Bruh, he was 28. I can't believe you're arguing this.
But that's not fair because of what you just said, they came in the league at different ages. When you compare Jordan's rookie year to Bron's you're comparing a polished 21 year old to a very raw 18 year old. In their 2nd seasons LeBron was still a late teen while Jordan was a polished 22 year old.
Age isn't pointless, "years played" is what's pointless. Players usually play to a certain
age, baring injury, not a certain "amount of years". Take Kobe for example, he's played way more years than Jordan because he came in at 18, but he didn't stop at 12 or 14 or whatever. He kept playing because he was still "young" enough to play at a high level. And he still is. 34 isn't that old. Steve Nash is in his 17th year just like Kobe and he's

, old as fukk. They came in the same year but one was much younger and thus more capable of NBA miles.
You can't fault LeBron and Kobe for that. You can only be amazed, especially at LeBron because he was able to adjust immediately.
Is it fair to compare AI and Kobe's rookie years? Same draft year. No b-b-b-but Kobe was only 18 and not getting any playing and blah, blah, blah. The truth is you would be right. But the fact is age didn't matter to LeBron cause he was a beast anyway and that's why you're trying to hold him to a higher standard. I understand. I mean, that's The King.
NBA activity as you call it means nothing. It's not like LeBron is gonna retire in 2 years just because he's already in his 10th. That's ridiculous, he's gonna keep playing into his mid 30's like everybody else.