Who will be acknowledged as the best basketball player ever in about 20 years? I really think that LeBron James will be. IMO, I think he'll have the longer career compared to MJ, mostly better career individual numbers, and will be the bigger icon. LBJ has a really good chance this year to make a dynasty in Cleveland, or elsewhere. He could definitely rack up some championships. If he never wins or only has 1-2 rings, I think him and MJ will become the greatest debate in sports history forever. If he can get himself a few rings along with the numbers, I think people will call him the greatest of all time.

No disrespect to Kobe, he's awesome. But he's accomplished so much, but nobody honestly compares him to MJ yet. They'll mention names... but he's not in his neighborhood yet. Kobe still has a chance to get 1-3 rings, something like that. If he can, that would be good arguement, but I don't think there is anything Kobe can do.

it was Jordan, is Jordan and always will be Jordan.

Detlef Schrempf, clearly.

Reasoning behind that? Definitely not starting an argument, it was just pretty bland. For a reason though, you probably think it's that plain and simple.

^That goes for both names mentioned.

jpake1 wrote:

No disrespect to Kobe, he's awesome. But he's accomplished so much, but nobody honestly compares him to MJ yet. They'll mention names... but he's not in his neighborhood yet. Kobe still has a chance to get 1-3 rings, something like that. If he can, that would be good arguement, but I don't think there is anything Kobe can do.

Unless I'm misunderstanding your true meaning, there is certainly been discussion in the media already being compared to MJ.

But, I digress. I don't even have those 2. I'd be more apt to include Oscar Robertson and Magic Johnson.

As long as he wins at least 2 rings and continues to put up the numbers, he'll go down as the greatest imo.

He'll win his 2nd MVP this season and possibly his 1st Title at age 25.

No one currently puts up the numbers that he does and the scary thing is he is only getting better as he develops.

People who say it must/will always be MJ annoy me. Why can't there ever be anyone better? What if LeBron wins a handful of rings and has numbers similar to Jordan? They're not even willing to hear the debate because "it will always be Michael Jordan". Boo.

And even if it's not LBJ...what if some other freak athlete comes along in 10 or 15 years and is better. Why would that be so bad? I'd love to see it.

JakeGiant wrote:

jpake1 wrote:

No disrespect to Kobe, he's awesome. But he's accomplished so much, but nobody honestly compares him to MJ yet. They'll mention names... but he's not in his neighborhood yet. Kobe still has a chance to get 1-3 rings, something like that. If he can, that would be good arguement, but I don't think there is anything Kobe can do.

Unless I'm misunderstanding your true meaning, there is certainly been discussion in the media already being compared to MJ.

But, I digress. I don't even have those 2. I'd be more apt to include Oscar Robertson and Magic Johnson.

Like I said, they put them in the same sentence by mentioning names, but nobody really compares them because he's not on MJ's block. For awhile, people where talking about Kobe and MJ in the same sentence, it just happens to be they were saying a young Kobe would be the NEXT MJ. That is as far as it has ever gone. Nobody really sits down and asks, who's better... MJ or Kobe. When LBJ turns 31, you'll be hearing it for sure.

Fab4Runner wrote: People who say it must/will always be MJ annoy me. Why can't there ever be anyone better? What if LeBron wins a handful of rings and has numbers similar to Jordan? They're not even willing to hear the debate because "it will always be Michael Jordan". Boo.

And even if it's not LBJ...what if some other freak athlete comes along in 10 or 15 years and is better. Why would that be so bad? I'd love to see it.

It's the nostalgic effect. As people get older, they want the "younger" generations to think that their generation was the best, so they will say "Oh you never saw MJ play, he was easily the best".

Lebron is already the best player to ever play basketball, yeah I know he hasn't won any rings, but if you're looking at pure basketball talent talent, he makes MJ look like Eric Snow, and you can take that to the bank.

Big Red Monster wrote: it was Jordan, is Jordan and always will be Jordan.

Everyone just STOP having THIS argument.

It's not who will be the next MJ, it's who will be the best player ever. Jordan will always be Jordan but it doesn't mean he couldn't be #2. He won't be #1 forever, regardless of if it's LBJ that passes him or not.

But I've thought that we're watching the best ever in LBJ for awhile now, but I know that jpake never used to have this line of thinking. Says a lot to me if you're starting a thread on this man, but I can see why. Every knock you ever used to have on him has almost become one of his strengths in the last few years.

Fab4Runner wrote: People who say it must/will always be MJ annoy me. Why can't there ever be anyone better? What if LeBron wins a handful of rings and has numbers similar to Jordan? They're not even willing to hear the debate because "it will always be Michael Jordan". Boo.

because MJ pretty much made the game what is it today. and images like these will be with basketball forever:

Okay...but that doesn't mean no one can/will be better than him. If LeBron (or anyone else) wins more rings and has better stats they will be better.

That's probably the lamest argument yet, pictures? Really? He has pictures and a statue?

A dunk contest picture at that...lol, not even the most famous image of Jordan. But yeah, dunk contest images cement his spot at #1...

I think Lebron will go down as the greatest ever (in my opinion, regardless of how many championships he wins). But to silence the doubters, he needs to win 7 rings. My roommate is the biggest Jordan worshiper, and he always points to the six rings.

Everyone points to the rings and always thinks that is all that matters but it's really just the last resort argument.

i dont see Lebron passing jordan

Michael Jordan.

And, for those who've take this position above, why does LeBron just need a COUPLE rings to overtake Jordan?

He doesn't.

But he's going to get them anyways.

SQ_Crazies wrote: Everyone points to the rings and always thinks that is all that matters but it's really just the last resort argument.

or its because the biggest thing you can have in the nba and lebron has zero

2quik4u wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: Everyone points to the rings and always thinks that is all that matters but it's really just the last resort argument.

or its because the biggest thing you can have in the nba and lebron has zero

Read up on variables.

There are too many of them to compare individuals who play in a team game to use that as the argument for Player A vs. Player B.

SQ_Crazies wrote:

2quik4u wrote:

SQ_Crazies wrote: Everyone points to the rings and always thinks that is all that matters but it's really just the last resort argument.

or its because the biggest thing you can have in the nba and lebron has zero

Read up on variables.

There are too many of them to compare individuals who play in a team game to use that as the argument for Player A vs. Player B.

couldnt the same be said for assists since you rely on someone else to make a shot?

Quint wrote: I think Lebron will go down as the greatest ever (in my opinion, regardless of how many championships he wins). But to silence the doubters, he needs to win 7 rings. My roommate is the biggest Jordan worshiper, and he always points to the six rings.

Point to Robert Horry, 7 rings = GOAT

sleeper wrote: That's probably the lamest argument yet, pictures? Really? He has pictures and a statue?

SQ_Crazies wrote: A dunk contest picture at that...lol, not even the most famous image of Jordan. But yeah, dunk contest images cement his spot at #1...

considering the NBA is all about image and superstar players, these pictures and images are relevant.

SQ_Crazies wrote: Everyone points to the rings and always thinks that is all that matters but it's really just the last resort argument.

its a team sport, its not a last resort argument. find me one player in the world who says "i dont play this sport to win a championship, i play to be known as the best player ever." you wont, and you can take that to the bank.