Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
At poker maybe, but certainly not basketball.
lulz. Lebron is a physical freak. He's played 400 more games than Jordan and he still is only "better" by accumulating and since all you people talk about is rings, he's short of those while being able to jump to and from 'super teams'. He's not better than MJ at basketball. His size alone gives him about a 20% advantage and he doesn't play in a physical league.
Lebron is #2 at the very best and it's not a close #2.
If you put them in the same league, in the same era without knowing their careers, you draft Lebron 10 x out of 10.
If you put them in the same league, in the same era with knowledge of how their career paths went, taking Lebron even once should get you fired.
Jordan had an uparalleled drive to be great that Lebron can't touch. [Reply]
Originally Posted by tredadda:
But it was the Chiefs. The Bengals were riding high leading up to that game. KC wins, but Cincy felt robbed. Because Lou does a great job against KC they most likely feel that they can afford to lose Bates and Reader. It’s also probably why he doesn’t budge on his scheme. They probably lack the talent for him to run his scheme.
No. The Chiefs had nothing to do with it. It was a bad organization that shit all over itself before the Chiefs and it's an organization that's shitting all over itself now, on cue. The shitting has always been there, waiting in the wings. [Reply]
Originally Posted by rfaulk34:
lulz. Lebron is a physical freak. He's played 400 more games than Jordan and he still is only "better" by accumulating and since all you people talk about is rings, he's short of those while being able to jump to and from 'super teams'. He's not better than MJ at basketball. His size alone gives him about a 20% advantage and he doesn't play in a physical league.
Lebron is #2 at the very best and it's not a close #2.
If you put them in the same league, in the same era without knowing their careers, you draft Lebron 10 x out of 10.
If you put them in the same league, in the same era with knowledge of how their career paths went, taking Lebron even once should get you fired.
Jordan had an uparalleled drive to be great that Lebron can't touch.
Their peaks were effectively equivalent except LeBron played 10 years longer as a top 5-10 basketball player (and counting). Their careers aren't close overall anymore and haven't been for well over a half decade. [Reply]
Originally Posted by KC_Connection:
Their peaks were effectively equivalent except LeBron played 10 years longer as a top 5-10 basketball player (and counting). Their careers aren't close overall anymore and haven't been for well over a half decade.
Except that in an easier league, with his physical size, he's not better than Jordan was. It's not even a legitimate discussion. And for the record, i hate Jordan more than any basketball player ever since he hit the shot against Georgetown. [Reply]
Originally Posted by rfaulk34:
Except that in an easier league, with his physical size, he's not better than Jordan was. It's not even a legitimate discussion. And for the record, i hate Jordan more than any basketball player ever since he hit the shot against Georgetown.
Calling the NBA an "easier league" than it was 40 years ago is a tell already that we can't reasonably have such a discussion. The athletes then are not even in the same stratosphere as they are in that league today (and LeBron is still remarkably better than all of them even at age 40). [Reply]
