That still doesn't make it the "glamor position," but whatever. This argument is boring.

Prime Lebron would beat MJ in 1-on-1.

Weird, I see Dolphin looking in my asshole

Oh I know.

And I agree with yous guys.

Just trying to help a guy out.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

The best thing about this multi thread argument is FF and LTG finally agree on something.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

Can someone identify any of the elite SF's that James is locking up with? For some reason no one wants to answer that

Shawn Marion, Kawhi, Durant.

It doesn't fucking matter. You beat teams not players. Who gives a shit if Miller outplayed Jordan during the ECF in 1998? Jordan won the fucking series - that's what matters.

Agreed. That’s one of the reasons Jordan > LeBron

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

Can someone identify any of the elite SF's that James is locking up with? For some reason no one wants to answer that.

I also remember a young developing Paul George getting up with him in that Indiana series too.


As i keep stating its dumb to focus on a mid 90's Jordan he was still the best player in the league but he wasn't as dominant. I understand why the young whipper snapper Dan Bernstein influenced members only reference the mid 90's. I really do. The black as hell, Jordan with Hair version was more dominant though.

Not only was he the best offensive player in the league but he was also one of the top defensive players in the league too. He was a lockdown defender. James has never been that.

He was dragged talentless rosters to the playoffs and won series when the Bulls were decidely the underdog.

If you list the number of All Stars that Jordan played with during his career and compare them to the number Lebron has played with it really becomes an even bigger joke.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

You can't use winning as a gauge. Using that metric makes Bill Russell the best player in history.


As Van Gundy once stated winning is not only a product of who you are but its also a product of who you play with.

Winning as a means of determining the best players are is one of the most flawed assessment schemes perpetrated on sports fans and it came into vogue during the talk show evolution phase.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.

Not taking winning into account is how you have people believing Javier Vazquez was a better pitcher than Mark Buehrle.

Not taking winning into account is how you have people believing Javier Vazquez was a better pitcher than Mark Buehrle.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

It's not that you don't take it into account. It's that saying "player x is better than player z because they won more titles" is a terrible argument. Unless you think Robert Horry is better than Hakeem Olajuwon.

This is the third appeal to authority on this board in the last day.

You're wrong because I saw it live is not a compelling argument. I wasn't going to mention it, but you've mentioned it like five times. Seems like that's the well you're going to when losing an argument.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

No but you and others that continue to support your argument have no frame of reference other than a pd when he was already 8 years in. In fact a lot of it is even later. John Starks? 98 Reggie Miller? That wasn't the best Jordan era. He was 36 years old in 98.

I also don't think that Jordan's career began when he began winning championships which is something that Vegan keeps pumping.

Its not just that i saw him its that those were in fact his best years. He was more dominant of a player then.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

Again, this post doesn't support your argument and instead talks about how you know more because you were there. It's a tell-tale sign of a bad argument.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

There is not a damned thing wrong with people who are bull shitters.

Jordan was definitely the best player in the 80s. What always was the thing holding him back from being in the conversation of all time greats was the missing championship.

He was immensely more talented in the 80s.

In the 90s he became a better overall player and teammate.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

Isn't the same argument used by you and Vegan? You are using your 90's viewership of Jordan as a way of discrediting him. There is absolutely no difference. You want me to ignore that pd because you are mostly unaware of it but i can't or won't. Jordan had a career pre Lakers series. I wish that you could comment on that era but i'm not going to not reference it simply because you can't.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

No, it's not the same unless we were trying to prohibit you from commenting on the 90's. We're not.

You don't seem to understand that we are keenly aware of 80s Jordan, have watched a ton of his games (especially the best ones), and obviously have access to his stats. Either you want to discuss it or you don't. BUT your opinion isn't the right one simply because you saw it live. If our argument is bad, make a better one. Continuing to say that we're wrong because we're younger than you isn't the least bit compelling or interesting. If you're gonna do that, then just sit here and argue with Walt.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

I'm a big dumb shitlib baby

I never said it was but i do notice that none of the comments other than Peeps relate to that era. Jordan was slowing down in the 90's. He was still the best in the game but he wasn't the same force that he was in the 80's.

Why in the hell do you think they love showing that Iverson crossover so much? The crossover showing is supposed to illustrate that Jordan was aging and in decline more than anything.

Paperboy was the glamour job during the heyday of the internet boom.

No one would be offended if you reference the 80s. I know I wouldn't. But you can do it without bringing up our age. Maybe you could tell us about some game you saw that we never did. It's not like this is some zero-sum game where everyone is just trying to win. At the end of the day, I'm still probably not gonna get laid and will retire to my basement to get beaten by 12 year olds in NBA 2k18 before going to bed.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

It's not clear what or who you're arguing. As far as I can tell you seem to be saying Jordan was really good in the '80s. I don't think anyone disagrees. What you've gotten away from is insisting that the 2 guard was the glamour position of the 80s and 90s. For the record, you've been thoroughly refuted on that front.

This is going to reach a head pretty soon.

It pains me to say, and I’m currently shedding a tear by posting this, but it’s time for the denial to stop. LeBron will wind up surpassing MJ. The sooner we accept it, the easier it will be. His game last night shows how much he has left. He’s shooting 61% with 29, 8, and 9 at age 33. Jordan was 33 for the second to last championship. He was still a champion, but he wasn’t racking shit like that. And he had played a lot fewer games than LeBron at that age.

Now before I get crucified, know that I probably watched at least 78 of Jordan’s games that year and the next year... and he was slowing down. At that point, it was more of a Jordan-Pippen dominated team than a Jordan team. Jordan could still finish games and series, but he was having a lot of 7-26 type “warrior” games in the playoffs. We just happen to remember the flu game and his closing moments.

If LeBron retired today, I’d still say Jordan, but Lebron still has a number of superstar level years left. And when it counts, he’s still the best in the game.

Jordan might still be the best scorer or the most focused finisher, but if I’m starting a franchise today with either player, knowing that I’ll have them the next 20 years, it’s probably LeBron.

Why do you hate MJ so much?!?

No way. This one I really believe wouldn’t be all that close. Jordan was clearly the better one on one player, imo.