So the same as this site's daddy?
Lebron really looks old now
- Thread starter Malcolmxxx_23
- Start date
Roger king
Superstar
The lakers and warriors have the same amount of wins thus far this season, steph curry and lebron are averaging the same number of points per game and lebron is averaging higher in rebounds and assists with a better field goal percentage, by any objective metric lebron who is three years older than steph and the oldest player in the league is playing better than curry is right now at this point in the season, so should the same principle apply to curry as well? His team is ''thrash'' as well.
Illin Degenerate
All Star
the 12 wins is true, but lakers have 10 losses warriors 8 losses. efg lebron .545, curry .584. curry averaging 1.4 steals per game 0.5 blocks, lebron 0.6 steals, 0.5 blocks. on/off curry +11.1, lebron -13.7.
Roger king
Superstar
Lebron is averaging two more rebounds than curry is per game and over 2 assists per game over curry and curry is a point guard as well. Those numbers in rebounding and assists are stronger argument than the less than 1 point difference in steals by those players. The point is if a neutral observer where to look at this stats a very strong case can be made lebron is the better player right now, at worst you argue they are even, yet if you listen to the discourse around the two, one is constantly critic as being washed and a strain on his team and the other three years younger heralded by supporters as the best point guard in league history is not, why the discrepancy? Also lebron has a better defensive rating as well than curry this season while being the older player
Last edited:
beenz
Rap Guerilla
all they remember isdropping 60 in his final NBA game.
father time remains undefeated
bron looking like bronny james with a green light these past few weeks
I'm starting to see why your rep is in the gutter, you really are half retarded. This concept shouldn't be so elusive to you but I'll explain anyways: Jordan announced his retirement in October 1993, just weeks before the start of the 1993-1994 season. The Bulls were not able to go into free agency to adequately replace his production and were merely left with scraps (like the Italian league's Pete Myers) to fill the void left by an all-time great. In most scenarios that don't involve a league completely and utterly diluted by expansion, a team losing their star player weeks before the start of the season would be dead on arrival. The Bulls, however, won nearly 60 games and were legitimate championship contenders. They pushed the Eastern Conference champs to 7 games and would have won the series if it weren't for a blown call.Imagine reading stats and and trying to make an argument that losing 1 time Allstar Horace Grant was a greater loss to the Bulls than losing a 6 time MVP
You're showing that you can't analyze and that's okay breh. We'll always need volunteers who can read children's books to the children
Imagine ignoring he passed him in less shots because he took and made more 3s. Imagine ignoring the fact it took 100+ more games to actually pass Jordan. Imagine ignoring that MJ missed 3 seasons of his prime (2nd season and 2 retirement seasons) that would have made that gap even larger.
Leave the analyzing to the analysts breh
And playing almost half of his career against 4 wings and 1 big man and the 3 second rule being implemented helped create a more favorable environment for modern offenses. Thats why context is needed when discussing players from different eras and not just blindly reading stats. In the end tho, nobody had to tear down Magic or Larry's accomplishments or opposition to prop up MJ. Nobody had to tear down Karl Malone or Charles Barkley's accomplishments to prop up Tim Duncan as being the best of all time either. This only occurs when it comes to discussing Lebron. And the funny thing is don't know it (can't analyze) but you're subconsciously admitting MJ is better every time you take that approach..
Are you following? Stay with me please.. Going into the next season, they lost the second best player of the 1993-1994 team who was their best rim protector, rebounder, and second best scorer. They also lost depth guys in Cartwright and Paxson. The 1995 team was a completely different team, Jordan's absence still loomed but now you take away another important piece and other contributors. It's not rocket science why the team would be worse. Jordan would also struggle to accumulate wins if you took away both Pippen and Grant in 1992-1993.
Who cares how many more games it took if Lebron scored more with 1000+ less FGs? That just means Lebron wasn't as much of a chucker and was responsible for running the team's offense and creating for others, which he did at a legendary rate. MJ averaged 26.2 fga in his career 30+ point games, he shot 53.2% from the field and averaged 5.3 assist per game in those. LeBron averages 23.1 fga in his career 30+ point games, shooting 55.4% from the field and also averaging 7.2 assists per game in those.Not to mention, average team scoring was 110.8 ppg in the season MJ got drafted and 93.4 the season Lebron got drafted. Jordan's first six or so seasons in the league were in an offensive environment that was much more conducive to scoring than the dead-ball era Bron came up in during the first couple of seasons of his career. Tack on the illegal defense/zone defense rules and the rapid expansion in the 1990s and you get a perfect storm for Jordan to dominate.
Miss me with the pearl clutching
Some of ya'll literally only post in this section to shyt on Bron but when the veil is lifted on your favorite players you start crying about Bron stans being disrespectful. shyt is pathetic.
VegetasHairline
Veteran
No different than being 30 plus watching comic book movies.Imagine being 30 plus watching wrestling
IsThatBrothaMouzone?
Superstar
MJ got the right coach and sidekick.
Bron was never getting that in his first run in Cleveland.
MJ was wayyyyyy more coachable. Bron always wanted to be the GM/Player-Coach. That's a big knock on Bron particularly in the 2nd half of his career.
If you put each player in the same situation, I think you get similar results. Bulls front office >>> Cavs front office....Bulls made good moves and the Cavs didn't. Phil Jackson + Scottie Pippen >>>>>>> anyone Bron had from 2003 to 2009. MJ is not getting the Cavs any further than Bron did.
Like I said, MJ has the better resume. On that, I'm picking him every time. If I'm starting with the #1 pick, I take Bron because he gives me more roster flex....I trust MJ more to take the last shot, but if I'm a lottery team, my goal is to just win games and become a contender quickly. Bron gets you there faster even if his peak isn't as good as MJ.
I'd also add that MJ's personality WOULD NOT work in the modern NBA. Just punching teammates, cussing them out etc., would get old fast. Basically the equivalent of Bron acting like Draymond.
threattonature
Veteran
I think these two statements contradict each other a bit. I think MJ provides more roster flexibility simply because he proved he can actually play in a system and can be coachable. He didn't need the ball in his hands as much as Bron and was much better at catching and making his move and then coming off the ball. Lebron has shown he only wants to play one way with the ball in his hands and everything revolving around him which then limits the kinds of players you can put around him.
Bron has repeatedly stated he hated playing with big men who lived in the paint so that's limiting. Pairing a traditional PG with Bron is a waste. Bron works best being surrounded by 3 and D players for the most part.
And this ain't to knock Bron as he clearly can carry subpar squads to high levels like you said. Maybe the best floor raiser in history. But when paired with superstars I don't think Bron is as effective as some of the other all time greats due to Bron ball.
Except for from 3 and at the rim.. so what you’re really saying is he’s a better midrange scorer.. there’s no doubt about that
Brolic
High Value Poster
LeBron is 40 years old… he’s literally doing the public a favor playing as well.