My current framing of the MJ vs LeBron debate

[MilkSpiller22]

anytime a discussion is had based on different eras you will never get a good debate...

there are the people that a nostalgic towards an era, and may even dislike another era... this happens in all sports... people always romanticize the past... thinking it is better than it really was..

basketball, people dislike the softness of the current players, and the offensive renaissance that really means defense is becoming less and less of a thing... whether its because of the rules, or just that players are much harder to stop...

nobody can debate that the average player is bigger stronger faster than they were in the 1990s... and Jordan had bigger stronger faster competition than previous greats before him...

so the question is not who is the more talented player... because to me that would be an obvious answer of Lebron... who is bigger, stronger faster, better shooter...

its who was better in their era... Michael was way more dominant than Lebron ever was... now was that because of competition?? I don't know...

90s Jordan was the best player who ever lived... and I don't think that is even close...

but if we talk about who had the better career, then yes, a lot of other factors..

if both players were in their prime today, I would probably start my team with Lebron over Jordan... as I would have less needs to fill afterwards...

if I have a team that needs that one thing to get over the hump... I would take Jordan... as he is a better competitor than Lebron ever was...

 

[Stakesarehigh]

If it's one season one title I'm probably going Jordan but it also matters who is on the team.

Lebron fits with pretty much anyone. Jordan and Kobe couldn't have co existed whereas Lebron and Kobe could.

But if we have the same pieces and it's not a second ball dominant guard as my next best player I go MJ slightly.

 

[trojanfan12]

anytime a discussion is had based on different eras you will never get a good debate...

there are the people that a nostalgic towards an era, and may even dislike another era... this happens in all sports... people always romanticize the past... thinking it is better than it really was..

basketball, people dislike the softness of the current players, and the offensive renaissance that really means defense is becoming less and less of a thing... whether its because of the rules, or just that players are much harder to stop...

nobody can debate that the average player is bigger stronger faster than they were in the 1990s... and Jordan had bigger stronger faster competition than previous greats before him...

so the question is not who is the more talented player... because to me that would be an obvious answer of Lebron... who is bigger, stronger faster, better shooter...

its who was better in their era... Michael was way more dominant than Lebron ever was... now was that because of competition?? I don't know...

90s Jordan was the best player who ever lived... and I don't think that is even close...

but if we talk about who had the better career, then yes, a lot of other factors..

if both players were in their prime today, I would probably start my team with Lebron over Jordan... as I would have less needs to fill afterwards...

if I have a team that needs that one thing to get over the hump... I would take Jordan... as he is a better competitor than Lebron ever was...

Agree with pretty much all of this. I also think that what has to be considered as well, is what other players they are compared to.

Lebron's game has always favored Magic far more than MJ.

Magic was considered the games greatest "Swiss army knife" until Lebron came along as a bigger, stronger, faster version of Magic with elite level defense thrown in.

MJ's best "modern day" comparison was always Kobe, not Lebron. Even MJ has said that Kobe was closest to playing like he did.

I think a big part of why the MJ/Lebron debate happens is because of how clearly better they were than anyone else in their eras. Most other eras, there are at least 2 players you can make a case for. Not so with the eras of MJ and Lebron. I know Lebron is still playing at a very high level, but I consider their "eras" to basically be when they were in their prime.

These debates are always fun, but ultimately prove nothing because of how much the game and how it's played has changed.

 

[WiggyRuss]

Not if you look at the competition and the fact Lebron carried his team to the Finals. Maybe he should have lost early like MJ did vs the C’s year in and year out. If he only goes to 4 championships and wins them all, is that making a difference? I think it actually diminishes his career vastly. What LBJ did to carry some of those Cavs teams to Finals not one person on the planet could have done, even MJ. There is a reason, MJ only made the Finals with Pip and when he was healthy.

The debate is actually very close. Closer than some realize.

There is always luck involved too. One perfect example. Lebron wins a title with Cleveland. GS strengthens the already superteam with KD. If this never happens, the Cavs very well could win another title. This was a chain reaction bc then the following year Kyrie forces his way out. That team won two games against the KD-Warriors and the future was bright.

The point is not everything is black and white. MJ won his titles when the Pistons bad boys aged. The Lakers-Magic and Kareem fell apart and aged. There was less talent in the league. The only team MJ had to worry about was the Jazz and adding Rodman was a perfect fit vs the Mailman. Everything went as planned. One thing goes wrong and MJ could have 3 titles-maybe less

I think one of the things you say is an under-rated point. There was much less talent in the league. There were barely any foreign born players in the NBA at that point. The college game also did not have nearly the same infrastructure and level of coaching and scouting as it does today. Ironically- Jordan's Bulls team had a very solid foreign born player in Kukoc and a of course Pippen was a guy from an incredibly small off the beaten path school- both anomalies at the time in the league.

The foreign born players, and the strength of the college infrastructure is so much deeper today and it brings a lot more talent into the league.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I think one of the things you say is an under-rated point. There was much less talent in the league. There were barely any foreign born players in the NBA at that point. The college game also did not have nearly the same infrastructure and level of coaching and scouting as it does today. Ironically- Jordan's Bulls team had a very solid foreign born player in Kukoc and a of course Pippen was a guy from an incredibly small off the beaten path school- both anomalies at the time in the league.

The foreign born players, and the strength of the college infrastructure is so much deeper today and it brings a lot more talent into the league.

What specifically about the college game do you feel has improved

 

[tlance]

What specifically about the college game do you feel has improved

It isn’t the college game.

It is the globalization of the sport combined with the money available.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

It isn’t the college game.

It is the globalization of the sport combined with the money available.

this I agree with

 

[ducky]

What specifically about the college game do you feel has improved

Yeah I am not sure about that either.

But at least today college plays the way the NBA plays for the most part. That wasnt the case back in the day. Back in the 80's and 90', zones ruled the college basketball landscape. Man defense only happened situationally for the vast majority of teams with only a few exceptions.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

Yeah I am not sure about that either.

But at least today college plays the way the NBA plays for the most part. That wasnt the case back in the day. Back in the 80's and 90', zones ruled the college basketball landscape. Man defense only happened situationally for the vast majority of teams with only a few exceptions.

the only exception I see are bigs like Eddey can thrive in college but not nba

but yes agree otherwise

 

[WiggyRuss]

What specifically about the college game do you feel has improved

more and better coaching, more and better scouting, more good programs- less guys slipping through the cracks- just the sheer amount of resources compared to 30+ years ago is astounding in number.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

more and better coaching, more and better scouting, more good programs- less guys slipping through the cracks- just the sheer amount of resources compared to 30+ years ago is astounding in number.

resources for sure. I don't know that some of these guys are as polished as days gone by due to length of time in school

player by player basis. The HS etc prep is def better so I'd say your average freshman is well ahead of a freshman from the 90s though

 

[tlance]

more and better coaching, more and better scouting, more good programs- less guys slipping through the cracks- just the sheer amount of resources compared to 30+ years ago is astounding in number.

I don’t know.

I think more guys slip through the cracks today because there are just more guys.

No way to prove that.

But player decisions after high school can drastically alter a players’ trajectory.

Steph Curry is a prime example of this. He chose Davidson where he was the offensive focal point the day he set foot on campus. Coaches poured resources into him continuously throughout his 3 years there.

His other primary option was a preferred walk on spot at Virginia Tech where his dad played.

And I can tell you from first hand knowledge of how Seth Greenberg recruited and made personnel decisions that Curry wouldn’t have been anywhere near the VT rotation for at least a year or two. He would not have had the same investment from their development coaches.

Does he still become the player he is today had he chosen Tech?

I doubt it.

How many guys are out there who we never heard of that were a bad decision away from NBA stardom?

Probably quite a few.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

I don’t know.

I think more guys slip through the cracks today because there are just more guys.

No way to prove that.

But player decisions after high school can drastically alter a players’ trajectory.

Steph Curry is a prime example of this. He chose Davidson where he was the offensive focal point the day he set foot on campus. Coaches poured resources into him continuously throughout his 3 years there.

His other primary option was a preferred walk on spot at Virginia Tech where his dad played.

And I can tell you from first hand knowledge of how Seth Greenberg recruited and made personnel decisions that Curry wouldn’t have been anywhere near the VT rotation for at least a year or two. He would not have had the same investment from their development coaches.

Does he still become the player he is today had he chosen Tech?

I doubt it.

How many guys are out there who we never heard of that were a bad decision away from NBA stardom?

Probably quite a few.

I know there are a lot of guys that screwed themselves long term by jumping to the NBA as a frosh rather than sitting and getting the exposure in college...at least early on. But now the NBA is conditioned to look past that and project where they should be

Which is making the draft more of a crap shoot imo.

To me with NIL make these kids stay 2 years at minimum.

 

[WiggyRuss]

I don’t know.

I think more guys slip through the cracks today because there are just more guys.

No way to prove that.

But player decisions after high school can drastically alter a players’ trajectory.

Steph Curry is a prime example of this. He chose Davidson where he was the offensive focal point the day he set foot on campus. Coaches poured resources into him continuously throughout his 3 years there.

His other primary option was a preferred walk on spot at Virginia Tech where his dad played.

And I can tell you from first hand knowledge of how Seth Greenberg recruited and made personnel decisions that Curry wouldn’t have been anywhere near the VT rotation for at least a year or two. He would not have had the same investment from their development coaches.

Does he still become the player he is today had he chosen Tech?

I doubt it.

How many guys are out there who we never heard of that were a bad decision away from NBA stardom?

Probably quite a few.

honestly one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.

For every 1 scout when Jordan came into the league, there are probably 15 now that are better trained.

30 years ago- there were what? maybe 3-4 coaches on a high level program? Now mid level programs have 8 coaches. Mid/Low Level programs have as much resources now a days as high level programs had 30 years ago.

you are 100% totally failing to see it in a macro perspective.

 

[Stakesarehigh]

honestly one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.

For every 1 scout when Jordan came into the league, there are probably 15 now that are better trained.

30 years ago- there were what? maybe 3-4 coaches on a high level program? Now mid level programs have 8 coaches. Mid/Low Level programs have as much resources now a days as high level programs had 30 years ago.

you are 100% totally failing to see it in a macro perspective.

resources are only so effective when a guy spends six months with the program.

 

[tlance]

honestly one of the dumbest things I have ever heard.

For every 1 scout when Jordan came into the league, there are probably 15 now that are better trained.

30 years ago- there were what? maybe 3-4 coaches on a high level program? Now mid level programs have 8 coaches. Mid/Low Level programs have as much resources now a days as high level programs had 30 years ago.

you are 100% totally failing to see it in a macro perspective.

And I actually thought you were becoming a more reasonable person.

I am looking at a different perspective. Nothing I wrote above is untrue.

More scouts for sure.

Also smaller gaps between players in the talent pool and much less of a gap between college levels.

60 draft spots every year, more and more come from overseas.

There are 100% for sure more players that aren’t getting drafted who would have been 30 years ago.

Disagree if you want, but don’t be an ass.

 

[WiggyRuss]

And I actually thought you were becoming a more reasonable person.

I am looking at a different perspective. Nothing I wrote above is untrue.

More scouts for sure.

Also smaller gaps between players in the talent pool and much less of a gap between college levels.

60 draft spots every year, more and more come from overseas.

There are 100% for sure more players that aren’t getting drafted who would have been 30 years ago.

Disagree if you want, but don’t be an ass.

your argument just does not make any sense though.

the total sum of the resources devoted to identifying and coaching talent in the college basketball system is so much better funded and refined then years ago.

to quote you---

"How many guys are out there who we never heard of that were a bad decision away from NBA stardom? Probably quite a few.":

because of the GIGANTIC increase in the infrastructure of the college system- from recruiting to coaching , etc.---- the number of guys that now slip through the cracks is UNDOUBTEDLY much much smaller than it used to be.


Steph Curry is a guy that makes my point probably more than any other- as when Jordan came in to the league - he may not have even been GIVEN an opportunity (less than famous father).

 

[WiggyRuss]

resources are only so effective when a guy spends six months with the program.

thats making my point though. If the colleges identify talent that only needs 1 season to make a jump- thats part of the whole- thats a guy who was identified and makes it to the league.

 

[WiggyRuss]

It is a very base level concept- for every x dollar spent- you are more likely to find and develop a prospective NBA player. The more resources spent on scouting, coaching, training- the more likely it is to find the right guys.

when a modern day mid-level program- has more coaches, more scouts, more development capacity- than a major program from years ago- and when a major program has absolutely insane infrastructure compared to years ago- you are going to be more successful finding an d developing players.

the total sum of the increase in funds spent means you are finding more of the right guys, and giving more of those right guys better coaching to take advantage of their talent.

combine that with the international influence- thats basically went from a small handful of guys (Sabonis, Kukoc, etc.), to a fair portion of the league- with guys like Jokic, Doncic and Giannis foreign born players---- it is not even a question - the NBA has way more talent in it then it ever has.

instead of inefficiently just drawing from the US- it is drawing much more efficiently from the US, AND drawing from a majority of the world (though it still seems Asia is a place where it is not efficient for the most part).

 

[tlance]

your argument just does not make any sense though.

the total sum of the resources devoted to identifying and coaching talent in the college basketball system is so much better funded and refined then years ago.

to quote you---

"How many guys are out there who we never heard of that were a bad decision away from NBA stardom? Probably quite a few.":

because of the GIGANTIC increase in the infrastructure of the college system- from recruiting to coaching , etc.---- the number of guys that now slip through the cracks is UNDOUBTEDLY much much smaller than it used to be.


Steph Curry is a guy that makes my point probably more than any other- as when Jordan came in to the league - he may not have even been GIVEN an opportunity (less than famous father).

I agree there is more resources. Not arguing that at all.

What I am disagreeing with is your point that fewer guys slip through the cracks.

Because there are so many guys out there that are damn good. Good enough to hold down a roster spot if given the opportunity.

Again, because there are so many guys that can play today. As you said, so much more talent.

And no, Curry doesn’t make your point.

He only had 3 D1 offers. He came very close to slipping through the cracks.

And he is an all time great player.