Its to the point where Bron's peak is now being held against him.
Mike took 7 years to win his 1st, then won 6 in 8 calendar years.
Bron took 8 before his 1st, has won 4 in 9 years. Brons window is still open. We cant hold it against Bron that Mike retired twice.
I still have Mike ahead but to say "Bron cant catch Mike" is ridiculous. He is still a peak performer and can add serious weight to his legacy in the next 1-2 years. Brons longevity as a peak performer shouldnt be a negative.
The real nuttiness about this is there are cats who portray Jordan's peak as if it was significantly greater than LeBron's, and it wasn't, that literally isn't verified by any measure you look to...
The highest performance peaks, measured by a number of angles, were Wilt, Kareem, Mike, and LeBron. To say any one of those guys was more than marginally higher than the others is a lie, and you can make the case to order those guys any which way. But its those four, those four guys at the absolute crest of their games performed at levels higher than anybody else who ever played basketball...
The big differentiator here is most of Cap and Wilt's highs came in regular seasons, most of Bron and Mike's came in postseasons...
But this notion that LeBron's peak was subpar, mediocre, or measurably lesser than Mike's peak, isnt true at all...he is absolutely underrated in regards to how high his peak was and how long he held that peak level of play...
Part of the issue is much of The Culture doesn't respect history, they have a belief Mike and only Mike played at an unparalleled level. The other part is much of Basketball Culture convinced themselves that once they saw Mike, there would never be anyone that dominant of an individual player again, and of course, they were wrong, but they should have known this, as Mike came after Wilt and Kareem....
Every season that MJ played but didnt win was a loss. He didnt win the trophy nor get there. This losing finals record thing is retarded - the NBA title was on offer every single season
This 100%, but folks don't respect history----->ring counting was never overvalued for GOATs, pre mid 90s Mike Hype Train, because The Culture understood championships are not only won differently, there are more factors that go into measuring greatness than to simplify it to, how many chips did you win...
But nikkas really don't respect the history of the sport, and they disingenuous when it comes to Michael Jordan---->everyone had the weak era except for him; his titles matter more than everyone else's; just a list of exceptions and exclusions that aren't applied objectively to everyone across the board...
The fact that LeBron more often had his team in position to compete for championships is a legacy point he has over Mike. The fact that LeBron could more often put his team in championship contention without exhaustion and retirements is a legacy point. The fact that LeBron put teams in championship contention irrespective of having All-Time coaches, All-Time teams or playing on a dynasty, is a legacy point---->granted, neither of those points are conversation-enders, but when he's compared to other players, these points aren't irrelevant...
There's only one winner every year. Mike played in 9 seasons where he didn't win the title. It happens, and like everything else it has to be contextualized properly, but people who push this, "well Mike never lost" thing obviously have an agenda...
