PDA

View Full Version : LeBron makes History



Pages : 1 [2]

ewing
05-07-2015, 04:07 PM
no, what you were saying is his teams weren't that bad without lebron. Well, that was his team, how good do you think they would have done without lebron?

again, i never once said that. I said they were good with him. He left a 60 win team and colluded to teammate up with other free agents stars. If pat ewing left my knicks in 92 and colluded team up with chuck and chris mullen, i'd call him a ***** not tell some sob story about how karl malone had a better supporting caste.

Hawkeye15
05-07-2015, 04:16 PM
er mer gerd

valade16
05-07-2015, 04:16 PM
again, i never once said that. I said they were good with him. He left a 60 win team and colluded to teammate up with other free agents stars. If pat ewing left my knicks in 92 and colluded team up with chuck and chris mullen, i'd call him a ***** not tell some sob story about how karl malone had a better supporting caste.

But again, they were good because of him. If you refuse to say they were good without him and only admit they were good with him that kind of suggests you realize he was the primary reason they were even good in the first place.

Yes, he ran away to a better team. But again, a big factor in his decision to do that was how bad the team around him in Cleveland was without him, which you apparently don't seem to be refuting.

Call him a ***** all you want, he was still the best basketball player on the planet in the prime of his career attempting to win the championship and playing with a clearly inferior supporting cast to the rest of the contenders. Most people would have left if they truly valued winning.

ewing
05-07-2015, 04:39 PM
But again, they were good because of him. If you refuse to say they were good without him and only admit they were good with him that kind of suggests you realize he was the primary reason they were even good in the first place.

Yes, he ran away to a better team. But again, a big factor in his decision to do that was how bad the team around him in Cleveland was without him, which you apparently don't seem to be refuting.

Call him a ***** all you want, he was still the best basketball player on the planet in the prime of his career attempting to win the championship and playing with a clearly inferior supporting cast to the rest of the contenders. Most people would have left if they truly valued winning.



Of course he was the primary reason they were good. Just like i think Pat Ewing was the primary reason those knicks were good. That's why i made the comparison. Ewing wasn't the best player the league but i think you can get it. I am speaking English yet? he's a *****

5ass
05-07-2015, 05:15 PM
Crazy how lebron doesn't win the award and his accomplishements are still celebrated more that curry who actually won yet has less discussion in his thread lol

Its a thread about lebron's accomplishment. Read the title

valade16
05-07-2015, 05:29 PM
Of course he was the primary reason they were good. Just like i think Pat Ewing was the primary reason those knicks were good. That's why i made the comparison. Ewing wasn't the best player the league but i think you can get it. I am speaking English yet? he's a *****

It sounds like you agree with us, so what are you arguing? How can you blame someone for leaving when the team was really only good because of LeBron James? He should have to stick it out with the worst supporting cast of all contenders despite the entire NBA Free Agent system designed specifically to allow him to leave if he so chose simply because you and others wouldn't like him leaving?

KMackSackAttack
05-07-2015, 06:28 PM
Still, another incredible achievement for the greatest player since MJ.

Kobe shaq and Duncan say hi

jerellh528
05-07-2015, 06:38 PM
Its a thread about lebron's accomplishment. Read the title

Duhhhhhhhh. What are you trying to say?

Chronz
05-07-2015, 07:50 PM
they weren't favorites against some teams so his prime was wasted. that is your stance not mind.
His prime was wasted because he wasn't given quality support, he did the most with the least amount of talent I've ever seen. Like I've seen stars carry really ****** support to the playoffs, but I cant imagine someone winning 66 games with only a moderately improved supporting cast. I really wish they would have handled their window with Bron far differently. Bron is to be blamed for some of their awful decisions tho.


He was on a solid team, played some great basketball, and was not far from being on a team that could bring it home. That is not playing for the bad team, that is not wasting a talent. Do you not think that Cavs team could have made another jump with one solid acquisition? If not, fine. I am no longer going to entertain the Cavs were the Washington Generals debate.
It was a solid team, especially in the regular season. They had some unfortunate injuries and coaching/personnel decisions but overall, they weren't far from the generals. Had they won a title, it would have been an unprecedented feat IMO. Like you take Bron off some of those Cavs squads and they dont even crack 25 wins IMO, whereas a guy like MJ could be on a team that could win 2 less games without him. Thats a great supporting cast IMO.


On a different note, you mention Delonte losing it when he was on the Cavs. Do you mean in his last year their? I think i remember him being very good his first two years there, at least during playoff time, no?
Yeah, 1 1/2 years would be more accurate and 2 decent playoff runs. He was a gritty defender who played bigger than his size (though he was overmatched in the Orlando series) but offensively he was very streaky. I think its kind of sad when one Brons best teammates produced at a below average rate. His floor game and defense make up for that but to what degree?

5ass
05-07-2015, 08:02 PM
Duhhhhhhhh. What are you trying to say?

I'll leave you to figure this one out by yourself. Get back to me when you figure out why we're talking about LeBron in a thread about LeBron's historical accomplishment. HINT: This thread is not talking about who won the MVP this year.

bucketss
05-07-2015, 08:27 PM
Still don't change the fact that Paul George had his team in 1st 2 strait years and without him nothing. No playoffs at all where you only need to win about 40% of games to even get in.

Kobe on any team out east gets in the playoffs. Any team out east. No east team is going to stop him. If Jennings gets you in then Kobe gets you in and does damage. If Paul George gets you first seed in the east then there is no dought in my mind that Kobe can't do the same.

yeah it was all george and had nothing to do with the the balanced roster, with all star roy hibbert, who was arguably just as important. and you said deep in the playoffs, so why mention jennings. dude was waxed in the playoffs when he got in.

jerellh528
05-07-2015, 09:01 PM
I'll leave you to figure this one out by yourself. Get back to me when you figure out why we're talking about LeBron in a thread about LeBron's historical accomplishment. HINT: This thread is not talking about who won the MVP this year.

No **** Sherlock. Reread what I wrote and smack yourself

5ass
05-07-2015, 10:01 PM
No **** Sherlock. Reread what I wrote and smack yourself

Alright i misread your post i guess, still these are two seperate accomplishments. All this is just more noise from you when people want to appreciate Bron. I dont understand why you even post in these threads. If you cant appreciate, leave. Its really that simple. Hope everything is clear for you now and things are less "crazy" lmao.

TheNumber37
05-07-2015, 10:36 PM
So he's one of the most popular players in the past 10 years.

FlashBolt
05-08-2015, 01:25 AM
So he's one of the most popular players in the past 10 years.

That's not the criteria...

ewing
05-08-2015, 08:18 AM
It sounds like you agree with us, so what are you arguing? How can you blame someone for leaving when the team was really only good because of LeBron James? He should have to stick it out with the worst supporting cast of all contenders despite the entire NBA Free Agent system designed specifically to allow him to leave if he so chose simply because you and others wouldn't like him leaving?


you are the one arguing with me. All i said was they were not trash. LeBron leaving the Cavs was not like Barkley wanting to be traded from a 35 win Sixers team. He left a 61 win team. After that you started putting words in my mouth.

As for do i judge him? For the 100th time yes, and its not b/c i don't like LeBron. Again, If Ewing had left the Knicks in 92 b/c Stark was his #2 and and colluded to make a super team- i would call him out. If he left at all i would. LeBron did more then leave though. he had meetings with the other power free agents that off season and plotted to create a super team- him and Wade decided on Bosh over Joe Johnson as their 3rd . Stern said these meeting were OK, i don't like it.

Now when one of his super friends starts to decline he leaves that team, despite the fact that they had been to 4 straight finals. he doesn't sign with a new team though, it seems, until his people could make sure they were going to engineer a trade for Kevin Love. You want to play the well it's a business card fine, but to me it still colors the fact that Bron teams have been as successful as they have.

So i'll say it one more time: The Cavs were not trash and LeBron has always been on a top teams b/c he has no loyalty (and he cuts corners). Maybe the Cavs would have been good enough all these years for him to be a top 5 MVP guy every year but we will never know.

M.I.A.
05-08-2015, 09:18 AM
Lebron is a great player but it is obvious that a team can't just ride on his back to a title. He's just not nearly as dominant like Jordan was.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 09:21 AM
Lebron is a great player but it is obvious that a team can't just ride on his back to a title. He's just not nearly as dominant like Jordan was.

who is?

valade16
05-08-2015, 09:26 AM
you are the one arguing with me. All i said was they were not trash. LeBron leaving the Cavs was not like Barkley wanting to be traded from a 35 win Sixers team. He left a 61 win team. After that you started putting words in my mouth.

As for do i judge him? For the 100th time yes, and its not b/c i don't like LeBron. Again, If Ewing had left the Knicks in 92 b/c Stark was his #2 and and colluded to make a super team- i would call him out. If he left at all i would. LeBron did more then leave though. he had meetings with the other power free agents that off season and plotted to create a super team- him and Wade decided on Bosh over Joe Johnson as their 3rd . Stern said these meeting were OK, i don't like it.

Now when one of his super friends starts to decline he leaves that team, despite the fact that they had been to 4 straight finals. he doesn't sign with a new team though, it seems, until his people could make sure they were going to engineer a trade for Kevin Love. You want to play the well it's a business card fine, but to me it still colors the fact that Bron teams have been as successful as they have.

So i'll say it one more time: The Cavs were not trash and LeBron has always been on a top teams b/c he has no loyalty (and he cuts corners). Maybe the Cavs would have been good enough all these years for him to be a top 5 MVP guy every year but we will never know.

But this is exactly what we're arguing about and you refuse to comprehend.

The Cavs were only not trash BECAUSE of LeBron. What of that can you not understand?! You can't point to their record as proof they were good even without LeBron.

I've asked you multiple times how you think those teams would have done with LeBron and you refused to answer. You did however say "Of course LeBron was the primary reason they were good", which is tantamount to the same thing.

So what was the biggest selling point for LeBron to stay with Cleveland? They had LeBron. His own ability was literally the only reason for him to stay. Seriously, what else could they have sold him on?

"With you we are a 60 win team"

OK, that applies to a lot of teams. So I fail to see your argument as any sort of compelling reason he should have stayed.

M.I.A.
05-08-2015, 09:31 AM
who is?

Good question and exactly my point.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 09:34 AM
Good question and exactly my point.

right. I don't know if I have ever seen someone say LeBron is/could be the best player ever. It is agreed upon that he isn't catching, or passing Jordan. That ship sailed a while back. But he is an all timer in his prime, and one of the best 3-6 players to ever play in all reality.

ewing
05-08-2015, 09:54 AM
But this is exactly what we're arguing about and you refuse to comprehend.

The Cavs were only not trash BECAUSE of LeBron. What of that can you not understand?! You can't point to their record as proof they were good even without LeBron.

I've asked you multiple times how you think those teams would have done with LeBron and you refused to answer. You did however say "Of course LeBron was the primary reason they were good", which is tantamount to the same thing.

So what was the biggest selling point for LeBron to stay with Cleveland? They had LeBron. His own ability was literally the only reason for him to stay. Seriously, what else could they have sold him on?

"With you we are a 60 win team"

OK, that applies to a lot of teams. So I fail to see your argument as any sort of compelling reason he should have stayed.



you are arguing with yourself. I haven't refuse to answer anything. How would that team have been without Bron? They would have been bad. How many times do i have to say, so what? The 92 Knicks would have sucked without Ewing. This years Rockets would suck without Harden. I don't think this years Cavs would be very good without him either. Maybe if they don't win he should opt out, start meeting with all the free agents before the committe anywhere, get his agents working on every GM in the league now- just in case, you know.

A lot of teams minus a legit franchise player aren't very good. The Cavs would have had no one to put the ball the hole or create shots. They wouldn't have been very good without him. I don't care

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 10:04 AM
you are arguing with yourself. I haven't refuse to answer anything. How would that team have been without Bron? They would have been bad. How many times do i have to say, so what? The 92 Knicks would have sucked without Ewing. This years Rockets would suck without Harden. I don't think this years Cavs would be very good without him either. Maybe if they don't win he should opt out, start meeting with all the free agents before the committe anywhere, get his agents working on every GM in the league now- just in case, you know.

A lot of teams minus a legit franchise player aren't very good. The Cavs would have had no one to put the ball the hole or create shots. They wouldn't have been very good without him. I don't care

well, we know the actual results of his teams when he leaves, or even misses games or rests. They fall off a cliff. I think that is the argument. There is no speculation, it's literally actual results haha.

But yeah, this debate has become ridiculous.

valade16
05-08-2015, 10:17 AM
you are arguing with yourself. I haven't refuse to answer anything. How would that team have been without Bron? They would have been bad. How many times do i have to say, so what? The 92 Knicks would have sucked without Ewing. This years Rockets would suck without Harden. I don't think this years Cavs would be very good without him either. Maybe if they don't win he should opt out, start meeting with all the free agents before the committe anywhere, get his agents working on every GM in the league now- just in case, you know.

A lot of teams minus a legit franchise player aren't very good. The Cavs would have had no one to put the ball the hole or create shots. They wouldn't have been very good without him. I don't care

You should probably tell this guy then:

You can think that's OK and he not a ***** but he didn't play with trash and he did face significantly weaker comp in getting to the finals

The teams he left were not trash and he faced significantly weaker comp in making the finals. those are facts.

I wish could make you read slower. Again- The teams he left were not trash

The teams he left were not trash. Those teams the next year are not the teams he left.

Everyone justifies his leaving to franchises high and dry b/c they weren't good teams. BS. They were too.

Did he leave a trash team? Obviously not.

He was on a solid team, played some great basketball, and was not far from being on a team that could bring it home. That is not playing for the bad team, that is not wasting a talent

That was you this entire thread. Let's go back to the very beginning of this argument for context.

Your first post:

MVP candidates are great players on top teams. LeBron is a great player who is always on a top team b/c he has no loyalty

Hawkeye responds with:

or cause any team he is on is a top team because he plays for them.....

To which you reply:

that would also be a possibility but we both know its not true. You cant put Bron on any team and have them be a contender. Bron is always at the top of the league b/c he is a conniving douche.

It goes back and forth but Hawkeye succinctly sums up our position:

because when he is on a team, that team is a contender. It really is that simple.

The point dies after that for a couple of pages but then you respond with this quote:

Its the same with this drivel where everyone compares Bron leaving to KG in Minn or Chuck wanting out of Philly. Bron left title contenders. You can think that's OK and he not a ***** but he didn't play with trash and he did face significantly weaker comp in getting to the finals

You'll notice that is one of your quotes I already quoted above. Look at how often you reiterate that the team Bron left wasn't that bad.

Here is our point: Prime LeBron makes any team he is on a contender and that team was trash without him.

You in your last post just agreed that team without LeBron would not do well.

So what are you saying? That the Cavs with LeBron were really good? They were, and that's because:

Prime LeBron makes any team a contender.

Which was our original point...

ewing
05-08-2015, 10:31 AM
You should probably tell this guy then:

You can think that's OK and he not a ***** but he didn't play with trash and he did face significantly weaker comp in getting to the finals

The teams he left were not trash and he faced significantly weaker comp in making the finals. those are facts.

I wish could make you read slower. Again- The teams he left were not trash

The teams he left were not trash. Those teams the next year are not the teams he left.

Everyone justifies his leaving to franchises high and dry b/c they weren't good teams. BS. They were too.

Did he leave a trash team? Obviously not.

He was on a solid team, played some great basketball, and was not far from being on a team that could bring it home. That is not playing for the bad team, that is not wasting a talent

That was you this entire thread. Let's go back to the very beginning of this argument for context.

Your first post:

MVP candidates are great players on top teams. LeBron is a great player who is always on a top team b/c he has no loyalty

Hawkeye responds with:

or cause any team he is on is a top team because he plays for them.....

To which you reply:

that would also be a possibility but we both know its not true. You cant put Bron on any team and have them be a contender. Bron is always at the top of the league b/c he is a conniving douche.

It goes back and forth but Hawkeye succinctly sums up our position:

because when he is on a team, that team is a contender. It really is that simple.

The point dies after that for a couple of pages but then you respond with this quote:

Its the same with this drivel where everyone compares Bron leaving to KG in Minn or Chuck wanting out of Philly. Bron left title contenders. You can think that's OK and he not a ***** but he didn't play with trash and he did face significantly weaker comp in getting to the finals

You'll notice that is one of your quotes I already quoted above. Look at how often you reiterate that the team Bron left wasn't that bad.

Here is our point: Prime LeBron makes any team he is on a contender and that team was trash without him.

You in your last post just agreed that team without LeBron would not do well.

So what are you saying? That the Cavs with LeBron were really good? They were, and that's because:

Prime LeBron makes any team a contender.

Which was our original point...



Just b/c without them they aren't good doesn't mean they are trash. I don't think any of the teams i mentioned above are filled with trash. As a collection they need a star to score and create. without that they aren't a very good. LeBron did not play with trash. If he did they would not have won 60 plus games twice. A 60 win team is a good team not a good player surrounded by trash.

I also said multiple times that i do not think you can just throw LeBron on any team in the league and they instantly become a contender. He's a great player, he isn't that great- no one is or ever has been IMO. The fact that Bron bailed on a group of guys that put in the work to get to that level makes him a *****. The way he did it makes him an even bigger one.

valade16
05-08-2015, 10:44 AM
Just b/c without them they aren't good doesn't mean they are trash. I don't think any of the teams i mentioned above are filled with trash. As a collection they need a star to score and create. without that they aren't a very good. LeBron did not play with trash. If he did they would not have won 60 plus games twice.

I also said multiple times that i do not think you can just throw LeBron on any team in the league and they instantly become a contender. He's a great player, he isn't that great- no one is or ever has been IMO. The fact that Bron bailed on a group of guys that put in the work to get to that level makes him a *****. The way he did it makes him an even bigger one.

Again, you can't reference what they did with LeBron because we are talking about how good they are aside from LeBron.

Was there any player in the league in 09 you feel could have been added to that Cavs team in place of Bron and they still win 66 games?

They were a bad team besides LeBron. Like I asked earlier, what was Cleveland's selling point to LeBron when he left? With you we are really good? That applied to virtually all of the teams in the league. You can't convince a guy he should be with your team by telling him he is very good. They had nothing else of value to offer LeBron outside of LeBron is really good, and that is a testament to how bad the supporting cast around LeBron was.

Here's the thing: I agree that how he left was pretty ****y. But here's the thing, if Cleveland wins the title this year (or in the next few years) I doubt very much any Cavs fans will care that he left in the first place.

ewing
05-08-2015, 11:09 AM
Again, you can't reference what they did with LeBron because we are talking about how good they are aside from LeBron.

Was there any player in the league in 09 you feel could have been added to that Cavs team in place of Bron and they still win 66 games?

They were a bad team besides LeBron. Like I asked earlier, what was Cleveland's selling point to LeBron when he left? With you we are really good? That applied to virtually all of the teams in the league. You can't convince a guy he should be with your team by telling him he is very good. They had nothing else of value to offer LeBron outside of LeBron is really good, and that is a testament to how bad the supporting cast around LeBron was.

Here's the thing: I agree that how he left was pretty ****y. But here's the thing, if Cleveland wins the title this year (or in the next few years) I doubt very much any Cavs fans will care that he left in the first place.

Stop putting word in my mouth. How many times do i have to say that they were a very good team with LeBron. I am not talking about how good a unit they could have been without LeBron. you are, only you. For about the 10 millionth time i do not care that they wouldn't be very good without LeBron. Could they have substituted another player and won the same amount of games or more? I don't think so. LeBron was the best player in the league and they acquired the players they had in an attempt to compliment him, so that's not exactly a surprise. I think you could have put in Durrant and won a good amount of games, maybe Kobe but the team is and should be its best with LeBron. They would have been fun with a peak Manu running around trying to be a top banana but again LeBron was the best player in the league.

For maybe the 5th or 6th time i disagree with the statement that being really good with LeBron would have applied to "all of the teams in the league". I don't think that is true for any player ever.

I have bashed his loyalty, made fun of him for giving up when he was a conteder, mocked his alliance to this teammates, extolled the Cavs D, and mock the way he manufactured his team. Do i really did to explain why i think he should have stayed instead of colluding to make a super team?

valade16
05-08-2015, 11:24 AM
Stop putting word in my mouth. How many times do i have to say that they were a very good team with LeBron. I am not talking about how good a unit they could have been without LeBron. you are, only you. For about the 10 millionth time i do not care that they wouldn't be very good without LeBron. Could they have substituted another player and won the same amount of games or more? I don't think so. LeBron was the best player in the league and they acquired the players they had in an attempt to compliment him, so that's not exactly a surprise. I think you could have put in Durrant and won a good amount of games, maybe Kobe but the team is and should be its best with LeBron. They would have been fun with a peak Manu running around trying to be a top banana but again LeBron was the best player in the league.

For maybe the 5th or 6th time i disagree with the statement that being really good with LeBron would have applied to "all of the teams in the league". I don't think that is true for any player ever.

I have bashed his loyalty, made fun of him for giving up when he was a conteder, mocked his alliance to this teammates, extolled the Cavs D, and mock the way he manufactured his team. Do i really did to explain why i think he should have stayed instead of colluding to make a super team

Neither am I. I am talking about how good they were being the result of LeBron, not how good they would be if he weren't on the team. There is a difference there and if you can't see that I really can't help you.

The only reason they were a 60+ win team or in contention for a title was because of LeBron. You just admitted this by saying you don't think they would have been as good as they were with any other player in place of LeBron.

And you can stop talking about how you don't think LeBron would have made any team a contender, I don't care. That is a side argument and really irrelevant to the fact that he made Cleveland a contender, pretty much by himself.

But this boils down to the fact you dislike him for leaving, even though you admit they had the least amount of talent around LeBron for any contender of the time period and that the main reason they were good was because of LeBron.

So it begs the question, why exactly are you getting mad at him? He should have to play his entire career with an inferior supporting cast to his rivals simply because they drafted him? Your hate is blind and irrational. LeBron was tired of playing with a **** squad and used what the FA system was intended to do to leave.

Because the simple fact was: the team Cleveland surrounded LeBron with wasn't very good. You said earlier they were one move away from possibly winning the title, but go back and look at the team the year he left and is that really even true? Both Shaq and Big Z only played one more season before they each retired. Antawn Jamison played 2 more seasons. Delonte West was just about to go nuts.

Seriously, that is like 4/5 of their best players outside of LeBron and in 2 years they all would have been gone. So no, they were not a move away from winning the title because they were 3-4 imminent moves away from losing all their talent.

Compare his supporting cast to the supporting cast Kobe and Pierce had as they played for the Champioship that season: Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum, Ron Artest, Lamar Odom for Kobe and KG, Ray Allen, Rajon Rondo, Kendrick Perkins and Rasheed Wallace for Pierce.

Is there even a comparison there? So you expected LeBron to stay on a team that was only good becasue of him with 3/5 of the best players besides himself so old they were a year or two away from retirement.

Can you not at least see how that it would have been completely idiotic for Bron (or anyone) to stay in that situation if they actually cared about winning Championships?

ewing
05-08-2015, 11:37 AM
He could have cared about winning a title and not gone about by any means necessary. Walking out on teammates and franchise when you are in contention for a title is not cool especially if you haven't gotten one yet. That's my opinion. You can say well blah, blah, blah but I am going to disagree. deal with it. As for the players being good b/c of LeBron, i find that silly. Those guys were good at what they were good at and LeBron both complimented a lot of that stuff and picked up stuff they weren't. He was the major reason they were a good team. So what? Should he has stayed? Yes. That's my opinion. Sorry i disagree, with you and you find that irrational

valade16
05-08-2015, 01:17 PM
He could have cared about winning a title and not gone about by any means necessary. Walking out on teammates and franchise when you are in contention for a title is not cool especially if you haven't gotten one yet. That's my opinion. You can say well blah, blah, blah but I am going to disagree. deal with it. As for the players being good b/c of LeBron, i find that silly. Those guys were good at what they were good at and LeBron both complimented a lot of that stuff and picked up stuff they weren't. He was the major reason they were a good team. So what? Should he has stayed? Yes. That's my opinion. Sorry i disagree, with you and you find that irrational

The fact that you disagree with me about thinking he should not have left his team hanging, or the way in which he did it is perfectly fine.

The irrational part is acting like he had a strong enough team to ever legitimately win a title. I guess you can believe he did, but you are in a very small minority there and all the evidence shows you're probably wrong.

Just curious, can you name a team that went to the finals in the last say 20 years that had a worse supporting cast around their best player? Can anyone?

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 01:19 PM
The fact that you disagree with me about thinking he should not have left his team hanging, or the way in which he did it is perfectly fine.

The irrational part is acting like he had a strong enough team to ever legitimately win a title. I guess you can believe he did, but you are in a very small minority there and all the evidence shows you're probably wrong.

Just curious, can you name a team that went to the finals in the last say 20 years that had a worse supporting cast around their best player? Can anyone?

I think iverson's 6ers had less talent overall.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 01:26 PM
I think iverson's 6ers had less talent overall.

Absolutely not. DPOY, 6th man of the year, defense at every position. Iverson was the worst defender on his starting lineup, easily.

And that east was just as bad as the last 5 years has been top to bottom. Philly won a #1 seed with 56 wins.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 01:30 PM
right. I don't know if I have ever seen someone say LeBron is/could be the best player ever. It is agreed upon that he isn't catching, or passing Jordan. That ship sailed a while back. But he is an all timer in his prime, and one of the best 3-6 players to ever play in all reality.

It looks like its sailed because Bron is declining.

But I've never agreed with you that a Finals loss determines everything in this comp. Put it this way, do you give MJ more credit for retiring than you do for Bron's Finals run? Whats better, to not play at all, or to make the Finals?

ewing
05-08-2015, 01:41 PM
The fact that you disagree with me about thinking he should not have left his team hanging, or the way in which he did it is perfectly fine.

The irrational part is acting like he had a strong enough team to ever legitimately win a title. I guess you can believe he did, but you are in a very small minority there and all the evidence shows you're probably wrong.

Just curious, can you name a team that went to the finals in the last say 20 years that had a worse supporting cast around their best player? Can anyone?


All the evidence you are willing to look at you mean. Its also easy to say a team wasn't good enough after they lose. The team had won 61 and 66 games in his last two years. They had a tough 6 game series in the ECF against a very good Celtics the last year. They ranked in the top 10 in both offensive and defensive rating both years- that a popular one around here.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 01:52 PM
It looks like its sailed because Bron is declining.

But I've never agreed with you that a Finals loss determines everything in this comp. Put it this way, do you give MJ more credit for retiring than you do for Bron's Finals run? Whats better, to not play at all, or to make the Finals?

The thing is, Jordan never had such a letdown series like LeBron did against the Mavs. The error for margin is so thin to catch Jordan.

Tony_Starks
05-08-2015, 02:06 PM
I think iverson's 6ers had less talent overall.

Absolutely not. DPOY, 6th man of the year, defense at every position. Iverson was the worst defender on his starting lineup, easily.

And that east was just as bad as the last 5 years has been top to bottom. Philly won a #1 seed with 56 wins.

AI led the league in steals. He was no lock down defender but he was far from a slouch defensively.

I also find it funny you'll give Iverson's teammates credit defensively but when it comes to Lebrons guys such as Andy V, Larry Hughes, Big Z, Drew Gooden, Eric Snow (older), Hickson, Ben Wallace etc...you give no credit. Lebron in Cleveland always not only had defensive help like AI, but also had something Iverson didn't...spot up dead eye shooters to kick the ball to when they double teamed.

koreancabbage
05-08-2015, 02:09 PM
AI led the league in steals. He was no lock down defender but he was far from a slouch defensively.

I also find it funny you'll give Iverson's teammates credit defensively but when it comes to Lebrons guys such as Andy V, Larry Hughes, Big Z, Drew Gooden, Eric Snow (older), Hickson, Ben Wallace etc...you give no credit. Lebron in Cleveland always not only had defensive help like AI, but also had something Iverson didn't...spot up dead eye shooters to kick the ball to when they double teamed.

I'll give more credit to Iverson's teammates for defense than Iverson himself. because they were decent defensive players, Iverson could play the passing lane a lot.

valade16
05-08-2015, 02:09 PM
All the evidence you are willing to look at you mean. Its also easy to say a team wasn't good enough after they lose. The team had won 61 and 66 games in his last two years. They had a tough 6 game series in the ECF against a very good Celtics the last year. They ranked in the top 10 in both offensive and defensive rating both years- that a popular one around here.

I've looked at all the evidence you've provided, but much like what you say in this very post, you mainly bring up what they did with Bron, which as you'll recall because we've said it a million times, LeBron was the reason they were that good.

It's a paper tiger. It'd be like putting Michael Jordan on my high school team and when we win saying the whole team must be pretty good because we won. No, we just had one amazing player who made us look better than everyone else was. That is the extreme example of what we are trying to convey.

They won 61 and 66 games BECAUSE of Bron. So again, you're saying "they had LeBron therefore they were a good team". We are saying "LeBron was why they were a good team"

You haven't answered what team from the last 20 years who made the finals had a worse supporting cast. If it's because you can't, doesn't that say something about how bad they must have been that no one in the last 20 years who got there was as bad?

ewing
05-08-2015, 02:13 PM
I've looked at all the evidence you've provided, but much like what you say in this very post, you mainly bring up what they did with Bron, which as you'll recall because we've said it a million times, LeBron was the reason they were that good.

It's a paper tiger. It'd be like putting Michael Jordan on my high school team and when we win saying the whole team must be pretty good because we won. No, we just had one amazing player who made us look better than everyone else was. That is the extreme example of what we are trying to convey.

They won 61 and 66 games BECAUSE of Bron. So again, you're saying "they had LeBron therefore they were a good team". We are saying "LeBron was why they were a good team"

You haven't answered what team from the last 20 years who made the finals had a worse supporting cast. If it's because you can't, doesn't that say something about how bad they must have been that no one in the last 20 years who got there was as bad?



i am not going to review every roaster for the last 20 years to make you happy, especially when the question is could they have won in at that time. Weather it was b/c of LeBron or JJ Hickson they won all those games. I don't think they were a favorite but they certainly were good enough to win.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 02:16 PM
AI led the league in steals. He was no lock down defender but he was far from a slouch defensively.

I also find it funny you'll give Iverson's teammates credit defensively but when it comes to Lebrons guys such as Andy V, Larry Hughes, Big Z, Drew Gooden, Eric Snow (older), Hickson, Ben Wallace etc...you give no credit. Lebron in Cleveland always not only had defensive help like AI, but also had something Iverson didn't...spot up dead eye shooters to kick the ball to when they double teamed.

Iverson wasn't a very good defender. He routinely was given the lesser player in the back court, where Snow would cover the stronger one.

LeBron had good defenders, for sure. But he was his teams best defender.

What good would it have been to give a guy who shoots 50 times a game spot up shooters haha? Iverson needed versatile defenders who could let him roam, and knew to stay out of the way for the most part on the offensive side of the ball. They weren't really a talented offensive crew by any means, but they didn't need to be with that defense, in that conference.

ewing
05-08-2015, 02:20 PM
Iverson wasn't a very good defender. He routinely was given the lesser player in the back court, where Snow would cover the stronger one.

LeBron had good defenders, for sure. But he was his teams best defender.

What good would it have been to give a guy who shoots 50 times a game spot up shooters haha? Iverson needed versatile defenders who could let him roam, and knew to stay out of the way for the most part on the offensive side of the ball. They weren't really a talented offensive crew by any means, but they didn't need to be with that defense, in that conference.

Shooters would definitely give AI room to drive. Keeping defenders out of the way is the point. If you cant shoot your defender gets in the way.

ewing
05-08-2015, 02:21 PM
Ai wasn't a bad defender snow and mcckie were a lot better but AI wasn't bad

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 02:27 PM
Shooters would definitely give AI room to drive. Keeping defenders out of the way is the point. If you cant shoot your defender gets in the way.

in theory, yep.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 02:27 PM
AI led the league in steals. He was no lock down defender but he was far from a slouch defensively.
Not a lockdown defender? LOL, you dont say. Not to be rude but thats such a fake critique, he was so FAR away from being a lockdown guy, the dude couldn't even defend his own position and theres a reason his best steals seasons came when he had a legit anchor behind him. Not that hes alone, but hes clearly more dependent on his teammates defensively. At least Bron was a true contributor to his teams defense.


I also find it funny you'll give Iverson's teammates credit defensively but when it comes to Lebrons guys such as Andy V, Larry Hughes, Big Z, Drew Gooden, Eric Snow (older), Hickson, Ben Wallace etc...you give no credit.
What makes you think he gives them no credit? We are comparing 2 squads here, only 1 gets the credit of being the superior defense. Hickson/Gooden were and still are awful defenders BTW. Larry Hughes was often injured. Im not seeing why you're mentioning Ben Wallace, Hickson when they werent on that Finals team. Why not mention Shaq while you're at it. Big Ben was great tho, its a shame he broke his leg that one year tho. Tough to be a great defender if you're playing hurt.


Lebron in Cleveland always not only had defensive help like AI, but also had something Iverson didn't...spot up dead eye shooters to kick the ball to when they double teamed.
I thought they were talking about the Cleveland team that made the Finals, the team that went 0-7 without Bron IIRC. That team had Eric Snow and Larry Hughes as its backcourt, by far the worst backcourt shooting team in the playoffs. Id much rather have a team that could defend like mad regardless of my effort than just some shooters. Especially when those shooters were wildly inconsistent.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 02:28 PM
Ai wasn't a bad defender snow and mcckie were a lot better but AI wasn't bad

nah, my point was, eh wasn't asked to carry the 2 way load LeBron was.

ewing
05-08-2015, 02:34 PM
Not a lockdown defender? LOL, you dont say. Not to be rude but thats such a fake critique, he was so FAR away from being a lockdown guy, the dude couldn't even defend his own position and theres a reason his best steals seasons came when he had a legit anchor behind him. Not that hes alone, but hes clearly more dependent on his teammates defensively. At least Bron was a true contributor to his teams defense.


What makes you think he gives them no credit? We are comparing 2 squads here, only 1 gets the credit of being the superior defense. Hickson/Gooden were and still are awful defenders BTW. Larry Hughes was often injured. Im not seeing why you're mentioning Ben Wallace, Hickson when they werent on that Finals team. Why not mention Shaq while you're at it. Big Ben was great tho, its a shame he broke his leg that one year tho. Tough to be a great defender if you're playing hurt.


I thought they were talking about the Cleveland team that made the Finals, the team that went 0-7 without Bron IIRC. That team had Eric Snow and Larry Hughes as its backcourt, by far the worst backcourt shooting team in the playoffs. Id much rather have a team that could defend like mad regardless of my effort than just some shooters. Especially when those shooters were wildly inconsistent.



that team was not as good as the ones that came a couple years later imo but they did have some good defensive players. I believe Hughes was pretty healthy that year and was a very good defender. They also had snow like you mentioned and Wesley- another old dude but he always Ded up. and for bigs they had Big Z, Andy, and Scott Pollard.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 02:37 PM
The thing is, Jordan never had such a letdown series like LeBron did against the Mavs.
Would you rather make the Finals or see your team without that star?

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 02:40 PM
Ai wasn't a bad defender snow and mcckie were a lot better but AI wasn't bad

he was poor. in addition to gambling a lot and taking plays off, he was undersized and weak.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 02:40 PM
that team was not as good as the ones that came a couple years later imo but they did have some good defensive players. I believe Hughes was pretty healthy that year and was a very good defender. They also had snow like you mentioned and Wesley- another old dude but he always Ded up. and for bigs they had Big Z, Andy, and Scott Pollard.

Agreed. Z was still mobile at the time for his length. Hughes had his best year (tho still injury riddled) he was really banged up come Finals IIRC. Wesley was a great defender in his youth, a pitbul who could D up even Bron. I remember what a difference he made for Houston when they traded Jim Jackson for him, it allowed T-Mac to play the 3 more often. I remember making a video mix of the guys defensive ability back then. But he was DONE by his Cleveland days. Andy V was always a plus.

So yes, a good mix of defenders, albeit most of them were out of their prime. NONE were on par with DPOY caliber defenders in Philly.

valade16
05-08-2015, 02:47 PM
i am not going to review every roaster for the last 20 years to make you happy, especially when the question is could they have won in at that time. Weather it was b/c of LeBron or JJ Hickson they won all those games. I don't think they were a favorite but they certainly were good enough to win.

You can think the were good enough to wi all you want, but you're wrong. If they were they'd have likely won wouldn't they?

I also don't think you could name one, even from the time. You seriously think they could have beaten the Celtics, Lakers, Mavs or Spurs?
C'Mon now you're smarter than that.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 02:51 PM
Would you rather make the Finals or see your team without that star?

obviously make the finals. The theories over his retirement are out there of course. But I am not holding it against Jordan for that year he missed. When presented the opportunity, he never ran and hid essentially. Well, maybe not that far, but I remember yelling at the television, I could not figure out what the hell LeBron was doing in the Mavs series. That was it for me, he aint passing MJ haha.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 02:52 PM
Ai wasn't a bad defender snow and mcckie were a lot better but AI wasn't bad
Not that you are BUT AI supporters have a tendency to express what AI isn't to defend his defense.

OK so he wasn't bad, he was still closer to bad than he is closer to average.

So would subpar be the term we're looking for instead of terms everyone wants to avoid.

M.I.A.
05-08-2015, 02:53 PM
Would you rather make the Finals or see your team without that star?

I'd rather see people who swear Lebron is the GOAT admit they're wrong. He isn't. He's a great player but like I said, he ain't going to carry this team on his back to a title. He just doesn't have that in him.

ILLUSIONIST^248
05-08-2015, 02:55 PM
Would you rather make the Finals or see your team without that star?

I'd rather see people who swear Lebron is the GOAT admit they're wrong. He isn't. He's a great player but like I said, he ain't going to carry this team on his back to a title. He just doesn't have that in him.

Precisely.he needs to be the overwhelming favorite to win.

ewing
05-08-2015, 02:58 PM
You can think the were good enough to wi all you want, but you're wrong. If they were they'd have likely won wouldn't they?

No. capable and likely mean different things

I also don't think you could name one, even from the time. You seriously think they could have beaten the Celtics, Lakers, Mavs or Spurs?
C'Mon now you're smarter than that.

the Lebron cavs were title contenders when he left :shrug:

ewing
05-08-2015, 03:02 PM
Not that you are BUT AI supporters have a tendency to express what AI isn't to defend his defense.

OK so he wasn't bad, he was still closer to bad than he is closer to average.

So would subpar be the term we're looking for instead of terms everyone wants to avoid.


I think he did a good job on that team. He certainly gave effort, he certainly created TOs. I guess a lot this was him being covered by other guys but i don't think AI hurt the 76ers as defensive player. Now if we going to talk individual defenders- of course those guys are a lot better and would get tougher assignments hence the qualification.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:02 PM
obviously make the finals.

The theories over his retirement are out there of course.
He could miss the season for whatever he wants.



But I am not holding it against Jordan for that year he missed.
What? Why not? Thats essentially saying longevity doesn't matter at all.


When presented the opportunity, he never ran and hid essentially. Well, maybe not that far, but I remember yelling at the television, I could not figure out what the hell LeBron was doing in the Mavs series. That was it for me, he aint passing MJ haha.
I still value getting mad at a FINALS RUN over getting mad that a player called it quits and not even playing. And I dont agree with how you view the series. Players struggle in their own ways, I dont let emotions dictate the severity one iota.

Like Cuban says, I give more credit to the Mavs defense than I degrade Bron's deferential play.


And for whatever it counts, whenever a team played the sort of defense that the Mavs did against Bron, Phil Jackson would be quick to point out the illegality of the zone.

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 03:03 PM
Would you rather make the Finals or see your team without that star?

That's my only gripe with mj. People love to talk about his basketball competitiveness, but he essentially walked out on the game when he was still on top to pursue baseball.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:08 PM
I'd rather see people who swear Lebron is the GOAT admit they're wrong. He isn't. He's a great player but like I said, he ain't going to carry this team on his back to a title. He just doesn't have that in him.
What do I care about a fan base I dont think exists. Dont really understand the context of your complaint.
Also, that would be a standard I dont think exists. We judge players for their own individual performances, not just the end result of his team. So when a guy like Larry Bird says Bron may have just had the greatest championship run in NBA history, I take that as a sign that the single player had arguably the most to do with his teams eventual championship. When the OBJECTIVE data says its not farfetched and my eyes agree with both the subjective testimonial AND objective evidence, I feel more than confident in my opinion that he has in facts carried his team to a title. If not him, who exactly do you think did? Do you value entire playoff loads or single series performance. Like when Cedrix Maxwell or James Worthy won MVP's, did you truly feel they led their teams to victory?

valade16
05-08-2015, 03:10 PM
the Lebron cavs were title contenders when he left :shrug:

But again, the only reason they were title contenders was because of Bron.

When MJ left the Bulls they won like 55 games. When Bron left the Cavs they plummeted to the bottom of the league. Beyond fit problems. That shows a general lack of talent overall...

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:11 PM
That's my only gripe with mj. People love to talk about his basketball competitiveness, but he essentially walked out on the game when he was still on top to pursue baseball.

It must be nice to have fanboys think you would have 8-peated. They degrade Houstons chips and how Orlando CONVINCINGLY defeated Chicago in doing so. Not to mention you get to rest your legs and refill your emotional tank. I absolutely discredit MJ for missing out on basketball during his prime, how could you not? Hes still the GOAT but longevity isn't so unimportant that we dont take away a single thing from retiring twice. MJ has proven the most, so hes entitled to quitting, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have been greater if he had played.


Like lets put it this way, if MJ plays the 2 years straight, does he get downgraded if he still loses? I find that thinking *** backwards, I always add to a players career the MORE he plays, its impossible to detract and go backwards but I feel like MJ wouldn't be viewed with his invincible aura had he stayed the course.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 03:14 PM
It must be nice to have fanboys think you would have 8-peated. They degrade Houstons chips and how Orlando CONVINCINGLY defeated Chicago in doing so. Not to mention you get to rest your legs and refill your emotional tank. I absolutely discredit MJ for missing out on basketball during his prime, how could you not? Hes still the GOAT but longevity isn't so unimportant that we dont take away a single thing from retiring twice. MJ has proven the most, so hes entitled to quitting, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have been greater if he had played.


Like lets put it this way, if MJ plays the 2 years straight, does he get downgraded if he still loses? I find that thinking *** backwards, I always add to a players career the MORE he plays, its impossible to detract and go backwards but I feel like MJ wouldn't be viewed with his invincible aura had he stayed the course.

not if he is dominating as he almost always did.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:14 PM
the Lebron cavs were title contenders when he left :shrug:

Agreed. What we've been arguing is that if you were to group all the contenders of the modern era, they would be the least talented "contender" given the circumstances going into the playoffs.

Like those Cavs were **** without Bron, compared to say, MJ's Bulls, who could win a mere 2-less games with him gone entirely. Think about that support, THE GOAT RETIRED, and they lose 2 games. That **** matters when dissecting supporting casts.

Every so called contender Bron has left, has completely fallen apart. Its a big deal to go from contending to a lottery team.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:16 PM
not if he is dominating as he almost always did.

Thats the glaring contradiction Hawk. If you're saying you would view him in higher regard had he actually played, then you cant in turn say you dont take anything away from him not playing at all.

ewing
05-08-2015, 03:18 PM
but again, the only reason they were title contenders was because of bron.

When mj left the bulls they won like 55 games. When bron left the cavs they plummeted to the bottom of the league. Beyond fit problems. That shows a general lack of talent overall...



i don't care

valade16
05-08-2015, 03:19 PM
It must be nice to have fanboys think you would have 8-peated. They degrade Houstons chips and how Orlando CONVINCINGLY defeated Chicago in doing so. Not to mention you get to rest your legs and refill your emotional tank. I absolutely discredit MJ for missing out on basketball during his prime, how could you not? Hes still the GOAT but longevity isn't so unimportant that we dont take away a single thing from retiring twice. MJ has proven the most, so hes entitled to quitting, but that doesn't mean he wouldn't have been greater if he had played.

Like lets put it this way, if MJ plays the 2 years straight, does he get downgraded if he still loses? I find that thinking *** backwards, I always add to a players career the MORE he plays, its impossible to detract and go backwards but I feel like MJ wouldn't be viewed with his invincible aura had he stayed the course.

I mean yes they did, but as any of the stats will show, MJ was clearly not at the level he was either before he retired or the next season. Now, that is of course his own fault for retiring but it certainly wasn't peak MJ in that series.

Although I will say the idea that MJ would have 8-peated is far from a sure thing as Houston I believe gave MJ more trouble than pretty much any team except for the Celtics or Pistons. So they very likely still win at least 1 title.

valade16
05-08-2015, 03:21 PM
i don't care

We have a word for people like that when it comes to unfairly criticizing someone without wanting or caring to understand the context of the situation: Hater.

ewing
05-08-2015, 03:21 PM
Agreed. What we've been arguing is that if you were to group all the contenders of the modern era, they would be the least talented "contender" given the circumstances going into the playoffs.

Like those Cavs were **** without Bron, compared to say, MJ's Bulls, who could win a mere 2-less games with him gone entirely. Think about that support, THE GOAT RETIRED, and they lose 2 games. That **** matters when dissecting supporting casts.

Every so called contender Bron has left, has completely fallen apart. Its a big deal to go from contending to a lottery team.


I've never disputed his importance to any team he has been on. I don't like a star player walking out on a team he has been with long term, who is contending for a title. I really don't like the way he did it.

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 03:22 PM
I mean yes they did, but as any of the stats will show, MJ was clearly not at the level he was either before he retired or the next season. Now, that is of course his own fault for retiring but it certainly wasn't peak MJ in that series.

Although I will say the idea that MJ would have 8-peated is far from a sure thing as Houston I believe gave MJ more trouble than pretty much any team except for the Celtics or Pistons. So they very likely still win at least 1 title.

I think the loss of Horace, and his addition to Orlando, along with what else Orlando had, beat the Bulls that year regardless. Horace was tired of being Phil's whipping boy haha

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 03:23 PM
Thats the glaring contradiction Hawk. If you're saying you would view him in higher regard had he actually played, then you cant in turn say you dont take anything away from him not playing at all.

perhaps. Did it hurt MJ from being the GOAT? Nah. But sure, the distance might be even greater between him, and Wilt/KAJ for me had he played and dominated both those years.

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 03:24 PM
i don't care

Wasn't there a head coaching & staff change and something like a 13 player turnaround? Basketball is a game of chemistry, subtracting or adding 1 player can make a big impact. Also when he left the heat, I believe there was a 9 or 10 player turnaround there too. I haven't looked t up in a while so I could be mistaken.

valade16
05-08-2015, 03:26 PM
I think the loss of Horace, and his addition to Orlando, along with what else Orlando had, beat the Bulls that year regardless. Horace was tired of being Phil's whipping boy haha

I mean, I'm not saying they were a lock to win had MJ been his normal ungoldy self, but it definitely played a factor. Losing Horace was huge too.

ewing
05-08-2015, 03:39 PM
We have a word for people like that when it comes to unfairly criticizing someone without wanting or caring to understand the context of the situation: Hater.

you are confusing not caring with not understanding. It makes no difference to me. I get what you are saying. I am not disputing it. just don't care.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:48 PM
I mean yes they did, but as any of the stats will show, MJ was clearly not at the level he was either before he retired or the next season. Now, that is of course his own fault for retiring but it certainly wasn't peak MJ in that series.
Agreed, he was playing at more of a Kobe like level than the usual MJ we're used to seeing.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:50 PM
I've never disputed his importance to any team he has been on. I don't like a star player walking out on a team he has been with long term, who is contending for a title. I really don't like the way he did it.
The way he did it, or the fact that he did it at all? Cleveland shouldn't get credit for contending given the circumstances of their contention, I mean, it would be one thing if Bron were on a decent contender that could afford him not carrying such an immense load. But the facts are, he didn't have a team that could sustain his departure.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 03:58 PM
Wasn't there a head coaching & staff change and something like a 13 player turnaround? Basketball is a game of chemistry, subtracting or adding 1 player can make a big impact. Also when he left the heat, I believe there was a 9 or 10 player turnaround there too. I haven't looked t up in a while so I could be mistaken.

The reason that excuse doesn't fly is because if you paid attention to the Cavs those years, you could see the loss of several players meant very little so long as 1 guy was around. Like they could lose Mo Williams (their most important player outside of Bron) and all they would do was run Bron at PG and win 10 in a row IIRC. The team also made some quality additions in addition to a full training camp with Antawn. This is for the chemistry comment, which does matter, but I cant help but think you overrate it if you think its worth mentioning in this argument. Like, it matters in the sense that when Cleveland first traded for Antawn, they immediately thrust him into the starting lineup and forced him and Shaq to play together despite having no chemistry and were bad compliments to begin with. The Cavs were still contending but it was obvious the lack of chemistry (not to mention coaching) held them back some. A testament to the fact that chemistry doesn't outweigh raw talent. At least not within the context of going from contenders to lottery.

Hell, you could give Cleveland multiple first round picks, including a legit prospect in Irving (who was better than anyone Bron ever had back then) give them back Mike Brown (as they actually did) and the team was STILL a bottom dwellar. Bron was THAT influential.

ewing
05-08-2015, 04:06 PM
The way he did it, or the fact that he did it at all? Cleveland shouldn't get credit for contending given the circumstances of their contention, I mean, it would be one thing if Bron were on a decent contender that could afford him not carrying such an immense load. But the facts are, he didn't have a team that could sustain his departure.

Both.

valade16
05-08-2015, 04:08 PM
Both.

Not saying this is you Ewing but most people who hate LeBron for leaving would be the first people to point out Bron doesn't have any rings and mock him for his lack of hardware.

It truly is a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for LeBron.

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 04:20 PM
The reason that excuse doesn't fly is because if you paid attention to the Cavs those years, you could see the loss of several players meant very little so long as 1 guy was around. Like they could lose Mo Williams (their most important player outside of Bron) and all they would do was run Bron at PG and win 10 in a row IIRC. The team also made some quality additions in addition to a full training camp with Antawn. This is for the chemistry comment, which does matter, but I cant help but think you overrate it if you think its worth mentioning in this argument. Like, it matters in the sense that when Cleveland first traded for Antawn, they immediately thrust him into the starting lineup and forced him and Shaq to play together despite having no chemistry and were bad compliments to begin with. The Cavs were still contending but it was obvious the lack of chemistry (not to mention coaching) held them back some. A testament to the fact that chemistry doesn't outweigh raw talent. At least not within the context of going from contenders to lottery.

Hell, you could give Cleveland multiple first round picks, including a legit prospect in Irving (who was better than anyone Bron ever had back then) give them back Mike Brown (as they actually did) and the team was STILL a bottom dwellar. Bron was THAT influential.

I just find it hard to understand how a guy takes "bottom dweller garbage" to the finals, but a prime/ better version of himself struggles to exceed the success of he bottom dweller team. You would think logically that lesser version/ before prime lebron + garbage = finals, that prime lebron + all star teammates and stacked teams = ring every year, yet he only has two in like 12 years. Also when Jordan left the Bulls they only lost like what, 5 more games than what they did with Jordan? Is lebron worth more to his team than Jordan? I feel like lebron gets way too much credit. It's not like his cavs team was much worse than the one iverson brought to the finals as well. You can argue the 6ers were better defensively, but that was also a slightly tougher east and the talent discrepancy between the two isn't worth mentioning as a point.

KnicksorBust
05-08-2015, 04:28 PM
Agreed. What we've been arguing is that if you were to group all the contenders of the modern era, they would be the least talented "contender" given the circumstances going into the playoffs.

Like those Cavs were **** without Bron, compared to say, MJ's Bulls, who could win a mere 2-less games with him gone entirely. Think about that support, THE GOAT RETIRED, and they lose 2 games. That **** matters when dissecting supporting casts.

Every so called contender Bron has left, has completely fallen apart. Its a big deal to go from contending to a lottery team.


I've never disputed his importance to any team he has been on. I don't like a star player walking out on a team he has been with long term, who is contending for a title. I really don't like the way he did it.

But how many years does a player have to play for a team that was mismanaged before he is allowed to look out for his own interests ?

valade16
05-08-2015, 04:34 PM
I just find it hard to understand how a guy takes "bottom dweller garbage" to the finals, but a prime/ better version of himself struggles to exceed the success of he bottom dweller team. You would think logically that lesser version/ before prime lebron + garbage = finals, that prime lebron + all star teammates and stacked teams = ring every year, yet he only has two in like 12 years. Also when Jordan left the Bulls they only lost like what, 5 more games than what they did with Jordan? Is lebron worth more to his team than Jordan? I feel like lebron gets way too much credit. It's not like his cavs team was much worse than the one iverson brought to the finals as well. You can argue the 6ers were better defensively, but that was also a slightly tougher east and the talent discrepancy between the two isn't worth mentioning as a point.

If you're referring to the difference between Bron in Cleveland and Bron in Miami he only had 4 years, not 12, to show what he could do.

I guess I must be the only person who isn't dissapointed in going to 4 straight finals and winning 2. :shrug:

KnicksorBust
05-08-2015, 04:38 PM
I just find it hard to understand how a guy takes "bottom dweller garbage" to the finals, but a prime/ better version of himself struggles to exceed the success of he bottom dweller team. You would think logically that lesser version/ before prime lebron + garbage = finals, that prime lebron + all star teammates and stacked teams = ring every year, yet he only has two in like 12 years. Also when Jordan left the Bulls they only lost like what, 5 more games than what they did with Jordan? Is lebron worth more to his team than Jordan? I feel like lebron gets way too much credit. It's not like his cavs team was much worse than the one iverson brought to the finals as well. You can argue the 6ers were better defensively, but that was also a slightly tougher east and the talent discrepancy between the two isn't worth mentioning as a point.

If you're referring to the difference between Bron in Cleveland and Bron in Miami he only had 4 years, not 12, to show what he could do.

I guess I must be the only person who isn't dissapointed in going to 4 straight finals and winning 2. :shrugs:

Disappointed is a strong word but I could argue they underachieved not winning 3.

valade16
05-08-2015, 04:49 PM
Disappointed is a strong word but I could argue they underachieved not winning 3.

They probably should have won 3 but at the same time, people say they didn't do that well. How good of a team (or how high do expectations) do you have to be where going 2/4 in the Finals in a 4 year stretch was underachieving.

I can think of 1-2 teams all-time that should be dissapointed with those results.

flea
05-08-2015, 04:58 PM
They probably should have won 3 but at the same time, people say they didn't do that well. How good of a team (or how high do expectations) do you have to be where going 2/4 in the Finals in a 4 year stretch was underachieving.

I can think of 1-2 teams all-time that should be dissapointed with those results.

Yeah but it was the East. The Heat could have lost Lebron and won every series they played in those 4 years except for the Pacers series and maybe the last gasp for Boston's Big 3 in 2012. They had the 3 best players on the court all the way through the Eastern Conference Finals pretty much every year (you maybe could argue Paul Pierce was better than Bosh in 2011, though I wouldn't).

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 05:01 PM
Nobody ever talks about the competitive disadvantage of playing in such a weak conference. Athletes thrive on meaningful competition.

flea
05-08-2015, 05:06 PM
Nobody ever talks about the competitive disadvantage of playing in such a weak conference. Athletes thrive on meaningful competition.

My heart bleeds for Lebron facing teams whose best player was Joakim Noah, Joe Johnson, and David West. Maybe that's what "coast mode" is about. Nobody can get on his level enough in his conference to make him care about the outcome of games.

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 05:07 PM
My heart bleeds for Lebron facing teams whose best player was Joakim Noah, Joe Johnson, and David West. Maybe that's what "coast mode" is about. Nobody can get on his level enough in his conference to make him care about the outcome of games.
Your ignorance is not my problem

ewing
05-08-2015, 05:09 PM
But how many years does a player have to play for a team that was mismanaged before he is allowed to look out for his own interests ?


Poor LeBron,.

flea
05-08-2015, 05:11 PM
Your ignorance is not my problem

No matter what occurs, it disadvantages Lebron. I want to just give him some of my money to make him whole again.

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 05:16 PM
What are all the other disadvantages you refer to?

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 05:17 PM
Nobody ever talks about the competitive disadvantage of playing in such a weak conference. Athletes thrive on meaningful competition.

Sure but they should also be ready for whatever is next. It's definitely an advantage to play easier teams than go through the grind of the west. They still had some good series over the years and had to play the best west team but it was the easier path.

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 05:20 PM
Sure but they should also be ready for whatever is next. It's definitely an advantage to play easier teams than go through the grind of the west. They still had some good series over the years and had to play the best west team but it was the easier path.
I'm not sure I believe that to be honest.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 05:29 PM
Yeah but it was the East. The Heat could have lost Lebron and won every series they played in those 4 years except for the Pacers series and maybe the last gasp for Boston's Big 3 in 2012. They had the 3 best players on the court all the way through the Eastern Conference Finals pretty much every year (you maybe could argue Paul Pierce was better than Bosh in 2011, though I wouldn't).

Well if they lose to the celtics in 2012 and then pacers 2013 there goes their title chances. On top of that I'm not sure 2011 is a guaranteed finals appearance with the way Wade played vs. the bulls (18/6/2 with a 90 ortg).

We could argue back and forth on this hypothetical but the main point is I disagree they could have lost Lebron and really done damage. Sure maybe a finals appearance but really not much more than that and even that isn't guaranteed.

jerellh528
05-08-2015, 05:31 PM
I'm not sure I believe that to be honest.

You don't have to believe that. Some people don't believe in evolution. It's a free country.

KnicksorBust
05-08-2015, 05:32 PM
But how many years does a player have to play for a team that was mismanaged before he is allowed to look out for his own interests ?


Poor LeBron,.

Lol I was genuinely asking. Disappointed at the lack of a response.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 05:35 PM
I'm not sure I believe that to be honest.

Well I probably can't change your mind on that. I do get what you are saying but these guys should be ready for the next challenge no matter what. Even if they are a bit surprised by the level of competition it should only throw them off one game at most.

valade16
05-08-2015, 05:49 PM
Yeah but it was the East. The Heat could have lost Lebron and won every series they played in those 4 years except for the Pacers series and maybe the last gasp for Boston's Big 3 in 2012. They had the 3 best players on the court all the way through the Eastern Conference Finals pretty much every year (you maybe could argue Paul Pierce was better than Bosh in 2011, though I wouldn't).

Kind of like the Heat would still be a competitive team after LeBron went back to Cleveland right? Wade and Bosh (albeit older versions) were so good without LeBron the Heat had a losing record last season...

Hawkeye15
05-08-2015, 05:51 PM
Kind of like the Heat would still be a competitive team after LeBron went back to Cleveland right? Wade and Bosh (albeit older versions) were so good without LeBron the Heat had a losing record last season...

and that is with Dragic coming over midseason, and the sudden emergence of Whiteside..

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 05:57 PM
You don't have to believe that. Some people don't believe in evolution. It's a free country.
Don't get me wrong, in the playoffs I'll take the easier road. But any athlete will tell you they'd rather faced good competition on a regular basis because it brings out the best in them and their teams. You'd have to be dumb or 12 to not understand why its to your advantage to play in the west if making the playoffs is all but assured in either case.

flea
05-08-2015, 05:58 PM
Kind of like the Heat would still be a competitive team after LeBron went back to Cleveland right? Wade and Bosh (albeit older versions) were so good without LeBron the Heat had a losing record last season...

They lost their best player, 3 of their 4 best bench players, and the best player that remained only played half a season. Wade's funeral was held in the 2014 Finals so I'm not really sure you can call the 2015 much more than a shell of a team built specifically for Lebron James.

I still think Bosh can be a top 20 player next year, but it's a drastically different team now. This is a pointless argument because the team was much different with Lebron the role players, plus less wear on Wade's knees. Wade was actually a very good (top 15) player in 2011-2013 in case you forgot. Now he'd be lucky to crack the top 50.

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 05:58 PM
Well I probably can't change your mind on that. I do get what you are saying but these guys should be ready for the next challenge no matter what. Even if they are a bit surprised by the level of competition it should only throw them off one game at most.
I should have clarified that I wasn't talking playoffs.

flea
05-08-2015, 06:00 PM
The Heat lost 16 EC playoff games in 4 years. 7 of those losses were to the Pacers.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 06:02 PM
I should have clarified that I wasn't talking playoffs.

Alright, I was specifically talking playoffs haha.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 06:12 PM
The Heat lost 16 EC playoff games in 4 years. 7 of those losses were to the Pacers.

What is the point you are trying to make here? This is with Lebron and without him they likely would have lost at least one series (possibly another if Bosh is injured like 2012). That pacer team exposed the weakness in Miami and without Lebron to help cover that up it could have been worse. Until last season's series Wade hadn't posted over a 105 ortg vs them and that was without being the main focus.

Like I said earlier that Miami team wasn't going to be doing much without Lebron. Even with the weak east everyone talks about they still would have had a lot of trouble making the finals (2014 is probably their best shot and they were declining).

Chronz
05-08-2015, 06:13 PM
I just find it hard to understand how a guy takes "bottom dweller garbage" to the finals, but a prime/ better version of himself struggles to exceed the success of he bottom dweller team.
He was better, but not exactly the same athlete. I feel like I've given my take on this to you before but essentially it boils down to this. There is a difference between depth and top heavy power (one is geared for the regular season grind, the other for the playoffs) the greatest of teams had the best combination of both, theres also a difference between regular season players and post season players (Mo Williams for example, exemplifies a regular season player).

And people overstate his improvement, sure hes a better player in Miami but his regular season production wasn't that different, the reason he became a better player was because he became more well rounded and come playoffs was harder to gameplan for. This happens to alot of players, forgot who coined it the phental state. Its like looking at Kobe the year he won his final championship. That wasn't his best regular season but I feel like he was at his best for the playoffs those years.


You would think logically that lesser version/ before prime lebron + garbage = finals, that prime lebron + all star teammates and stacked teams = ring every year, yet he only has two in like 12 years.
What if we dont agree with your interpretation of his support?


Also when Jordan left the Bulls they only lost like what, 5 more games than what they did with Jordan?
Pretty sure it was only 2 games but I must admit there is alot more context left out with that number. Needless to say, thats what a great contending team does. It can sustain the loss of a star, whereas the Cavs that went to the Finals were WINLESS without Bron and saw their efficiency COLLAPSE when he was on the bench. Thats the difference.


Is lebron worth more to his team than Jordan?
Depends on how you define value, in terms of regular season wins, there is no doubt Bron was worth more to those Cavs than MJ was to those Bulls, for reasons that go beyond their own performance but also the replacement value of his teammates.


I feel like lebron gets way too much credit. It's not like his cavs team was much worse than the one iverson brought to the finals as well.
Based on what?


You can argue the 6ers were better defensively, but that was also a slightly tougher east and the talent discrepancy between the two isn't worth mentioning as a point.

I dont see any defense for that. The Cavs actually defeated a superior team (with Bron winning G6 in historic fashion) whereas the Sixers nearly lost every series they entered.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 06:29 PM
Disappointed is a strong word but I could argue they underachieved not winning 3.

Yes, but it was also Y1 with guys like Bibby and Dampier playing big roles and clogging up the driving lanes while providing zilch defensively. I know they were 3 stars at the time but they were all offensive performers with only 1 ball to share. Sometimes its best to have the inferior player if he does ALL the dirty work. Its still a function of the team that matters and those Heat weren't the space and pace outfit we saw once they added some role players.

Chronz
05-08-2015, 06:33 PM
Well if they lose to the celtics in 2012 and then pacers 2013 there goes their title chances. On top of that I'm not sure 2011 is a guaranteed finals appearance with the way Wade played vs. the bulls (18/6/2 with a 90 ortg).

We could argue back and forth on this hypothetical but the main point is I disagree they could have lost Lebron and really done damage. Sure maybe a finals appearance but really not much more than that and even that isn't guaranteed.

Bron and Wade were taking turns each series, their entire motto (from Spo down) was he doesn't care what they did offensively, so long as they got the stops on the other end. Spo was a great defensive coach but the fact that he couldn't see that Rio was their best starter or that Dampier should never play a meaningful minute over going small, is really what cost Miami.

Zefflin
05-08-2015, 06:36 PM
haha @ this still being a top thread...RIP quality PSD days

Chronz
05-08-2015, 06:38 PM
Yeah but it was the East. The Heat could have lost Lebron and won every series they played in those 4 years except for the Pacers series and maybe the last gasp for Boston's Big 3 in 2012. They had the 3 best players on the court all the way through the Eastern Conference Finals pretty much every year (you maybe could argue Paul Pierce was better than Bosh in 2011, though I wouldn't).

KG ate Bosh's lunch on the blocks last I remember. Could be wrong tho, forgotten those series.

Bostonjorge
05-08-2015, 07:06 PM
Ok so now we calling the guys James had in Miami scrubs and the proof is look at what they did this year? Yet still back up the competition level in the east. So with this concept lets look at James best competion during the decline years of Wade and bosh.

Pacers the best team James played out east three strait years. George goes down and this year, and the pacers are the Miami Heat. A bunch of scrubs. So basically James was playing only against George leading a bunch of scrubs. So how is this impressive at all?

Chronz
05-08-2015, 07:15 PM
Ok so now we calling the guys James had in Miami scrubs and the proof is look at what they did this year? Yet still back up the competition level in the east. So with this concept lets look at James best competion during the decline years of Wade and bosh.

Pacers the best team James played out east three strait years. George goes down and this year, and the pacers are the Miami Heat. A bunch of scrubs. So basically James was playing only against George leading a bunch of scrubs. So how is this impressive at all?
Who called them scrubs? Why do the haters insist on strawman arguments? Are you actually trying to debate or just appear extreme?

As for your flawed concept, Pacers didn't add players the caliber of Dragic, Whiteside and Deng. Pacers were also without that guy who led the league in triple doubles and without the highly efficient George Hill. That the Pacers still fielded a similarly competitive team despite the accusation that the Heat had "Stars" isn't something that helps your argument.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 07:25 PM
Bron and Wade were taking turns each series, their entire motto (from Spo down) was he doesn't care what they did offensively, so long as they got the stops on the other end. Spo was a great defensive coach but the fact that he couldn't see that Rio was their best starter or that Dampier should never play a meaningful minute over going small, is really what cost Miami.

I don't disagree at all, everyone else could tell Bibby sucked by that point. I think they played a ton of Joel Anthony that post season as well. I am saying that without Lebron they would have had trouble even making the finals over the 4 year span. They would still have all of the same issues with size/rebounding/depth/coaching just without the cover up of Lebron.

They definitely were trading off series that year though. Lebron struggled vs the mavs when wade went off and the opposite happened against the bulls.

Shlumpledink
05-08-2015, 07:44 PM
If Kobe or Duncan's teams were in the east they would have finished every year with better records, and therefore be voted higher by the media, possibly even more finals appearances.

Can't discount that variable, playing in the east = playing inferior teams = better records = better stats = more mvp votes

Jamiecballer
05-08-2015, 07:52 PM
If Kobe or Duncan's teams were in the east they would have finished every year with better records, and therefore be voted higher by the media, possibly even more finals appearances.

Can't discount that variable, playing in the east = playing inferior teams = better records = better stats = more mvp votes
False. Zero evidence to back any of those claims up.

mngopher35
05-08-2015, 08:07 PM
If Kobe or Duncan's teams were in the east they would have finished every year with better records, and therefore be voted higher by the media, possibly even more finals appearances.

Can't discount that variable, playing in the east = playing inferior teams = better records = better stats = more mvp votes

I'm not so sure about this. Kobe is out basically no matter what since his 05 team wasn't that good and he missed like 16 games. Even if that team had been able to make the playoffs in the east instead of not making it he wouldn't have been in the top 5 (I don't think he made any ballots as is).

Duncan might have an argument here but it really comes down to 06 for him. This year had had a down year from an efficiency stand point and also didn't crack 20ppg for the first time in his career. Generally speaking players don't seem to always have better stats against the east so I'm not sure how much this would change (although this specific year his were better). Also the Spurs handily had the best record in the league but the award went to Nash who was in 2nd in the west so changing conferences affects nothing there (unless you think they win like 70+ in the east which could get him extra votes).

The more finals appearances part is probably true but for the 10 straight top MVP years I'm not sure it makes a huge difference for them. Kobe definitely would be out of the running and maybe Duncan could jump from 8-5 in 06 but I am not so sure it would change much.

ewing
05-08-2015, 11:24 PM
and that is with Dragic coming over midseason, and the sudden emergence of Whiteside..

Imagine he hadn't bolted on a group of guys that had made 4 consecutive finals with him, they found whiteside and traded for Dragic?

ewing
05-08-2015, 11:26 PM
No matter what occurs, it disadvantages Lebron. I want to just give him some of my money to make him whole again.

i just started a kickstarter project

Tony_Starks
05-08-2015, 11:32 PM
Kind of like the Heat would still be a competitive team after LeBron went back to Cleveland right? Wade and Bosh (albeit older versions) were so good without LeBron the Heat had a losing record last season...

and that is with Dragic coming over midseason, and the sudden emergence of Whiteside..

Bosh freak injury says hello.....

Chronz
05-09-2015, 12:15 AM
Bosh freak injury says hello.....

You mean the same Bosh who led the Heat to a sub.500 record? It doesn't change what Hawk said. That team still added a monster prospect and an alleged All-Star caliber PG at the deadline. Thats still better than nothing.

Bostonjorge
05-09-2015, 03:44 AM
I'm not so sure about this. Kobe is out basically no matter what since his 05 team wasn't that good and he missed like 16 games. Even if that team had been able to make the playoffs in the east instead of not making it he wouldn't have been in the top 5 (I don't think he made any ballots as is).

Duncan might have an argument here but it really comes down to 06 for him. This year had had a down year from an efficiency stand point and also didn't crack 20ppg for the first time in his career. Generally speaking players don't seem to always have better stats against the east so I'm not sure how much this would change (although this specific year his were better). Also the Spurs handily had the best record in the league but the award went to Nash who was in 2nd in the west so changing conferences affects nothing there (unless you think they win like 70+ in the east which could get him extra votes).

The more finals appearances part is probably true but for the 10 straight top MVP years I'm not sure it makes a huge difference for them. Kobe definitely would be out of the running and maybe Duncan could jump from 8-5 in 06 but I am not so sure it would change much.

I'm not sure about this at all. Kobe put up almost identical stats to iverson who finished in the top 5 for MVP on a 7th place team out east. You put Kobe out east and Kobe is only going to improve like shaq did against weaker teams. Kobe with the same exact stats in the playoffs out east gets you a top 5 easily. Kobe would only have to win 51% of his games to make the playoffs and that gets you a MVP vote with kobes roster in 2005. Not sure why you think these east teams could stop prime Kobe? Kirk had his team In 4th place out east that year.

mngopher35
05-09-2015, 04:00 AM
I'm not sure about this at all. Kobe put up almost identical stats to iverson who finished in the top 5 for MVP on a 7th place team out east. You put Kobe out east and Kobe is only going to improve like shaq did against weaker teams. Kobe with the same exact stats in the playoffs out east gets you a top 5 easily. Kobe would only have to win 51% of his games to make the playoffs and that gets you a MVP vote with kobes roster in 2005. Not sure why you think these east teams could stop prime Kobe? Kirk had his team In 4th place out east that year.

The lakers still had below .500 record against the east that year (and kobe was statistically the same vs. each conference). Iverson scored more (lead the league), assisted more, and played 9 more games that season for a team that won 9 more games. Kobe would not have finished top 5 in 2005.

HeatFan
05-09-2015, 02:17 PM
Seems like a great accomplishment but really against who was he compared all those years? The MVP field of candidates in the 80's and 90's, maybe early 2000's as well, was much more stacked with definite top 10-20 caliber players in their prime than Lebron's was. Not to discredit entirely, but worth mentioning.

I am surprised Kobe isn't in this same list. Top 10 player IMO but not much love when it came to MVPs.

Hawkeye15
05-09-2015, 07:30 PM
Imagine he hadn't bolted on a group of guys that had made 4 consecutive finals with him, they found whiteside and traded for Dragic?

hindsight is a ***** my man.

Imagine if my Wolves hadn't:

traded Ray Allen for Starbury
drafted Corey Brewer over Noah
drafted Rubio/Flynn over Curry
drafted Wes J over Cousins
hired David Kahn

I could go on, but my fingers would turn into nubs.

Hawkeye15
05-09-2015, 07:31 PM
Seems like a great accomplishment but really against who was he compared all those years? The MVP field of candidates in the 80's and 90's, maybe early 2000's as well, was much more stacked with definite top 10-20 caliber players in their prime than Lebron's was. Not to discredit entirely, but worth mentioning.

I am surprised Kobe isn't in this same list. Top 10 player IMO but not much love when it came to MVPs.

Kobe did get over 10 straight years in MVP shares. But honestly, was Kobe ever just obviously the best player in the game? I don't think you can make a case for that.

Hawkeye15
05-09-2015, 07:31 PM
Bosh freak injury says hello.....

how were they doing with Bosh? His production was easily replaced when he went down btw. Heat still missed the playoffs. In the east.

ewing
05-09-2015, 10:41 PM
hindsight is a ***** my man.

Imagine if my Wolves hadn't:

traded Ray Allen for Starbury
drafted Corey Brewer over Noah
drafted Rubio/Flynn over Curry
drafted Wes J over Cousins
hired David Kahn

I could go on, but my fingers would turn into nubs.

actually, I said he was ***** for running out on Wade at the time.

M.I.A.
05-09-2015, 10:51 PM
What do I care about a fan base I dont think exists. Dont really understand the context of your complaint.
Also, that would be a standard I dont think exists. We judge players for their own individual performances, not just the end result of his team. So when a guy like Larry Bird says Bron may have just had the greatest championship run in NBA history, I take that as a sign that the single player had arguably the most to do with his teams eventual championship. When the OBJECTIVE data says its not farfetched and my eyes agree with both the subjective testimonial AND objective evidence, I feel more than confident in my opinion that he has in facts carried his team to a title. If not him, who exactly do you think did? Do you value entire playoff loads or single series performance. Like when Cedrix Maxwell or James Worthy won MVP's, did you truly feel they led their teams to victory?

It was the entire team that won the titles. Without that team Lebron is great but not dominant. The Cavs are struggling witth the Bulls right now, a lower seed. And Lebron doesn't even look to be the best player on his team right now.

Chronz
05-10-2015, 01:30 AM
It was the entire team that won the titles.
Im pretty sure its always the team that wins titles, I dont think I've ever seen 1 player be the only 1 to receive a ring during the ceremony.



Without that team Lebron is great but not dominant.
Forgive me if I side with the objective evidence, subjective testimonials of people I respect AND my own 2 eyes. I mean, forget what I personally believe, Im really trying to see your point but can we start with why your unsubstantiated opinion matters more than the likes of Larry Bird and the stats that go against you?? Im not seeing why you think he wasn't dominant given the overwhelming evidence that suggests he was.


The Cavs are struggling witth the Bulls right now, a lower seed. And Lebron doesn't even look to be the best player on his team right now.

Not seeing what this has to do with what he accomplished in Miami where he was the undisputed best player in the league and so thoroughly dominant that the likes of Larry Bird suggested he just had the best championship run ever. Still, the Cavs lost a pretty important piece and if you're referring to Kyrie, technically he just tweaked that ankle so RIGHT NOW, he played the worst this last game. Lets stay rooted in fact here, plz.

M.I.A.
05-10-2015, 04:14 AM
Im pretty sure its always the team that wins titles, I dont think I've ever seen 1 player be the only 1 to receive a ring during the ceremony.



Forgive me if I side with the objective evidence, subjective testimonials of people I respect AND my own 2 eyes. I mean, forget what I personally believe, Im really trying to see your point but can we start with why your unsubstantiated opinion matters more than the likes of Larry Bird and the stats that go against you?? Im not seeing why you think he wasn't dominant given the overwhelming evidence that suggests he was.


Not seeing what this has to do with what he accomplished in Miami where he was the undisputed best player in the league and so thoroughly dominant that the likes of Larry Bird suggested he just had the best championship run ever. Still, the Cavs lost a pretty important piece and if you're referring to Kyrie, technically he just tweaked that ankle so RIGHT NOW, he played the worst this last game. Lets stay rooted in fact here, plz.

The Cavaliers will go down in flames and everyone will finally realize that Lebron isn't Superman. Without Bosh & Wade I doubt we see him get another title. Just being real.

And you're forgiven. ;)

Chronz
05-10-2015, 04:49 AM
The Cavaliers will go down in flames and everyone will finally realize that Lebron isn't Superman. Without Bosh & Wade I doubt we see him get another title. Just being real.

And you're forgiven. ;)

no one is superman. Everyone needs help to win. Ill stick to the facts, experts and stats over whatever it is you value

KnicksorBust
05-10-2015, 08:48 PM
Kobe did get over 10 straight years in MVP shares. But honestly, was Kobe ever just obviously the best player in the game? I don't think you can make a case for that.

"Obviously" makes it challenging but... 2005-2007

Tony_Starks
05-10-2015, 08:54 PM
Seems like a great accomplishment but really against who was he compared all those years? The MVP field of candidates in the 80's and 90's, maybe early 2000's as well, was much more stacked with definite top 10-20 caliber players in their prime than Lebron's was. Not to discredit entirely, but worth mentioning.

I am surprised Kobe isn't in this same list. Top 10 player IMO but not much love when it came to MVPs.

Kobe did get over 10 straight years in MVP shares. But honestly, was Kobe ever just obviously the best player in the game? I don't think you can make a case for that.

Easily was in Nash MVP year and Dirks, among others. The 81 point year he was so far and ahead the best in the game its not even really debatable. Well, outside of PSD that is....

Teeboy1487
05-10-2015, 09:13 PM
I swear I wish people get over this pissing match between Kobe and Lebron. Why is it even relevant in the twilight of Kobe's career? Both players great in their own right. Get over it and stop acting like divas.

FlashBolt
05-10-2015, 09:38 PM
I swear I wish people get over this pissing match between Kobe and Lebron. Why is it even relevant in the twilight of Kobe's career? Both players great in their own right. Get over it and stop acting like divas.

Amen. It's sad we can't enjoy two top ten players of this generation without putting them in an arguing contest. It's no wonder more and more people are avoiding these forums.

M.I.A.
05-11-2015, 08:12 AM
no one is superman. Everyone needs help to win. Ill stick to the facts, experts and stats over whatever it is you value

I don't blame you. But remember Captain Kirk's famous statement about what makes us human. We have the ability to leap beyond logic. Yeah, I like that. ;)

FraziersKnicks
05-11-2015, 09:55 AM
Amen. It's sad we can't enjoy two top ten players of this generation without putting them in an arguing contest. It's no wonder more and more people are avoiding these forums.

The majority of the animosity is created by Kobe fans who are scared LeBron will pass him all time. There's were it all comes from really. Then there's the fans who have never really liked Kobe, they side with LeBron and thus creates Kobe vs. LeBron.

FlashBolt
05-11-2015, 11:38 AM
The majority of the animosity is created by Kobe fans who are scared LeBron will pass him all time. There's were it all comes from really. Then there's the fans who have never really liked Kobe, they side with LeBron and thus creates Kobe vs. LeBron.

No doubt in my mind about that. Not nitpicking but there are about five Kobe fans who should be banned from these forums because they are 100% the ones who thrive off hating him. I know there are crazy LeBron fans too but when you make a tough shot like that and then they start saying the refs saved the Cavs? LMAO, what a joke. Any basketball fan knows they will review that play 100% of the time. The funny part is James was fouled by Noah before that game winner shot but they ignore that because it doesn't help their agenda.

FraziersKnicks
05-11-2015, 12:41 PM
No doubt in my mind about that. Not nitpicking but there are about five Kobe fans who should be banned from these forums because they are 100% the ones who thrive off hating him. I know there are crazy LeBron fans too but when you make a tough shot like that and then they start saying the refs saved the Cavs? LMAO, what a joke. Any basketball fan knows they will review that play 100% of the time. The funny part is James was fouled by Noah before that game winner shot but they ignore that because it doesn't help their agenda.

The problem is all the people that dislike Kobe (myself included) have the upmost respect for the guy and will give credit where it's due. An incredible player who just happens to be a jerk and I don't like his selfish basketball mentality, but he's in my top 10 all-time and the NBA will greatly miss him when he retires. The main people that hate on LeBron criticise him for absolutely everything possible.

As it's been mentioned before, the pro-LeBron group on PSD consists of fans of completely different teams in the league. The anti-LeBron group is primarily Lakers fans. That says a lot.

FlashBolt
05-11-2015, 12:49 PM
The problem is all the people that dislike Kobe (myself included) have the upmost respect for the guy and will give credit where it's due. An incredible player who just happens to be a jerk and I don't like his selfish basketball mentality, but he's in my top 10 all-time and the NBA will greatly miss him when he retires. The main people that hate on LeBron criticise him for absolutely everything possible.

As it's been mentioned before, the pro-LeBron group on PSD consists of fans of completely different teams in the league. The anti-LeBron group is primarily Lakers fans. That says a lot.

Exactly. And I hate to be the one to say it but Kobe just isn't better than LeBron. I don't know what else needs to be said. It's funny that the only thing they can come up with are rings but when you look into that, you'll see James still has 5 years left and the fact that he had a crappy team for 7 long years. Kobe was placed into a better situation. It's almost as if they ignore everything that has been going on just to conclude their agenda. I have yet to see one bad thing about James that we can truly ridicule him for other than that Mavs Finals series. But even then, what has he done off the court that makes him such a hated person?

Bostonjorge
05-11-2015, 04:05 PM
You Kobe haters are obsessed with the man. Your weak excuse is because we talk about James? Sound fake to me. The Kobe bashing has been going on before James. People just don't like James and it's not because of this site. He was the most hated player in 2011. Even people who didn't watch basketball didn't like James. So it's not unusual to find people on here that don't like James either.

Also here is what bird said about James and Kobe. Gave both amazing compliments but when asked if you can play with one player bird picked Kobe because this game is played to win championships.

http://youtu.be/ecS0D-Vxh8Y

Hawkeye15
05-11-2015, 04:09 PM
You Kobe haters are obsessed with the man. Your weak excuse is because we talk about James? Sound fake to me. The Kobe bashing has been going on before James. People just don't like James and it's not because of this site. He was the most hated player in 2011. Even people who didn't watch basketball didn't like James. So it's not unusual to find people on here that don't like James either.

Also here is what bird said about James and Kobe. Gave both amazing compliments but when asked if you can play with one player bird picked Kobe because this game is played to win championships.

http://youtu.be/ecS0D-Vxh8Y

meh. The only reason I started to root for LeBron was he got a ton of hate while in Cleveland, playing with crap, while playing at a level we have rarely seen. My like for one player never has anything to do with not liking another player. The player himself has to annoy me for me to dislike him.

flea
05-11-2015, 04:24 PM
You Kobe haters are obsessed with the man. Your weak excuse is because we talk about James? Sound fake to me. The Kobe bashing has been going on before James. People just don't like James and it's not because of this site. He was the most hated player in 2011. Even people who didn't watch basketball didn't like James. So it's not unusual to find people on here that don't like James either.

Also here is what bird said about James and Kobe. Gave both amazing compliments but when asked if you can play with one player bird picked Kobe because this game is played to win championships.

http://youtu.be/ecS0D-Vxh8Y

I think that Kobe had a better age 30 season than Lebron - and I'll think that even if the Cavs win it all. Kobe always had a more well-rounded offensive game, which is why he had such an effective decline. Seriously doubt Lebron has a better career age 30+ than Kobe did, but that's why they play the games I guess.

Hawkeye15
05-11-2015, 04:49 PM
I think that Kobe had a better age 30 season than Lebron - and I'll think that even if the Cavs win it all. Kobe always had a more well-rounded offensive game, which is why he had such an effective decline. Seriously doubt Lebron has a better career age 30+ than Kobe did, but that's why they play the games I guess.

I agree, at age 30, Kobe had the better season than LeBron just had. Interested to see what LeBron does with his game now that he has lost a step physically. In my opinion, LeBron had multiple seasons better than anything Kobe ever produced, but the decline looks to have set in.

Edit: If the Cavs win it all, I may take that back, it would mean LeBron has to play out of his mind haha (not likely)

FraziersKnicks
05-11-2015, 05:31 PM
I think that Kobe had a better age 30 season than Lebron - and I'll think that even if the Cavs win it all. Kobe always had a more well-rounded offensive game, which is why he had such an effective decline. Seriously doubt Lebron has a better career age 30+ than Kobe did, but that's why they play the games I guess.

I completely agree. It's what makes Kobe so great. The longevity of his career and being a top 5 player for about forever. Fortunately for LeBron, he's had such a superior career up to 30 that he's already ahead of him in my opinion. So anything from here on out will just widen the gap in LeBron's favour.

Bostonjorge
05-11-2015, 06:22 PM
I agree, at age 30, Kobe had the better season than LeBron just had. Interested to see what LeBron does with his game now that he has lost a step physically. In my opinion, LeBron had multiple seasons better than anything Kobe ever produced, but the decline looks to have set in.

Edit: If the Cavs win it all, I may take that back, it would mean LeBron has to play out of his mind haha (not likely)

I don't buy that. You can't say Kobe was put into a geat situation by going to the lakers to win, without saying James was put into a great situation by having his whole career in the east. You can't point at James stats and compare them to Kobes when Kobe was playing against the best the league had to offer and winning. James stats didn't translate to rings only translated to dominating the east.

FlashBolt
05-11-2015, 06:24 PM
I don't buy that. You can't say Kobe was put into a geat situation by going to the lakers to win, without saying James was put into a great situation by having his whole career in the east. You can't point at James stats and compare them to Kobes when Kobe was playing against the best the league had to offer and winning. James stats didn't translate to rings only translated to dominating the east.

James numbers and record are actually better vs the West. Please stop embarrassing yourself.

Bostonjorge
05-11-2015, 06:40 PM
James numbers and record are actually better vs the West. Please stop embarrassing yourself.

Then why did it translate to 2-5 in finals appearance. A sweep and then the biggest point differential in the history of a 7 game series finals. I guess having a winning record against west meant nothing.

FraziersKnicks
05-11-2015, 07:01 PM
Please don't anyone waste your time trying to argue with him. It will literally be like talking to a brick wall.

FlashBolt
05-11-2015, 07:42 PM
Please don't anyone waste your time trying to argue with him. It will literally be like talking to a brick wall.

Just look at his argument. It went from James being in an easier conference to him now being 2-5 and James is being blamed for losing vs Spurs last season. Lmao, this guy.

Hawkeye15
05-11-2015, 09:10 PM
I don't buy that. You can't say Kobe was put into a geat situation by going to the lakers to win, without saying James was put into a great situation by having his whole career in the east. You can't point at James stats and compare them to Kobes when Kobe was playing against the best the league had to offer and winning. James stats didn't translate to rings only translated to dominating the east.

yes, I can. He went to a storied franchise that has been the model for the entire modern NBA.

LeBron actually dominates the west too btw. But, that doesn't fit your agenda.

Hawkeye15
05-11-2015, 09:11 PM
Then why did it translate to 2-5 in finals appearance. A sweep and then the biggest point differential in the history of a 7 game series finals. I guess having a winning record against west meant nothing.

ohhhhhhh, you mean his team results.

Make sure you point that out next time, so I can ignore your post.

jerellh528
05-11-2015, 09:36 PM
naturally playing almost double your games vs the east is going to produced more duds in the greater pool of games if you're statistically a great player. Also it's much easier to "get up" vs a tough western confrence opponent when you can coast ever other game in the east than it is to grind it out vs tough competition in the west night in and night out, ESPECIALLY in the playoffs. Ppl can say he plays good against the west, and he does, but it's a hugely barebones statement just like the other stats that lacks context. Truth is we don't know how Lebron would respond to the western grind, it's just as easy to say that the phenomenal level of durability he's shown is a direct result of what many Lebron fans refer to as coasting, playing in the east allows that luxury. Not taking anything away from James though, he's always been able to fill up the stat box

KnicksorBust
05-11-2015, 09:37 PM
naturally playing almost double your games vs the east is going to produced more duds in the greater pool of games if you're statistically a great player. Also it's much easier to "get up" vs a tough western confrence opponent when you can coast ever other game in the east than it is to grind it out vs tough competition in the west night in and night out, ESPECIALLY in the playoffs. Ppl can say he plays good against the west, and he does, but it's a hugely barebones statement just like the other stats that lacks context. Truth is we don't know how Lebron would respond to the western grind, it's just as easy to say that the phenomenal level of durability he's shown is a direct result of what many Lebron fans refer to as coasting, playing in the east allows that luxury. Not taking anything away from James though, he's always been able to fill up the stat box

Has Tim Duncan coasted?

jerellh528
05-11-2015, 09:39 PM
Has Tim Duncan coasted?

I don't know, I do know that he doesn't have a rabid fan base pulling the coast card whenever he has a bad stretch. U tell me, do you think he coasts?

KnicksorBust
05-11-2015, 09:48 PM
Has Tim Duncan coasted?

I don't know, I do know that he doesn't have a rabid fan base pulling the coast card whenever he has a bad stretch. U tell me, do you think he coasts?

I dont think it matters. There is a point in a player's career where the regular season is simply used as a warm up and all that matters is being healthy for the playoffs. The Spurs have perfected that.

jerellh528
05-11-2015, 09:51 PM
I dont think it matters. There is a point in a player's career where the regular season is simply used as a warm up and all that matters is being healthy for the playoffs. The Spurs have perfected that.

If it doesn't matter, why did you ask.? Pop's system maximizes every player's production down to the last guy on the bench. Everyone else scratches and claws for seeding.

KnicksorBust
05-11-2015, 09:59 PM
I dont think it matters. There is a point in a player's career where the regular season is simply used as a warm up and all that matters is being healthy for the playoffs. The Spurs have perfected that.

If it doesn't matter, why did you ask.? Pop's system maximizes every player's production down to the last guy on the bench. Everyone else scratches and claws for seeding.

Bc far too many people exaggerate the "grind" of the West when in reality Lebron would have coasted no matter what conference or division.

jerellh528
05-11-2015, 10:04 PM
Bc far too many people exaggerate the "grind" of the West when in reality Lebron would have coasted no matter what conference or division.

Lol k

FlashBolt
05-11-2015, 11:23 PM
People forget that the West in general are stacked. Every team without their superstar is a much better team than the East without their superstars. Example: Playoff teams of the West are currently:

Warriors
Spurs
LAC
Warriors
Houston
Portland
Dallas
Pelicans

You take the best player off any one of those teams and put LBJ in there, you'll have a better team. So is the WC better? Yeah, but it's not because of one player. The teams are better because they are more stacked. You can argue that James hasn't played in the WC but lets say he was in LAC with CP3+DeAndre. They'll kick ***.

valade16
05-12-2015, 09:33 AM
People forget that the West in general are stacked. Every team without their superstar is a much better team than the East without their superstars. Example: Playoff teams of the West are currently:
Warriors
Spurs
LAC
Grizzlies
Houston
Portland
Dallas
Pelicans

You take the best player off any one of those teams and put LBJ in there, you'll have a better team. So is the WC better? Yeah, but it's not because of one player. The teams are better because they are more stacked. You can argue that James hasn't played in the WC but lets say he was in LAC with CP3+DeAndre. They'll kick ***.

As someone pointed out, the only player in the Top 15 of the MVP votes this year from the east was Bron. The West has by far the greater concentration of top end talent.

Jamiecballer
05-12-2015, 01:44 PM
Bc far too many people exaggerate the "grind" of the West when in reality Lebron would have coasted no matter what conference or division.

not true. he would have been better for it.

Chronz
05-12-2015, 01:52 PM
Bc far too many people exaggerate the "grind" of the West when in reality Lebron would have coasted no matter what conference or division.

Yeah, I love how when people mention the West they neglect he would also benefit from being around superior teammates (on top of having absolutely ZERO in the way of evidence to back any and all assertions). Also, run and gun play was primarily found in the West for as long as I can remember. Its less physically taxing and more conducive to Brons preferred style of play.

Also, never feel the need to defend objective evidence in the face of pure speculation.

Chronz
05-12-2015, 01:53 PM
not true. he would have been better for it.
You can speculate all you want, but you cant say someone else is wrong for speculating as well.

Jamiecballer
05-12-2015, 02:45 PM
You can speculate all you want, but you cant say someone else is wrong for speculating as well.

you aren't going to coast when you are challenged every night. i've never seen a top competitor do that in my life. and by competitor i'm talking about the uber elite athletes, not the average players, or even the very good players. i'm talking top of the mountain, will not be forgotten for a long time if ever type of athletes.

Chronz
05-12-2015, 03:24 PM
you aren't going to coast when you are challenged every night. i've never seen a top competitor do that in my life. and by competitor i'm talking about the uber elite athletes, not the average players, or even the very good players. i'm talking top of the mountain, will not be forgotten for a long time if ever type of athletes.
Even if ur right there's still gotta be some tangible stress that hinders longevity/durability from that sort of Strain. I mean these guys DO coast for a reason beyond competition. That's why i rather argue the fact that being in the west could actually provide him more coasts really depends on team philosophy.

Vinylman
05-12-2015, 04:53 PM
Yeah, I love how when people mention the West they neglect he would also benefit from being around superior teammates (on top of having absolutely ZERO in the way of evidence to back any and all assertions). Also, run and gun play was primarily found in the West for as long as I can remember. Its less physically taxing and more conducive to Brons preferred style of play.

Also, never feel the need to defend objective evidence in the face of pure speculation.

he would have had more talent than he had in Miami? Interesting

The WC vs EC has nothing to do with his performance against WC teams it has to do with the probability that his teams could get through better teams in the playoffs EVERY round vs the EC... the grind would have got to such a soft team as the HEAT and not resulted in 4 finals appearances.

Jamiecballer
05-12-2015, 06:00 PM
Even if ur right there's still gotta be some tangible stress that hinders longevity/durability from that sort of Strain. I mean these guys DO coast for a reason beyond competition. That's why i rather argue the fact that being in the west could actually provide him more coasts really depends on team philosophy.
Sure, long term I have no doubt it wears you down. I still view it as a disadvantage in general, where most people see it the opposite though.

There is a reason MJ was famous for imagining slights against him.

Chronz
05-12-2015, 06:30 PM
Sure, long term I have no doubt it wears you down. I still view it as a disadvantage in general, where most people see it the opposite though.

There is a reason MJ was famous for imagining slights against him.
I happen to believe there's also a reason he coasted during his final years. Granted Hes a special case but that goes both ways

Jamiecballer
05-12-2015, 06:33 PM
I happen to believe there's also a reason he coasted during his final years. Granted Hes a special case but that goes both ways
Well sure man but he was old

jerellh528
05-12-2015, 08:23 PM
Yeah, I love how when people mention the West they neglect he would also benefit from being around superior teammates (on top of having absolutely ZERO in the way of evidence to back any and all assertions). Also, run and gun play was primarily found in the West for as long as I can remember. Its less physically taxing and more conducive to Brons preferred style of play.

Also, never feel the need to defend objective evidence in the face of pure speculation.

What team in the west could he be on with superior teammates than Miami, or Irving, and love, and still be under the cap? His problem isn't the teammates, that's why he can coast in the first place in the east. Where's the evidence that is less physically taxing in the west? Sounds like speculation to me. If you're directing something at me, just quote me instead of backhanding me in another reply

KnicksorBust
05-12-2015, 08:43 PM
bc far too many people exaggerate the "grind" of the west when in reality lebron would have coasted no matter what conference or division.

lol k

gg

KnicksorBust
05-12-2015, 08:46 PM
Bc far too many people exaggerate the "grind" of the West when in reality Lebron would have coasted no matter what conference or division.

not true. he would have been better for it.

You don't think he would have coasted? Can we all agree that 99% of players take games off?

Jamiecballer
05-12-2015, 08:58 PM
You don't think he would have coasted? Can we all agree that 99% of players take games off?
Yeah I would agree with that but I think there is a high correlation between intensity and the perceived quality of the opponent. So I think it would elevate his play as I believe it does almost all the games best players.

KnicksorBust
05-12-2015, 09:06 PM
You don't think he would have coasted? Can we all agree that 99% of players take games off?
Yeah I would agree with that but I think there is a high correlation between intensity and the perceived quality of the opponent. So I think it would elevate his play as I believe it does almost all the games best players.

So I am not sure you what you were quoting from me that was not true?

Jamiecballer
05-12-2015, 09:13 PM
So I am not sure you what you were quoting from me that was not true?
I thought you were saying you thought conference would make no difference in the level of coasting?

KnicksorBust
05-12-2015, 09:16 PM
So I am not sure you what you were quoting from me that was not true?
I thought you were saying you thought conference would make no difference in the level of coasting?

I see.

koreancabbage
05-13-2015, 12:00 AM
Lol k

well Lebron could have taken WAY more ill advised shots because thats what you do when you're too tired of driving to the rim. shoot 45% for his career. I would consider that coasting.

Chronz
05-13-2015, 01:25 PM
he would have had more talent than he had in Miami? Interesting
Easily.


The WC vs EC has nothing to do with his performance against WC teams it has to do with the probability that his teams could get through better teams in the playoffs EVERY round vs the EC... the grind would have got to such a soft team as the HEAT and not resulted in 4 finals appearances.
Are we granting him a Western teams support tho? If we're just transplanting the Heat into the West then I agree, I had them as the 5th best team in the league last year so maybe only 2-3 Finals run. Still, people downplay the consistency of defeating teams. Its not like we havent seen great players lose to inferior teams, particularly if injuries mount. Like we've seen Magic lose to a sub.500 team during his most cancerous season. Hes made a **** load of Finals when the West was weak.

Chronz
05-13-2015, 01:35 PM
What team in the west could he be on with superior teammates than Miami, or Irving, and love, and still be under the cap?
Most playoff teams, because they are in the playoffs without him. Cavs without him dont look very good and thats with a declining Bron. Depending on which year, the Heat played .500 ball without him and that last year weren't very good.


His problem isn't the teammates, that's why he can coast in the first place in the east.
I dont understand this argument, he could coast more on a team like the Spurs, they have such depth that the minutes load for their best players isn't very taxing. Hell, in Miami he didn't even know which days Wade would be ready to play, Bron was providing the rest FOR Wade so its not like Bron has coasted his entire career, tho I can remember him coasting as early as his first Finals year when people were disappointed with his performance.


Where's the evidence that is less physically taxing in the west? Sounds like speculation to me.
Of course, that part of my post was pure speculation but if you're honestly asking me, think about it, would you rather run up and down freely or be forced to move laterally more often and bump bodies? I can see if I can find some commentary on the matter but asking for objective evidence is beyond my pay grade. Im sure there have been studies but the point I was making is that we have stats that adjust for quality of comp and the picture they paint changes very little. Those stats matter more than unsubstantiated theories.


If you're directing something at me, just quote me instead of backhanding me in another reply
Oh its not just you, its people of your ilk. Mostly Kobe fans for some reason.