[h=1]MJ or LeBron? NBA execs choose[/h][h=3]An informal poll shows an overwhelming loyalty to His Airness[/h]By Chris Broussard | ESPN Insider
One of the common themes coming from LeBron James lately has been his desire to be the greatest player in NBA history. He doesn't name names and talk about whom he needs to surpass to become the greatest of all time, but we all know who the current GOAT is. So in his quest to be the best, James must eclipse his boyhood idol, Michael Jordan.
Last season, I spoke with two executives who told me they believed James is a better player than Jordan was. They wouldn't say it on the record, but privately, that's how they felt. One of them put it this way: "If you take winning out of the equation, LeBron James is the best player ever.'
At first, that quote might sound ridiculous because the point of any game is to win. But actually, it's a reasonable statement. Basically, the executive was taking teammates and opponents into account, and examining the player outside of any specific environment. Because of the way MJ's rings often tip the scales in any debate, in some ways this kind of thinking goes deeper than most observers care to. It's a fact: There is a strong tendency to equate titles with individual greatness.
The executives' opinions -- not to mention Scottie Pippen's infamous comment (at least before backtracking) about James being superior to Jordan -- made me curious to see how many other basketball brains would take LeBron over Michael. So I polled dozens of the league's coaches, executives and scouts and asked them this question:
"Is LeBron James better than Michael Jordan was? Not potentially, but right now?''
It wasn't close.
<OFFER></OFFER>
For the time being at least, Jordan is still the greatest. And many of those polled didn't think there was anything James could do over the remainder of his career to change that. Of the 42 respondents, 36 said Jordan was better. Only six chose James. Seven said James, who should play another 8-10 seasons, has a chance to take Jordan's crown as the greatest player of all time.
So what were some of the deciding factors for these NBA executives and coaches?
• Some coaches and executives focused on Jordan's perceived competitive edge over James.
Western Conference coach: "Tough question, but I would go with Jordan. I believe LeBron is a better all-around player, but Jordan has the intangibles. He was an assassin as well as a leader. LeBron pales in comparison in those areas.''
Eastern Conference coach: "Jordan was and will forever be the most feared competitor I've ever seen. I believe Jordan was better at the 10-year mark than LeBron is now. LeBron is just a hair behind, though.''
Eastern Conference executive: "Simply put, no. Jordan had more killer in him.''
Eastern Conference executive: "MJ was the very best. He was a ruthless assassin that took no prisoners and left no doubt. He met competition head-on and would have never left Chicago. Remember, the Bulls were not good when he first arrived and he never decided to take his talents elsewhere. He hated [Bulls GM] Jerry Krause but stayed anyway.''
Western Conference coach: "MJ was a killer. I do not see that in LeBron. Kobe in his prime was the closest to MJ. MJ had the killer instinct as well as the talent.''
Western Conference executive: "No. They're different types of players. MJ was the ultimate warrior and competitor. LeBron is a better rebounder and passer. But the edge goes to MJ all day.''
• One Eastern Conference executive wondered why Kobe Bryant was not part of the discussion.
Eastern Conference executive: "Why is it that Kobe is so easily pushed aside and the question is always Jordan vs. James? To me, Kobe's game is more like MJ's than LeBron's, both physically and mentally. LeBron is a scoring, more athletic version of Magic. LeBron's size allows him to be more versatile than either Kobe or Mike. But I would give Kobe and Mike the edge over LeBron at this juncture because of their extreme mental toughness. But I do like what I am beginning to see in LeBron, and he can overtake both Mike and Kobe in a few years. MJ gets the slight edge over Kobe because he was a little more athletic and had bigger hands. Kobe's pure guard skills were actually better than MJ's in my opinion. But MJ's elite athleticism is the deciding factor for me.''
• Several focused on the differences in the game when Jordan played compared to the game in which James plays today.
Eastern Conference coach: "I think LeBron is a better all-around player. MJ was a killer. LeBron is not there yet. MJ was one of the best scorers and closers to ever play. They play a different brand of ball and their eras play a different brand of ball. But at the end of the day, LeBron is not better than MJ.''
Western Conference coach: "Jordan was better. He played against better players and older, more experienced players. That's not to take away from LeBron's greatness. I think LeBron is far and away better than the rest of the league -- and there's a huge gap. In the '80s and '90s you could hand check. And handchecking changes everything. Plus, imagine MJ playing against Europeans and 18-to-20-year-olds. He might have averaged 40 points.''
Western Conference executive: "Apples and oranges. But I'd have to go with MJ because he dominated for so long. LeBron is more skilled and can do more. But MJ could flat-out score. Can we revote in five years?''
Eastern Conference coach: "Absolutely not. No one is or ever will be better than MJ. Not even Kobe. The rules of the era MJ played in alone put him in a class by himself, along with the overall competition in the league at that time. These guys today are skilled but no one's getting hit anymore. Mike would average 50 PPG with these rules. He was the most athletic, the most skilled, the hardest worker and the most fearless. All that equals the GOAT.''
Western Conference coach: "Jordan played in an era when it was physical and you could foul hard. Not this new stuff where you can't hand check and there's no hard fouls. MJ was the NBA.''
Eastern Conference coach: "No way. Whoever says LeBron is crazy. MJ would average 40 in today's game.''
Eastern Conference executive: "Nope. MJ was special. People really forget how great of a player he was.''
• Others drew a distinct line in the sand when it came to James' physical gifts.
Western Conference executive: "LeBron has a chance to be better than Jordan because of his physical gifts. I always advise people to see [LeBron] in person to believe his size, strength and overall athleticism. He must win at least five championships to make a strong argument for his legacy, but he definitely has a chance.''
Eastern Conference executive: "The conversation is like picking your favorite child. But if you force me, I'll go with Akron.''
Western Conference coach: "LeBron is better because he's a more complete player.''
• For one executive, Jordan's number of championships simply outweighed everything else. Unfair? Perhaps. But the six trophies continue to serve as the standard. If that is the case, though, James still has a chance to equal, if not eclipse Jordan. These opinions reflect that idea.
Western Conference executive: "I still think Jordan was better, but that might change if LeBron wins another couple of championships.''
Eastern Conference coach: "He's not better than Jordan right now, but potentially, he could be. I believe LeBron will end up as the best ever."
One of the common themes coming from LeBron James lately has been his desire to be the greatest player in NBA history. He doesn't name names and talk about whom he needs to surpass to become the greatest of all time, but we all know who the current GOAT is. So in his quest to be the best, James must eclipse his boyhood idol, Michael Jordan.
Last season, I spoke with two executives who told me they believed James is a better player than Jordan was. They wouldn't say it on the record, but privately, that's how they felt. One of them put it this way: "If you take winning out of the equation, LeBron James is the best player ever.'
At first, that quote might sound ridiculous because the point of any game is to win. But actually, it's a reasonable statement. Basically, the executive was taking teammates and opponents into account, and examining the player outside of any specific environment. Because of the way MJ's rings often tip the scales in any debate, in some ways this kind of thinking goes deeper than most observers care to. It's a fact: There is a strong tendency to equate titles with individual greatness.
The executives' opinions -- not to mention Scottie Pippen's infamous comment (at least before backtracking) about James being superior to Jordan -- made me curious to see how many other basketball brains would take LeBron over Michael. So I polled dozens of the league's coaches, executives and scouts and asked them this question:
"Is LeBron James better than Michael Jordan was? Not potentially, but right now?''
It wasn't close.
<OFFER></OFFER>
For the time being at least, Jordan is still the greatest. And many of those polled didn't think there was anything James could do over the remainder of his career to change that. Of the 42 respondents, 36 said Jordan was better. Only six chose James. Seven said James, who should play another 8-10 seasons, has a chance to take Jordan's crown as the greatest player of all time.
So what were some of the deciding factors for these NBA executives and coaches?
• Some coaches and executives focused on Jordan's perceived competitive edge over James.
Western Conference coach: "Tough question, but I would go with Jordan. I believe LeBron is a better all-around player, but Jordan has the intangibles. He was an assassin as well as a leader. LeBron pales in comparison in those areas.''
Eastern Conference coach: "Jordan was and will forever be the most feared competitor I've ever seen. I believe Jordan was better at the 10-year mark than LeBron is now. LeBron is just a hair behind, though.''
Eastern Conference executive: "Simply put, no. Jordan had more killer in him.''
Eastern Conference executive: "MJ was the very best. He was a ruthless assassin that took no prisoners and left no doubt. He met competition head-on and would have never left Chicago. Remember, the Bulls were not good when he first arrived and he never decided to take his talents elsewhere. He hated [Bulls GM] Jerry Krause but stayed anyway.''
Western Conference coach: "MJ was a killer. I do not see that in LeBron. Kobe in his prime was the closest to MJ. MJ had the killer instinct as well as the talent.''
Western Conference executive: "No. They're different types of players. MJ was the ultimate warrior and competitor. LeBron is a better rebounder and passer. But the edge goes to MJ all day.''
• One Eastern Conference executive wondered why Kobe Bryant was not part of the discussion.
Eastern Conference executive: "Why is it that Kobe is so easily pushed aside and the question is always Jordan vs. James? To me, Kobe's game is more like MJ's than LeBron's, both physically and mentally. LeBron is a scoring, more athletic version of Magic. LeBron's size allows him to be more versatile than either Kobe or Mike. But I would give Kobe and Mike the edge over LeBron at this juncture because of their extreme mental toughness. But I do like what I am beginning to see in LeBron, and he can overtake both Mike and Kobe in a few years. MJ gets the slight edge over Kobe because he was a little more athletic and had bigger hands. Kobe's pure guard skills were actually better than MJ's in my opinion. But MJ's elite athleticism is the deciding factor for me.''
• Several focused on the differences in the game when Jordan played compared to the game in which James plays today.
Eastern Conference coach: "I think LeBron is a better all-around player. MJ was a killer. LeBron is not there yet. MJ was one of the best scorers and closers to ever play. They play a different brand of ball and their eras play a different brand of ball. But at the end of the day, LeBron is not better than MJ.''
Western Conference coach: "Jordan was better. He played against better players and older, more experienced players. That's not to take away from LeBron's greatness. I think LeBron is far and away better than the rest of the league -- and there's a huge gap. In the '80s and '90s you could hand check. And handchecking changes everything. Plus, imagine MJ playing against Europeans and 18-to-20-year-olds. He might have averaged 40 points.''
Western Conference executive: "Apples and oranges. But I'd have to go with MJ because he dominated for so long. LeBron is more skilled and can do more. But MJ could flat-out score. Can we revote in five years?''
Eastern Conference coach: "Absolutely not. No one is or ever will be better than MJ. Not even Kobe. The rules of the era MJ played in alone put him in a class by himself, along with the overall competition in the league at that time. These guys today are skilled but no one's getting hit anymore. Mike would average 50 PPG with these rules. He was the most athletic, the most skilled, the hardest worker and the most fearless. All that equals the GOAT.''
Western Conference coach: "Jordan played in an era when it was physical and you could foul hard. Not this new stuff where you can't hand check and there's no hard fouls. MJ was the NBA.''
Eastern Conference coach: "No way. Whoever says LeBron is crazy. MJ would average 40 in today's game.''
Eastern Conference executive: "Nope. MJ was special. People really forget how great of a player he was.''
• Others drew a distinct line in the sand when it came to James' physical gifts.
Western Conference executive: "LeBron has a chance to be better than Jordan because of his physical gifts. I always advise people to see [LeBron] in person to believe his size, strength and overall athleticism. He must win at least five championships to make a strong argument for his legacy, but he definitely has a chance.''
Eastern Conference executive: "The conversation is like picking your favorite child. But if you force me, I'll go with Akron.''
Western Conference coach: "LeBron is better because he's a more complete player.''
• For one executive, Jordan's number of championships simply outweighed everything else. Unfair? Perhaps. But the six trophies continue to serve as the standard. If that is the case, though, James still has a chance to equal, if not eclipse Jordan. These opinions reflect that idea.
Western Conference executive: "I still think Jordan was better, but that might change if LeBron wins another couple of championships.''
Eastern Conference coach: "He's not better than Jordan right now, but potentially, he could be. I believe LeBron will end up as the best ever."
