Michael Jordan is Not the Best: WHAT!?
Before you read this article, it is not mine: it is from the site http://airjudden2.tripod.com/jordan/index.htm, and i found it very interesting. It is NOT mine and i do not take any credit for it, but i want it to be seen and i am here to defend it.
Here it is:
Author's E-mail address: airjuddenSPAM@hotmail.com
Michael Jordan is one of the greatest basketball players in the history of the NBA. He is in the elite class of players who dominate the game. He had many great traits that I do not need to expound on.
However, with that said, he's not the best player in NBA history. Many media types, who are into hype and usually never seen anyone play from past eras, sing Jordan's praises and say he is the best ever - without question. If you do question it, I find that Jordan fanatics act like you've committed blaspheme.
I am here to step on toes, if need be. Jordan is not the best and this web-page explains why.
What I require from you is to explain what criteria you use for comparing two players. How do you compare Patrick Ewing vs. Hakeem Olajuwon? Isiah Thomas vs. John Stockton? Larry Bird vs. Magic Johnson? Wilt Chamberlain vs. Bill Russell? Allen Iverson vs. Vince Carter? Kevin Garnett vs. Shaq? If you have a consistent method for determining which 2 players are better, then I will prove to you that Jordan is not the best.
If you say, "Bill Russell is better than Wilt because he won more championships" then that means you believe Isiah Thomas is better than John Stockton (2 championships to none). If you back peddle and say Stockton is better because he had better career numbers, then you have just exposed your duplicity. You have no method for comparing players. You just make up any excuse to pick a player you like, and your double-standard is a joke. I often find Celtics fans say Russell is better than Chamberlain because of championships, but at the same time, they will not admit Magic Johnson is better than Larry Bird, based on the same criteria. These people do not have educated opinions. They are just fans trying to hype their favorite players. If you are one of these people, go away. I only want to talk basketball with intelligent fans.
With that said, think about your criteria for comparing players. I list mine on this site. If you determine yours, you will see that Jordan is not the best. The only criteria that puts Jordan No. 1 is endorsements and popularity. If this is your criteria for comparing players, then please leave. I have no time to discuss basketball with Inside Stuff -watching fanboys.
This site is not a forum to argue about if Bill Russell is better than Magic Johnson or Oscar Robertson is better or worse than Kareem Abdul-Jabbar. I respect arguments comparing these guys. They are all elite players, on the same level of Jordan, and have a good argument for being the best player ever. What I DO know is that no player - not Wilt, Russell, Magic, Jordan, etc has an outright claim to being the best basketball player ever, and that is why this site serves only one purpose—to prove that whatever you think about Michael Jordan's place in basketball history, it is NOT at the very top.
If you disagree, that is your choice, but please have a well-defined reason as to why Jordan is the best ever. As you will see, for Jordan, there is no standard. His claim to the best ever is based on popularity, media-hype, and endorsements, with a few weak arguments thrown in for good measure. This page will systematically tear down these popular weak arguments given for Jordan's supposed dominance, as well as expose the myths created by the media.
With that said, here are the topics:
Who is better than Jordan?— Determine your criteria and you will see that someone is better.
How I rank them— Here is an example of determining criteria for comparing players and then ranking the elite players consistently based on this criteria.
Jordan myths exposed:
Jordan did not carry a bunch of marginal role players to 6 championships— The Bulls were a very, very good team with or without Michael Jordan. The argument I present proves beyond a shadow of doubt that Jordan simply wasn't as valuable as his friends in the media would like to make him out to be.
Jordan does not make those around him better— Dismantling the myth. He played with very good teammates who did just fine without him.
Jordan was an overrated defender— From 1996-98, Jordan had no business being named to the all- defensive team.
Examples of Jordan being over-hyped by the media:
Jordan in college— a perfect example of media hype. He didn't "lead" Carolina to a title. When he did lead the team, they choked.
Jordan - the greatest athlete ever?— Proof that ESPN's list was biased and ignorant.
The 1988 dunk contest— Even when Jordan loses, he wins.
So now that you have read it lets debate.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?