Why LeBron is (maybe) the best player in the NBA

[QUOTE=Samurai Swoosh]Because of hype, potential, etc.

As actual players, they are neck and neck.

Who are you kidding ..[/QUOTE]

To be fair, no one is going to take Wade over LeBron for a few different reasons. Age and potential are the two biggest ones. LeBron is still evolving as a player and is 4 years younger than Wade. That means something if we are talking about taking who or who. Realistically speaking, they are extremely close as individual players. Both can score at will, take over games, can go 1 on 5, have impressive resumes, and are legitimate superstars. The only reason I would say LeBron is better is because he's a little more versatile than Wade is. If he ever figured out how to use his body the right way, I don't think anyone would argue about Kobe,Wade,Howard,etc... being better. It would be a given.

[QUOTE=Inactive]That trust you have in your opinions is one of the limitations I was referring to.

Scientists once knew, from their years of experience treating, and analyzing patients, that draining their blood was an effective treatment for most diseases. How many fans are convinced that their favorite team wins more, when they're watching? How many people claim that they love one brand of soft drink, and hate the other, and then can't tell the difference between the two in blind taste tests? How many people are given placebos, and still think that they were given effective medicine? How many people thought that they were healed by Franz Mesmer's animal magnetism, before he was outed as a fraud?

Unless you're validating your impressions with data, and corroborating with (relatively) unbiased observers, your opinion is practically worthless. You're delusional, if you think otherwise.[/QUOTE]


You forgot to mention that most data based studies start with an assumption or hypothesis that someone made. Then they progress and prove it with data. If you think about it, it might not be PROVEN before the data comes out, but their assumption was correct when it was made; it just needed to be shoved down people's throats for it to be accepted. This is true for most unconventional ideas.

You also are trying to compare people who the average man would define as idiots or, at least, sheep, to the person you are debating. I'd say that unless you can point out something that he has said that shows such bias or blindness, then you're just talking about 'some people' opposed to him.

No matter what you say, your eyes are the best bet for judging things. The more you have studied data, the more your eyes are trained to tell what matters and what doesn't.

By the way, if you label anything that disagrees with you as biased, how does that even make sense?

We all know that stats are very misleading. There are plenty of stats that I believe they could come up with that would be more 'advanced', but they haven't really tapped into that. Even stuff like PER uses basic stats in a formula. Again, stats could tell more of the story than they do, but since they are so subjective (no stat for boxing out, no stat for helping on defense, no real way to determine what kind of a basket is assisted, no stat for correctly swinging the ball... etc) how can you say they are any less subjective than an educated fan's opinion?

Just my 2 cents... but I think LeBron does have a case for best player.

-Smak

[QUOTE=Kurosawa0]Try to justify? Sounds like you're the one trying to push something.

I've watched these guys since they came in and Wade is just not better. LeBron is the guy you take, always. Wade's damn close, but [B]I'm not taking a 6'4 shooting guard over a 6'8 point forward.
[/B]
No GM in the league takes Wade before LeBron.

It's close, but LeBron is the choice, objectively anyway.[/QUOTE]
Are you sure? :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=LEFT4DEAD]Are you sure? :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

What? Do you mean that Wade isn't really 6'4? :lol

[QUOTE=Kurosawa0]What? Do you mean that Wade isn't really 6'4? :lol[/QUOTE]
My bad, I thought MJ was 6'4 but he was little taller. :lol

[QUOTE=LEFT4DEAD]My bad, I thought MJ was 6'4 but he was little taller. :lol[/QUOTE]

He was supposedly 6'6.

Anyway, I was just saying that Wade is a bit undersized for a two guard.

[QUOTE=Kurosawa0]He was supposedly 6'6.

Anyway, I was just saying that Wade is a bit undersized for a two guard.[/QUOTE]
He has perfect combination of speed, quickness, weight and strength for his position and he is compensating his height with out of this planet athletism. And he was always combo guard for me. Great playmaker and penetrator in the same time with great court vision. And for me it's little doubtfull saying "undersized" for a player who has been top 10 at worse since his 2nd year.

[QUOTE=LEFT4DEAD]He has perfect combination of speed, quickness, weight and strength for his position and he is compensating his height with out of this planet athletism. And he was always combo guard for me. Great playmaker and penetrator in the same time with great court vision. And for me it's little doubtfull saying "undersized" for a player who has been top 10 at worse since his 2nd year.[/QUOTE]

But... he is undersized. I'm not saying that he's not awesome, but he is a bit smaller than what you'd want from a two guard.

[QUOTE=Kurosawa0]But... he is undersized. I'm not saying that he's not awesome, but he is a bit smaller than what you'd want from a two guard.[/QUOTE]

That's like saying Chuck was undersized for a PF. It's just irrelevant when talking about a player like Wade or Chuck since they more than make up for whatever size disadvantage they may have.

Also, Wade has really long arms which also helps.

[QUOTE=Kurosawa0]But... he is undersized. I'm not saying that he's not awesome, but he is a bit smaller than what you'd want from a two guard.[/QUOTE]
It's better to be undersized and to have others qualities like speed and athletism than to be taller and slow with bad ball handling skills etc. Just sayin'.

[QUOTE=Knoe Itawl]That's like saying Chuck was undersized for a PF. It's just irrelevant when talking about a player like Wade or Chuck since they more than make up for whatever size disadvantage they may have.

Also, Wade has really long arms which also helps.[/QUOTE]

Sure, but it's about what you'd rather have. If I have two players, fairly similar talent level, I'm not taking the undersized one of the two.

[QUOTE=Knoe Itawl]That's like saying Chuck was undersized for a PF. It's just irrelevant when talking about a player like Wade or Chuck since they more than make up for whatever size disadvantage they may have.

Also, Wade has really long arms which also helps.[/QUOTE]

I agree. Wade has long arms, with gorilla hands, and is buffer than most SGs anyway. Wade is a physical specimen at SG.

[QUOTE=ILLsmak]

-Smak[/QUOTE]


Is there any reason you sign your posts? It's as if you don't think I am capable of just scrolling up a bit or looking to the left and seeing your name right above your avatar. Just wondering.

[QUOTE=Kurosawa0]Sure, but it's about what you'd rather have. If I have two players, fairly similar talent level, I'm not taking the undersized one of the two.[/QUOTE]

I think Wade is a more deceptive scorer. He is better at getting to the rim. I don't think LeBron is as reliable (scoring-wise) as Wade, especially against tough defenses in the postseason. He is still a poor off-ball player, too.

Wade can get to the rim better than LeBron, and is more unguardable IMO. He is the least likely of the two to get shut down by defensive specialists.

[QUOTE=canefandynasty]I think Wade is a more deceptive scorer. He is better at getting to the rim. I don't think LeBron is as reliable (scoring-wise) as Wade, especially against tough defenses in the postseason. He is still a poor off-ball player, too.

[B]Wade can get to the rim better than LeBron, and is more unguardable IMO.[/B] He is the least likely of the two to shut down.[/QUOTE]
We have saw that against Celtics last year. They were only threats on their teams and Wade has had much better series against Celtics. I agree he is more unguardable than Lebron.