Oops. I meant semifinals. They won 55 games and lost in 7 to the knicks. My point is that even if Lebron doesn't win 6 rings, but continues the success that he has had, he should still be considered up there with Jordan.
Here is Kobe's playoff shooting pecentages: http://www.nba.com/playerfile/kobe_bryant/career_stats.html
lebron is the best player in the league right now. that's all i know. not sure abut the jordan stuff. won't know until lebron's done with his career.
LBJ avg 22.0/.356 in 07 finals, and didn't hit a potential game typing shot in game 3. Who's a choker? Even in Kobe's worst finals series in 04, he at least shoot a better %, and made a tying shot and won a game.
Lebron James is 25 years old. Repeat that three times. He's got a long way to go in his career and it's way too early to make comparisons between him and MJ. Right now Lebron is the best player in the game, but he's got 0 rings. That's all.
PER is John Hollinger's baby and it's a pretty good metric to measure overall production and can be an element of consideration, but it cannot be the end-all, be-all metric, like Hollinger is using it here. For example, David Robinson has the 4th highest career PER of all time, and he's clearly not better than some of the people who are below him on that list (Hakeem, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Tim Duncan, etc.) PER is also pace adjusted, which helps the current players and hurts players who played in higher paced eras (like the 1960's or the 1980's). Lebron in particular plays one of the slower teams in the NBA. Would his raw numbers increase if he played at a quicker pace? This is like projecting per 36 minutes, we're not entirely sure whether that's the case.
You also forgot that Kobe was arguably on the better team, each time his team lost in the Finals. The Lakers have been unanimous favorite in nearly every Finals, they've played in this decade. Everyone knew LeBron's team did not have a snowflakes chance in #ell of winning against the Spurs. They were entirely overmatched and scored monumental victory over the Pistons (which was unexpected in its own right).
And people don't seem to understand this, or how quickly they overlook Jordan's first 7 years with statistical greatness yet lack of title. Lebron James being this good at 25 is a scary thought, just reaching his potential.
of course the answer to that particular question is kobe. i've watched enough replays to know that kobe is clutch. but how does that make him a "hands down" better basketball player than lebron? you're asking the wrong question just to prove your point.
You are making yourself laughable. Kobe, in his worst finals series, were still better than LeBron. Kobe 2001-02 NBA Finals 26.8/.514 2003-04 NBA Finals 22.6/.381 2007-08 NBA Finals 25.6/.405 Lebron 2006-07 NBA Finals 22.0/.356
The Lakers were favored in 04, but not 08, when they didn't have HCA to begin with. Cavaliers were unanimous favorite in last year's ECF, so that didn't count? LBJ avg far less points/fg% in finals, and that's not choking? I mean, if you just want to say LBJ didn't have a great team, say it, why bring up the shooting % in the first place and made yourself a clown? It's like Kobe choked in some finals, oh oh, I didn't know LBJ choked even worse .
All that is def true, but the Eastern Conference (and NBA in general) was much stronger than it is now (Talent on playoff teams). Jordan's era had to get through much more a difficult stretch than LBJ's cavs do. Either way, when it is all said and done, if James doesn't have injury problems he will be likely the best player of all time, and simply because he is bigger stronger than everyone and still has a desire to become better each year.
He needed 7 rings to prove that. Wilt at one point was more dominant than any player in NBA history, and he's no where close to GOAT, even top 5 is debatable.
I don't think it's debatable even by modern analysts (who tend to dislike the 1960's players) that Chamberlain was a top 5 player in NBA history.
I completely disagree with needing just as many rings or more than Michael to be as good as him. By that logic Robert Parrish is twice the player Jordan ever was. Fact of the matter remains if you take the 1st 6 years of MJ or the 1st 6 years of Lebron all else being equal (team wise), I believe Lebron has a better shot of winning a title with that team. MJ had a LOT of help, great rebounder year in and year out (Horace Grant/Rodman), Shooters around him (Kerr, Kukoc), a great complimentary/hall of famer (Pippen). Lebron has: A shooter that choked horribly vs orlando (Mo Williams), A decent center, a little better than Will Purdue (Illgaskas), a decent rebounder but no where near the Rodman/Grant level (Varjaou), and hell I can't name a single other person on his team last year. He added this year: Shaq WAY PAST HIS PRIME, and Jamison (this can be his #2 (obv not a hall of famer like Pippen, but very solid #2), if he plays as good as he was in Washington). I mean if you stick Jordan on any Cavs team Lebron has been on I can't imagine them winning a title either.
MJ, Magic, Bird, Russel, Jabbar. That's 5 there. You saw those 5 above Wilt in different GOAT ranking, so it's definitely debatable.
