What makes Lebron better than Kareem?
- Thread starter Imyremeshaw
- Start date
T’Challa’s Heir
Superstar
If I had to guess it’ll be:
1)Not making the playoffs his first 2 years
2) 2010 playoffs where he “quit” against the Celtics while scoring 27 and grabbing 15 boards (a nearly identical line to the finals MVP game 7)
3) Mavs 2011, it is what it is
4) cramping in the 2014 Finals Game 1
5) The Lakers tenure. Because somehow missing the playoffs in part because of injury outweighs winning a championship
6) and someone might throw in the 04 Bronze when Larry Brown didn’t play rookies
All people talk about is Lebron's low moments. Kareem has his fair share that people literally don't even know about.
He's saying wins and loses don't matter, which will knock out a huge portion of your argument.
Just for fun, let's have a discussion.
I can't agree that he faced the most on-court diversity, but I do agree with the microscope. However, Bill Russell played amongst death threats, discrimination, some of the worst possible conditions any one man should have to endure. And Kareem was on the front lines off court. Magic & Bird had to carry the league on their backs, a barely sustaining league, while also dealing with the embellished narrative of a rivalry of Black vs White. I also don't agree that the current game has evolved from what it was. I'd say it changed, in that one skill set was given up for another. Guards can dribble the air out of the ball, but can't make an entry pass or a pull-up midrange. Bigs can shoot a 3 at 34%, but can't score 4' away from the basket at 45%, don't know how to box out, rebound, or block shots. Even the argument "no spacing" translates to you don't know how to get to whatever spot or shot you want. People aren't learning the game. Even with off-the ball movement, watch the game and see how many teams have plays in which everyone is stationary, and they're just waiting for a pass for the wide open shot.
Since Bron entered the league, he played a good portion of his prime (4 years) with 2 of the Top 4 players of his draft class. That would eliminate some of his would be competition for a lot of awards.
Steph also came into the league 6 years after Lebron, so you're not even comparing the same window. Hell, they're not even peers.
All of your other points refer others among their peers - Mike, Cap, Magic, Logo, Wilt, Bill, Shaq, Kobe, Duncan, Sam Jones, Hondo, Cousy.
Every other player has "Comebacks, buzzer beaters, scoring blitzes, clutch defensive plays" in the Finals. Go watch the games. "Havlicek stole the ball." "Bird stole the ball and an incredible pass" The push-off shot/pose is iconic. And there are tons of others.
Phil wasn't an all-time coach until he coached Mike. That was like his 2nd year with them. Pop grew as a coach with the Spurs. He was only like 3 yrs in - Bob Hill was Admiral's coach. And Pop was under Nellie...his style is NOTHING like Nellie.
He doesn't have higher highs than Jordan in the Finals. In 93, Chuck had 25 14 & 5, and MJ had to average 41 to keep them at bay. There are plenty of others - Magic etc...He's also not the only player to drag a less than stellar cast to the Finals. Dream did it, AI, hell 94 Knicks, Jason Kidd did it twice...But you can't bring teams talk to it, without calling out Lebron as well. He had better players on his teams ever since the first Clev run. Lebron is supposed to be the difference maker.
Lebron is NOT the only all-timer who's loses affect his status. It's the ONLY thing that affects Wilt & Logo's status. If Wilt is 4-2 instead of 2-4, he's #3 easily. If Logo is 5-4, and not 1-8, he's Top 10. They were dominant but the loses in the Finals hurts. He also has a losing record to every team/player he faced in the Finals, save Jimmy Butler.
By most comparisons, you cannot blatantly say that Lebron was more dominant in his era than others were in theirs. And that's what this discussion is about. His highs aren't really higher than anyone else's. The other closest would be Mailman & Cap...perhaps Moses...they all tailed off year 17 & 18.
Lebron has the highest longevity/output ratio of any All-Timer, that's his claim to prominence.
murksiderock
Superstar
1. Why does this matter to you? Mike made the playoffs with a 38 and 30-win teams; Kobe wasn't "Kobe" when he was a 6th man at best with no playoff starts and his team made the playoffs with him averaging 17.4 minutes per game, as his team made the playoffs his first two years; and not making the playoffs as rookies or Y2 players isn't held against Shaq, or Oscar, or Durant, or Steph, or Garnett, or anyone else...
These talking points literally never come up with any type of regularity, literally nobody says, "well you know KD has a hit on his resume not taking those Sonics/Thunder to the playoffs his first two years"
. Nobody says "Kobe has a hit on his resume for being a 6th man his first two years". Here's that sliding standard of accountability I talk about, this doesn't matter if we're not holding every All-Timer to this bar...Because in the same breath you'd mention this you'd have to mention Mike playing on sub-40 win teams who backed into the playoffs, you'd have to mention West lucking into a situation that already had Elgin Baylor, Magic lucking into a situation that had Kareem, Duncan lucking into a situation that had Robinson, that lowered the burden of responsibility these guys had in "getting" their teams to the playoffs in the first two years...
This is a terrible talking point, you'd have to admit that
...2. This was a bad look. This point deserves to be mentioned in his story...
3. This is his career low point, nikkas talk about this as much as any high point, it's talked about ad nauseum...
4. This is silly, blame an injury on him?
he was the best player in that series by a mile, Heat got nothing from anyone else. Come on, man...5. His 5 years in LA have been significantly brighter than the 5 LA years that preceded his arrival, so while it's a lower point in his career, I don't see the relevance in people staying on this when we all see he rejuvenated a franchise whose leadership has shown us they'd still be floundering had he not come here...
He came here and brought a title, blaming injuries on an older player who is balling at an age most guys are out The League or buried deep into the rotation is ridiculous...
6. I don't know what you mean here...
All people talk about is Lebron's low moments. Kareem has his fair share that people literally don't even know about.
There's a thread here somewhere where I traced Kareem's low points beginning with that '74 Finals choke and kept going---->it's absolutely true muhfukkas just don't know Kareem's blemishes, and then when presented with them, you get the "that's different" shyt...
Mike also has blemishes that are never talked about. LeBron is the only guy where we don't talk about how he overcame his adversity. Everyone else, Mike, Kareem, everybody, is celebrated...
T’Challa’s Heir
Superstar
1. Why does this matter to you? Mike made the playoffs with a 38 and 30-win teams; Kobe wasn't "Kobe" when he was a 6th man at best with no playoff starts and his team made the playoffs with him averaging 17.4 minutes per game, as his team made the playoffs his first two years; and not making the playoffs as rookies or Y2 players isn't held against Shaq, or Oscar, or Durant, or Steph, or Garnett, or anyone else...
These talking points literally never come up with any type of regularity, literally nobody says, "well you know KD has a hit on his resume not taking those Sonics/Thunder to the playoffs his first two years"
Because in the same breath you'd mention this you'd have to mention Mike playing on sub-40 win teams who backed into the playoffs, you'd have to mention West lucking into a situation that already had Elgin Baylor, Magic lucking into a situation that had Kareem, Duncan lucking into a situation that had Robinson, that lowered the burden of responsibility these guys had in "getting" their teams to the playoffs in the first two years...
This is a terrible talking point, you'd have to admit that
2. This was a bad look. This point deserves to be mentioned in his story...
3. This is his career low point, nikkas talk about this as much as any high point, it's talked about ad nauseum...
4. This is silly, blame an injury on him?
5. His 5 years in LA have been significantly brighter than the 5 LA years that preceded his arrival, so while it's a lower point in his career, I don't see the relevance in people staying on this when we all see he rejuvenated a franchise whose leadership has shown us they'd still be floundering had he not come here...
He came here and brought a title, blaming injuries on an older player who is balling at an age most guys are out The League or buried deep into the rotation is ridiculous...
6. I don't know what you mean here...
There's a thread here somewhere where I traced Kareem's low points beginning with that '74 Finals choke and kept going---->it's absolutely true muhfukkas just don't know Kareem's blemishes, and then when presented with them, you get the "that's different" shyt...
Mike also has blemishes that are never talked about. LeBron is the only guy where we don't talk about how he overcame his adversity. Everyone else, Mike, Kareem, everybody, is celebrated...
I’m team Lebron. Outside of 2011, I don’t hold any of that shyt against him. And I think the other 19 years outweigh 2011. Someone asked what are his lows. Those are the most common things I’ve seen mentioned w/r/t his lows.
And #6 was people talking shyt because he got a bronze medal w/ the 2004 Olympic team. But on that team he got like no minutes because Larry brown hates rookies. I’ve seen that held against him.
murksiderock
Superstar
I do agree with you that the way the game is played has changed, but Bron changed with it. He was great in The League he entered and he's still great now...
I also agree with you, that Bron and Steph are only "halfway" peers. Bron has an entire Hall Of Fame career before Steph became "Steph" a decade ago, which is why it's always nonsense when someone proposes a Bron/Steph comp that chops off Bron's first 10 years. For half of Bron's career, literally half, Steph Curry was not a marquee player, Bron has been a figure the entire 14-year duration of Steph's career. So while I consider them peers, they aren't 1-for-1 peers, there's a 10-year gap before Steph even ascended to earning conversation space with LeBron. I agree with that...
•from a competitive standpoint LeBron has faced the most on-court adversity. For one thing it's agreed upon that the last 20 years of ball is the most talent rich in league history, correct? More international players that are actual superstars, not just a league Shrempf type international players; and players today have a wider range if skills 1 thru 5, are faster, are stronger...
Next, LeBron wasn't drafted into a hallmark franchise like Magic or Bird or Kobe (draft day trade but still the same), so the NBA had no investment in making him the face. He had to dig out a poor franchise and make them relevant when The League wouldn't care if the frickin Cavaliers were relevant...
His position group was loaded with stars in his time. Not just one or two or three. From Mac and Pierce, to Durant and Kawhi, to many in between, and Bron played in a league that transformed into having switchability on D and being able to defend multiple kinds of offensive threats...
He never had that All-Time coach that ran the perfect program to complement his talents, because of the deep talent pool too there were always other dominant teams. He had to lift these teams himself, which takes me to this:
•yes, Phil and Pop were nonfactors when they became coaches. What did they do after they had Mike and Duncan? Phil ran off another dynasty. Pop didn't do much, the argument is fair on him (he does have a WCF with Kawhi post-Duncan and another couple playoff runs, though)...
No coach Bron played for won a title without him. Spoelstra would be the Pop comp here, so there's credit due for that, although if you ding Pop for no titles post-Duncan, the same goes for Spo too...
•I think you're overstating playing with Wade and Bosh. These guys between them had 1 title, 1 Finals run, 0 MVPs and minimal anything else without Bron, they also played AFTER him. What we know of Wade's play style and injury history, Bron extended his career, those 4 years took pressure off his body. He started breaking down and declining in Y2 of The Heatles, he played 5 years post-Bron, if Bron never comes to Miami it's not crazy that Wade is done by 2015...
He only placed Top 5 in MVP twice in 16 years, he was never taking any award away from LeBron. He woulda retired in '15 or so with the one title and still be celebrated...
Bosh was never a significant factor to threaten anything from Bron, come on, g...
•Bron isn't the only guy with huge playoff scoring blitzes, series defining defensive plays, comebacks, buzzer beaters, I didn't say he was. He just has more of them than everyone else. Given most all of his legacy points occurred from 2018 on backwards, meaning by Y15, his career isn't something you can brush off due to him playing forever. He was doing this shyt in his youth...
•we're going to have to agree to disagree on who had the higher highs between Bron and Mike...
•I didn't say Bron's status is the only one affected by Finals losses, I said his Finals losses are the only ones amplified. People don't sit here abd bring up Wilt's and Jerry's losses repeatedly, we have posters on this site right now who will tell you Wilt is the GOAT and never mention the 4 Finals losses, but those same posters will shyt on Bron. And we know most times Bron took an inferior team to The Finals...