Michael Jordan is very often compared to LBJ, but Jordan doesn’t quite see it that way. In a recent interview during MJ’s Flight School camp, Jordan stated that Kobe is better than LBJ. His logic?

“5 beats 3.”

MJ went on to say that while LBJ may be a better player, Kobe’s five rings automatically give him the legacy edge.

In terms of every statistical category, LeBron blows Kobe out of the water. He has better career averages, and he has won four MVP awards, to Kobe’s three. Frankly, the standards for what determines a good player are a bit murky, but this philosophy of judging by championships is absurd. Do rings only count if you’re the best player on the championship team? In that case, do either of Curry or Durant’s rings not count?

If it’s purely about rings, then should Brian Scalabrine be a top player, or perhaps Robert Horry? Players should be judged by their stats and their season accomplishments. Playoff success should factor in, but it should not be the category that trumps all others.

In the end, it really doesn’t matter which player is better… We’re much better simply saying that they are both great players. When players face each other in their primes and are in the same position, that’s one thing, but different positions at different times are not comparable.

Is Jordan right? Comment below and remember to SHARE!

Comments