Yeah, like all 5 of them? How many international players are in the NBA today? And prime Sabonis never played in the NBA, so no, all the best international players were not playing in the NBA. Sabonis would probably be what Jokic is today (an all-NBA center).

Actually, a more top-heavy league suggests that the average player is worse, because it's easier to dominate a weaker league than a stronger one.

25 years ago , 24 foreign players were in the league .
Now around last 2 years , it’s about 25% of the league where the majority comes from Canada with 16 players ...

That concept about now nba is international is way out of proportion .
Just drop the 10 best foreigner and who you got left really , to stop guys like lebron , KD , etc ....

Yeah the average players are a bit better but it’s not like international players totally wreck the league .

A B players is a B players , regardless of the country he comes from ...
My point is , Maybe you got less C american player today that are replace by B , B- international players but it won’t change much for the top players .

Arguing that the NBA now (or in 2009) isn't more competitive than it was in 1988 is futile, and Jordan is directly responsible for that being true. Jordan's greatness and popularity helped grow the game & more importantly, Jordan brought more money into the game. The latter point is guaranteed to make the competition better in a league once it happens.

*I also don't think it takes away from what Jordan accomplished at all, and I think trying to argue Player A is better than Player B because they played against better competition is a waste of time.

Doncic > MJ

Hell, there's even a case that Rodman > MJ https://skepticalsports.com/the-case...an-v-jordan-2/

Bro. The argument was that this elite European talent wasn't even being found by NBA scouts in the 80's/90's because they weren't looking. Sabonis was drafted by the NBA in 1986. He had a serious injury the next year. He chose to stay in Europe. He later came to the NBA in '95. Are you even fact checking anything?

The league wasn't "top heavy", as I proved by giving a sample listing of the average league starter that year. The top was elite (clearly better than 2008-09, no matter what other people keep chirping about; like just look at the list of players), the middle was good (as good or better than 08-09, the years in question), and I don't know about the bottom because that doesn't matter b/c those guys weren't playing much and they certainly weren't guarding Jordan/LeBron.

i.e. the league was stacked in the late 80's and definitely better at the top and on average (remember, the talent was diluted in '88 compared to '09 as there were ~30% more roster spots; so this counterbalances the increased popularity in Europe) than in '09. These are the years in question because the claim was LeBron's stats suffered relative to Jordan because the league was "an order of magnitude better". That claim was wrong. It was hilariously wrong. Not only was the "order of magnitude" claim wrong, it was wrong in the entirely opposite direction.

It's not "guaranteed" to happen, because the league (# of teams and therefore roster spots) is diluted by about 30% relative to '87-'88. And there is year to year variance in skill and talent level.

Rather than making assumptions, there are ways to check this. Look at the best and average players in the respective years.

Is it guaranteed track and field is better as well because the population has grown and athletics is more popular, therefore Usain Bolt would get trounced in today's competition?

Is Giannis leagues better than LeBron since LeBron's prime was in a different era? The league is quite a bit different now than in 2008.

It's guaranteed to happen, remember? Mathematical fact. Bigger population, better access to training. Usain Bolt couldn't compete.

Right. You argue stupid stuff. We get it. If I agree will you go away? The reason we have twogs saying the stuff he says about LeBron is because we have the yous saying the stuff you say about MJ. It's the circle of stupid.

This is actually a super interesting article bacalaopeace. Thanks for linking. The author actually explicitly states he's not arguing that Rodman > MJ, and he states this multiple times. But he is arguing that Rodman is the greatest "3rd best" role player by a wider margin than any other player, relative to his value tier, in history.

The argument is pretty compelling. And it actually probably proves that the '95-'96 Bulls were better than the '16-'17 Warriors. The Warriors were loaded with scorers and shooters, yes, but that skill set totally overlaps. They didn't have a rebounder/defender like Rodman. Because no one in history was a rebounder/defender like Rodman. Statistically, by a gigantic margin, there is only one Dennis Rodman. So yeah, your article more or less proves the '96 Bulls are still the GOAT, and I wasn't totally convinced of that til now. Good talk bacalo.

i remember a game maybe 13 years ago, lebron with cavs vs kobe. someone a few weeks later asked in the NBA thread here "since when did lebron james become accepted as the best player in the nba". For me it was that game. Lebron switched on Kobe late in the 4th. Kobe was like damn. He passed out of it. It was the Hulk vs Spiderman in a phone booth. Hulk smash


The thing is, Jordan was the size a Kobe. But back then u have to wonder. Would Jordon just yell at Dennis, get this biggun off of me before i shove this basketball up his nose.

Just watched Space Jam.

MJ is GOAT.

I don’t think that’s true. Consider that the article was written in 2011, before prime Draymond Green came along. Green wasn’t/isn’t as good of a defender or rebounder as Rodman, but he provides additional value rare offensively with elite passing and decent ball handling combined with his defensive ability. Combined with Curry this made him insanely lethal in PnR in a way Rodman wouldn’t be able to. Not a great shooter but certainly more of a threat than Rodman and could still defend many positions.

I do agree that Rodman likely added much more value than he’s normally given credit for as a third option, as well as Horace Grant. Both elite 3rd options/role players.

Good point. I didn't look at the date of article. Would be interesting for him to analyze with Draymond in the sample set.

Although the way he is viewing the data is a bit weird. He's almost saying Rodman is adding more relative value by not touching the ball offensively, because that takes away from someone like Jordan. He's adding value in other ways that don't subtract from the offensive superstars. Like I think the article's author would claim Draymond has a totally different overall role so isn't really a Rodman comparison. This kinda makes sense to me, but not sure I totally buy it.

One other point is Rodman is way ahead of Draymond in rebounding stats. 16.1 per game in his best Chicago year; 26.6% TR%; 19.9% OR%. Draymond's best year(s) he's at 9.5 per game; 14.7%; 6.2%. Giant gap there. I think the author would say they have totally different roles/strengths.

Like Draymond is a Pippen/Rodman hybrid with his point forward + post defense type role but not as good at either individually. Rodman didn't touch the ball but was waaay ahead in rebounding. Post defense maybe a wash?

You're referencing arguments that other people have been making ITT, not me- I'm specifically making the point that Jordan making the NBA more popular and bringing more money into the game (along with others, but especially Jordan) has made it more competitive, because it has.

And I will say it again- I don't think it takes away from what Jordan accomplished at all, and I don't think it means Lebron>Jordan. My position (for years now) is that both players have a legitimate argument for being the GOAT, and that fans of both players routinely underestimate the other guy when getting into these debates.

Stop talking crazy.

I posted this elsewhere but it's a bit apples and oranges to talk anything else.

Best G - Jordan
Best F - Bron
Best C - Kareem or Wilt

You're comparing Jerry Rice to LT to Larry Allen otherwise.

I know when he was drafted. The point is, he didn't play in the NBA until many years after he was drafted and past his prime, so you cannot say that "the best international players were already playing in the NBA."

You're missing my point, which is that you can't compare raw stats and say one group is "better" because they are competing against different players.

I don't think it's arguable that the NBA draws from a vastly larger player pool now than in 1990 because of the increased global popularity of the sport. This increase is far larger than then percent increase in the number of teams due to expansion (4 teams added in 89 and 90). More players = more competition = the average and replacement level has gone up over time.

u would take 28 year old lebron number one if it was to win a ring or u die. if forced u would bet your life on it.

u might think you wont. but u would. u just would. u see him barreling downhill to the rack. u see a hand over the rim higher than any hand ever. u just would.

~27 year old Shaq tho

Also, if you look at my 5 year peak+current draft that I posted the results of, you are correct.

Except you said one year. Expand that a bit and you're right. You might even be right anyway but I just wanted to post something.

Honestly? Maybe. Or Kareem. Or Shaq even. Russell. I think big men or point forward types have more versatility. So depends on the team. Random collection of scrubs I might take LeBron.

But for a team constructed around a player and catered to their strengths (GOAT scorer, perimeter player, GOAT wing defender), I take prime Jordan and it's not remotely close. Like I prefer a Jordan/Scottie combo waaaay over a LeBron/Wade combo. But I might prefer a LeBron/scrubs team over a Jordan/scrubs team. Even though I think Jordan is clearly better LeBron is more versatile.

Agreed.

Jack of all trades (specialist in few) vs specialist in multiple categories.

As has been covered, Bron gets redundant next to other guys way more than Jordan.

I feel like it's made basketball worldwide more competitive; literally no argument there. I don't know that the NBA is specifically more competitive in 2009 compared to 1988. Because the NBA was truly loaded in the Magic/Bird/Jordan era. And talent was more stacked due to 7 fewer teams. I use those two years b/c of the Jordan/LeBron stats debate.

I don't know that your last paragraph is true. I agree the player pool is vastly larger. I think the mid-late 80's NBA was a gigantic anomaly with an obscene amount of talent packed onto 23 teams. I used '87-'88 with 23 teams b/c that was Jordan's peak statistical year.

Basically I'm arguing with bacalotroll not you/jmill. Unless you agree that the NBA is an order of magnitude better in '08-09 compared to 1988 then I'm arguing with you too. I just don't think you can definitively assume a later era is automatically better across all years because "globalization". It's about as hand wavy as you can get.

Honest question that no one has answered:

Is prime Giannis better than prime (11 years ago) LeBron because the league has improved (let's assume that this is a mathematical fact since basketball is becoming ever more popular in Europe and worldwide; which is exactly what's being argued in this thread). Is Jokic better than Shaq? Shaq's peak was two decades ago. Pretty close to Jordan. Is the NBA so much better now, and Jokic faces so much better competition, that he's almost certainly better?

Would Usain Bolt struggle in today's athletics environment? The population of track athletes has increased just the same as every other sport and training methods have improved in track, just the same as the NBA. Again, his prime was ~11 years ago. That's so long ago he must be behind the curve in 2020 right?

Or are there exceptions to this iron clad mathematical proof that 2020 has better competition and talent than all previous generations? If there are exceptions, how do you determine when a previous era isn't completely dominated by 2020? If not, why are there still records that are held from the 1980's?

interesting nuance of Jordan and Lebron with stars or scrubs.