There is a constant debate going on about who is the Greatest Of All Time (GOAT). I've always wondered how to decide this question. Stats, hardware, and the eye test always seem to be an element. Then, we always discuss intangibles; toughness, legacy, and brand. We also have to factor in the era and sport too. How do stats translate from sport to sport and era to era? What about titles? Or awards? I'm going to try to give a sample of how to go about this conversation going forward. All of these elements are unable to stand on their own. So, over the next several weeks, I'll look at the various aspects to analyze the GOAT conversation. Then, maybe I'll say who I think is the GOAT. First things first:
Hardware.
Championships
To be quite honest, I think championships are the most important part of this discussion. Now, before all of the "rObErT HoRrY" people jump on that train, calm down. It cannot stand alone, but it helps to set a difference. Michael Jordan will always have 6-0. LeBron is 4-6. Now, that means he made it to the Finals four more times than Jordan. A lot of people will argue that LeBron shouldn't get snubbed for making it to the Finals more. No one is faulting Brady for being 6-3. But football is different. Has there been another quarterback close to that level? Joe Montana? He is 4-0. Does anyone argue that Montana is better than Brady? No. However, there are more elements to factor in. Montana won his 4 Super Bowls over 9 seasons and was then replaced. Brady has been to the Super Bowl 9 times in 20 seasons (including 1 year he was out for the season). This means that Brady has had a nearly 50% chance of making it to the Super Bowl. LeBron has played for 17 seasons and has made it to the Finals 10 times. LeBron has an even greater chance to make it to the Finals than Brady to the Super Bowl.
NFL/NBA Comparison
But how do we factor in the difficulty of making it to the Finals compared to the Super Bowl? Well, if we look at both the NFL and the NBA over the past 40 years, the comparison becomes a little clearer. The NFL has had 18 different champs in the past 40 years with 26 teams having made it to the Super Bowl. Meanwhile, 12 teams have won the title in the NBA with 20 teams reaching the Finals in that same span.
So, assuming this is a fair sample size, it would appear that it is easier to make it to the Super Bowl than the Finals. That may be true, but it is also easier to have repeat success in the NBA. Eight teams have won 37 of the last 41 NBA championships. This would mean that 8 teams average 4.5 titles in that span; meaning that each team has an average of one title per decade. Compare that to the NFL's 11 teams that account for 31 Super Bowl titles in that same span. So, each of those teams would average 2.8 titles with even less per decade.
So, it is easier to win a Super Bowl than the NBA Finals, but it is easier to repeat in the NBA. So, does that make Brady's achievement the greater of the two? It very well may. Consider this comparison, each has played for two decades and thus LeBron would average 2 titles per decade and Brady would average 3 per decade. LeBron is pulling less than half of the NBA's most dominant teams average, but Brady is averaging slightly more than the NFL's dominant teams. Is this fair though? LeBron accounts for a portion from two separate teams on the list: 66% of the Heat's titles but less than 10% of the Lakers titles (The Cavs don't make the Dominant Teams list). Jordan would average 3 per decade in this model, and would also fall below the average Dominant Team; however, he would account for 100% of the Bulls titles. If we go down to the greatest single decade of each player, MJ blows both Brady and LeBron away. Brady and LeBron's average would stay the same and Jordan's would jump up to 6. Montana would also overtake Brady in this model. He went 4-0 in the Super Bowl in the 80s. We'll discuss longevity at another time.
Awards
Then we get to the awards. Michael Jordan is a 14-time All-Star, 11-time All-NBA, 9-time All-Defensive Team, Defensive player of the year, Rookie of the year, 6-time Finals MVP, and 5-time Regular Season MVP. Compare that to LeBron: 16-time All-Star, 16-time All-NBA, 6-time All-Defensive Team, Rookie of the year, 4-time Finals MVP, and 4-time Regular Season MVP. So, there are some clear comparisons here. The awards would give Jordan a slight edge. I don't want to hear about how LeBron has been robbed of some MVPs though. The same argument could be made about Jordan. Tom Brady is a 14-time Pro-Bowler, 3-time All-Pro, and 3-time MVP. I'm replacing Montana with Peyton Manning for the award section for sake of argument. Compare Brady's awards to Manning: 14-time Pro-Bowler, 7-Time All-Pro, and 5-time MVP. It would seem from this perspective, Manning would have the edge. Manning would also have an average of 1 title per decade. If the awards are close, that's the difference.
NBA/NFL Comparison
How do we compare awards in the NBA to the NFL? We must certainly consider this difference. Brady has 2 out of the last 10 MVPs. Meanwhile, LeBron has won 3 in that same span. The NFL has had 8 different MVPs in that span while the NBA has had 7. Jordan won 4 in the '90s and the NBA had 6 different recipients. Furthermore, consider that Michael Jordan wasn't really eligible for 3 of those seasons. So, really he won 4 of 7. Again, it looks like if we come down to one decade, Jordan wins, but we cannot ignore the longevity. We'll come back to that at another time.
Just based on hardware, I'd have to go with: 1. Jordan, 2. Brady, 3. LeBron.
LeBron has more awards than Brady but his record in the Finals drops him down below Brady. Brady's bucking of the difficulty to create a dynasty in the NFL puts him over LeBron, but Jordan's downright 10-year dominance overtakes them both.
For more material like this, click here to see all previous sports-related posts. Also, consider subscribing or following us on Facebook or Instagram so you never miss an update.