Lebron played in the weakest conference ever

[3ball]

.
This is common knowledge.. So Lebron has played worse competition than MJ or Kobe, which is why his playoff achievements only required him to beat [COLOR="Navy"]HALF[/COLOR] the 50-win teams as MJ or Kobe.

Infact, the entire NBA was so weak when Lebron came into the league, that they couldn't even beat Euroleague comp - Lebron and the NBA's best lost to the Euros in 2004 Olympics and 2006 World Games.

So don't give me BS about how Lebron played better competition - that's exactly opposite of the facts

[Ben Simmons]

No, there is so much more parity now because the competition is greater. That's why the records are lower.

In reality Lebron played in the most competitive era and that's why he's better than Jordan.

[keep-itreal]

OP is right.

East conference is worst than ever

[AirBonner]

Actually the conference is quite stronger than Ordans. 30 wins and you make the playoffs in ordan's era. Facts.

[3ball]

Actually the conference is quite stronger than Ordans. 30 wins and you make the playoffs in ordan's era. Facts.

It's common knowledge that the 80's East was among the toughest ever, while the 2000's East is the weakest.

That's why Lebron's playoff achievements only required him to beat HALF the 50-win teams as MJ or Kobe.. So don't give me BS about how Lebron played better competition - that's exactly opposite of the facts

Infact, the entire NBA was so weak when Lebron came into the league, that they couldn't even beat Euroleague comp - Lebron and the NBA's best lost to the Euros in 2004 Olympics and 2006 World Games - but even though the NBA comp couldn't beat Euroleague, Lebron STILL needed to team-hop to win.

[AirBonner]

It's common knowledge that the 80's East was among the toughest ever, while the 2000's East is the weakest.

That's why Lebron's playoff achievements only required him to beat HALF the 50-win teams as MJ or Kobe.. So don't give me BS about how Lebron played better competition - that's exactly opposite of the facts

Infact, the entire NBA was so weak when Lebron came into the league, that they couldn't even beat Euroleague comp - Lebron and the NBA's best lost to the Euros in 2004 Olympics and 2006 World Games - but even though the NBA comp couldn't beat Euroleague, Lebron STILL needed to team-hop to win.

What is it about Lebron? You seem concerned he might pass your idol.

[3ball]

.
5) Jordan faced greater defensive attention because his 2nd option wasn't an equal scoring threat

Jordan scored 15 ppg more than his 2nd option, compared to 1 ppg for Lebron.. But despite the greater defensive attention, MJ made all the game-winning plays for Pippen, whereas Kyrie made several for Lebron.

It should be noted that no all-time great led their team in scoring for every playoff series of their careers, let alone by an average margin of 15.4 ppg like Jordan.

6) Jordan did more with less, including the biggest impact on a lottery team

In 1989, the 47-win Bulls would've missed the 45-win playoff cut without Jordan's 33/8/8.. So they were a lottery roster without Jordan in 1989, that Jordan led to a 3-peat beginning in 1991 - that's the goat impact on a lottery team.

7) It's been [COLOR="darkRed"]proven[/COLOR] that Lebron's early Cavs teams had better supporting casts than Jordan's early Bulls teams

Lebron won 19 more games in 2009 than Jordan won in 1989, even though their individual stats were equal.. The only way Lebron's equal production can yield 19 more wins is due to a better supporting cast, and probably inferior competition as well.

Lebron didn't benefit from brand of basketball - we know Jordan's brand was better because his brand thrived and was more successful in the higher-competition playoffs.. Jordan's 6th seeded Bulls beat higher seeds in every round and took the champs to 6 games in ECF, whereas Lebron's favored 1 seed saw their brand of basketball exposed by Howard's underdog Magic.

8) Lebron can't shoot, and many of today's top wings can't either

Lebron's midrange efficiency is below 40% for 10 of 13 seasons, while his career 3-point percentage is 32% in the playoffs.

The reality is that Lebron, Westbrook, Wade, Derozan and Butler ALL have sub-par 3-point and midrange efficiency, but they're still top scorers because today's spacing and hands-off defense allows athletic players easier access to the rim than ever before.

MJ's athleticism would benefit the same way, except he was a goat midrange shooter, which gives him a massive advantage over non-shooters Lebron, Westbrick and company.

9) Lebron employs a [COLOR="DarkRed"]suboptimal style[/COLOR] that makes a ring highly unlikely (requiring team-hopping)

Specifically, he turns teammates from playmakers into play-finishers by lowering their APG (playmaking), and increasing their assisted rate (play-finishing).. Here's the APG and assisted rate of every key teammate:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...73&postcount=1


Lebron's ball monopolization results in a sophomoric brand of basketball and predictable, play-finishing teammates that can't succeed against the best playoff teams.. A weak brand of basketball and underperforming teammates results in the TEAM underperforming and losing as the favorite (2009 ECF, 2010 ECF, 2011 Finals) and when it's 50/50 (2014).

10a) Lebron team-hopped twice

Many all-time greats could go 2/4 if they teamed up with a top-2 SG and PF who both had top 5 PER's.. Seriously - would anyone give Isiah respect if he left the Pistons to play with Jordan and Barkley, and how many rings would he win??.. It's ridiculous.

[COLOR="White"]...[/COLOR]b) in the weakest conference ever

His weak conference is why his Finals appearances were achieved by beating HALF the 50-win teams as MJ or Kobe..... even though he's played more playoff games.

Infact, the entire NBA was so weak when Lebron came into the league, that they couldn't even beat Euroleague comp - Lebron and the NBA's best lost to the Euros in 2004 Olympics and 2006 World Games.

11) Both MJ and Lebron played in the modern era

Jordan won his last ring only 6 years before Lebron entered the league, so both guys played against many of the same players.. Infact - Shaq, Kobe, Duncan and Garnett are the best players Lebron ever played against - and they were all-stars in 1998 when Jordan dominated them more than Lebron ever has, while winning all the awards over them (MVP, FMVP, all-star MVP, scoring title, championship)..

Sure - some of these guys were young, but the point is that BOTH Jordan and Lebron played in the modern era, so we can use rings and fmvp's to determine the goat.

Aside from the 4 best players Lebron played against (Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, Garnett), other players also finished behind Jordan in 1998, including Grant Hill, Penny, Drexler, Payton, Pippen, David Robinson, Hakeem, and more - these guys are obviously equal or greater than today's best.. So again - it's clear that both Jordan and Lebron played in the modern era, so we can use rings and fmvp's to determine the goat.. that means mj is the goat.

12) Jordan played in the UNSPACED phase of the modern era:

That's a tougher time period than today's SPACED phase of the modern era.. It's statistical fact that Lebron and Curry achieve their stats WITH teammates spacing the floor (their teams took 30 threes per game), while Jordan achieved his stats WITHOUT teammates spacing the floor (Bulls took 5 threes per game in 1991).

Obviously, Jordan's stats would explode in today's spacing.. Just look at Lebron and Westbrook - Jordan has same or better athleticism, but they can't shoot, while he had goat midrange efficiency, much better than Curry's.

Essentially, MJ had Lebron/Westbrook's athleticism and better midrange shooting than Steph Curry.

.

[AirBonner]

Nah, but his inferiority provides greater understanding of Jordan's goatness.. It's pretty cool

Just think - Lebron has HALF the rings thru 13 years as MJ

And lebron has MORE MVPs thru the same age.

[3ball]

And lebron has MORE MVPs thru the same age.

Thru 13 seasons:

[COLOR="DarkRed"]Jordan[/COLOR]:[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] 6 rings, 6 fmvps
[COLOR="Navy"]Lebron[/COLOR]:[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] 3 rings, 3 fmvps

And lebron has MORE MVPs thru the same age.

[COLOR="DarkRed"]MORE WAS REQUIRED[/COLOR] for Jordan's MVP's - specifically, 20-30% more scoring, equal or greater assists, and less turnovers:

STATS THRU 31 YEARS OLD:

[COLOR="DarkRed"]Jordan Playoffs[/COLOR]:[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] 34.7 ppg.. 6.7 rpg.. 6.6 apg.. 2.3 spg.. 1.0 bpg.. 50.1 fg.. 58.1 ts.. 119 ortg.. 29.6 PER
[COLOR="Navy"]Lebron Playoffs[/COLOR]:[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] 28.0 ppg.. 8.8 rpg.. 6.8 apg.. 1.8 spg.. 0.9 bpg.. 47.8 fg.. 56.7 ts.. 115 ortg.. 27.7 PER

[COLOR="DarkRed"]Jordan Finals[/COLOR]:[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] 36.3 ppg.. 6.6 rpg.. 7.9 apg.. 2.0 spg.. 0.8 bpg.. 52.6 fg
[COLOR="Navy"]Lebron Finals[/COLOR]:[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR] 27.0 ppg.. 9.9 rpg.. 7.2 apg.. 1.9 spg.. 0.8 bpg.. 45.4 fg

... take this L

[Just2McFly]

stop lying OP, the 80's west was the most horrific conference I have ever seen.. they shouldn't have even had a WCF most years

[WayOfWad3]

Just as an FYI, OP considers Bill Russel to be the GOAT, which would make it odd for him to bring up this argument

[NBAGOAT]

Just as an FYI, OP considers Bill Russel to be the GOAT, which would make it odd for him to bring up this argument

pretty sure he's switched back to MJ now.

Actually the conference is quite stronger than Ordans. 30 wins and you make the playoffs in ordan's era. Facts.

come on that doesn't say the conference is weak because you're completely ignoring. there were only 11 teams in the East back then instead of 15. It's like the 11 seed making the playoffs now and 30 wins when you're near the bottom of the conference is normal.

[RRR3]

I don't know how many times I have to say it but using the "50 wins" cutoff for LeBron is ridiculously ingenuous considering he beat two teams that would easily have won 50+ games in a 82 game season in the 66 game 2012 season (Thunder and Pacers), and beat another team (2012 Celtics) who had an outside chance of reaching 50 wins if they had 82 games. LeBron's own team in 2012 didn't win 50 games, so by your insane logic=LEGOD won with a 46 win team!

He also beat the 49-32 Pacers in 2013, a team who only played 81 games due to some cancellation against the Knicks IIRC. So they very well could have had 50 wins too.


2012 Thunder and Pacers were winning 50 games if they got 82 games. Pacers were 42-24, if they got 16 more games you think they couldn't go 8-8? Thunder were 47-19, you think they couldn't win 3 of 16 more games?

[NBAGOAT]

I don't know how many times I have to say it but using the "50 wins" cutoff for LeBron is ridiculously ingenuous considering he beat two teams that would easily have won 50+ games in a 82 game season in the 66 game 2012 season (Thunder and Pacers), and beat another team (2012 Celtics) who had an outside chance of reaching 50 wins if they had 82 games. LeBron's own team in 2012 didn't win 50 games, so by your insane logic=LEGOD won with a 46 win team!

He also beat the 49-32 Pacers in 2013, a team who only played 81 games due to some cancellation against the Knicks IIRC. So they very well could have had 50 wins too.


2012 Thunder and Pacers were winning 50 games if they got 82 games. Pacers were 42-24, if they got 16 more games you think they couldn't go 8-8? Thunder were 47-19, you think they couldn't win 3 of 16 more games?

let's not forget Lebron's career isn't close to finished. He could easily add like 5-10 in the next 5 seasons.

[tpols]

I don't know how many times I have to say it but using the "50 wins" cutoff for LeBron is ridiculously ingenuous considering he beat two teams that would easily have won 50+ games in a 82 game season in the 66 game 2012 season (Thunder and Pacers), and beat another team (2012 Celtics) who had an outside chance of reaching 50 wins if they had 82 games. LeBron's own team in 2012 didn't win 50 games, so by your insane logic=LEGOD won with a 46 win team!

He also beat the 49-32 Pacers in 2013, a team who only played 81 games due to some cancellation against the Knicks IIRC. So they very well could have had 50 wins too.


2012 Thunder and Pacers were winning 50 games if they got 82 games. Pacers were 42-24, if they got 16 more games you think they couldn't go 8-8? Thunder were 47-19, you think they couldn't win 3 of 16 more games?

you could just as easily say the imploding 2014 pacers or 2015 hawks who got swept by the Cavs B team werent as good as their records suggested.. hell even the derozan / lowry led raptors that won 56 this year were an eye lash away from getting beat in the first round by a 7 seed.. and played much worse in the playoffs than they did in the regular season.. so it all balances out in the end.


even if you add the Thunder to that list.. thats ten 50 win teams beat.. half of jordan or kobe.. less than magic as well right now whose beaten thirteen 50 win teams despite his weak conference.. it's just facts that the East since Jordan retired has been pretty garbage overall.