LeBron, Jordan Teammates' Game Score Share Comparison (Each Finals)

[Roundball_Rock]

How did the Cavs do without Mark Price? That is a team MJ stans love to tout as a "great team." They were down their best player for 66 games with Daughtery, Nance in their primes. The results were...? Or hell, how about the Pacers losing their third best player? What happened the one year Jackson was gone for 2/3 the season? Prime Reggie "Curry" Miller there.

If the Cavs were stacked and they looked like the 19' Cavs without Price, then logically what does that make the Bulls' "cast"?

The Lakers could go 1-81 without LeBron next year and MJ stains would still call them more stacked than the Bulls.

[3ball]

Lebron needed an extra star to win, or a BETTER star, and never beat a good team with poor sidekick performance

[guy]

Because everything isn't an "argument."

The guy that has made 50-100 threads that in the last 6 months directly or indirectly downplaying Jordan / uplifting Lebron isn’t making arguments? Okay.

The argument for MJ often is 6-0 vs. 4-6 (the specific # doesn't matter: just that it is less than 50%) or 6 vs. 4 rings. As long as that happens, people are going to examine the team situations they were in and those of the competition. You said it yourself: basketball isn't 1 or 1 or 2 on 2 or 3 on 3.

So above 50% is not 10-0, but at least 6-4. Hmm, like I said seems like your data supports that argument.

Which is relevant context. The table is teammate share of GS, so when the best player underperforms that leaves more of the pie for the rest. That happened different ways of course. In 07' LeBron was terrible for a player of his caliber, even if he was a 22 year old against a dynasty. It wasn't a case of his teammates stepping up. 11' was. LeBron arguably was even worse in 11' than 07' but Wade had a FMVP-caliber finals and Bosh was great too.

You took total game score? Including the other team? The total GS is impacted by pace so it makes sense to use % like you did. But with that being the case, that also means if Lebron improved his game, the opponent’s game score is definitely going to get impacted. So he would cut into both, which means it may not be that much different.

LeBron detractors would like you to believe the 11' finals are what LeBron got on his team consistently, not that they were outliers.

Okay. Similar things can be said about Jordan.

MJ stans could easily say 33% is the cut-off (using these 16 teams--we would need a broader data set to say that more confidently) and MJ went 6-0 and LeBron 4-2 in that scenario. They won't, though, because so much of their narrative is invested in LeBron being below .500 in the finals and "LeBron was on stacked teams" etc. If you say he didn't get support sufficient to win nearly half the time, the "stacked teams" argument is destroyed.

If he was 6-0 in those finals then he would be 6-4 overall, which is above .500, so whats the difference? Its basically making the same point, just said differently.

Different rosters, or in LeBron's case, literally different teams. What do the 2007 Cavs have to do with the 2020 Lakers? The Bulls had the same core from 1991-1993 and then 1996-1998.
It isn't aimed at "anyone with a brain." It is aimed at idiots like 3ball who will present the entire 2011-2014 Miami Heat as the same and Wade/Bosh in 11' as the same guys in 14. Thanks for pointing that out, though. See MJ stans, one of your own just said it.

The OP said nothing about different rosters/different cores. All it did was look at the performance at hand. Now you noticed that your data doesn’t work, so yo’re trying to bring up other things? Feel free to bring up other things but this has nothing to do with game score so not sure why you are trying to connect these two.

It tells me the 2015-2018 Cavs were materially weaker than the 2011-2014 Heat or 2020 Lakers (if we are going to assume the stat is a good gauge, which is another question).

Sure, and it concludes that he should’v won 6 just like Jordan if we’re comparing it Jordan’s situation standard or just all 10 of the championships standard.

Duh, but that isn't what the OP was about. It is right in the OP: the averages were 36% and 33%.

Like I said, a sane fan base would simply say 6-0>4-2 but that isn't what we are seeing.

Yes, 33% when you take into the account the 4 series where I am acknowledging the data supports he deserves a pass for.

Come on man. You’re not dumb. Most people give him a pass for 3-4 Finals. This data supports that, but not a pass for more than that. Now you’re just upset because you thought it would tell you something more excusable for Lebron, but sorry, it doesn’t. Take the L and move on.

If you want to dedicate your life to arguing with 3ball, go ahead. Most reasonable people don’t see it his way.

Why are you bitching so much?

You of all people want to talk about bitching?

Why would I have a problem with the data? Like all things, I don’t think it should be taken as the be all end all. However, it does support my belief based on watching games and paying attention to both careers that Lebron should also have 6 rings based on Jordan’s standard, although it gets to that conclusion differently.

[Roundball_Rock]

He didn't answer because the Cavs were a 30 win pace team over 66 games without Price--with Daughtery, Nance playing the full season in their primes.

This is a team they point to as an example of a stacked 90's team with real stars, not bums like Pippen and Grant/Rodman (even though Pippen, Rodman are HOFers and Price, Daughtery, Nance are not) that MJ was stuck with. 24-42=stacked; 55-27=no help.

LeBron's comp without their best player: 73-9.

[guy]

Bingo. This is what is typically done. Create an arbitrary set of rules, then when challenged, tell you that you can't do that and you MUST stick to my rules.

Lump the averages into a select group of years, then complain when being challenged.

You could make the argument that 6/10 "sidekicks" (ridiculous argument to begin with), are in LeBron's favor.

2011, 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2020 all seem to be at least on par or better than the opposition.

Jordan's is 4 out of 6. You could make the case that Stockton's impact in 1997 was just as important as Pippen's. Pippen shot 5-17 in game 5, and 6-17 in game 6, with 8 total turnovers, thus only giving the nod to 3/6, but whatever.

What does any of this actually mean? I have no idea. It's literally splitting hairs. Both players had help.

The difference for me is that when the help was diminished somewhat or significant, MJ found a way to win. In LeBron's case, this isn't the case. Now was he "supposed" to win? Not necessarily. But I do think that MJ uplifts the team to better results than LeBron did in the following finals:

2007 - People forget that games 3 and 4 were decided by just 4 total points, and the Cavs essentially lost those games because of LeBron. I don't think MJ plays anywhere near that badly. Young MJ is likely putting up 30-35 a night on high efficiency, and is at least taking that series to 6 games.

2011 - No reason to beat this over the head

2014 - I don't think the Heat get slaughtered like this with MJ. The point differential was drastic, yes, but here are some things to consider.

In game 1, the Heat were actually up by 4 entering the fourth quarter. They got outscored by almost 20 in the 4th and LeBron went 1-3 with 2 points, no assists. I don't think this happens with MJ.

In game 4, the Heat entered the 4th being down by 8. LeBron scored 4 points and had 3 big turnovers in that quarter within about 3 minute span. I honestly don't think this happens with MJ either. One big variable that is often left out of the conversation is over the course of their careers, MJ was able to control the ball and limit turnovers better than LeBron.

2017 - I just don't think MJ loses this series 4-1. Harden took this same Warriors team to 7 games the following season in the WCF, losing without Chris Paul in games 6 and 7. I do believe Jordan's defensive impact would have allowed for them to win at least 2 games, and possibly even the series since his perimeter defense would have been crucial against Steph and Klay. LeBron was not an elite defender by 2017.

Agree with all this for the most part

[MadDog]

Literally no one thought Wade was better than LeBron. That's why it was such a big deal that LeBron choked.

Or maybe it was that LeBron choked with the best help. Remember, he claimed Miami would have "easy" rings.

As usual, they want it both ways. Blame LeBron for the loss but then say he was the sidekick to diminish him/elevate Wade.

Why can't it be both? LeBron did choke, while Wade throughtout the playoffs had better: scoring, defense and averaged a higher PER/WS48/BPM/VORP.

When did Jordan ever win with another teammate who outplayed him in the postseason? Heck, when did Jordan ever lose in that scenario?

[Roundball_Rock]

So above 50% is not 10-0, but at least 6-4. Hmm, like I said seems like your data supports that argument.

Yeah, like I noted a few times, the OP could be construed favorably to MJ. MJ stans are up in arms anyway.

You took total game score? Including the other team? The total GS is impacted by pace so it makes sense to use % like you did.

Oh, these weren't my #'s. It was from the ESPN article I linked. What he did was took total GS for the team and then subtracted MJ or LeBron and calculated what teammates accounted for. He didn't do the same for the opposition. That would be interesting to see.

They played in different eras, different pace, rules, etc. so anything that is comparing them to their eras is better than randomly comparing numbers. It is funny how often MJ stans do that to deflate the stats of MJ's teammates--it works the other too. If you adjusted for pace, pointed out efficiency was higher due to softer defenses, etc., that would boost MJ too.

If he was 6-0 in those finals then he would be 6-4 overall, which is above .500, so whats the difference?

You would think not much: in either scenario MJ is ahead but ever since 2014 LeBron being below .500 is an obsession of his detractors, whether it is 2-3 or 3-6 or 4-6. I'm waiting for him to finish 6-6 or something exactly at .500.

The OP said nothing about different rosters/different cores. All it did was look at the performance at hand. Now you noticed that your data doesn’t work, so yo’re trying to bring up other things?

It isn't my data. If I did it I would have broken it up by cores since those are different teams--with a particular focus on the Heat and 2015-2017 Cavs since those are the most debated. That AD was dominant isn't really debated. What Wade, Irving, Bosh, Love were is.

it concludes that he should’v won 6 just like Jordan if we’re comparing it Jordan’s situation standard or just all 10 of the championships standard.

Jordan is always going to have the edge no matter how you slice it because he came through consistently when he had the better team. Look at who is the highest for LeBron's: 11'.

Most people give him a pass for 3-4 Finals.

On the street or if you polled people at a NBA game? Sure, but not in these debates, whether you are talking ISH, Twitter, or commentators/analysts in the media. 6-0 vs. 4-6 comes up a lot.

You see it sometimes with Montana vs. Brady--4-0 vs 6-3, with "perfection" being argued for Montana. Just not as much because 4<6. If LeBron somehow gets to 7 then you may see that here, with MJ advocates saying 6-0>7-6.

Like all things, I don’t think it should be taken as the be all end all.

Yeah, it is a flawed measure. It is heavily influenced by TS % for instance, so Splitter putting up 3 PPG had a higher GS than Wade because Splitter was 75% or something and Wade 49% or something.

There is no perfect way to assess how strong a "supporting cast" is. To me the best way is simply seeing what happens if that player is removed from the equation, assuming the core of the team remains the same or filled with similar players (so the 11' Cavs or 99' Bulls tell us nothing). This doesn't require stats, analytics, etc. Just W-L on the court.

The problem is MJ fans are adamant what a team did w/out a player tells us nothing (for obvious reasons ) and we have limited samples. How often do #1's miss large chunks of the season? Retire in their prime? Change teams? Etc.

For MJ's era the ultimate comps would be if Malone or Ewing missed a full or nearly all the season (e.g., the best players on the Bulls' best comp). It never happened in their primes. What we have are Magic retiring, Shaq leaving, Price missing 66 games, Robinson missing 76 games. For LeBron's what do we have? LeBron leaving Miami, KD leaving OKC, Kawhi leaving SA and then Toronto, etc.

Let's face it, though. If Ewing missed all of 94' and the Bulls went 55-27 and the Knicks 27-55 you know full well MJ fans would be telling us forevermore the Knicks were a better "cast" than the Bulls and only MJ being the GOAT allowed those bums to overcome the "stacked" comp.

A lot of the MJ stuff is driven by this obsessions to paint him as winning with a poverty of help.

[Roundball_Rock]

You could make the case that Stockton's impact in 1997 was just as important as Pippen's

Name a game where Stockton was the best player on the court. I'll give you one for Pippen: Game 1. In Game 3, Pippen led the Bulls back into the game in the 4th quarter after being down 20 (Malone was the best player in that game, though) and outscored MJ for the scoring police. Pippen, not Stockton, was the one commanding double teams.

This guy obviously didn't watch the series. A recurring theme of NBC's coverage was the "Big 4" so they often put up graphics of the production of those 4 throughout the games (Rodman is a HOF'er too but it was defined as the 4 top 30 all-time guys). Stockton consistently brought up the rear. Pippen was closer to Malone (whether ahead or behind) than Stockton was to Pippen in those graphics.

Stockton, who MJ stans will not say a solitary word of criticism about, didn't have the capability to be the best player on a court with 5 HOF of that caliber on it--partly because he only took wide open shots (MJ stains ooh and ahh over his TS % not grasping how he played--any star could shot a high TS % if they took 8-10 shots that were wide open J's or layups, but legitimate superstars understand you need to diversify to be a scoring threat to keep defenses honest--like every other star PG of Stockton's era did--except him). He is top 30 all-time because he maintained an all-NBA caliber level for a long time but he didn't have the MVP caliber gear the others in the "Big 4" had.

It showed in those 12 games in 97' and 98'. I can't think of one in which Stockton was the best player. Pippen was in a couple, Malone a couple, Jordan in most of them. Can anyone name a single NBA finals game where Stockton was the best player on the floor?

This is why this will keep being debated. There is an obvious edge Jordan had in his sidekick versus the Jazz's but Pippen is brought down to Stockton's level--meanwhile LeBron's sidekicks are elevated, even when getting outplayed by non-HOF players in series.

MJ stans are comical. There is an easy legitimate answer if you are insecure about Pippen's elite play in the 97' finals: Kukoc. Most of the Bulls' scoring was MJ/Pippen because Kukoc was a non-factor that run (foot injury) and no one stepped up to fill that void.

Jordan fans can't say that, though. Have to pretend Stockton was equal in impact to Pippen in the series.

Why can't it be both? LeBron did choke, while Wade throughtout the playoffs had better: scoring, defense and averaged a higher PER/WS48/BPM/VORP.

Because how often do you ever see sidekicks being blamed for a team losing?

[MadDog]

Because how often do you ever see sidekicks being blamed for a team losing?

When his teams underperform, eBron's sidekick and teammates are ALWAYS blamed That narrative doesn't hold any weight. Not unless you think Wade is the reason for LeBron choking

[Roundball_Rock]

Stockton was praised in this very thread and is revered by MJ stans (Kemp, Miller, Ewing, Stockton are particular fascinations of theirs--combined they have as many all-NBA 1st teams as Pippen, who sucks, alone does). He never gets attacked for going 0-2--Pippen somehow does for 6-0 (the implication being if there was a Stockton, Starks, Smits, Porter, KJ, Worthy, Dumars, Daughtery, etc. instead of Pippen "MJ" would have won more chips and/or by larger margins. I can see that. With Starks 72-10 would have been 80-2! ). Malone gets the blame for the finals losses. To the extent Stockton gets critiqued, you know which fan base rushes to his defense, right? I'm not talking Jazz fans.

It is true the Jazz may have won if Malone played better but it is equally true the Jazz may have won if Stockton did (or Hornacek for that matter). Especially in 98'. 9.7 PPG doesn't cut it in an era where Jordan's fans say 20 PPG was terrible.

[LAmbruh]

Roundball putting on a clinic

[3ball]

Roundball putting on a clinic

If you think anyone reads his long drivel, you're dumber than he is

No one reads anything on this board unless it's a one-liner

The fact that he can't say things concisely shows that he doesn't have a high level understanding of what he's talking about

He can't say things concisely, like this:

Lebron needed an extra star to win, or a BETTER star, and never beat a good team with poor sidekick performance (never had a carry-job against a good team)

[3ball]

Pippen almost always outscored the opponents 2nd option

He was matched or outscored 42% of the time

So no

[Roundball_Rock]

Roundball putting on a clinic

He was matched or outscored 42% of the time

So no

This is more deception. Deception after deception after deception.

It is a joke this thread even has to be made but let's set the record straight. This is scoring only. Points generated via assists aren't factored in here, nor is defense or rebounding (Pippen, a SF, led his team in rebounding in 91', 94', 95' and tied Grant in 92'). Just PPG since that is the daily obsession. If someone is in parentheses, they wre the first option.

1991 1R: Pippen 20, Vandweghe 17 (Ewing 17)
1991 ECSF: Pippen 23, Hawkins 20 (Barkley 26)
1991 ECF: Pippen 22, Dumars 13 (Isiah 17)
1991 Finals: Pippen 21, Worthy 19 (Magic 19)
1992 1R: Pippen 24, Seiklay 21 (Rice 19)
1992 ECSF: Pippen 16, McDaniel 19
1992 ECF: Pippen 20, Daughtery 18 (Price 19)
1992 Finals: Pippen 21, Porter 16 (Drexler 25)
1993 1R: Pippen 15, Willis 17
1993 ECSF: Pippen 18, Daughtery 17 (Price 14)
1993 ECF: Pippen 23, Starks 15 (Ewing 26)
1993 Finals: Pippen 21, Johnson 17
1996 1R: Pippen 20, Mourning 18 (Hardaway 18)
1996 ECSF: Pippen 16, Starks 13
1996 ECF: Pippen 19, Penny 26
1996 Finals: Pippen 16, Kemp 23
1997 1R: Pippen 17, Howard 19 (Webber 16)
1997 ECSF: Pippen 22, Laettner 16 (Smith 18)
1997 ECF: Pippen (injured) 17, Mourning 16; Pippen (healthy) 21
1997 Finals: Pippen 20, Stockton 15 (Malone 24)
1998 1R: Pippen 18, Kittles 16 (Van Horn* 13)
1998 ECSF: Pippen 18, Mason 13
1998 ECF: Pippen 17, Smits 16 (Miller 17)
1998 Finals: Pippen (injured) 16, Stockton 10; Pippen (healthy) 20

Series after series he outscores the other #2 option--in many of them he exceeds, matches or is close to the opposing #1 option. Like I said, it is a joke this thread even has to be made but fun-house mirrors lead to up being down, down being up.

*Cassell injured for the playoffs.

In the finals, Pippen was 20+ 4 of 6 times and was at that level through 4 games before injuring his back in Game 5 in 98'. The other guys? They cleared 20+ PPG 1x out of 6 tries. Stockton couldn't even get to 10 PPG in one of them (you have to round up to get him there). Keep in mind MJ stans assail Pippen's scoring 24/7. If he sucked at scoring, how weak was MJ's comp? Look at this list and their scoring.

The funniest parts are Pippen basically misses all of Game 5 in the 5 game ECF and still outscores Mourning and that he is a shell of himself in the final games of the 98' Finals and still easily outscores Stockton.

Notice MJ stains talk about Pippen's scoring but not that of any of his counterparts from the same era? Is there some sort of problem there that needs to be concealed? Why don't you ever see them talking about how often Stockton, Starks, Smits, Daughtery, Porter, Elliott, etc. outscored the opposing #2 option?

You know the answer...

[Gray GOAT]

Roundball providing excellent knowledge to this thread, thank you.