[ESPN] Lebron Closing in On Jordan...

Outstanding, I think that's the objective way of looking at it.

 

Like another poster stated, much of his passing is produced from his athletic ability (primarily on drives). Once he slows down and teams are more able to contain him, that aspect of his game will dwindle a bit. I'm not saying that he won't be able to make passes, but most plays involving LeBron begin with his athleticism.

 

well said. useless to compare the two before lebron's career is done.

 

He hope Lebron doesnt win a championship in the next 3 yrs and see how he wins when he cant just run over people.


LEBRON RINGS = 0



so who cares with all these comparisions.

 

You never know. Big O averaged triple double at one point, but he never led a team to championship.

 

LerBon would do well under a JVG slow it down, half court play.
He could dance in slow motion too, while at it.

Also, I think LerBon is fit to be compared with Magic more. Both can play all positions.

 

WAAAAAAAAAAAAY better.

 

McGrady was 25 years old 5 years ago. We all know what happened to that guy. Athleticism disappears quickly in the NBA. It's not a place to age gracefully. We'll see how Lebron's body fares in the coming years. Kobe has slowed down but he has all the moves in the game which is why you don't see much a drop-off in his production. The guy is just a basketball machine. LeBron will need to add more dimensions to his game if he wants to dominate past his 20's. Either that or he really is a mutant alien warrior and he won't ever age.

 

He did. 1971

EXACTLY. I wondered why PER was used so direct and matter-of-factly. Then I saw the link was from ESPN, then thought hmmm I wonder WHO could it be assessing players so emphatically with PER? And I guessed the person correctly.

But it has merit, and his career his player assessment so he can do that...

 

On CAREER achievement, sure.

I can tell you, and you yourself might know, around that same '88 Jordan season people were already anointing Jordan the greatest in the game. Early in his career with no titles. In the same Golden Era of Magic and Bird who at the time had 5 MVPs and 7 titles between them. Where Jordan wouldnt have a championship for another 3 years. Proof? From Magic and Bird THEMSELVES:

Now they won every award imaginable by then. They already had so much more success than the next player that they didnt feel too threatened maybe. Just that no one shied away as much back then from the comparisons.

If Magic and Bird's hardware didnt matter as much, why should Kobe's, Shaq's or Duncan's?

 

Not exactly the kind of leading we talked about, Jabbar was the man.

 

LOL at the Kobe and Jordan fanboys. It seems funny to me that defense of these guys being better than Lebron fall under three categories:

1) He doesn't have the hardware

2) Kobe/Jordan is way more clutch than he is/LBJ is a choker

3) LBJ is all about athletecism/he'll be done when he gets old



To that I say:

1) Basketball is a team sport. Whether or not you get rings shouldn't be the be all and end all of greatness because guess what? In a given game there are 9 people out there on the court which affect the outcome of the game. Kobe has 4 rings, does that mean he was only great 4 times in his career and you invalidate the years he didn't win anything? In fact, you guys are doing nothing but picking the facts you want, if you're judging by rings shouldn't Russell be your GOAT? Since when did 6>11? He even won a ring as a player/coach, let's see MJ top that

2) Again this is just selective bias, if clutch really was all that how come Robert Horry isn't regarded as the best of anything? I don't really care whether a player is clutch or not, what matters is his overall performance on the court. If he goes off for 25 pts, 8 rebs and 7 assists on 50% FG then I don't care if he chokes every time at end game, more likely you'll be so far in the lead it wouldn't even matter.

3) LBJ is 25 years old. 25! WTF are you guys talking about his athleticism leaving him as if he's benjamin button or something? Kobe's already past 30 and he can still get up and dunk it. I find it hard to believe someone like LBJ won't last that long as well. More importantly, Kobe (or Jordan) at age 25 weren't exactly the complete players you see now. At age 25 they were exactly like LBJ: relying on their athleticism to win games. I'm pretty sure he'll be able to develop other moves in his repertoire as his career progresses, he's still got a decade or so left after all.

 

Warning LONG

Yes Kobe is 31 and hes still athletic, but less athletic than he was at 25 and you could see him adjust his game for that. Same when MJ came back albeit it was later and MJ averaged over 20 and was effective post 40. Kobe maybe could pull that off bc of how crafty he is and he opens up his game with his mastered mid-range. Lebron opens up his game with his athleticism, you take that away, the rest of his tools are shaky and will close in. The fact is hell still be athletic at 30, but his window might not be as big bc his athleticism will diminish to some level by then and then his marginal advantage towards other plays won't be there. Yes, everyone says he can learn like they did, but by each of their 7th seasons, MJ and Kobe had their midrange mastered. Yes Lebron has improved his shooting, but his ft percentage is a testimony to just a shaky structure in his shooting.

Hollinger loves to talk about how much faster they played then, does he not mentioned be it slower now, because more fouls are called, and there is no hand checking which actually promotes the more athletic wings and guards in our league. So that means far more free throws and far more hesitancy from the defense just to close in on the offense. The rules are made to bring about an 'illusion' of the golden age, inflate stats to support that. You get to the line much more and you get free bucks much more, the rules give advantage to the offense over defense compared to the 90s and 80s easily, so how can you not take that to account rather than say his stats would be easily better.

LBJ is clearly special, I am not a fan of his antics, attitude, persona, but you can't deny his talent and special vision, regardless of the aforementioned flaws and still some holes in his game that seemed to be patched up or excused my either the nba or espn. But really, does ESPN work for this kid? They constantly right arbitrary articles defending him. When he scores 39, I have read the writer's tricks they give him with a story line and almost a gladiator movie like introduction where theyll glorify him as a god carrying his team to the uncertain. When he changed his number for his so called respect for the game and MJ(and then felt DR J and Bill russell didn't deserve the same respect), espn wrote a side article saying some peopel are questioning his motive and talked about some arbitrary dates that were important to lebron that related to 6 and says so don't question. Just for anything, they are there to lift this kid up, how can we blame him for acting like such a spoiled brat with all this.

Secondly, In the end of the day, if MJ's career replicated his superior 'PER' years in the late 80s, and he did that over in the 90s instead of win championships with less stats, his legacy would not be great. So for Hollinger to compare him to those stats and say hes just as great or better, that just doesnt cover it. MJ had great stats, but his legacy is all about clutch moments and those 6 championships. That's why he is great. Kobe lovers love Kobe because he closes games, he's a winner, not because one season he averaged 35 ppg. In the end of the day, stats are a product of system and there are too many factors to determine and say a is better than B bc of his stats. Each team asks their players to do something different, bc Kobe is in triangle and no player in Phil's triangle has averaged over 7 assists(including MJ who averaged over 8 before that) does that mean he is a bad passer or just asked less to pass in this offense. Same goes with spreading shots and playing in an equal opportunity offense where as Lebron is asked to hold the ball and keep it in his hands at all times, which is hwy he dominated the NBA in possessions per game which have to have a factor in your stats. Same thing with Nash, hes a great player, but we see the difference in his stats with different coaches who give him different freedom and domination of the ball in his hand, so stats can't be taken at face value.

2nd the team. Yes Lebron has an inferior individually talented team and has done a lot with it. The fact is, basketball is a cohesive sport. It takse 5 cohesive units to work together and play rolls to work. Lebron's team is winning because they fit him like a glove. there are people who throw up 30-5-5 plus and don't win. His team closes in and surrounds him with shooters and defenders to maximize his strengths and let him drive and kick out and avoid double teams. Even if Mo williams choked last year, they know he is a spot up shooter and his reputation thus allows them not to double team lebron and worry about mo williams, this is a team built around for lebron, meant to give lebron room to do what he does best, muscle in and drive or get to the line. A center like Illgaskus is more effective than a center like Bynum which takes a big man out of the paint for Lebron. This is built like the 01 sixers with which spreading the court and defensive minded team and coach let iverson do his work and supported his room. Everyone talks about Dwade and lebron winning a title together, you put those two guys on the same NBA team and they are stepping on eachothers toes, two guys who need the ball in their hands to be effective and neither are specialty shooters so you can't play off eachother like that, its just not as cohesive as putting them with other shooters.

Phew(finally breathes)

 

But its true, if MJ played for the Grizzlies and they never won, his legacy would not be the same period, His legacy is about winning and being clutch really more so than anything. He would still be a great player, just as lebron is undoubtedly a great player, but he would not be the GOAT IMO.

As far as the argument on surrounding players, yes, basketball is about cohesiveness more so than anything else and you have to take this into account when you put together talent. If you put together the indiviudally talented players but their games don't compliment eachother they might take away from eachothers games and that chemistry won't result in winning, lebron's team is less individually talented as in they are not stars, but they are stellar specialty role players who have strong capabilities and add and compliment him really well where as if you put him with wade and someone else, these guys wouldn't open up the floor for each other like if you surrounded lebron with a specialist like krover, put it with a defensive minded coach, and that makes a good combination to lebron's credit he is the main peice in the puzzle that makes the role players and defense function, but they work off of each other. Individual talent does not equal success, in fact there are so many other factors in terms of coach, team style, team offense that could dictate the stats that people like credit a skill set with, you give lebron two amazing rebounders and his rebounding numbers would've never been there and he would've been known as a worse rebounder, same with putting him in triangle equal opportunity offense where he would have less ball control and possession of the ball and equal less passing, doesn't mean hes a worse passer, but just trying to make hte point that theres too many factors that go into statistics that they can not be used in face value to say this guy is the superior person at this certain aspect

 

This isn't really central to the discussion but I have to say that, as big as LeBron is, he's just average at the 4, if not, undersized, specially vertically. LeBron doesn't really have a refined post game, either.

 

And I also get what your saying about luck or something they have nothing to do with being a factor, but that is just the nature of the beast. Kobe and MJ got lucky that their talent surrounding them came together to build a contender.

Yet this works in other ways too, bc of kobe's superior surrounding talent, his 28-5-5 is often discredited bc he has the best talent around him, as now on espn award list, he is 4th in votes while leading teh best team in the west with a 28-5-5 average. Lebron is no one respectively and no 2 is durant for taking a young team to competitive level, albeit not the best. So basically if you have a great gm with great peices, you will get penalized in perception of MVP voters.

What is inconsistent with this is when Kobe averaged 35-5-4 and took a team with Kwame Brown and Smush Parker into a tought west with about the same record as Durant's team, he got 4th again

but for the most part they all play a roll, you do get penalized and rewarded at times for things they perceive to be as advantages that you don't control, it works with the MVP race and it works in general perception of GOAT. In the end of the day, I do not think the case for MJ as the GOAT would be there if he didn't close with 2 straight 3 peats, 6 championships, and numerous game closers. Those are his trademarks.

 

And also on this if he loses a bit of athleticism, and moves to the 4, the main reason he is able to gain so many assists is because of the attention focus on him that at any time he can blow by you and get the foul or the dunk, if that is gone his passing is not as valuable because the attention is limited as well, mixed with his shaky shooting, he will certainly still be able to contribute, but a lot of his bread and butter will be taken away in what makes him one of the most effective players today

 

Oh really?