Will Bron END UP the GOAT?

[hailtoyourvictor]

@Matt Laurer

This season has been the highest paced season in LeBron's 13 year career at 97.3 per game.

Michael Jordan played in 7 seasons with more possessions per game than the highest in LeBron's career.


More possessions per game = more opportunity for counting stats. I think Jordan's numbers would be similar now as they were back then.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Am I trying to discuss this with a troll account or is this a legitimate poster?

 

[Matt Laurer]

@hailtoyourvictor you have been exposed as a homer. Using your logic in my hypothetical would mean you would place Jimmy G above Brady. But you can’t do that because you know he really wouldn’t be above Tom. So you moved the goalposts.

Let’s assume Jimmy G’s numbers aren’t as good as Tom’s but he dominates the NFC and goes to more SBs than Tom, but finishes 2-6 or 3-6 against the AFC. Would you place home above Tom?

 

[Big_C_KU]

Scoring in the 1980s was up because of the pace. It has some to do with defense but mostly with the pace of the game.

The pace of NBA teams have slowly gone down since the inception of the shot clock. The 1980s were played at a faster pace than what the NBA is played now but not by much. The pace began to really slow in the 1990s when 1-on-1 basketball began to become more prevalent and the NBA featured more high quantity of high level NBA centers than it had ever seen. Reached an all-time low in the early 2000s. It would remain this pace for the next 2 decades until the last 5 years where the use of the 3-ball has reached an all-time high leading to more shots from 3 quicker in possessions and more missed 3s leading to run outs and shorter possessions that way as well.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

@hailtoyourvictor you have been exposed as a homer. Using your logic in my hypothetical would mean you would place Jimmy G above Brady. But you can’t do that because you know he really wouldn’t be above Tom. So you moved the goalposts.

Let’s assume Jimmy G’s numbers aren’t as good as Tom’s but he dominates the NFC and goes to more SBs than Tom, but finishes 2-6 or 3-6 against the AFC. Would you place home above Tom?

If Tom Brady has better numbers and more Super Bowls then I place him ahead.

If Jimmy G has comparable numbers and less Super Bowls, I still go with Brady because passing numbers have been inflated since the 2007 rule changes.

If Jimmy G has way better numbers, but less Super Bowls it's debatable.

 

[Matt Laurer]

If Tom Brady has better numbers and more Super Bowls then I place him ahead.

If Jimmy G has comparable numbers and less Super Bowls, I still go with Brady because passing numbers have been inflated since the 2007 rule changes.

If Jimmy G has way better numbers, but less Super Bowls it's debatable.

So MJ has better numbers (comparable at worst) and way more titles. How are you making this argument?

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

So MJ has better numbers (comparable at worst) and way more titles. How are you making this argument?

Jordan doesn't have better numbers than LeBron

 

[Matt Laurer]

Jordan doesn't have better numbers than LeBron

He does. At the very least, they are comparable.

So based on your metrics above, MJ > LBJ

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

He does. At the very least, they are comparable.

So based on your metrics above, MJ > LBJ

LeBron has better numbers than Jordan. I had an inkling that you were just a troll account but you not being able to acknowledge that is pretty confirming. Note to self to not take you serious going forward.

 

[Matt Laurer]

LeBron has better numbers than Jordan. I had an inkling that you were just a troll account but you not being able to acknowledge that is pretty confirming. Note to self to not take you serious going forward.

Jordan ahead in PER. #1 all-time. How are you coming to this belief that James has better numbers?

 

[JimboBBN]

Jordan ahead in PER. #1 all-time. How are you coming to this belief that James has better numbers?

Yup. Also, look at the win shares for ages 33 for both guys. Jordan has LBJ by almost four, which is a pretty decent amount for a whole season.

 

[boilerzz]

 

[Big_Blue79]

@hailtoyourvictor you have been exposed as a homer. Using your logic in my hypothetical would mean you would place Jimmy G above Brady. But you can’t do that because you know he really wouldn’t be above Tom. So you moved the goalposts.

Let’s assume Jimmy G’s numbers aren’t as good as Tom’s but he dominates the NFC and goes to more SBs than Tom, but finishes 2-6 or 3-6 against the AFC. Would you place home above Tom?

Dude, do you host a drive time AM radio show?

 

[Big_Blue79]

Scoring in the 1980s was up because of the pace. It has some to do with defense but mostly with the pace of the game.

The pace of NBA teams have slowly gone down since the inception of the shot clock. The 1980s were played at a faster pace than what the NBA is played now but not by much. The pace began to really slow in the 1990s when 1-on-1 basketball began to become more prevalent and the NBA featured more high quantity of high level NBA centers than it had ever seen. Reached an all-time low in the early 2000s. It would remain this pace for the next 2 decades until the last 5 years where the use of the 3-ball has reached an all-time high leading to more shots from 3 quicker in possessions and more missed 3s leading to run outs and shorter possessions that way as well.

Not a bad post but i just want to hijack your post to say that pace was down in the 1990s because Pat Riley had a deal with the devil to try to destroy the NBA and he almost succeeded.

 

[Big_Blue79]

Yup. Also, look at the win shares for ages 33 for both guys. Jordan has LBJ by almost four, which is a pretty decent amount for a whole season.

PER is 27.9 to 27.7. Hot damn, that is a commanding lead. Win shares per 48 virtually identical. They're close in rate stats. LeBron already has more accumulated win shares and will obviously dominate any accumulated stats. Sometimes the best ability is availability.

The stats argument is pretty much what you choose (I love Hollinger but PER is probably the worst of the all in one stats). It's close; let's not pretend this is a slam dunk either way (unless you're filling three hours of drive time like Matt Laurer apparently is).

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

I have no opinion. Just thought this was funny.

 

[B-Westy]

I have no opinion. Just thought this was funny.

Terrible meme/troll job. But obviously LeBron's teams he's taken to the finals have been astronomically worse than any of the teams the rest of those guys lost in the finals with.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

Terrible meme/troll job. But obviously LeBron's teams he's taken to the finals have been astronomically worse than any of the teams the rest of those guys lost in the finals with.

I probably agree.

 

[lurkeraspect84]

Terrible meme/troll job. But obviously LeBron's teams he's taken to the finals have been astronomically worse than any of the teams the rest of those guys lost in the finals with.

But players are better today.

 

[B-Westy]

But players are better today.

Absolutely correct. Anderson Varejao is an absolute specimen.

 

[Big_C_KU]

Terrible meme/troll job. But obviously LeBron's teams he's taken to the finals have been astronomically worse than any of the teams the rest of those guys lost in the finals with.

I get it. The guy has taken some incredibly average to bad teams around him to the NBA Finals. Most notably 2007 and 2018. But recent history has made some people have selective history. Just like with Jordan fans who have selective history because they never think of Jordan having a bad game. He still went 2-2 in the NBA Finals with Wade and Bosh as his teammates. Still lost a couple times in the NBA Finals with multiple all-stars around him. LeBron is incredible and 1A or 1B to Michael. But LeBron has failed to win titles with stacked teams as well.

 

[B-Westy]

I get it. The guy has taken some incredibly average to bad teams around him to the NBA Finals. Most notably 2007 and 2018. But recent history has made some people have selective history. Just like with Jordan fans who have selective history because they never think of Jordan having a bad game. He still went 2-2 in the NBA Finals with Wade and Bosh as his teammates. Still lost a couple times in the NBA Finals with multiple all-stars around him. LeBron is incredible and 1A or 1B to Michael. But LeBron has failed to win titles with stacked teams as well.

Do we conveniently forget that Wade & Bosh were never 100% healthy during the end of his tenure with the Heat? I get the Mavericks loss, but that last Finals loss with the Heat isn't that bad IMO.

 

[dtgold88]

The wins argument can’t be proven or disproven. We can only guess.

However, anyone that had played sports seriously would know that a 2 year hiatus to play an entirely different sport would require some time to come back from. Certainly more than 4-6 weeks. The way you work out for baseball is radically different than the way you do for basketball. For you to argue otherwise exposes your ignorance.

Can it be proven? No, but we can use logic, facts and reason to make a pretty good guess. They had Kyrie and lost every game without Lebron. with no Kyrie, what makes you think they could be a .500 team without him with this roster?

The ignorance is you thinking MJ did not stay in game shape and didn't play basketball on his "hiatus". We also know MJ came back from a broken foot and was able to come back in only 18 games to score 112 points in his first 2 playoff games. You thinking easier to come back from a broken foot than it was playing baseball? Or are you thinking he was working out and playing bball more with his broken foot than he did in the 2 years he played baseball?

Still think 18 games or 4-5 weeks is "instantly"?

 

[dtgold88]

Teams averaged more points per game over Jordan's career than over LeBron's career. This idea that scoring has been significantly inflated over LeBron's career is for old people that don't know how to Google. The stats are there for people smart enough to find them.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html

Before looking, I'm setting the odds at 455-1 he admits this gaffe. I wouldn't take that bet. Would be throwing away money.

 

[dtgold88]

If Jimmy G takes the Niners to the Super Bowl 9 times over the next 15 years but has a SB record of 3-6 while posting comparable numbers as Brady, would you place him above Brady?

Kind of hard to know with only that info, isn't it? Is Jimmy G clearly the best QB in the league every year?

 

[dtgold88]

That’s pretty much the argument people make for Jordan and LBJ. It’s universally accepted that Jordan would have better numbers today

It's accepted by those not willing to look at the real facts.

 

[dtgold88]

Scoring does not necessarily equal offensive efficiency. The ten most efficient teams have a smattering of teams from the 80s through this current year.

Regardless, Brady played most of his career in a pass friendly league. The year he won his first SB, they beat the greatest show on turf. If you want to bring in scoring, the league average was 21.7 ppg last year. In 1998, it was 21.3.

So again, by your standards, Garrapolo would surpass Tom. He would take a shittier organization without the unquestioned GOAT coach to more SBs but come up short because of talent around him.

If he puts up numbers like Brady, then sure.

 

[Matt Laurer]

@Lucas McCain start towards the end of this thread when I get into it with the Wolverine. There’s a lot more to wade through but I find this exchange quite comical

 

[dtgold88]

@hailtoyourvictor you have been exposed as a homer. Using your logic in my hypothetical would mean you would place Jimmy G above Brady. But you can’t do that because you know he really wouldn’t be above Tom. So you moved the goalposts.

Let’s assume Jimmy G’s numbers aren’t as good as Tom’s but he dominates the NFC and goes to more SBs than Tom, but finishes 2-6 or 3-6 against the AFC. Would you place home above Tom?

But Lebron's numbers are as good as MJs.

Always say, cannot argue with irrational. But I'm trying.

 

[Matt Laurer]

Can it be proven? No, but we can use logic, facts and reason to make a pretty good guess. They had Kyrie and lost every game without Lebron. with no Kyrie, what makes you think they could be a .500 team without him with this roster?

The ignorance is you thinking MJ did not stay in game shape and didn't play basketball on his "hiatus". We also know MJ came back from a broken foot and was able to come back in only 18 games to score 112 points in his first 2 playoff games. You thinking easier to come back from a broken foot than it was playing baseball? Or are you thinking he was working out and playing bball more with his broken foot than he did in the 2 years he played baseball?

Still think 18 games or 4-5 weeks is "instantly"?

Well, I’ve broken my foot. You can start rehab fairly quickly. Light running, lifting and shooting. You can shoot almost immediately as well. Getting cleared by the doctors is what makes it the long wait time and by the time you’ve been cleared, your 100% ready. Further, usually after physical therapy, you’re in better shape than when you’ve started. Nagging injuries had healed and you’ve had time to rest. Not to mention, Jordan was 22 coming back from this.

Playing baseball meant he was practicing and doing something very different than shooting. Do you think if Mike Trout or Max Sherzer took 2 years off to play basketball, they could instantly come back to elite level playing in 3/4 weeks?

 

[Matt Laurer]

But Lebron's numbers are as good as MJs.

Always say, cannot argue with irrational. But I'm trying.

His PER states otherwise.

 

[dtgold88]

So MJ has better numbers (comparable at worst) and way more titles. How are you making this argument?

Because he doesn't have better numbers. Lebron has more assists and rebounds, and a slightly better shooting % overall, far better 3 point %. PER is very close. I think MJ was .2 ahead.

 

[dtgold88]

Jordan ahead in PER. #1 all-time. How are you coming to this belief that James has better numbers?

because MJ is a whopping .2 ahead? Lebron does have more assists and rebounds. MJ more points, but maybe because he shot more. Lebron with a slightly better shooting % so if he shot as much as MJ he'd score a little more.

 

[Matt Laurer]

Because he doesn't have better numbers. Lebron has more assists and rebounds, and a slightly better shooting % overall, far better 3 point %. PER is very close. I think MJ was .4 ahead.

because MJ is a whopping .4 ahead? Lebron does have more assists and rebounds. MJ more points, but maybe because he shot more. Lebron with a slightly better shooting % so if he shot as much as MJ he'd score a little more.

MJ with more steals and less turnovers while playing better defense. You dismissing the PER is lame. MJ’s PER was dragged down a bit by coming back the Wizards. At age 33, MJ’s PER was like 4 points higher than LBJ

 

[dtgold88]

Well, I’ve broken my foot. You can start rehab fairly quickly. Light running, lifting and shooting. You can shoot almost immediately as well. Getting cleared by the doctors is what makes it the long wait time and by the time you’ve been cleared, your 100% ready. Further, usually after physical therapy, you’re in better shape than when you’ve started. Nagging injuries had healed and you’ve had time to rest. Not to mention, Jordan was 22 coming back from this.

Playing baseball meant he was practicing and doing something very different than shooting. Do you think if Mike Trout or Max Sherzer took 2 years off to play basketball, they could instantly come back to elite level playing in 3/4 weeks?

Broken foot = no broken foot?

Now I've seen it all. Are you just messing with me? No adult can be this irrational. You got me.

 

[dtgold88]

His PER states otherwise.

by .2

 

[Matt Laurer]

Broken foot = no broken foot?

Now I've seen it all. Are you just messing with me? No adult can be this irrational. You got me.

Oh Jesus I hope you are just a shitty troll and not this limited. I’m starting to feel badly for you.

 

[Matt Laurer]

by .2

So that would mean MJ has better numbers. Thanks for playing.

 

[dtgold88]

MJ with more steals and less turnovers while playing better defense. You dismissing the PER is lame. MJ’s PER was dragged down a bit by coming back the Wizards. At age 33, MJ’s PER was like 4 points higher than LBJ

I'm not dismissing it at all. You thinking being .2 ahead is the end all be all is what I find comical. But not more comical than thinking broken foot = no broken foot.

How about Lebron playing seasons at age 18-19 right out of HS without 3 years of tutelage by Dean Smith and starting at age 21? That doesn't help MJ?

 

[dtgold88]

Oh Jesus I hope you are just a shitty troll and not this limited. I’m starting to feel badly for you.

translation - "ya got me. I cannot refute what you said. Was silly of me to think having a broken foot was no different than a healthy foot."