|
 Not long after declaring that he would not discuss his impending free agency, LeBron James announced that from next season he would be changing his number from 23 to 6. The reasoning behind said change was that he wanted to pay homage to Michael Jordan by not using #23, and using #6 in homage to Julius Erving...
Anyone else see the paradox there?
Now... ignoring the cynical implications that go with realising that number 23 is already retired at both New Jersey and Miami - James' most likely destinations should he leave Cleveland - LeBron also declared that he believes that the league should retire #23 across all teams, in honour of Michael Jordan.
"I just think what Michael Jordan has done for the game has to be recognized some way soon. There would be no LeBron James, no Kobe Bryant, no Dwyane Wade if there wasn't Michael Jordan first."
(That is certainly a dangerous path to tread - for with that logic firmly in place, would there have been a Michael Jordan if there had been no Dr J, no Magic?... ad infinitum)
But anyway: given that it's very unlikely that the league will ever change the NBA logo from Jerry West to the Jumpman, LeBron feels that in tribute to Jordan they should retire #23 league-wide.
...
Say what?
Aside from finding James' "if I won't wear it, no-one should" incredibly egotistical, there are other considerations that should be explored before charging headlong into doing this.
Whilst there's no doubting the greatness of Michael Jordan's ability, I question as to whether he's impacted the game enough to warrant such an action.
Yes, he was a great player, arguably the best ever. But he was handsomely renumerated both during his playing days and post them for being "a great player".
Many will point to the changes that occurred both to the game, and it's audience growth during Jordan's time... but was he an instigator of change, or merely the face of it?
If the period of growth in popularity that the NBA experienced during 80s/90s, then David Stern had more to do with the growth of the NBA (and perhaps the marketing gurus at Nike!) than his Airness. Jordan was just the very convenient personification of that growth.
For number 23 to be retired for all on a league-wide basis, Jordan would have to have brought about change of a greater magnitude than simply being a great player. No offense to Michael Jordan, but to raise that number above all others would be to disrespect the impact that Jackie Robinson had, and to an extent it would be disrespecting players that came before Jordan and impacted the game: Magic, Larry Bird, Bill Russell, Wilt Chamberlain, et al - the list would be quite extensive. Sure, most didn't quite impact the popularity of the game the way Jordan did, but that had more to do with marketing than anything that occurred on the hardwood.
Now, LeBron's choice is LeBron's choice. I'd argue that this change is occurring more because he doesn't want to be "the other 23" than anything else (well... I do wonder if Kobe mentioned to him the truckloads of cash to be made by such a change). His ego dictated that he initially choose #23, and now his ego is dictating that he change.
If other individuals who currently use the number 23 decided to change their number - and decide by themselves and not have it forced upon them by any one individual... then that would be one thing.
But calls for the NBA to retire #23 should be dealt with a smile, an acknowledgement of the greatness of Michael Jordan... and a polite, but stern, "no".
 |
As a Jordan fan, I think he's worthy of it BUT as an NBA fan AND someone who respects the history of the game I agree with you that the it would behoove the NBA to do that.
Look at how many other greats the NBA has had. To choose one player as better than the rest is not a precedent one wants to set.
Personally I think Lebron's intentions are honourable, but I can also see the other viewpoint that a sports cynic may hold
So, let's review, LBJ isn't gonna wear 23 anymore...but he's gonna wear 6...I guess he forgot that's Bill Russell's #