Thursday, October 15, 2020

The Neverending GOAT Debate

Two championships won on Sunday renewed the debate about who's the "Greatest of All-time" in both of those sports.  One is men's tennis, where Rafael Nadal won what seems like his 35th consecutive French Open to tie Roger Federer's record for the most career Grand Slam titles.  The other is basketball, where LeBron James won his fourth career championship--with his third different team.

There's nothing wrong with a good GOAT debate.  Everyone has their opinion and their reasons for it, and you're not going to convince them that your guy is better.  The Jordan people will always be Jordan people and the LeBron people will always be the LeBron people.  Likewise, the Roger people will always be the Roger people and the Rafa people will always be the Rafa people.

Part of what makes those debates so fun, though, is also what makes them incredibly frustrating.  There's no objective standard that qualifies somebody as the "Greatest."  There also frequently tends to be a recency bias, completely forgetting about players from different eras.  Which is why there's no "right" answer in the GOAT debate.  Because it's not an apples-to-apples comparison.

Of course, there are exceptions to the rule.  Mariano Rivera is widely accepted as the Greatest Closer in history.  Hockey has its "Holy Trinity" of Wayne Gretzky, Gordie Howe and Bobby Orr, but Gretzky is called "The Great One" for a reason.  Just like Muhammad Ali was "The Greatest" (even if there are other boxers worthy of at least being in the conversation).  And you'll get very few arguments about Michael Phelps and Usain Bolt as the Greatest Swimmer and Greatest Sprinter ever.  But, for the most part, there's no "right" answer in the GOAT debate.

Take Serena Williams.  A lot of people consider her the women's tennis GOAT.  Her next Grand Slam title will be her 24th, tying the all-time record.  She's been the face of women's tennis for two decades, and her longevity is definitely an argument that works in her favor.  But Serena's never really had a rival.  When she's healthy, she wins.  When she isn't, she doesn't.

Chrissie and Martina had each other (and they both won 18).  Steffi Graf had Monica Seles.  Serena has won the Serena Slam twice and won Olympic gold in London.  Steffi won the Golden Slam in 1988 and won every Grand Slam tournament at least four times.  I'm not saying your wrong if you think Serena is the GOAT.  But you aren't wrong if you prefer one of the others, either.  (For the record, I think it's Graf.)

Likewise, on the men's side, the GOAT debate is far from over.  The Big Three are ranked 1-1-3 in all-time Grand Slam titles, and does anybody really think they're done?  The totals will probably change in Australia.  None of us know how it'll shake out once it's all said and done (personally, I think Djokovic will end up with the most).  And can you really say one is better than his two rivals?

They've all won the career Grand Slam, and they've all dominated one particular tournament--Nadal at the French, Djokovic in Australia and Federer at Wimbledon.  Nadal also has an Olympic gold medal from Beijing, but he's won two-thirds of his Grand Slam titles at the same tournament.  Federer, meanwhile, had a five-year winning streak at two separate Slams (with them overlapping at Wimbledon and the US Open from 2004-07).  And Djokovic has beaten both of them at their signature event!

While you'd get no argument from me if you put them at 1-2-3 on the all-time list, you can't forget the all-time great men's players from the past.  Rod Laver won the Grand Slam twice.  Jimmy Connors only played the Australian Open twice in his entire career--winning in 1974 and making the final in 1975.  And let's not forget Pete Sampras, either!

Another active athlete who commonly has GOAT status conferred upon him is Tom Brady.  Once again, who's to define what makes the "Greatest Quarterback Ever."  Are Brady's Super Bowl records and the Patriots' 20-year run of dominance enough?  For some, they are.  Others might prefer someone else (for whatever reason).  And they wouldn't be wrong.

That brings me to LeBron.  After the Lakers won on Sunday, he tweeted "now I'll get some respect" or something along those lines.  As if to imply LeBron hadn't earned peoples' respect a long time ago.  But that doesn't mean he should be considered the GOAT, period, end of sentence without even entertaining a conversation.  Because that's disingenuous to all of the other greats.

It commonly comes down to a debate between LeBron and Michael Jordan.  And it can generally be broken down along age lines.  Older fans tend to prefer Jordan, while younger fans (who only know Jordan as the owner of the Hornets) think it's LeBron.  As if they're the only two players who've ever played basketball.

Jordan, obviously, had the six championships.  LeBron is now at four, and he's the first to win with three different teams.  However, Jordan never lost the NBA Finals.  LeBron has lost six.  The Bulls were built around Jordan.  LeBron was essentially able to build his own team in both Miami and LA.  And, yes, LeBron's team has been to the Finals in nine of the last 10 years, a remarkable run to be sure, but against what competition?  He didn't really face much of a challenge in the Eastern Conference, and the Finals were predictable matchups, too!  The Heat faced the Spurs back-to-back and the Cavs played the Warriors four straight times!

The Jordan Camp can make a pretty compelling argument.  So can the LeBron Camp.  Neither side is necessarily "wrong."  It's just a matter of preference.  And good luck convincing somebody who disagrees with you to come over to your side.

Although, if you're using championships as your criterion, why aren't we talking about Bill Russell?  Or how about Kareem?  Why isn't Kareem ever mentioned in the GOAT conversation?  Or Wilt Chamberlain?  Why is it just Michael vs. LeBron?

My point is that there's no "right" answer when discussing the GOAT.  We could both be asked to create our all-time team, and my list might look completely different than yours!  You can count championships or Grand Slam titles, but those are simply objective stats.  Opinions are subjective.  And, as long as we all have our own opinions, the GOAT debates will continue.

No comments:

Post a Comment