Do you value peak (Michael Jordan) or longevity (LeBron) in the GOAT debate?

[Drygon]

Michael Jordan and LeBron James are undisputed top 2 players in NBA history and it's not even close.

MJ played only 11 full seasons in Chicago Bulls... But Peak MJ is easily by far & away the most dominant player in NBA history.

- After starting 0-3 in 90/91 season, MJ never again lost 3 straight games during a stretch of 629 reg season & playoff games.
- MJ had a season of winning DPOY and averaging 35 PPG on great efficency
- Highest PPG average in NBA history, including 10 scoring titles
- Won a 3-peat, then took 1.5 year long retirement in his prime. MJ won a second 3-peat in 3 full seasons after making comeback

Obviously, Peak LeBron didn't reach the same heights as Peak MJ. But LeBron's longevtity is absolutely unprecedented in NBA history

- LeBron is a top 10 player despite being the oldest player in NBA currently as he will turn 40 in December this year
- LeBron has played most minutes ever in reg season & playoffs
- LeBron is NBA's all-time leading scorer for most points

As the title says, do you value peak or longevity in GOAT debate?

[FKAri]

To me, longevity just means sample size. In basketball you don't need a huge sample size to gauge a player's level. In football(either of them) it's more important and in baseball longevity is everything.

Some people like to argue, "X would only make my team a contender for 5 while Y would do it for 8 years." I don't factor that in.

[3ba11]

Longevity is playing at a lower level for longer

So the "lower level" part means inferior basketball, aka not GOAT basketball

Otoh, Jordan is the only player that played goat offense and goat defense for his entire prime (88-98') - no one is anywhere near this - he was scoring champ and 1st team defense from 88-98'

In addition to being the only player that played goat offense and defense for their entire prime, MJ was MVP over the longest stretch of time.. Specifically, Lebron was MVP-caliber for a 5 year period (09-13'), while MJ won MVP's throughout a 10 year stretch (88-98'), so MJ has goat longevity of MVP play.

[Soundwave]

Peak by far, unless the peak is short where you don't get a proper sense of what the player was, but Jordan won like 6 championships, back to back 3 peats, like you got a very length look at him dominating the league both individually and team wise.

This isn't like Yao Ming or Penny Hardaway or something where like injuries prevented you from really evaluating what they were as a player.

[Da_Realist]

LeBron played way longer but won less, dominated less individually, had less dominant teams (despite team-hopping and searching for the best players to play with) and lost as the favorite several times.

Do I want to draft a once in a lifetime player that will dominate, have the most iconic career, leave everyone in awe, make the game global, expand viewership to astronomical levels and be talked about decades after he is retired?

Or a guy that will reverse many of the gains the NBA had experienced under choice #1, peak at a lower level, win some but lose more, will only stick around for so long before he wants to run from the grind or play with some new best friend. He will gain a lot of individual numbers and accolades over the course of a career that spans across several different teams. His achievements are his achievements, not something a singular franchise can take pride in.

He will basically treat the franchise like an instagram thot instead of a beloved wife, using her until a prettier one shows up. This guy is a rolling stone.

I think the choice is easy.

[RRR3]

LeBron played way longer but won less, dominated less individually, had less dominant teams (despite team-hopping and searching for the best players to play with) and lost as the favorite several times.

Do I want to draft a once in a lifetime player that will dominate, have the most iconic career, leave everyone in awe, make the game global, expand viewership to astronomical levels and be talked about decades after he is retired?

Or a guy that will reverse many of the gains the NBA had experienced under choice #1, peak at a lower level, win some but lose more, will only stick around for so long before he wants to run from the grind or play with some new best friend. He will gain a lot of individual numbers and accolades over the course of a career that spans across several different teams. His achievements are his achievements, not something a singular franchise can take pride in.

He will basically treat the franchise like an instagram thot instead of a beloved wife, using her until a prettier one shows up. This guy is a rolling stone.

I think the choice is easy.
It's so funny how utterly incapable you are of discussing this subject without getting incredibly emotional :oldlol:

Just completely unable to make rational arguments, nothing but getting in your feelings about your childhood hero.

[sdot_thadon]

Michael Jordan and LeBron James are undisputed top 2 players in NBA history and it's not even close.

MJ played only 11 full seasons in Chicago Bulls... But Peak MJ is easily by far & away the most dominant player in NBA history.

- After starting 0-3 in 90/91 season, MJ never again lost 3 straight games during a stretch of 629 reg season & playoff games.
- MJ had a season of winning DPOY and averaging 35 PPG on great efficency
- Highest PPG average in NBA history, including 10 scoring titles
- Won a 3-peat, then took 1.5 year long retirement in his prime. MJ won a second 3-peat in 3 full seasons after making comeback

Obviously, Peak LeBron didn't reach the same heights as Peak MJ. But LeBron's longevtity is absolutely unprecedented in NBA history

- LeBron is a top 10 player despite being the oldest player in NBA currently as he will turn 40 in December this year
- LeBron has played most minutes ever in reg season & playoffs
- LeBron is NBA's all-time leading scorer for most points

As the title says, do you value peak or longevity in GOAT debate?

If you're not valuing Both, you're doing it wrong. The people that only take one or the other have neon obvious reasons for doing so. There's so many things and categories to consider in the goat conversation that if you're attempting to exempt the strong points of a candidate, you've already lost the debate.

[FilmyCogTurner]

LeBron played way longer but won less, dominated less individually, had less dominant teams (despite team-hopping and searching for the best players to play with) and lost as the favorite several times.

Do I want to draft a once in a lifetime player that will dominate, have the most iconic career, leave everyone in awe, make the game global, expand viewership to astronomical levels and be talked about decades after he is retired?

Or a guy that will reverse many of the gains the NBA had experienced under choice #1, peak at a lower level, win some but lose more, will only stick around for so long before he wants to run from the grind or play with some new best friend. He will gain a lot of individual numbers and accolades over the course of a career that spans across several different teams. His achievements are his achievements, not something a singular franchise can take pride in.

He will basically treat the franchise like an instagram thot instead of a beloved wife, using her until a prettier one shows up. This guy is a rolling stone.

I think the choice is easy.

I don't know how anyone could disagree with this...

[Im Still Ballin]

Peak because the memories and impact are greater.

[gengiskhan]

why LONGEVITY is "back" loaded and never "front" loaded.

the entire NCAA career is overlooked because 18 YO babies debuting in NBA start of mid-90s.

if Player A plays full 4 years of NCAA amateur career and actually performs, it must be included in LONGEVITY.

But 18 YO kid bench warming for 2 years or playing limited minutes is counted as full season in LONGEVITY.

This makes LONGEVITY highly overrated and actually worthless.

Give me Peak or Best years any given day.

[RRR3]

why LONGEVITY is "back" loaded and never "front" loaded.

the entire NCAA career is overlooked because 18 YO babies debuting in NBA start of mid-90s.

if Player A plays full 4 years of NCAA amateur career and actually performs, it must be included in LONGEVITY.

But 18 YO kid bench warming for 2 years or playing limited minutes is counted as full season in LONGEVITY.

This makes LONGEVITY highly overrated and actually worthless.

Give me Peak or Best years any given day.
Bill Walton>Duncan then amirite

[Naero]

Both are important, though peak play holds considerably more weight for me. As long as one sustains their dominance long enough to prove they're not a fluke or one-trick pony, I won't penalize them for relatively shorter primes (e.g., Larry Bird).

Longevity, like many aspects, is especially tricky to compare across eras. Training, nutrition, medical care, and technology have all advanced over time, which have helped lengthen players' primes in general. Not to mention, they're more affordable than ever now because of how much more money players make nowadays (even accounting for inflation). It's why although I don't ignore longevity, I don't value it as much as peak/prime play, the latter of which isn't as era-dependent.

[StrongLurk]

The whole longevity thing with Lebron is downplaying the fact that the dude had a top 5, and arguably top 3 peak, of all time.

The fact the Lebron is a clear tier or two below his peak, yet still a top 10 player at 40, proves this.

Basically you are asking do you want a 9.9 (MJ) for 11 years or do you want a 9.8 (Lebron) for 15 years?

[SouBeachTalents]

The whole longevity thing with Lebron is downplaying the fact that the dude had a top 5, and arguably top 3 peak, of all time.

The fact the Lebron is a clear tier or two below his peak, yet still a top 10 player at 40, proves this.

Basically you are asking do you want a 9.9 (MJ) for 11 years or do you want a 9.8 (Lebron) for 15 years?
Yeah, I find the longevity angle extremely disingenuous. People try to act like he's Karl Malone, but like you said, LeBron at his peak is still easily one of the 3-5 greatest players ever, and was either the best player in the league or in legitimate discussion for it for over a decade (2009-2020).

[gengiskhan]

Both are important, though peak play holds considerably more weight for me. As long as one sustains their dominance long enough to prove they're not a fluke or one-trick pony, I won't penalize them for relatively shorter primes (e.g., Larry Bird).

Longevity, like many aspects, is especially tricky to compare across eras. Training, nutrition, medical care, and technology have all advanced over time, which have helped lengthen players' primes in general. Not to mention, they're more affordable than ever now because of how much more money players make nowadays (even accounting for inflation). It's why although I don't ignore longevity, I don't value it as much as peak/prime play, the latter of which isn't as era-dependent.

Disagree.

Longevity is actually overrated. NBA is a young man and grown man's sport. Not an old man's sport.

No nutrition. tech. training. medical care will get you back to 28-32. reverse your age. Also, Testo level decreases every year starting age 25!

Many dont like to admit it. Testo level also effects brain function and mentality. Reason older player make costly decisions (TO) with Bball in their hand despite peak conditioning. No tech, medical care can reverse aging joints, loss of fluid, aging ligaments and tendons. nothing.

prime peak window is always short. 28-32 yrs max. Some get lucky get to 33rd yr with great diet, sleep.

My point is. 1998 ECF Game 6. MJ was 35. Last play of the game. MJ drives to basket. falls to the ground on his own. no tripping by defender. no pushing.
this is age 35 telling you. mentally, MJ thinks he can get to FTs or "and1" but physically, his joints, muscles too old. He is 35 YO and Not 29. Hence, he falls flat straight to the ground.

[SATAN]

It's so funny how utterly incapable you are of discussing this subject without getting incredibly emotional :oldlol:

Just completely unable to make rational arguments, nothing but getting in your feelings about your childhood hero.

Pretty sure he's retarded...

[Jasper]

jordan had 2 3peats.

If he did not go to baseball , he would of had 9 chips(.)

[iamgine]

Both have GOAT peaks.

[gengiskhan]

jordan had 2 3peats.

If he did not go to baseball , he would of had 9 chips(.)

straw man's argument!

heard it million times b4.

going thru 8 Full 82 games season straight (1990-1994) with guy like Pippen (bad lower back, lower leg issues) is impossible!.

and " NO", 1994 and 1995 MJ is NOT beating 1994 or 1995 Hakeem at peak of his powers 2 times. Impossible.

Beating Malone back-2-back in his peak prime is much easier than beating Hakem Back-2-back.

Hakeem is Top 8 GOATs to ever play. Hakeem also is DPOY 2 x unlike Malone. Hakeem is beating 1994 or 1995 MJ atleast once if not back-2-back.

Had MJ not retired in 1993-1995, he would've retired in 1995 or 1996 for sure once his original contract was done!.

all night gambling, boozing, poor sleep patterns, Bball by day, partying by night would've eventually destroyed 32-33 YO MJ.

MJ did not worship basketball like Kobe who actually had discipline and lived and breath Bball and its history.

MJ loved Bball after Baseball and he saw it as a great teacher, an institution of life. that's about it. His memoirs talk about this.

[Axe]

jordan had 2 3peats.

If he did not go to baseball , he would of had 9 chips(.)
But he'll never have any without scottie.

[sdot_thadon]

The whole longevity thing with Lebron is downplaying the fact that the dude had a top 5, and arguably top 3 peak, of all time.

The fact the Lebron is a clear tier or two below his peak, yet still a top 10 player at 40, proves this.

Basically you are asking do you want a 9.9 (MJ) for 11 years or do you want a 9.8 (Lebron) for 15 years?

Right. And I've seen high level conversations on peak conclude for many that Lebron peaked higher. The focus on longevity is to hope you don't notice his peak is very debatable. Also, for all of you in this thread if Peak matters most, then Wilt is probably the goat and Shaq should have alot more to say about it as well, but of course it's not the most important thing unless it needs to be. Which says all you need to know.

[NBAGOAT]

Peak is more important but longevity can’t be ignored it’s some mix of both. Your goal is to help your team to win championships. Greater peak gives you higher to win a title better longevity gives you more chances. To do some math Jordan say gave you a random team a 35% chance to win a title for a 5yr prime but didn’t play for 3 years. Lebron gave you a 30% chance for 8 years. I’m not pulling these numbers randomly 32% is the cutoff thinking basketball gave for a goat season.

You expect to win 1.75 titles with Jordan and 2.4 with lebron. Even if you don’t think longevity should be added up linearly, it’s obvious from this example longevity matters

Edit: I made gap bigger between lebron and Jordan jist to make a point likely isn’t that big

[GimmeThat]

if we were to assign numeric value to the concept peak, it's a phrase which means high risk for the sake of high reward

in the grand scheme, the valuation of peak is just (0.1)^infinity.

in another simpler idealogy, evolution derives from longevity, not peak.

[HoopsNY]

Peak and dominance were the rubric for decades. Clutch Media came around to change the narrative in order to help LeBron's case. It doesn't matter anyway. Hakeem is the GOAT.

[Wardell Curry]

Longevity has to matter a lot, at least to a point, because otherwise people should have Tracy McGrady on Kobe Bryant's level, and the truth is none of us do. So anyone who argues that longevity doesn't matter is lying.

Longevity is also the reason that Shaq isn't the GOAT.

[iamgine]

Longevity has to matter a lot, at least to a point, because otherwise people should have Tracy McGrady on Kobe Bryant's level, and the truth is none of us do. So anyone who argues that longevity doesn't matter is lying.

Longevity is also the reason that Shaq isn't the GOAT.

Tracy was more of a accomplishment issue tho, not longevity.

[HoopsNY]

Tracy was more of a accomplishment issue tho, not longevity.

Yea. I was about to say this. With T-Mac, yea he didn't have the longevity, but he also didn't do much else. He never got out of the 1st round, never won an MVP, let alone a FMVP, was never DPOY or All-Defensive 1st Team (though an argument could be made that in a couple years, he was almost as good a defender as Kobe), etc.

[GimmeThat]

Tracy was more of a accomplishment issue tho, not longevity.

it's as if he's waiting for the segregation of straight men only gym, and gay men only gym etc.

[John8204]

I go generation and position...peak and longevity are kinda of their own things and they are very subjective.

I value a productive longevity (Stockton, KAJ, Lebron, Duncan) but I also look at consistent peaks (Jordan, Dr J, Bird, West)

[Manny98]

You can't say peak MJ blows peak LeBron out of the water but you can so Lebron's longevity blows MJs out of the water

[John8204]

You could also say Lebron was the best at Longevity while Jordan was 2nd or 3rd in Peak behind Mikan and Wilt. Depending on if you value rings or stats.

[gengiskhan]

Longevity has to matter a lot, at least to a point, because otherwise people should have Tracy McGrady on Kobe Bryant's level, and the truth is none of us do. So anyone who argues that longevity doesn't matter is lying.

Longevity is also the reason that Shaq isn't the GOAT.

Nope!

LONGEVITY is the elephant in the room.

It has been coined deliberately in last 15 yrs starting with Kobe aka BrickBe aka DeadBe to undermine and downgrade previous GOATs. it has to be called out as it is.

Now LBJ is really benefitting with LONGEVITY discussion thanks to Klutch Media and its implanted minions in ESPN and social media.

LONGEVITY has never ever been in discussion when Wilt, Kareem, Dr J, Magic, Bird etc retired. Because all those guys had QUALITY years.

LONGEVITY was deliberately put into discussion to somehow de-thrown the GOAT MJ and somehow replace him using QUANTITATIVE ladder (longevity).

Because no one can ever REPEAT 3-PEAT ever again in a single decade. Lets make it a discussion of 2 Decades aka 20 years aka LONGEVITY.

It all started with Kobe. Kobe FAILED at 3-Peat. then LBJ "not 4, not 5" almost happened with a chance at 4-Peat but FAILED miserably and barely RE-PEATED just like Kobe. The Goal Post had to be deliberately sabotaged and changed so that GOAT MJ had to be dethroned somehow or else, next generation will tank the NBA viewership if GOAT is not anointed from their current generation!

Since Kobe, LBJ and Curry and Durrant RE-PEATED as Champs with Multiple FMVPs (except Curry). Curry is excluded because 1 out of 4 FMVPs chances. Kobe is excluded because one 1 season MVP and riding Shaq for 3 rings. Durrant is excluded because of colluding and building super team.

LBJ has multiple MVPs, FMVPS but biggest problem is LBJs blatant COLLUSIONS and SUPER TEAMS! resulting is easy finals trips from east conf.

How to destroy this narrative of LBJ not being anointed GOAT replacing MJ....................LONGEVITY!. aka 20 years!

[sdot_thadon]

Peak and dominance were the rubric for decades. Clutch Media came around to change the narrative in order to help LeBron's case. It doesn't matter anyway. Hakeem is the GOAT.

It became a narrative once he broke into uncharted territory, it had to be. When you're doing something that's never been done in the history of hoops it's a big deal. You could just as easily say Mj media and fans don't want the narrative because it's one of the few parties Mj isn't invited to. Just like Kobe fans didn't want to see efficiency or they'd meltdown, Lebron has a seat at nearly every conceivable table of the goat discussion. That's his most powerful case.

[RogueBorg]

Back in 2001-2003 I was told that Supermen do exist. "We're seeing things that normal human beings have never done before..." was the talk. What we all came to learn was there is no such thing as Supermen, only regular men who are super at cheating.

[jlip]

You can't say peak MJ blows peak LeBron out of the water but you can so Lebron's longevity blows MJs out of the water

^This.^

Anybody that claims that MJ's peak is "so much" or "vastly" greater than LeBron's peak is simply blinded by nostalgia, fan boy worship, or style preference. While I don't fully agree with everything this YouTuber says (especially his overrating of KG) his analysis of how close their peaks are/were is pretty similar to mines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzzlvnncLOQ&t=44s

In the social media age, it's amazing how the criteria for greatness have switched from "whatever MJ specifically did" to "definitely not anything that favors LeBron." People claiming that longevity is insignificant are only saying that since LeBron has now become the new face of longevity instead of Kareem. Kareem has always been in the GOAT conversation amongst knowledgeable fans, and the fact that he was great for so long, even winning FMVP at age 38, and being the NBA's all time leading scorer have always been contributing factors.

The point is simple. Whether one thinks that LeBron's peak was equal to or better than MJ's is actually a matter of debate. Ultimately, I don't care. One day I may lean MJ. The other day I might lean LBJ. It's actually close. But one thing for certain is that there has never been any NBA player who has been as good as LeBron has been for as long as he has, other than Kareem. You can come up with all the excuses for why that may be the case including changes in medicine, nutrition, rules, physicality, etc., but the point still stands.

And this is why I don't have a single GOAT and rank according to tiers. Two many factors have to be considered to definitely name one player.

[j3lademaster]

I value peak more than longevity. The problem with this agenda thread is that Lebron’s peak can match up with anyone’s.

[WhiteKyrie]

LeBron played way longer but won less, dominated less individually, had less dominant teams (despite team-hopping and searching for the best players to play with) and lost as the favorite several times.

Do I want to draft a once in a lifetime player that will dominate, have the most iconic career, leave everyone in awe, make the game global, expand viewership to astronomical levels and be talked about decades after he is retired?

Or a guy that will reverse many of the gains the NBA had experienced under choice #1, peak at a lower level, win some but lose more, will only stick around for so long before he wants to run from the grind or play with some new best friend. He will gain a lot of individual numbers and accolades over the course of a career that spans across several different teams. His achievements are his achievements, not something a singular franchise can take pride in.

He will basically treat the franchise like an instagram thot instead of a beloved wife, using her until a prettier one shows up. This guy is a rolling stone.

I think the choice is easy.

Couldn’t have said it better. The choices obvious to anyone with a brain, or of somebody with good character.

Here’s one for you, though, that guy that you didn’t pick or Kobe? Or hell that guy you didn’t pick or Magic or Bird?

[dankok8]

Peak for sure because longevity is situational. Lebron got 21 years in the NBA because he came in out of high school plus maybe he would have retired a while ago if he won 7 rings. Likewise maybe Jordan plays 20+ years if he won less. You can easily argue that with 6 rings, he felt like he had nothing more to prove.

And at the end of the day, players are just based on how good they were during their peaks. Lebron wouldn't even be in the GOAT discussion if people didn't think that he also had a great peak.

[gengiskhan]

I value peak more than longevity. The problem with this agenda thread is that Lebron’s peak can match up with anyone’s.

rather a PROPOGANDA thread!

LONGEVITY was never calculated into All Time Great's discussion as much. it matters more in MLB. But never in NBA and NFL.

The GOATness of Barry Sanders will never decline compared to 3 super bowl champs Emitt Smitt because former retired in his prime. Even in today's day and age # of Superbowl wins is not an issue at all in GOAT WR discussion or GOAT running back discussion. Superbowl and SB MVPs are only in discussion at GOAT QB level. With Tom Brady, LONGEVITY conversation is started. but never before that. Not even with Payton Manning.

With MJ, the conversation of # of Championships defined GOATness. But MJ was an ORGANIC GOAT rather than manufactured or Engineered GOAT.

Reason I say ORGANIC b/c by 1993 MJ was atleast consensus GOAT if not unanimous with Wilt being in Conversation as Runner-up. Only sheer dominance of stats was looked at (Scoring Champ dominance + Steals champ dominance). One "offense" and one "defense" category.

With Kobe, the conversation of LONGEVITY actually started. First time, Manufactured/Engineered GOAT conversation was created to belittle and insult Shaq's 3 FMVP dominance (2nd GOAT LAL ever), Hakeem, Magic (being GOAT LAL ever), Bird, Hakeem, Kareem (3nd greatest LAL ever). ESPN wanted to quickly move onto future generation viewers. #1 MJ being ORGANIC GOAT or #2 Kobe MANUFACTURED GOAT.

With LBJ, the LONGEVITY with support of #1 ALL TIME SCORING is being solidified. in favor of another MANUFACTURED GOAT. LBJ doing his due diligence with Klutch Media, 2016 chip "right there makes me GOAT"

reality will always be far far from it. Kobe will NEVER be Top 10 GOATs, LBJ will barely crack Top 10 GOAT. Kobe will be #12 at best. LBJ will be #9 at best.

Once everything is factored in. NCAA legacy, Sheer Dominance (transending/transforming game), awards, accolades, stats dominance, Clutchness, Playoffs dominance, Finals dominance, head-2-head arch-rival performances, team success into ATG or "dynasty" as team leader, PER. the ones that really count instead of fake "analytics" or "longevity" to tilt favor into 18 YO rookies.

[RRR3]

Peak and dominance were the rubric for decades. Clutch Media came around to change the narrative in order to help LeBron's case. It doesn't matter anyway. Hakeem is the GOAT.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

[gengiskhan]

You can't say peak MJ blows peak LeBron out of the water but you can so Lebron's longevity blows MJs out of the water

Here we go again!......same PROPOGANDA narratives that ESPN and Klutch instilled in Gen Z.

Are you including NCAA MJ in LONGEVITY or not. That means MJ has 18 seasons of competitive Bball.

Regarding Peak MJ. MJ had Peak from 1987-1993. that is Prolonged GOAT peak absolute DOMINANCE stuff. LBJ is far far from it.

MJ had 4 MVP "sweeps" to LBJs 2 MVP "sweep" (2012, 2013). also LBJ was helped out by shortened NBA season in 2012.

than there is that 1988 MJ season!. MVP + DPOY + Scoring title + Steals Title.

Where does LBJ fits in all this comparatively. nowhere!.

LBJ had great peak prime. thats about it.

MJ had Peak "prime" (1990-1993). Peak "post-prime" (1995-1998) and Peak "Pre-prime" (1984-1989).

Hell! MJs entire career was some Peak or the other.

Can LBJ peak compare with Hakeem Peak 1993 - 1995? NO!

1994 Hakeem....Greatest Ever Individual Season in NBA History. Season MVP + DPOY + Finals MVP ( arch-nemesis Ewing in 7 games) + Block Shots champ.

[Da_Realist]

Hell! MJs entire career was some Peak or the other.

True. Until he came back for the Wizards. Even when he lost some physical capability, he still dominated the league while winning championships. MJ's peak was higher but also longer than LeBron's. LeBron has just played way longer. MJ won league MVP at 35 while leading his team to 62 wins and a championship with Pippen missing almost 40 games. Powered his team to a title when his best teammate was struggling with back pain. He won his first league MVP at 25 and his last 10 seasons later. LeBron hasn't won a league MVP in his 30s.

MJ retired after a three-peat, came back and did it again as a totally different type of player. LeBron hasn't won a three-peat once in 20 years.
MJ led the league in something (by average) 13 times. He led the league in scoring 10 times and steals 3 times. All three times he led the league in steals he also led the league in scoring. Lebron led the league in something twice in 20 years; scoring once and assists once.
LeBron won the scoring title by 1.7 ppg over 2nd place. MJ had a season where he cleared #2 by 8 points! This would also be one of the years he had 200 steals and 100 blocks. Let's stop the nonsense.

LeBron was the best for a time but there are levels to this. He did not dominate the league like MJ did, who also won more. Peak is not close. The further we dig, the bigger the discrepancy.

[Hey Yo]

No chance the Bulls win 6 titles in 8yrs if MJ doesn't quit to rest up.

[Dbrog]

Well it's clear OP favors LeBron as seen by "Jordan and Lebron are top 2 players in history and it's not close."

The "it's not close" part will always separate stans from people who actually think. There is a legitimate case to be made for anyone in probably the top12ish that everyone puts on their lists. I've seen it argued that Oscar Robinson is the best, by people from his era btw, whereas others might say that Kareem, or Wilt or Russell is. Then others from the 80s still argue that Magic or Bird was the best...hell even Michael still has nothing but admiration for Bird. Point being it's obviously close if these conversations are even happening.

To answer the question though I personally prefer peak because of reasons others have mentioned. I watch the sport to be entertained at the end of the day and it's more entertaining to me to see the underdog defy all odds ala Dirk DESTROYING a superstacked Miami team, or Giannis having a historic run and CAPPING it with a 50pt and 14reb game to close out the Suns, or Duncan leading GARBAGE offensive players to dethrone one of the most dominant 3 peat teams in history. Those are very satisfying storylines to me

[NBAGOAT]

Yea. I was about to say this. With T-Mac, yea he didn't have the longevity, but he also didn't do much else. He never got out of the 1st round, never won an MVP, let alone a FMVP, was never DPOY or All-Defensive 1st Team (though an argument could be made that in a couple years, he was almost as good a defender as Kobe), etc.

yea bill walton is the best example of being higher if longevity didnt matter at all. He was on the lvl of peak kareem a top 5-10 peak of all time arguably

[gengiskhan]

No chance the Bulls win 6 titles in 8yrs if MJ doesn't quit to rest up.

Its much more than that.

1994 and 1995 Bulls were never built to ride out Hakeem's GOAT run in 1994 and 1995.

Bulls were able to ride out Malone's back-2-back run but Malone never was Hakeem's GOAT level.

1994 and 1995 Rockets were Bulls' match up nightmare. Clutch Bob, Mario, mad max, thorpe, addition of Clyde Drexler

They were long, deep and fearless. If they can push 1994 Knicks with Dominant big man to game 7.

Bulls with weakest center position would've lost in 6 games or in a game 7 blow out.

Bulls had no answer for Hakeem despite Kukoc rookie season.

If 1994 Rockets lost to 1994 Bulls in 7 games. Addition of 1995 Drexler to Rockets and Horace leaving for Orlando would've made sure 1995 rockets bulls re-match a quick 5 game win for rockets.

either way, Jordan aint beating Hakeem's GOAT peak twice. He will loose one if not both times.

[Jasper]

straw man's argument!

heard it million times b4.

going thru 8 Full 82 games season straight (1990-1994) with guy like Pippen (bad lower back, lower leg issues) is impossible!.

and " NO", 1994 and 1995 MJ is NOT beating 1994 or 1995 Hakeem at peak of his powers 2 times. Impossible.

Beating Malone back-2-back in his peak prime is much easier than beating Hakem Back-2-back.

Hakeem is Top 8 GOATs to ever play. Hakeem also is DPOY 2 x unlike Malone. Hakeem is beating 1994 or 1995 MJ atleast once if not back-2-back.

Had MJ not retired in 1993-1995, he would've retired in 1995 or 1996 for sure once his original contract was done!.

all night gambling, boozing, poor sleep patterns, Bball by day, partying by night would've eventually destroyed 32-33 YO MJ.

MJ did not worship basketball like Kobe who actually had discipline and lived and breath Bball and its history.

MJ loved Bball after Baseball and he saw it as a great teacher, an institution of life. that's about it. His memoirs talk about this.

ok u name player that could win more than Jordan...challenging Russells count

[Da_Realist]

No chance the Bulls win 6 titles in 8yrs if MJ doesn't quit to rest up.

No chance LeBron plays 20 seasons if he wasn't resting on defense the past 10 and load managing every season.

[SATAN]

True. Until he came back for the Wizards. Even when he lost some physical capability, he still dominated the league while winning championships. MJ's peak was higher but also longer than LeBron's. LeBron has just played way longer. MJ won league MVP at 35 while leading his team to 62 wins and a championship with Pippen missing almost 40 games. Powered his team to a title when his best teammate was struggling with back pain. He won his first league MVP at 25 and his last 10 seasons later. LeBron hasn't won a league MVP in his 30s.

MJ retired after a three-peat, came back and did it again as a totally different type of player. LeBron hasn't won a three-peat once in 20 years.
MJ led the league in something (by average) 13 times. He led the league in scoring 10 times and steals 3 times. All three times he led the league in steals he also led the league in scoring. Lebron led the league in something twice in 20 years; scoring once and assists once.
LeBron won the scoring title by 1.7 ppg over 2nd place. MJ had a season where he cleared #2 by 8 points! This would also be one of the years he had 200 steals and 100 blocks. Let's stop the nonsense.

LeBron was the best for a time but there are levels to this. He did not dominate the league like MJ did, who also won more. Peak is not close. The further we dig, the bigger the discrepancy.

:facepalm

[WhiteKyrie]

No chance LeBron plays 20 seasons if he wasn't resting on defense the past 10 and load managing every season.

Also facts plus probable illegal substance use

[eliteballer]

Longevity with or without Steroids?

[kawhileonard2]

I prefer the guy that turns a franchise that never won into a dynasty without having to change teams. Lebron stacked the deck and still couldn't do that.

[sdot_thadon]

^This.^

Anybody that claims that MJ's peak is "so much" or "vastly" greater than LeBron's peak is simply blinded by nostalgia, fan boy worship, or style preference. While I don't fully agree with everything this YouTuber says (especially his overrating of KG) his analysis of how close their peaks are/were is pretty similar to mines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzzlvnncLOQ&t=44s

In the social media age, it's amazing how the criteria for greatness have switched from "whatever MJ specifically did" to "definitely not anything that favors LeBron." People claiming that longevity is insignificant are only saying that since LeBron has now become the new face of longevity instead of Kareem. Kareem has always been in the GOAT conversation amongst knowledgeable fans, and the fact that he was great for so long, even winning FMVP at age 38, and being the NBA's all time leading scorer have always been contributing factors.

The point is simple. Whether one thinks that LeBron's peak was equal to or better than MJ's is actually a matter of debate. Ultimately, I don't care. One day I may lean MJ. The other day I might lean LBJ. It's actually close. But one thing for certain is that there has never been any NBA player who has been as good as LeBron has been for as long as he has, other than Kareem. You can come up with all the excuses for why that may be the case including changes in medicine, nutrition, rules, physicality, etc., but the point still stands.

And this is why I don't have a single GOAT and rank according to tiers. Two many factors have to be considered to definitely name one player.

Best post in the thread. Goalposts have never shifted as much as they have during Lebrons time. His longevity is a big deal, If it was Mj with that sort of longevity it would be the best shit ever. However since he's not included in that category it must not be that good right? He's got the most buckets in the history of planet earth. Let that sink in. And his peak is side by side with Mjs, and I'd venture to say while it was shorter I'd take his peak defensively over Mike's. We've never seen impact like prime Lebron before and won't ever see it again. The thing that always made me consider him up there before his resume caught up was just watching him play the game. How many guys in the top 10 are capable of any basketball play you can imagine? Everybody scores, Lebron has done some things that are strictly Lebron things. Mj was a sg that played his position to the max, Lbj is a Swiss army knife capable of anything on the floor. I've got them looking eye to eye at this point

[HoopsNY]

It became a narrative once he broke into uncharted territory, it had to be. When you're doing something that's never been done in the history of hoops it's a big deal. You could just as easily say Mj media and fans don't want the narrative because it's one of the few parties Mj isn't invited to. Just like Kobe fans didn't want to see efficiency or they'd meltdown, Lebron has a seat at nearly every conceivable table of the goat discussion. That's his most powerful case.

So then why wasn't it the dominant narrative for Kareem or Kobe? I grew up in the 90s and Kareem wasn't regarded the GOAT due to longevity at all. I don't remember longevity being the dominant narrative during Kobe's run in the late 2000s either.

[HoopsNY]

In the social media age, it's amazing how the criteria for greatness have switched from "whatever MJ specifically did" to "definitely not anything that favors LeBron." People claiming that longevity is insignificant are only saying that since LeBron has now become the new face of longevity instead of Kareem. Kareem has always been in the GOAT conversation amongst knowledgeable fans, and the fact that he was great for so long, even winning FMVP at age 38, and being the NBA's all time leading scorer have always been contributing factors.

How? When was this the case? It wasn't the case in 1980 when Russell was voted as the GOAT. It wasn't the case when Kareem retired. It wasn't the case through the 90s or the 2000s.

I mean sure, there might have been some fans discussing it and maybe even a media mention, but there was never a serious discussion or a dominant narrative that put Kareem at the helm for as long as I can remember. That literally only becomes a thing in or around 2013.

This is revisionist history.

[sdot_thadon]

So then why wasn't it the dominant narrative for Kareem or Kobe? I grew up in the 90s and Kareem wasn't regarded the GOAT due to longevity at all. I don't remember longevity being the dominant narrative during Kobe's run in the late 2000s either.

I grew up in the 80s and once Kareem retired.the scoring record became his public basketball identity. Just because they didn't refer to it as longevity yet doesn't mean that's not what it was. And if longevity NEVER mattered, why wasn't Walton higher in the goat list? His short run is considered high peak basketball as well yet im not sure hes even in yor top 20. Why were Bird and Magic generally not seen as above Kareem? If we're being completely honest it's a tough sell that Mj did enough to surpass Kareem depending on the angle taken. Kobes longevity had a hard drop in quality the last few years. Just being in the league is not what we're celebrating Lebron for, still being a top player after 20 years is what's amazing.

[rmt]

IMHO, longevity these days is a result of improved medical, training, technology, rule changes, etc. over past eras in ALL sports.

In tennis, it was usual before early 2000s for players to retire in early 30s. Then came the era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic where they all won over 20 Grand Slams while playing against each other when before their era, the record was 14. Djokovic (before last Monday) was ranked #1 in the world at age 37. Federer retired at age 40. Nadal is 38 and still playing. Is it coincidence that Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Tom Brady and Lebron are playing into their 40s when previous champions in their sports retired at much younger ages? IMO, no - it is the result of easing of rules, advances in medical, technology, hyperbaric chambers, advanced stats that were not available to previous eras.

For me, GOAT is more peak than longevity - I don't think people give much credence to Vince Carter for playing so long compared to someone with similar peak/stature who did not play as long (as long as their BODY OF WORK WAS SUSTAINED and not a flash in the pan couple/few years).

As far as MJ vs Lebron is concerned, it is still 6 rings/FMVPs (more over so with a SHORTER career) compared to 4 - and the goal of players should be winning the championship.

[HoopsNY]

I grew up in the 80s and once Kareem retired.the scoring record became his public basketball identity. Just because they didn't refer to it as longevity yet doesn't mean that's not what it was. And if longevity NEVER mattered, why wasn't Walton higher in the goat list? His short run is considered high peak basketball as well yet im not sure hes even in yor top 20. Why were Bird and Magic generally not seen as above Kareem? If we're being completely honest it's a tough sell that Mj did enough to surpass Kareem depending on the angle taken. Kobes longevity had a hard drop in quality the last few years. Just being in the league is not what we're celebrating Lebron for, still being a top player after 20 years is what's amazing.

Well, I'm not arguing that longevity never existed. I guess I misunderstood you. My point was that it wasn't used as the predominant narrative to claim GOAT status.

Also, I clearly remember Bird and Magic being above Kareem in the early to mid 90s. I remember a segment on NBA on NBC where they mentioned the top 4 being MJ, Russell, Magic, and Bird.

[RRR3]

Well, I'm not arguing that longevity never existed. I guess I misunderstood you. My point was that it wasn't used as the predominant narrative to claim GOAT status.

Also, I clearly remember Bird and Magic being above Kareem in the early to mid 90s. I remember a segment on NBA on NBC where they mentioned the top 4 being MJ, Russell, Magic, and Bird.
Kareem didn’t play nice with the media that’s why he got underrated.

[BarberSchool]

Relieved that the vast majority have enough sense to put longevity in its proper place.

It is a factor, but it’s nowhere near the most important factor.

For instance, Tmac is a greater talent, and greater player than soooo many players who rank waaaaay higher in multiple statistical categories.

[warriorfan]

IMHO, longevity these days is a result of improved medical, training, technology, rule changes, etc. over past eras in ALL sports.

In tennis, it was usual before early 2000s for players to retire in early 30s. Then came the era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic where they all won over 20 Grand Slams while playing against each other when before their era, the record was 14. Djokovic (before last Monday) was ranked #1 in the world at age 37. Federer retired at age 40. Nadal is 38 and still playing. Is it coincidence that Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Tom Brady and Lebron are playing into their 40s when previous champions in their sports retired at much younger ages? IMO, no - it is the result of easing of rules, advances in medical, technology, hyperbaric chambers, advanced stats that were not available to previous eras.

For me, GOAT is more peak than longevity - I don't think people give much credence to Vince Carter for playing so long compared to someone with similar peak/stature who did not play as long (as long as their BODY OF WORK WAS SUSTAINED and not a flash in the pan couple/few years).

As far as MJ vs Lebron is concerned, it is still 6 rings/FMVPs (more over so with a SHORTER career) compared to 4 - and the goal of players should be winning the championship.

Excellent post

Bron is the GOAT at taking advantage of modern medicine, not the GOAT at the game of basketball. Two very different things.

[dankok8]

IMHO, longevity these days is a result of improved medical, training, technology, rule changes, etc. over past eras in ALL sports.

In tennis, it was usual before early 2000s for players to retire in early 30s. Then came the era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic where they all won over 20 Grand Slams while playing against each other when before their era, the record was 14. Djokovic (before last Monday) was ranked #1 in the world at age 37. Federer retired at age 40. Nadal is 38 and still playing. Is it coincidence that Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Tom Brady and Lebron are playing into their 40s when previous champions in their sports retired at much younger ages? IMO, no - it is the result of easing of rules, advances in medical, technology, hyperbaric chambers, advanced stats that were not available to previous eras.

For me, GOAT is more peak than longevity - I don't think people give much credence to Vince Carter for playing so long compared to someone with similar peak/stature who did not play as long (as long as their BODY OF WORK WAS SUSTAINED and not a flash in the pan couple/few years).

As far as MJ vs Lebron is concerned, it is still 6 rings/FMVPs (more over so with a SHORTER career) compared to 4 - and the goal of players should be winning the championship.

This. Great post.

Also would add Messi and Ronaldo to that as well as Ovechkin. They also have insane longevity. It's happening across all sports.

And like I said, longevity is situational too. Lebron getting into the NBA out of high school is a factor. Him winning less and still chasing Jordan is a factor. If Lebron came into the NBA at 22 and won 7 rings, he might have had a 12-year career and called it a career.

Lebron is even getting GOAT shouts in the first place because his peak is considered good enough by many people. Clearly peak matters a lot more. Longevity can at best break a tie if all else is equal.

[RRR3]

This. Great post.

Also would add Messi and Ronaldo to that as well as Ovechkin. They also have insane longevity. It's happening across all sports.

And like I said, longevity is situational too. Lebron getting into the NBA out of high school is a factor. Him winning less and still chasing Jordan is a factor. If Lebron came into the NBA at 22 and won 7 rings, he might have had a 12-year career and called it a career.

Lebron is even getting GOAT shouts in the first place because his peak is considered good enough by many people. Clearly peak matters a lot more. Longevity can at best break a tie if all else is equal.
I doubt it, LeBron actually likes basketball unlike MJ who just cares about winning competitions.

[sdot_thadon]

Well, I'm not arguing that longevity never existed. I guess I misunderstood you. My point was that it wasn't used as the predominant narrative to claim GOAT status.

Also, I clearly remember Bird and Magic being above Kareem in the early to mid 90s. I remember a segment on NBA on NBC where they mentioned the top 4 being MJ, Russell, Magic, and Bird.
Because they had just retired, how without playing another game did they end up where they currently are lol?

IMHO, longevity these days is a result of improved medical, training, technology, rule changes, etc. over past eras in ALL sports.

In tennis, it was usual before early 2000s for players to retire in early 30s. Then came the era of Federer, Nadal and Djokovic where they all won over 20 Grand Slams while playing against each other when before their era, the record was 14. Djokovic (before last Monday) was ranked #1 in the world at age 37. Federer retired at age 40. Nadal is 38 and still playing. Is it coincidence that Federer/Nadal/Djokovic/Tom Brady and Lebron are playing into their 40s when previous champions in their sports retired at much younger ages? IMO, no - it is the result of easing of rules, advances in medical, technology, hyperbaric chambers, advanced stats that were not available to previous eras.

For me, GOAT is more peak than longevity - I don't think people give much credence to Vince Carter for playing so long compared to someone with similar peak/stature who did not play as long (as long as their BODY OF WORK WAS SUSTAINED and not a flash in the pan couple/few years).

As far as MJ vs Lebron is concerned, it is still 6 rings/FMVPs (more over so with a SHORTER career) compared to 4 - and the goal of players should be winning the championship.


Relieved that the vast majority have enough sense to put longevity in its proper place.

It is a factor, but it’s nowhere near the most important factor.

For instance, Tmac is a greater talent, and greater player than soooo many players who rank waaaaay higher in multiple statistical categories.
See this is the problem, I don't think the argument was ever that longevity matters more than peak, just that its a significant section of the goat debate. We've all eventually adopted the more rings is better narrative, why wouldn't more years as a top player hold value as well? Also we gotta decide what peak consists of, i keep seeing rings mentioned as the main part of a players peak. Rings are an entirely different category of the debate lol. The Vince example doesn't really apply to the meat of this debate, his longevity consisted of being in a bench role, he never made an all nba team after his 7th season and played what 22 years? What's being said is it matters for guys still playing at a high level this far into a career. If it was just medicine and training everyone would have it rather than a small group of elite stars, these guys all make millions of dollars to play ball.

[TheMan]

Bill Walton>Duncan then amirite

Bill Walton's peak was relatively short (injuries), MJ's peak was from around 87 until he retired as a Bulls player for good. Why don't you just simply state you consider LBJ and his longevity GOAT and let those who believe peak play is more important in the GOAT discussion be?

[RRR3]

Bill Walton's peak was relatively short (injuries), MJ's peak was from around 87 until he retired as a Bulls player for good. Why don't you just simply state you consider LBJ and his longevity GOAT and let those who believe peak play is more important in the GOAT discussion be?
I actually don't have LeBron as GOAT I just hate stupid arguments. Saying MJ's peak continued until 98 is delusional though. 96 at latest, but more likely 93.

[TheMan]

I actually don't have LeBron as GOAT I just hate stupid arguments. Saying MJ's peak continued until 98 is delusional though. 96 at latest, but more likely 93.

MJ was still the best player in his last year as a Bull, Shaq was close but who do you think were better players than MJ in 96-98?

MJ was no longer physically the player he once was but his game changed, more of a post player, unstoppable baseline fade away and winning an MVP, 3 scoring titles, 3 FMVPs and carrying the 98 Bulls to the chip with his best teammate missing half the season and injured during the postseason.

[SouBeachTalents]

MJ was still the best player in his last year as a Bull, Shaq was close but he do you think were better players than MJ in 96-98?
Being the best player in the league doesn't always mean you're still at your peak. '96-'98 Jordan is clearly not as good as the '88-'93 version, even if he was wiser/had more weapons in his arsenal. His competition for BITW at that time was Karl Malone & a pre peak Shaq, move that version of Jordan to the 2000's, imo he wouldn't be the best player in the league, or at least not considered the consensus one like he was then.

[TheMan]

Being the best player in the league doesn't always mean you're still at your peak. '96-'98 Jordan is clearly not as good as the '88-'93 version, even if he was wiser/had more weapons in his arsenal. His competition for BITW at that time was Karl Malone & a pre peak Shaq, move that version of Jordan to the 2000's, imo he wouldn't be the best player in the league, or at least not considered the consensus one like he was then.

Like I wrote in my edited post, sure he was no longer in his peak/prime but he changed his game to compensate his loss of physical prowess and was still the best player in the league when he retired in 98. But point taken, he was no longer in his peak.

[RRR3]

MJ was still the best player in his last year as a Bull, Shaq was close but who do you think were better players than MJ in 96-98?

MJ was no longer physically the player he once was but his game changed, more of a post player, unstoppable baseline fade away and winning an MVP, 3 scoring titles, 3 FMVPs and carrying the 98 Bulls to the chip with his best teammate missing half the season and injured during the postseason.
And LeBron was still the best player in 2020, he wasn't at his peak though.

[Da_Realist]

MJ at less than peak won league MVP, Finals MVP, won the scoring title, led his team to the best record in the league with his best teammate missing almost 40 games and closed the Finals in the most epic fashion when he was the only reliable scorer on the team. That may not be MJ's best, but it's better than most everyone else's best.

[sdot_thadon]

I think some people here are confusing peak with prime. Peak is generally just a few seasons ar the apex of a players powers when a player still has their athletic abilities. Their prime is pretty much once they are established till they aren't that guy anymore. 2nd 3peat Mj wasn't peak Mj imo. It was still part of his prime but not his peak.

[rmt]

Because they had just retired, how without playing another game did they end up where they currently are lol?



See this is the problem, I don't think the argument was ever that longevity matters more than peak, just that its a significant section of the goat debate. We've all eventually adopted the more rings is better narrative, why wouldn't more years as a top player hold value as well? Also we gotta decide what peak consists of, i keep seeing rings mentioned as the main part of a players peak. Rings are an entirely different category of the debate lol. The Vince example doesn't really apply to the meat of this debate, his longevity consisted of being in a bench role, he never made an all nba team after his 7th season and played what 22 years? What's being said is it matters for guys still playing at a high level this far into a career. If it was just medicine and training everyone would have it rather than a small group of elite stars, these guys all make millions of dollars to play ball.

Vince, obviously, is not part of GOAT conversation. I compared him to someone of SIMILAR stature to emphasize the point that playing so long (into his 40s) doesn't really move the needle on the type/level people think of him.

Are you really saying that the top 100th tennis player in the world has the resources to a hyperbaric chamber the way (previously) #1 Djokovic has? Or some NBA scrub the same as Lebron who I'm sure dedicates significant time/resources to maintaining his superb body? It is undeniable that players are lasting longer these days regardless if it's from better nutrition, training methods, recovery, load management, etc. or more likely a combination of them all.

Rings are the goal of the whole season. It is what separates and elevates players to GOAT status - no matter what individual stats or stellar play, if you don't WIN, you are not going to be considered in this upper echelon of players. And naturally, the more you win, the higher you go.

Some of you have been agag over Jokic's play. But if it is not combined with winning, is he going to climb atop GOAT consideration? No, he isn't. Because others have played well AND ALSO WON.

[RRR3]

MJ at less than peak won league MVP, Finals MVP, won the scoring title, led his team to the best record in the league with his best teammate missing almost 40 games and closed the Finals in the most epic fashion when he was the only reliable scorer on the team. That may not be MJ's best, but it's better than most everyone else's best.
This is why no one takes you seriously. 98 MJ has zero case as being the best player ever. Zero.

[NBAGOAT]

You can do era adjusted longevity too. Lebrons longevity sure might be a little bit less impressive than say malones. However old bron plays at a higher lvl than old malone.

if you’re going use the medicine argument to discredit bron then what about Kareem? His peak is also like top 5 all time and he has the most impressive longevity of all time being all-nba lvl or better for 17 years.

[RRR3]

You can do era adjusted longevity too. Lebrons longevity sure might be a little bit less impressive than say malones. However old bron plays at a higher lvl than old malone.

if you’re going use the medicine argument to discredit bron then what about Kareem? His peak is also like top 5 all time and he has the most impressive longevity of all time being all-nba lvl or better for 17 years.
MJ stans would prefer to pretend Kareem doesn't exist.

[SATAN]

I'm surprised it worked, OP. The "goat argument" completely oversimplified to 1 single talking point that decides it all. 6 pages. :lol

[Da_Realist]

This is why no one takes you seriously. 98 MJ has zero case as being the best player ever. Zero.

Stop being so triggered. I didn't say that.

[sdot_thadon]

Vince, obviously, is not part of GOAT conversation. I compared him to someone of SIMILAR stature to emphasize the point that playing so long (into his 40s) doesn't really move the needle on the type/level people think of him.

Are you really saying that the top 100th tennis player in the world has the resources to a hyperbaric chamber the way (previously) #1 Djokovic has? Or some NBA scrub the same as Lebron who I'm sure dedicates significant time/resources to maintaining his superb body? It is undeniable that players are lasting longer these days regardless if it's from better nutrition, training methods, recovery, load management, etc. or more likely a combination of them all.

Rings are the goal of the whole season. It is what separates and elevates players to GOAT status - no matter what individual stats or stellar play, if you don't WIN, you are not going to be considered in this upper echelon of players. And naturally, the more you win, the higher you go.

Some of you have been agag over Jokic's play. But if it is not combined with winning, is he going to climb atop GOAT consideration? No, he isn't. Because others have played well AND ALSO WON.

I'm saying hell yeah they all have access to modern medicine and training when role players are landing 20-30 million a year? And in Lebrons case specifically he wasn't allowed to sign for more money than any other superstar from his class or the ones in his vicinity before or after. Yet where are the others? His entire draft class and probably a few after it are retired. Being an iron man has always been respected in sports because of how uncommon it is.

Yes rings are the thing you shoot for in sports and I'm saying it's deserving of its own subject in the goat discussion rather than being lumped in with peak play. Peak play is more performance focused, not accolade focused and is more on the individual than a ring is. Wilt was a force of nature in the 60s and only won 2 rings yet you could never question his peak. I'm not quite sold on Jokic yet because I've always been a wait and see type of fan. You've gotta prove it to me 1st. Guys lead a team to win a chip, it's validation to the next level in my eyes as a superstar. If they can do it more than once? They're in the next room, once they've won a few I'm not so concerned with the number as much as they've proven they can do it more than what you could call a fluke, because we all know well how much circumstance and so many moving parts factor into world titles too(thats a whole other thread though).

And as far as applying perspective to longevity, here's a little quick list of guys furthest season into their careers making an all nba or all defensive team with their total seasons played in parentheses if they outplayed their all nbaevel:

Lebron- 21
Shaq- 19 (20 last one,impressively came after a 4 year drought)
Duncan- 18(19)
kareem- 17(20)
Kobe- 17(20)
KG-17(21)
Durant-17
K.Malone- 16(19)
Curry-15
Hakeem-15(18)
Havlicek-14(16)
Dirk-14(21)
Wilt- 14
Mj- 13(15)
Russell-13
West-13(14)
Erving-13(16)
M.Malone-13(21)
Magic- 12(13)
Bird- 11(13)
Robertson-11
Vince-7 ( 22)

Just throwing great players off the top of my head Mj is tied at 14th with a handful of guys, if we're only talking top 10 mainstays he's 8th in this regard. Of course we want this to not matter just like we never wanted the wizards years to count lol.

[gengiskhan]

I actually don't have LeBron as GOAT I just hate stupid arguments. Saying MJ's peak continued until 98 is delusional though. 96 at latest, but more likely 93.

Your dumbness hold no bounds.

You hate stupid arguments but you dont mind starting one.

You and the entire world know MJs PEAK ended in 2001-2003 when he was no longer that PEAK performer!

world only saw MJ past his PEAK and in clear decline in his Wizard years.

Even you know, 1998 Pippen only played half of the season. 1998 MJs mild decline looking at approx 47%FG, lowest in his bulls career and FT% of 78%, finally below 80%FT mark in his career.

Biggest confounder here is Pippen surgery and sabotaging 1998 team chemistry. 1998 Jordan at age 35 had Pippen load to carry too.

was 1998 MJ subtle statistical decline in FG%, FT% due to additional minutes and additional pippen burden to carry or it was it MJ finally aged? How do you know?

How do you adjust for the "elephant in the room" in Pippen missing half the 1998 Bulls regular season?

But assuming in 1998, MJ was past his PEAK when he is 1998 MVP finishing Top 3 (Karl and Shaq), All Defensive 1st team, and winning FMVP is absolute Joke.

Like I said b4, MJ was PEAK 1984 - 1998. take your pick! Pre-Prime (1984-1989), Prime (1990 - 1993), Post-Prime twilight years (1995 - 1998).

[Da_Realist]

MJ's 97-98 season is only one of ten seasons where a player has won both League MVP and Finals MVP while also having led the league in some statistical category by average. I counted 10 seasons since the Finals MVP was first awarded in 1969.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1971 (Points). He was 23 years old.
Moses Malone 1983 (Rebounds). He was 27 years old.
Larry Bird 1984, 1986 (FT% both seasons). He was 27 and 29 years old.
Magic Johnson 1987 (Assists). He was 27 years old.
Michael Jordan 1991, 1992, 1996, 1998 (Points all four seasons). He was 28, 29, 33 and 35 years old.
Shaquille O'Neal 2000 (Points). He was 27 years old.

MJ and five other players. MJ being the only one to do it more than twice. The last was when he was 35 years old after playing every regular season and playoff game for 3 straight years. That's individual dominance and team dominance at the same time. This isn't about being very good for a long period of time. It's about having the league in a stranglehold both individually and team-wise even up to mid-30's.

[And1AllDay]

brans 5 yr peak is unmatched with 5 mvps

only player ever..

12' to 16'

12' mvp, fmvp
13' mvp, fmvp
16 fmvp

lil mikey never had 5 mvps in 5 years

peak goat 5 yrs = bran

we win again

[GimmeThat]

the idealogy behind the black hole is the process of elimination in a finite world

the idealogy behind the big bang is the process of addition in an infinite world

[HoopsNY]

Kareem didn’t play nice with the media that’s why he got underrated.

I'm not sure why this belief exists. I don't recall that being the primary reason after he retired. It makes sense during his career, and maybe even immediately after. But the late 90s or through the 2000s? I don't recall any of that. And at no point were even his most of his fellow players giving him that nod.

I always recalled Russell, Magic, MJ, and Bird. Players used to say Oscar, or at least a handful of them, then MJ, then Kobe. Even now Kareem isn't ranked #1 by anyone due to longevity.

[HoopsNY]

Because they had just retired, how without playing another game did they end up where they currently are lol?

See this is the problem, I don't think the argument was ever that longevity matters more than peak, just that its a significant section of the goat debate. We've all eventually adopted the more rings is better narrative, why wouldn't more years as a top player hold value as well? Also we gotta decide what peak consists of, i keep seeing rings mentioned as the main part of a players peak. Rings are an entirely different category of the debate lol. The Vince example doesn't really apply to the meat of this debate, his longevity consisted of being in a bench role, he never made an all nba team after his 7th season and played what 22 years? What's being said is it matters for guys still playing at a high level this far into a career. If it was just medicine and training everyone would have it rather than a small group of elite stars, these guys all make millions of dollars to play ball.

I don't quite follow your question. Are you asking how did they end up where they did if not for longevity? Or without it?

As for just retiring, then Kareem had just retired, too.

[rmt]

brans 5 yr peak is unmatched with 5 mvps

only player ever..

12' to 16'

12' mvp, fmvp
13' mvp, fmvp
16 fmvp

lil mikey never had 5 mvps in 5 years

peak goat 5 yrs = bran

we win again

Is that the game we're playing (lol) - where we cherry pick? Do you think Lebron would trade his 5 mvps in 5 years for MJ's 6 rings/6 FMVPs/4 MVPs in 8 years? In a heartbeat.

[Da_Realist]

Is that the game we're playing (lol) - where we cherry pick? Do you think Lebron would trade his 5 mvps in 5 years for MJ's 6 rings/6 FMVPs/4 MVPs in 8 years? In a heartbeat.

Not only that. MJ actually did it in 3 years. Twice. I thought for sure someone would have corrected him by now but it looks like no one cares about what he posts.

[gengiskhan]

brans 5 yr peak is unmatched with 5 mvps

only player ever..

12' to 16'

12' mvp, fmvp
13' mvp, fmvp
16 fmvp

lil mikey never had 5 mvps in 5 years

peak goat 5 yrs = bran

we win again

Larry Bird did One better.

3 MVP in 3 Years
2 MVP Sweeps (MVP + FMVP in same year) in 3 Years
2 FMVPs in 3 Years

LePEDs did 5 MVPs in 5 Yrs. and he needed a SUPER team and open, weakest Eastern Conference

Bird, Top 5 GOATs, actually did 5 MVPs in 3 Years!. STACKED team. Yes. Toughest of Tough Eastern Conference.

reason why LeColluder is Top 10 GOATs and Bird Top 5 GOATs.

[3ba11]

Peak = how well you played ball

Longevity = how long you played ball



I'll go with peak (how well you played ball) in determining the best ballplayer... Seems to make sense

[3ba11]

Lebron was 1st team defense and MVP for a short period of 5 years (09-14').

Otoh, only Jordan reached a peak of MVP/1st team defense/scoring champ and maintained that level for 10 years (88-98')

So MJ is the only guy that played goat offense, goat defense and MVP caliber throughout a 10-year period (88-98')

[sdot_thadon]

I don't quite follow your question. Are you asking how did they end up where they did if not for longevity? Or without it?

As for just retiring, then Kareem had just retired, too.

I'm asking if you're certain they were seen higher than Kareem, without any of the 3 ever playing another game, how did they shuffle so far behind him? I kinda got indoctrinated into goat debates as soon as I could get my hands on books about basketball as a kid. The historical records automatically ask those questions. And I for one, find it hard to believe no one here remembers the debate being between Wilt and Kareem for some time, as Wilt was the untouchable one at that time. Especially with so many supposedly old enough to have watched Mj and act like an authority on eras. I feel like this generations fans are washing narratives to their liking, rather than stating them as they actually stood in real time. Lots of players you barely ever see names posted here were regarded much higher before "That Era" and the legend disrespect is disgusting and has been since the end of the 90s, no coincidence.

[Norcaliblunt]

Would you rather be rich your whole life and die at 40 or be poor and die at 80?

[sdot_thadon]

Would you rather be rich your whole life and die at 40 or be poor and die at 80?

That's isn't what it is though is it? It's would you rather be rich and live till 40 or be slightly less rich and live till 80.:lol

[And1AllDay]

Larry Bird did One better.

3 MVP in 3 Years
2 MVP Sweeps (MVP + FMVP in same year) in 3 Years
2 FMVPs in 3 Years

LePEDs did 5 MVPs in 5 Yrs. and he needed a SUPER team and open, weakest Eastern Conference

Bird, Top 5 GOATs, actually did 5 MVPs in 3 Years!. STACKED team. Yes. Toughest of Tough Eastern Conference.

reason why LeColluder is Top 10 GOATs and Bird Top 5 GOATs.


1 szn = bran
5 years = bran
career = bran

brans 5 yr peak is unmatched with 5 mvps

only player ever..

12' to 16'

12' mvp, fmvp
13' mvp, fmvp
16 fmvp

lil mikey never had 5 mvps in 5 years

peak goat 5 yrs = bran

we win again

[rmt]

1 szn = bran
5 years = bran
career = bran

brans 5 yr peak is unmatched with 5 mvps

only player ever..

12' to 16'

12' mvp, fmvp
13' mvp, fmvp
16 fmvp

lil mikey never had 5 mvps in 5 years

peak goat 5 yrs = bran

we win again

Peak argument for Lebron is a losing proposition - MJ accomplished MORE in a SHORTER period of time than LBJ. Longevity (more points, more stats) would be the argument for Lebron.

[SATAN]

Why are you on a message board pretending to be an old woman?

[HoopsNY]

I'm asking if you're certain they were seen higher than Kareem, without any of the 3 ever playing another game, how did they shuffle so far behind him? I kinda got indoctrinated into goat debates as soon as I could get my hands on books about basketball as a kid. The historical records automatically ask those questions. And I for one, find it hard to believe no one here remembers the debate being between Wilt and Kareem for some time, as Wilt was the untouchable one at that time. Especially with so many supposedly old enough to have watched Mj and act like an authority on eras. I feel like this generations fans are washing narratives to their liking, rather than stating them as they actually stood in real time. Lots of players you barely ever see names posted here were regarded much higher before "That Era" and the legend disrespect is disgusting and has been since the end of the 90s, no coincidence.

I'm not sure. I think you're old enough to remember those days. Do you recall Kareem being at the head? I honestly don't recall it. From what I know, Russell was at the head of everyone's list up until the Magic/Bird era.

The only other player who I could recall being above any of them was Oscar and that was because other players were mentioning him. By '91, SI wrote an article about MJ being the best and I recall by '93, it was basically a consensus.

I only remember Kareem ranking above Magic or Bird once the longevity argument started. Those who were around at the time of Wilt could maybe comment on him and Kareem, but I've never read anywhere that had Wilt at the top over everyone as the dominant narrative. Maybe there were mentions here and there, but was that what was known at the time?

[ImKobe]

MJ accomplished more than Bran and in less amount of time. It's a no-brainer.

Better peak play goes to MJ and the accomplishments (rings, FMVPs, MVPs) also go to MJ and he did all that in his 14 years in Chicago. Bran doesn't have a single dynasty (the Heat were not a dynasty with just 2 rings sorry) to his name which is also something that should keep him out of the GOAT convo. Also you can't be the GOAT with a -86 Finals +/- and also have the same Finals record as Jerry West (22-33).

[Carbine]

1 szn = bran
5 years = bran
career = bran

brans 5 yr peak is unmatched with 5 mvps

only player ever..

12' to 16'

12' mvp, fmvp
13' mvp, fmvp
16 fmvp

lil mikey never had 5 mvps in 5 years

peak goat 5 yrs = bran

we win again

This doesn't make sense?

Jordan accomplished 5 MVPs of some sort in the span of 3 years.....twice.

Doing something that takes someone five years to do in three years.... Is more impressive for the player that takes five years?

Kinder Garden Logic

[rmt]

Why are you on a message board pretending to be an old woman?

I consider myself middle-aged. If you're still around on this message board and I'm fortunate to be alive in 20 years' time, then you may call me old :-)

Don't know why my age and gender bother you so.

[gengiskhan]

edited

[warriorfan]

I consider myself middle-aged. If you're still around on this message board and I'm fortunate to be alive in 20 years' time, then you may call me old :-)

Don't know why my age and gender bother you so.

He doesn’t know a lot about basketball and it causes him to have trouble refuting points he emotionally disagrees with

So this is the posting he is left with

[sdot_thadon]

I'm not sure. I think you're old enough to remember those days. Do you recall Kareem being at the head? I honestly don't recall it. From what I know, Russell was at the head of everyone's list up until the Magic/Bird era.

The only other player who I could recall being above any of them was Oscar and that was because other players were mentioning him. By '91, SI wrote an article about MJ being the best and I recall by '93, it was basically a consensus.

I only remember Kareem ranking above Magic or Bird once the longevity argument started. Those who were around at the time of Wilt could maybe comment on him and Kareem, but I've never read anywhere that had Wilt at the top over everyone as the dominant narrative. Maybe there were mentions here and there, but was that what was known at the time?

Honestly with Kareem I was young enough that I had no care or clue of the politics surrounding Kareem at the time. What I do remember was he wasn't well liked from a media standpoint, but respected in what we'd compare to Duncan in the more modern era. His identify was definitely " all time leading scorer" though. Whats crazy is he should have been regarded as one of the coolest stars at that point. He was in movies, did karate with Bruce Lee and was an activist. My assumption is this lack of promo caused him to get marginalized by some they same way we do Timmy (which im guilty of from time to time) I don't recall him being hated, just not beloved. Wilt on the other hand was the man Kareem was chasing to unseat, and was pretty dismissive of Kareem as the challenger to his status. Maybe it's dependent on what part of the country you grew up in(Texas for me) but Wilt was who I was told and heard called the goat before Mj earned his way Into that conversation. The only knock on Wilt's case was he couldn't beat Russell, so how was he the greatest? But objectively he was clearly the better of the 2 he could do far more. I reckon up north maybe some felt Russell was the goat, I know from reading it was a discussion in the 70s for sure. And as far as what the public thought, remember who Jordan argued with at the top 50 ceremony in '96 about who was the man.....it wasn't Kareem, Magic, or Bird lol.

[dankok8]

I doubt it, LeBron actually likes basketball unlike MJ who just cares about winning competitions.

Any all-time great basketball player loves basketball. That's like people backing MJ because of his will to win. It's likewise an overblown argument.

[FilmyCogTurner]

^This.^

Anybody that claims that MJ's peak is "so much" or "vastly" greater than LeBron's peak is simply blinded by nostalgia, fan boy worship, or style preference. While I don't fully agree with everything this YouTuber says (especially his overrating of KG) his analysis of how close their peaks are/were is pretty similar to mines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzzlvnncLOQ&t=44s

In the social media age, it's amazing how the criteria for greatness have switched from "whatever MJ specifically did" to "definitely not anything that favors LeBron." People claiming that longevity is insignificant are only saying that since LeBron has now become the new face of longevity instead of Kareem. Kareem has always been in the GOAT conversation amongst knowledgeable fans, and the fact that he was great for so long, even winning FMVP at age 38, and being the NBA's all time leading scorer have always been contributing factors.

The point is simple. Whether one thinks that LeBron's peak was equal to or better than MJ's is actually a matter of debate. Ultimately, I don't care. One day I may lean MJ. The other day I might lean LBJ. It's actually close. But one thing for certain is that there has never been any NBA player who has been as good as LeBron has been for as long as he has, other than Kareem. You can come up with all the excuses for why that may be the case including changes in medicine, nutrition, rules, physicality, etc., but the point still stands.

And this is why I don't have a single GOAT and rank according to tiers. Two many factors have to be considered to definitely name one player.

Hey man you should probably realize you don't understand basketball because someone who doesn't know better might actually believe what you're saying.

[SATAN]

https://test.calmrehab.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/crack-cocaine-calm-rehab-bali-1030x360.jpg

:durantunimpressed:

[8Ball]

LeBron Peak = or > Jordan Peak.

LeBron longevity >>>>> Jordan.

[8Ball]

^This.^

Anybody that claims that MJ's peak is "so much" or "vastly" greater than LeBron's peak is simply blinded by nostalgia, fan boy worship, or style preference. While I don't fully agree with everything this YouTuber says (especially his overrating of KG) his analysis of how close their peaks are/were is pretty similar to mines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzzlvnncLOQ&t=44s

In the social media age, it's amazing how the criteria for greatness have switched from "whatever MJ specifically did" to "definitely not anything that favors LeBron." People claiming that longevity is insignificant are only saying that since LeBron has now become the new face of longevity instead of Kareem. Kareem has always been in the GOAT conversation amongst knowledgeable fans, and the fact that he was great for so long, even winning FMVP at age 38, and being the NBA's all time leading scorer have always been contributing factors.

The point is simple. Whether one thinks that LeBron's peak was equal to or better than MJ's is actually a matter of debate. Ultimately, I don't care. One day I may lean MJ. The other day I might lean LBJ. It's actually close. But one thing for certain is that there has never been any NBA player who has been as good as LeBron has been for as long as he has, other than Kareem. You can come up with all the excuses for why that may be the case including changes in medicine, nutrition, rules, physicality, etc., but the point still stands.

And this is why I don't have a single GOAT and rank according to tiers. Two many factors have to be considered to definitely name one player.

1000% nostalgia when they put Jordan's peak higher than anyone's.

[warriorfan]

Jason Terry absolutely cucked any dream of lebron being the goat

[gengiskhan]

Jason Terry absolutely cucked any dream of lebron being the goat

Jason Terry DESTROYED LeRoid everytime.

Kawhi did the same in 2014 finals.

LBJ use to cringe everytime Kawhi stepped on the floor in 2014 finals.

I've seen that Finals live.

[Hey Yo]

Jason Terry absolutely cucked any dream of lebron being the goat

Curry got Delly paid after the 2015 Finals

[warriorfan]

Jason Terry DESTROYED LeRoid everytime.

Kawhi did the same in 2014 finals.

LBJ use to cringe everytime Kawhi stepped on the floor in 2014 finals.

I've seen that Finals live.

https://wp.usatodaysports.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/90/2013/06/lebronkawhi.gif


:roll:

[3ba11]

.
* coaching carousel

* worst-ever championship record

* weak FT's

* #1 all-time turnovers

* goat choke 2011

* started the era of teaming up with opponents

* accused of roids

* his peers win 3 chips in 4 years like Curry or Duncan, while Lebron cannot have stretches of mostly winning with a cast, aka mostly loses regardless of cast

[sdot_thadon]

Anybody that claims that MJ's peak is "so much" or "vastly" greater than LeBron's peak is simply blinded by nostalgia, fan boy worship, or style preference. While I don't fully agree with everything this YouTuber says (especially his overrating of KG) his analysis of how close their peaks are/were is pretty similar to mines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzzlvnncLOQ&t=44s

In the social media age, it's amazing how the criteria for greatness have switched from "whatever MJ specifically did" to "definitely not anything that favors LeBron." People claiming that longevity is insignificant are only saying that since LeBron has now become the new face of longevity instead of Kareem. Kareem has always been in the GOAT conversation amongst knowledgeable fans, and the fact that he was great for so long, even winning FMVP at age 38, and being the NBA's all time leading scorer have always been contributing factors.

The point is simple. Whether one thinks that LeBron's peak was equal to or better than MJ's is actually a matter of debate. Ultimately, I don't care. One day I may lean MJ. The other day I might lean LBJ. It's actually close. But one thing for certain is that there has never been any NBA player who has been as good as LeBron has been for as long as he has, other than Kareem. You can come up with all the excuses for why that may be the case including changes in medicine, nutrition, rules, physicality, etc., but the point still stands.

And this is why I don't have a single GOAT and rank according to tiers. Two many factors have to be considered to definitely name one player.

This cant be repeated enough.

[warriorfan]

^This.^

Anybody that claims that MJ's peak is "so much" or "vastly" greater than LeBron's peak is simply blinded by nostalgia, fan boy worship, or style preference. While I don't fully agree with everything this YouTuber says (especially his overrating of KG) his analysis of how close their peaks are/were is pretty similar to mines.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzzlvnncLOQ&t=44s

In the social media age, it's amazing how the criteria for greatness have switched from "whatever MJ specifically did" to "definitely not anything that favors LeBron." People claiming that longevity is insignificant are only saying that since LeBron has now become the new face of longevity instead of Kareem. Kareem has always been in the GOAT conversation amongst knowledgeable fans, and the fact that he was great for so long, even winning FMVP at age 38, and being the NBA's all time leading scorer have always been contributing factors.

The point is simple. Whether one thinks that LeBron's peak was equal to or better than MJ's is actually a matter of debate. Ultimately, I don't care. One day I may lean MJ. The other day I might lean LBJ. It's actually close. But one thing for certain is that there has never been any NBA player who has been as good as LeBron has been for as long as he has, other than Kareem. You can come up with all the excuses for why that may be the case including changes in medicine, nutrition, rules, physicality, etc., but the point still stands.

And this is why I don't have a single GOAT and rank according to tiers. Two many factors have to be considered to definitely name one player.

I would like to present, Exhibit A

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/2011NBAFinalslogoofficial.jpg

[Da_Realist]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RwJglHOH3Is&t=1555s

[SATAN]

Kenny is a washed up old clown who completely overrates who he was on the court. Not watching.

[sdot_thadon]

Kenny is a washed up old clown who completely overrates who he was on the court. Not watching.

Also, we're supposed to act like we don't know he not only played in thr 90s, but was MJ's teammate in college lol.

[warriorfan]

Also, we're supposed to act like we don't know he not only played in thr 90s, but was MJ's teammate in college lol.

Yeah let’s listen to someone who never played basketball in their life and wasn’t even alive during the time of the events.


Sounds legit.

[gengiskhan]

.
* coaching carousel

* worst-ever championship record

* weak FT's

* #1 all-time turnovers

* goat choke 2011

* started the era of teaming up with opponents

* accused of roids

* his peers win 3 chips in 4 years like Curry or Duncan, while Lebron cannot have stretches of mostly winning with a cast, aka mostly loses regardless of cast

Hard for them to imagine....

One guy did 3000, 200, 100 in one season.

then went out winning Dunk Title entertain the crowd.

when, the other guy just announces to the crowd of participating in Dunk contest. then goes out on live TV with THE DECISION breaking hearts.

Cant get more cringeworthy than this.........seriously.

[gengiskhan]

Kenny is a washed up old clown who completely overrates who he was on the court. Not watching.

40 YO LePEDs is a washed-up old clown bruh.

that colluder literally hired his Pod Cast guy as a la la Land Head Coach. :lol

Can it ever get more cringeworthy than this.........seriously

[gengiskhan]

I would like to present, Exhibit A

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a2/2011NBAFinalslogoofficial.jpg

funny you bring this up.

I went back and re-watched 2007 NBA Finals and LBJ performances in it......Here lies the main problem!.

Its the 22 YO 1986 MJ mindset vs 22 YO 2007 LBJ Mindset.

2007 PISTONS CAVS Game 5. LBJ played his best ever playoff game of 48 pts and broke thru with 2 pts win. series 3-2. won series.

All 2007 LBJ had to do is build on it. Blue print was already there against DEFENSIVE Pistons in 2007. SAS can never be more physical than PISTONS!.

You replace 22 YO 1986 playoffs MJ (49pts, 63pts, 18pts) in place of 22 YO 2007 playoffs LBJ (48 pts) against 2007 SAS in Finals.

MJ will go all out. Back-2-Back 50 pts or even 50 pts - 60 pts game. Game 1 and 2. knowing his CAVs suck. And get that elusive 1-1 tie somehow.

This was an era of 2-3-2. Next 3 games are AT HOME for MJ. Home team and bench play better at home. 1986 MJ will do exactly what he did to 1986 celtics in Game 3. Try play making and get that 2nd win and shock SAS. As ON ROAD, 2007 SAS and Coach Pop would've been hellbent on stopping "air jordan". rest of the cavs team can steal another game 3. Go up 2-1.

Eventually, 2007 SAS would've figured MJ and Cavs out and win the Championship in 6 games 4-2........thats not my point.

better team always win. But LBJ has no idea how to carve out WINs. despite 2007 pistons game 3 of 48 pts performance win and series win.

2007 LBJ (22 yrs old) got 'swept' 4-0 but 1986 playoff MJ (22 yrs old) on 2007 cavs would've carved out 2 wins (Game 2 and Game 3) and put 2007 SAS under some pressure.

This is the difference between two 22 YO great players mindset. MJ average 47 PPG (1 road win + 1 home win) VS LBJ 22 PPG (0-4 Sweep).

[And1AllDay]

case closed? brans 5 yr peak is unmatched with 5 mvps

only player ever..dis it from 12' to 16'

12' mvp, fmvp
13' mvp, fmvp
16 fmvp

lil mikey never had 5 mvps in 5 years

peak goat 5 yrs = bran

we win again

[sdot_thadon]

funny you bring this up.

I went back and re-watched 2007 NBA Finals and LBJ performances in it......Here lies the main problem!.

Its the 22 YO 1986 MJ mindset vs 22 YO 2007 LBJ Mindset.

2007 PISTONS CAVS Game 5. LBJ played his best ever playoff game of 48 pts and broke thru with 2 pts win. series 3-2. won series.

All 2007 LBJ had to do is build on it. Blue print was already there against DEFENSIVE Pistons in 2007. SAS can never be more physical than PISTONS!.

You replace 22 YO 1986 playoffs MJ (49pts, 63pts, 18pts) in place of 22 YO 2007 playoffs LBJ (48 pts) against 2007 SAS in Finals.

MJ will go all out. Back-2-Back 50 pts or even 50 pts - 60 pts game. Game 1 and 2. knowing his CAVs suck. And get that elusive 1-1 tie somehow.

This was an era of 2-3-2. Next 3 games are AT HOME for MJ. Home team and bench play better at home. 1986 MJ will do exactly what he did to 1986 celtics in Game 3. Try play making and get that 2nd win and shock SAS. As ON ROAD, 2007 SAS and Coach Pop would've been hellbent on stopping "air jordan". rest of the cavs team can steal another game 3. Go up 2-1.

Eventually, 2007 SAS would've figured MJ and Cavs out and win the Championship in 6 games 4-2........thats not my point.

better team always win. But LBJ has no idea how to carve out WINs. despite 2007 pistons game 3 of 48 pts performance win and series win.

2007 LBJ (22 yrs old) got 'swept' 4-0 but 1986 playoff MJ (22 yrs old) on 2007 cavs would've carved out 2 wins (Game 2 and Game 3) and put 2007 SAS under some pressure.

This is the difference between two 22 YO great players mindset. MJ average 47 PPG (1 road win + 1 home win) VS LBJ 22 PPG (0-4 Sweep).

Oh yeah you're right that mindset IS the difference, I remember when Mike was in a pretty similar spot. Game 5 of a 2-2 conference finals series against the Pistons with his 1st trip to the finals on the line. Lebron? Nearly identical scenario. One guy scored 29 of the last 30 in a legendary game, punched his 1st ticket to the finals at the age of 22 and the other guy? He took 8 shots, lost the series and would make his 1st finals 2 seasons later. That mentality doe.

[And1AllDay]

Oh yeah you're right that mindset IS the difference, I remember when Mike was in a pretty similar spot. Game 5 of a 2-2 conference finals series against the Pistons with his 1st trip to the finals on the line. Lebron? Nearly identical scenario. One guy scored 29 of the last 30 in a legendary game, punched his 1st ticket to the finals at the age of 22 and the other guy? He took 8 shots, lost the series and would make his 1st finals 2 seasons later. That mentality doe.

issa bloodbath

[SATAN]

40 YO LePEDs is a washed-up old clown bruh.



https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2018/06/SPORT-PREVIEW-Michael-Jordan.jpg?strip=all&quality=100&w=750&h=500&crop=1

:milton

[Da_Realist]

Excellence is the point. Basketball is a sport, after all, where the ultimate objective is to win, not get a ton of stats or even accolades. Identifying the GOAT can't be divorced from winning. Of course, context matters. Nothing matters if context doesn't. So it's not simply a math equation. It's not "you have to get six before you're considered". Not as simple as that. But for someone with less than six, the context must be strong. LeBron's isn't.

Everyone who has seen Michael Jordan play knows he was the ultimate winner above and beyond all the personal achievements. Since winning is the standard and should be the ultimate goal for every player, then we should judge on excellence, not longevity, especially if both players have given us 15 years. No one is at their best or even close to it after that point anyway, despite how easy it is to pad stats to look that way.

Playing longer while winning less (and no strong context that could justify it) is not impressive in this discussion. It may be if the discussion is about how long a guy can be effective in the league or if a guy is the best at an advanced age. But it has nothing to do with the GOAT conversation. Playing 10 extra years but winning less is actually a mark against you in the GOAT conversation if both players are playing under similar conditions (82 game seasons, 4 Playoff rounds, etc).

MJ has proven himself to be Secretariat. I don't care if T-Bone races for 20 extra years, if he doesn't dominate races like Secretariat or win as much as Secretariat did, he's not a greater horse!

A real competitor would want to be judged by the highest standard. MJ didn't even want his name mentioned with Bird and Magic until he did something they didn't (3-peat) despite all his previous individual and team success. He raised the bar...and kept raising it. No one should be given the crown for doing less over more time. The next guy has to raise the bar. That's the challenge. Keep the bar sky high and see if someone can jump over it. Not lower it because someone has tried for longer.

Michael Jordan would never trade his career for LeBron's. LeBron would trade his for MJ's in a flash. We all know this.

[SATAN]

How many times did you jack off to your Michael Jordan avatar while typing that out? :oldlol:

[1987_Lakers]

Excellence is the point. Basketball is a sport, after all, where the ultimate objective is to win, not get a ton of stats or even accolades. Identifying the GOAT can't be divorced from winning. Of course, context matters. Nothing matters if context doesn't. So it's not simply a math equation. It's not "you have to get six before you're considered". Not as simple as that. But for someone with less than six, the context must be strong. LeBron's isn't.

Everyone who has seen Michael Jordan play knows he was the ultimate winner above and beyond all the personal achievements. Since winning is the standard and should be the ultimate goal for every player, then we should judge on excellence, not longevity, especially if both players have given us 15 years. No one is at their best or even close to it after that point anyway, despite how easy it is to pad stats to look that way.

Playing longer while winning less (and no strong context that could justify it) is not impressive in this discussion. It may be if the discussion is about how long a guy can be effective in the league or if a guy is the best at an advanced age. But it has nothing to do with the GOAT conversation. Playing 10 extra years but winning less is actually a mark against you in the GOAT conversation if both players are playing under similar conditions (82 game seasons, 4 Playoff rounds, etc).

MJ has proven himself to be Secretariat. I don't care if T-Bone races for 20 extra years, if he doesn't dominate races like Secretariat or win as much as Secretariat did, he's not a greater horse!

A real competitor would want to be judged by the highest standard. MJ didn't even want his name mentioned with Bird and Magic until he did something they didn't (3-peat) despite all his previous individual and team success. He raised the bar...and kept raising it. No one should be given the crown for doing less over more time. The next guy has to raise the bar. That's the challenge. Keep the bar sky high and see if someone can jump over it. Not lower it because someone has tried for longer.

Michael Jordan would never trade his career for LeBron's. LeBron would trade his for MJ's in a flash. We all know this.

Russell > MJ

[sdot_thadon]

Excellence is the point. Basketball is a sport, after all, where the ultimate objective is to win, not get a ton of stats or even accolades. Identifying the GOAT can't be divorced from winning. Of course, context matters. Nothing matters if context doesn't. So it's not simply a math equation. It's not "you have to get six before you're considered". Not as simple as that. But for someone with less than six, the context must be strong. LeBron's isn't.

Everyone who has seen Michael Jordan play knows he was the ultimate winner above and beyond all the personal achievements. Since winning is the standard and should be the ultimate goal for every player, then we should judge on excellence, not longevity, especially if both players have given us 15 years. No one is at their best or even close to it after that point anyway, despite how easy it is to pad stats to look that way.....


https://i.postimg.cc/3wzC8dnz/210722-Bill-Russell-to-auction-most-of-his-prized-NBA-memorabilia.jpg