If you’re reading the sports page, you’re probably well aware by now that Sunday was Michael Jordan’s 50th birthday. SportsCenter jammed MJ highlights, statistics and anecdotes down our throats for seven days straight—it was one of the few instances in which the show was entirely justified to flood its programming with a single topic. Although it’s easy to overdose on Tim Tebow or the Los Angeles Lakers’ latest struggles, you can never get enough MJ (by the way, do yourself a favor and read Wright Thompson’s excellent MJ profile on ESPN.com if you haven’t done so already).
Part of SportsCenter’s MJ week circled around a debate that I’m sure most basketball fans have at least overheard sometime in the last few years: Who would win in a game of one-on-one with both guys in their prime, MJ or LeBron James?
It was logical to pit MJ against LeBron: MJ is almost unanimously accepted as the greatest basketball player of all time, while LeBron has won three NBA MVP awards in the last four seasons, capturing his first career championship last season in the process.
It was a timely discussion, too, as LeBron had just capped off an unprecedented six-game stretch in which he scored at least 30 points and shot at least 60 percent from the floor.
Along with the MJ-LeBron debate came the implication whomever won the matchup would be deemed the better basketball player. Although it’s fun to hypothetically think about MJ and LeBron going one-on-one in their prime, it isn’t a logical measuring stick to determine who’s the better basketball player.
There is so much more to the game than simply beating a defender to the rim, knocking down a contested jump-shot, or preventing someone from doing either of those things. Off-the-ball movement, help defense and court vision—I refuse to use “basketball I.Q.” here—are just a few elements you’ll find in the best basketball players. Those, along with leadership skills, a winner’s mentality, and a whole slew of intangibles I’m probably unaware of. Regardless, my point is that most of them won’t be on display in a one-on-one game.
I’m not saying individual offensive and defensive skills aren’t imperative in hoops. I’m not saying the MJ-LeBron question it isn’t a great discussion. After all, aren’t the truly great debates ones that can seemingly be argued back and forth until the end of time?
Better pizza: thin crust or deep dish? Which is a more versatile add-on, bacon or avocado? Is an animal cracker a cookie or a cracker? I’m sure there are others that don’t deal with food, too.
Anyway, I think sports media’s obsession with determining the all-time greats, no matter the sport, can sometimes go overboard. There’s no way to objectively compare players from different eras, as the game will inevitably have changed immensely over the years. Here’s a thought: Maybe we aren’t even supposed to know who was better! As far as the MJ-LeBron debate goes, analysts will tout LeBron’s superior physique, even though that could also mean MJ was “tougher.” MJ’s six NBA titles tower over LeBron’s one, but LeBron didn’t play with Scottie Pippen in his prime.
My stance in the MJ-LeBron debate is that the two played in entirely different eras. However, I think both probably would have equal or similar success playing in the other’s era. Isn’t that a pretty good indicator that they’re two of the all-time greats? I don’t see anything wrong with leaving it at that.
Who do you think would win in a game of one-on-one, MJ or LeBron? Is an animal cracker a cookie or a cracker? Let Vince know your thoughts by sending him an email at sports@dailycardinal.com.
