Sports Reference Blog
LeBron Passes Jordan to Become All-Time VORP King
Posted by Mike Lynch on January 15, 2016
LeBron James has moved his career VORP total to 104.46 and now narrowly leads Michael Jordan's 104.44 for most in NBA history. It should be noted that VORP can only be calculated since 1973-74, so Wilt Chamberlain's career is not included (nor are the first four seasons of Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's career). VORP was created by Daniel Myers, in conjunction with Box Plus/Minus. Descriptions of the statistics and how they are calculated can be found here.
A comparison of some of their career regular-season advanced statistics can be seen below:
| Player | G | MP | TS% | TRB% | AST% | STL% | BLK% | TOV% | USG% | OBPM | DBPM | BPM | VORP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LeBron James | 947 | 37062 | .581 | 10.8 | 34.4 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 12.5 | 31.7 | 7.3 | 1.9 | 9.2 | 104.5 |
| Michael Jordan* | 1072 | 41011 | .569 | 9.4 | 24.9 | 3.1 | 1.4 | 9.3 | 33.3 | 7.0 | 1.1 | 8.1 | 104.4 |
As you can see, LeBron has been a slightly more efficient shooter, a slightly better rebounder and a significantly more prolific passer. Jordan, on the other hand, took better care of the ball, had greater usage, and had an edge in steals. Still, while LeBron has a slight 7.3 to 7.0 edge in Offensive Box Plus/Minus, it's his decisive 1.9 to 1.1 edge in Defensive BPM which gives him the edge in VORP despite playing about 4,000 fewer minutes than MJ. This is largely the result of LeBron playing for superior defensive teams throughout his career. When Jordan was winning titles in Chicago, they were elite defensively, but that was not always the case earlier (or later) in his career. Another factor, according to Myers, is that "Jordan's offensive stats look to the regression more like a pure offensive player than LeBron, possibly because they are more guard like. And guards usually have a bit less value on the defensive end."
| Player | G | MP | TS% | TRB% | AST% | STL% | BLK% | TOV% | USG% | OBPM | DBPM | BPM | VORP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LeBron James | 947 | 37062 | .581 | 10.8 | 34.4 | 2.3 | 1.6 | 12.5 | 31.7 | 7.3 | 1.9 | 9.2 | 104.5 |
| Michael Jordan* | 930 | 35887 | .580 | 9.4 | 24.9 | 3.3 | 1.5 | 9.3 | 33.5 | 7.7 | 1.3 | 9.0 | 99.8 |
| Player | G | MP | PER | OWS | DWS | WS | WS/48 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LeBron James | 947 | 37062 | 27.6 | 128.6 | 56.6 | 185.2 | .240 |
| Michael Jordan* | 1072 | 41011 | 27.9 | 149.9 | 64.1 | 214.0 | .250 |
| Player | G | MP | PER | OWS | DWS | WS | WS/48 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LeBron James | 947 | 37062 | 27.6 | 128.6 | 56.6 | 185.2 | .240 |
| Michael Jordan* | 930 | 35887 | 29.1 | 145.8 | 58.7 | 204.5 | .274 |
I have been watching this too. I wonder if the fact that BPM was built looking at years that Lebron played but Jordan didn't has any impact.
In career playoff VORP, LeBron passed Jordan last spring.
But Jordan was the bigger playoff improver generally. His PER advantage over LeBron goes from 27.9-27.6 in RegSea to 28.6-27.4 in PO.
MJ also leads LeBron in WS/48: .250-.240 in RS and .255-.234 in PO.
Jordan with about 15% more Win Shares than LeBron in RS, 8% more in PO.
This in spite of LeBron already playing more minutes in both.
LeBron has been known to shy from the ball in PO; Jordan never did.
In RS, Jordan's Usg% is 1.6 larger than LeBrons; in PO, it's 3.5
No Mike G, having 3.4% more USG but only THAT player efficiency rating is not more impressive. Not to imply you're the only person that does this, but most PER fans keep doing that and it is a bad habit. I'll tell you the real reason MJ is better below, but they're both underachievers. They play the game the wrong way, they could have been much better (See this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-point_field_goal).
LeBron's stats in the playoffs are probably more impressive once you take into account this:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/bill-russells-celtics-were-great-tim-duncans-spurs-have-been-better/
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/kickers-are-forever/
TL;DR: Athletes are much better now, MJ is from an old era that's probably overrated and not nearly as talented. Olympic athletes are also another great indicator of this.
But MJ was probably still better than LeBron, because LeBron chokes in the Finals. There you go, the real reason MJ was better. And both of their playing styles are outdated and wrong. MJ could have been much better but he wasn't, so now people like LeBron end up with better stats (and other players will also pass Jordan in various efficiency metrics one day, and they all won't choke in the Finals like LeBron).
If you chart out VORP over the course of the last 40 years, you find a direct correlation between NBA expansion and VORP numbers. Compare the median VORP of the top 20 players before expansion and then the years following shows a fairly straightforward trend -- the number was about a 4 from 1977 to 1985 then rose to 4.3 for three years before rising from 4.7 to 5.5 from 1989 to 1992, the seasons the NBA added expansion Charlotte, Miami, Minnesota and Orlando. In Lebron's career (lockout 2012 excluded) it's been as low as 4.3 (last season) and as high as 5.65 (2006).
It follows that the replacement player hasn't always been at the same basketball level over time. Today's replacement value player 0.0 are McAdoo and Ian Clark and Barbosa on the GSW bench. Or they're 19-23 year-olds on other teams, etc. The vast majority would not be in the league in 1985-88 when Jordan's Bulls were playing in a loaded Eastern conference. The replacement player of today might be a good young athlete, but he's still learning the game. The replacement player of the 1980s was a better player than the replacement player of 2007 or today.
That the box score +/- is the root of VORP is another reason to look at the strength of the league when Jordan entered it. Jordan's Bulls won 38 games his rookie year -- not bad. They played the Celtics, Bucks and Sixers 17 times and went 5-12 in those games (0-5 against Philly). Those teams won a combined 180 games in the 1984-85 season, effecting +/- and WS and a lot of other things in the East throughout the 1980s, most obviously the records of the opponents they played five or six times a year. Jordan's numbers were probably effected the least, considering some of the great games he had against those teams.
To relate those circumstances to Lebron, it would be like him entering the NBA as an 19-year-old and having to play his current Cavs, the Warriors and the Spurs 17 times, which certainly wasn't happening in the East in 2004. The Celtics 2008-2010 are at least something of a barometer, but even the 25-year-old Lebron could not get past them.
Box score +/- and VORP are not bad ways to look at players who play similar minutes under similar conditions, but they're very flawed measures for players who play different positions under different conditions in different eras -- like MJ and Lebron. WS/48 is much better, but even WS was impacted by expansion/dilution of the leagues.
In the end this means that there's probably no real hope for a stat that would put Lebron over the top in a comparison with Jordan. Maybe the 33-year-old Jordan playing in a 29-team league, but not the 26-year-old Jordan trying to beat the Pistons in a 25 team league. Lebron's a 34-year-old superstar dominating a league chock-full of 19-23 year olds still learning the game of basketball (and the English language if they're international players) while honing their X-Box/E sports skills. Where's the adjustment for all this?
(Playoff stats only, excluding all 1st round games? But even then, Lebron had that Cavs team in the Finals in his 4th season. That doesn't happen in the 1980s. Jordan's Bulls don't even make the 2nd round until 1988, Jordan's 4th season).
If you chart out VORP over the course of the last 40 years, you find a direct correlation between NBA expansion and VORP numbers. Compare the median VORP of the top 20 players before expansion and then the years following shows a fairly straightforward trend -- the number was about a 4 from 1977 to 1985 then rose to 4.3 for three years before rising from 4.7 to 5.5 from 1989 to 1992, the seasons the NBA added expansion Charlotte, Miami, Minnesota and Orlando. In Lebron's career (lockout 2012 excluded) it's been as low as 4.3 (last season) and as high as 5.65 (2006).
It follows that the replacement player hasn't always been at the same basketball level over time. Today's replacement value player 0.0 are McAdoo and Ian Clark and Barbosa on the GSW bench. Or they're 19-23 year-olds on other teams, etc. The vast majority would not be in the league in 1985-88 when Jordan's Bulls were playing in a loaded Eastern conference. The replacement player of today might be a good young athlete, but he's still learning the game. The replacement player of the 1980s was a better player than the replacement player of 2007 or today.
That the box score +/- is the root of VORP is another reason to look at the strength of the league when Jordan entered it. Jordan's Bulls won 38 games his rookie year -- not bad. They played the Celtics, Bucks and Sixers 17 times and went 5-12 in those games (0-5 against Philly). Those teams won a combined 180 games in the 1984-85 season, effecting +/- and WS and a lot of other things in the East throughout the 1980s, most obviously the records of the opponents they played five or six times a year. Jordan's numbers were probably effected the least, considering some of the great games he had against those teams.
To relate those circumstances to Lebron, it would be like him entering the NBA as an 19-year-old and having to play his current Cavs, the Warriors and the Spurs 17 times, which certainly wasn't happening in the East in 2004. The Celtics 2008-2010 are at least something of a barometer, but even the 25-year-old Lebron could not get past them.
Box score +/- and VORP are not bad ways to look at players who play similar minutes under similar conditions, but they're very flawed measures for players who play different positions under different conditions in different eras -- like MJ and Lebron. WS/48 is much better, but even WS was impacted by expansion/dilution of the leagues.
In the end this means that there's probably no real hope for a stat that would put Lebron over the top in a comparison with Jordan. Maybe the 33-year-old Jordan playing in a 29-team league, but not the 26-year-old Jordan trying to beat the Pistons in a 25 team league. Lebron's a 31-year-old superstar dominating a league chock-full of 19-23 year olds still learning the game of basketball (and the English language if they're international players) while honing their X-Box/E sports skills. Where's the adjustment for this?
(Playoff stats only, excluding all 1st round games? But even then, Lebron had that Cavs team in the Finals in his 4th season. That doesn't happen in the 1980s. Jordan's Bulls don't even make the 2nd round until 1988, Jordan's 4th season).
This could actually work if you looked at playoff stats only and excluded first round games, which should eliminate the expansion/dilution factors, development players, etc.
Jordan, 1988-1993, age 25-30 -- 78 games, 3 Finals, 3 titles.
Lebron, 2006-2012, age 21-27 -- 79 games, 3 Finals, 1 title.
Jordan, 1996-98, age 33-35 -- 49 games, 3 for 3.
Lebron, 2013-2015, age 28-30 -- 51 games, 1 for 3.
Jordan's Bulls were 86-41 in those games, which says a lot. The WS numbers aren't going to help Lebron, and we know his numbers aren't good in the 2007 or 2011 Finals, so why bother? At a glance, Lebron's Game Scores 2012-15 are similar to Jordan's 1996 to 98 when MJ was in his mid-30s. The younger Jordan is another story.
Game Scores are PER based, so if Lebron can't get any help against Jordan from the efficiency model designed for his era (the making of 5-14 3-point shooters into stars) it just makes a lot more sense to compare him to Dr. J.
@ J.D.
Let us agree that the VORP of the top 20 players across the years has gone up. Isn't that because "top 20" means more in a 450 person league than in a 300 person league? What happens when you compare the top 10% of players: 45ish in our time, 30ish in the 80s, and so on?
As for expansion as dilution, would it interest you to learn that in terms of number of teams per capita, the NBA is currently at its LEAST diluted since the NBA-ABA merger? Furthermore, that by this metric Jordan's championships actually came in MORE diluted years (10.58 teams per 100 million Americans) than LeBron's (only 9.51)? Throw in the increase in available talent pool due to increased American wealth and increased international basketball markets, and it seems hard to justify the contention that the league was more talented in the 80s than today.
I think you have to look at the guys who actually play -- the NBA wasn't running a development program in the 1980s, so for simplicity, let's say 230 players in the '80s vs. 300 today. I agree that some of the dilution has been covered by the millennial generation and international players. And yes, Jordan 1996-1998 is more diluted than current, and that's where we see his numbers comparable to Lebron (and he's well past his prime then.)
It's a great idea to look at national demographics, but in the end it shows why the dilution occurred. The core of '80s Magic-Bird-Doc-Moses basketball are baby boomers, a huge American generation. We can say that generation advanced basketball, laid out the future of the NBA. U.S. Birth rates fell drastically in America during Vietnam War, then began to rise again in the late 1970s. You could even refer to Jordan as the first Gen Xer.
Players born in the mid-1960s received the best basketball training America had to offer, stayed in college 3-4 years, grew the fan base even further while they were in school and created the market need to expand the NBA. But because of the low U.S. birth rates in the first half of Gen X, there weren't enough high level American players to fill the need. Dilution resulted, and it became real apparent when the NBA went from 27-29 teams in 1995 and the players from the mid-1980s began to retire. The league opened up to 18-year-olds as a result.
So why has the overall U.S. population continued rising? That's immigration largely, a lot of it from places that you can't call basketball hotbeds. People are living longer, too, so there's another factor. The NBA opening up to the international basketball markets has covered a big chunk of the dilution gap, but you still see some dilution factor as the league trains its 19-22 year-olds, players who would have been trained in college in the 1980s.
[…] week, LeBron James passed Michael Jordan in basketball-reference’s career VORP. For most basketball fans, this is alphabet soup […]
There were 6 new teams added in the immediate period (8 years) prior to that 72-10 season - talk about dilution! That was the second weakest period dilution-wise ever in the NBA (-ABA); with the most massive being the combo of ABA creation and NBA expansion to combat it (68-76).
Given that expansion, one could argue (and I do - having been a "rabid" NBA-ABA fan for 55+ years); that ALL of MJ's achievements mean less *; again, because the competition was generally diluted across the board. (Who can deny that brand new teams suck for any number of years - meaning the other teams, especially the super-star heavy ones, feast on the rest of the more-diluted League, especially on the new teams.)
* My take on the NBA(-ABA) GOAT list:
a) ALL 5 positions should be treated virtually equally - each contributes about the same to the overall results. Consider that big men have tended to last longer than guards - more wear and tear on the outside - that counts for something, just like bigs contributing more on defense.
So on my GOAT Top 5, I have 1 Center, 1 PF, 1 SF, 1 SG & 1 PG:
#1 KAJ (most Finals of all my Top 10; most clutch, most unique/unstoppable shot ...) (barely ahead of Wilt - who, except for Mikan (in a much weaker era) was THE most-dominant player ever).
#2 Magic (best TEAM-mate; 3 more Finals than MJ). (Ahead of The Big "O"; but not by that much).
#3 MJ (#1 assassin; not the best teammate; QUIT TWICE (forced out for gambling once). (Many people claim he would have done even more had he played; but you can't get credit for games you didn't play - he might well have gotten injured or worn down more). (barely ahead of Kobe - who's peak was not as high; but whose top-quality play for so LONG means he got considerably more All-NBA Teams than did MJ)
#4 TD (barely ahead of Karl Malone).
#5 LeBron (possibly the most complete player ever; he has already passed Dr J and Bird (who I consider to be the 2nd and 3rd best SFs in that order).
N.B. I've had LeBron moving up the GOAT Top 1 about one position each year. imo, if he keeps playing like a super-star (and at least makes some more Finals), he'll continue that trend.
I got to see Wilt LIVE with the Harlem Globetrotters a number of times. I've been a "rabid" fan of the NBA(-ABA) ever since - so I got to see ALL of the All-Time Top 50 Greats play (except the first half of Pettit's & Cousy's careers).
I sure wish that B-ball Reference would "adjust" one or more of its All-Time lists, particularly VORP (and Rebounds: Offensive & Defensive): by adding in a conservative estimation (based on subsequent known years and/or reasonable estimates) of these players' probable achievements:
KAJ: VORP (We know what he did after his first four years; his first four years, especially the 2nd, 3rd and 4th - were monster years - we could guesstimate his approximate VORP "score" for those 4 years - and he'd end up #1 on the VORP list - where he belongs (again even if his number-value is not exact - it would be close enough to be meaning-full; and his lead over LBJ would be HUGE - worth people knowing this.)
Perhaps (?) a guestimate could be calculated for his pre-recorded blocks.
Wilt & Russell: Rebounds: Offensive & Defensive (It shouldn't be too hard, should it, to guestimate what percent of their total Rebounds were Offensive and Defensive?)
Pablo, you can also use the standard deviation model presented by Dean Oliver to create a dilution model. The strongest period of course were 1980-88, and you have a general standard deviation through that period of 3.06. It goes up to 4.02 from 1989-98. So your multiplier would be 1.3 , the cut rate would be .77. That's probably overkill, but something has to be done r.e. VORP -- which is a lousy measure anyway.
I don't yet have a suggestion for what I call the deadball decade 1999-??. Dilution remained a factor, just how much isn't apparent in the standard deviation. As for today, you can't just populate the league with backup center power-forward types from Canada and other countries and say the dilution problem is solved, but these days it is less than what was in the aughts, thanks to a few good millennial drafts. These last three have been horrible, though, so I see some reversion ahead.
If you make all of these adjustments, Jordan still comes out vs. Lebron, and Bird also remains ahead of Lebron -- Lebron doesn't shoot as well nor does he rebound as well as Bird did. He does have the assists edge but nobody who saw Bird play believes Lebron is the better passer -- he just plays more point forward. Winning in the playoffs the edge to Bird, too.
A note on Kareem - I agree it's completely relevant to estimate Kareem's offensive-defensive rebounds 1970-73, and the turnovers, too. It's difficult to look at Kareem or Rick Barry or Havlicek through time with all those blank boxes. The pace was crazy back then too (estimated 117 poss.per game in 1970) so some major adjustments would be in order, but it could be done.