Appreciate the response here.
I may have understated the amount of man-zone hybrid defense that is played, but I still stand by my overall point that the lack of handchecking would benefit MJ far more than the new defensive rules would hurt him. There may be tradeoffs in both directions, but I think it would certainly be a net positive for Jordan based on his skills. The man had a deadly midrange jumper, and I have no reason to doubt that he would have extended his range based on the prevalence of 3 point shooting in today's game given how pure his stroke was and how hard he worked to improve it from the time he entered the league.
I still have a hard time reconciling the notion of these more sophisticated defenses with the clearly stated goals of the NBA to make the game more free flowing and offensive. Now scoring may be incrementally down, but I could point to a variety of factors including the one and done system that has plagued the league, the rise of AAU ball that has robbed players of fundamentals, and the dilution of talent via the expansion of the league. The reliance on the three ball could very well result in a lack of overall scoring, as teams not named the Ws or Rockets are foregoing more high percentage shots with far less talented shooters in an effort to run and gun.
As for Jet Terry, I would certainly define any sixth man as a role player. And Jet has never been called a star player by anyone. For him to call out a player of LBJ's stature on the biggest stage is just unheard of really, and I am certain that you would agree nobody would have dared to do that with Jordan. To call him out would have been bad enough, but can you imagine a bench player calling MJ out in the Finals and then actually delivering on it while running off 4 straight all the while as a heavy, heavy underdog? There's simply no excuse for the way LBJ wilted in those Finals. You can't just sweep that performance under the rug when trying to compare someone to Michael Jordan.
Jordan's performances on the grandest stages are an integral part of his position as GOAT.
I'm sure that it's only a matter of time before the negative comments about how this is not USC related and the length of our posts start, but I do enjoy a good civil debate with anyone that is knowledgeable. I'm glad that you pointed out how nonsensical it was earlier in this thread when someone made the claim that MJ couldn't play the point considering how effective he was under Collins playing the position. It would have been interesting to see what kind of numbers he would have had if he continued to play PG long term.
Also, I should point out that I don't disagree with the idea of MJ being the GOAT, but I do firmly believe that Lebron is only slightly behind him as the 2nd best to ever play. I think that the ESPN article that was linked to in an earlier post puts it best that Jordan was the greatest at his peak, but Lebron is on pace to have the more impressive overall career. He's close already, and will almost certainly surpass him if he plays another several years. It's certainly valid to point out that Jordan lost over 1.5 years of his prime when he left to play baseball, but the debate should be primarily centered on facts instead of hypotheticals whenever possible.
The one exception where hypotheticals have to be included is the debate about how rule changes would have affected Jordan. While there's no way to objectively determine just how this would have affected him, I'm willing to concede that MJ very well may have benefited positively from the net effect of the hand check rule enforcement combined with the legalization of zone defense. However, if all of the changes would have in fact been a net positive, I don't think that the net positive would have been much more than a couple points per game at most. There's definitely no way that Jordan would have averaged 50 ppg like Pippen suggested a few years back.
Based on the actual data that is available, the total team point per game has been anywhere from 5-10 points per game less for the majority of Lebron's career compared to the era that Jordan played in. Even though we can't objectively quantify the overall effect that the rule changes would have had on Jordan personally, there's clear evidence that all of the rule changes taken together has led to a massive decrease in overall scoring of 5-10 percent (depending on specific year). This leads me to conclude that the effect of the change in the hand check rule is typically tremendously overstated while the often overlooked effects of zone defense has been much more significant.
One last brief point about the hand check rule change; Lebron (8.1) and MJ (8.2) have both attempted almost the exact same number of FT's per game for their careers so the data doesn't show an effect in terms of increased foul shots. It's important to note that these numbers are undoubtedly affected bt the way that players have adjusted the way that they play defense with the rule changes, but I did want to at least provide the numbers.
Also, it is true that the league has been shifting more toward a free-flowing offensive centered league as the shift toward a more European style game continues. However, this shift has occurred after a few years where defenses were starting to become much more dominant immediately following the rule change that allowed zone defense to be played. The prevalence of one and done players could possibly have some effect, but the elimination of players straight out of high school would take away from this effect.
I do find it interesting that you would mention league expansion as a potential reason for the decreased scoring in the league considering that the only expansion team in the post Jordan era has been the Bobcats (now named Hornets with the name change in New Orleans). The only other expansion team that were founded after Jordan won his first championship were the Grizzlies and Raptors back in the mid-90's. The overall effect of this limited amount of recent expansion coupled with the enormous increase in international players over the past 10-15 years has been an increase in the overall talent pool as opposed to a dilution of talent.
Conversely, the massive expansion of NBA teams that occurred while Jordan was playing occurred in the late 1980's just prior to the Bulls run of championships. I'm not sure exactly how many expansion teams were created in the late 80's, but I know the list includes at least the original Charlotte Hornets, Orlando Magic, Miami Heat and Minnesota Timberwolves. Add in the Grizzlies and Raptors in the middle of Jordan's two three-peats and it appears that league expansion would have been much more beneficial to MJ that Lebron (I realize that your main point was how expansion affected scoring, but I wanted to at least mention how if could directly relate to the MJ vs Lebron debate).
In regards to the effect of the increased prevalence of three point shooting and how it has affected scoring totals, there's concrete evidence to support the notion that the increase in 3 pointers has resulted in an increase in scoring. To illustrate this point just look at the data. The overall FG percentage of all 2 point shots is typically between 48-50 percent overall (depending on the specific year). The total FG percentage for 3 pointers is typically 35-37 percent in recent years. As long as the league percentage for 3 pointers is greater than 2/3's of the league percentage for 2 pointers, scoring will increase with more 3 pointers. I understand this is an oversimplification since it doesn't take FT's into account, but I just wanted to provide a simple explanation. The easiest way to see how the increased 3 point shooting has affected the league is just to look at how scoring has increased over the past five years or so. It is actually higher in the last few years than it has been at any time since the Bulls completed their first 3 peat.
As far as the way that MJ would have been affected by the change in playing style across the league, I feel it would have the complete opposite effect than you. As great as Jordan was, he was never considered an elite long range shooter. His jumper improved significantly as he got older, but he was still never known as any kind of sharp-shooter. Lebron isn't known for his long-range jumper either, but he does have a better career 3 point percentage than Jordan (.344 to .327). Judging by his 3 point FG percentage, it doesn't appear that Jordan would have been used heavily to shoot 3 pointers, especially considering many of his teammates were better in this area (John Paxson, BJ Armstrong, Steve Kerr, Toni Kukoc). Ergo, if Jordan's teammates would have been taking more 3 point shots per game, this would have resulted in a reduction in the number of FG attempts per game for Jordan himself.
In reference to the teams that each has played against in the playoffs, I don't disagree that the East has been the weaker conference in Lebron's era compared to Jordan's era when it as the stronger conference. However, if you want to point out the Larry Bird Celtics and the Bad Boys as the reason that Jordan had trouble in the playoffs in the first part of his career, I would counter that the Pierce-Garnett-Allen Celtics that knocked LBJ out of the playoffs a few times were a very strong team. They certainly weren't as good as the Bird-Parish-McHale Big Three Celtics teams of the 80's, but I would actually make the argument that they were at least equal to the Bad Boy Pistons squads of the late 80's. Lebron eventually went on to defeat them on his way to the Finals. The Pistons of the mid 2000's that knocked Lebron out of the playoffs were a pretty good team too, although there's no doubt they weren't the same as the Bad Bay Pistons.
The important thing to point out is that even though he may have faced weaker competition in the Eastern Conference playoffs than Jordan, Lebron has managed to make it to the NBA Finals in every year that he has been on a team that has at least one other all-star caliber player (unless you want to count Mo Williams as all-star caliber in 2009). Regardless of competition level, it is a fact that Jordan never won a single playoff series without a HOF caliber teammate.
If you are going to make an argument against Lebron compared to Jordan because of the weaker competition he has faced in the Eastern Conference then it's only fair to use the exact same logic in favor of Lebron because of the stronger teams that he has faced in the NBA Finals. Of the teams that Lebron has played in his 8 Finals appearances, I would put the three Warriors teams as the best with the three Spurs teams as the second best out of all the Finals opponents that each of them has played. The aging Lakers that Jordan played might be the third best team followed by the Jazz. After that I would put the Thunder as the next best with the Mavs, Trail Blazers and Suns all being pretty close. The worst team that either of them played in the Finals would be the SuperSonics.
As great as Jordan was in the NBA Finals, I don't know if any of his teams (96 Bulls included) would have ever been able to beat the Warriors. This is speculation of course, but you to admit that Lebron's Finals opponents have been better than Jordan's Finals opponents.
Also, there's one other major difference that is too often overlooked in this debate. Jordan benefited from having the greatest coach of all time. In every FULL season that Jordan played under Phil Jackson except for the first season, they went on to become NBA Champions. Jordan began winning championships only after he benefited from Jackson's triangle offense as opposed to the different style he played in his earlier career. James has never had a coach of anywhere near that caliber. Just look at how good of a coach Mike Brown turned out to be when he didn't have Lebron to make him look good. Jackson on the other hand went on to win 5 more championships without Jordan.
Finally, although it's true that Lebron has had all-star and HOF level teammates ever since he left Cleveland for Miami, the Heat and recent Cavs teams would have been better if they had been able to surround Lebron with elite talent that would be able to complement his style of play. For as good as Wade and Lebron both were during their time in Miami, their playing styles do not complement one another. Each of them still managed to put up good numbers, but with both of them being primary ball handlers that prefer to drive to the basket and short range pull up jumpers, they got in each others way much more than Jordan and Pippen ever did. The same thing happened in Cleveland with Lebron and Kyrie Irving. As talented as both are, once again they are both primary ball handlers that prefer to drive to the basket and shoot short range jumpers. Irving did improve his long range jumper, but he was never the ideal type of player to play alongside Lebron.
As good as Bosh and Love are, Lebron would be better served if he had an elite defender and rebounder (Love is a great rebounder but average defender) as the third piece of the puzzle with an elite wing defender who could move with or without the ball. Lebron has never had a teammate that could play defense on a level anywhere near Scottie Pippen or Dennis Rodman.
Almost forgot about the Jason Terry debate. I completely agree that JET has never been a superstar anywhere near the level of Lebron, but the reason that I don't consider him to be a role player is because he logged as many minutes as a typical starter and it was only for strategical reasons that he came off the bench. Remember back in OKC when James Harden came off the bench. I wouldn't have considered him to be a role player back then either. Regardless, you're right that no one would have called Jordan out the way Terry called Lebron out.
There's no denying the fact that Lebron didn't play up to his usual level in his first two Finals appearances. Jordan has a clear advantage in that he never had a Finals series where he performed like James did against the Spurs and Mavs. However, if you compare the career playoff numbers for Lebron and MJ they are actually pretty close. Jordan has the advantage in scoring (33.4 to 28.7 ppg) and steals (2.1 to 1.8), but Lebron has the lead in rebounds (8.9 to 6.4), assists (7.0 to 5.7) and blocks (1.0 to 0.9). Their FG percentage and 3 point percentage are virtually identical.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jamesle01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jordami01.html
