re: Phil Jackson: "LeBron needs to takeover like Michael did"

quote:

---

The difference between great and good is sacrifices you make to work while others are not.

---

And a whole lot of other stuff as well, some are things these players can't even control.

quote:

---

That's not my logic. It's a factor though. If we controlled for all factors of talent, etc the hardest working would win more on average

---

EXACTLY. It's reflected in the outcome and performance data. There may be some euro league player that works harder than every single NBA player. Maybe the he's overachieved relative to his talent, but our evaluation of him as a player is on his performance.

Let's say that some parallel universe everything else is equal except there is an MJ with less "drive" but had more "talent." At the end of the day, his performances were equal to our MJ's. So is was he <, =, or > than our MJ?

quote:

---

And a whole lot of other stuff as well, some are things these players can't even control.

---

Sure. We don't know how much of X player's performance is due to genetics, childhood development, personal dedication in what distribution.

And even personality. I think a lot of Jordan's pathological competitiveness was involuntary and ingrained in him, has a lot to do with father issues. That's a pretty reasonable and common observation, but again can't be quantified or proven. If these things could be sports would be boring, athletes would be robots, and message boards like this wouldn't exist. Though great advances have been made, it's a delusion of futurism to think we live in that world or are even close to it.

quote:

---

And a whole lot of other stuff as well

---

I'm really not sure what they are arguing now. MJ > LeBron because he was better than LeBron. There are a number of variables that contributes to the quality of a player, but at the end of the day, it doesn't matter what the exact combination is if determining the quality.

It's just one big regression equation. BUT there is a reason we have predictive/explanatory variables and an OUTCOME variable. We are trying to figure out the OUTCOME because it is what we value.

BUT WE HAVE THE OUTCOME,

quote:

---

CTLY. It's reflected in the outcome and performance data. There may be some euro league player that works harder than every single NBA player. Maybe the he's overachieved relative to his talent, but our evaluation of him as a player is on his performance.

---

Exactly. People dont rank MJ ahead of LJ because they grew up watching MJ. I rank him ahead of LJ because of performance.

quote:

---

Though great advances have been made, it's a delusion of futurism to think we live in that world or are even close to it.

---

I see what you're doing now.

You're conflating the explanatory variables with the outcome variable. This would make sense if we don't have the outcome.

Guess what though? We have the outcome variable.

So while interesting to debate what contributed to the outcome, it's irrelevant to the comparison of the outcomes themselves.

quote:

---

Uhhh....

---

Whoops, horrible misworning there lol.

Here's what I meant:

Just because player A cries and player B doesn't does not mean player A cares more. It's just 2 players who express themselves differently.

quote:

---

I assume you arent counting injuries.
The team youre drafted too means nothing because you have free agency once youre about to enter your prime.

---

I meant moreso physical gifts. Height limitations, and just general lack of talent compared to some guys who, in theory, could never really work out a day in their lives and still be really great athletically speaking.

quote:

---

Good point. Jordan greater drive doesn't make him greater. The fact that he won more championships

---

The fact that he was a better player, yes.

quote:

---

But if he played the 2015 and 2016 Warriors on his two lesser championship teams and lost, but played just as well as when he won, he would still be just as great of a player.

---