Lebron deserves a lot of blame for the 2007 finals.

[StrongLurk]

If you considered Lebron to be a superstar in 2007, then you have to hold him to superstar expectations.

Lebron in the first three rounds of the playoffs: 26/8/8 on 43/31/77 splits, only 2.7 TOV per game. Not very efficient but still a good run.

Lebron in the 07 finals: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

Lebron is my favorite player, but there really is no logical defense for just how poorly he played in the finals. Cavs lost 0-4 in that series, but the Spurs only outscored the Cavs by 24 total points, or 6PPG. There is no way the Cavs should've been swept, if anything the series could very realistically been tied 2-2 going into game 5. People only look back at the OUTCOME of those finals and ignore how the outcome occured. I'm not saying Lebron/Cavs should have won those finals, but they should've been a little competitive. Lebron's play dropped a historical amount from the first 3 rounds of the playoff.


Does anyone have any rebuttals?

Rebuttal 1: "He had no help" - This doesn't work since he "wouldn't have help" in the first 3 rounds of the playoffs, but still made the finals.

Rebuttal 2: "His team sucked" - Well how did they make the finals again if they sucked? - "Lebron carried them" - So why couldn't he carry them in the finals? Logical conclusions must be either Lebron carried them like a true superstar, but then choked in the finals, OR, Lebron was very overrated in 07 and only managed to get to the finals by getting lucky/having a historically weak East in 07.

Basically I see a lot of stans try to have things "both ways" (i.e. Lebron gets all the credit for carrying "bums" to the finals but somehow deserves ZERO blame for getting swept even though his terrible play CAUSED the sweep to occur). The 07 finals is not the same as the 2018 Finals, because Lebron actually played incredible and was the best player in the finals.

[dankok8]

Yep Lebron had a terrible Finals...

[WhiteKyrie]

Yep Lebron had a terrible Finals...

Guarded by old, unathletic plumber Bruce Bowen too. And just dared to shoot wide open jumpers. He just wasn’t the best player in the game in 2006, 2007, and 2008.

[tpols]

Look into 2013 Finals games 1-6 or 2014 Finals.

Pops defense was like belichick where he cuts the head of the snake to win.

Carlisle mirrored him. Kerr employed an opposite strategy since the sniper talent was too heavy.

[Kblaze8855]

I'm not saying Lebron/Cavs should have won those finals, but they should've been a little competitive.



So a team you know should lose…lost…but you want to talk about who gets blamed? Generally blame is applied for situations that don’t go the way they should. Not for things going exactly as expected. Losing in five games would mean absolutely nothing. Would people be posting 4.5/10 if they took a game off the Spurs before defeat?

Of course not.

Nobody should really take blame for losing when they should lose. It’s just more 1/9 nonsense. People can say it but deep down they know it doesn’t actually make any kinda point. At least id like to think they do.

I could be wrong though. People passionate about these things repeat themselves so often maybe they start to believe it.

[WhiteKyrie]

Look into 2013 Finals games 1-6 or 2014 Finals.

Pops defense was like belichick where he cuts the head of the snake to win.

Carlisle mirrored him. Kerr employed an opposite strategy since the sniper talent was too heavy.

Correct. Spurs gave him the jumper. And he’s even admitted it had a terrible effect on him, shaking him, because deep down he’s never had confidence in his shooting ability. He said it was even there in the 2013 finals and that’s what people would consider his peak. Warriors did opposite and wanted him to drive and force him to be a scorer to beat them.

[StrongLurk]

So a team you know should lose…lost…but you want to talk about who gets blamed? Generally blame is applied for situations that don’t go the way they should. Not for things going exactly as expected. Losing in five games would mean absolutely nothing. Would people be posting 4.5/10 if they took a game off the Spurs before defeat?

Of course not.

Nobody should really take blame for losing when they should lose. It’s just more 1/9 nonsense. People can say it but deep down they know it doesn’t actually make any kinda point. At least id like to think they do.

I could be wrong though. People passionate about these things repeat themselves so often maybe they start to believe it.

I'm surprised at your response...it's not just "did you win/lose", but HOW did you win/lose.

1/9 MJ stuff is meaningless because, even though his teams lost, MJ was putting up 35-40ppg on insane efficiency and was the best player on the court. The Bulls did not lose because of MJ.

I even pointed out in my post that Lebron losing the 2007 finals (sweep) is very different than him losing the 2018 finals (sweep). The 2018 finals was a sweep even with Lebron playing incredible. The sweep did not occur BECAUSE of Lebron. However the sweep in 2007 occurred BECAUSE of Lebron completely shitting the bed. That is why I am saying Lebron deserves way more criticism for losing the 07 finals than what he actually gets.

People want to act like it was IMPOSSIBLE for the Cavs to even win a game, when in reality that 07 series was very close. Cavs easily would've won at least 2 games if Lebron played like he should have and the series would be 2-2 or 3-2 at some point...which means anything could have happened there.

[ShawkFactory]

Yea I'm with Blaze here. We can certainly talk about how he didn't play well if you like. He didn't.

But that doesn't really translate to "blame" for losing that series. Lets say he does score an extra 5-6 points a game and shoots better (maybe 44% instead of 36%). I don't like to say that that automatically translates to more wins. Because if that happens, then that changes everything else that happens too. Maybe the Spurs play with a little more urgency offensively. Maybe Duncan looks to take over more or something.

You can't just say "well they lost by 5, so if Lebron scores 6 more points then they win". The world doesn't work that way.

The Spurs were far better.

[Kblaze8855]

I’m not sure anyone to ever play deserves a lot more criticism than they get. We are in a society where people feel a need to counter the acknowledgment of greatness with equal and opposite hate but it’s never really a worthwhile pursuit to me.

Lebron is likely the most critiqued player in the history of the sport now that we have the media age and internet so intertwined. There are people who have made tens of million of dollars getting up at 4am and hating on him full time on tv or social media till bed time.

I don’t see how what number of games you lose an inevitability lost series need to push itself to the top of the pile of already overly broken down and rehashed criticism that makes up like 70% of all discussion of the game.

If you just need to pile on unnecessary hate I feel like there are better options. He shot like 2/18 with 10-11 turnovers one close loss to the 08 Celtics and that went to game 7.

Compared to that I don’t know why a series even his biggest(honest) detractors know shouldn’t have been won(considering literally everyone to ever win had a better team than that) even needs to be mentioned.

I watched a bit of one of those games a while back when it was on nba tv. Think I made a topic on it. That matchup was some ugly ass ball played between a team that mastered that ugly ball and one of the most “Meh” ass squads ever on that stage. The “Well how did they make it if they weren’t good?” argument is just disregarding a lot of history and our own eyes. “Meh” teams win a series or two more than they should at times. Doesn’t mean every finals team seriously should have been competitive because they made it there.

The Nets made the finals. Doesn’t mean they were good relative to the lakers. They were within a shot or two in the last minute of 3 of the 4 games doesn’t mean they were supposed to win a game or two.

Youre outclassed or you aren’t. 07 Cavs didn’t belong there talent, experience, coaching, or execution wise wise no matter how scrappy they were.

It just isn’t a series that justifies much of a deep dive. And god knows everything about that guy worth two looks gets one for the last two decades.

I think we can do without an extra subject to run into the ground.

[SouBeachTalents]

I’m not sure anyone to ever play deserves a lot more criticism than they get. We are in a society where people feel a need to counter the acknowledgment of greatness with equal and opposite hate but it’s never really a worthwhile pursuit to me.

Lebron is likely the most critiqued player in the history of the sport now that we have the media age and internet so intertwined. There are people who have made tens of million of dollars getting up at 4am and hating on him full time on tv or social media till bed time.

I don’t see how what number of games you lose an inevitability lost series need to push itself to the top of the pile of already overly broken down and rehashed criticism that makes up like 70% of all discussion of the game.

If you just need to pile on unnecessary hate I feel like there are better options. He shot like 2/18 with 10-11 turnovers one close loss to the 08 Celtics and that went to game 7.

Compared to that I don’t know why a series even his biggest(honest) detractors know shouldn’t have been won(considering literally everyone to ever win had a better team than that) even needs to be mentioned.

I watched a bit of one of those games a while back when it was on nba tv. Think I made a topic on it. That matchup was some ugly ass ball played between a team that mastered that ugly ball and one of the most “Meh” ass squads ever on that stage. The “Well how did they make it if they weren’t good?” argument is just disregarding a lot of history and our own eyes. “Meh” teams win a series or two more than they should at times. Doesn’t mean every finals team seriously should have been competitive because they made it there.

The Nets made the finals. Doesn’t mean they were good relative to the lakers. They were within a shot or two in the last minute of 3 of the 4 games doesn’t mean they were supposed to win a game or two.

Youre outclassed or you aren’t. 07 Cavs didn’t belong there talent, experience, coaching, or execution wise wise no matter how scrappy they were.

It just isn’t a series that justifies much of a deep dive. And god knows everything about that guy worth two looks gets one for the last two decades.

I think we can do without an extra subject to run into the ground.
I will say though for as incessantly as the guy is talked about here, the one series I have literally never, even seen brought up here, even by 3ball, is the '06 Pistons one.

[ShawkFactory]

I will say though for as incessantly as the guy is talked about here, the one series I have literally never, even seen brought up here, even by 3ball, is the '06 Pistons one.

Not sure why anyone would. The 06 Pistons were a wagon, particularly on defense, and the undermanned Cavs with 21-year-old Lebron fought admirably. Particularly when Hughes went out.

[Kblaze8855]

Having thought about it for a minute I’m not sure there is a single player of note who should get more criticism than they get. It might be the only thing in our society doled out in either appropriate or excessive amounts, in every single case.

[StrongLurk]

Yea I'm with Blaze here. We can certainly talk about how he didn't play well if you like. He didn't.

But that doesn't really translate to "blame" for losing that series. Lets say he does score an extra 5-6 points a game and shoots better (maybe 44% instead of 36%). I don't like to say that that automatically translates to more wins. Because if that happens, then that changes everything else that happens too. Maybe the Spurs play with a little more urgency offensively. Maybe Duncan looks to take over more or something.

You can't just say "well they lost by 5, so if Lebron scores 6 more points then they win". The world doesn't work that way.

The Spurs were far better.

The bolded was debunked in my first post. The Spurs only won each game by an average of 6 points. Cavs lost game 3 by 3 points and game 4 by 1 point. And this is WITH Lebron playing horribly. So it's really not true that the Spurs were far better. It's funny you say "if Lebron scores 5-6 points extra"...because that literally would've been enough to WIN THE GAMES.

You can't just hand waive Lebron himself playing horribly...was he a superstar or not? I'm seeing quite a lot of long posts here that are really dancing around the issue, which is the 07 finals would absolutely been competitive if Lebron played up to his standards. The numbers are below, and they are BAD.

Lebron in the 07 finals: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

Also I can't stand the "Cavs didn't belong there". Okay??? Then if you think that, then you need to go further and explain that Lebron/Cavs only made those finals as a fluke/lucky run with horrible comp, and therefore should Lebron making the 07 finals really be celebrated as much as it is? A lot of people literally classify that LeBron 07 run as "legendary" and he gets a ton of credit...but should he really based off some of the responses here? Again, I am a huge Lebron fan and the 07 run is one of my personal favorites (game 5 vs Pistons had me stunned), but I also acknowledge Lebron crapped the bed when it mattered most in the finals. I mean, we literally saw him do it again in the 2011 finals...it's pretty clear Lebron had some issues with the finals pressure and for sure choked away his first two finals.

[Kblaze8855]

I will say though for as incessantly as the guy is talked about here, the one series I have literally never, even seen brought up here, even by 3ball, is the '06 Pistons one.


I’ve wondered about that too. Some things are just totally ignored like they don’t even get sick of talking about the same things. 08 and 06 are almost totally ignored. Which is fine because as I’ve said we never need more hate on anyone. But if you must…at least shake it up a bit.

[ShawkFactory]

The bolded was debunked in my first post. The Spurs only won each game by an average of 6 points. Cavs lost game 3 by 3 points and game 4 by 1 point. And this is WITH Lebron playing horribly. So it's really not true that the Spurs were far better. It's funny you say "if Lebron scores 5-6 points extra"...because that literally would've been enough to WIN THE GAMES.

You can't just hand waive Lebron himself playing horribly...was he a superstar or not? I'm seeing quite a lot of long posts here that are really dancing around the issue, which is the 07 finals would absolutely been competitive if Lebron played up to his standards. The numbers are below, and they are BAD.

Lebron in the 07 finals: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

Also I can't stand the "Cavs didn't belong there". Okay??? Then if you think that, then you need to go further and explain that Lebron/Cavs only made those finals as a fluke/lucky run with horrible comp, and therefore should Lebron making the 07 finals really be celebrated as much as it is? A lot of people literally classify that LeBron 07 run as "legendary" and he gets a ton of credit...but should he really based off some of the responses here? Again, I am a huge Lebron fan and the 07 run is one of my personal favorites (game 5 vs Pistons had me stunned), but I also acknowledge Lebron crapped the bed when it mattered most in the finals. I mean, we literally saw him do it again in the 2011 finals...it's pretty clear Lebron had some issues with the finals pressure and for sure choked away his first two finals.

I feel like everything you've said here has already been addressed. The Spurs were the best team in the league.

The could muck it up with scrappy teams like the Cavs, or they could score in bunches against the Suns. If the Cavs score more then I don't doubt that the Spurs could too. They proved their versatility and ability to pull out games regardless of style over many years.

Again, changing one thing about the series (Lebron shooting better) changes other things about it as well. Especially with a championship pedigree team that led the league in SRS, Net rating, etc.

[Kblaze8855]

The bolded was debunked in my first post.



Disagreement isn’t debunking.

Playing close games doesn’t mean one team isn’t better. Especially when they all have the same outcome. 5, 3, and 6 point games doesn’t mean the 02 Nets weren’t way worse than the lakers who swept them. The nets had no business beating Shaq and Kobe and they didn’t. Consistent close losses don’t show teams are close. It shows which team knows how to close. Which is the most important part of being better in the playoffs.

Cavs lost by 9, 11, 3 and 1. Go watch the Bullets lose to the 69 win Bulls by 12, 3, and 1 in the sweep and tell me the Bulls weren’t the far better team.

playoff series are always two groups of relatively good players. You can play close games. But when one team consistently does what it needs to win over and over and over and over that’s probably the far better team and it’s definitely the team with better execution, poise, and closing and nothing matters more than that in the playoffs.

[StrongLurk]

I feel like everything you've said here has already been addressed. The Spurs were the best team in the league.

The could muck it up with scrappy teams like the Cavs, or they could score in bunches against the Suns. If the Cavs score more then I don't doubt that the Spurs could too. They proved their versatility and ability to pull out games regardless of style over many years.

Again, changing one thing about the series (Lebron shooting better) changes other things about it as well. Especially with a championship pedigree team that led the league in SRS, Net rating, etc.

I don't get the bolded. You are legit saying it doesn't matter how good or bad Lebron played...very weird statement to make about a team's best player.

[ShawkFactory]

I don't get the bolded. You are legit saying it doesn't matter how good or bad Lebron played...very weird statement to make about a team's best player.

I mean..yea if he goes for 40 a game on 60% then sure. We're talking realistically though.

Going from 22 to 28 against a team like the Spurs isn't going to win the Cavs the series. Maaybe they go to 6. I still would doubt that.

[StrongLurk]

Disagreement isn’t debunking.

Playing close games doesn’t mean one team isn’t better. Especially when they all have the same outcome. 5, 3, and 6 point games doesn’t mean the 02 Nets weren’t way worse than the lakers who swept them. The nets had no business beating Shaq and Kobe and they didn’t. Consistent close losses don’t show teams are close. It shows which team knows how to close. Which is the most important part of being better in the playoffs.

Cavs lost by 9, 11, 3 and 1. Go watch the Bullets lose to the 69 win Bulls by 12, 3, and 1 in the sweep and tell me the Bulls weren’t the far better team.

playoff series are always two groups of relatively good players. You can play close games. But when one team consistently does what it needs to win over and over and over and over that’s probably the far better team and it’s definitely the team with better execution, poise, and closing and nothing matters more than that in the playoffs.

Once again you are handwaving Lebron's awful performance and basically stating that upsets can NEVER happen. How do you perceive that 07 run made by the Cavs/Lebron? I don't know if you've just given a few simply facts to cover your perspective, so how about just laying it out? Does Lebron deserve "GOAT credit" for that run or is it overrated? Were the Cavs an elite team and made the finals because of them being elite, or was it because the 07 East was historically bad?

[StrongLurk]

I mean..yea if he goes for 40 a game on 60% then sure. We're talking realistically though.

Going from 22 to 28 against a team like the Spurs isn't going to win the Cavs the series. Maaybe they go to 6. I still would doubt that.

Lebron in the first three rounds of the playoffs: 26/8/8 on 43/31/77 splits, only 2.7 TOV per game.

Lebron in the 07 finals: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

It wasn't just a raw drop in PPG...his efficiency cratered on a massive level AND his turnovers per game more than doubled. The Cavs could absolutely have had a real chance to win the finals if Lebron plays like he did in the 1st three rounds and even potentially pulls out another "game 5 vs Pistons" type performance.

I understand that, as a 22 year old, Lebron was still young and pre-prime...but he had four years of experience by that time. Lebron is a GOAT candidate, so he will be held to high standards. We literally just saw the year before, Dwayne Wade, absolutely step up in the finals and win in a legendary manner. Even if the Heat lost in 06...DWADE stepped up massively in the finals and he would've done the same thing in Lebron's place...so why didn't Lebron step up?

[ShawkFactory]

Lebron in the first three rounds of the playoffs: 26/8/8 on 43/31/77 splits, only 2.7 TOV per game.

Lebron in the 07 finals: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

It wasn't just a raw drop in PPG...his efficiency cratered on a massive level AND his turnovers per game more than doubled. The Cavs could absolutely have had a real chance to win the finals if Lebron plays like he did in the 1st three rounds and even potentially pulls out another "game 5 vs Pistons" type performance.

I vehemently disagree :confusedshrug:

[StrongLurk]

You can disagree, but that's you simply going against facts.

I understand that, as a 22 year old, Lebron was still young and pre-prime...but he had four years of experience by that time. Lebron is a GOAT candidate, so he will be held to high standards. We literally just saw the year before, Dwayne Wade, absolutely step up in the finals and win in a legendary manner. Even if the Heat lost in 06...DWADE stepped up massively in the finals and he would've done the same thing in Lebron's place...so why didn't Lebron step up?

I think the obvious answer is he wasn't mentally ready, plus has a serious shooting weakness. Basically my point is I really don't like the changing of history where Lebron is given GOAT credit for making the finals in 2007. He doesn't deserve GOAT credit when you play as bad as he did at the biggest stage. Game 5 vs the Pistons however was a GOAT game for sure.

[ShawkFactory]

You can disagree, but that's you simply going against facts.

I understand that, as a 22 year old, Lebron was still young and pre-prime...but he had four years of experience by that time. Lebron is a GOAT candidate, so he will be held to high standards. We literally just saw the year before, Dwayne Wade, absolutely step up in the finals and win in a legendary manner. Even if the Heat lost in 06...DWADE stepped up massively in the finals and he would've done the same thing in Lebron's place...so why didn't Lebron step up?

I think the obvious answer is he wasn't mentally ready, plus has a serious shooting weakness. Basically my point is I really don't like the changing of history where Lebron is given GOAT credit for making the finals in 2007. He doesn't deserve GOAT credit when you play as bad as he did at the biggest stage. Game 5 vs the Pistons however was a GOAT game for sure.

The sentiment of what you are saying is fair.

However it is absolutely not a fact that the Cavs have a real chance to beat the Spurs if Lebron plays well, as you've stated. I think there was a combination of the incredible Lebron play in game 5 and a little bit of luck for the Cavs the get past the Pistons.

And the Spurs were better than the Pistons fairly easily. The real finals was in the WCSF that year.

You can still give Lebron credit for playing well, and one of the GOAT games, and getting past the Pistons without mentioning the finals. They aren't necessarily a package deal. Unless you want them to be.

[Kblaze8855]

Once again you are handwaving Lebron's awful performance and basically stating that upsets can NEVER happen. How do you perceive that 07 run made by the Cavs/Lebron? I don't know if you've just given a few simply facts to cover your perspective, so how about just laying it out? Does Lebron deserve "GOAT credit" for that run or is it overrated? Were the Cavs an elite team and made the finals because of them being elite, or was it because the 07 East was historically bad?

Nothing I said suggests upsets can never happen. What I said is playing a close series doesn’t mean the team that wins every game isn’t a lot better.

I don’t care at all about the kind of argument you seem to be trying to have with the platitudes and thousands of times repeated points and stupid goat discussion.

I don’t care if you rank LeBron 14th or first or whatever. It’s a boring ass discussion that doesn’t need to happen ever again as long as I live, but the fact is at this point there are nothing but terrible arguments being made going both ways with nobody listening to each other. You’re all reading other peoples takes only to respond not to understand what they’re saying so none of it interests me.

Certain concepts sometimes stand out to me that speak to the game as a whole and how we evaluate teams and people. Your suggestion that close games means the worse team should’ve been able to win or even make a great showing in a series was one of them. I’ll talk to you all day about that conceptually, but I don’t care about your LeBron James discussion. That shit was boring 10 years ago.

The idea that any of these constantly criticized people deserve more criticism is pretty ridiculous to me and something I don’t mind talking about to explain why. The idea that close games mean two teams are close in their ability and expectations also grabs my attention because it immediately makes me think of many many times that isn’t the case and I like talking about things that get me thinking. The LeBron aspect of it bores me more than I can explain though.

I just replied initially because I was in the waiting room of my dealership getting my car serviced. I don’t have the stamina for one of these long ass Lebron things where there’s nothing left to say but everyone is happy to repeat themselves anyway.

[WhiteKyrie]

1/9 MJ stuff is meaningless because, even though his teams lost, MJ was putting up 35-40ppg on insane efficiency and was the best player on the court. The Bulls did not lose because of MJ.
You’re just now finding that out?

That’s always been an absolutely desperate attempt to put a skid mark on Michael’s career by LeBron Stans. 1 for 9 without Scottie is missing the most important part besides MJ’s own production. He made the Semi Finals and the Conference Finals (Pistons their only 2 losses) with Pip doing this:

1988 - 8 ppg, 4 rpg, 2 apg
1989 - 14 ppg, 6 rpg, 4 apg

MJ ‘88 - 35 ppg, 6 rpg, 6 apg, 3 spg
MJ ‘89 - 33 ppg, 8 rpg, 8 apg, 3 spg

Look at the massive gulf in difference of production.

Are we supposed to be impressed by those numbers? Everybody needs a sidekick or supplemental star in MJ’s case and in other player’s case a legit superstar (Shaq, LeBron, KD etc) to win anyway, but Scottie wasn’t even All-Star caliber player there yet. Role player at best, really. It’s an arbitrary strawman argument attempting to throw shade.

[SouBeachTalents]

You’re just now finding that out?

That’s always been an absolutely desperate attempt to put a skid mark on Michael’s career by LeBron Stans. 1 for 9 without Scottie is missing the most important part besides MJ’s own production. He made the Semi Finals and the Conference Finals (Pistons their only 2 losses) with Pip doing this:

1988 - 8 ppg, 4 rpg, 2 apg
1989 - 14 ppg, 6 rpg, 4 apg

MJ ‘88 - 35 ppg, 6 rpg, 6 apg, 3 spg
MJ ‘89 - 33 ppg, 8 rpg, 8 apg, 3 spg

Look at the massive gulf in difference of production.

Are we supposed to be impressed by those numbers? Everybody needs a sidekick or supplemental star in MJ’s case and in other player’s case a legit superstar (Shaq, LeBron, KD etc) to win anyway, but Scottie wasn’t even All-Star caliber player there yet. Role player at best, really. It’s an arbitrary strawman argument attempting to throw shade.
1-9

[StrongLurk]

Nothing I said suggests upsets can never happen. What I said is playing a close series doesn’t mean the team that wins every game isn’t a lot better.

I don’t care at all about the kind of argument you seem to be trying to have with the platitudes and thousands of times repeated points and stupid goat discussion.

I don’t care if you rank LeBron 14th or first or whatever. It’s a boring ass discussion that doesn’t need to happen ever again as long as I live, but the fact is at this point there are nothing but terrible arguments being made going both ways with nobody listening to each other. You’re all reading other peoples takes only to respond not to understand what they’re saying so none of it interests me.

Certain concepts sometimes stand out to me that speak to the game as a whole and how we evaluate teams and people. Your suggestion that close games means the worse team should’ve been able to win or even make a great showing in a series was one of them. I’ll talk to you all day about that conceptually, but I don’t care about your LeBron James discussion. That shit was boring 10 years ago.

The idea that any of these constantly criticized people deserve more criticism is pretty ridiculous to me and something I don’t mind talking about to explain why. The idea that close games mean two teams are close in their ability and expectations also grabs my attention because it immediately makes me think of many many times that isn’t the case and I like talking about things that get me thinking. The LeBron aspect of it bores me more than I can explain though.

I just replied initially because I was in the waiting room of my dealership getting my car serviced. I don’t have the stamina for one of these long ass Lebron things where there’s nothing left to say but everyone is happy to repeat themselves anyway.

It's okay, you don't need a long response. Just go ahead and say what you are hesitant to say - "Lebron shit the bed and caused the Cavs to get swept".

[WhiteKyrie]

1-9

4 for 10

[Hey Yo]

4 for 10

4 gold and 6 silver >>>>>> 6 gold

[Kblaze8855]

It's okay, you don't need a long response. Just go ahead and say what you are hesitant to say - "Lebron shit the bed and caused the Cavs to get swept".

If that’s the kinda empty cliche 4 minute bursts of rehashed segment filler trying to get a bored producer to the next ad read sports talk that interests you…go right ahead.

Just very very little meat left on that bone for me. Some of y’all trying to boil the bones down for stock then grind the bones to make your bread like the giant from Jack and the beanstalk.

Im just not that hungry.

[tpols]

The main reason this is being brought up is because there are a lot of people who are saying Lebron is the GOAT but MJ never had a playoff series this bad in his entire career. Even when he was losing to the dynasty Celtics or Pistons or whatever he always produced. If LeBron shoots 45% instead of 35% it's likely the Cavs would've won at least two games. If he shoots 50% they might have won it all. When the games come down to the wire and you have a guy by far taking the most shots on your team the % rate he converts buckets is gonna matter a lot. Kblaze literally out here arguing the rate at which you make buckets doesn't matter. :oldlol: :facepalm

[WhiteKyrie]

The main reason this is being brought up is because there are a lot of people who are saying Lebron is the GOAT but MJ never had a playoff series this bad in his entire career. Even when he was losing to the dynasty Celtics or Pistons or whatever he always produced. If LeBron shoots 45% instead of 35% it's likely the Cavs would've won at least two games. If he shoots 50% they might have won it all. When the games come down to the wire and you have a guy by far taking the most shots on your team the % rate he converts buckets is gonna matter a lot. Kblaze literally out here arguing the rate at which you make buckets doesn't matter. :oldlol: :facepalm
Exactly

[tpols]

Exactly

May as well put me in the game. Who cares if I shoot 8% from the field and lose. The rate at which you score in basketball doesn't matter. Muggsy bogues shot 37% one time back in the 80s and lost so it's all good.

[Kblaze8855]

Kblaze literally out here arguing the rate at which you make buckets doesn't matter.



Im arguing the statistical specifics of an inevitable loss doesn’t justify 20 years of rehashing and that a sweep having close games doesn’t make the two teams comparable.

The only reason to keep talking about it and trying to add additional scoops of dry heat lamped rehash is because the subject is Lebron James who a great many people feel discussion should never ever veer from for long.

I like to talk concepts and ideas with whoever has one to give me. This is just more Lebron, Lebron, Lebron. It’s the offseason so I know there’s no news really so it’s…fine. Im not saying not to do it. Im explaining why that part of it isn’t interesting to me.

I can’t really think of anything related to the guy that would be right now. Maybe some hypothetical situations and thought experiments or something but every aspect of everything he’s ever done has been typed over and over for decades to the point all I can really talk about is the underlying logic supporting the complaints or praise. The subject itself is just brutal to even read. It’s like you’re all punishing me. Reading these Lebron specific points is like being on time out with my face to the wall man. I just wanna move around you know?

And if I HAVE to hear about it why not at least search for a new approach? There really are ignored subjects to hate on even within the overall Lebron talk.

Really. Dude went 2-18 with 10 turnovers in a one point loss of a 7 game series he lost. Gotta be some meat left on that bone. Even 3ball doesn’t bring it up.

[tpols]

Im arguing the statistical specifics of an inevitable loss doesn’t justify 20 years of rehashing and that a sweep having close games doesn’t make the two teams comparable.

The only reason to keep talking about it and trying to add additional scoops of dry heat lamped rehash is because the subject is Lebron James who a great many people feel discussion should never ever veer from for long.

I like to talk concepts and ideas with whoever has one to give me. This is just more Lebron, Lebron, Lebron. It’s the offseason so I know there’s no news really so it’s…fine. Im not saying not to do it. Im explaining why that part of it isn’t interesting to me.

I can’t really think of anything related to the guy that would be right now. Maybe some hypothetical situations and thought experiments or something but every aspect of everything he’s ever done has been typed over and over for decades to the point all I can really talk about is the underlying logic supporting the complaints or praise. The subject itself is just brutal to even read. It’s like you’re all punishing me. Reading these Lebron specific points is like being on time out with my face to the wall man. I just wanna move around you know?

And if I HAVE to hear about it why not at least search for a new approach? There really are ignored subjects to hate on even within the overall Lebron talk.

Really. Dude went 2-18 with 10 turnovers in a one point loss of a 7 game series he lost. Gotta be some meat left on that bone. Even 3ball doesn’t bring it up.

There's a lot of material to bring up on playoff Lebron. That 2008 series and 2007 proves he had help and didn't deliver. They didn't even need him to be superman.... just not shit the bed. I'm gonna go and listen to some T.I. now.

[WhiteKyrie]

There's a lot of material to bring up on playoff Lebron. That 2008 series and 2007 proves he had help and didn't deliver. They didn't even need him to be superman.... just not shit the bed. I'm gonna go and listen to some T.I. now.

People forget the absolutely bonkers shooting game Boobie Gibson had to get them into the finals that year, in a game where LeBron was wetting the bed. People only remember the 48 special and act like he played with total dog shit. The east had minimal amount of talent, all you need is a guy like a LeBron and Big Z (perennial all star by the way) and quality playing role guys like Boobie, Mo Williams, Delonte etc.

I get that the game and the conference got tougher when the Boston big three formed, but they were starting to exit their prime together, their last burst.

And to be really honest that shit was dead by January or February 2009, when Kevin Garnett suffered his dramatic injury, they continue to be high functioning because of the ascension of Rajon Rondo to compensate KG being 75% of the guy he was before the injury …

Which is what made LeBron joining forces with prime Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh all the more cowardly. Like bro, all you needed was a Chris Bosh (Gasol tier) level guy on your team and you could’ve beat the Celtics. Just look what twilight prime Kobe did with Gasol, and twilight prime Artest against them?

[8Ball]

People forget the absolutely bonkers shooting game Boobie Gibson had to get them into the finals that year, in a game where LeBron was wetting the bed. People only remember the 48 special and act like he played with total dog shit. The east had minimal amount of talent, all you need is a guy like a LeBron and Big Z (perennial all star by the way) and quality playing role guys like Boobie, Mo Williams, Delonte etc.

I get that the game and the conference got tougher when the Boston big three formed, but they were starting to exit their prime together, their last burst.

And to be really honest that shit was dead by January or February 2009, when Kevin Garnett suffered his dramatic injury, they continue to be high functioning because of the ascension of Rajon Rondo to compensate KG being 75% of the guy he was before the injury …

Which is what made LeBron joining forces with prime Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh all the more cowardly. Like bro, all you needed was a Chris Bosh (Gasol tier) level guy on your team and you could’ve beat the Celtics. Just look what twilight prime Kobe did with Gasol, and twilight prime Artest against them?

You said you would change avatars and call LeBron the GOAT if he ever came back down 3-1 against Golden State in 2016.


We haven't forgotten your flip floping.

[8Ball]

There's a lot of material to bring up on playoff Lebron. That 2008 series and 2007 proves he had help and didn't deliver. They didn't even need him to be superman.... just not shit the bed. I'm gonna go and listen to some T.I. now.

He had help in 2007 and 2008? Lmfao.

[StrongLurk]

The main reason this is being brought up is because there are a lot of people who are saying Lebron is the GOAT but MJ never had a playoff series this bad in his entire career. Even when he was losing to the dynasty Celtics or Pistons or whatever he always produced. If LeBron shoots 45% instead of 35% it's likely the Cavs would've won at least two games. If he shoots 50% they might have won it all. When the games come down to the wire and you have a guy by far taking the most shots on your team the % rate he converts buckets is gonna matter a lot. Kblaze literally out here arguing the rate at which you make buckets doesn't matter. :oldlol: :facepalm

I feel like I'm one of the few Bron stans who actually acknowledges Bron's failures. His 2007 finals wasn't a failure because the Cavs lost, it was a failure because his play was putrid and inexcusable, especially for someone who is directly compared to MJ. Now Lebron did A LOT in his career after 2007 and I have him number 2 all time behind MJ, but I can't stand some of the revisionist history with the 07 run.

The Lebron stans can't have thing both ways (i.e. Lebron was a GOAT and carried trash to the finals, BUT he had no expectations to win the finals and his terrible individual performance doesn't matter). These two ideas clash and can't be used.

I fully acknowledge that the 07 finals was a defensive, slow, slugfest, but the Cavs were used to winning like that as long as Bron did his thing...but he fell far short from his usual play.

[StrongLurk]

He had help in 2007 and 2008? Lmfao.

Yes Lebron had help. It wasn't flashy, and it wasn't with an elite second option. His help was elite rebounding and defense, which mattered a lot more in 2008 than it does in 2023.

Lebron in the first 4 games of the Celtics series put up this stat line - 19/6/9, 2.5 steals, 1.8 blocks, and 5.8 turnovers. 38.7 TS%, 81 ORTG, 11.4 gamescore...yes you are reading those numbers right. He was ATROCIOUS! I have been a Lebron stan from the get go and watching hin in 07 vs Spurs and 08 vs Celtics was painful.

And yet even with his terrible first 4 games...the series was still tied 2-2. So clearly he had "help".

[WhiteKyrie]

Yes Lebron had help. It wasn't flashy, and it wasn't with an elite second option. His help was elite rebounding and defense, which mattered a lot more in 2008 than it does in 2023.

Lebron in the first 4 games of the Celtics series put up this stat line - 19/6/9, 2.5 steals, 1.8 blocks, and 5.8 turnovers. 38.7 TS%, 81 ORTG, 11.4 gamescore...yes you are reading those numbers right. He was ATROCIOUS! I have been a Lebron stan from the get go and watching hin in 07 vs Spurs and 08 vs Celtics was painful.

And yet even with his terrible first 4 games...the series was still tied 2-2. So clearly he had "help".

Bingo. LeBron had better help to compete against the 2008 Celtics than Kobe’s 2008 Lakers did. Matchups and play style matter. It’s not just about names. Something LeBron and his fans just simply can’t grasp.

[tpols]

I feel like I'm one of the few Bron stans who actually acknowledges Bron's failures. His 2007 finals wasn't a failure because the Cavs lost, it was a failure because his play was putrid and inexcusable, especially for someone who is directly compared to MJ. Now Lebron did A LOT in his career after 2007 and I have him number 2 all time behind MJ, but I can't stand some of the revisionist history with the 07 run.

The Lebron stans can't have thing both ways (i.e. Lebron was a GOAT and carried trash to the finals, BUT he had no expectations to win the finals and his terrible individual performance doesn't matter). These two ideas clash and can't be used.

I fully acknowledge that the 07 finals was a defensive, slow, slugfest, but the Cavs were used to winning like that as long as Bron did his thing...but he fell far short from his usual play.

It wasn't slow for Tony Parker.

https://i.postimg.cc/rpnqmHXN/Screenshot-20230920-145705-Chrome.jpg

25 ppg on 57% shooting from a small French guy.

[WhiteKyrie]

It wasn't slow for Tony Parker.

https://i.postimg.cc/rpnqmHXN/Screenshot-20230920-145705-Chrome.jpg

25 ppg on 57% shooting from a small French guy.

Probably what made them go grab such a perimeter defensive beast like LeBron’s dad, in Delonte

[RRR3]

LeBron wasn’t even in his prime until 2008-09, OP desperate as usual.

[tpols]

Probably what made them go grab such a perimeter defensive beast like LeBron’s dad, in Delonte

That type of shit is why he teamed up. I remember people shitting on Derrick Rose because he got clamped by miamis defense. They were a top 5 defense before "the Decision" and then they added lebron and Bosh.

Lebron has GOAT talent but he's always taken the easy way out.

[WhiteKyrie]

That type of shit is why he teamed up. I remember people shitting on Derrick Rose because he got clamped by miamis defense. They were a top 5 defense before "the Decision" and then they added lebron and Bosh.

Lebron has GOAT talent but he's always taken the easy way out.
Not only that but Derrick had no true star player next to him at that point. Boozer was on the decline and undersized PF without great athletic ability. Luol Deng? A spot up guy. Keith Bogans? They zoned up and shaded on all his drives. That Bulls team over achieved due to defense and Thibs making them play hard in the regular season.

[ShawkFactory]

Bingo. LeBron had better help to compete against the 2008 Celtics than Kobe’s 2008 Lakers did. Matchups and play style matter. It’s not just about names. Something LeBron and his fans just simply can’t grasp.

I hope you're willing to play that matchup game in other instances. Like in 2014. Bunch of banged up dudes (outside of Bron of course) against the ball movement that the Spurs employed. Not really gonna go well. But Wade and Bosh though!

If the 08 Cavs were more help for Bron against the Celtics than the 08 Lakers were for Kobe then I don't ever want to ever hear from you (or anyone who agrees with you here) about shit the 14 Heat against the Spurs.

Maybe you haven't called them stacked, in which case I apologize. And yes I generally agree that playstyles and matchups matter. But it feels like that type of context is only given when it's convenient in a particular argument involving Lebron.

[StrongLurk]

LeBron wasn’t even in his prime until 2008-09, OP desperate as usual.

You got no response to my OP.

[RRR3]

You got no response to my OP.
There’s nothing to respond about. He was 22 and before his prime. He wasn’t the guy people think about when they say “LeBron” yet. He wasn’t even first team all nba that year. You just enjoy whining.

[tpols]

There’s nothing to respond about. He was 22 and before his prime. He wasn’t the guy people think about when they say “LeBron” yet. He wasn’t even first team all nba that year. You just enjoy whining.

What's your excuse for 2011 when he was peak age?

[SouBeachTalents]

What's your excuse for 2011 when he was peak age?
Wade's fault.

[StrongLurk]

There’s nothing to respond about. He was 22 and before his prime. He wasn’t the guy people think about when they say “LeBron” yet. He wasn’t even first team all nba that year. You just enjoy whining.

It all depends on what your main stance is regarding Lebron's finals run in 2007 and if you are being logically consistent with the main stance.

Based on what you have said in this thread, you are of the opinion that:
1. Lebron was overrated in 2007 and not a true superstar
2. Lebron/Cavs only made the finals because the East was historically weak
3. Because of the two stances above, Lebron's horrible play in the 2007 finals "doesn't really matter" because it was a fluke that he made it in the first place.
4. Because of the above three stances, Lebron making the 07 finals is NOT a GOAT accomplishment and shouldn't really be factored into his arguments for being a top 5 player of all time.

[8Ball]

LeBron at 23 = NBA finals.

Jordan at 23 = swept in the first round.



This is why not 1 media member that writes about Lebron talks about 2007 as a negative, only Jordan stans that are upset about LeBron surpassing Jordan as the GOAT scorer and the GOAT player.

Deal with it.

[RRR3]

What's your excuse for 2011 when he was peak age?
None. But a pretty flawless prime production wise otherwise.

[RRR3]

It all depends on what your main stance is regarding Lebron's finals run in 2007 and if you are being logically consistent with the main stance.

Based on what you have said in this thread, you are of the opinion that:
1. Lebron was overrated in 2007 and not a true superstar
2. Lebron/Cavs only made the finals because the East was historically weak
3. Because of the two stances above, Lebron's horrible play in the 2007 finals "doesn't really matter" because it was a fluke that he made it in the first place.
4. Because of the above three stances, Lebron making the 07 finals is NOT a GOAT accomplishment and shouldn't really be factored into his arguments for being a top 5 player of all time.
I don’t think I’ve ever used 2007 as evidence for LeBron being top 5. He wasn’t that good in the playoffs outside of that one game. Legendary moment for sure though but he was still developing as a player.

[3ba11]

I don’t think I’ve ever used 2007 as evidence for LeBron being top 5. He wasn’t that good in the playoffs outside of that one game. Legendary moment for sure though but he was still developing as a player.


yeah he only needed 25 ppg to win the East or beat those Pistons - that would be the worst series of Jordan's career, yet it won the 2007 East - then he was put in a secure vault in the Finals - a complete joke performance that lost 3 fourth quarter leads in the series.. MJ easily wins that series since Lebron's 22 on 36% yielded 4 close games and 3 lost leads in 4th

btw, unathletic stars like Curry, Dirk, Jokic or Duncan are the kind of guys that Jordan feasted on, #weakera

[Johnny32]

LeBron at 23 - led possibly the worst finals supporting cast in NBA history to the finals
Lil Mikey at 23 - got her shit pushed in in the 1st Rd

LeCry more, fatboy.

[StrongLurk]

I don’t think I’ve ever used 2007 as evidence for LeBron being top 5. He wasn’t that good in the playoffs outside of that one game. Legendary moment for sure though but he was still developing as a player.

Agreed that game 5 vs the Pistons was an all-timer for sure.

[Legend248]

LeBron at 23 = NBA finals.

Jordan at 23 = swept in the first round.



This is why not 1 media member that writes about Lebron talks about 2007 as a negative, only Jordan stans that are upset about LeBron surpassing Jordan as the GOAT scorer and the GOAT player.

Deal with it.

Jordan also retired and still has more rings, 3 peated twice LOL....how many times lequeen female dog james 3 peat? ****** mother ****er

[3ba11]

LeBron at 23 - led possibly the worst finals supporting cast in NBA history to the finals
Lil Mikey at 23 - got her shit pushed in in the 1st Rd

LeCry more, fatboy.


22-23 Years Old vs Championship Team and #1 Defense


Jordan vs 86' Celtics......... 44 on 50%
Lebron vs 07' Spurs'......... 22 on 36%
Lebron vs 08' Celtics......... 26 on 36%


A clear pattern - Lebron simply couldn't perform against championship comp until he received the all-star spacing that his stiff arm needed in 2009

[8Ball]

Jordan also retired and still has more rings, 3 peated twice LOL....how many times lequeen female dog james 3 peat? ****** mother ****er

Look at this little Jordan stan all upset in his feelings now that LeBron is the GOAT scorer of all time, something Jordan held on to.

Rings are team championships, Russell has 11, so Russell > Jordan in your own book.


Since you don't think Russell > Jordan, that means your criteria is 100% hypocritical and should be immediately discarded.

[8Ball]

22-23 Years Old vs Championship Team and #1 Defense


Jordan vs 86' Celtics......... 44 on 50%
Lebron vs 07' Spurs'......... 22 on 36%
Lebron vs 08' Celtics......... 26 on 36%


A clear pattern - Lebron simply couldn't perform against championship comp until he received the all-star spacing that his stiff arm needed in 2009

Chicago Bulls 1986 - 8th seed. 30 wins - 52 losses. :roll:

Cavs 2007 - 50 wins - 32 losses.


LeBron 2007 >>>>>>>>>> 1986 Jordan by a mile.

[8Ball]

Yes Lebron had help. It wasn't flashy, and it wasn't with an elite second option. His help was elite rebounding and defense, which mattered a lot more in 2008 than it does in 2023.

Lebron in the first 4 games of the Celtics series put up this stat line - 19/6/9, 2.5 steals, 1.8 blocks, and 5.8 turnovers. 38.7 TS%, 81 ORTG, 11.4 gamescore...yes you are reading those numbers right. He was ATROCIOUS! I have been a Lebron stan from the get go and watching hin in 07 vs Spurs and 08 vs Celtics was painful.

And yet even with his terrible first 4 games...the series was still tied 2-2. So clearly he had "help".

2007 Cavs 2nd option was 15ppg on 40%. You can't even name this player without googling it, or the full starting lineup of the Cavs.

2007 Spurs had 3 hall of famers in their primes.


Defensive help?

2007 Cavs - 0 All defensive teams

2007 Spurs - 2 - 1st team all defensive, Bruce Bowen and Tim Duncan.



Everyone and their mother knew this 16 years ago, apparently Jordan stans have amnesia.

[3ba11]

Chicago Bulls 1986 - 8th seed. 30 wins - 52 losses. :roll:

Cavs 2007 - 50 wins - 32 losses.


LeBron 2007 >>>>>>>>>> 1986 Jordan by a mile.


Lebron had a Year 4 team that included an all-star center, HOF coach and 22/5/5 all-defender acquisition, while MJ had a rookie team and traveling cocaine circus





Chicago Bulls 1986 - 8th seed. 30 wins - 52 losses. :roll:

Cavs 2007 - 50 wins - 32 losses.


LeBron 2007 >>>>>>>>>> 1986 Jordan by a mile.


Help that MJ and Lebron needed to win 40 games:

2005........ 2x all-star Zydrunas
1987'....... role player Oakley


Help that MJ and Lebron needed to win 50 games:

2006........ HOF coach... 2x all-star center... 22/5/5 acquisition (1st team defender)
1988........ no coach'......7.9 rookie bench player


* Lebron avoided low seeds, bad playoff teams and the 8 vs 1 matchup by waiting 3 years to develop a veteran high seed before entering the 06' Playoffs.. He didn't have a low seed until 2021 (1st Round exit).

* Lebron never beat a top 5 SRS team with weak scoring & efficiency from a sidekick (no carry-jobs in 2 decades)


CONCLUSION: MJ was the better floor-raiser

[8Ball]

1986 Bulls - 32 wins

2007 Cavs - 50 wins

Both Jordan and LeBron 23 years old.

One was bounced in the 1st round, another made the finals.

1985 Bulls and 1987 Bulls were also < 50 wins and didn't make the finals either.




1-9 until Pippen came along.

[3ba11]

1986 Bulls - 32 wins

2007 Cavs - 50 wins

Both Jordan and LeBron 23 years old.

One was bounced in the 1st round, another made the finals.

1985 Bulls and 1987 Bulls were also < 50 wins and didn't make the finals either.




1-9 until Pippen came along.


Jordan was a rookie in 86' while Lebron was a Year 4 player with all-star teammates and HOF coach - it's apples and oranges

The record shows that Jordan needed less help to win 40 or 50 games (no all-star teammates or good coach needed)

[8Ball]

Jordan was a rookie in 86' while Lebron was a Year 4 player with all-star teammates and HOF coach - it's apples and oranges

The record shows that Jordan needed less help to win 40 or 50 games (no all-star teammates or good coach needed)

Rookie at 22 years old? LMFAO

Lebron at 18 years old averaged 20/5/5 against NBA competition.

Jordan at 18 years old averaged 13/4/2 against college competition.


Comparing apples to apples LeBron > Jordan.

[3ba11]

Rookie at 22 years old? LMFAO

Lebron at 18 years old averaged 20/5/5 against NBA competition.

Jordan at 18 years old averaged 13/4/2 against college competition.


Comparing apples to apples LeBron > Jordan.


86' Jordan was basically a rookie because he didn't play that season, while 2007 Lebron had 4 years to develop a favored high seed of veteran all-stars, all-defenders and HOF coaching.. it's night and day..

Jordan would've won the title with that 2007 roster because that team had better team defense than the 1st three-peat Bulls and more scoring help (jordan never had 3rd scoring options like all-star Zydrunas)

Btw, 18-year old Lebron had lower PER than 40-year old Jordan the prior year against the exact same comp

[Bacchus]

In the final 24 seconds of the 4th quarter or overtime, LeBron James has never made a potential game-tying or go-ahead shot in a potential series clincher, when facing elimination or in the NBA Finals.

https://twitter.com/ESPNStatsInfo/status/989504369417580552

[Bacchus]

Still waiting for someone to show me a video of Jordan choking in the clutch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JphetiuFDak

[WhiteKyrie]

Rookie at 22 years old? LMFAO

Lebron at 18 years old averaged 20/5/5 against NBA competition.

Jordan at 18 years old averaged 13/4/2 against college competition.


Comparing apples to apples LeBron > Jordan.

Colllege you run an offensive system. Especially on a college team and against college teams that back then consisted of a lot of quality pro players. The joke always was the only person to hold MJ to under 20 ppg was Dean Smith because of the four corner offense.

[sdot_thadon]

Op I'm pretty sure Lebron got more than his fair share of blame for 07. The fact that it's not recognized as overachieving of the highest order says enough. When we criticize the 07 finas we seem to brush off the amazing performance it took to get there. What he did to Detroit Informed the Spurs staff and players exactly what they couldn't let happen to them. The Spurs actually finished their WCF series the day before Lebron's epic game 5. So they got a front row seat with popcorn to watch that horror movie. You think there was a chance in hell that a coach the caliber of Pop wasn't game planning that shit immediately lol? A little more background is the kid was 22 years old facing a team that just swept their western equivalent record wise in the Jazz, and that team definitely had more talent than those Cavs. Quick question for perspectives sake: has any player besides Lebron reached the stage of the finals, this young, AND without a fellow veteran star? I can't recall another off the top of my head. Could he have played better? Sure. How much better would have allowed him to beat the Spurs and how possible was that recalling the fact that Hughes was hurt and aside from that even at a low ppg of 22 for the series he was nearly 10 ppg over them next best guy on his team. Who could even grab a moment of attention from a good Spurs defense to allow him room to work?

[red1]

he had a dogshit series and everyone criticized the broken jumper



what are you talking about OP. all we did that summer was roast lebron for being swept. that was the most boring finals ever.

[red1]

86' Jordan was basically a rookie because he didn't play that season, while 2007 Lebron had 4 years to develop a favored high seed of veteran all-stars, all-defenders and HOF coaching.. it's night and day..

Jordan would've won the title with that 2007 roster because that team had better team defense than the 1st three-peat Bulls and more scoring help (jordan never had 3rd scoring options like all-star Zydrunas)

Btw, 18-year old Lebron had lower PER than 40-year old Jordan the prior year against the exact same comp

:roll:

[dankok8]

2007 and 2008 Cavs definitely had inadequate help for Lebron on the offensive end but defensively, those teams were insane.

The 2007 Cavs had a -8.2 rDRtg in the playoffs which is 10th highest all-time for a team that made the NBA Finals. Like they were historically good on defense and it's not a surprise when you realize they were a really big, physical team. The 2008 Cavs were -7.6 rDRtg too.

It's very probable that had Lebron played better offensively in the 2007 Finals that the Cavs would have won a couple of games. Outright winning the series would have been tough but with a GOAT-level performance, unlikely but maybe... The dynasty Spurs did lose to the 2006 Mavs and 2008 Lakers in surrounding years. They weren't unbeatable. The 2008 Celtics series was more winnable even. Who knows if the Cavs took Game 1. They actually outscored the Celtics by 8 points in the series as is and with Lebron shooting better who knows.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Lebron absolutely deserves blame.

How much is the question. Personally? I don't think a whole lot, since he's widely regarded a Top 2 player all-time. Bron's 2011 Finals is the monkey wrench in his GOAT case. Not 2007

[StrongLurk]

Op I'm pretty sure Lebron got more than his fair share of blame for 07. The fact that it's not recognized as overachieving of the highest order says enough. When we criticize the 07 finas we seem to brush off the amazing performance it took to get there. What he did to Detroit Informed the Spurs staff and players exactly what they couldn't let happen to them. The Spurs actually finished their WCF series the day before Lebron's epic game 5. So they got a front row seat with popcorn to watch that horror movie. You think there was a chance in hell that a coach the caliber of Pop wasn't game planning that shit immediately lol? A little more background is the kid was 22 years old facing a team that just swept their western equivalent record wise in the Jazz, and that team definitely had more talent than those Cavs. Quick question for perspectives sake: has any player besides Lebron reached the stage of the finals, this young, AND without a fellow veteran star? I can't recall another off the top of my head. Could he have played better? Sure. How much better would have allowed him to beat the Spurs and how possible was that recalling the fact that Hughes was hurt and aside from that even at a low ppg of 22 for the series he was nearly 10 ppg over them next best guy on his team. Who could even grab a moment of attention from a good Spurs defense to allow him room to work?

This is the kind of post that I criticize for this thread. You can't have things both ways for Lebron (i.e. Lebron was a GOAT and carried trash to the finals, BUT he had no expectations to win the finals and his terrible individual performance doesn't matter).

If he was good enough to carry the team to the finals by himself through good performance, then why couldn't he perform well in the finals? He either was a superstar and choked, or he was overrated and the "crap Cavs team" only made the finals through a historical lack of competition in the East.

You are saying "oh Lebron was young" and using that as an excuse for his poor finals performance. But if he was "so young and inexperienced", then how did he make it to the finals in the first place? How did he pull out that game 5 performance? Look, the guy was either a true superstar in 07 or HE WASN'T. If you think he was a superstar, then his finals performance is inexcusable. You can't say Lebron was a superstar and then just handwave his awful performance vs the Spurs.

[sdot_thadon]

This is the kind of post that I criticize for this thread. You can't have things both ways for Lebron (i.e. Lebron was a GOAT and carried trash to the finals, BUT he had no expectations to win the finals and his terrible individual performance doesn't matter).

If he was good enough to carry the team to the finals by himself through good performance, then why couldn't he perform well in the finals? He either was a superstar and choked, or he was overrated and the "crap Cavs team" only made the finals through a historical lack of competition in the East.

You are saying "oh Lebron was young" and using that as an excuse for his poor finals performance. But if he was "so young and inexperienced", then how did he make it to the finals in the first place? How did he pull out that game 5 performance? Look, the guy was either a true superstar in 07 or HE WASN'T. If you think he was a superstar, then his finals performance is inexcusable. You can't say Lebron was a superstar and then just handwave his awful performance vs the Spurs.

That game 5 vs the Pistons was legit the 1st hint of his true potential. His coming out party as an atg as far as I'm concerned. He definitely was young though, 22 is and will forever be considered young for many things lol. And I'm definitely not trying to have anything both ways, I'm of the train of thought that he made the Finals ahead of schedule with a once ever type of performance. He literally had no business being there to begin with. He punched above his weight when he did that vs. Detroit but you can't honestly expect a guy to do that for an entire series vs an even better team. Who's done that under similar circumstances? No one. Think about what you're asking of a 22 year old for a moment. Backpacking and entire squad offensively vs an elite defensive team with great coaching for an entire series lol. And by back packing we mean basically scoring 25+ points every 4th qtr with no secondary offensive threat. That's a bit much don't you think? And that's before considering that his jumper was even more erratic and streaky back then.

[StrongLurk]

That game 5 vs the Pistons was legit the 1st hint of his true potential. His coming out party as an atg as far as I'm concerned. He definitely was young though, 22 is and will forever be considered young for many things lol. And I'm definitely not trying to have anything both ways, I'm of the train of thought that he made the Finals ahead of schedule with a once ever type of performance. He literally had no business being there to begin with. He punched above his weight when he did that vs. Detroit but you can't honestly expect a guy to do that for an entire series vs an even better team. Who's done that under similar circumstances? No one. Think about what you're asking of a 22 year old for a moment. Backpacking and entire squad offensively vs an elite defensive team with great coaching for an entire series lol. And by back packing we mean basically scoring 25+ points every 4th qtr with no secondary offensive threat. That's a bit much don't you think? And that's before considering that his jumper was even more erratic and streaky back then.

Okay sounds like you acknowledge that his 07 run was closer to a fluke than a GOAT type run. So it was mostly CIRCUMSTANCE (historically weak East) that allowed that Cavs team to make the finals. Considering this, we shouldn't really use his 07 run as an argument for Lebron being a GOAT. It's more of a very interesting footnote. The only thing that should really be celebrated was his iconic game 5 vs this Pistons, and NOT the fact that the Cavs team made the finals.

I'm not saying Lebron SHOULD HAVE beat the Spurs, but he should have played much better than he did in the finals. Look what MJ did against the 86 Celtics when he was only like 200 days older than Lebron.

Lebron (age 22, 166 days) vs the 07 Spurs: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

MJ (age 23, 55 days) vs the 86 Celtics: 44/6/6 on 50/100/87 splits, 4.7 TOV per game. 58.4 TS%, 115 ORTG, 30.6 game score.

[8Ball]

Okay sounds like you acknowledge that his 07 run was closer to a fluke than a GOAT type run. So it was mostly CIRCUMSTANCE (historically weak East) that allowed that Cavs team to make the finals. Considering this, we shouldn't really use his 07 run as an argument for Lebron being a GOAT. It's more of a very interesting footnote. The only thing that should really be celebrated was his iconic game 5 vs this Pistons, and NOT the fact that the Cavs team made the finals.

I'm not saying Lebron SHOULD HAVE beat the Spurs, but he should have played much better than he did in the finals. Look what MJ did against the 86 Celtics when he was only like 200 days older than Lebron.

Lebron (age 22, 166 days) vs the 07 Spurs: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

MJ (age 23, 55 days) vs the 86 Celtics: 44/6/6 on 50/100/87 splits, 4.7 TOV per game. 58.4 TS%, 115 ORTG, 30.6 game score.


2005 Detroit Pistons took Spurs to 7 games in the finals and Bran beat em in 2007.


1986 Bulls - 30 wins 52 losses and made the playoffs?

[8Ball]

LeBron "help" in 2007:



2007 Cavs 2nd option was 15ppg on 40%. You can't even name this player without googling it, or the full starting lineup of the Cavs.

2007 Spurs had 3 hall of famers in their primes.


Defensive help?

2007 Cavs - 0 All defensive teams

2007 Spurs - 2 - 1st team all defensive, Bruce Bowen and Tim Duncan.



Everyone and their mother knew this 16 years ago, apparently Jordan stans have amnesia.



Stronglurk getting dumpstered in this thread. Give it up and go home.

[WhiteKyrie]

Lebron absolutely deserves blame.

How much is the question. Personally? I don't think a whole lot, since he's widely regarded a Top 2 player all-time. Bron's 2011 Finals is the monkey wrench in his GOAT case. Not 2007
Of course, nobody saying 2007 is what destroys his GOAT case. We were just saying it shouldn’t be swept under the rug like he wasn’t piss poor. It still counts. Because if he won the championship, the tune would be entirely different.

[Full Court]

Of course he does though. I mean, he does have the most choke jobs of all time.:confusedshrug:

[WhiteKyrie]

Of course he does though. I mean, he does have the most choke jobs of all time.:confusedshrug:

Every player has bad series but he definitely has some all time stinkers. 2007 Finals vs Spurs, 2010 ECSF vs Celtics, 2011 Finals vs Mavs, 2014 Finals vs Spurs, 2018 Finals vs Warriors, 2021 1st Round vs Suns, and the 2023 WCF vs Nuggets

[Full Court]

Every player has bad series but he definitely has some all time stinkers. 2007 Finals vs Spurs, 2010 ECSF vs Celtics, 2011 Finals vs Mavs, 2014 Finals vs Spurs, 2018 Finals vs Warriors, 2021 1st Round vs Suns, and the 2023 WCF vs Nuggets

Don't forget the 2008 series against the Celtics.

[sdot_thadon]

Okay sounds like you acknowledge that his 07 run was closer to a fluke than a GOAT type run. So it was mostly CIRCUMSTANCE (historically weak East) that allowed that Cavs team to make the finals. Considering this, we shouldn't really use his 07 run as an argument for Lebron being a GOAT. It's more of a very interesting footnote. The only thing that should really be celebrated was his iconic game 5 vs this Pistons, and NOT the fact that the Cavs team made the finals.

I'm not saying Lebron SHOULD HAVE beat the Spurs, but he should have played much better than he did in the finals. Look what MJ did against the 86 Celtics when he was only like 200 days older than Lebron.

Lebron (age 22, 166 days) vs the 07 Spurs: 22/7/7 on 36/20/69 splits, 5.8 TOV per game (TOV more than doubled). 42.8 TS%, 83 ORTG, 10.6 game score.

MJ (age 23, 55 days) vs the 86 Celtics: 44/6/6 on 50/100/87 splits, 4.7 TOV per game. 58.4 TS%, 115 ORTG, 30.6 game score.

Fluke? Nah considering what Lebron became after thst we all know it wasnt a fluke.That makes zero sense, in what world do we not celebrate or count accomplishments? 07 is already counted against him every time it's mentioned. It is what it is: an accomplishment wrapped up in a failure. An almost but no cigar moment, that's the unpredictability of sports. Thia thread was fine without bringing up Mj, but if you insist? No one has ever picked at Mjs career for the rotten pieces to determine his place in history, he got a pass on that and I'm not sure exactly when fishing for trash became a thing bit it's never been the way you determine how great someone is. Especially when they've been continuously great for decades lol. I'm not so sure why we'd compare the Celtics series when the Bulls were an embarrassment to the game to make that postseason with 30 wins.... its actually kinda difficult to compare the 2 because the 86 Celtics weren't near the same type of defensive team. I mean era specifically yeah the come in with similar rankings for srs and netrg, etc. But they allowed 14 more points a game and they definitely didn't have a single guy equipped to handle a guy Ike Mj, Nique or Lebron for that matter Nique dropped 40 on them a couple of times that year and had 2 games a bucket from 40 in their 5 game series. And not including Mjs 45 and 63. The. 07 Spurs? In a league with 06 Kobe, Lebron, Melo, Dwade, Tmac, Dirk, Vince, Amare, Pierce, Arenas, and Iverson all kicking around they didn't allow a single 40 point game I could find. So expecting Lebron to light them up when they didn't allow a single performance like that All season isn't smart money. Maybe the Lebron he developed into could have.

[WhiteKyrie]

Don't forget the 2008 series against the Celtics.

While I agree my image of that series always gets skewed with his 45 in game 7 but then I remember he gave up 41 to Pierce, so he was a positive 4 points in that direct positional matchup.

:oldlol:

[sdot_thadon]

Of course, nobody saying 2007 is what destroys his GOAT case. We were just saying it shouldn’t be swept under the rug like he wasn’t piss poor. It still counts. Because if he won the championship, the tune would be entirely different.

Should we sweep things that don't look good under the rug for all greats? Like 95? or the "that don't count t" Wizards years? Quitting in the 1989 conference finals? Pretty much being known for playing flashy losing ball until certain people were in place in the organization? You can literally do this to anyone , not just Lebron. I always challenge Mj stans to talk about bad points for Mike's career, you guys aren't capable. Programming works lol.


Don't forget the 2008 series against the Celtics.
Oh you mean that series where he went to the absolute brink with the the 1st modern era superteam? The guys who annihilated Prime Kobe a couple of weeks later?

[dankok8]

I don't think y'all realize just how good the 2007 and 2008 Cavs were on defense in the playoffs.


2007 and 2008 Cavs definitely had inadequate help for Lebron on the offensive end but defensively, those teams were insane.

The 2007 Cavs had a -8.2 rDRtg in the playoffs which is 10th highest all-time for a team that made the NBA Finals. Like they were historically good on defense and it's not a surprise when you realize they were a really big, physical team. The 2008 Cavs were -7.6 rDRtg too.

It's very probable that had Lebron played better offensively in the 2007 Finals that the Cavs would have won a couple of games. Outright winning the series would have been tough but with a GOAT-level performance, unlikely but maybe... The dynasty Spurs did lose to the 2006 Mavs and 2008 Lakers in surrounding years. They weren't unbeatable. The 2008 Celtics series was more winnable even. Who knows if the Cavs took Game 1. They actually outscored the Celtics by 8 points in the series as is and with Lebron shooting better who knows.

[Full Court]

While I agree my image of that series always gets skewed with his 45 in game 7 but then I remember he gave up 41 to Pierce, so he was a positive 4 points in that direct positional matchup.

:oldlol:

In game 1 he had 12 points on 11% shooting and TEN TURNOVERS.

:lebronamazed:


And then in games 2-4 he shot 25%, 31%, and 35% respectively.

Epic choke.

[sdot_thadon]

I don't think y'all realize just how good the 2007 and 2008 Cavs were on defense in the playoffs.

They were as good as the 07 Spurs and 08 Celtics on defense, the problem was they weren't in the same neighborhood offensively. Both those teams had balanced attacks with several elite offensive players.

Lebron on the other hand:


In game 1 he had 12 points on 11% shooting and TEN TURNOVERS.

:lebronamazed:


And then in games 2-4 he shot 25%, 31%, and 35% respectively.

Epic choke.

Was pretty much the only real offensive threat on his squads and his jump was pretty streaky. You guys don't remember the box and 1 zones and similar concepts that teams started running on Lebron. Pretty much bandied on him seeing too many jerseys and making the right play to the wrong guys lol. So when he made these passes to guys who weren't equipped to cash in? L. Remember all the crying when he started getting better teammates? That's how the box zone stuff wouldn't ever work again he had the personnel to take advantage of the way he was being defended and all of a sudden no one ever talked much about those defenses ever again.

[dankok8]

They were as good as the 07 Spurs and 08 Celtics on defense, the problem was they weren't in the same neighborhood offensively. Both those teams had balanced attacks with several elite offensive players.

Lebron on the other hand:



Was pretty much the only real offensive threat on his squads and his jump was pretty streaky. You guys don't remember the box and 1 zones and similar concepts that teams started running on Lebron. Pretty much bandied on him seeing too many jerseys and making the right play to the wrong guys lol. So when he made these passes to guys who weren't equipped to cash in? L. Remember all the crying when he started getting better teammates? That's how the box zone stuff wouldn't ever work again he had the personnel to take advantage of the way he was being defended and all of a sudden no one ever talked much about those defenses ever again.

The 07 Spurs were a lot better offensively which is why it would be tough to win that series. I agree with you.

The 08 Celtics I'm not sold on as an offensive team. They had a +2.7 rORtg (10th) in the regular season and +3.3 rORtg in the playoffs which is good but nothing special. Honestly they were better than the Cavs offensively but nothing dramatic. And of course it ended up being a defensive slugfest and a super close series with the Cavs actually outscoring them by 8 points over 7 games. It's not inconceivable that with Lebron shooting better and turning the ball over less that the Cavs would have won the series. Game 1 could have flipped for sure.

[sdot_thadon]

The 07 Spurs were a lot better offensively which is why it would be tough to win that series. I agree with you.

The 08 Celtics I'm not sold on as an offensive team. They had a +2.7 rORtg (10th) in the regular season and +3.3 rORtg in the playoffs which is good but nothing special. Honestly they were better than the Cavs offensively but nothing dramatic. And of course it ended up being a defensive slugfest and a super close series with the Cavs actually outscoring them by 8 points over 7 games. It's not inconceivable that with Lebron shooting better and turning the ball over less that the Cavs would have won the series. Game 1 could have flipped for sure.

Definitely was possible just not probable. They still would have had the next 3 best offensive players in the series after Lebron. Thats tough to overcome.

[dankok8]

Definitely was possible just not probable. They still would have had the next 3 best offensive players in the series after Lebron. Thats tough to overcome.

They do have the next 3 best offensive players but when the pace slows down and it's possession by possession, having three guys over one is not a huge advantage. As evidenced by the point differential in the series. The Cavs lost by a narrow margin but actually outscored the Celtics.

[sdot_thadon]

They do have the next 3 best offensive players but when the pace slows down and it's possession by possession, having three guys over one is not a huge advantage. As evidenced by the point differential in the series. The Cavs lost by a narrow margin but actually outscored the Celtics.

Disagree. Purely from a numbers standpoint its a disadvantage. With only one guy you can trap and zone him as well.as the usual send help once he gains an advantage. With 3 guys you not really doing much but playing help defense once someone gains advantage, you can't really afford to double of any of them. Boston won that chip despite my belief that hadn't really gelled as an offensive unit, star power can do that.

[dankok8]

Disagree. Purely from a numbers standpoint its a disadvantage. With only one guy you can trap and zone him as well.as the usual send help once he gains an advantage. With 3 guys you not really doing much but playing help defense once someone gains advantage, you can't really afford to double of any of them. Boston won that chip despite my belief that hadn't really gelled as an offensive unit, star power can do that.

Well sure. And just to be clear...

I don't deny the Celtics were better on offense. But the Cavs were so insane on defense that they could have won the series. Against a great offensive team like the 2007 Spurs, it's very tough but against an above average one like the 2008 Celtics, it's doable. The Celtics in the Big 4 era (with Rondo) were never a great offensive team, just around average. They actually got worse on offense after 2008.

[Full Court]

Well sure. And just to be clear...

I don't deny the Celtics were better on offense. But the Cavs were so insane on defense that they could have won the series. Against a great offensive team like the 2007 Spurs, it's very tough but against an above average one like the 2008 Celtics, it's doable. The Celtics in the Big 4 era (with Rondo) were never a great offensive team, just around average. They actually got worse on offense after 2008.

On paper, the Celtics were probably better. However, nobody can deny that the series was totally winnable for the Cavs if LeShrivel hadn't choked in 4 of the games.

[ShawkFactory]

On paper, the Celtics were probably better. However, nobody can deny that the series was totally winnable for the Cavs if LeShrivel hadn't choked in 4 of the games.

No way!

[Full Court]

No way!

Yes way!

[ShawkFactory]

Yes way!

I'm joking...

The Celtics won 66 games and had highest net rating in the league by a wide margin. Obviously they were better on paper.

The only way for the Cavs to remotely hang was to slow the game down and play very physical, which they did a good job of.

[sdot_thadon]

Well sure. And just to be clear...

I don't deny the Celtics were better on offense. But the Cavs were so insane on defense that they could have won the series. Against a great offensive team like the 2007 Spurs, it's very tough but against an above average one like the 2008 Celtics, it's doable. The Celtics in the Big 4 era (with Rondo) were never a great offensive team, just around average. They actually got worse on offense after 2008.

Agree with most of that, just not that the Cavs defense was better than the Celtics D was to offset that offensive disadvantage. They definitely could have won that game 7 had Lebron been able to take over that last few minutes to a great extent, this is true. But it doesn't happen every time for anyone, Nor can I justify somehow calling it choking.

**we forget how close these series run sometimes, remember the Cavs were literally a rebound away from maybe beating Detroit in 06.

[sdot_thadon]

On paper, the Celtics were probably better. However, nobody can deny that the series was totally winnable for the Cavs if LeShrivel hadn't choked in 4 of the games.

So why didn't the Pistons beat them the next round, or Kobe and the Lakers the following round?

[Full Court]

I know you were.

If Lebron could have pulled off the upset in that series, the narrative about him even today would have ended up very differently.

[dankok8]

Agree with most of that, just not that the Cavs defense was better than the Celtics D was to offset that offensive disadvantage. They definitely could have won that game 7 had Lebron been able to take over that last few minutes to a great extent, this is true. But it doesn't happen every time for anyone, Nor can I justify somehow calling it choking.

Lebron didn't choke in Game 7. He had a great game. But Game 1 was there for the taking...

Of course it doesn't mean the Cavs would for sure win the series but they would have an even better chance.

[sdot_thadon]

Lebron didn't choke in Game 7. He had a great game. But Game 1 was there for the taking...

Of course it doesn't mean the Cavs would for sure win the series but they would have an even better chance.

True. I edited my previous reply to add

we forget how close these series run sometimes, remember the Cavs were literally a rebound away from maybe beating Detroit in 06.
They gave up 3 offensive rebounds in a 2 point game with under a min in the game. Sometimes things don't go your way.

[RRR3]

The 08 Celtics also took 7 games to beat the below .500 Hawks. They played with their food.

[dankok8]

The 08 Celtics also took 7 games to beat the below .500 Hawks. They played with their food.

The Hawks series is very different. Boston outscored Atlanta by a whopping 84 points and every Celtic win was a blowout.

[RRR3]

The Hawks series is very different. Boston outscored Atlanta by a whopping 84 points and every Celtic win was a blowout.
I'm gonna quote Kblaze here and say who the hell cares if you win by 30 or 3, either way it's the same result. The fact is they had trouble with a shitty Hawks team as well, no matter how mad it makes you. You don't get extra points for being competitive in losses, or are you going to give LeBron credit for being "competitive" against the Nuggets last year? :lol

[Full Court]

I'm gonna quote Kblaze here and say who the hell cares if you win by 30 or 3, either way it's the same result. The fact is they had trouble with a shitty Hawks team as well, no matter how mad it makes you. You don't get extra points for being competitive in losses, or are you going to give LeBron credit for being "competitive" against the Nuggets last year? :lol

BIG difference between losing by 3 or losing by 30.

And the Lakers were very competitive against the Nuggs last year - despite LeShrivel being a net negative. AD, Reaves, and Hachimura made for some close games.

[dankok8]

I'm gonna quote Kblaze here and say who the hell cares if you win by 30 or 3, either way it's the same result. The fact is they had trouble with a shitty Hawks team as well, no matter how mad it makes you. You don't get extra points for being competitive in losses, or are you going to give LeBron credit for being "competitive" against the Nuggets last year? :lol

But Boston didn't have trouble with Atlanta. I just told you they won every game by a blowout.

It matters when you win by 30 vs. winning by 3 when you're talking about how dominant a team is.

[kawhileonard2]

Yep Lebron had a terrible Finals...

Bruce Bowen locked him down.

[Full Court]

Bruce Bowen locked him down.

Broke him just like Devin Booker and Jamal Murray did.