I've seen the argument made that overall the teams from jordan's era were more competitive and he had to go up against tougher opponents than lebron's team have had to face, which is hard to argue against. As I stated before, this year, the cavs' hardest competition was a shit-tier celtics squad who relied on a 5'4 midget to be their primary option on offense.
That's true - the Cavs road to the finals this year was relatively easier indeed. However, that hasn't always been the case. In 2011, James had to go through a 62 win Chicago Bulls team - which featured the league MVP at the time in Derrick Rose - and a healthy 56 win Boston Celtics team, who - lets be honest - would have likely won the chip' that year had they made it past Miami (although that meltdown vs. the Mavericks was just hard to watch). In 2012, Lebron had to go through that very same Boston Celtics squad and a young but fierce Indiana Pacers team whom had won 42 games (recall: this was the lockout season), all without the 3rd best player on his team (Bosh). The emergence of Paul George took place over the next few seasons and the Pacers became a real threat, but Lebron and Co. were still able to take care of business.
James has had his fair share of tough opponents in the eastern conference. And when we look at these past 2-3 years, his finals competition has been some of the toughest in NBA history.
Any time lebron-led teams had to face competition where talent was evenly matched, he's floundered badly. The only way he's been able to win is when his teams have a huge disparity of talent. That's hardly the mark of someone who is allegedly #2 and "closing in on" #1 in the panels of all time greats.
Really? The man has been an underdog 6 out of 8 times in the finals. His team was an underdog in 2012, yet they still won. They were underdogs in 2015, yet, even without Kyrie and Love, Lebron had his team up 2-1 and on the verge of a championship against a heavy favorite. Last seaon, he wasn't supposed to win against the so-called "greatest team in NBA history", but we all know what happened. In 2013, that Spurs team was more than evenly matched with Miami. How about in 2007 against the powerhouse Pistons? Lebron wasn't supposed to win that series.
He has beaten a boat load of teams that had 'more talent'.
The reason there is a disparity in terms of size is I think due in large part to something vd alluded to earlier: players in this era are relying more on size/athleticism than they are on talent/skills (e.g. dwight howard: a physical specimen with very low b-ball iq, and completely inept at shooting, or post moves, but considered a top player for many years).
Yes that is definitely true. Players rely more on athleticism than they do skill nowadays. But that's the game today. It's an 'athletes' sport. That doesn't however, mean that the individuals of today's era are far less skilled. They are 'less skilled' in areas which a) do not effectively complement their athletic abilities, and b) which don't trend along with how the game is now played. Some examples include, post-ups, half-court execution, etc.
Despite an advantage in terms of "average size", I very much doubt that they'd be able to handle the physicality of yesteryear's players because they simply are not accustomed to having to deal with guys bodying them, hand-checking them, getting fouled hard and just having it be a common foul instead of a tech or flagrant.
Fair enough. It would definitely take getting used to.
I believe the players of today's generation are a bit tougher than they make themselves out to be. We would see less flopping and less 'acting' if the league would completely omit and penalize those aspects of the sport, but the players know they can get away with it and maybe even earn a few calls in their favor by performing those acts. I personally hate it, and just like many of you have said, the league has gone soft, perhaps too soft for it's own good.
Like I previously mentioned, I personally believe the 2000s was the epitome of ball. That era had basically the best of all worlds - physicality without punishment, inside post-play, outside post-play, outside shooting, mid-range game, half-court execution, run-and-gun, little flopping, little tanking, great defense and offense, etc. It was just truly entertaining and fascinating to witness.
I never buy into the Lebron vs. Jordan debates. I believe they are simply a waste of time (although I certainly acknowledge that currently Jordan is the undisputed GOAT). MJ and LJ are 2 different individuals and they played in 2 different eras. Look at Magic, Jordan, Bird - these guys have their own legend, and one day Lebron will have his own too. I acknowledge the greatness of James in an unbiased way - I think that's why a lot of people lose their shit here from time to time, because supposedly there's an unwritten law that states "you can't appreciate the greatness of both Jordan and Lebron!".