[NBA Express] Can LeBron James now be compared to Jordan?

Source: Sina Sports [April 1, 2013, 15:24] Ever since the Heat's winning streak was ended by the Bulls, the debate over the intensity of defense on LeBron James has never stopped. First, there was a war of words between Ainge and Riley, and even Hornets head coach Monty Williams took a veiled jab: 'He's just facing a bunch of boys; he cannot be compared to Jordan.' Let's take this topic further and talk about the matters between LeBron James and Michael Jordan. Why compare LeBron James to Michael Jordan? As a truly perfect idol in the NBA [Weibo], Jordan is a topic that is difficult to touch on. Comparing him to current players is particularly challenging and thankless. Opponents believe the gap in championships is still too wide, so the comparison is premature; supporters would say, 'Why compare with others? Just be the best version of yourself.' This is also LeBron's own attitude. Not long ago, he tweeted, 'I'm not MJ, I'm just LJ.' The term 'Guan Gong fights Qin Qiong' certainly has a satirical meaning, but in professional sports, comparison is inevitable. Pelé and Maradona had an age difference of over two decades, yet in the early 21st century, they still argued unpleasantly over the title of the best player. Now, as Messi becomes increasingly dominant, the debate over whether he or the old Maradona is stronger has emerged. The reason is simple: when a player reaches a certain level and dominates the world stage with few rivals, everyone wants to see him face legendary figures from the past, even if only hypothetically. It can be said that before last year, the voices comparing LeBron to Jordan were still few because the difference between 'no championship' and 'having a championship' was too significant. Before, the young king had a plethora of honors, but lacking only the ultimate certification of leading a team to a championship on his own—the word 'on his own' might be controversial, since he left his original team to join the Heat. But this matter is more about discussing values rather than on-court strength. From the first day of his transfer, LeBron has been the indisputable number one star of the Heat. At this point, Kobe [Weibo] fans might be unhappy: 'I haven't even started to compare Kobe to Jordan yet, so how can LeBron be compared?' Actually, there is a very dialectical issue here, which is that the discussion space between LeBron and Jordan is much larger than that between Kobe and Jordan.There is a saying in China: 'Oranges and apples cannot be compared.' This actually somewhat applies to LeBron James and Michael Jordan, because the two players have very different styles. The common evaluation is that 'James is more well-rounded, Jordan has more of a killer instinct.' Digging further often easily turns into an endless debate of 'each has their own strengths.'

But Jordan and Kobe Bryant are a different case. Their playing styles come from the same school. Jordan's talent and consistency are superior, which means that while Kobe might be stronger than others (even on par with James in discussion), comparing him to Jordan is to put himself at a disadvantage. If James' style were narrower and more focused on scoring, would he also fall short in front of Jordan? This is impossible to assume, but the fact that he has 'advantages beyond scoring' over Jordan is indisputable. At this point, we should just look at the results; there is no need to speculate on what would happen if Jordan focused on assists or James on scoring.

Why can James be compared to Jordan?

At least in terms of data, James can already hold a candle to Jordan. Some say you shouldn't evaluate a player by data alone, but in fact, in the NBA, no player has produced the stats that James and Jordan had during their respective eras. This is not just something that comes from having more opportunities—more shot attempts often mean a lower shooting percentage. Being able to maintain impressive averages while also being efficient is extremely rare (according to ESPN, only James can match Jordan in efficiency rating, and defensively, which stats can't fully reflect, he is also strong). While honors can still be won, the closeness of personal ability is the reason why the two are discussed together.

Even fans least supportive of James would admit that in terms of endurance, or in the sense of 'within 48 minutes,' he is already the undisputed top player in the league, with few historical rivals. James' playstyle can be criticized for being overly rational, which sometimes misaligns with his personal abilities, especially his physical advantages, leading to criticism (especially in clutch moments). But this is exactly a process defined by results—everyone is just doing what they think is best for the team. If carrying wins and losses on your shoulders defines a higher-tier superstar, then Russell Westbrook's evaluations would have long surpassed Steve Nash's.

The next question is: because they played in different eras, whose achievements were harder to attain, James' or Jordan's?Monty Williams' tone is similar to what Jordan said a few years ago (when Jordan claimed he could score 100 points in modern basketball), essentially meaning that defenses are more relaxed now, making it easier to put up good stats.

But is the reality really like this? We might have to question that. Take the 1986-87 season as an example (Jordan's highest-scoring season), the pace of the NBA back then was faster, with 100.8 possessions per game, far higher than today's 91.9 possessions. The result was that each team averaged 11.8 more points per game, took 6.9 more shots, and had 8.2 more free throws. Even when converted to possession-independent offensive efficiency, the modern NBA averages 105.8 points per 100 possessions, which is still lower than the 108.3 points at the end of the 1980s. The situation in the following years was similar, yet this period was later described by Jordan as the most difficult.

Some might say that a few years ago, the NBA reformed rules to encourage offense and enforced stricter calls on defensive plays. This view is somewhat one-sided: while the reforms that encouraged offense had a positive effect, they did not necessarily outweigh the legalization of zone defense (it is unnecessary to discuss here whether zone or man-to-man is harder to score against; having an additional defensive style is an extra challenge for the offense). More importantly, the context for the league's rule changes was that in the early 21st century, defense dominated, and low-scoring games were common. In the 2003-04 season, the average points per game were as low as 93.4, and only strong offensive teams could average over 100 points per game.

In other words, the NBA encouraged offense not because defense in the 1980s and 90s was too fierce, but because some teams in the early 21st century had taken defense to an extreme, affecting the watchability of games, which led to a rules reversal. The defensive efficiency of the Pistons and Spurs at that time was even beyond what such so-called strong defensive teams of previous years (like the Pistons, Knicks, and the Bulls themselves) could imagine.

Just watching game footage, especially early Jordan videos, you can see some unconventional defensive moves. Whether this was harsher than the Bulls guarding LeBron is another matter, but consider what Jordan himself said in interviews: 'I realized my physical ability wasn't enough against the Pistons, so I trained hard over the summer to achieve later success.' Yet this scenario has now turned into a different story: Jordan couldn't beat those overly defensive teams with just talent and only overcame them with the triangle offense and teamwork. The story is captivating but somewhat romanticized, and it also seems to undervalue the personal refinement and effort of the players.Today, ESPN also published an article discussing this issue. The article suggests that defensive play in that era wasn't as disciplined as it is now, so players could only compensate through the scale of their movements, which ultimately didn't reflect in the results. This is why comparative data provides a more objective and fair assessment. Nowadays, the NBA sees more three-point shooting, not only because it's necessary to adapt and play a more multidimensional offense, but also because getting into the paint has become increasingly difficult. The number of traditional centers has decreased, partly because defense can't keep up with the pace of modern basketball.

Conclusion:
Recently, some American media wrote in support of LeBron James, claiming that his biggest disadvantage compared to Jordan or Kobe is that he is only 28 years old, with only half of his career behind him. Especially in Jordan's case, at 28 he had only won one championship, and the criticism he faced prior was even greater than what James has experienced. Moreover, retired players' images are more complete and their most glorious moments are easier to remember. This evaluation applies not only to him, but also to many players who debuted in the same era. Looking back now, every player from the Dream Team seems almost perfect, unlike today's players where it seems 'everyone has flaws'; unequal media coverage tends to exaggerate these differences.

In a sense, Jordan is indeed insurmountable. He was at the forefront of the information age and served as an enlightening figure for NBA fans worldwide. Even if LeBron someday matches Jordan in championship numbers, he likely won't achieve the same level of influence that transcends the sport itself.

But speaking strictly in terms of basketball, LeBron's honors may fall short, and the competitive gap can only be measured in tiny margins; there's no need to continue building him into a demigod. Jordan was the best player of the 1990s and could possibly still be the best today; however, that doesn't mean the 1990s was definitively the best NBA era. Jordan's opponents and the defensive environment also happened to be extraordinary. Monty Williams said that the NBA back then 'was all men'; we might interpret this to mean that today there are more talented players, with many making a name for themselves in their early twenties, which is precisely what makes American basketball so formidable. Nostalgia should be moderate; constantly using it to belittle the present is simply living in the past.