For more than a decade, year after year, it seemed LeBron James was always in the NBA Finals. He went ten times – nine straight – leading long-time NBA mainstay Rachel Nichols to nickname the Finals “the LeBron James Invitational.”
Nichols also covered Michael Jordan, who of course went to six finals, and won them all. But while people across the world, on basketball courts, at sports bars, and inside barbershops seem to love having the MJ vs LBJ debate, Nichols isn’t here for it.
“I am not a huge fan of the MJ versus LeBron debate. Not because like we’re all too holier than thou to have it. I just think at its core, there’s a point where when athletes play in different periods of time in different eras with frankly pretty different rules. It’s a different game that they were playing,” argues Nichols.
Jordan played in an era where defensive players could use their hands more. The referees are quicker to blow their whistles these days. The three-point shot is more prevalent in today’s game. Offenses are scoring at a higher rate during LeBron’s era. If you compare their statistical numbers, LeBron skipped college, so he automatically gets a head start.
Another argument is that Jordan’s dominance wasn’t something that happened in hindsight. People saw it in real-time. His greatness was indomitable and inevitable. Jordan went 6-0 in the NBA Finals. Kobe lost. LeBron lost. Jordan was undefeated on the game’s biggest stage.
Nichols covered both Jordan and James in different places, Jordan with the Bulls and Wizards, and as an owner, and LeBron with the Cavs, Heat, and Lakers. She’s seen them close up.
Nichols brings questions to the table concerning the debate. James has had the better group of teammates. He teamed with Kyrie Irving, Dwayne Wade, and Anthony Davis. Kyrie Irving was sensational in the year Cleveland won the title, hitting the biggest shot in the Finals against Golden State. Wade is a sure-shot Hall of Famer who already had championship experience before Lebron took his talents to South Beach. Davis has proved to be one of the best big men in the league when healthy.
Jordan didn’t have that. “So, why were the Bulls inevitable? Was it 100% MJ,” says Nichols?
“If it’s less, what’s the percentage? Then you start looking at the nuance. If you get to the Bulls were inevitable as a big point of this discussion, we need to get a little deeper into why and how much of that was because of Michael, and clearly, it’s the majority. But how much over 50%? Has LeBron had a teammate that was Scottie Pippen level,” asks Nichols?
Nichols also considers things outside of the playing lines. LeBron went back to Cleveland when others were leaving the area. Should that be taken into consideration about his greatness?
Looking at manufacturing jobs and the great pieces of the American Midwest and Ohio, the fact that LeBron left for a place that was glamorous and warm and sunny and everything Miami is, and then he came back on purpose. Some argue Lebron’s greatness goes beyond the game.
He came back for those people and won as a huge underdog considering being down 3-1 in the series. The circumstance in that moment of those finals represented something to the people there in a way that isn’t going to mean the same to other fanbases.
Rachel Nichols wants to appreciate the greatness of both legendary names. She poses the questions because she is a seasoned journalist who knows how to give people information to ponder so they can make their own informed decisions. She doesn’t believe all things are equal.
“We seem to live in a time where people have to choose between two extremes, everything is portrayed as black and white, with no grey area. But in this particular thing, it has been really bothering me the way people talk about this, that it either has to be completely one or the other. When, of course, anyone who has had an athlete that they love knows that they are never all everything,” she adds.
Author Profile
