March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

[tru11]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

Assuming he passes Kobe for #3 in points before the end of the season and with the assumption he eventually ends up at #1, when do we think that happens?

Accounting for rest (60 games) and assuming he maintains the same level of scoring (let’s say 25ppg), he will overtake Kobe before the All-Star break. Following that, it will take him another 189 to surpass Kareem as the all time points leader.

So do we think he’s going to do it? 235 games to reach number one in points. And hypothesizing that he wins another championship or two, breaks into the top 5 in assists and top 50 in rebounds, will it then be too difficult to deny him as the greatest ever? Or is the way Jordan achieved all he did too impressive to beat?

Baring injuries Lebron will most likely claim that #1 spot in points.
He is already in the GOAT discussion, so that wont change.

What Jordan archieved and in the way he did it will most likely still be to impressive to beat though.

[Smallville102001]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

The pathetic 2011 NBA finals James had ended any chance of him being the GOAT. But he could end up being the first guy to have 40k points and top 5 in assist and i known people hate on his finals record but just about all the finals he lost the other team was just simple the better team. Out side of the 2011 finals even Jordan would have lost those finals if you replaced Jordan for James on those teams. I think James is number 2 best of all time.

[cima]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

If you take ringz out of the equation, is MJ still the GOAT?

[ojandpizza]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

The pathetic 2011 NBA finals James had ended any chance of him being the GOAT.

I don’t think we can take just 6 games from any players career and decide that those 6 games determine how we rank a players entire career.. I could take the same minded argument and take LeBron’s single best series and claim that series alone makes him GOAT. Or take Jordan’s single worst series and claim he doesn’t have a claim himself..

Had the Heat won this argument wouldn’t even be possible. He would even be viewed higher by “ring counters” even though he contributed no more/less. Same goes for them losing a round sooner. He doesn’t even have a chance to play poorly in the finals even though not making the finals is worse than losing in the finals.

It is what it is, he allowed Dallas to make him passive and he didn’t do anything to change that on the games biggest stage. If that’s the only finals he ever played in the argument would possibly hold some weight. But at 26 years old LeBron has had plenty to show since that point in time that he can be pretty amazing on the leagues biggest stage.

If you take ringz out of the equation, is MJ still the GOAT?

I would say yes. I don’t agree on rings being the way we decide a player is great or not great. I’ve always been more so on the stance that how much a player contributes to them determines how great they are. A player can be the best player on the floor and his team still lose. With that though you can never truly ignore the rings.. even if you you were to take them out of the equation Jordan still played amazing basketball in 6 finals. Win or lose them, count the trophies or not, he played at a GOAT level on the biggest stage.. That can’t just be wiped away.

There is far more aspects to look at than just that though.. I’ve been saying for a few years now that there are 3 players to me that have a legit argument to the GOAT title. Not that you can’t make a case for a select few others, but I think those 3 have far less holes you can poke in their arguments. Those 3 are Kareem, Jordan, LeBron..



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cima]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

LeBron's case will only get stronger as an individual. Gonna be hard to argue against the all-time leading scorer and top 3 in assists, which is likely how he will end his career.

[Anthraticus]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

James has to push off too much on offense for me. (and unfortunately get away with it alot more than not) Reminds me of Shaq in this regard.



Great overall player, but offensively I wouldn't put him up there with the all time legends.

[tru11]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

If you take ringz out of the equation, is MJ still the GOAT?

Yes.

MJ has him beat on the personal accolades by a mile still.

[ojandpizza]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

Yes.

MJ has him beat on the personal accolades by a mile still.

Not really.

And this goes back to what I said earlier as well, it depends how much stock people put into various things. Accolades being one of them as I know a good chunk of people don't really care much one way or the other what the media votes. And a large chunk of accolades are media appointed awards.

Scoring titles are where the accolades really separate for the two of them. But I'm not sure how much value we determine they hold. LeBron for the most part isn't even judged as a scorer.. Even then he's now passed Jordan in career points, playoff points, and finals points.. Though we know he's played longer, again depends how much you value longevity there as well.. If we gave equal value to what assists are worth for the team (same as points) he passed Jordan in total points accounted for years ago. The only player close to him his Stockton, who if we give Stockton 2 points for every assist LeBron is already about 2,000 total points ahead of him.. I'll let someone else go tally up if Utah even made 2,000 threes during Stockton's time there, minus his own, to determine if it's possible they are closer than that. Jordan/LeBron scoring isn't even separated by a ton, per 75 possessions Jordan's career average is 30, LeBron's just under 28. Jordan gets a decent edge in FT%, while LeBron a slight edge in FG%, 2pt%, 3pt%, eFG%, TS%..

Jordan has the MVP edge 5 to 4, but both of them have had probably 8-10 MVP-level years a piece. So again that mostly falls on how much do we care about media votes again. They are 1 and 2 all time in MVP award shares, LeBron finishing anywhere in the top 10 this season would take over the number 1 spot, and then only grow from there. LeBron has 13 seasons of finishing in the top 5, Jordan has 10. Again he's played more seasons so that falls back on how much you value longevity again. Both have won the finals MVP for every year that they could (you're not winning it without the ring).

Jordan has a DPOTY award, LeBron finished 2nd in a year that the winner was voted to the 2nd team.. Another instance of why people don't love media appointed awards. I'm not even sure the year Jordan won it was his best defensive season, he just racked up tons of steals and blocks that year. LeBron has 6 defensive teams to Jordan's 9, I think both of them could realistically have 1-2 less than they do if defensive specialists received the votes rather than just All-Stars who play defense. Both were routinely 2 of the best defenders on the floor come playoff time, which is what really matters.

Both rookie of the year - who cares, both gold medalists which doesn't really matter in NBA terms, both tons of All-Star votes which also don't really matter, 1 and 2 All-Time in MVP shares, 1 and 2 All-time in PER, 1 and 2 All-time in VORP, 1 and 2 All-Time in Box +/-, 4 and 5 All-Time in Win Shares..

[Smallville102001]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

I don’t think we can take just 6 games from any players career and decide that those 6 games determine how we rank a players entire career.. I could take the same minded argument and take LeBron’s single best series and claim that series alone makes him GOAT. Or take Jordan’s single worst series and claim he doesn’t have a claim himself..

Had the Heat won this argument wouldn’t even be possible. He would even be viewed higher by “ring counters” even though he contributed no more/less. Same goes for them losing a round sooner. He doesn’t even have a chance to play poorly in the finals even though not making the finals is worse than losing in the finals.

It is what it is, he allowed Dallas to make him passive and he didn’t do anything to change that on the games biggest stage. If that’s the only finals he ever played in the argument would possibly hold some weight. But at 26 years old LeBron has had plenty to show since that point in time that he can be pretty amazing on the leagues biggest stage.



I would say yes. I don’t agree on rings being the way we decide a player is great or not great. I’ve always been more so on the stance that how much a player contributes to them determines how great they are. A player can be the best player on the floor and his team still lose. With that though you can never truly ignore the rings.. even if you you were to take them out of the equation Jordan still played amazing basketball in 6 finals. Win or lose them, count the trophies or not, he played at a GOAT level on the biggest stage.. That can’t just be wiped away.

There is far more aspects to look at than just that though.. I’ve been saying for a few years now that there are 3 players to me that have a legit argument to the GOAT title. Not that you can’t make a case for a select few others, but I think those 3 have far less holes you can poke in their arguments. Those 3 are Kareem, Jordan, LeBron..



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I known 6 games for a players career is not all that matters but he just came up way to small that year. Jordan would have never came up that small in the playoffs. The way i look at Jordan and LeBron in there prime goes something like this. Defensively i think they are even. Jordan is the better scorer but i think James being the better passer evens them out again. Then Jordan is the better foul shooter. So at the end of the day i think foul shooting and the 2011 nba finals is what makes Jordan the better player. If James didn't came up so small in the 2011 finals and if he was more like a 80-85% foul shooter instead of around 73 i think the talk of James being better then Jordan would be a lot more far and closer.

[TheFinalEvent97]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

Obviously it's only 16 games in but the stats for Luka this season are insane. Especially 7:00 to 7:25
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/f8RhyUzW3t0" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[tru11]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

Not really.

And this goes back to what I said earlier as well, it depends how much stock people put into various things. Accolades being one of them as I know a good chunk of people don't really care much one way or the other what the media votes. And a large chunk of accolades are media appointed awards.

Scoring titles are where the accolades really separate for the two of them. But I'm not sure how much value we determine they hold. LeBron for the most part isn't even judged as a scorer.. Even then he's now passed Jordan in career points, playoff points, and finals points.. Though we know he's played longer, again depends how much you value longevity there as well.. If we gave equal value to what assists are worth for the team (same as points) he passed Jordan in total points accounted for years ago. The only player close to him his Stockton, who if we give Stockton 2 points for every assist LeBron is already about 2,000 total points ahead of him.. I'll let someone else go tally up if Utah even made 2,000 threes during Stockton's time there, minus his own, to determine if it's possible they are closer than that. Jordan/LeBron scoring isn't even separated by a ton, per 75 possessions Jordan's career average is 30, LeBron's just under 28. Jordan gets a decent edge in FT%, while LeBron a slight edge in FG%, 2pt%, 3pt%, eFG%, TS%..

Jordan has the MVP edge 5 to 4, but both of them have had probably 8-10 MVP-level years a piece. So again that mostly falls on how much do we care about media votes again. They are 1 and 2 all time in MVP award shares, LeBron finishing anywhere in the top 10 this season would take over the number 1 spot, and then only grow from there. LeBron has 13 seasons of finishing in the top 5, Jordan has 10. Again he's played more seasons so that falls back on how much you value longevity again. Both have won the finals MVP for every year that they could (you're not winning it without the ring).

Jordan has a DPOTY award, LeBron finished 2nd in a year that the winner was voted to the 2nd team.. Another instance of why people don't love media appointed awards. I'm not even sure the year Jordan won it was his best defensive season, he just racked up tons of steals and blocks that year. LeBron has 6 defensive teams to Jordan's 9, I think both of them could realistically have 1-2 less than they do if defensive specialists received the votes rather than just All-Stars who play defense. Both were routinely 2 of the best defenders on the floor come playoff time, which is what really matters.

Both rookie of the year - who cares, both gold medalists which doesn't really matter in NBA terms, both tons of All-Star votes which also don't really matter, 1 and 2 All-Time in MVP shares, 1 and 2 All-time in PER, 1 and 2 All-time in VORP, 1 and 2 All-Time in Box +/-, 4 and 5 All-Time in Win Shares..

People dont love or care about stuff that dont support their argument.

I mean how much stock/value are we going to put in eveything Lebron has done since he has jumped ship the first time and then the 2nd time and now the 3rd time forming a super team.

We can question everything and downplay everything to try and proof a point....

[ojandpizza]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

Obviously it's only 16 games in but the stats for Luka this season are insane. Especially 7:00 to 7:25
<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/f8RhyUzW3t0" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I don't know that I would crown Luka the best 2nd year player I've ever watched. Duncan was amazing, Shaq was amazing, Jordan's 2nd season was before my time but he was amazing as well, although injured, dropped 63 on the Celtics that season's playoffs.. But Luka is definitely probably the best 20 year old I've seen play, or at least on par with any I've seen play.

He reminds me a bit of Duncan in how he adjusted so easily to the feel of the game, but I think that was because the years playing professionally compare a lot to Duncan playing 4 years in college.. Duncan was the better rookie, and better 2nd year player IMO, but Luka is also substantially younger.. Age wise he compares a bit more to year 3 LeBron, which that season Lebron was insane in the playoffs and kinda had his "ok maybe he CAN be the next all-time great" moments. I probably give Bron the edge there too, but Luka seems to be somewhere in that mix of really great players at a really young age.

The stats in the video itself though kinda has me questioning some of these all-in-1 metrics though.. They seem to HEAVILY favor modern play-style, first it was Curry who had the best year ever, then Harden, now Luka, in these similar-computed metrics.. All seem to heavily favor 3 point shooting, and possibly to a slightly lesser extent free-throw shooting as well.. I'm sure the next "best season ever" will happen from someone else in another 2-3 years as well, possibly when someone starts taking 15-20 threes a game..

Part of me wonders if at some point there is an adjustment to be made for how players who didn't shoot 10 threes a night are computed in these metrics. Some sort of manual adjustment curve to scale how eras were just different. Something like "Bird shot 3 three-point attempts a night this year when it was normal for TEAMS to shoot 4-5 a night, so his adjustment would look more like this if converted to today's numbers"... Because if the standard for measuring how good a player is seems to jump so highly based on how often the ball is in their hands and how many threes they shoot, we are really undervaluing the way a lot of other players have played the game, even the way some play today.. Not to say it's bad, it's just hard to compare against players who aren't playing today's game or today's style of game.. Of course in depth analytics will always skew a bit towards the era the stat was designed for as well, so it's understandable in that sense..

Another question I would pose, he ranked Luka as a neutral defender. Which again kinda tugs against the idea that despite that he's running off a "best season ever".. Something isn't accurate in the mix there, and reminds me a bit of how Curry is statistically painted as a good defender, but we all know from watching games that everyone on the floor wants to run an offense that get's him on their better players because they exploit him.. Not that Luka is Curry, I think his size allows him to be a better defender than Curry, and his effort makes him better than Harden on most nights.. But just the idea of being able to say he's a neutral on defense, and then say these all-in-one stats say he's having the best season of all time, makes it seem as if the all-in-one stats just have some big holes in them.

I also realize this all stems from box-score like thinking, which anyone who can mimic a Luka or Harden like approach, especially if they are decent rebounders, are going to really dominate these type of stats because the ball is rarely not in their hands. In Ben's "Offensive Load" stat I think Luka's current season is only second to Westbrook's 2017 season All-Time. Quite a bit higher than any season from someone like MJ or LeBron.. I guess a few ways to look at that, one would be it's impressive to play at that level of usage/load and still be an efficient player and make your team better for it, on the other hand even the most average player is going to have a pretty eye-popping box-score with that type of usage/load. Somewhat blurs the lines of how much you do/don't let the numbers talk.

[ojandpizza]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

People dont love or care about stuff that dont support their argument.

I mean how much stock/value are we going to put in eveything Lebron has done since he has jumped ship the first time and then the 2nd time and now the 3rd time forming a super team.

We can question everything and downplay everything to try and proof a point....

Oh I definitely agree with that, people are always going to look more towards the stuff that only fuels their side of an argument..

But I was talking more-so in general, not specifically on making a LeBron vs Jordan "argument" but more so saying if we were to have a baseline for how all players are judged against all other players I don't think media-appointed awards are going to be all that high on a "who's better" list for most people.. Nobody views Moses Malone to be 3 times the player Kobe was because his 3 MVP awards are more than Kobe's 1 for example.

I would say the second part of your post is comparable to the "Jordan never won anything without Pippen" comments. Basically, both are relatively insignificant in terms of telling us how good LeBron/MJ are.

[Yeah...THAT Guy]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

I don't know that I would crown Luka the best 2nd year player I've ever watched. Duncan was amazing, Shaq was amazing, Jordan's 2nd season was before my time but he was amazing as well, although injured, dropped 63 on the Celtics that season's playoffs.. But Luka is definitely probably the best 20 year old I've seen play, or at least on par with any I've seen play.

He reminds me a bit of Duncan in how he adjusted so easily to the feel of the game, but I think that was because the years playing professionally compare a lot to Duncan playing 4 years in college.. Duncan was the better rookie, and better 2nd year player IMO, but Luka is also substantially younger.. Age wise he compares a bit more to year 3 LeBron, which that season Lebron was insane in the playoffs and kinda had his "ok maybe he CAN be the next all-time great" moments. I probably give Bron the edge there too, but Luka seems to be somewhere in that mix of really great players at a really young age.

The stats in the video itself though kinda has me questioning some of these all-in-1 metrics though.. They seem to HEAVILY favor modern play-style, first it was Curry who had the best year ever, then Harden, now Luka, in these similar-computed metrics.. All seem to heavily favor 3 point shooting, and possibly to a slightly lesser extent free-throw shooting as well.. I'm sure the next "best season ever" will happen from someone else in another 2-3 years as well, possibly when someone starts taking 15-20 threes a game..

Part of me wonders if at some point there is an adjustment to be made for how players who didn't shoot 10 threes a night are computed in these metrics. Some sort of manual adjustment curve to scale how eras were just different. Something like "Bird shot 3 three-point attempts a night this year when it was normal for TEAMS to shoot 4-5 a night, so his adjustment would look more like this if converted to today's numbers"... Because if the standard for measuring how good a player is seems to jump so highly based on how often the ball is in their hands and how many threes they shoot, we are really undervaluing the way a lot of other players have played the game, even the way some play today.. Not to say it's bad, it's just hard to compare against players who aren't playing today's game or today's style of game.. Of course in depth analytics will always skew a bit towards the era the stat was designed for as well, so it's understandable in that sense..

Another question I would pose, he ranked Luka as a neutral defender. Which again kinda tugs against the idea that despite that he's running off a "best season ever".. Something isn't accurate in the mix there, and reminds me a bit of how Curry is statistically painted as a good defender, but we all know from watching games that everyone on the floor wants to run an offense that get's him on their better players because they exploit him.. Not that Luka is Curry, I think his size allows him to be a better defender than Curry, and his effort makes him better than Harden on most nights.. But just the idea of being able to say he's a neutral on defense, and then say these all-in-one stats say he's having the best season of all time, makes it seem as if the all-in-one stats just have some big holes in them.

I also realize this all stems from box-score like thinking, which anyone who can mimic a Luka or Harden like approach, especially if they are decent rebounders, are going to really dominate these type of stats because the ball is rarely not in their hands. In Ben's "Offensive Load" stat I think Luka's current season is only second to Westbrook's 2017 season All-Time. Quite a bit higher than any season from someone like MJ or LeBron.. I guess a few ways to look at that, one would be it's impressive to play at that level of usage/load and still be an efficient player and make your team better for it, on the other hand even the most average player is going to have a pretty eye-popping box-score with that type of usage/load. Somewhat blurs the lines of how much you do/don't let the numbers talk.

This honestly makes perfect sense though. Teams are figuring out more and more what the most efficient way to play basketball is, creating an era where the best players today are more efficient than the best players of yesteryear, which results in the efficiency ratings of these players surpassing the players from previous eras.

[ojandpizza]

Re: March 2019: LeBron James is no longer the best player in the world. So who is?

This honestly makes perfect sense though. Teams are figuring out more and more what the most efficient way to play basketball is, creating an era where the best players today are more efficient than the best players of yesteryear, which results in the efficiency ratings of these players surpassing the players from previous eras.

It does, but I can't help but feel there is something that gets lost in the mix when these all-in-one analytical metrics are computed. Not just specifically past players, but even just play-styles that differ from one person having the ball in his hands all game long while also playing on a successful offense.

Like in the Luka example for instance, Giannis is averaging 30ppg on 20 shots just like Luka is, hes doing it on less minutes which means his per 36 and per possession numbers are seemingly better as well. Giannis is also more efficient from the field overall, and his eFG% is better.. Luka narrowly edges him in TS% from making more threes and free-throws, but that is still seemingly ignoring that he's missing more shots overall. Which means more rebound opportunities for the other team as well. It's not going to be a sizable amount, but for example he's missed 15 more shots in 2 less games played.

That all ignores the defensive end of the floor, where Giannis is likely a DPOTY candidate. Most of these metrics will admit they can fail to properly incorporate defensive value, but it would seem to me that the gap he creates there would come at least close to closing the gap for the extra assists. Luka is a great passer, but Dallas as a team is also shooting incredibly well from deep. 8-9 guys shooting in the mid 30's+, Luka himself is like 12th on the team in 3p% and he's right at that money 33% zone. While a lot of credit goes to Luka, some has to be given for them making the shot too. Buck's are on pace to be a top defensive team again, where Giannis is a dominant defensive rebounder, roughly the same rate as Deandre Jordan. Currently leading the league in defensive rating and defensive win shares, he blocks shots, switches most positions, he truly anchors both ends of the floor..

I also understand Luka gets a lot of credit in certain aspects because Dallas has a top rated offense.. While Dallas is a good team and playing well, the primary reason their offense ranks up at that level is simply because they take 40 threes a game. Same applies to your comment about individuals here, if you can make them incorporating a large chunk of threes is a more efficient way of scoring. But it can also mean more missed shots overall, and lower percentage shots (even if worth an extra point) can also lead to a great risk of cold runs too.. I don't want to compare him to Harden-led teams because we've yet to even see Luka in the playoffs, but we've saw how that can often do more harm than good come playoff time.

Maybe I'm just over-thinking the whole thing honestly. Might be just as easy to say "box score isn't everything" and when we see one of these stats saying Harden, Luka, and whoever is next is having the best year ever in that specific metric, it doesn't literally mean they are having the best season of all time overall.

Regardless of the rant, I'm super impressed with what Luka is doing this year. Ready to see how he looks 5, even 10 years down the road.