Yes.

Lebron will most likely be more successful post-playing career.

Things I can accept....

MJ is a bad person.
Bad GM.
Bad card player.
Bad coach.
Bad golfer.
Bad husband.
Bad father.
Bad human being.
Bad teammate.
For all the things that warped his mind, his drive, his singular focus in beating you at some mundane task.

But if there is a game of basketball for the fate of the world, I want MJ on my team first and foremost. He doesn’t give a fuck about your feelings or getting you touched. He wants to win, and that is the only thing he wants. He will find a way to beat you.

I have no issue with you guys thinking Jordan is the best ever (and I probably agree)... my only issue is people acting like that's the "right" answer. People on the Jordan side will say shit like "it's not even debatable." That's ridiculous. It is very debatable, especially when discussing players across different eras. There is no other sport where people are this dogmatic about the best player ever.

Brady, Gretzky, Jordan, Babe Ruth.

Aren't all those guys pretty much unanimous GOAT?

I have no issue with you guys thinking Jordan is the best ever (and I probably agree)... my only issue is people acting like that's the "right" answer. People on the Jordan side will say shit like "it's not even debatable." That's ridiculous. It is very debatable, especially when discussing players across different eras. There is no other sport where people are this dogmatic about the best player ever.

No. And hockey isn't a sport.

The only one that seems questionable is Brady. Who else is in the running in hockey or baseball?

The only one that seems questionable is Brady. Who else is in the running in hockey or baseball?

I have no issue with you guys thinking Jordan is the best ever (and I probably agree)... my only issue is people acting like that's the "right" answer. People on the Jordan side will say shit like "it's not even debatable." That's ridiculous. It is very debatable, especially when discussing players across different eras. There is no other sport where people are this dogmatic about the best player ever.

Well, part of the problem is that people on the other side of this debate are taking similar stances for Lebron. For example, after jumping in my car to head home on Friday I flipped on the radio and the SCORE was on (as I typically listen to M&H during my morning commute) -Parkins and Mac were discussing the MJ Vs James topic and were snickering about people thinking MJ was better with shit like 'I mean, it's not like there isn't proof that Lebron hasn't already surpassed him..' '50 years from now people are going to look back on this debate and wonder why there was even a debate'. They even went on about how the real reasons people won't put LBJ over Jordan are as follows -the 'decision', James beats your team every year, therefore you don't like him and that's why you think Jordan is better, and 'Six rings'. Never mind all the other legit reasons one could think MJ is better like.. winning the scoring title and defensive player of the year in the same season, all the scoring titles, 9 time All Defensive 1st team.. and so on.


It's incredibly stupid. At least people arguing for MJ are taking the decades long unanimously agreed upon GOAT side of the debate. That's not something that should be discarded lightly. Especially for a player in James that had to go seek out another alpha to play with to win titles coming out of the weakest conference in the NBA.. when MJ gutted it out after getting cut down by the Pistons in the toughest conference in the NBA, then went on to cut down that same Pistons team (ending their chance at a dynasty), and to dominate that same top conference leading his team as the unquestioned Alpha. People spend so much time moving goal posts and practicing mental gymnastics to keep James in the debate imo.


Who cares if James can score 50 in a losing effort in a finals game. I've seen Jordan score 63 in a losing playoff effort against one of the greatest teams of all time. The debate is becoming dumb at this point, if Lebron was really greater than Jordan there wouldn't even be a debate -just like there really wasn't a debate when Jordan was acknowledged as the GOAT. The fact of the matter is that the debate moves ratings needles for media outlets and gives them something to discuss. They did this with Kobe Vs Jordan when Kobe was in his prime and now it's James. That's all I really see at this point.

Jordan didn't win until he got help. Just like James.

Not just like James.

Mario Lemieux, Bobby Orr, and Gordie Howe get best-ever nods for hockey but I don't think there's a persuasive argument for anyone other than Gretzky.

...and James went 2/4 with that help.

Not just like James.

I think there are good arguments for all three of the guys you mentioned. Bobby Orr radically changed the way the game was played. You can't say that about Gretzky. And obviously the era had an effect on the points Gretzky scored as compared to Howe. I would compare it to quarterbacks. The worst guy in the current NFL isn't better than Bart Starr, but his numbers would suggest he is.

Anyway, back to Jordan, it's not a conversation that one can have reasonably with Chicagoans. They take Jordan being the "greatest" as an article of faith. When I was out in Boston last weekend I had a discussion with my friend's 18 year old son. The kid is a huge basketball fan who really knows the history of the league. I would compare him to FavreFan. He's a big Celtics fan. But he isn't going to tell you Russell or Bird are the "best ever". And when I asked him about LeBron, he said he's hands down the greatest player ever to step on a court. I brought up Jordan and played devil's advocate. But his basketball arguments for LeBron were really better than mine for Jordan. It came down to me repeating that Jordan never lost in a finals.

Anyway, I'm not making any argument at all about who is the "greatest". I'm on record here as stating that if there is such a thing that it's undoubtedly one of the centers. And if we're talking non-centers, I'm probably going to make a case for Magic. My point is simply that if you travel around the country, the idea that Jordan is the greatest of all-time isn't some indisputable truth the way it is in Chicago where Les Grobstein will spend an entire show insisting that some performance by Jordan that he witnessed 20 years ago was better than what was obviously an incredible game by LeBron.

I think there are good arguments for all three of the guys you mentioned. Bobby Orr radically changed the way the game was played. You can't say that about Gretzky. And obviously the era had an effect on the points Gretzky scored as compared to Howe. I would compare it to quarterbacks. The worst guy in the current NFL isn't better than Bart Starr, but his numbers would suggest he is.

Anyway, back to Jordan, it's not a conversation that one can have reasonably with Chicagoans. They take Jordan being the "greatest" as an article of faith. When I was out in Boston last weekend I had a discussion with my friend's 18 year old son. The kid is a huge basketball fan who really knows the history of the league. I would compare him to FavreFan. He's a big Celtics fan. But he isn't going to tell you Russell or Bird are the "best ever". And when I asked him about LeBron, he said he's hands down the greatest player ever to step on a court. I brought up Jordan and played devil's advocate. But his basketball arguments for LeBron were really better than mine for Jordan. It came down to me repeating that Jordan never lost in a finals.

Anyway, I'm not making any argument at all about who is the "greatest". I'm on record here as stating that if there is such a thing that it's undoubtedly one of the centers. And if we're talking non-centers, I'm probably going to make a case for Magic. My point is simply that if you travel around the country, the idea that Jordan is the greatest of all-time isn't some indisputable truth the way it is in Chicago where Les Grobstein will spend an entire show insisting that some performance by Jordan that he witnessed 20 years ago was better than what was obviously an incredible game by LeBron.

Doesn't matter to me, TP. We went back and forth on this in the Jordan vs LBJ thread. At the end of the day they both didn't win until the rosters improved. How the roster improved has little to no relevance to me. That some of you would have no problem if James and Wade were drafted together as opposed to joining each other via free agency is absurd to me. If they were drafted together then your criticism (he only won with another star by his side) should still stand, but you'd drop it. Doesn't make sense to me.

I agree. It's just something to use to bash the modern player.

What's funny is that it's really no different than some 90 year old guy arguing that Cousy was better than Chris Paul, but the people making the Jordan over LeBron argument see that as ridiculous while thinking their own argument is just great.