Earlier this week, Trail Blazers star Damian Lillard weighed in on the debate between Michael Jordan and LeBron James, stating that even if someone is greater than Jordan, nobody will be able to admit it.
I don't think ppl will ever be able to admit someone is better than Jordan even if they are lol... https://t.co/DiLT7BLHd5— Damian Lillard (@Dame_Lillard) August 30, 2017
Lillard is tapping into something very profound here. Not only is Jordan the undisputed greatest player of all time, it's also pretty much undisputed that nobody will ever be better than him. Think of that. Nobody will ever be better than Jordan? Can we really say that with certainty?
Let me first say that I do believe Michael Jordan is the greatest player of all-time. He's 6-0 in the NBA Finals, #1 all-time in points per game (30.3), #4 all-time in steals per game (2.3), and was an All-Star in each and every season that he played in the NBA with the exception of the 1994-95 season in which he came back after the All-Star break.
With that as a disclaimer, let's get back to the question at hand: Is it really fair to automatically disqualify a player from the conversation of greatest of all-time before he finishes his career? Can't we at least wait until LeBron or anyone else's career is over before we compare them to Jordan or anyone else?
This certainly seems like a reasonable position to have. I mean, it's certainly not impossible for someone to be better than Jordan by virtue of the fact that we haven't yet seen it. Before Jordan came along, Magic Johnson was viewed as the greatest of all-time and before him there was Oscar Robertson, Bill Russell, etc. Every legend has been surpassed by someone and to say that can't happen to Jordan, on its face, is ludicrous.
I think that while Jordan is the greatest of all-time, it needs to be understood that LeBron on paper is the better player. He's bigger, stronger, more athletic, and can do more things on the floor. LeBron is a 6'8", 250 pound point guard, something that Jordan wasn't.
Now of course, you can flip this the other way and say that Jordan had a better scoring instinct, was more clutch, and was the guy who you'd rather have on your team with the game on the line. This is all true. But, if we are just talking about who has a better combination of size, speed, athleticism, and skill, LeBron takes the cake.
So, if LeBron is better in these seemingly crucial categories, why should we rule him out from the conversation for greatest ever? The answer is we shouldn't. LeBron still has more years left in him and if he wins a couple of more titles, he could make things interesting.
The problem is that Jordan's career was just so picture perfect. While it's not hard to fathom someone having more physical gifts and skills than him, it's hard to imagine someone replicating Jordan's 6-0 NBA Finals record and impact on the sports world.
In other words, I'm not sure there will ever be another person "Like Mike" and therein lies the hidden truth that Lillard is getting at. Michael Jordan is an athlete that comes around once. We need to stop looking for "the next Michael Jordan" because there's only one Michael Jordan. Nobody else will ever be him. Others may accomplish great things, but the odds of someone retiring with the same level of gravitas and respect as his Royal Airness are next to none.
If you want to really have a debate, it's whether or not Michael Jordan is the greatest athlete of all-time. He's the greatest basketball player of all-time and for the reasons listed above, it's hard to think of anyone duplicating his level of success on the hardwood. But, when it comes to comparing him to athletes across other sports, that's where it gets interesting. Is he as great as Joe Montana who went 4-0 in the Super Bowl while throwing 11 touchdown passes and 0 interceptions? Is he as great as Roger Federer who is still winning grand slams into his late 30s? Is he as great as Tiger Woods, who dominated golf as much as he dominated basketball?
There's other athletes that you could mention as well, but those are three examples that spring to mind. You could have a fun debate about who the greatest athlete of all-time is and argue a compelling case for any of the guys I just mentioned.
But as far as basketball is concerned, I just don't see anyone surpassing Michael Jordan for the greatest ever. That isn't to say we should rule out everyone that comes after him by default, but right now, I have a hard time believing anyone will retire with a resume of the same weight.
Now, Lillard is making a slightly different point, which is that even if someone is better than Jordan, nobody will want to admit it. While this is certainly true right now, that may not be true in the future. We know greatness when we see it and could tell that Jordan was the greatest when he was on the floor. If someone comes along who accomplishes more than him and dominates the game to the same degree, I don't think people will be afraid to say someone has passed Jordan.
The reality is that as of right now, Jordan is the greatest player of all-time and no player up until this point has passed him. Not Kobe, not Shaq, and not even LeBron. In a way, Lillard makes a point that can't be proven right now. If we haven't seen a player greater than Jordan can we really say we won't call a player greater than Jordan if he is in fact greater?
While I do think that it's highly unlikely anyone duplicates Michael Jordan's level of success, I do think that if someone were to do so, we would give that person his credit. If someone goes 7-0 in the NBA Finals, finishes #1 all-time in points per game, and wows us to the same degree as Jordan, that person will supplant him as the greatest of all-time. It's just that as of right now, that person doesn't exist and we don't know if that person will ever exist.
To connect with NBA Lord on Twitter, click here.
To connect with NBA Lord on Facebook, click here.
To connect with NBA Lord on Google Plus, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment