in doubt (first 3 games).
1997 - His most clutch finals. Flu game. Game 1 and 5 winners.
1998 - Closed the deal with a 45 point game.

MJ had a DOMINANT footprint in all of the finals. No one has had as many alpha dog, make a statment, demoralize your opponent moments than MJ. It's really not even close.

[ClipperRevival]

Prime Jordan didn't fail man.
Prime Jordan got to the top and stayed there.

The biggest 'Controversy' I can think of is Barkley getting MVP and Jordan making him regret it.

Lebron had to overcome obstacles throughout this prime. A huge hurdle in the form of the GOAT regular season team.

The fact that Jordan did not does not deminish his greatness, it's just what it is.

Lol. Did you not read what I just typed? Like I said, people who never saw that era just assume it was laid out for him when in reality, MJ had to get it. Nothing is given to you at the highest level. You have to take it. Winners take it, losers are hesitant.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Nothing Jordan touches beats what LeBron did in 2016. Nothing.

[ClipperRevival]

Hold on right there, Mister.


That Suns team was defensive garbage.


They were not a #1 ranked defense, a la the GS Warriors

They were a high powered offensive team, had HCA, the league MVP and a deeper, more talented roster. Without MJ's 41.0 ppg on 50%, the Bulls lose that series. Heck, if he gives you 30 ppg, they lose for sure. It took a superhuman series by MJ for the Bulls to have a chance.

[ClipperRevival]

And of course, because MJ went 6/6 and never lost, people just assume he didn't face great competition. :oldlol: I guess it's better to lose a few and give the excuse of the comp was too strong. MJ prevented other greats from becoming top 10-15 borderline GOATs (Ewing, Drexler, Barkley, Payton, Kemp, Malone, Stockton). Beat Shaq. Beat incredibly tough teams in the EC (Cavs, Knicks, Heat, Pacers) and faced great teams in the WC when it was very competitive.

[bond10]

Nothing Jordan touches beats what LeBron did in 2016. Nothing.

Lebron got his but let's not act like playoffs GSW is the same 73 win team. They almost lost to OKC and it looked more like a epic choke job by Curry in the finals more than anything. I can't remember Barkley, Malone, Stockton, or Magic choking like that. Diminishes this so called GOAT 2016 finals a lil bit.

[SilkkTheShocker]

And of course, because MJ went 6/6 and never lost, people just assume he didn't face great competition. :oldlol: I guess it's better to lose a few and give the excuse of the comp was too strong. MJ prevented other greats from becoming top 10-15 borderline GOATs (Ewing, Drexler, Barkley, Payton, Kemp, Malone, Stockton). Beat Shaq. Beat incredibly tough teams in the EC (Cavs, Knicks, Heat, Pacers) and faced great teams in the WC when it was very competitive.

Ewing, Drexler, Barkley, Kemp, etc wouldn't win titles in this era either. CP3/Griffin alone are better than Payton/Kemp, and they can't even get to the WCF. And good Lord, do you think LeBron would rather play the 92 Blazers or the 13 Spurs? Now about the 16 Warriors or 98 Jazz? :oldlol: I couldn't even imagine LeBron's main eastern conference rivalry being a skinny jumpshooter that needs screens to get open. Or a Knicks whose second best player was a grocery bagger. Not impressed at all.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Lebron got his but let's not act like playoffs GSW is the same 73 win team. They almost lost to OKC and it looked more like a epic choke job by Curry in the finals more than anything. I can't remember Barkley, Malone, Stockton, or Magic choking like that. Diminishes this so called GOAT 2016 finals a lil bit.


Magic choked hard in the 84 Finals. Barkley blew series leads in 94 and 95. 95 being a 3-1 lead over the Rockets. Malone and Stockton lost several series they were the favorites.

[SilkkTheShocker]

I see posters on here try to tear about the Warriors' 73 win record. Here is the thing, the narrative will be LeBron toppled a 73 win team as a huge underdog. No matter how hard you try to convince yourselves that the win wasn't that big of a deal, it will be remembered in NBA history as being one of the biggest wins ever.

[ArbitraryWater]

'93 Suns were just so poorly defensively, and Bron shot a higher %, better defense, rebounds, playmaking, etc...

'91 is up statistically, but that Bulls' team was far better in the first place than the injury riddled Lakers.

[LostCause]

I mean I dont know what measure yal want to pretend is "reliable" for comparing teams across eras, but the 96-97 Jazz would be the 2nd or 3rd best opponent either MJ or Lebron have defeated in the Finals. The Warriors of this past season are the only ones higher

The Sonic are also in the Top 5

This done by using both Elo and SRS ratings. If anyone has other objective measures and want to throw them out there to show this rankings are bad, go ahead and offer it up. I'm interested to see it

Edit: Oh and I only mentioned teams Lebron/MJ defeated in the Finals for obvious reasons (Including but not limited to: Jordan never losing in the Finals and why count teams Lebron didn't even defeat?)

[bond10]

I see posters on here try to tear about the Warriors' 73 win record. Here is the thing, the narrative will be LeBron toppled a 73 win team as a huge underdog. No matter how hard you try to convince yourselves that the win wasn't that big of a deal, it will be remembered in NBA history as being one of the biggest wins ever.

Not in this digital age where every kid looks up stats when making comparisons. They'll realize how shitty finals Curry was compared to regular regular season.

[Mr Feeny]

'93 Suns were just so poorly defensively, and Bron shot a higher %, better defense, rebounds, playmaking, etc...

'91 is up statistically, but that Bulls' team was far better in the first place than the injury riddled Lakers.

Maybe all true except for the "shot a higher %"
I think MJ shot 50% while lebron shit 49%? It's negligible but just wanted to post that out.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

In terms of significance? Winning a title for the city of Cleveland? Sure. LeBron's 2016 finals might be a cut above.

Impact and just...playing basketball? '93 MJ was better. The 1991 Bulls along with MJ weren't favorites against the Lakers either; after losing Game 1 @ Chicago their play in that series was masterful.

[ClipperRevival]

GSW was somewhat of a fraud. They did NOT play like a historically dominant team in the playoffs. They should've lost to OKC. They were just 12-5 heading into the finals. They didn't resemble ANYTHING like a historic team throughout the playoffs. Even LeBron fans have to admit this.

Still have to give LeBron credit because he took advantage of Curry's disappearance and took it. And had many alpha dog moments. But the team they played was not a historically great team.

[ArbitraryWater]

In terms of significance? Winning a title for the city of Cleveland? Sure. LeBron's 2016 finals might be a cut above.

Impact and just...playing basketball? '93 MJ was better. The 1991 Bulls along with MJ weren't favorites against the Lakers either; after losing Game 1 @ Chicago their play in that series was masterful.

They were seen head to head at the time, but most guys here also said they knew at the time CHI should be favored.. just the better team. Media still gave respect to Magic, though.

[ArbitraryWater]

Maybe all true except for the "shot a higher %"
I think MJ shot 50% while lebron shit 49%? It's negligible but just wanted to post that out.

My bad.

[Da_Realist]

Lebron wouldn't average 41 in a gym by himself. And he certainly wouldn't shoot 50%.

[Mr Feeny]

Lebron wouldn't average 41 in a gym by himself. And he certainly wouldn't shoot 50%.

30 points on 50% along with 11 and 9 isn't bad.
Or 36 ppg last year, albeit on poor efficiency

[Da_Realist]

41 is what happens when a team dared MJ to beat them with jumpshots.

[Mr Feeny]

They're not the same type of player. Lebron isn't about jumpsuits or necessary only scoring. He's about an all around game and he just became the only man in history to lead both teams in all statistical categories. Out blocking the opposition big men. Outrebounding opposition centers. Out-assisting everyone on either team and out scoring everyone too.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

They're not the same type of player. Lebron isn't about jumpsuits or necessary only scoring. He's about an all around game and he just became the only man in history to lead both teams in all statistical categories. Out blocking the opposition big men. Outrebounding opposition centers. Out-assisting everyone on either team and out scoring everyone too.

Mike is one of the greatest 2-way, all around players in history though.

Only difference really is that dude was just a FAR greater scorer. I mean...there's a reason MJ holds the most scoring records (non-longevity) in playoff history.

[ArbitraryWater]

They're not the same type of player. Lebron isn't about jumpsuits or necessary only scoring. He's about an all around game and he just became the only man in history to lead both teams in all statistical categories. Out blocking the opposition big men. Outrebounding opposition centers. Out-assisting everyone on either team and out scoring everyone too.

^from a guy who grew up on MJ and had him as his childhoo idol :applause: good to hear you preach your knowledge man

[Mr Feeny]

^from a guy who grew up on MJ and had him as his childhoo idol :applause: good to hear you preach your knowledge man

:cheers:

[ArbitraryWater]

Mike is one of the greatest 2-way, all around players in history though.

Only difference really is that dude was just a FAR greater scorer. There's a reason MJ holds the most scoring records (non-longevity) in the playoffs.

True, but outside of one year where MJ went to score boards to check for his all around stats, he never averaged 6 or more assists or rebounds... different to Bron who's clipping 7-8 every year.

[Da_Realist]

They're not the same type of player. Lebron isn't about jumpsuits or necessary only scoring. He's about an all around game and he just became the only man in history to lead both teams in all statistical categories. Out blocking the opposition big men. Outrebounding opposition centers. Out-assisting everyone on either team and out scoring everyone too.

What big men? What centers? All the "big men" are out at the three point line. How many true point guards are in the league? If 41 can be mocked, anything can be.

[Mr Feeny]

Mike is one of the greatest 2-way, all around players in history though.

Only difference really is that dude was just a FAR greater scorer. I mean...there's a reason MJ holds the most scoring records (non-longevity) in playoff history.

Agreed but I'd say that Lebron's more well-rounded than Jordan was.
We agree that both are great 2 way players and great scorers. I'd say that Jordan has the edge in scoring while lebron has the edge in other areas.

If Jordan had an advantage in scoring, Lebron had an advantage in rebounding, playmaking,shot blocking and help defense. Jordan was a better man to man defender.
But overall, if we look at ALL of those, I'm not sure Jordan's edge in scoring gives him that much separation given that Lebron has an advantage in those other categories.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

True, but outside of one year where MJ went to score boards to check for his all around stats, he never averaged 6 or more assists or rebounds... different to Bron who's clipping 7-8 every year.

That's a horrible argument, but then again you might not be serious.

Bron "checks his stats" all the time. Y'all are going crazy over LeBron's production this last finals, and he obviously deserves praise, but Jordan did average 30/11/7 while out-assisting Magic for over half the 1991 finals.

Keep a little perspective. Just saying.

[LostCause]

True, but outside of one year where MJ went to score boards to check for his all around stats, he never averaged 6 or more assists or rebounds... different to Bron who's clipping 7-8 every year.

You should put this into context

In that particular season MJ was asked to run the point. It was assumed that since he was commanding so much attention defensively it made sense for him to use that to his teams advantage, so he did. The Bulls were also winning and teams just didn't know how to handle it. Sort of like the problem with Lebron now. How do you defend a guy who can kill you by scoring but he's also setting up his teammates? Analysts were straight up debating whether Jordan had become the best point guard in the league, and Magic was still playing

As for checking his stats, that did occur but I don't see the relevance. He wanted to see how close he was to a triple double (This was during that historic triple-double streak he had). I don't see what's wrong with it, his team was winning. Lebrons done it too
http://www.cleveland.com/cavs/index.ssf/2015/04/lebron_james_triple-double_cav.html

Difference is Bron does every year what MJ only really did for less than half of one. Some people will take that some type of way but don't really see how it can be denied their roles in their teams respective gameplans differ greatly. Certainly wasn't out of MJ's ability to grab a few more boards or assists per game, as he displayed in plenty of playoff series or prior to the triangle. Just wasn't what he was used to do (Primary Ball handler/distributor)

[Mr Feeny]

What big men? What centers? All the "big men" are out at the three point line. How many true point guards are in the league? If 41 can be mocked, anything can be.

It's a different game, isn't it?
Ezeli is still a relatively large man. Ditto Bogut. Iggy is not small and neither is green.

I'm not sure it's all about size either. Rodman and Barkley were both smaller than lebron.

I'm not sure anyone is mocking 41 ppg. If someone did, he's an idiot. But the idea that you'll "okay them back" by mocking a 30 point triple double average against the winningest team in nba history doesn't make much sense.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Agreed but I'd say that Lebron's more well-rounded than Jordan was.
We agree that both are great 2 way players and great scorers. I'd say that Jordan has the edge in scoring while lebron has the edge in other areas.

If Jordan had an advantage in scoring, Lebron had an advantage in rebounding, playmaking,shot blocking and help defense. Jordan was a better man to man defender.
But overall, if we look at ALL of those, I'm not sure Jordan's edge in scoring gives him that much separation given that Lebron has an advantage in those other categories.

The raw stats and impact data we have pretty much say it all. LeBron is one of the greatest players in history, probably the second greatest perimeter player of all timeh, just not Jordan great yet.

Along with the numbers, look at the results and ways they were/are defended.

LeBron's skills or lack there of make him more susceptible to being "stopped". MJ was more dominant, despite not being as well-rounded.

[Mr Feeny]

The raw stats and impact data we have pretty much say it all. LeBron is one of the greatest players in history, probably the second greatest perimeter player of all timeh, just not Jordan great yet.

Along with the numbers, look at the results and ways they were/are defended.

LeBron's skills or lack there of make him more susceptible to being "stopped". MJ was more dominant, despite not being as well-rounded.

Statistically, Jordan is 1st in career PER and ws/48 in regular season play and the finals.
But lebron is not just ahead of any other perimeter player; he's ahead of anyone else who's ever played. He's 2nd in both the regular season and playoffs in PER IIRC.

On the otherhand, I'd you value DPM, VORP and total Winshares more, Lebron has the edge there as he's number 1 all time in all those categories.

He can't catch Jordan's scoring average in the playoffs but can give himself the longevity production argument. He'll surpass Jordan in playoff scoring next year, finals scoring soon enough, and will inevitably also surpass him in career regular season scoring
He's already ahead in assists, rebounds, steals and blocks.

If it's a statistical debate, it's not clear cut. Peak for peak,MJ's coming out on top. But he only had 11 full seasons with the bulls. He didn't dominate as long as lebron will have done.

If Lebron comes up slightly short in terms of peak production, he'll make up for it in longevity.

[Young X]

In terms of significance? Winning a title for the city of Cleveland? Sure. LeBron's 2016 finals might be a cut above.

Impact and just...playing basketball? '93 MJ was better. The 1991 Bulls along with MJ weren't favorites against the Lakers either; after losing Game 1 @ Chicago their play in that series was masterful.This is how I look at it.

James and Cleveland winning their first title against a team like the Warriors was a bigger, more impressive accomplishment that any of the Bulls' finals victories. I don't see how anybody who isn't stupid can deny that.

But individually, Michael's '91 and '93 Finals are better. As impressive as coming back from the 1-3 deficit was, James had 3 disappointing games that played a part in even getting them in that hole.

Now that I think about it, a good comparison for Bron's '16 finals is Wade's '06 finals. Both improbable comebacks as underdogs driven by a superstar playing GOAT-level basketball.

[ClipperRevival]

They're not the same type of player. Lebron isn't about jumpsuits or necessary only scoring. He's about an all around game and he just became the only man in history to lead both teams in all statistical categories. Out blocking the opposition big men. Outrebounding opposition centers. Out-assisting everyone on either team and out scoring everyone too.

True. But let's get real here. Many times in the finals, he was the tallest and biggest man on the floor. This is the small ball era. Doubt he leads the finals in blocks in a more normal era with normal bigs patrolling the paint. But still, unbelievably impressive regardless.

[LostCause]

I wonder what Jordans all time-stats and percentages would look if he never retired the first time and didn't join the Wizards at like 39, but played until maybe the year 2000. I'd imagine he'd be in better shape than he actually was in during the second 3-peat and far greater shape than he was in during his Wizards years. Then again he felt he wasn't being challenged and he probably could've slacked off....

Really something that the man pretty much left 2 years during his prime. Not to mention the one lost due to injury

[guy]

Is it just me, or is it not insane how much weight people put into Lebron's little 1-2 rpg and apg advantage over Jordan when it comes to impact? :oldlol:

[Mr Feeny]

True. But let's get real here. Many times in the finals, he was the tallest and biggest man on the floor. This is the small ball era. Doubt he leads the finals in blocks in a more normal era with normal bigs patrolling the paint. But still, unbelievably impressive regardless.

But doesn't small ball when you're the tallest player on the court and leading rebounder mean you're less likely to be leading everyone in steals as well? Point taken about the style of play. It's a different era.

[Mr Feeny]

I wonder what Jordans all time-stats and percentages would look if he never retired the first time and didn't join the Wizards at like 39, but played until maybe the year 2000. I'd imagine he'd be in better shape than he actually was in during the second 3-peat and far greater shape than he was in during his Wizards years. Then again he felt he wasn't being challenged and he probably could've slacked off....

Really something that the man pretty much left 2 years during his prime. Not to mention the one lost due to injury

31.5 ppg, 6, 5 on 51.5% fg , 33.0%3fg and 33.8%FT I think after 1998.


His numbers after the first retirement were staggering. Had he stayed out then,his averages would have been insane.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Statistically, Jordan is 1st in career PER and ws/48 in regular season play and the finals.
But lebron is not just ahead of any other perimeter player; he's ahead of anyone else who's ever played. He's 2nd in both the regular season and playoffs in PER IIRC.

On the otherhand, I'd you value DPM, VORP and total Winshares more, Lebron has the edge there as he's number 1 all time in all those categories.

He can't catch Jordan's scoring average in the playoffs but can give himself the longevity production argument. He'll surpass Jordan in playoff scoring next year, finals scoring soon enough, and will inevitably also surpass him in career regular season scoring
He's already ahead in assists, rebounds, steals and blocks.

If it's a statistical debate, it's not clear cut. Peak for peak,MJ's coming out on top. But he only had 11 full seasons with the bulls. He didn't dominate as long as lebron will have done.

If Lebron comes up slightly short in terms of peak production, he'll make up for it in longevity.

PER adjusts for pace and is mostly an efficiency stat...so if the purpose of was using it to say Player A > Player B in efficiency? We're good.

VORP and winshares are pretty much crap and don't account for defenses, opponent, lineups etc. Its too reliant on the TEAM aspect (:oldlol: @ Kobe leading LA in winshares during the 2001 playoffs).

Far as DPM goes, where are you getting that info? I wasn't aware DPM existed in the 90s, or at least during the late 80s and early 90s where MJ was at his best.

Longevity stats and totals don't do it for me either. Kobe has a bundle of them, and look where he's @ all time. On the surface you would think he's surefire top 3-5. He ain't.

If we're being realistic? LeBron's stats and career averages are all going down from this point forward. Unless dude is on some Space Jam "secret juice" ish, that's likely what will happen. What happens to all great players. Father time.

MJ will reign supreme, IMO.

[Da_Realist]

Is it just me, or is it not insane how much weight people put into Lebron's little 1-2 rpg and apg advantage over Jordan when it comes to impact? :oldlol:

Especially comsidering MJ has more offensive rebounds against tougher competition where big men were big men and not three point specialists. I wonder how may rebounds Lebron would average if he actually had to fight for them against Oakley, Mason and Ewing one night, Barkley another night, and Daugherty, Nance and Hot Rod on another instead of against jumpshot happy stretch 4's.

[ClipperRevival]

But doesn't small ball when you're the tallest player on the court and leading rebounder mean you're less likely to be leading everyone in steals as well? Point taken about the style of play. It's a different era.

True. He was also very impactful jumping passing lanes and anticipating the ball.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

This is how I look at it.

James and Cleveland winning their first title against a team like the Warriors was a bigger, more impressive accomplishment that any of the Bulls' finals victories. I don't see how anybody who isn't stupid can deny that.

But individually, Michael's '91 and '93 Finals are better. As impressive as coming back from the 1-3 deficit was, James had 3 disappointing games that played a part in even getting them in that hole.

Now that I think about it, a good comparison for Bron's '16 finals is Wade's '06 finals. Both improbable comebacks as underdogs driven by a superstar playing GOAT-level basketball.

Yup.

Not a bad comparison either. Wade's play in 2006 and overall circumstances fared similarly. What really hurts him is all the freethrows though. LeBron's b2b 40-point games felt more "earned" if that makes any sense. The fact they came against THAT Warriors team probably tints the lens if you will.

[Mr Feeny]

PER adjusts for pace and is mostly an efficiency stat...so if the purpose of was using it to say Player A > Player B in efficiency? We're good.

VORP and winshares are pretty much crap and don't account for defenses, opponent, lineups etc. Its too reliant on the TEAM aspect (:oldlol: @ Kobe leading LA in winshares during the 2001 playoffs).

Far as DPM goes, where are you getting that info? I wasn't aware DPM existed in the 90s, or at least during the late 80s and early 90s where MJ was at his best.

Longevity stats and totals don't do it for me either. Kobe has a bundle of them, and look where he's @ all time. On the surface you would think he's surefire top 3-5. He ain't.

If we're being realistic? LeBron's stats and career averages are all going down from this point forward. Unless dude is on some Space Jam "secret juice" ish, that's likely what will happen. What happens to all great players. Father time.

MJ will reign supreme, IMO.

But we can't just cherry pick which ones we like. Per is "good" and vorp isn't, doesn't work.

Not all stats are perfect. I agree. In fact, none are perfect. So we look at the totality. No one individual metric but the overall image.

If Lebron ends up 2nd in PER only to Jordan, 1st in VORP, 1st in DPM,1st in Winshares, the all time playoff leading scorer, the all time playoffs steals leader and a top 3 all time in assists,that's a pretty good portfolio.

I'm not sure about DPM and the 90's so I'll have to look that up.
As far as longevity goes, I agree that it isn't be all end all but if we're using Kobe as an example, Kobe does not and will not have the longevity stats that Lebron does.
In fact, Kobe didn't even have as many playoff points or assists as Jordan despite playing longer.

If someone's case is purely based on longevity, I'd agree with you. It doesnt mean much except that you played longer. In Lebron's case, unlike most player, he's actually not THAT far off in terms of production/averages. There's an advantage there but it's relatively tiny. Combine that with longevity and THAT is what makes his case in my opinion.

Lebron's stats might well go down, but do you really see him averaging less than 24, 7 , 7?
He's already played for so long (13 seasons) that a minor decline isn't going to drop his career averages by that much. The period in which he'd play as a diminished player would be less than the one in which he dominated at an elite level.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

But we can't just cherry pick which ones we like. Per is "good" and vorp isn't, doesn't work.

Not all stats are perfect. I agree. In fact, none are perfect. So we look at the totality. No one individual metric but the overall image.

If Lebron ends up 2nd in PER only to Jordan, 1st in VORP, 1st in DPM,1st in Winshares, the all time playoff leading scorer, the all time playoffs steals leader and a top 3 all time in assists,that's a pretty good portfolio.

I'm not sure about DPM and the 90's so I'll have to look that up.
As far as longevity goes, I agree that it isn't be all end all but if we're using Kobe as an example, Kobe does not and will not have the longevity stats that Lebron does.
In fact, Kobe didn't even have as many playoff points or assists as Jordan despite playing longer.

If someone's case is purely based on longevity, I'd agree with you. It doesnt mean much except that you played longer. In Lebron's case, unlike most player, he's actually not THAT far off in terms of production/averages. There's an advantage there but it's relatively tiny. Combine that with longevity and THAT is what makes his case in my opinion.

Lebron's stats might well go down, but do you really see him averaging less than 24, 7 , 7?
He's already played for so long (13 seasons) that a minor decline isn't going to drop his career averages by that much. The period in which he'd play as a diminished player would be less than the one in which he dominated at an elite level.

We can "cherry pick" stats if we're trying to get the ABSOLUTE best results and information in these player comparisons.

PER is great because all its really telling you is how efficient said player was. Plus it adjusts for some ERA differences.

VORP and winshares are both advanced stats that don't adjust anything. They're basically raw outputs with WAY too much noise to draw anything conclusive.

I mean come on...Kobe > Shaq during his peak...in the playoffs? That doesn't make sense.

DPM is a fantastic stat though. Ditto with OPM and RAPM because THEY DO account for everything I talked about.

Let me know if you find those numbers btw.

[Dragonyeuw]

I see posters on here try to tear about the Warriors' 73 win record. Here is the thing, the narrative will be LeBron toppled a 73 win team as a huge underdog. No matter how hard you try to convince yourselves that the win wasn't that big of a deal, it will be remembered in NBA history as being one of the biggest wins ever.

Way too much fuss is made over team record. Out of all of MJ's accomplishments, the 72 wins is way down on my list. Reason being that the team with the best record doesn't always translate to the championship. We saw that this year. And in the last 15 years alone, on only 4 occasions has the team with the best record won the title. Golden State was the most recent in 2015, the Heat in 2013, before that the 2008 Celtics, and one of the Spurs teams( think 2003).

Hell, the Cavs won 66 games in 2009. Very few teams have beaten that mark. And yet absolutely no-one would consider that team amongst the best ever on account of record. In fact, the 2013 Heat won the same number of games as the 2009 Cavs. Based on the logic of this board and the hyping of season records, that would make them equal........right?

The most impressive thing about the 2016 finals was the 3-1 comeback, regardless of the Warriors record. The Warriors' omnipotence was exposed as a fraud the moment the playoffs started. A team that just the prior round, nearly lost to an OKC team that was blowing double digit 4th quarter leads throughout the regular season, if not for the beta bitchiness of its best player( who then ran for the same team he choked against).

[Asukal]

And what is the next best opponent he faced compared to LeBron's 2014 and 2016 finals opponents, or the most adversity (balance between help/opposition) as LeBron's 2015 finals?

Last time I checked it was Kyrie that nailed the clutch 3. What heroics? :rolleyes: :oldlol:

Surely you don't mean that single block? That's nothing to Jordan's sequence of plays that lead to victory in his last finals game. :bowdown:

[Hey Yo]

In terms of significance? Winning a title for the city of Cleveland? Sure. LeBron's 2016 finals might be a cut above.

Impact and just...playing basketball? '93 MJ was better. The 1991 Bulls along with MJ weren't favorites against the Lakers either; after losing Game 1 @ Chicago their play in that series was masterful.
Bulls lost game 1 cause MJ was trying to be top scorer while assigned to guard Magic. That was a failed experiment.

Games 2-5 Pippen was assigned to guard Magic. That lead to MJ being able to concentrate on scoring while Pippen concentrated on guarding Magic and provide 2nd option scoring.

Hence the backdoor sweep!

[SouBeachTalents]

Last time I checked it was Kyrie that nailed the clutch 3. What heroics? :rolleyes: :oldlol:

Surely you don't mean that single block? That's nothing to Jordan's sequence of plays that lead to victory in his last finals game. :bowdown:

So did Paxton in '93. And Kerr hit the series winner in '97

[Hey Yo]

Way too much fuss is made over team record. Out of all of MJ's accomplishments, the 72 wins is way down on my list.
It doesn't matter where it's on your list.

It's been on the list of who's opinions are looked at that matters for the last 20yrs.

72 is always brought up (at one point or another) by them when referring to MJ's accomplishments.

[ClipperRevival]

It doesn't matter where it's on your list.

It's been on the list of who's opinions are looked at that matters for the last 20yrs.

72 is always brought up (at one point or another) by them when referring to MJ's accomplishments.

Of course the 72 is brought up because it was so special but MJ honestly transcends even that. He was beyond just stats. It was his will and deterimination to win that separated him and people saw this. But in the end, people love winners. Winning is the be all, end all.

Two guys dominated winning more than anyone in history: Russell (old time era) and MJ (modern era).

[Hey Yo]

Of course the 72 is brought up because it was so special but MJ honestly transcends even that. He was beyond just stats. It was his will and deterimination to win that separated him and people saw this. But in the end, people love winners. Winning is the be all, end all.

Two guys dominated winning more than anyone in history: Russell (old time era) and MJ (modern era).
Then maybe you should have quoted Dragonyeuw and convinced him how special 72 was cause it looks like he thinks that it wasn't much of a BFD.

[RRR3]

LeBron isn't as good as MJ. But he's close which is an accomplishment :applause:

[Lebronxrings]

Jordan stans sounding like the kobe stans bringing up ring count and finals wins and losses to back up their insecurity. :oldlol:

[Poetry]

I couldn't even imagine LeBron's main eastern conference rivalry being a skinny jumpshooter that needs screens to get open.

They don't play in the same conference but...

http://www.businesspundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Stephen-Curry-Net-Worth.jpg

[Dragonyeuw]

It doesn't matter where it's on your list.

It's been on the list of who's opinions are looked at that matters for the last 20yrs.

72 is always brought up (at one point or another) by them when referring to MJ's accomplishments.

I didnt say it did matter where on my list. But in the big picture, the best regular team recordwise often doesnt translate to the champion. After the finals, you dont hear anyone calling Curry the best player now, do you? Nor should you, which makes rhe unanimous MVP count about as meaningful as 73 wins. You think Golden state wouldnt trade the best record, or Curry the unanimous MVP distinction, for a championship? The Chicago Bulls knew that their record meant nothing if they didnt legitimize it with a ring. Thats why they'll go down in history with the 86 celtics, 87 Lakers, 72 Lakers. None of the teams considered the greatest of alltime failed to win the title. The 2016 Warriors 10 years from now will be talked about as much as the 2007 Patriots. Remember them?

And in general, they're just not as great as advertised. They have a style of play and roster best designed to take advantage of today rules, and they'll blow through the regular season amassing all kinds of 3point and other offensive records. They jumped out to a 25-0 record, then the season narrative became about breaking the record. They gunned for it, they got it. Kudos to them.Then the playoffs hit, they lose as many games in the playoffs alone as the regular season, nearly lose to OKC, and choke a 3-1 lead in the finals. Hence the term ' the playoffs are a different beast'. The prior year their run was aided by star players dropping like flies, and are nearly upset by a depleted Cavs team with Lebron iso-ing and Matthew Dellavadova making a name for himself. Curry will trick you into thinking his impact rivals the peaks of MJ, Lebron, Wilt, Shaq, then curls up in the fetal position during the playoffs. Zero FMVP votes last year, and gets thoroughly outplayed by Kyrie Irving, likely in noones top 10 list, this year. Its not revisionist history. Its not hate. Its reality.

You quoted a very small portion of my post, which was the least important part. Argue that the 2013 Heat and 2009 Cavs are equal on account of record. Or that the 2009 Lakers who won 65 games are nearly as good as the 1986 Celtics who won 67. Because all this pinning over season records is done by those who like jerking it to gaudy box scores regardless of the end result.

[SouBeachTalents]

In terms of storyline

1. Defeating the 73 win defending champs
2. Leading the first come back from 3-1 down in Finals history
3. Breaking Cleveland's 50 year title drought
4. Leading BOTH teams in every statistical category

We'll probably never see a more epic Finals performance than this one. The LeBron haters can cry about it and try to deny it, but this really was a perfect storm of events and one that we'll probably never see again the rest of our lives

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Bulls lost game 1 cause MJ was trying to be top scorer while assigned to guard Magic. That was a failed experiment.

Games 2-5 Pippen was assigned to guard Magic. That lead to MJ being able to concentrate on scoring while Pippen concentrated on guarding Magic and provide 2nd option scoring.

Hence the backdoor sweep!

So Marv and Fratello saying Chicago should try putting Jordan back on Magic, who picked apart the Bulls in Games 3 and 4, didn't actually happen?

Take it from someone who watched the series... Aside from a few mano y mano possessions in Game 2, Pippen couldn't guard Magic one on one alone. And neither could MJ, which is why they mixed it up and doubled him. Magic feasted in the post where he got most of his assists. That got Worthy going who was Scottie's actual defensive assignment.

[Da_Realist]

So Marv and Fratello saying Chicago should try putting Jordan back on Magic, who picked apart the Bulls in Games 3 and 4, didn't actually happen?

Take it from someone who watched the series... Aside from a few mano y mano possessions in Game 2, Pippen couldn't guard Magic one on one alone. And neither could MJ, which is why they mixed it up and doubled him. Magic feasted in the post where he got most of his assists. That got Worthy going who was Scottie's actual defensive assignment.

Yep. Magic was guarded by MJ, Pip and Horace throughout the series with MJ being the main defender.

[Mr Feeny]

Yep. Magic was guarded by MJ, Pip and Horace throughout the series with MJ being the main defender.

What's everyone fussing about? Whatever combo guarded Magic absolutely nullified him to 43% fg and minimised his impact. At times it was Pippen and at other times Jordan.

Why has the thread gone off on this tangent?

As far as hey yo saying Jordan was the reason the Bulls lost game 1, that's a little silly. He might not have watched the series but Jordan had 36 points, 12 assists and 8 rebounds on 》 50%fg. The rest of the Bulls weren't themselves. 1st finals game jitters.

They recovered and the Bulls backdoor swept the Lakers though.

[Da_Realist]

What's everyone fussing about? Whatever combo guarded Magic absolutely nullified him to 43% fg and minimised his impact. At times it was Pippen and at other times Jordan.

Why has the thread gone off on this tangent?

As far as hey yo saying Jordan was the reason the Bulls lost game 1, that's a little silly. He might not have watched the series but Jordan had 36 points, 12 assists and 8 rebounds on 》 50%fg. The rest of the Bulls weren't themselves. 1st finals game jitters.

They recovered and the Bulls backdoor swept the Lakers though.

You already know why it went off tangent so why did you quote me instead of the guy who initiated the tangent to begin with?

[Mr Feeny]

You already know why it went off tangent so why did you quote me instead of the guy who initiated the tangent to begin with?

Calm down mate? :confusedshrug: