Why Michael Jordan Doesn’t Embrace the GOAT Debate: ‘Doesn't Exist With Me’

Michael Jordan was back on our TV screens Sunday night for a new installment of NBC's MJ: Insights to Excellence, when he gave quite a thoughtful answer to basketball's ongoing (and oftentimes exhausting) GOAT debate.

For most NBA fans, the greatest player of all time is either Jordan, who won six NBA championships with the Chicago Bulls and arguably one of the most famous athletes to ever live, or LeBron James, who has won four championships with three different teams and is in the middle of his 23rd season in the league. Occasionally, you'll hear differently from a diehard Kareem Abdul-Jabbar or Bill Russell acolyte—but for the most part, when we're talking GOAT, we're talking Jordan or James.

Speaking with NBC's Mike Tirico in the "episode" aired Sunday, Jordan explained why he doesn't care much about the title, and why he believes it's more divisive than anything.

"The 'GOAT' term is never gonna be something that I ever will get high or low about. It just doesn’t exist with me. I never played against Oscar Robertson or Jerry West. Would've loved to," he told Tirico.

"And I actually learned from them. And we paved the way for the Kobes and the LeBrons, right? And to me, that's the beauty of the game of basketball that a player, after a previous player, has evolved the game further. But don’t then ... now use that against the players that actually taught you the game or that you learned from. That's why I have a tough time [with the GOAT talk]. Look, I would have loved to play against LeBron and Kobe in my prime. ... But we’ll never be able to know that."

Michael Jordan discusses Olympic basketball and the Goat debate in the latest installment of MJ: Insights to Excellence. pic.twitter.com/LAO5Dbq8hU
— NBA on NBC and Peacock (@NBAonNBC) March 8, 2026

Jordan said that he believes the GOAT conversation is just part of the narrative trying to "elevate one generation above the other," and "I think it creates animosity."

"I have no animosity against today's players, but you do have certain players that do have animosity because of the forgotten-ness of what their contribution has been to the game of basketball. It is what it is. It is an empty comparison. [We'll] never absolutely find the true answer to that question."

James has had an "unbelievable career," Jordan added, and "I admire him for what he's done. As well as Kobe, [Kevin Durant], all these guys, and all these guys that have played in this era. I think they have elevated the game of basketball tremendously. I just don't agree when you start trying to put one above the other. It doesn't work."

Part of the reason it doesn't work is that it could hurt "other players who look for their existence within the generation of basketball," he said—guys like Abdul-Jabbar, or Russell or Wilt Chamberlain, for instance.

"How do you just push them in the corner and say, 'We ain't gonna think about you'?" Jordan concluded. "That to me is where I get lost."

It's a generous take from the man perhaps most synonymous with basketball, and perhaps one only he can give considering his status within the game. But he does have a strong point—GOAT debates often reduce a sport down to just one or two statistical contributors, rather than honoring the many who broke barriers in their own individual way. And while it's hard to imagine a world without rankings, maybe we all (and the game) would be better off if we decided we were done with GOATs once and for all.

More NBA on Sports Illustrated