To be considered a better player than Michael Jordan

There's more to player evaluation than a box score, so I can't really answer.

 

Yes!

But what if a player averaged 50 points, 17 rebounds, 13 assists and 7 blocks per game and won 11 championships in 10 years?! Would he be better than this mythical Better Than MJ player?

What if a player averaged 73.4 ppg....

 

Those are Tom Chambers career stats.

 

Yes. Obviously these numbers were made to trump Jordan without the scoring, but to show a much more balanced overall game at a high level.

Now I wouldn't agree 100% that this is a clear cut yes. What if the league had washed up talent and NBA basketball wasn't what it used to be (or is right now). You can argue that MJ played in the most dominant era of basketball. Tough run and gun 80s style basketball, then winning 6 times in the stacked super teams of the 90s.

If you're hypothetical player won 8 titles in 20 years, where the talent level had diminished then I think you argue against him. For instance, Bill Russell, has 11 rings, was a player coach, considered the GOAT of defense by a good amount of people. Even though he's accomplished so much, and has the Finals MVP trophy named after him, he's never been in anyone's GOAT discussion that I've heard.

 

Maybe.

Wha'cha gonna do about it?

 

On a slightly more serious note, Michael Jordan is a mythology that basketball fans reinforce with one another. People who were watching in the 70s have their own pantheon of basketball greats -- they'll allow Jordan his respect, but they aren't quick to crown him the best ever. It'll be the same with the next generation. As Lebron James heads into the twilight of his career, a mythology will be formed around him by people who watched him when they were teenagers and who never really watched Jordan play (never mind Wilt Chamberlain or the other forefathers of basketball). If not Lebron, someone else. And we'll be the old guys trying to argue with the young whippersnappers about how the league today is watered down, and how Lebron or whomever could never survive in the 90s. But there will be too many of them and Jordan will fade to the back.

But Tom Chambers? No, he's not better than Jordan. C'mon.

 

I disagree. People that watched the NBA pre-Jordan all seem to acknowledge immediately that Jordan was the best. People that watched Jordan then saw Kobe, LeBron, Shaq, etc... generally maintain that Jordan was the best.

The people that missed out on MJ seem to want to crown Kobe or LeBron.

 

Probably. However, it depends on things like his shooting percentage and on if he could elevate his game in the play offs and in the clutch.

 

I've never seen anybody come close to crowning Kobe / Lebron over MJ unless we're talking about hardcore stans. But I do agree there's a mythology effect with Jordan. I saw him play the 3rd threepeat with the Bulls and the man was not flawless, especially post 1996.

If you were to take THAT Jordan and swap him with current Lakers Kobe, we'd all be sitting here talking about how Jordan is an inefficient chucker rather than the leader who won 3 more rings.

 

Alot of the People who watch PRE JORDAN NBA

Draw comparisons to Oscar Robinson/Kareem/Magic/Bird etc
as comparisons . . .
They base it on the SIght test too . .and some stats

Rocket River

 

Because it is generally accepted by the mass of NBA fans that Jordan was the best, the majority of those people tend to only evaluate a player's potential to be the best by whether they do things that Jordan could or if they could do it better. Once people realize that there are other ways to be the best, it won't be so farfetched to see a player like Lebron passing Jordan. Before anyone thinks I am suggesting that Lebron has passed Jordan, the short answer is... I don't.

 

^^^this is spot on

 

I'll take Lebron or Duncan, they don't seem to punch their teammates.

 

Jordan will be the Babe Ruth of basketball. Even alive, he's already a mythical figure.

 

I'd say No.

In my opinion, IF a player like that does come along they will always be compared to MJ. And if it's even a question, that player already lost. MJ is transcendent. Hell, people use the analogy "The Michael Jordan of..."

Even though the "Be Like Mike" generation of players is coming to an end, he's the first of his kind. A natural athlete who's fundamentally sound with the competitive fire to make Smokey the Bear run and hide.




...these off-season topics though.

 

Nobody can ever be better than Michael Jordan. He is BY DEFINITION the best ever basketball player. How can you be better than the definition of the best? No way. Never.

The above concept is etched in most people's mind, consciously or subconsciously. So asking if anyone who can be better than Jordan is pretty much meaningless. It's like asking Einstein if anything can travel faster than light.

 

Jordan is here to stay

I don't think no matter what someone does they can eclipse MJ

MJ will go down the greatest player in basketball even 200 years from now

 

Here is a visual representation of the differences in approach and execution in both Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant.

Notice the difference in spacing and decision making.


MJ:

Spoiler

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Cn05ZJo53WA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Kobe:

Spoiler

<blockquote class="twitter-video" lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Kobe Bryant (<a href="https://twitter.com/kobebryant">@kobebryant</a>) Be Like…
FT: <a href="https://twitter.com/That_Guyy23">@That_Guyy23</a> <a href="http://t.co/f74DsGJJsi">pic.twitter.com/f74DsGJJsi</a></p>&mdash; B.A. (@BdotAdot5) <a href="https://twitter.com/BdotAdot5/status/628292321717518336">August 3, 2015</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

Hakeem was better. So, if that player can do Hakeem like stuff, then that player is my answer.