LeBron Had 7 More Years… Still Can’t Catch Jordan | Stephen A. Smith Rips the GOAT Myth!

LeBron James. Michael Jordan. Two names echoing through arenas, across city blocks, and around dinner tables in every corner of the basketball world. The “Greatest of All Time” debate, a tempest of hot takes and furious stats, seemed to only gain momentum as LeBron’s career extended into his late 30s and now, shockingly, his 40s. As King James moved past Kareem to become the NBA’s all-time leading scorer and continued to shatter records, another debate ramped up: Has LeBron, with his unprecedented longevity, finally surpassed the beloved #23?

But not so fast, says ESPN’s Stephen A. Smith—a voice synonymous with bold proclamations and unfiltered sports passion. “LeBron had SEVEN more years,” Smith barked on a recent episode of First Take, “and he STILL can’t catch Michael Jordan.” It’s a bombshell many LeBron loyalists don’t want to hear, and one that MJ fanatics celebrate like another championship ring. So, is the GOAT debate really as settled as Stephen A. claims? Or is there more to this story than meets the eye?

The Tale of the Tape: LeBron vs. Jordan

First, let’s line up the stats and accomplishments that have come to define the debate.

LeBron James’ Resume (as of 2024):

21 NBA seasons and counting.

4 MVP awards.

4 NBA championships.

4 NBA Finals MVPs.

All-time NBA scoring leader.

19 All-Star appearances.

18 All-NBA selections.

Over 40,000 career points (and counting).

Michael Jordan’s Resume:

15 NBA seasons (including two retirements).

5 MVP awards.

6 NBA championships.

6 NBA Finals MVPs.

14 All-Star appearances.

11 All-NBA selections.

10 scoring titles.

The numbers cue the LeBron vs. Jordan symphony endlessly played out on TV segments and in comments sections. If you’re rooting for quantity and longevity, LeBron dazzles. If you’re a disciple of dominance and peak performance, Jordan’s resume feels unimpeachable. But Stephen A. Smith’s explosive argument dives deeper than numbers—it’s about legacy.

Stephen A. Smith: “We’ve Forgotten What GOAT Means”

At the core of Smith’s argument is a conviction that the “greatest ever” isn’t just about accumulating stats. “LeBron’s longevity is unparalleled, but GOAT is about more than sticking around. It’s about defining your era, about being the apex predator when the stakes are highest,” Smith declares.

Consider this: Michael Jordan won all six championships he played in—never tasted defeat in the NBA Finals. Each Finals appearance ended with Jordan holding the trophy, Finals MVP in hand, often after a signature moment: The Shot over Ehlo, The Double Nickel, The Flu Game, The Last Shot in Utah. Jordan’s tenure at the top was relentless, almost mythical.

LeBron? The narrative is different. His four rings in eleven Finals trips mean more Finals losses (7) than wins (4). And while his impact on the game is immense—dragging weaker Cavaliers teams to the Finals, dominating with Miami’s Big Three, leading the Lakers back to glory—the aura of invincibility Jordan carried remains elusive for LeBron.

The Longevity Paradox

Perhaps LeBron’s greatest achievement—his durability—is also the double-edged sword in the GOAT conversation. “The fact he’s still this good in his 21st season is mind-blowing,” says Smith. “But should we celebrate a guy for needing twice as long to catch up to someone who did it all, fast and furious, and never lost?”

There’s merit to arguing longevity itself is greatness. LeBron has redefined what’s possible in pro athlete longevity—maybe extending the prime years of his peers by a generation. By that logic, his sustained excellence counts for something monumental.

And yet, the magic of Jordan’s shortened zealous reign—his ability to dominate fiercely, then walk away (twice) before the world saw any real decline—seems to hold special magic that LeBron’s marathon doesn’t.

Impact Beyond the Numbers

Stephen A. is quick to point out something often lost in spreadsheets and advanced analytics: culture. Jordan wasn’t just the best; he was the standard. His swagger, his ruthless competitiveness, changed not just the NBA but the nature of winning itself. He made “clutch” a requirement, not an accessory.

LeBron, to his credit, has been a pioneer on and off the court: building schools, elevating social discourse, and wielding unprecedented player power. He created superteams years before it was fashionable and took player empowerment to stratospheric heights. But in Stephen A.’s view, “Nobody was selling out every arena in every city, turning shoes into cultural emblems, inspiring a generation to ‘Be Like Mike’. That’s GOAT stuff.”

The Counterargument: What If We’re Missing the Point?

While Smith’s argument stirs the pot, there’s a growing contingent that thinks the GOAT debate has itself grown tiresome. The NBA is richer, more competitive, and vastly different than during Jordan’s heyday. The game is global. Defense and offense are both lightyears more sophisticated. In many ways, “GOAT” is a moving target.

LeBron’s haters overlook how impossible his journey was: coming out of high school as “The Chosen One”, bearing the weight of expectation, never scandalized, never falling off, and always living up to the moment. Maybe never has an athlete managed so many years in the fishbowl, all while still breaking records and redefining greatness.

The Verdict? Maybe the Debate Is the Point

Stephen A. Smith’s fiery declaration—“LeBron had SEVEN more years and still can’t catch Jordan!”—isn’t just a hot take. It’s a window into the way we think about greatness: is it a mountain climbed fastest, or the one climbed the longest? Is it rings and MVPs, or cultural transformation? Or is it, simply, whichever icon spoke to you as a child, making you fall in love with basketball?

In the end, the GOAT debate refuses to die because it’s not about statistics—it’s about storytelling. Jordan and LeBron will keep trading places in these stories, long after the final buzzer. And maybe, just maybe, that makes basketball the real winner.