Official LeBron to the Bulls thread

I'm not the one saying advanced stats tell all. You are. Let's see your list of greatest NBA careers.

 

Regular Season + Playoff: Individual dominance and durability.

According to everything I alluded to.

 

Either advanced stats tell all & you can outline how these stats can show which players had the greatest NBA careers.

Or Lebron had a hell of a 14 game stint in the 2008 playoffs and you are cherry-picking certain advanced stats to make the case you want to make.

Given how you can't even abide by Basketball-reference's definition of a player's age for a certain season, I'm leaning towards cherry picking.

 

It was a 95 game stint, better than Jordan ever had (Jordan had an equal number of win shares once, but in slightly more games). This is not cherry picking.

1963 + 25 = 1988.

2 months apart in age, more fair than 10 months apart if I were to use 1988-1989.


What results on that site trouble you, in regards to an all-time list?

Any issues, you're free to ask me I don't mind.

 

95? Lebron has played 71 games in the playoffs. I guess you are a Win Shares guy. Jordan has the higher PER (27.87 with your ages and 28.8 with basketball-reference for MJ verses 27.1 for Lebron).

So Win shares / Games played determines who is a better player?

Right, you *need* to give Lebron the advantage here. This also gives Lebron the advantage of comparing his 4th through 7th NBA season to Jordan's 1st through 4th. Guess what...this is fine...Jordan's peak was later (across many seasons)....In contrast early entrants like Bryant and Garnet peaked earlier.

Lebron's statistical peak may have been last year. But keep telling yourself it doesn't matter that he doesn't have any championships at at 24, 25, etc. Reeling off 6 championships in 8 years I'm sure won't be no problem. Wasting an opportunity when your team had the best regular season record and home court advantage throughout the whole playoffs is no biggie, right.

You are the only person that claims box score stats can definitely tell you who the better players is. But you won't say what stat or combination of stats is needed. That's hardly fair, eh?

 

Re: Hunter Wants To See LeBron In Chicago

Isn't this tampering?

 

BBR did an inner-circle hall of fame, that's pretty much what I think.

Win Shares are a great portion of it. Look at the all time seasons, their rankings are logical for their era.

If you played in the 70's you would have an advantage, due to lack of turnovers, etc. being tracked. And minutes played. Mostly we're talking about Jordan's era so it shouldn't matter.

Again I try not to "believe", "need", "speculate" when possible. I only know what has transpired so far. I don't know how he plays at age 29, but I doubt he falls far.

Why would I compare 26 year old LeBron, to 25 year old Jordan? It makes more sense the way I did it.

LeBron started peaking, BEFORE Jordan btw. That's also the amazing part about his career.

He can sleep all day in his house next year and still be ahead of Jordan's pace. Jordan took some important years off his career, right in the middle of a title run.

He'll have surpassed Jordan before 6 rings, it won't matter.

You should read John Hollinger then. He talks about it all the time.

I have alluded to it various times, Win Shares mostly.

AV is also a useful tool. 100% of your peak, 95% of your second best year, 90% of your third best year, etc. This eliminates garbage seasons like Jordan had with the Wizards, and appreciates players that perform at high levels. Either way LeBron dominates these barometers.

 

Here you go.

That's a great summary of what is important.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/blog/?p=4245

 

It's not amazing..it's the same thing we saw with the other HS to pro studs. Reach the peak earlier and decline earlier. Let's see when Lebron starts declining.

Not by PER in the playoffs. He is already behind.

Not by winning championships. He is even but MJ had a torrid pace starting in his late 20s. Being even is being behind.

Win Shares? Show me where Hollinger claims Win Shares is the end-all-be-all. He is Mr. PER.

Hell, show me where Hollinger discusses Win Shares at all.

 

LeBron started peaking a year earlier, which would also occur in a more talented individual as well.

Kobe peaked at 27... :X

He's got lower PER in the years Michael wasted in College. ;]

It says 37 playoff PER at his peak, with higher PER and win shares for that season. Again, a 95 game stint.

You corrected yourself thankfully, after this silly comment.

He is easily even, he would be even a year from now if he decides to play tennis.

Hollinger uses Statistical +/-, and many of the other APBRmetrics. And he is Mr. PER, but so is Bron don't worry.

 

How does it use it? As a tool, not the end all be all. Like all the other APBRmetric heads. Except you.

 

Hollinger doesn't like to use intangibles. ;]

We all use it pretty much the same.

He uses +/- to do Defensive teams for example, he has to. PER doesn't account for defense. He cross checks his stuff with Expected Wins Above Replacement, and similar calculated figures like that.

 

I tweeted this and instantly someone named "LebronChicago" followed us. Lol. If this really happens, I can see a playoff run. LeBron is Cleveland. He can do the same in Chicago.