A lot of subjective nonsense in this post "twice the defender", "twice the leader" etc. You do Jordan's legacy a disservice with all that hyperbole.
Jordan isn't the best player because he was really clutch or because he won six titles from six attempts or because he was defensive player of the year that one time. He's the best player because a range of measures indicate that he was the most productive player who ever played the game. On a per minute basis he did more than any other player to help his team win basketball games.
The same measures indicate that LeBron James is the second most productive player to ever play the game. He doesn't score as many points but he is better at setting up his teammates. He doesn't get as many steals and yet he has shown the rare ability to defend every position.
From the age of 21 until 30 years of age:
Michael Jordan: 667 games; PER 29.8; WS 147.6
LeBron James: 683 games; PER 29.2; WS 149.2
You've become so fixated on Jordan's greatness that the only way someone can be better is if they tick off all of Jordan's achievements. Until Jordan came along dominant scorers were not regarded particularly highly. In 1980, Bill Russell was regarded as the greatest NBA player in history despite the offensive performance of the likes of Wilt Chamberlain. Similarly neither Magic Johnson or Larry Bird were particularly dominant scorers and yet both were viewed as the best players in the league for the best part of a decade.
LeBron may not be as great as Jordan but there are things he does on a court better than Jordan did. There are teams throughout history who would've benefited more from having a LeBron James than they would have by getting their hands on Michael Jordan.
