Jordan versus Lebron.
Lebron versus Jordan. It's a debate that has captured the public's attention for
the last several years, especially after THIS moment in 2016, when Lebron James
beat the Golden State Warriors to win the third championship of his career. In
Lebron's own words, "That one right there made me the Greatest Player of All-Time. That's what I felt.
I was like... that one right there made you the Greatest Player of
All-Time." But did it? Is everything since that moment simply icing on Lebron's cake?
Or is Lebron destined to finish his career in Michael Jordan's shadow? We've
all heard the arguments from Lebron's supporters... "He's bigger, he's stronger
he's faster, he's more durable" ...and from Jordan's
supporters... "Michael Jordan was merely 6-0 with six MVPs in the finals." But the GOAT debate isn't as simple as the pundits make it seem. There are a number
of factors relevant in determining the greatest basketball player of all time.
In fact, I would say there are five things that really matter when
determining the GOAT of any sport. These criteria are, in no particular order:
Accomplishments, Longevity, Winning Statistics, and what we'll refer to in
this video as the "Eye Test." And to be the GOAT you don't need to be
the best in any specific category, but you need to be pretty good across the
board. So simply winning seven championships, like Robert Horry did,
isn't enough to get you into the conversation. When we're finished with
this video, it'll be plainly obvious that one guy comes out on top. But before we
get started, I want to clarify that this is NOT a comparison of legacies. It's
about who was the better basketball player. If we were talking about legacies,
Jordan's is nearly untouchable. Not only did he lead basketball to global
popularity. He helped transform Nike into an empire, changed the way players played,
and how they dressed, and he even made it cool for guys to be BALD. And while those
things certainly contribute to MJ's iconic status, they don't make him a
better player on the court. So let's evaluate the criteria that matter, and
we'll start with individual accomplishments. Take a look. Jordan had
more regular-season MVPs, twice as many Finals MVPs, nine more
Scoring Titles, and several more selections to the NBA's All-Defensive
Team, including once being named Defensive Player of the Year. Lebron has
more All-Star appearances, but that's largely due to his having played more
seasons. In fact, when taking into account retirements and major injuries, Jordan
essentially played 13 seasons compared to 17 seasons for Lebron, making Jordan's
significant lead in accomplishments all the more impressive. And that's to say
nothing of MJ's brilliant college career, which saw him twice named All-American
and once awarded College Player of the Year, at a time when the country's best
players actually went to college. So regardless of whether you're a Lebron
fan or MJ fan, you have to give the Accomplishments check mark to Jordan. The
second criteria in our GOAT analysis is Longevity. And this one is also a
no-brainer, but this time in favor of Lebron. Not only has Lebron played more
seasons in the league, but he's had a longer peak than Jordan. Jordan's peak
lasted about ten years, whereas Lebron's peak has lasted SIXTEEN years... and is still
going. And he's been incredibly durable during that time, missing significant
time to injury only in 2019. That said, the claim that Lebron has been much more
durable than Michael has been a bit overblown. Consider that Jordan played in
at least 80 regular season games 11 times in his career, including all 82
games an incredible NINE times. Compare that to Lebron, who played in at
least 80 regular season games just twice, and in all 82 games just once.
So BOTH Lebron and Jordan get high marks for their durability, but durability
aside, the bottom line is that Lebron has sustained his level of excellence for a
much longer period of time than Jordan. Which puts the Longevity check mark
squarely in Lebron's corner. That brings us to the third GOAT criteria... Winning. As
we all know, Jordan won six championships. Lebron has won three. Jordan is 6-0 in the NBA Finals. Lebron is 3-6. Yes, Lebron has made the finals 9
times compared to only 6 times for Jordan. But let's not pretend that making
the Finals is the same thing, or even close to the same thing, as winning a
title. Take a prime example from another sport -- the Buffalo Bills. They're the only
team in NFL history to appear in four consecutive Super Bowls. But is there a
single player, or fan, of that team that wouldn't trade all four of those
appearances for just one Super Bowl WIN? Frankly, talk to any fan whose team lost
the season's final game and ask them how they felt afterward. Almost
universally, their feelings are of sadness, anger and disappointment. And
that's just the fans. For players, those feelings are only magnified. Listen to
Charles Barkley talk about losing in the NBA Finals.
"I was just in shock when it was over because I had to... I was frustrated
because I couldn't will my team past Michael and the Bulls. And it... first of
all, I probably... I don't think I've ever gotten over it, number one. But that
was traumatic... and it's just... it's painful." So we can all stop with this false
equivalence between winning the championship and finishing runner-up. In
the words of Herm Edwards: "You play to win the game. HELLO. You play to WIN THE GAME." Now back to Jordan and Lebron. As mentioned, on basketball's biggest stage, the NBA Finals,
Jordan was 6-0. Lebron was 3-6. And frankly, that doesn't even
show how lopsided their records really are. In terms of individual Finals' games
Jordan was 24-11. LeBron is 18-31. And that's because in four of his six
finals losses, Lebron's team hasn't even been competitive. Twice he got swept,
and two other times he lost 4 games to 1. That includes being on the wrong
side of the two most lopsided Finals, by margin of loss, in NBA history. Of course,
Lebron fans will tell you that the only reason for Lebron's poor Finals
record is that his competition was so tough. Ironically, some of these same fans
criticize Jordan for losing early in his career to a Celtics team stacked
with FIVE Hall of Famers. And they conveniently gloss over the fact that
LeBron REACHED the Finals so many times, in part, because the competition in his
own conference was so weak. During the vast majority of his career,
Lebron played in what many dubbed the "Leastern Conference" because the East
was so much weaker than the West. On the other hand, during Jordan's playing days,
the East was generally considered the STRONGER conference as Jordan had to
battle through hard-fought rivalries against the Bad Boy Pistons, Patrick
Ewing's Knicks, the Shaq-Penny led Magic, and Reggie Miller's Pacers. That said if
you want to blame Lebron's failure in the Finals on the level of his competition, I
won't argue with you. But let's also not blow it out
portion. If you look at the average number of wins of their Finals opponents,
you'll see that Lebron's Finals opponents averaged 60.8 wins per
season, whereas Jordan's Finals opponents averaged 61.2 wins per season. So as it turns out, BOTH players faced stiff
competition in the Finals, but a big reason we don't hold the '93 Suns, the '96
Sonics or the '98 Jazz in the same regard as some of Lebron's Finals opponents is
because, unlike Lebron's adversaries, Jordan's opponents never actually WON
the Larry O'Brien trophy. Which goes to my original point -- that the difference
between winning the title and finishing runner-up is HUGE. And the reason those
teams never won the title... this guy. Look, I'm not trying to say that Jordan's
opponents were as good as the Warriors teams that Lebron faced four times in
the Finals. The truth is that Jordan never played a juggernaut quite like
that. But there's a pretty good reason for that. Jordan's Bulls WERE the
juggernaut. They WERE the team winning 70-plus games. They WERE the team with the
target on their back every year. And as the Warriors showed us, that's not an
easy place to be. As great as the Warriors were, they were never able to
string together three consecutive championships. Jordan's Bulls did it...
TWICE. So what's the greater achievement? Beating the juggernaut or BEING the
juggernaut? Or to be more specific, beating the juggernaut one time out of
the four times you face them, or BEING the juggernaut... YEAR after YEAR after
YEAR. And then doing it again... YEAR after YEAR after YEAR. There is no doubt that
Lebron's victory over the 73-win Warriors was the highlight of his career. But it's
not the first time that an underdog has won the championship. And there actually
have been much bigger underdogs who ended up winning the title. But how many
times have we seen a player lead his team to 6 championships in 8 years.
Prior to Jordan's Bulls, only Bill Russell's Celtics ever accomplished that
feat in the NBA, when they incredibly won 11 championships in 13 seasons. However,
back then there was an average of less than 10 teams in the league, and only a
couple rounds of playoffs. So it was considerably easier to win a title.
And no player -- not even Bill Russell -- ever had a run of winning 25 of 26 playoff
series, as Michael Jordan did. And Michael's pattern of winning goes beyond
the NBA. Let's not forget that Jordan has never won anything BUT Gold in the
Olympics. And he also earned an NCAA Championship, in which he hit the first
of two iconic championship-winning shots in his career. All that is to say, when it
comes to Winning, the check mark clearly goes to Jordan.
On to the fourth GOAT criteria... Statistics. This one is a bit more complicated. I
mean, how do you statistically evaluate two players who played in different eras
under different rules at different positions? One way of doing it is to
simply look at the eight traditional statistics of basketball -- Points, Assists,
Rebounds, Steals, Blocks, Field Goal Percentage, Free-Throw Percentage and
Turnovers. And we'll focus on per-game stats rather than cumulative stats, since
cumulative stats (such as total career points and total career assists) really
speak to Longevity which is already its own category of the GOAT analysis. Per-game stats, on the other hand, is more of an apples-to-apples comparison. So
looking at the eight traditional stats, we see that Jordan leads Lebron in five
of them -- Points per game, Steals per game, Blocks per game,
Free-Throw Percentage, and fewer Turnovers. Lebron leads in the other
three -- Assists per game, Rebounds per game, and Field Goal Percentage. But that's a
pretty simplistic way of looking at statistics. What if we instead turn to
ANALYTICS? Probably the most well-known analytics stat is Player Efficiency
Rating, or PER for short. This metric was created by respected basketball
analyst, John Hollinger, to give an overall rating to a player's
performance based on traditional stats like the ones we just mentioned. Jordan
has led the league in PER seven times, Lebron six times. Jordan has finished top
three in PER 10 times, Lebron 9 times. In fact, Jordan has the highest career PER
in both the regular season and the playoffs.
Another popular analytics stat is Win Shares. Jordan has led the league in Win
Shares 8 times, Lebron 5 times. Jordan has finished top three
in Win Shares 11 times, Lebron 6 times. And when it comes to
Win Shares per 48 minutes, Jordan has the highest career rating in
both the regular season and the playoffs. What about Box Plus Minus? Until recently,
Lebron was actually ahead of Jordan in career Box Plus Minus. But after the 2017
season gave Russell Westbrook the greatest single-season Box Plus Minus in
history by a wide margin, the architect of Box Plus Minus realized that the stat
was fundamentally flawed. So he made some changes to improve its formula. As a
result, Michael Jordan now has the highest career Box Plus Minus in both
the regular season and the playoffs. And lastly, what about Value Over
Replacement Player, which on its face seems to favor Lebron James?
Well, Value Over Replacement Player is a cumulative stat, and as previously
noted, cumulative stats speak more to longevity than they do game-to-game
dominance. That said, according to Value Over Replacement Player, Jordan owns
6 of the 9 greatest individual seasons ever played. And on a per-game
basis, MJ's career rating in Value Over Replacement Player is the highest of all
time in both the regular season and the playoffs. Are you noticing a theme here?
Not only does Jordan beat Lebron in every ratable analytics stat. He
consistently ranks as the BEST EVER across the board. Before we move on from
analytics, I want to mention a lesser-known stat called Game Score,
another brainchild of John Hollinger. Game Score measures a player's
performance in a single game, so it won't tell us who's had the better career. But
it does provide insight into who's had the greatest GAMES. Now we only have Game
Score stats since 1983, so you won't see any mentions of Wilt Chamberlain here.
That said, of the 100 highest game scores ever recorded,
incredibly 19 of them belong to Michael Jordan. In other words nearly one out of
every five of the best single game performances over the last
four decades has been by MJ. That includes the highest Game Score of all time, for
Jordan 69-point 18-rebound masterpiece. Comparatively, Lebron has had
only 3 of the top 100 game scores. When discussing the GOAT, Nick
Wright is fond of asking this question: "The aliens come down... you have ONE GAME
to save humanity. Who's your first pick in the history of the world?"
Well, Nick, I think we have our answer. Now that I've finished drowning you in numbers,
let's be real. Hardly anyone watching this video knows how to calculate PER,
Win Shares, Box Plus Minus, Value Over Replacement Player, or Game Score. And why
should you? This is basketball, not Good Will Hunting. So let's go back to the
traditional stats that we all know and understand. But this time, let's add
CONTEXT to them. What do I mean by context? Well, some positions are simply
better than others at racking up certain stats.
Let's take rebounding as an example. In a vacuum, if we simply compared the number
of rebounds per game of Brook Lopez and Jason Kidd, we might think that Lopez was
the better rebounder. The truth is, relative to their positions, Lopez is
statistically one of the worst rebounding CENTERS in NBA history,
whereas Kidd is statistically one of the best rebounding GUARDS in NBA history.
But even a poor rebounding Center can grab more rebounds than a great
rebounding Guard, solely by virtue of their roles on the court. So it makes
sense that, to understand the context of a player stats, we should compare them to
the respective POSITIONS that they played. When comparing Lebron James to
the other Small Forwards who have played at least 500 NBA games, this is where he
ranks. Overall that's pretty impressive. Now let's see how Jordan compares to all
Shooting Guards who have played at least 500 NBA games.
As good as Lebron is compared to other Small Forwards, Jordan is on another
level when compared to other Shooting Guards. He's darn near the top of every
major statistical category, and there isn't a single category where Lebron is
better than MJ, relative to his position, other than assists. So to sum up
Statistics, whether comparing traditional stats or analytics, and especially when
judging these players in the context of the positions they played, Jordan has a
noticeable edge over Lebron. As such, we have to give the check mark to Jordan. And
that takes us to the last category in our GOAT analysis... the "Eye Test." And to be
clear, by Eye Test, I don't mean which of these players is bigger, faster, or jumps
higher. None of that is relevant unless we're having a track and field
competition. And frankly, if physical measurables mattered, then George
Muresan would be in the GOAT conversation. No, what I mean by the Eye Test is: if
you sat an average basketball fan in front of a TV to watch a player in
action, what would he notice that the player is,
and is not, great at. Thankfully, I happen to be an average basketball fan, and I've
had the privilege of watching BOTH Lebron AND Jordan during their playing
days. So unlike a lot of my fellow YouTubers, I haven't merely relied on
highlight videos. Here's what my eyes told me when I saw Michael Jordan play,
particularly during his playing days with the Chicago Bulls.
He was the best OFFENSIVE player in the game. He was arguably the best DEFENSIVE
player in the game. He had the best MID-RANGE game. He was the best FINISHER
at the rim. He had the best POST-UP game, which is incredible considering most
players who dominated the post were big men. He was widely considered the most
CLUTCH player in the game. He was regarded by opponents as the fiercest
COMPETITOR on the court. He was regarded by teammates as the HARDEST WORKER in
practice. And when all was said and done, amongst the other stars of his
generation, he was the greatest WINNER. Now when you're playing against the
elite of the elite athletes of the world, to be the best at any ONE of those
things is pretty remarkable. But to be the best at ALL of them? I'd tell you it's
impossible... but for the fact that we saw Michael Jordan do it. And when it comes
to the GOAT debate, that's the biggest hurdle facing Lebron
He's basically being compared to a guy who was great at everything and
practically had NO WEAKNESSES. Seriously, judging by the Eye Test, what's
the worst thing we could say about Michael Jordan's game? Probably that he
wasn't a very good 3-point shooter. Jordan shot 33% from beyond the arc in
an era when the average player also shot... 33%. So when it came to 3-point
shooting, he wasn't good, he wasn't bad, he was just... average. But remember that
Michael played in an age when the 3-point shot wasn't a big part of
the game. During Jordan's years, teams averaged only 9.5
3-point attempts per game, and Michael himself attempted less than two
3's per game. And if being an average 3-point shooter is a weakness of
Michael's game, well then we also have to call it a weakness of Lebron's game. The
difference is that Lebron plays in an era where the 3-point shot is a HUGE
part of the game. During the years in which Lebron played, teams attempted on
average over 21 3's per game and Lebron himself averaged 4.3 3-point
attempts per game, or two-and-a-half times as many as Jordan. Despite the
increased emphasis on 3's, Lebron's career shooting percentage from beyond
the arc is only a hair better than Jordan... at 34%. And it's actually slightly
BELOW his peers, who've averaged 35% from 3 during his era. But to reiterate,
being an average 3-point shooter was BY FAR the worst part of MJ's game. For
Lebron, it's not even close. Lebron in fact has four major weaknesses
as a basketball player, each of which is readily apparent to anyone who has
actually watched him play. First, he's not a good FREE-THROW shooter. For his career,
Lebron has shot around 73.5% from the free-throw
line, which is pretty poor for a player who handles the ball as much as he does.
In fact, many analysts point out that at the end of games,
Lebron shies away from driving to the basket because he's AFRAID of being sent
to the line. I don't know whether that's true, but what I do know is that the odds
of Lebron hitting two consecutive free-throws is statistically not much
better than a coin flip. Jordan on the other hand shot a solid 83.5% from the free-throw line during his career. And MJ NEVER shied
away from contact at the end of games. Lebron's second weakness is that he's an
INCONSISTENT DEFENDER. Sure he's had some years where he was elite defensively,
which is evidenced by his numerous selections to the NBA's All-Defensive
Team. But he's also had several years where he's practically been a LIABILITY
on the defensive end. Compare that to MJ, who, during his Bulls days, was a
consistently elite defender. In fact, Jordan is the only player to rank in the
top five amongst all guards in both Steals Per Game and Blocks Per Game for
his career. Additionally, Michael led his position in Defensive Win Shares
practically every year that he played for the Bulls -- an incredible TEN times.
Lebron, comparatively, has led his position in Defensive Win Shares on
just four occasions and in 5 of his last 7 seasons, he didn't even crack
the top 10 at his position in Defensive Win Shares. Now, some will excuse Lebron's
recent fall-off on the defensive end as a byproduct of his RESTING on defense so
that he can have more energy on offense. And we can debate the merits of that
strategy. But resting on defense is not something Michael Jordan was EVER
accused of doing. Heck, even as a 40-year old, he was busting his tail on the
defensive end. But what about the notion that Lebron has been the more VERSATILE
defender? Lebron supporters will argue that he can
guard positions 1 through 5 on the court, such as when he guarded Derrick
Rose for stretches in the 2011 playoffs. But Lebron's guarding the opposing
teams Point Guard or Center isn't something that happens very often. In
fact, during his career, Lebron has spent less than 5% of his total minutes
guarding the opposing players' 1 or 5. So the versatility argument is HIGHLY
exaggerated. And, look, when it comes to versatility, Hometown Buffet may have a
more versatile menu than Spago... that doesn't make it a better restaurant.
Lebron's third weakness is that he's not a very good SHOOTER. And this is a pretty
significant flaw for someone claiming to be the GOAT. I mean, shooting the ball is
THE quintessential skill in the game of basketball. It's the part of the game
that everyone practices, whether on the playground, at the YMCA, or in the NBA. Now
some people will contend that Lebron is actually a BETTER shooter than Jordan
because he has a better career field goal percentage. And, yes, Lebron's career
field goal percentage is 50.4% compared to Jordan's 49.7% But recall what I said about placing
stats into proper context. To help us understand context when it comes to
shooting, allow me to introduce DeAndre Jordan and Tyson Chandler. We all know
that DeAndre and Tyson were great rebounders and defenders. But what if I
told you that they were also two of the greatest SHOOTERS of all time?
That would be certifiably crazy. Yet if you look at all the shooting metrics --
field goal percentage, effective field goal percentage, true shooting percentage --
both of these guys rank near the top in NBA history. Of course, there's an
obvious reason for that. As we all know, both DeAndre Jordan and Tyson Chandler
take a lot of their shot attempts on dunks, layups and put-backs, which are
extremely high percentage shots. Well guess what? So does LeBron James. In fact,
every single year of his career, the shot that Lebron James has taken the most has
been within 0 to 3 feet from the basket.
In other words... dunks, layups and put-backs. More than 1 of every 3 of
Lebron's shots has been within this point-blank range. Which is aided by his
playing in an era where it's been relatively easy to get to the rim,
particularly when compared to the physical era in which Jordan played. And
just like every other player, Lebron is really effective from 0 to 3 feet,
hitting over 73% of these shots. But how does Lebron fare from OUTSIDE this range?
According to basketball-reference.com, LeBron's shooting percentage from outside
3 feet is 37.5% It's even poorer in the playoffs,
where he shoots 35.9%. And it gets even worse in close-and-late situations... in the last two minutes of games were the score is within
5 points, Lebron hits only 31.7% of his jumpers. Look, it
doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that these numbers aren't very good.
Which is probably why, in the 2013 Finals, the Spurs' defensive strategy against the
Heat was to basically DARE Lebron James to shoot. And keep in mind, this was
against Lebron in his PRIME. Can you imagine an opposing coach using a
similar strategy against MJ? Now, Lebron actually credits the Spurs for
forcing him to work on his jump shot. But it's not as if his results have gotten
much better since then. Here's Lebron's shooting percentage from outside 3
feet over the last six years. YIKES. Well, I'll give him this... he IS consistent.
For comparison, consider that in the last year of Michael Jordan's career, as an
aging player on the Washington Wizards, Jordan shot close to 42% from outside
3 feet. While that's certainly not great, it means that even as a 40-year
old shell of his former self, Jordan was STILL a better shooter -- a FAR
better shooter -- than Lebron James. Unfortunately basketball-reference.com
doesn't have advanced shooting metrics from Michael's Bulls days, when he was a
significantly more efficient scorer. But few would argue that Michael was
anything BUT a lethal jump shooter when he was wearing Red and Black. When it
comes to shooting, all of us can recall practicing shots on the blacktop,
counting down... three... two... one... before launching a shot at the rim. Well, if you
were pretending to be Lebron James, you'd BRICK almost two-thirds of the
time. Actually that's not entirely true. If you were playing against a countdown,
it would be much, MUCH worse. And that gets me to the last major weakness of
Lebron's game -- his performance, or more accurately, LACK of performance, in the
clutch. Remember when people were praising LeBron for making a couple of
buzzer-beaters in the playoffs two years ago? They used THESE stats to claim that
Lebron was better in the clutch than Jordan. But look at these numbers
carefully. What stands out to you? How about this? People were using a sample
size of less than one shot per season to make the case that Lebron was more
clutch than Jordan. That would be the equivalent of polling just 100 people in
the country to try to predict the winner of the next Presidential Election. So
let's use more telling stats, shall we? Here's a situation that's often used to
determine a player's "clutch-ness": Five seconds to go in the 4th quarter or
overtime and your team needs a bucket to either win or tie the game. It answers
the age-old question -- Who do you want taking the last shot with the game on
the line? It turns out that in the regular season and playoffs combined,
Lebron has taken 94 such shots. That's a pretty good sample size.
And how many of those 94 shots has Lebron made? 19... for a shooting percentage of... 20%. Let me repeat that... TWENTY PERCENT. Guys, that's not bad in the clutch. That's
ATROCIOUS. Michael Jordan in the same situation shot roughly 50%. Yes, that's
right. Jordan's performance under pressure was the same as it was throughout the
rest of the game. And that, my friends, is the definition of CLUTCH. So there you go...
when it comes to the Eye Test, our eyes tell us that one player -- Michael Jordan --
is great at everything and has practically no weaknesses. And the other
player -- LeBron James -- while also having a ton of strengths, has several obvious FLAWS
to his game. And when all is said and done, after analyzing the five key
factors of being the GOAT, Jordan gets FOUR check marks to Lebron's ONE... making
this GOAT debate, well, not much of a debate at all. Now don't get me wrong, I'm
not saying that Lebron James is a bad player. He's a PHENOMENAL player.
Personally, I have him on basketball's Mount Rushmore,
along with Jordan, Kareem, Wilt Chamberlain, and Bill Russell. He's just
not... Michael Jordan. And just to underscore how good MJ was, let's ignore
Lebron and Jordan for a minute and focus on the other three players highlighted
here: Kareem, Wilt and Bill Russell. Most would agree that these are the three
greatest centers in NBA history, and each of them has a strong case to justify his
standing among basketball royalty. Wilt is an all-time great because he was an
OFFENSIVE FORCE of nature, and he holds a ton of NBA RECORDS. Russell is in the
conversation because he was a DOMINANT DEFENDER and a PERENNIAL CHAMPION. Kareem
also led his team to numerous titles, and in terms of individual awards and
ACCOLADES, was the most decorated of the three. Not to mention he had the NBA's
most UNGUARDABLE SHOT. Now imagine a Center that had ALL the best qualities
from these three Titans. A player like that would be the basketball equivalent
of THANOS. Now add to that player the highest level of intangible traits,
such as a tireless work ethic, unmatched killer instinct, and an ability to
deliver in the clutch. And now you'd essentially be looking at Thanos with
all of the INFINITY STONES, and no one would question whether this player was
the Greatest of All-Time. But the truth is, we don't have to IMAGINE such a
player. That player already existed. He just happened to be a Shooting Guard not
a Center. When you think about it, Michael Jordan is the real-life version of an
overpowered video game character. He had ALL the qualities we look for in a
superstar athlete, and he had it in spades. He's basically Babe Ruth... if Babe
Ruth played defense like Willie Mays. And that's why, even in comparison to the
other all-time greats, he is truly in a class of his own. Simply put... he's the GOAT. Thanks for watching. This was my first
video, but if you want me to make more content like this, please SUBSCRIBE to my
channel. Also if you like what you saw, please click the LIKE button below, and
share this video with your friends. And
Bron not even better than Kareem
So MJ is #1 all time in PER, WS/48, BPM/ VORP Per Game in both the playoffs AND the regular season.
MJ has more team accomplishments, so most of Lebron's argument is going to have be made based on stats.
But MJ is by the advanced stats the greatest player of all time.
In my opinion LeBron lost the chance to be the "greatest" when he lost two finals with the heat
I like that this video shows the screamingly obvious distance between them in language that the kids today understand, but everyone also has a lot of time at the moment so you can just go watch them both play. One of these things is not like the other one.
No upvotes for this post? How many butt hurt people out there down voting this!?
Watching this vid rn, very good
Love that first quote. The moment LeBron declared himself to be the GOAT, it was apparent he wasn't. As far as I know, Jordan has never once felt the need to publicly declare his status.
Wow. That video really made it clear. Definitely MJ, the one true goat. Guess this will end all the discussion and debate.