Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Ultimately, there is just too much working against Lebron in the playoffs to put him as the GOAT. He was outplayed by another player last year in the Finals, and was probably only marginally better than another player if at all. Of course he's a better all around player but no one cared that Jordan didn't get enough rebounds. I mean, I literally never heard anyone say "MJ is really good, but you know what I wish he did more of? Grab rebounds.".
Also, it does matter that Lebron has been able to cherry pick his teams twice now, and likely will a third time, and still won't have near the playoff resume as Jordan.
Lebron did have a chance to surpass Jordan. He was the first guy in the game who was probably talented enough to do it. Potential doesn't mean we ignore the actual results. He couldn't even go better than .500 in the Finals with two future hall of famers(or if Bosh doesn't make it, an unprecedented snub in basketball HOF history).
I probably agree with much of your first paragraph. But that's not the argument (at least not the one I'm making). You're oversimplifying it act as though people are running around saying LBJ could be GOAT because he rebounded a lot. What he does can't be quantified in a box score or even advanced metrics... it has to be observed. If there was a stat in basketball for secondary assists (sort of like hockey), he'd lead the league every year. He completely changes any offense he's in with his knowledge and instincts. He can reverse the ball from one side of the court to the other more quickly and with more accuracy then anyone I've ever seen. In the 2016 Finals, he basically played 1-on-5 half the time. Jordan did similar things against teams like Phoenix in '93, but Jordan tends to get more credit for it because the good outcomes for Jordan usually resulted in his own points rather than someone else's. They're two very different players, but I think people became so accustomed to a pure scorer's style that any other style is considered inferior. The one thing I will admit is that, in the final minutes of games, I'd rather have a Jordan or Kobe with the ball because with tight defense and nerves at the end of games, too much passing has too many variables that can go wrong. However, I believe LBJ's style may work even better for the first three-and-a-half quarters of the game. And it's not like he hasn't gotten results.
To your second paragraph, I could see the argument if he'd only won in Miami. But Cleveland wasn't hand-picked. He had some very good talent around him, but so has every champion ever, including Jordan. Jordan had Scottie Pippen, a widely accepted top 50 player of all-time, for all six championships. That doesn't mean Jordan doesn't get credit for the championships, but the same rule has to apply to LBJ.
To your last paragraph, you basically just made an argument against Jordan. First, a .500+ shooting percentage in an NBA Finals by a person who takes 20+ shots per game is an incredibly high bar. So high, in fact, that it describes Jordan's last three championships. Jordan did not shoot over .500 for any of the last three Finals series he played in, and he
literally (not just theoretically) had two hall of famers on his team. That's just cherry picking Lebron stats that you're not even holding Jordan to the same standard for.
Again, when I originally created the thread, my intention was to argue (in addition to the fact that Lebron continues to make a case, IMO), but there's no need to actively look for things to knock LBJ for. Jordan does beat him on Finals wins and many other key areas (for now, at least). Someone once said that they'd probably take Lebron for the first three quarters and Jordan for the fourth. Given their history, I'd say that's probably fair. But it doesn't mean that Lebron shouldn't even be discussed, and I definitely don't think it will be cut and dry once Lebron's entire career is over.
_________________
Curious Hair wrote:
I'm a big dumb shitlib baby
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
