6 hours ago
I think in the GOAT debate, both sides developed an unfair tendency to belittle the help of their favorite while upping the competition's help. For example, I remember us being scared to death by the Lakers with Gasol, Odom and later Bynum back in the day, while Kobe guys like SkapAttack on YouTube talk about how Kobe had no help because they never made any All-NBA teams or whatever. It is all just a matter of framing. I don't think it takes away from Michael to admit that Pippen was his perfect number two and one of the best ever, and also recognizing the excellence of his role players. In Bron's case, the super team stuff hurts him more, but it is also true that he beat the Warriors and wasted his years in Cleveland with zero help.
Let's just be fair and realistic. Both are rightfully in the GOAT debate, but for me, peak beats longevity every time - so it's Jordan by a landslide. Longevity just breaks down at some point. Sure, one could play until he was 70, and it would be impressive that he would smack around 50-year-olds, but at some point it's just not "great" anymore, so what's the point? But I can see the other side of the argument - it's an "intuition" thing which one you rank higher, and there's no right or wrong answer. There's just right and wrong arguments.
Let's just be fair and realistic. Both are rightfully in the GOAT debate, but for me, peak beats longevity every time - so it's Jordan by a landslide. Longevity just breaks down at some point. Sure, one could play until he was 70, and it would be impressive that he would smack around 50-year-olds, but at some point it's just not "great" anymore, so what's the point? But I can see the other side of the argument - it's an "intuition" thing which one you rank higher, and there's no right or wrong answer. There's just right and wrong arguments.