Former Golden State Warriors guard Baron Davis has a different way of looking at the comparisons between Michael Jordan, LeBron James, and Stephen Curry. Davis sees Curry as a closer stylistic match to Jordan, while he believes James has more in common with Magic Johnson.
Watch What’s Trending Now!
Speaking alongside Gilbert Arenas on Gil’s Arena, Davis questioned why the comparisons are not made according to the players’ styles.
“Why wouldn’t you compare LeBron to Magic because that is a better comp and Steph to Michael Jordan because that is a better comp,” Davis said.
For Davis, the distinction comes down to how each player creates an impact offensively. He sees Curry’s scoring influence as closer to Jordan’s, even though their approaches to putting points on the board are considerably different.
“Steph Curry is more like he do what Jordan do like his scoring is so dynamic that it affects the game,” Davis explained. He then highlighted the contrast between their scoring styles: “Michael Jordan took it to the air; Steph Curry take it to the air from outside.”
Jordan built his reputation through explosive drives, mid-range scoring, and his ability to finish around defenders. Curry has created a different kind of offensive pressure with his shooting range, movement, and ability to score from beyond the three-point line. Their methods differ, but Davis sees a similar capacity to make scoring the defining force of a game.
Davis then explained why he believes comparisons should account for the different roles players have on the court.
“Why wouldn’t we compare like that kind of mode or score versus score and then all-around guy versus all-around guy,” he added.
Davis’s point was that the comparisons should not be limited to overall rankings. He wants to separate players based on what they bring to the court.
Gilbert Arenas Offers His Interpretation of LeBron James’s NBA Legacy
Arenas took the discussion toward the way basketball history has been presented to audiences. He pointed to the league’s established storyline around three major figures, saying, “because the NBA was built (the NBA we know) was built on Magic, Bird and Jordan.”
Arenas offered his own explanation for why James became part of the Jordan debate instead of being compared more directly with Magic. He suggested that the NBA’s established legacy narrative influenced how those comparisons developed, although he did not present it as a confirmed decision by the league.
He also argued that James entered the league with qualities associated with both legends.
“LeBron’s second year in the NBA, he came into the NBA as Magic Johnson with Jordan-like ability,” Arenas added.
James’s second season, 2004-05, offered a statistical illustration of that all-around impact. He averaged 27.2 points, 7.4 rebounds, and 7.2 assists per game, showing how he could contribute as a scorer, rebounder, and playmaker.
Arenas also suggested that comparing James with Magic would have created a different historical conversation.
“If you compare him to Magic, he would pass Magic, and it’d be LeBron James as the best point guard ever, Jordan as the best shooting guard ever,” he said.
The discussion also touched on the difference between Magic’s pass-first approach and Jordan’s aggressive scoring mentality. That distinction is important to Davis’s comparison because James has often been asked to balance both responsibilities. He can create opportunities for teammates when defenses collapse on him, but he can also take control as a scorer when the situation calls for it.
Davis’s comparison comes down to the different ways Curry and James influence a game. Curry’s ability to take over through scoring reminds him of Jordan, while James’s playmaking brings Magic to mind. Rather than placing all three in the same debate, Davis believes their different strengths deserve separate comparisons.