JayWood2010 said:
burninmylight said:
JayWood2010 said:
He played outstanding last night. best he has played in both series probably. But like i said he is suppose to be an all time great and he isn't efficiently doing this. Michael Jordan dominated in the post-season and no it isnt fair to compare James to Jordan but that is what is going to happen when you are considered an all-time great.
|
He's about halfway through his career right now. It's not fair to talk as if his legacy is completely written. It's not fair to call him an all-time great when he's still making his legacy now.
Michael Jordan has had it a lot easier over the course of his career than James has had it ever. Jordan has always, always been a media darling. People have hated James since he was in high school because of his nickname (King James) and his high school games being broadcast on ESPN (not to mention "The Decision" and the "Not two, not three, not four!" pep rally). And there wasn't nearly as much sports coverage of Jordan's every little move the way their is of James'. If those two hopped in a time machine and took each others' place in their respective eras, James wouldn't look so bad and Jordan wouldn't look so good. It took Jordan seven years to win his first ring, and it's taken LeBron the same amount of time, yet the media never mounted the same amount of pressure on MJ because there just wasn't as much media to breath down MJ's neck back then.
And let me ask you this: do you know who Booby Gibson, Larry Hughes, Donyell Marshell, Zydrunas Ilgauskas and Drew Gooden are? If you're not a hardcore b-ball fan, probably not. Outside of a couple of All-Star appearances from Ilgauskas in a crappy Eastern conference and Defensive 1st Team from Hughes, they're a bunch of scrubs that had no business ever making an NBA finals. But guess who carried them there on his back? Yeah, it was probably the worst team to ever make an NBA Finals (I'm still trying to decide between them and Iverson's '01 Sixers), but that says a lot about just how much that Cavs team was LBJ and no one else.
|
Yes I know every one of those players actually. No his Cleveland team was not that great. Jordan was carrying his team for years as well. in fact his 3rd year he was averaging 37 ppg.
| YEAR |
TEAM |
G |
GS |
MPG |
FG% |
3P% |
FT% |
OFF |
DEF |
RPG |
APG |
SPG |
BPG |
TO |
PF |
PPG |
| 84-85 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
38.3 |
.515 |
.173 |
.845 |
2.0 |
4.5 |
6.5 |
5.9 |
2.39 |
.84 |
3.55 |
3.50 |
28.2 |
| 85-86 |
CHI |
18 |
7 |
25.1 |
.457 |
.167 |
.840 |
1.3 |
2.3 |
3.6 |
2.9 |
2.06 |
1.17 |
2.50 |
2.60 |
22.7 |
| 86-87 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
40.0 |
.482 |
.182 |
.857 |
2.0 |
3.2 |
5.2 |
4.6 |
2.88 |
1.52 |
3.32 |
2.90 |
37.1 |
| 87-88 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
40.4 |
.535 |
.132 |
.841 |
1.7 |
3.8 |
5.5 |
5.9 |
3.16 |
1.60 |
3.07 |
3.30 |
35.0 |
| 88-89 |
CHI |
81 |
81 |
40.2 |
.538 |
.276 |
.850 |
1.8 |
6.2 |
8.0 |
8.0 |
2.89 |
.80 |
3.58 |
3.00 |
32.5 |
| 89-90 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
39.0 |
.526 |
.376 |
.848 |
1.7 |
5.1 |
6.9 |
6.3 |
2.77 |
.66 |
3.01 |
2.90 |
33.6 |
| 90-91 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
37.0 |
.539 |
.312 |
.851 |
1.4 |
4.6 |
6.0 |
5.5 |
2.72 |
1.01 |
2.46 |
2.80 |
31.5 |
| 91-92 |
CHI |
80 |
80 |
38.8 |
.519 |
.270 |
.832 |
1.1 |
5.3 |
6.4 |
6.1 |
2.28 |
.94 |
2.50 |
2.50 |
30.1 |
| 92-93 |
CHI |
78 |
78 |
39.3 |
.495 |
.352 |
.837 |
1.7 |
5.0 |
6.7 |
5.5 |
2.83 |
.78 |
2.65 |
2.40 |
32.6 |
| 94-95 |
CHI |
17 |
17 |
39.3 |
.411 |
.500 |
.801 |
1.5 |
5.4 |
6.9 |
5.3 |
1.76 |
.76 |
2.06 |
2.80 |
26.9 |
| 95-96 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
37.7 |
.495 |
.427 |
.834 |
1.8 |
4.8 |
6.6 |
4.3 |
2.20 |
.51 |
2.40 |
2.40 |
30.4 |
| 96-97 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
37.9 |
.486 |
.374 |
.833 |
1.4 |
4.5 |
5.9 |
4.3 |
1.71 |
.54 |
2.02 |
1.90 |
29.6 |
| 97-98 |
CHI |
82 |
82 |
38.8 |
.465 |
.238 |
.784 |
1.6 |
4.2 |
5.8 |
3.5 |
1.72 |
.55 |
2.26 |
1.80 |
28.7 |
| 01-02 |
WAS |
60 |
53 |
34.9 |
.416 |
.189 |
.790 |
.8 |
4.8 |
5.7 |
5.2 |
1.42 |
.43 |
2.70 |
2.00 |
22.9 |
| 02-03 |
WAS |
82 |
67 |
37.0 |
.445 |
.291 |
.821 |
.9 |
5.2 |
6.1 |
3.8 |
1.50 |
.48 |
2.11 |
2.10 |
20.0 |
| Career |
|
1072 |
1039 |
38.3 |
.497 |
.327 |
.835 |
1.6 |
4.7 |
6.2 |
5.3 |
2.35 |
.80 |
2.73 |
2.60 |
30.1 |
| Playoff |
|
179 |
179 |
41.8 |
.487 |
.332 |
.828 |
1.7 |
4.7 |
6.4 |
5.7 |
2.10 |
.88 |
3.05 |
3.00 |
33.4 |
| All-Star |
|
13 |
13 |
29.4 |
.472 |
.273 |
.750 |
1.7 |
3.0 |
4.7 |
4.2 |
2.85 |
.46 |
3.23 |
2.40 |
20.2 |
Not to meantion his post-season has always been phenominal.
| Year |
Team |
G |
Min |
Pts |
PPG |
ORB |
DRB |
TRB |
RPG |
AST |
APG |
STL |
BLK |
TO |
| 1984-85 |
CHI |
4 |
171 |
117 |
29.3 |
7 |
16 |
23 |
5.8 |
34 |
8.5 |
11 |
4 |
15 |
| 1985-86 |
CHI |
3 |
135 |
131 |
43.7 |
5 |
14 |
19 |
6.3 |
17 |
5.7 |
7 |
4 |
14 |
| 1986-87 |
CHI |
3 |
128 |
107 |
35.7 |
7 |
14 |
21 |
7.0 |
18 |
6.0 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
| 1987-88 |
CHI |
10 |
427 |
363 |
36.3 |
23 |
48 |
71 |
7.1 |
47 |
4.7 |
24 |
11 |
39 |
| 1988-89 |
CHI |
17 |
718 |
591 |
34.8 |
26 |
93 |
119 |
7.0 |
130 |
7.6 |
42 |
13 |
68 |
| 1989-90 |
CHI |
16 |
674 |
587 |
36.7 |
24 |
91 |
115 |
7.2 |
109 |
6.8 |
45 |
14 |
56 |
| 1990-91 |
CHI |
17 |
689 |
529 |
31.1 |
18 |
90 |
108 |
6.4 |
142 |
8.4 |
40 |
23 |
43 |
| 1991-92 |
CHI |
22 |
920 |
759 |
34.5 |
37 |
100 |
137 |
6.2 |
127 |
5.8 |
44 |
16 |
81 |
| 1992-93 |
CHI |
19 |
783 |
666 |
35.1 |
32 |
96 |
128 |
6.7 |
114 |
6.0 |
39 |
17 |
45 |
| 1993-94 |
- |
retired |
| 1994-95 |
CHI |
10 |
420 |
315 |
31.5 |
20 |
45 |
65 |
6.5 |
45 |
4.5 |
23 |
14 |
41 |
| 1995-96 |
CHI |
18 |
733 |
552 |
30.7 |
31 |
58 |
89 |
4.9 |
74 |
4.1 |
33 |
6 |
42 |
| 1996-97 |
CHI |
19 |
804 |
590 |
31.1 |
42 |
108 |
150 |
7.9 |
91 |
4.8 |
30 |
17 |
49 |
| 1997-98 |
CHI |
21 |
872 |
680 |
32.4 |
33 |
74 |
107 |
5.1 |
74 |
3.5 |
32 |
12 |
45 |
You can put that side by side with James and you will see what I am saying. Michael's will to win and the fire that drove him is what seperates him from James. And yes Michael is far superior outside the paint compared to James which is still his weakest asset. The good thing about James is that he is an all around player but until he develops an efficient outside game he will continue to stuggle in the post-season. He has improved this year but he needs to push it up a notch.
People forget many things in the past. offensive and defensively Michael took control completely.
|
Please forgive my delayed response.
You say James' outside shooting is far weaker than Jordan's, but look at those 3-pointer percentages... 18 percent in the year you pointed out. You call that far superior outside the paint? He didn't start shooting a good 3P% until his 10th year in the league (and it was a damn good percentage too!) LeBron has never shot below 29 percent, and that was in his rookie year. We tend to remember Jordan as this player who was completely dominant in every facet of the game, but we forget that he really wasn't much of a shooter in his early years. His game consisted of getting to the rim at all costs, and he didn't develop a consistent mid-range and outside game until the championship years. This is why I say it isn't fair to compare one guy's complete career to another guy's career that is still being made.
But since we're doing that anyway, let's compare some other stats. We don't simply compare the PPG of two guys to determine who is better. I'm going to ignore the Washington years for Jordan, by the way.
Rebounds per game: Jordan (6.2), James (7.1)
Assists per game: Jordan (5.2), James (6.9)
Steals per game: Jordan (2.4), James (1.7)
FG%: Jordan (just Chicago, remember) (.497), James (.490)
3FG%: Jordan (.291), James (.337)
I'm not even going to get into advanced stats (not right now, at least), like true shooting percentage, points responsible for, and player efficiency rating. But as you can see, James wins three out of five of those "other" categories, and one (FG%) is so close that it's negligible. Points per game is nice and all, but it's hardly tellling of how much more valuable one player is over another. Carmelo Anthony just won the scoring title this past season; no one outside of New York thinks he's in the same class as James or Jordan.
Also, before I forget, I must also point out that you have to take into consideration the different eras that they played in. In Jordan's time, everyone generally had higher FG percentages than modern players. Defenses weren't as sophisticated then. Around the early-to-mid 2000s, defense became such a premium in the NBA and scoring/shooting percentages was getting so low that the NBA changed the rules to pretty much outlaw handchecking around the perimeter. Which leads me to my next point: Jordan had it tougher than James because the game in his day was much more physical. Refs nowadays are a lot quicker to whistle a guy for putting a hand on a ballhandler around the perimeter because the NBA wants to encourage more athleticism and getting to the rim.
Also, you forget or don't realize that James is far more versatile than Jordan ever was. Jordan was a guard through and through; a wing pretty much, a combo guard at best. James has been called on to play PG, SG, SF and PF throughout his career, and has done them all well. He regularly guards all four positions, depending on the opponent's best player, and guards them well. Jordan was rarely asked to guard big men, if ever. The NBA is all about matchups, and exploiting mismatches on offenses and plugging holes on defense. A guy who can perform efficiently at more positions than the one indicated on his bio in the program guide is invaluable.
TL;DR - Everyone had higher FG%s in Jordan's day, but everyone has it easier on offense in Jame's current day. James' versatility is something you're vastly undervaluing, and something Jordan has no comparison for.
EDIT: I just realized I forgot to compare playoff stats, but I'll do that another time. I'd Imagine Jordan's are better based on the fact that he was helped by having better rosters around him.
