Out Of Bounds: Lebron is Better Than Jordan (Extra Long Read)

Welcome to my first edition/installment of "Out Of Bounds".

This is a series of unpopular opinion and politically incorrect views, hence the title header. These topics are sure to draw ire and lots of negative responses and point deductions.

The first topic is one I have wanted to post for a while but wanted to think on it and do it at the right time.

Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of All Time in my opinion. I think that is a consensus opinion. However, where I make a left turn is....I believe that unequivocally, Lebron is the best player of All Time...and better than Jordan. Jordan is the greatest because he was one of the top 5 players of all time without a doubt and he had the one of the most amazing careers of any modern day athlete. We know his accolades, they have been cited many times over.

A few weeks ago, I had a conversation with some friends of mine. We were discussing the question..."if you could pick any player in history to start your team with, who would it be?" Most of the answers were Jordan, a few said Kobe. I said without a doubt...my player would be Lebron. Another friend agreed with me. When they asked who would I take second....I said Magic.

I have stated on this forum several times that I believe Magic to be a very close second to Jordan as the best/greatest player I have ever seen. I also stated, there have been a few who were able to mimic a lot of what Jordan could do on the court skill wise, but NO ONE has ever been able to come close to duplicating Magic's skills. Of all the Magic "supposed-to-bees", the closest I can get to him skill wise with similar physicality would have to be Lebron and after that maybe a young Lamar Odom....when we are talking about playing 4 to 5 positions on the court. Of course Odom could play multiple positions but he is nothing to Magic at any of those positions....its like an NBA player against a High Schooler. Thats not disrespect to Odom, but a testament to how monumental the skills of Magic was.

The reason why I pick Lebron and Magic alike is because I look at players from how they affect the win/loss column. This is the same reason it is my opinion that Jason Kidd is better than Steve Nash and John Stockton. We get too wrapped up in championships. When asked the question of the player we would choose, the first thing that came out of everyone's mouth is, but Lebron needs championships. I wholeheartedly disagree. He does not. NBA Championships take an extraordinary level of TEAM effort. In a team sport, a lot comes down to timing and circumstance. As I was reading the other day, someone said championships require a combination of skill and luck.

While some may place an enormous amount of creedence into winning championships in team sport, I place the highest level of value on individuals who win wherever and whenever they play.

Magic was a winner at every level. Every stop he dominated and led his teams to victory. Magic could easily be considered the sport's all time best. In HS, he won games and won a title while leading his team. In college, he won games and won a title while leading his team. The next year after leading his college team to a national title he led his NBA team to a title. The year before Magic arrived in L.A. they had a record of 47-35 and were nearly swept out of the Western Conference semi-finals. The year Magic arrived, the Lakers won 60 games and an NBA Title, going 12-4 in the playoffs. The amazing thing is, I will never forget when it was announced that Kareem would not be able to play in game 6 of the finals. Everyone was thinking, this would be the Lakers swan song. It was a reasonable assessment, as Kareem averaged 33ppg for the series. Magic stepped in as center, and the rest is history. 42 points, 15 rebounds, and 7 assists.

Magic is arguably the greatest winner the sport has ever seen. Oh, but this conversation is about Lebron vs Jordan....I was getting to that.

Magic did always have great players around him. Lebron didnt have that luxury. For this reason, it is why Lebron is severely underrated and undervalued for his accomplishments.

For the past few months, I have challenged friends and family alike, to name me someone...anyone who played on the Cavaliers finals team with Lebron. Most cant name anyone. If someone is lucky enough....they can name one player. Some have named Ilgauskas....but thats about it, as far as correct answers go. I have had more people name Delonte West as a player from the team which is actually funny to me and shows the obscurity of the other players.

A bit of trivia. On Jordan's first Finals appearance, he played with several players who made the All Star team at some point in their careers, 4 to be exact. Pippen, Armstrong, Grant, and Cartwright. Pippen, Armstrong, and Grant all made All Star teams AFTER they played with Jordan....and what many dont remember is, they all were All Stars the year Jordan didnt play! Lebron only played with one All Star in his first finals appearance. Ilgauskas, who was an All Star prior to Lebron but never after!

One of the things that compelled me to write this topic that I grew up watching Jordan at UNC and then into the NBA and I remember vividly when everyone was critical of him, saying he wasnt the best, he could score but he couldnt win, he was a gunner, etc... It was deja vu all over again when Kobe came along (after Shaq). It pissed me off because I felt like both of these guys were great players who just didnt have the help. People would say (when asked personally) they WOULDNT want those guys on their time because they would never be able to win with them. Sounds funny now in retrospect.

Jordan as a rookie had a losing record. He improved his teams wins by 11 victories from the previous season. We wont count his 2nd year due to injury but in his 3rd year....his team only won 10 more games than the previous season. So he had a decrease in plus wins. The next year, Jordan's 4th, he had a winning team. He never played on a winning team that didnt contain either Pippen or Grant...or even Oakley for that matter who also made the All Star team AFTER he played with Jordan...and that was on a different team.

Lets look at Lebron win/loss columns. Lebron's first year in the league was the only year in his career he has played on a team with a losing record. How much did he mean to the team's win column? An improvement over the previous year by 18 games! In his 4th season he went to the Finals at 22 years old.

I think we realized how great Lebron was when he left Cleveland and for the first time in NBA history a team went from the best record to the worst within a year. Thats pretty amazing. It is very hard to win a championship in a team sport as one man...but Lebron was the closest in recent memory to almost pull it off. People often say the Bulls were nothing without Jordan, but look at the collapse of the Cavaliers post-Lebron and then recall that when Jordan left the Bulls, Chicago won 55 games without him. Wait...what did I say? 55 games without Jordan. The Bulls were still a playoff team! Did Jordan make his teammates better. Of course he did, but this is one of the most overstated and misused assessments of Jordan talents and an oh so overused cliche in Jordan GOAT discussions.

Who made their teammates better? We will leave Magic out of this conversation for now but obviously he is one of the best at this.

Quite a few of Jordan's teammates had their best seasons statistically when they DIDNT play with Jordan. Lets take Pippen for example. He averaged career highs in Points, Rebounds, Steals and FGMpg. His assist total dipped but he was the primary focus of the offense. Well, if you are the primary focus and there is No Jordan so teams can just key in on you, you should shoot a lower percentage right? Wrong. Pip shot 49% from the field. Although that was not career high for him, he never shot at that high a percentage ever again once Jordan returned. This actually shows support that Jordan's teammates sacrificed their games to fit in with him and make HIM better. Grant didnt get worse...averaged career highs in Points and Rebounds in Jordans absense. Kukoc shot a career best from the field, Kerr shot a career best from 3pt range and his 2nd highest FG% of his career, Scott Williams, Bill Wennington, even Pete Myers had their best seasons of their careers when Jordan was playing baseball.

The second player in history to lead his team in points, rebounds, assists, blocks and steals was Scottie Pippen. He did it without Mike. Pretty amazing feat. (Mike mustve made him really good.) There are only 3 other players who have done this. Dave Cowens was the first, then Kevin Garnett, then....you guessed it...Lebron James.

Pippen was more valuable to the win column than Jordan, like it or not. Without Pip, Jordan never had a winning season...ever. Yet I documented what Pip did without Jordan....also he won while playing for other teams as well. Not to say he could win a title by himself, not even Lebron could do that. Pippen, Lebron, Grant Hill, Magic, those were players who were important to the win column. Those are players that truly made everyone around them better. Pippen's ability to play point guard/forward was the key to Jordan excelling as he did, the same as DWade benefits from Lebron point skills. Jordan actually stated that he would not play without Pippen on his team.

Does Lebron make Mo Williams better? Statiscally, no. Mo was putting up nearly identical numbers before he got to Cleveland. The difference is, the season before he got there, he only won 26 games with Milwaukee the year prior. In Cleveland, he won 66 games. Those 40 games are the difference in a player putting up good numbers on a bad team and a guy who is an All Star. What has Mo done since Lebron? Boobie Gibson has had a better statistical season since Lebron left, unfortunately, it was when the Cavs were the worst team in the league. Drew Gooden hasnt played more than half a season for a team with a winning record since Lebron. You may say that Damon Jones was on his way out of the league regardless. I say Lebron prolonged his NBA tenure. The year after Jones stopped playing with Lebron, ironically was his last year in the league...and he was only 31 years old. Donyell Marshall only appeared in 40 more games after leaving Cleveland. I struggled just bringing those guys names up but only to prove a subtle point.

Lebron went more years before winning a title but still won his first at 27...so from that regard he is on par with Jordan...but one of the most biased arguments I always have to hear is that Lebron has been in the league longer...as to say he shouldve won earlier. Not fair. At age 27, Lebron has a massive lead on Jordan at the same age in terms of regular and post season stats. Points, rebounds, assists, and blocks. The only stat Jordan is close in is steals. "But Lebron came in the league almost 3 years younger than Jordan!" Is that supposed to mean that his stats are inflated because he was so good he made the jump from HS? If anything, it only shows that Lebron was more talented.

I really dont like to harp on individual stats and awards, but rather wins vs loses. Still, at 27, Lebron has 3 league MVP's, 1 Finals MVP, 3 Conf Titles, 8 All NBA selections and 4 All Defense selections.

It is my opinion that for what Lebron has accomplished, he is the best player of all times when you are talking from a pure winning perspective. Not simply titles. What I do believe is that history will best reward Lebron. He does not have the mentality that Jordan does, that does not make him less of a player, only less valuable in certain situations and settings. He will never be that kind of killer like Jordan was scoring wise, nor Kobe for that matter...but in the end, Jordan's competitve nature was more about him than the team (likewise with Kobe)...it just happened that he had some great teammates placed around him that helped him succeed.

Quote from Jordan: "I thought of myself first, the team second. I always wanted my teams to be successful. But I wanted to be the main cause." - The Jordan Rules

Lebron is more like Magic, but what is wrong with that? To me, they are the two best players in the history of the game in terms of pure winning and making teams and teammates better.

Lebron is not as Great as Jordan...yet. He is better though. When you talk about impact on win/loss, its not close either. I have given plenty of verification of my statements. Lebron is the type of player that you build a team around, it is unfortunate that Cleveland couldnt put the pieces around him and he was forced to defect to another team to find championship glory.

In closing, if Lebron stays on pace, he wont have to win a bunch of NBA titles, contrary to popular belief. Not 6, not 5, not 4....No. If he continues winning at the level that he is winning at, continues to be the league MVP, continue to scorch towards record numbers in cumulative top 5 catagorical statistics, then there will be NO WAY that he will not only be considered in the conversation with Jordan (which I believe he already is) but considered as the greatest basketball player to ever lace em up.

mikeyvthedon
mikeyvthedon's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 5723
Points: 14012
Offline
Well said

Honestly surve, if you had better organized your thoughts and really done some research (ie. winning percentages, breaking down the teams Michael and LeBron played on rather than just pointing to LeBron leading bad teams to wins and Michael not without Scottie), this could have been much more effective. I think you put a lot of work into writing it, just did not do all of the research you could have. Not to mention while you said their was no emotion, it seemed like their was a lot. It was semi-refreshing to see emotion for LeBron rather than against him (in my opinion, lol), just think that it turned into you splitting hairs on some kind of less than stellar claims.

Delving into players as "winners" or "losers" takes a lot of work. Your argument was pretty broad and the way you went about it definitely favored LeBron's regular season accomplishments in the win department. The thing it left out was leadership and prowess in the post-season. As great as LeBron has been in the post-season (he has been exceptional, as much as people tend to point out otherwise), Michael Jordan was at a level unsurpassed. The reason I point out his averages is because they are incredible. They are to the point where any season you say "how could someone have done more"?

With LeBron in the Boston and Dallas series of 2010 and 11, he left you wanting a lot more. Even with his teams success in the regular season, is that not part of questioning a person as a winner in general? Michael came up short in 1989 and 90, yet still was never really stopped. That first championship season, he was the best he had ever been. Much of the same can be said for LeBron's 9th season, yet even with his carrying of those Cleveland teams to huge winning marks, could you still not question his ability to lead a team to the ultimate mark more so than a guy like Michael who never seemed to crack? I think you know what I am getting at. I am not just talking about Michael having six rings, just his ability to always give it his all when it mattered the most.

LeBron did that this season, he has done it before, yet he still needs to do quite a bit more before I feel he has passed Michael Jordan. When you compare them at the age of 27, I still feel Michael was indeed the better player and had a will to win he had displayed even more so than LeBron. I still think it is early for LeBron, that he did indeed face far different circumstances and obviously did not have the tools to win on his original franchise. Just also know that LeBron probably takes accountability for his letdowns and Michael does as well. Still feel that Michael was always dominant to a point we had never seen combined with team success and that LeBron did indeed play less than stellar those two seasons before he finally got his championship. As much as you felt rings were looked at too much in this debate, had LeBron not won his would you have posted this? My feeling is, as impressive and valuable as LeBron has shown himself to be, Michael Jordan had quite a bit of his own that you seemed to not give full credit to. While winning itself is impressive, winning championships when you have the ability and the chance to do so is the ultimate to me. Lets just say, I feel LeBron finally jumped this hurdle, just think he needs to keep racing.

JoeWolf1
JoeWolf1's picture
Registered User
Joined: 05/28/2009
Posts: 8596
Points: 18011
Offline
You think Lebron and his

You think Lebron and his "Taylor made bums" could get past the 90-91 Knicks and Pistons? The 91-92 Knicks and Cavs? or the 92-93 Hawks, Cavs and Knicks?

I don't the East was a lot harder back then.

FastAndFurious
FastAndFurious's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/05/2009
Posts: 3612
Points: 8937
Offline
There is an "EXTREME" amount

There is an "EXTREME" amount of bias in this topic like it always is whenever someone is compared to Jordan(Especially Lebron). To say Lebron is better than Jordan or will be better than Jordan for now is a little far fetched, but to say Lebron is not on Jordans level is downright absurd.

aamir543
Registered User
Joined: 04/11/2009
Posts: 5066
Points: 5557
Offline
Looking at MJ's 4th season in

Looking at MJ's 4th season in the league(87-88, 24 years old) and Lebron's 4th year in the league(06-07, 22 years old), both carried an average team to a 50-32 record, except Lebron's Cavs made it to the finals, and MJ's Bulls fell to the Pistons in 5 in the second round.

I feel you guys are throwing out a lot of stats and I appreciate Surve for making a great thread like this, but really it's quite simple: Look at the rosters Lebron and Jordan each had before their first tittle and see which you believe had the better supporting cast.

Now before we look at plain numbers, let's remember that Lebron's 07 team was 19th in the league in scoring at 96.8 ppg. MJ's team was also 19th, but that was out of 23 teams, however they scored 105 ppg. Both teams were top 5 defensive teams, MJ's Bulls led the league in opponents ppg at 101.6, while Lebron's team ws 5th in that cataogory at 92.9.

As you can infer by those stats, the pace back inteh late 80s was emteremly fast, crazy compared to what we have nowdays. That also explains why MJ had seasons averaging 35, 37, and averaged 32 for a majority of years, while Lebron has been mostly around 27-29, with his peak at 31.

Back to the topic, Lebron's main helpers were Larry Hughes(28 years old, 15 ppg, stunk it up in the playoffs, don't need stats to remember that one) Ilgauskas(31 years old, 12 and 7) and Drew Gooden(25 years old, 11 and 8) with Sasha Pavlovic scoring 9 a game, and Varejao, Donyell Marshall, and Damon Jones scoring 7 a game. And we all know Boogie Gibson helped big time in the playoffs.

MJ had similar production from his role players, Sam Vincent was a mid-season aquisition from the Sonics, who had averages way above his career averages the 29 games he spent with the Bulls, averaging 13 and 8 with them. The Bulls were 31-22 when they got him, and went 19 and 10 for the remainder of the season, including winning 13 of their last 17 games. However he also stunk it up in the playoffs, and his assists nearly split in half, and he never averaged more than 5 dimes a game. They had a young 24 year old Charles Oakley, a monster that was getting 12 and 13 a game. Dave Corzine averaged 10 and 6.6, Brad Seller averaged 10 a game as well, and then you had the young pups, Paxon, Pippen, and Grant, who all played 20 minutes per game, and averaged 8 points per game, and Grant added in 5 boards per game. In the playoffs they had 4 guys who scored exactly 10 per game, while Jordan scored 36, but that team just wasn't ready fro an extended tittle run, but soon enought they would be ready.

One thing I was wondering, what if they didn't trade Oakley for Cartwright? I know Carwright was the lockeroom presence and he was the leader on that team just as much as MJ was, but imagine if they had Oakley, Grant, Pippen, and Jordan? However Cartwright did give them 4 productive years, and that allowed Grant to get more playing time, so I guess it all worked out.

Looking at their teams in their early days, they both had mediocore role players and had to put the team on their backs every game. The Bulls drafted well and landed Pippen and Grant, however the Cavs did not do anything as such. I know I didn't really prove anything, but just wanted to lay it all out and show that they both had sucky supporting casts, and that it really is amazing that Lebron got to the Finals in 07.

And how the hell did the Bulls make the playoff in the 85-86 season? They were 30-52!(not MJ's fault, only played 18 games that season due to a foot injury. Also didn't know George Gervin finished up his career in Chicago, the year MJ was hurt, averaged 16 in 25 mpg, but retired the following season.

mikeyvthedon
mikeyvthedon's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 5723
Points: 14012
Offline
They needed a center

You look at Oak's numbers and say that he would have maybe helped more, but Cartwright was 7-1 and a true pivot. As much as Oak was a tough [email protected] and fantastic rebounder, he was young and 5 inches shorter. I think they needed to make a decision between Oakley and Grant, they went with the slightly younger tall kid. Also, remember that Bill Cartwright was a former third pick in the draft, a one time All-Star and had a butter shot. Having a true center like that can be a big help.

Now, I know PER has its downfalls and it is not a statistic I see as the gospel. Still, it can kind of tell a part of a story, which I think it does as far as the LeBron vs. Michael 4th year thing goes. The "average" PER is always 15. In Michael's 4th season, his was an insane 31.7 to LeBron's 24.5, which is not my point. My point is, the PER of their immediate help. You had Zydrunas Ilgauskas at 18.0 (solid, even if he was just that and not incredible) and Drew Gooden at 16.5, Andy Verajao at 14.4, Donyell Marshall 15.3 and Larry Hughes at 12.1 (ugh. That Larry Hughes deal was a panic move and it SUCKED). In the play-offs, Boobie Gibson was huge, Ilgauskas was the same, Gooden at 15.7, Andy at 14.9, Hughes below 10, Marshall below 10. Not great at all.

Now, Michael's fourth year squad had no Zydrunas Ilgauskas. Oakley may have been a better version of Drew Gooden, yet he had a 15.4 PER. Sam Vincent had a 16.1 (in 29 games as Aamir mentioned), which went to an 8.3 (worse than Larry Hughes). Scottie and Horace were both rookies, with PER's around 13. They had Dave Corzine at 13.6 in the regular season, in the post-season 5! 5! He was playing over 30 minutes per game. Horace did a solid 15.4 in the play-offs, Scottie only did 10.

My ultimate point is, I do not know if Michael Jordan was indeed better than LeBron in year 4 (though statistically speaking, it would look that way). What I do know is, LeBron's title team certainly looked like they had more help than Michael's team during his 4th year. I think it would have helped to have more of a breakdown besides Scottie and crew doing pretty well after MJ left (plus Scottie after MJ is irrelevant, none of his teams won titles and while he was solid, he was not close to the same. Michael flat out never got a chance to play without Scottie from ages 22-38). Surve may point to LeBron's team at age 24 being 66-16. I will point to say that team was even more balanced and had more help overall than his championship team. The issue? The development of a Celtic and Magic team that made the East that much more formidable of a conference those two seasons later.

aamir543
Registered User
Joined: 04/11/2009
Posts: 5066
Points: 5557
Offline
Was MJ in 1988 better than

Was MJ in 1988 better than Lebron in 2007? Yes, no doubt. Was Lebron's supporting cast a little bit better? Yes. But that doesn't take away from the fact that Lebron was amazing in his own right and that he definatly carried an average group of guys to the finals. That team definatly overachieved that year, thanks to Lebron. Now do I believe MJ would have been able to do the same? Absolutly, but that doesn't mean I don't think that Lebron was amazing that season.

MJ is better than Lebron--for now. Time will tell what happens in the future, but up till this point, Lebron has a legit shot to be the GOAT when all is said and done.

mikeyvthedon
mikeyvthedon's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 5723
Points: 14012
Offline
In no way am I saying what LeBron did in 2007

Was not amazing. It was, blew my fragile little mind. Game 5 of that Pistons series was unbelievable. LeBron making the Finals with that team that season had me telling my friends I could see him being the best player of all time. Just an amazing accomplishment. Still, what you say about Michael Jordan:

Now do I believe MJ would have been able to do the same? Absolut(e)ly, but that doesn't mean I don't think that Lebron was amazing that season.

What I was saying takes nothing away from what LeBron did. It goes more along the lines that surve using this as a way to say LeBron was more of a winner or a better winning player than LeBron might not necessarily be true. I would not say MJ would have "absolutely" led that team to the Finals. Just, from his track record as a player, it certainly would be a possibility.

Michael Jordan may not have won more than he lost without Scottie, but he was developing as a player, same way that LeBron was. I dare say, LeBron's teams his first few years were indeed better than Michael Jordan's. As Michael and his team developed, added pieces, I think eventually they could indeed compete and compete well with the 2009 Cavs 66-16 team (57-25 Bulls team would be one hell of a match-up in my mind). If you read what I posted here Aamir, I think I have been making the exact same claims you are seemingly trying to inform me of.

jiggawhat
Registered User
Joined: 07/15/2012
Posts: 27
Points: -19
Offline
Even if someone is better

Even if someone is better than Jordan, no one is going to admit it because Jordan has been put on this pedestal by the media.

mikeyvthedon
mikeyvthedon's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 5723
Points: 14012
Offline
Just some pointers, for another possible one of these

Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player of All Time in my opinion. I think that is a consensus opinion. However, where I make a left turn is....I believe that unequivocally, Lebron is the best player of All Time...and better than Jordan. Jordan is the greatest because he was one of the top 5 players of all time without a doubt and he had the one of the most amazing careers of any modern day athlete. We know his accolades, they have been cited many times over.

Now, I am assuming:

Greatest=Most accomplished career, incredible individual numbers, six championship rings, complete and utter dominance.

While:

Best=A flat out better player who could do more to help a team win than any other player in history.

However, you go on mixing the two up and never really giving a CLEAR definition. You say you use stats and evidence, though you seem to use them only in support of your argument. When we say stats, you say totals. When we say rings, you say regular season wins. When we say he had help, you claim Michael had even more so and LeBron did not need his. See where this went? Just in absolute circles, with emotion that certainly need not be tied to it.

Man, to say everyone is just blinded by Jordan is a tad ridiculous. Yes, he is the popular opinion as the greatest player of All-Time. However, I even said I was hoping LeBron might be even better. LeBron has been great, but I still am not even close to certain he was better and I feel their accomplishments as far as winning, even with LeBron having two more years along your age guidelines, are very similar.

The NBA was different in Michael Jordan's first few years. Losing teams used to make the play-offs, often. As a matter of fact, their were only 23 total teams! This led to a lot smaller league, greater competition and more often than not, a greater divide between the top of the league and the bottom. Over Scottie Pippen's first few years, they added a few more teams and the league definitely shifted. Still, before Michael Jordan won a championship, he was in an 80's that had 8 Championships won by two teams.

Lets face it, the NBA landscape in both conferences were very different and relegated to a select few teams. The Bulls were not even in the equation until Michael got at least some sufficient help. LeBron was in very much the same place until the Cavs got him some pieces as well. Unfortunately, the Cavs were not able to draft these pieces and develop them with LeBron. Michael was lucky enough to get a Scottie Pippen and Horace Grant to grow with. LeBron had bupkis. Still, he led the bupkis to a lot of wins, even a title game. Nonetheless, he came up short.

A lot of the blame is not on LeBron's shoulders. His teams simply did not have the pieces necessary to compete with some tougher opponents that caused mismatches. For the Jordan Bulls, it was gaining a bit of toughness and experience. For LeBron, it was going to a team with some pieces to help him compete at a higher level. I do not fault LeBron for this, he is a victim of circumstance. Still, I do not look at what he did with the Cavs and say "No way could Michael Jordan have done that."

As much as LeBron is a victim of circumstance according to peoples perception of his whimping out by joining the Heat, it seems that Michael Jordan to you is a victim of circumstance to you. Scottie Pippen played a year without Michael Jordan and did well. Still, while he was on a high level that year, could he lead that team during the post-season? Could he do it that next season, when they were 3 games above .500 with 17 games left in the season? You claim that Scottie affected the wins column more than Michael, but I do not think Michael got a fair sample size and he had teams that I think were below the level of even LeBron's first few teams in Cleveland.

All in all, I think you had a plan and a vision, just could have maybe done a more precise job of execution. I have been through it and have been misunderstood as well. In the end, just think of maybe the most straight forward and factual way of putting it. Use statistical data to support this, the more the better. The particular data you used was honestly not very convincing and did not tell the entire story. Say what aspects LeBron would be better at, maybe even say, "If he were on the Bulls, they might have won more", and why. As soon as that paragraph I posted at the top was written without much of a differentiation between "best" and "greatest" (which are kind of synonymous), than you were bound to have major miscommunication on I am sure what you hoped to be a more civilized, productive discussion.

Instead it was a lot of neg complaining and bitterness at seeing things differently than you might. I know you respect the opinions of others, just realize that their were better ways to have presented this discussion that would not have led to you taking the stance of being the one man trying to stop a conspiracy. If the person trying to unlock the conspiracy was accepting and transparent, without knocking viable data and answering viable questions, instead covering them up as being the work of an apologist, than it would work out much better. The thing was, when people started to point out holes in your theory, you took the defensive and started belittling their opinion. This may not have been your intention, it did happen on this thread quite a bit. Some of was at you, I will agree, though an awful lot of it was by you.

RSS: Syndicate content