Goat debate

[QUOTE=3ball]You posted total win shares, which is meaningless (longevity-based) [/quote]

You may think counting stats are meaningless, but most people don't. Durability matters. Yes, Jordan retired twice, or he would have had a lot more, but James isn't done yet, either.

But let's accommodate your point. Through age 29 (when MJ retired the first time), James had more WS than Jordan, 168-147. Yes, he entered the NBA two years earlier, and if you start them at the same age, they are about even; but those extra years also mean more wear and tear down the road. Through age 34, when MJ retired the second time, he had 202 WS. Give him 30 WS for the nearly two seasons he missed playing baseball, and he's at a little over 230, slightly above where James is now at age 34. But keep in mind that in this exercise, Jordan gets those WS for free. He doesn't experience the wear and tear that would result if he had actually played those two years.

[quote]MJ leads in average win shares (ws/48) [/quote]

Again, a rate stat that doesn't take into account the length of the career. At their peaks, age 24-29, James's WS/48 was similar to MJ's. It has declined as he has continued to play, as Jordan's would have if he had continued to play. Jordan may have benefitted from the two years off, as his WS/48 had started to decline before baseball, and came back up after. In any case, Jordan retired the second time at age 34 when he had played about 930 games, and it was evident then that he was declining, as his WS/48 was his worst since his early years (not counting the few games he played when he returned from baseball). James reached that workload several years ago, and has been declining ever since.

So while you discount counting stats because James has played more games, you don't take into account that Jordan's rate stats are better in good part because he didn't play as many years while in decline, nor did he accelerate that decline by playing more games when he was younger.

[quote]Only MJ is top 2 all-time in VORP, BPM, WS/48, and PER for regular season and playoffs..... And he set the record for plus-minus.. so MJ owns the advanced stats easily..[/COLOR][/I]. :confusedshrug:[/B][/QUOTE]

But James is ahead of him in VORP and BPM, barely trails him in PER, and is high in WS48.

My point is not that James is the GOAT. It's that it's really close, and stats don't easily show that Jordan is better. You can have a good argument either way.

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon]you can have whoever you choose your preference is pretty clear and i don't have an axe to grind either way. i pointed out the bolded because fundamental understanding of the game is a broad term and i dont agree. fundamental skills? sure have at it. fundamental understanding? cant quantify that bro.[/QUOTE]

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Lebron does things better, sure. Its mostly because of his build though.

Moving off the ball. Having the correct hand in passing lanes. Total control with angles (in the post, triplethreat, moving without the ball, or even just hitting freethrows). Mike was simply the more fundamental player, coupled with a higher in-game iq. Nothing he did was stagnant but everything was with a purpose. Quick and to the fukking point. And that's not a knock on Lebron. Jordan was faster than Kobe in that regard too. MJ's ability to adjust to a team offense, unlike Lebron who, for the most part is his team offense, I believe stemmed from playing college ball.

One of my favorite takeways about MJ is actually from Kenny Smith:
[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4G3Eirm3uU[/url]

I can break this down at a macro and even micro level. Simply watching the 2 play should be enough though.

[QUOTE=pauk]What do you mean somehow? They have nowhere near the goods (accolades) to be in that discussion.... come on man, i know you aint stupid...

As far as the GOAT debate, you all know i like Lebron... but please, stop... MJ will never be surpassed, seemingly... through various criteria etc. Lebron is a bit more reasonable debate for being under MJ at the very best, if you are extremly kind to Russell/Wilt then he is #4, he shouldnt be anywhere lower than #5 tho... those other guys just dont have the accolades enough (Shaq, Bird, Kobe, Shaq is the closest)... Magic Johnson is the absolute closest accolades wise, but Lebron has the longevity thing (he was just more prominent for longer)...[/QUOTE]

Nah I don't believe that. I brought this up cause I have two new younger guys on my staff that I talk ball with and they use lebrons rebounds and assists as their reasoning for LeBron over Jordan. Which I don't really care who is goat I just like a good debate about it and lazy reasoning deserves the same in reply.

[QUOTE=nayte]Nah I don't believe that. I brought this up cause I have two new younger guys on my staff that I talk ball with and they use lebrons rebounds and assists as their reasoning for LeBron over Jordan. Which I don't really care who is goat I just like a good debate about it and lazy reasoning deserves the same in reply.[/QUOTE]
If they haven't watched MJ play then their opinion is irrelevant. I don't talk about guys I haven't watched play. I caught the tail end of Kareem so I don't talk about him either.

[QUOTE=Elosha]Lebron's RS stats and playoff stats aren't really better than Jordan's and they are almost certainly bound to get lower the longer he plays. He's nowhere close to Jordan in terms of accomplishments, playoff performances, etc. He's not nearly the defender Jordan was, particularly when comparing them in their 30's. What's his case for GOAT again, as opposed to top 5-10? :confusedshrug:[/QUOTE]

I'm not saying LeBron is goat but plenty do. This thread was me annoyed at some people's reasonings when talking about this topic.. Those people being some kids at my work

[QUOTE=FKAri]If they haven't watched MJ play then their opinion is irrelevant. I don't talk about guys I haven't watched play. I caught the tail end of Kareem so I don't talk about him either.[/QUOTE]

Ha they even use the milkman reference that some of the people here use against jordan

[QUOTE=nayte]Ha they even use the milkman reference that some of the people here use against jordan[/QUOTE]
To be honest I love pointing out things like how a grocery bagger dunked on MJ, MJ's trainer's name being linked with steroid rumors, MJ's admitted statpadding, etc. I enjoy seeing 3ball's HTML-heavy meltdowns. Though, he usually just ends up talking about Lebron :oldlol:

1. mj
2. lbj
3. kaj

[QUOTE=FKAri]If they haven't watched MJ play then their opinion is irrelevant. I don't talk about guys I haven't watched play. I caught the tail end of Kareem so I don't talk about him either.[/QUOTE]

This

[QUOTE=red1]1. mj
2. mj
3. kobe.[/QUOTE]


fixed.

[QUOTE=tpols]fixed.[/QUOTE]
1.mj
2.lbj
3.kaj

4.shaq
5.magic
6.bird
7.duncan
8.hakeem

12.kobe



Not sure who 9,10,11 are going to be just know kobe's going to fit [I]right in[/I] at 12. Perfect spot for him really.

[QUOTE=FKAri]To be honest I love pointing out things like how a grocery bagger dunked on MJ, MJ's trainer's name being linked with steroid rumors, MJ's admitted statpadding, etc. I enjoy seeing 3ball's HTML-heavy meltdowns. Though, he usually just ends up talking about Lebron :oldlol:[/QUOTE]

I suppose it depends if I'm having a debate or just talking sheit with mates. I will use those Jordan things and the delonte things for a laugh
3balls ability to turn any convo into a LeBron v Jordan is truly an amazing achievement. I don't care about any player enough to put in that much effort.. Lol.

[QUOTE=nayte]3balls ability to turn any convo into a LeBron v Jordan is truly an amazing achievement. I don't care about any player enough to put in that much effort.. Lol.[/QUOTE]

It would be even more amazing if it's some player nobody ever talks about like Bernard King.

[QUOTE=Marchesk]It would be even more amazing if it's some player nobody ever talks about like Bernard King.[/QUOTE]

There's certainly ppl on here who know more about Bernard King than myself, but the reason he's probably not brought up more is that he was a bit more one-dimensional than most of the atg most prolific scorers, though his boards were there sometimes, I think he tended to drive the paint a lot, and his defense was lacking.

[QUOTE=72-10]There's certainly ppl on here who know more about Bernard King than myself, but the reason he's probably not brought up more is that he was a bit more one-dimensional than most of the atg most prolific scorers, though his boards were there sometimes, I think he tended to drive the paint a lot, and his defense was lacking.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, it's not the best example. Elgin Baylor or Dr. J would be better to use. If we had a super Dr stan who always came up with arguments for how Erving was better than Lebron, that would be humorous.

Someone once did use Bernard King in an argument with me about how the GOAT is totally subjective, which I disagreed with. There's no argument for King over Jordan, Wilt, Kareem, etc. But they thought there was.