Lets talk about Lebron's Cleveland teams

[Jameerthefear]

The general consensus nowadays seems to be that Lebron's Cleveland teams were crappy, and he carried them. This is partially true, the team's success was mostly based off Lebron, but do we give his role players enough credit? You don't have that kind of regular season and playoff success without having a good team overall. I don't remember people saying that his teammates sucked when Lebron was still playing there, so I want to see what everyone thinks. This kind of relates to the last thread I made too about some players putting a team on their back.

[Black and White]

The general consensus nowadays seems to be that Lebron's Cleveland teams were crappy, and he carried them. This is partially true, the team's success was mostly based off Lebron, but do we give his role players enough credit? You don't have that kind of regular season and playoff success without having a good team overall. I don't remember people saying that his teammates sucked when Lebron was still playing there, so I want to see what everyone thinks. This kind of relates to the last thread I made too about some players putting a team on their back.

I don't think that Mo Williams gets the credit he deserves for that team.

[TheReal Kendall]

:facepalm

Those teams didn't suck, they had like multiple 60+ win seasons.

The teams were built around Lebron's strengths.

People just say they suck to big up Lebron

[CelticBaller]

The 07 team was horrendous outside LeBron though.

[Jameerthefear]

:facepalm

Those teams didn't suck, they had like multiple 60+ win seasons.

The teams were built around Lebron's strengths.

People just say they suck to big up Lebron
That's basically what I'm saying. It's kind of like how people say Dwight carried a bunch of scrubs to the finals. That Magic was team was NOT full of scrubs.

[coin24]

Well the same tards were calling the current heat the Miami cavaliers scrubs.
Basically if a team can't win it all without him they suck, Lebron is supposed to just slide in and efficiently dominate. Apparently that's the new criteria for GOAT:lol

[TheMarkMadsen]

they were as well built around a player like Lebron's talents as a team could be from 08-10.

Those 09 & 10 teams were expected to make the finals because of how good their overall team was. They had a great front court, amazing depth at that position while having D & 3 guys all over the court.

Not to mention the perfect combination of non ball dominant guards that could spot up and shoot.

you don't win 60+ games b2b seasons without having a great team around you

[Jameerthefear]

The 07 team was horrendous outside LeBron though.
this is true for the most part. lebron played really special in the playoffs, and they had a little help with the east being so bad that year.

[Jameerthefear]

they were as well built around a player like Lebron's talents as a team could be from 08-10.

Those 09 & 10 teams were expected to make the finals because of how good their overall team was. They had a great front court, amazing depth at that position while having D & 3 guys all over the court.

Not to mention the perfect combination of non ball dominant guards that could spot up and shoot.

you don't win 60+ games b2b seasons without having a great team around you
I agree with this partly.

[RedBlackAttack]

The 07 team was horrendous outside LeBron though.
It was not "horrendous." That team was at the top of the league in team defense and rebounding. The offense was painful to watch at times, but that isn't the only aspect of the game that counts.

It was 5th in the league in opponent points per game:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/team-comparison-per-game/sort/avgPointsOpponent/year/2007

7th in opponent FG%:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/defense-per-game/sort/fieldGoalPctOpponent/year/2007

2nd in rebounding:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/rebounds-per-game/year/2007

7th in turnovers caused:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/miscellaneous-per-game/sort/avgTurnovers/year/2007

7th in points differential:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/team-comparison-per-game/sort/avgPointsDifference/year/2007


...and, all of those things came into play during that huge upset of the Pistons in the ECF. People can say what they want about the East being weak that year, but the Pistons were considered head-and-shoulders above everyone else and a legitimate threat to win an NBA title.

A lot of people were predicting a Pistons sweep in the ECF. Most were saying five games maximum. The Cavs won that series with defense and by controlling the boards. Yes, James went completely nuts in Game 5 which also played a big part in the Cavs taking the series. He did what great players do.

But, the Cavs hung their hat on TEAM defense and TEAM rebounding that season and in that series.

[j3lademaster]

:facepalm

Those teams didn't suck, they had like multiple 60+ win seasons.

The teams were built around Lebron's strengths.

People just say they suck to big up LebronThis. But Mo Williams, Antawn Jamison and co. did suck in the playoffs. Mo would be like 25% from 3 with 4 out of every 5 open.

[RoundMoundOfReb]

Having back to back 60 win seasons with Mike Brown as the coach and Mo Williams as your 2nd option on offense is absurd. I think they might have been the worst 66 win team on paper ever.

[pudman13]

I watched almost every game each of those years, and all I have to say is that those teams are not as good as their records: they were built for regular season wins but not for tough games. I hated Brown as a coach: it wasn't just that the games were boring but that his no-offense style didn't work against the best teams. What you see on paper is what I saw in the actual games: Lebron and a bunch of role players, some of which (I'm looking at you, Larry Hughes and Antawn Jamison) did more damage than good.

I do give Lebron some of the blame. He was the one who lobbied for Jamison, when PF was the last position the team needed to beef up at the time. Huge mistake---had they gotten a solid third guard things might have been different. That said, '10 was a tough year--who could have guessed that Shaq would suddenly become useless?

That '09 team--I can't believe they actually won 66 games. Mo Williams did play very well and was a great complimentary piece, but look at the rest of the roster: Z was in his decline, as were all those guys they got in the previous season's trade. The only real exception was Delonte West, who actually looked great that year. But a headcase always crashes sooner or later. They did manage a full, injury-free season from Varejao, which is a big deal, but still this team was missing some significant pieces.

[Mr Exlax]

I say they suck because if you took LeBron off the team, they'd be a lottery team. It's all fine and dandy that the team was built around his strengths, but EVERYTHING hinged on him. That's horrible IMO. There's nobody there to tow the line or even help. The role players played their roles only when he was out there. When he wasn't, they couldn't. I just wished he was able to get some legit help there.

[PJR]

Only LeBron is expected to lead a dynasty with a core of old Big Z, Varejao, Mo Williams, and Delonte West. And a head coach who has proven to be offensively inept and unimaginative. And then dubbed a failure when it doesn't happen.

The standard LeBron has been held to is like no other player in NBA history. It's just a testament to his greatness I suppose.

[Dresta]

I watched almost every game each of those years, and all I have to say is that those teams are not as good as their records: they were built for regular season wins but not for tough games. I hated Brown as a coach: it wasn't just that the games were boring but that his no-offense style didn't work against the best teams. What you see on paper is what I saw in the actual games: Lebron and a bunch of role players, some of which (I'm looking at you, Larry Hughes and Antawn Jamison) did more damage than good.

I do give Lebron some of the blame. He was the one who lobbied for Jamison, when PF was the last position the team needed to beef up at the time. Huge mistake---had they gotten a solid third guard things might have been different. That said, '10 was a tough year--who could have guessed that Shaq would suddenly become useless?

That '09 team--I can't believe they actually won 66 games. Mo Williams did play very well and was a great complimentary piece, but look at the rest of the roster: Z was in his decline, as were all those guys they got in the previous season's trade. The only real exception was Delonte West, who actually looked great that year. But a headcase always crashes sooner or later. They did manage a full, injury-free season from Varejao, which is a big deal, but still this team was missing some significant pieces.
Suddenly? He'd been useless for 2+ seasons already.

Those Cleveland teams were pretty weak: they were good defensively, but shocking offensively without Bron. They were sort of like a worse version of the current Bulls teams sans Rose. Quite a bit worse though tbh.

[tmacattack33]

The general consensus nowadays seems to be that Lebron's Cleveland teams were crappy, and he carried them. This is partially true, the team's success was mostly based off Lebron, but do we give his role players enough credit? You don't have that kind of regular season and playoff success without having a good team overall. I don't remember people saying that his teammates sucked when Lebron was still playing there, so I want to see what everyone thinks. This kind of relates to the last thread I made too about some players putting a team on their back.

I guess you weren't a big bball fan back then

[pauk]

If that is true that the Lebron's Cleveland teams success was due to building around Lebrons strengths then i dont think he would have left, he would have stayed there and won championships....

The reality is more like Lebron BUILT HIMSELF around what he had to work with using his strengths....

They were great if you only saw the team record........ I never ever thought any Lebron team in Cleveland was great, if you take out your main guy and you are still able to contend, getting to at least minimum playoffs... thats a great team.... but soon as you take him out and you immediately drop of to have the worst winning record in the NBA next season, thats not a great team... The excuses of the changed roster or injuries that season needs to be spared, take a look at this Cleveland team even today and tell me what you see... this Cleveland team today is 100 x better than any Lebron team (without Lebron) and they are still sweating & bleeding their behinds of to not end up with the worst record.... in the East... add Lebron there and see what happens.... While at it, see what happens to Miami aswell.... this is a Wade team that has missed the playoffs or got killed in the 1st round since 2006.... you think a simple addition of Bosh would take them to the Finals or better yet a Championship?

In my lifetime i have seen only Shaq and Jordan to have that kindof an immediate impact on a team no matter who they had around them..... they may have not won a championship with the worst supporting cast ever, but they sure will make that team win more games than anybody ever could.....

[HurricaneKid]

You don't have that kind of regular season and playoff success without having a good team overall.

In 2008-2009 the Cavs won 66 games.

LeBron was out 900 minutes that season, or about the length of a HS season. When LeBron was off the floor the Cavs were outscored by 5.9 points/100 possessions. When LeBron was IN they outscored their opponents by 15.1pts/100 poss. And again, this is not a small sample size.

Extrapolated to a full season, the Cavs would have been ~3-5th worst team in the league without LeBron. Instead, only 9 teams have ever had a better record. And its not like this was completely unique.

In 07-08 the Cavs ORTG went from 109.0 w/LeBron to 96.7 without. In the playoffs it went from 106.6 (w) to 84.5 (w/o).

In 08-09 115.6 (w), 102.6 (w/o)

In 9-10 115.8 (w) to 100.5 (w/o), playoffs: 110.1 (w) to 96.0 (w/o)

The Cavs got DESTROYED when LeBron wasn't in. For years. That was a BAD team that he completely carried.

[chazzy]

They were really good, but not quite championship caliber. I thought they would make the finals and give the Lakers a run in '10. Overall, they were usually a great defensive team even before Lebron himself became a good defender - in 07 they were the 4th best defensive team and 18th best offensive. But once Lebron entered his real prime around 08 and 09, he carried their offense to elite levels. He had a lot of spacing but his 2nd option wasn't a guy who could create his own offense in bunches. And their interior D got exploited in the playoffs

[ninephive]

I honestly think this entire discussion goes away if the Cavs win games 3 & 4 of the Finals and extend it to at least 6. Those were 1 and 3 point games and really show that the Cavs team was a good team (especially after knocking out Detroit in the ECF).

What it doesn't do is give credit to a really really good Spurs team that year. All the Spurs big names were healthy for a playoff run (something that happens like once every 5 years) and you had Parker beginning his prime/peak, Duncan ending but still in his, Ginobili playing well, and still had Bowen to contain Lebron. The supporting cast was good (nothing new there for the Spurs) in Horry, Finley, Barry, etc., which did make the Spurs the better team, obviously. But it was really the first time you saw Parker being unguardable. Mike Brown could have gambled and put James on him like Spoelstra did this year, but even on some of those plays in '07, Parker was way too fast for Lebron to stay in front of him. Parker has lost a step since then, so it worked well in '13 (Parker had to often times throw up more wild shots like the clincher in Game 1, the big 3 at the end of Game 6, and then the wild runner at the buzzer when he had to run the length of the court, etc.).

[NumberSix]

I say they suck because if you took LeBron off the team, they'd be a lottery team. It's all fine and dandy that the team was built around his strengths, but EVERYTHING hinged on him. That's horrible IMO. There's nobody there to tow the line or even help. The role players played their roles only when he was out there. When he wasn't, they couldn't. I just wished he was able to get some legit help there.
If? Lol. They WERE a lottery after LeBron left the team. That's not a hypothetical. It's what did happen. They went from 66 wins to 19 wins.

[pegasus]

Those teams were built as well as any team can be built without adding a second superstar player. Who knew Lebron would need not one but two superstar teammates to get it done? I'm not saying he should have won the title with those teams, but he were as good as he was being advertised, then they would have at least made the finals, but in fact they didn't even come close to achieving that goal. Orlando and Boston beat Cleveland rather easily.

[TheMarkMadsen]

If? Lol. They WERE a lottery after LeBron left the team. That's not a hypothetical. It's what did happen. They went from 66 wins to 19 wins.


Stop kidding yourself. The 2011 Cavs were missing alot more than just Lebron from their 2010 team

[Mr Exlax]

Stop kidding yourself. The 2011 Cavs were missing alot more than just Lebron from their 2010 team

Do you think the 2010 Cavs would've made the playoffs w/o LeBron? That's what a championship caliber team means to me. If you take off the main guy and that team can at least make the playoffs then I consider that a championship caliber supporting cast.

[PJR]

Stop kidding yourself. The 2011 Cavs were missing alot more than just Lebron from their 2010 team

No, you stop kidding YOURSELF.

They set a record for futility. 27 game losing streak.

It's one thing to drop from 60 wins to like 42. But to be historically bad? That's not a good team. That's not great supporting pieces.

[chips93]

if you take dirk off of the 2011 mavs, do they make the playoffs?

probably not

but that cast was still enough for dirk to win a title

[Dresta]

Those teams were built as well as any team can be built without adding a second superstar player. Who knew Lebron would need not one but two superstar teammates to get it done? I'm not saying he should have won the title with those teams, but he were as good as he was being advertised, then they would have at least made the finals, but in fact they didn't even come close to achieving that goal. Orlando and Boston beat Cleveland rather easily.
Try all-star and you're closer.

The 2nd bolded is just series of speculative and incorrectly worded non sequiturs.

[PJR]

if you take dirk off of the 2011 mavs, do they make the playoffs?

probably not

but that cast was still enough for dirk to win a title

They wouldn't be historically bad, though. Probably win like 40 games. There's a diffrence.

[Mr Exlax]

if you take dirk off of the 2011 mavs, do they make the playoffs?

probably not

but that cast was still enough for dirk to win a title

True. I didn't say it wasn't possible. I just don't count them as a championship caliber team. Same thing with the Rockets when we won the first one. Take Hakeem off and we were a lottery team. Not to discredit Dirk, but all he was was his teams leading scorer. Not rebounder. Not defensive anchor. Not playmaker. Not point guard. He just had to score.

[DMAVS41]

They were really good, but not quite championship caliber. I thought they would make the finals and give the Lakers a run in '10. Overall, they were usually a great defensive team even before Lebron himself became a good defender - in 07 they were the 4th best defensive team and 18th best offensive. But once Lebron entered his real prime around 08 and 09, he carried their offense to elite levels. He had a lot of spacing but his 2nd option wasn't a guy who could create his own offense in bunches. And their interior D got exploited in the playoffs

I agree with all of this except I thought they had a better chance to make the finals in 09. Thought they were a better team that year and honestly just got really unlucky that the Magic caught fire and Mo Williams went ice cold...think he shot like 35 or 36 percent for the series...iirc.

That series really was the epitome of a bad matchup initially that turned into a nightmare with Lewis getting hot (especially late in games) combined with ice cold shooting from the Cavs outside of Lebron.

Too bad we never got the Cavs vs Lakers either year...I think the Cavs actually would have beat the Lakers in 09 and then lost in 10...

[DMAVS41]

True. I didn't say it wasn't possible. I just don't count them as a championship caliber team. Same thing with the Rockets when we won the first one. Take Hakeem off and we were a lottery team. Not to discredit Dirk, but all he was was his teams leading scorer. Not rebounder. Not defensive anchor. Not playmaker. Not point guard. He just had to score.

Dirk did a lot more than just score. He got 8 boards and 3 assists...and played quality defense. Not only man to man, but team as well. There was a reason Carlisle put Dirk on Aldridge and not Chandler (chandler was getting raped)...and a reason why the defense got better with Dirk on the floor.

And of course this ignores the impact of Dirk's floor spacing and probably his most important quality outside of his individual game...his pick and roll game that allowed the likes of Terry and Barea to wreak havoc on defenses and get great shots. Not to mention the weak side 3's for Kidd off that action as well.

Dirk had to do way more than score..

The Mavs probably win 35 to 40 games without Dirk, but comparing Dirk's 11 help to the 09 Cavs isn't really fair because Dirk saw all his teammates step up in the playoffs while Lebron so all of his get worse.

Having said that, that 09 team is better than people remember...and on paper has a lot of similarities to the 11 Mavs. It was the 2010 team that I think gets over-rated big time here.

[pegasus]

No, you stop kidding YOURSELF.

They set a record for futility. 27 game losing streak.

It's one thing to drop from 60 wins to like 42. But to be historically bad? That's not a good team. That's not great supporting pieces.

You are right. That's an entirely different team. If Lebron left Miami next year along with Bosh, and Wade and Chalmers were hurt most of the season, would you talk up Lebron for Miami's guaranteed struggles and probably having the worst record in the league?

[Mr Exlax]

Dirk did a lot more than just score. He got 8 boards and 3 assists...and played quality defense. Not only man to man, but team as well. There was a reason Carlisle put Dirk on Aldridge and not Chandler (chandler was getting raped)...and a reason why the defense got better with Dirk on the floor.

And of course this ignores the impact of Dirk's floor spacing and probably his most important quality outside of his individual game...his pick and roll game that allowed the likes of Terry and Barea to wreak havoc on defenses and get great shots. Not to mention the weak side 3's for Kidd off that action as well.

Dirk had to do way more than score..

The Mavs probably win 35 to 40 games without Dirk, but comparing Dirk's 11 help to the 09 Cavs isn't really fair because Dirk saw all his teammates step up in the playoffs while Lebron so all of his get worse.

Having said that, that 09 team is better than people remember...and on paper has a lot of similarities to the 11 Mavs. It was the 2010 team that I think gets over-rated big time here.

It's one thing to contribute. I'm not saying Dirk didn't. I'm just saying he wasn't his teams everything like LeBron was to the Cavs. I don't consider that Dallas team a championship caliber team though. They got hot and stayed hot. Kudos for them. I've always considered Dirk a championship caliber player. Even when the refs and Miami beat them back in like 06. Whenever they gave Dwade a whistle if a Mavs player looked at him. I personally don't like it when a player has to lead his team in every category. I was just generalizing Dirk's role. I know he did a lot more. Stuff that doesn't show up in stats. Didn't feel like going into all that. I will just say that LeBron had to do more for his team's than Dirk did. That's not saying Dirk didn't have to do a lot though.

[PJR]

You are right. That's an entirely different team. If Lebron left Miami next year along with Bosh, and Wade and Chalmers were hurt most of the season, would you talk up Lebron for Miami's guaranteed struggles and probably having the worst record in the league?

Stop it. Who was missing from Cleveland (that was relevant) in the beginning of the season? When they were actually trying to win?

Old Shaq? He missed like 30 games the year before, and they didn't miss a beat with JJ Hickson starting at center.

The manic depressed Delonte West? Didn't miss a beat with Anthony Parker replacing him.

Big Z? :oldlol:

Also refer to HurricaneKid's post. The common denominator is always LeBron.

[tmacattack33]

You are right. That's an entirely different team. If Lebron left Miami next year along with Bosh, and Wade and Chalmers were hurt most of the season, would you talk up Lebron for Miami's guaranteed struggles and probably having the worst record in the league?

Wrong.

For the first 35-40 games of the season (which included the historically bad losing streak), that Cleveland team was very much the same team as the team was the year before.

Shaq and Illgauskas were gone, but they were injured for a large part of 2010 anyway...yet Lebron was still able to lead the team to a great record and round 2 of the playoffs or whatever it was.

[Dresta]

You are right. That's an entirely different team. If Lebron left Miami next year along with Bosh, and Wade and Chalmers were hurt most of the season, would you talk up Lebron for Miami's guaranteed struggles and probably having the worst record in the league?
How is losing one player the same as losing 4 starters?

:facepalm

[pegasus]

Are you guys choosing to forget that Varejao, their MVP at that point, went down with a season-ending injury in the early part of the season? And Williams was limited by nagging injuries before being traded to the Clippers. And Delonte West was gone along with Z and Shaq, so what are you talking about?

[DukeDelonte13]

team was entirely different after Lebron left. No more mike brown. Byron Scott with a completely new "showtime" offense. 0 team defense was played. No real shot creators on the team. No centers on the team. Andy V. was out the majority of the year. Wouldn't have made much of a difference anyways, but still.



People love to play revisionist history with the the Lebron era cavs. You take the main player out of a team that was constructed for that specific player you are gonna have problems.


People wanna bash them for trading for Shaq and Antawn, but the cavs literally gave up nothing for antawn and Ben Wallace post leg break for Shaq. Shaq did his job againt Bynum and Howard that season too.

[pegasus]

How is losing one player the same as losing 4 starters?

:facepalm

Learn to count: West, Shaq, Z, and Varejao (injury).

[tmacattack33]

Are you guys choosing to forget that Varejao, their MVP at that point, went down with a season-ending injury in the early part of the season? And Williams was limited by nagging injuries before being traded to the Clippers. And Delonte West was gone along with Z and Shaq, so what are you talking about?

No, we clearly mentioned that we are talking about the first 35-40 games of the season...before any injuries to any starters and before Mo Williams was traded.

[Dresta]

Learn to count: West, Shaq, Z, and Varejao (injury).
Shaq, Z and Varejao were all starting were they? And one of them is supposed to be the equivalent of D-Wade?

:hammerhead:

[pegasus]

Shaq, Z and Varejao were all starting were they? And one of them is supposed to be the equivalent of D-Wade?

:hammerhead:
Who said anyone was the equivalent of D-Wade? Why should we compare the two teams when one of them had a lot more success than the other? I was just using his current team as an example.

[chips93]

Who said anyone was the equivalent of D-Wade? Why should we compare the two teams when one of them had a lot more success than the other? I was just using his current team as an example.

but how can you say shaq, andy and z were all starters?

[pegasus]

but how can you say shaq, andy and z were all starters?

They were a big part of Cleveland's 8-man rotation. I didn't say they were all starters. I just simply took out each team's best 4-5 players and asked if the results would have been similar. Why don't you answer that?

[ProfessorMurder]

You can't say they were bad when they were favorites to win in 2009 and 2010.

[chips93]

They were a big part of Cleveland's 8-man rotation. I didn't say they were all starters. I just simply took out each team's best 4-5 players and asked if the results would have been similar. Why don't you answer that?

but you said that they lost 4 starters, not 4 of their best players (which is far more subjective)

[pegasus]

but you said that they lost 4 starters, not 4 of their best players (which is far more subjective)

Dresta (page 3) said "How is losing one player the same as losing 4 starters?", and I gave him 4 names to show that it wasn't just 1 player. In fact, it was five including Lebron. So my statement had nothing to do with "4 starters".

[jlip]

[QUOTE=Jameerthefear]The general consensus nowadays seems to be that Lebron's Cleveland teams were crappy, and he carried them. This is partially true, the team's success was mostly based off Lebron, but do we give his role players enough credit? QUOTE]

Do people ever given the role players on a team with a dominant star credit?

[Mr Exlax]

[QUOTE=Jameerthefear]The general consensus nowadays seems to be that Lebron's Cleveland teams were crappy, and he carried them. This is partially true, the team's success was mostly based off Lebron, but do we give his role players enough credit? QUOTE]

Do people ever given the role players on a team with a dominant star credit?

Some do. I for one give role players a ton of credit when they deserve it. That's why I don't look at rings when I'm judging two players.

[chips93]

Dresta (page 3) said "How is losing one player the same as losing 4 starters?", and I gave him 4 names to show that it wasn't just 1 player. In fact, it was five including Lebron. So my statement had nothing to do with "4 starters".

ohhhhh

my bad

:hammerhead:

[Dresta]

Who said anyone was the equivalent of D-Wade? Why should we compare the two teams when one of them had a lot more success than the other? I was just using his current team as an example.
Because losing D-Wade is nothing like losing Delonte West. Your comparison is absurd.

And in regard to your other point: the best 4 Cavs aside from Lebron didn't go down, so why would you pick the Heat's 4 best players? They had Mo Williams still, and Antawn Jamison, and some Varajeo; so why exactly would you remove the Heat's 4 top starters in your comparison?

edit: not to mention that the 4 players you did mention, with the exception of Varajeo, could be replaced in the rotation by any average player, and make no discernible difference (in fact, it may be an improvement).

[zoom17]

Pegasus is retarded

[NumberSix]

Dresta (page 3) said "How is losing one player the same as losing 4 starters?", and I gave him 4 names to show that it wasn't just 1 player. In fact, it was five including Lebron. So my statement had nothing to do with "4 starters".
This same idiot arguing how awesome the Cavs roster was will argue to the death that Rose had no help.:roll:

[SavageMode]

Remember when Lebron left cleveland and then they became a 14-70 win team the following season

[Dresta]

While also losing other players, new coach, depressed franchise, tanking for a lottery pick. Why yes, I remember the season when LeBron left his hometown franchise without a word in advance for a possible sign and trade, in complete cowardly fashion to win championships the absolute easiest way possible.
:facepalm

So bitter...

[pegasus]

Because losing D-Wade is nothing like losing Delonte West. Your comparison is absurd.

And in regard to your other point: the best 4 Cavs aside from Lebron didn't go down, so why would you pick the Heat's 4 best players? They had Mo Williams still, and Antawn Jamison, and some Varajeo; so why exactly would you remove the Heat's 4 top starters in your comparison?

edit: not to mention that the 4 players you did mention, with the exception of Varajeo, could be replaced in the rotation by any average player, and make no discernible difference (in fact, it may be an improvement).

You dumb ass. Cleveland made it to the finals once and won 0 games, whereas Miami made three straight final appearances and won two in a row, so of course their respective best players are not comparable. There is a huge difference, and that's why everybody thinks Lebron took the easy way out, but that's not what we are discussing here. Learn to read or learn to shut up.

[Mr Exlax]

While also losing other players, new coach, depressed franchise, tanking for a lottery pick. Why yes, I remember the season when LeBron left his hometown franchise without a word in advance for a possible sign and trade, in complete cowardly fashion to win championships the absolute easiest way possible.

How was it the easiest, but he led the team in damn near everything?

[TheMarkMadsen]

No, you stop kidding YOURSELF.

They set a record for futility. 27 game losing streak.

It's one thing to drop from 60 wins to like 42. But to be historically bad? That's not a good team. That's not great supporting pieces.


2010 Cavs: Daniel Gibson
Danny Green
J.J. Hickson
Zydrunas Ilgauskas
Cedric Jackson
Darnell Jackson
LeBron James
Antawn Jamison
Coby Karl
Jamario Moon
Shaquille O'Neal
Anthony Parker
Leon Powe
Sebastian Telfair
Anderson Varejao
Delonte West
Jawad Williams
Mo Williams

Head Coach: Mike Brown


2011 Cavs: Baron Davis
Semih Erden
Christian Eyenga
Alonzo Gee
Daniel Gibson
Luke Harangody
Manny Harris
J.J. Hickson
Ryan Hollins
Antawn Jamison
Jamario Moon
Anthony Parker
Leon Powe
Samardo Samuels
Ramon Sessions
Anderson Varejao (played 30 games)
Jawad Williams
Mo Williams (played 36 games)

Head Coach: Byron Scott


A lot more than just subtracting Lebron..

[pegasus]

This same idiot arguing how awesome the Cavs roster was will argue to the death that Rose had no help.:roll:

I usually ignore you because you are a pathetic, supposed Laker fan who rides Lebron's dick harder than the super egomaniac Lebron himself would if he could.

I never said Rose had no help. If I wanted to do that, I would say the only reason we are below .500 instead of having the league's best record right now is Rose's absence, while choosing to ignore that we are also missing Deng and Butler. That's basically what the Lebron homers are doing with the 2010-11 Cavs.

[pegasus]

Because that's his style of play. The basketball version of a swiss army knife. He's not comfortable playing a niche on a championship capable team. Like say, just being the team's leading scorer or bailing them out offensively in tough situations.

It was the easiest because he stock piled superstar talent, one of them being a comparable MVP contemporary within his own conference. Are we going to suddenly act like statistics alone are representations of one's abilities? 2011 - 2013 Wade, and Bosh are just scrubs now?

Wade was giving on these championship Heat teams:
26 / 5 / 5
22 / 5 / 5
20 / 5 / 5 ... coming off MVP caliber seasons in 2009, and 2010.

LeBron's a better, healthier player so of course he will lead various statistical categories. But he purposely picked Wade to play with because he was a fellow top five player, and someone who could help him achieve in situation he doesn't feel comfortable with. Bosh, another top 20 player was just additional fire power. Icing on the cake.

How was the team LeBron chose not the easiest route? He had good role players galore, just like Cleveland. But now had a franchise, MVP caliber player next to him, and the perfect traditional beta 2nd option on a championship team too in Chris Bosh.

That is absolutely the easiest route possible.

LeBron validated this thought too by literally saying: "it's gonna be easy" ... "not 5, not 6, not 7" even if exaggerating, the core essence of what he was saying was he expected to win, win multiple championships, and do it AS EASY as possible.

Where is the competitive spirit in that? No one saying he shouldn't have had a legit sidekick to help him compete. He went to the opposite extreme and stacked the entire deck in his favor through cowardly collusion. It wasn't an organic way to win. And it will always taint the value of some of these championships, IMO. And also in the eyes of people who don't have revisionist history.

Said before a thousand times but still...:applause:

[Mr Exlax]

Because that's his style of play. The basketball version of a swiss army knife. He's not comfortable playing a niche on a championship capable team. Like say, just being the team's leading scorer or bailing them out offensively in tough situations.

It was the easiest because he stock piled superstar talent, one of them being a comparable MVP contemporary within his own conference. Are we going to suddenly act like statistics alone are representations of one's abilities? 2011 - 2013 Wade, and Bosh are just scrubs now?

Wade was giving on these championship Heat teams:
26 / 5 / 5
22 / 5 / 5
20 / 5 / 5 ... coming off MVP caliber seasons in 2009, and 2010.

LeBron's a better, healthier player so of course he will lead various statistical categories. But he purposely picked Wade to play with because he was a fellow top five player, and someone who could help him achieve in situation he doesn't feel comfortable with. Bosh, another top 20 player was just additional fire power. Icing on the cake.

How was the team LeBron chose not the easiest route? He had good role players galore, just like Cleveland. But now had a franchise, MVP caliber player next to him, and the perfect traditional beta 2nd option on a championship team too in Chris Bosh.

That is absolutely the easiest route possible.

LeBron validated this thought too by literally saying: "it's gonna be easy" ... "not 5, not 6, not 7" even if exaggerating, the core essence of what he was saying was he expected to win, win multiple championships, and do it AS EASY as possible.

Where is the competitive spirit in that? No one saying he shouldn't have had a legit sidekick to help him compete. He went to the opposite extreme and stacked the entire deck in his favor through cowardly collusion. It wasn't an organic way to win. And it will always taint the value of some of these championships, IMO. And also in the eyes of people who don't have revisionist history.

I'd agree with you if he didn't lead the team in everything though. I hate that he has to lead in everything in order for his teams to win. I'd love for him to play with a defensive specialist or a PG that can actually run the offense or a rebounding center that can also protect the paint. I wanna agree with you, but I can't. I don't think it taints his championships. I don't really value rings when i'm comparing players either though.

[Mr Exlax]

If you went to go play pick up at the gym, and the most talented guy on the court immediately says he will only play if it's with the other next best player on the floor ... where is the competition in that? Who does that anyway?

See I'd agree with you there if he and Wade actually ever played against each other. The two most talented guys in the East both lost to a team with 3 superstars. What's wrong with them teaming up? The only thing that I can honestly think of is race related. White men put together the Boston Big 3. Black men put together the Miami Big 3. I can't wrap my head around any other reason why it's a problem.

[Mr Exlax]

Oh god. Come on. Wade is chopped liver now? Where was LeBron's volume scoring to win the game last night? His dorky obsession with maintaining quality FG% actually might become a detriment to the team winning games. When the chips are down, throw caution to the wind, and score the damn ball by taking of the game.

Who's dissing Wade? Where did I say anything negative about Wade? I think you mistook me as talking about a single game. I'm talking big picture and even then I'm not looking at the stats. You know what I mean. He leads the team in everything. I like a player that takes over the game in more ways than just scoring though. You and I value totally different things when it comes to basketball. I like the correct basketball play over anything else. I'm the type of guy who gets mad at a teammate for taking a bad shot whether he makes it or misses it.

[Mr Exlax]

You know what, I'm getting this thread off topic now. I don't think anybody could have won a championship with those Cavs teams. I think LeBron did all that could be done with that supporting cast. A superstar is supposed to make the players around them better. I feel he did that and got the most out of those guys.

[aj1987]

His dorky obsession with maintaining quality FG% actually might become a detriment to the team winning games.
People said the same thing last season when he scored 56/40. Miami won 66.
Dude went 6/16. I don't see how he was trying to protect his FG%. He was more obsessed with the refs than actually playing ball.

[riseagainst]

:facepalm

Those teams didn't suck, they had like multiple 60+ win seasons.

The teams were built around Lebron's strengths.

People just say they suck to big up Lebron

:applause: