My current framing of the MJ vs LeBron debate

[rmilia1]

Nah.

Stuff before NBA is mostly irrelevant to this conversation.

Both were amazing high school players. LeBron obviously faced far higher levels of competition in high school playing a national schedule in a modern era.

What they accomplished as boys has no bearing on who was best as a man playing against other men.

And if LeBron played 3-4 years of college, I am betting that would have been pretty legendary.

Probably. But the same points work for Kareem too

If he had come directly from HS to the NBA he'd still be the all time leading scorer and his cNBA resume would be even that much better than Jam re s compared to what it already is

Ultimately there's a reason you don't see anyone comped to Kareem statistically. Because no one can win that argument

LeBron is the closest but he's still not inarguably better and he's got less rings which is the Trump card when the other data points are similar

And if your having a debate on best basketball player ever then stuff before the NBA has to count because that still part of your basketball career so when you add on 3 national titles and all the other individual awards Kareem won at UCLA the gap gets even larger

 

[tlance]

Probably. But the same points work for Kareem too

If he had come directly from HS to the NBA he'd still be the all time leading scorer and his cNBA resume would be even that much better than Jam re s compared to what it already is

Ultimately there's a reason you don't see anyone comped to Kareem statistically. Because no one can win that argument

LeBron is the closest but he's still not inarguably better and he's got less rings which is the Trump card when the other data points are similar

And if your having a debate on best basketball player ever then stuff before the NBA has to count because that still part of your basketball career so when you add on 3 national titles and all the other individual awards Kareem won at UCLA the gap gets even larger

UCLA was the original super team.

Kareem was great. Wooden was better.

And many of Kareem’s NBA titles came when he was no longer the best player on his team.

And that matters a lot.

Those can’t be viewed in the same light as the title won with big O in Milwaukee or any of LeBron’s.

 

[Pastafazul]

This might be the worst take on the entire thread. And that is saying something.

The quality of play in college is pretty low because the best guys only stay for 1 year.

Once again, not seeing the point!

doubt he saying the quality of the players, but the game at how it’s played , With heart! Not prima Donna’s that act like there are snipers takin shots at them from all rows .

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Yeah, I honestly don’t know who said.

I will never take issue with someone ranking MJ ahead of LeBron. I have it as a 1A 1B level tie.

I believe it is extremely close. Can’t fault someone for picking 1 over the other.

But there are some reasons that are plain weak. That is one.

it cant be THE reason... but playing for one team does help a legacy.... and basically when you get to this level of discussion, isnt legacy and subjectivity overhyped???

 

[msgkings322]

it cant be THE reason... but playing for one team does help a legacy.... and basically when you get to this level of discussion, isnt legacy and subjectivity overhyped???

It does, but so does winning FMVP with 3 different teams (never done before), that also enhances a legacy. It's not moving around to make more money or to chase rings and fail, it's winning rings everywhere you go.

Like let's say Kawhi becomes the 2nd player to do it (if the Clippers win a title)...doesn't that help his legacy?

 

[MilkSpiller22]

It does, but so does winning FMVP with 3 different teams (never done before), that also enhances a legacy. It's not moving around to make more money or to chase rings and fail, it's winning rings everywhere you go.

Like let's say Kawhi becomes the 2nd player to do it (if the Clippers win a title)...doesn't that help his legacy?

here is the difference... Lebron the player has fans... But Heat, Laker, and cav fans dont go crazy for him...

Not like Bulls fans go crazy for michael, or Celtic fans go for Bird, Or laker fans on Kobe or Magic....

Its about the love... the fandom... it creates this unworldly type of legacy...

Lebron can not ever reach that type of legacy... The subjective part of the question WHO IS THE GREATEST.... he will always be behind...

 

[msgkings322]

here is the difference... Lebron the player has fans... But Heat, Laker, and cav fans dont go crazy for him...

Not like Bulls fans go crazy for michael, or Celtic fans go for Bird, Or laker fans on Kobe or Magic....

Its about the love... the fandom... it creates this unworldly type of legacy...

Lebron can not ever reach that type of legacy... The subjective part of the question WHO IS THE GREATEST.... he will always be behind...

As I said in the OP, the arguing is the point, everyone has different criteria. To me it helps, to you it doesn't

Pretty sure Cavs fans do go crazy over LeBron (Jordan didn't only play for one team by the way but unlike LeBron and Kawhi he didn't win a title on more than one team).

 

[MilkSpiller22]

As I said in the OP, the arguing is the point, everyone has different criteria. To me it helps, to you it doesn't

Pretty sure Cavs fans do go crazy over LeBron (Jordan didn't only play for one team by the way but unlike LeBron and Kawhi he didn't win a title on more than one team).

I do think winning for multiple teams helps as well... really all factors add up....

all i am saying is that when a fanbase sees a an extended dynasty for their team, and can give a single player to be the main cause of that dynasty, then a player is imortalized for that team...

Lebron didnt really give any team a dynasty...


He won 4 championships, but didnt win more than 2 with any team he was on... He won 2 with the Heat, but that team was created to give them championships...

Just saying his legacy is about him, not his teams... and thats what hurts him...

 

[msgkings322]

I do think winning for multiple teams helps as well... really all factors add up....

all i am saying is that when a fanbase sees a an extended dynasty for their team, and can give a single player to be the main cause of that dynasty, then a player is imortalized for that team...

Lebron didnt really give any team a dynasty...


He won 4 championships, but didnt win more than 2 with any team he was on... He won 2 with the Heat, but that team was created to give them championships...

Just saying his legacy is about him, not his teams... and thats what hurts him...

LeBron is definitely 'immortalized' for the Cavs and probably the Heat too.

He's basically immortalized for the whole league as at LEAST the 2nd best player ever who oh by the way scored more points than anyone ever.

 

[dtgold88]

here is the difference... Lebron the player has fans... But Heat, Laker, and cav fans dont go crazy for him...

Not like Bulls fans go crazy for michael, or Celtic fans go for Bird, Or laker fans on Kobe or Magic....

Its about the love... the fandom... it creates this unworldly type of legacy...

Lebron can not ever reach that type of legacy... The subjective part of the question WHO IS THE GREATEST.... he will always be behind...

He will be behind to many but not to all......and guess what, an argument can be made for Lebron as the better player.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

The biggest obstacle in the Lebron vs Michael debate imo is the nolstagia aspect.

As Lebron is currently playing, he doesn’t get the basketball was better back then people.

People will always gravitate to who they grew up liking.

Lebron will very likely be the best player ever in 15 years.

Fans are emotional and will always judge by subjective standards.

 

[tlance]

The biggest obstacle in the Lebron vs Michael debate imo is the nolstagia aspect.

As Lebron is currently playing, he doesn’t get the basketball was better back then people.

People will always gravitate to who they grew up liking.

Lebron will very likely be the best player ever in 15 years.

Fans are emotional and will always judge by subjective standards.

Facts.

Pick which one you prefer. Make your argument.

But base it accomplishments and not circumstance the players had no control over.

And whichever side people claim, if they can’t admit it is close then I can’t take their opinion seriously.

 

[msgkings322]

The biggest obstacle in the Lebron vs Michael debate imo is the nolstagia aspect.

As Lebron is currently playing, he doesn’t get the basketball was better back then people.

Ah but he will as time marches on. My kids barely know who Michael Jordan is, he's just some guy old people say was the best ever (like Babe Ruth to our generation). In the future this generation will be telling youngsters 'man you shoulda seen LeBron James play he was amazing'

People will always gravitate to who they grew up liking.

True, that does color things for most, I've seen both MJ and LeBron, and my thread OP is how I view them. No wrong answers, everyone has their own feelings on it

Lebron will very likely be the best player ever in 15 years.

If he's 'going to be' then he already is, since he won't be playing then (or shit maybe he will be LOL)

Fans are emotional and will always judge by subjective standards.

As I keep saying, agreed.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Facts.

Pick which one you prefer. Make your argument.

But base it accomplishments and not circumstance the players had no control over.

And whichever side people claim, if they can’t admit it is close then I can’t take their opinion seriously.

Btw. My opinion was posted earlier in this thread. Now I am more just highlighting(for my entertainment) the advantages Michael has on Lebron through fans eyes. Not by facts


The nolstagia affect and playing for one team or one dynasty are entirely emotional garbage.

But it is there. And you can see it in people’s opinions.

 

[MilkSpiller22]

Also. The nostalgia affect is even larger right now because older fans glorify how the game was played back then and many don’t love this offensive crazy and playing soft on defense style of play.

Those who glorify the past will never say Lebron is better than Michael. And many don’t even have Lebron as number 2.

 

[dtgold88]

Also. The nostalgia affect is even larger right now because older fans glorify how the game was played back then and many don’t love this offensive crazy and playing soft on defense style of play.

Those who glorify the past will never say Lebron is better than Michael. And many don’t even have Lebron as number 2.

Is it really playing soft on defense by being asked to actually play defense?

 

[fightinfunbags]

Also. The nostalgia affect is even larger right now because older fans glorify how the game was played back then and many don’t love this offensive crazy and playing soft on defense style of play.

Those who glorify the past will never say Lebron is better than Michael. And many don’t even have Lebron as number 2.

I remember coming up in the mid 80s and 90s with the NBA for middle school and high school and my dad and my uncles singing the same tune these guys are singing now.
“Why are you watching this? These guys don’t even play defense. Blah blah blah”. It’s hilarious to me when people get so old with their mindset that they start to become like they’re old man.

 

[tlance]

Is it really playing soft on defense by being asked to actually play defense?

Right?

Crazy to me that people actually glamorize being able to grab and push a ball handler to impede their progress.

That is not how basketball defense was ever intended to be played.

Then those same people think that clotheslining a player driving to the basket makes someone tough.

That isn’t basketball.

 

[trojanfan12]

I remember coming up in the mid 80s and 90s with the NBA for middle school and high school and my dad and my uncles singing the same tune these guys are singing now.
“Why are you watching this? These guys don’t even play defense. Blah blah blah”. It’s hilarious to me when people get so old with their mindset that they start to become like they’re old man.

Right?

Crazy to me that people actually glamorize being able to grab and push a ball handler to impede their progress.

That is not how basketball defense was ever intended to be played.

Then those same people think that clotheslining a player driving to the basket makes someone tough.

That isn’t basketball.

I've seen the 70's, 80's, 90's...up to now and have enjoyed every era for what it was.

Things are weighted too heavily toward offense now.

But the 90's, while fun in their own way, barely resembled basketball at times.

As I've said before the 80's, imo, had the best mix of physicality and finesse. For me, 2000-10 came closest to that.

 

[seattlefan75]

I love this debate and I give the edge to Jordan for going 6 for 6 in the finals but I do give major credit to Lebron I do believe winning multiples on 3 different teams in 2 different conferences is very impresses. One of the franchises (the Cavs) has a history of not winning anything and he was able to bring them a championship. If Kobe would have been traded to Chicago or Duncan would have left to Orlando I don't know if they would have found success in winning more championships.

Also I feel the quality of opponents that Lebron faced was better also in this day in age it would be super hard to win as teams change heavily in the offseason and a lot of stars do like to buddy up and try to create super teams. Imagine Reggie miller leaving Indiana to go team up with Patrick Ewing in New York or Karl Malone/Stockton in Utah for the sake of trying to beat the Bulls.