SHAQ: Lebron will destroy Reaves upon return - so y'all LYING about Bron's high IQ?

How can someone have high hoops IQ when they always destroy key players like Love, Bosh, Jamison, Ingram, Westbrook, Hughes, IT and more

Players with high hoops IQ don't have bad fits - bad fits are antithetical to having high IQ

CONCLUSION: Lebron has low IQ because he has a long list of teammates that he destroyed their games - he's just a simpleton, "downhilll" ball-dominator (high-scoring primary ballhandler).. The resulting weak chemistry is why his teams always underwhelm and "need more help" REGARDLESS OF CAST.. tldr: lebron is a bum compared to truly high IQ players that could play sophisticated offense that allowed great chemistry/fits/teammate elevation like Kobe, MJ, Curry, Duncan - these guys weren't dumb simpleton ball-dominators like LukaDumb and LeDumb.. Lebron never evolved out of AAU dumb-ball... People are enamored with his physical talent and simply lie about his IQ - the ridiculous losing proves the case - he lost in the 1st Round with Luka and AD - so his brand of ball is pure shit because the talent is obviously sufficient.

[IMG]https://c.tenor.com/PLCroit80ccAAAAd/tenor.gif[/IMG]

Rent free...for the last 15 years.

OP go see a therapist.

Their abilities overlap so they have no choice but to sacrifice, like Wade had to reduce his role on offense for the Heat to become better. Lebron I think has become a better off-ball player now so I think Reaves can still shine, but he's not going to average 28 and be top 10 in the league in assists as well with two other players that have similar skillsets.

OP is spot on. Lebron's IQ is one of the most overrated things in the entire sport. Right up there with Lebron's career as a whole. LeUnderAcheiver.

[QUOTE=ImKobe;15042930]Their abilities overlap so they have no choice but to sacrifice, like Wade had to reduce his role on offense for the Heat to become better. Lebron I think has become a better off-ball player now so I think Reaves can still shine, but he's not going to average 28 and be top 10 in the league in assists as well with two other players that have similar skillsets.[/QUOTE]


ultimately, it's the off-ball guys that have high IQ because they fit with everyone and allow the best brand of ball (dynasty-ball) - so this would be Curry, MJ, Duncan, Kobe.. these guys have the skills to execute the best brand of ball and great fits/chemistry

[QUOTE=3ba11;15042934]ultimately, it's the off-ball guys that have high IQ because they fit with everyone and allow the best brand of ball (dynasty-ball) - so this would be Curry, MJ, Duncan, Kobe.. these guys have the skills to execute the best brand of ball and great fits/chemistry[/QUOTE]

Lakers did sort of get in that bag with Luka bringing the ball up in the Playoffs and having Lebron & Reaves in each corner to spread it out and if they double you give Lebron and Reaves and 4 v 3.

LeBron made Reaves the player you've seen on the court this season.

[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15042953]LeBron made Reaves the player you've seen on the court this season.[/QUOTE]


Uh... Negative

Reaves averaged 28 ppg without Lebron last year, compared to under 20 in the games they both played.

Lebron's downhill skillset simply craters the 3rd option - for his entire career - it started with Hughes and then Jamison, and then Bosh, Love, Westbrook, and now Reaves

Btw, Reaves and AD joined the Lakers in 2020, so AD was the off-ball assist target that a young ballhandler needs to develop - aka AD developed Reaves.. Remember that AD and Lebron were equal-scoring partners, so they could theoretically both get credit for Reaves' development - however, it's clear that AD was the great fit for Reaves while Lebron cratered Reaves and held him back

[QUOTE=ImKobe;15042950]Lakers did sort of get in that bag with Luka bringing the ball up in the Playoffs and having Lebron & Reaves in each corner to spread it out and if they double you give Lebron and Reaves and 4 v 3.[/QUOTE]


it failed drastically by getting upset-swept in the 1st Round as a big favorite.. Lebron was simply a big negative off-ball and a bad off-ball player - this is proven by the big negative plus/minus (the only negative on the team) and the sweep-upset in the first round as a big favorite..

Lebron actually doesn't really play a traditional off-ball role because he doesn't move off screens - he simply stands there on the wing and "looks to go downhill upon the catch" according to the TWolves coach.. Again, Lebron is a bad off-ball player, which is why he never did it consistently until Luka arrived, and even then it wasn't good off-ball (doesn't move off screens)

[QUOTE=Hey Yo;15042953]LeBron made Reaves the player you've seen on the court this season.[/QUOTE]

Definitely helped his progression that Lebron took him under his wing early on. But you've gotta remember only one guy in nba history was powerful enough to create another hall of fame being from scratch. He who tooketh earth into his palms, clapped his hands together and said "Let there be Pip"

[QUOTE=3ba11;15042957]it failed drastically by getting upset-swept in the 1st Round as a big favorite.. Lebron was simply a big negative off-ball and a bad off-ball player - this is proven by the big negative plus/minus (the only negative on the team) and the sweep-upset in the first round as a big favorite..

Lebron actually doesn't really play a traditional off-ball role because he doesn't move off screens - he simply stands there on the wing and "looks to go downhill upon the catch" according to the TWolves coach.. Again, Lebron is a bad off-ball player, which is why he never did it consistently until Luka arrived, and even then it wasn't good off-ball (doesn't move off screens)[/QUOTE]

Defense was a bigger issue tbh & they struggled to close games because Luka wasn't in form and Lebron's too old to take over + Reaves played with a toe injury himself. Lebron can shoot off the catch and he can make the right read to get someone else an easy look. Obviously having three guys who do similar things is not really the correct way of building a contender but it's not like they can just move Lebron for better or comparable assets at this point.

[QUOTE=ImKobe;15043083]Defense was a bigger issue tbh & they struggled to close games because Luka wasn't in form and Lebron's too old to take over + Reaves played with a toe injury himself. Lebron can shoot off the catch and he can make the right read to get someone else an easy look. Obviously having three guys who do similar things is not really the correct way of building a contender but it's not like they can just move Lebron for better or comparable assets at this point.[/QUOTE]


Again, a Luka-Curry combination would have zero issues and be true contenders for the title and homecourt advantage throughout.

So a player's individual defense (Lebron or Curry's defense) has little to do with it.

The issue is that everyone must slow down to an old ball-dominators pace when he's in the game - everyone simply plays slower and more accommodating/less aggressive with Lebron in the game... Otoh, Curry creates zippy ball movement where everyone can stay aggressive, move fast and play their game/play to full capacity..

Ultimately, basketball is an attrition battle, i.e. Curry's brand of ball has always put defenses on their heels via great chemistry/aggressive teammates and ball movement - the worn-down defenses have less capacity to "get hot" offensively.. Essentially, Curry's teams have lower defensive requirements because his great brand of ball wears out opponents, while Bron-ball (or Luka-ball) lets defenses rest, so the story/excuse is always that "b-b-but opponent just got hot (shrug)".. See the 14' Finals for the goat example of this attrition battle - I guarantee that the Spurs wouldn't get hot like that against Curry's Warriors because they'll be working so much harder on defense

[I]If you don't agree with the above, then ask yourself why Lebron's teams nearly always struggle defensively and have bad fits, while it's the exact opposite for the greatest off-ball players like Curry, MJ or Duncan... High-scoring and high-assist primary ballhandling (ball-dominance) is simply a cancer that has much lower team ceilings than all the best off-ball players - and btw, Finals record over a good sample is perhaps the best gauge of the team ceilings that a player yields [/I]

[QUOTE=sdot_thadon;15043062]Definitely helped his progression that Lebron took him under his wing early on. But you've gotta remember only one guy in nba history was powerful enough to create another hall of fame being from scratch. He who tooketh earth into his palms, clapped his hands together and said "Let there be Pip"[/QUOTE]


AD led the Lakers in scoring in 2020 when Reaves arrived, while being the off-ball
assist target that a young ballhandler like Reaves needs to develop..

Otoh, Reaves cratered alongside Lebron and had horrible numbers in the games they played together.. Reaves would already be an all-star alongside Curry just like Wiggins - or alongside MJ, just like baby Pippen... So Lebron never developed anyone from low producer to meaningful producer like Curry/MJ did with Klay, Dray, Pippen, Poole, BJ, Grant, and more

It's interesting because Lebron never brought immediate success when joining a team - he was lottery in 2019 or 2005, while losing in 2011 or 2015... Otoh, other guys arrived and lifted his teams, such as AD lifting the Lakers from lottery to champion, or Mo's spacing adding 21 wins for LeDrive

Who do you think is better between the two, op? Sga or haliburton?

[Img]https://i.ibb.co/JmpGnKz/IMG-20230528-095117.jpg[/img]

[QUOTE=Axe;15043116]Who do you think is better between the two, op? Sga or haliburton?

[Img]https://i.ibb.co/JmpGnKz/IMG-20230528-095117.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]


[B]SGA[/B] = [U]not a high assist player[/U], so not a full ball-dominator, i.e. by having lower assists, SGA isn't using teammates as bailout options as often because HE'S the closer via great mid-range

[B]Haliburton[/B] = [U]not a high scorer[/U], so not a full ball-dominator, i.e. he doesn't have high volume of unassisted buckets like [I]high-scoring[/I] primary ballhandlers (ball-dominators)



Who's better? SGA obviously... But even though SGA isn't as cancerous as a high assist ball-dominator (aka Harden, Westbrook, Luka, Lebron), he still has many unassisted buckets that produces weaker chemistry than prior era off-ball guys like MJ, Curry or Duncan.. The issue is that [B]everyone today is a "downhill" player, so one of them has to win.. it happens to be SGA[/B], who has the advantage of lower assists/greater closing than other ball-dominant players that use teammates as bailout options more often than him

Duncan never even averaged over 25 ppg for a single title run. The only reason Duncan gets included in these discussions is because in '03, against the powerhouse 49 win Nets, he outscored his 2nd option by 10 ppg while in the 2013 Finals LeBron outscored his 2nd option by 6 ppg.

This is literally the criteria OP judges entire careers on, a 4 ppg differential by which they outscored their 2nd option over a single series sample size. A very intelligent methodology :lol

.
[B]Thread cliffs [/B]


Don't you guys get tired of using defense as an excuse for Lebron's underwhelming/underachieving teams??

Don't you wonder why it's always the same story?

The reality is that ball-dominance is a bad brand of ball and therefore needs RIDICULOUS offensive star help, thus preventing the GM from getting the right defenders/others, aka elite roster construction.. aka ball-dominators prevent elite roster construction.. Furthermore, there's the attrition battle described earlier (ball-dominance lets defenses rest, so they're super fresh on offense)

Carry on tho

Of course you didn't address a single point I made, but you know what I said is 100% accurate, but seeing it spelled out it's so indefensibly stupid you had to ramble on about whatever nonsense you jus typed.

[QUOTE=SouBeachTalents;15043147]Duncan never even averaged over 25 ppg for a single title run. The only reason Duncan gets included in these discussions is because in '03, against the powerhouse 49 win Nets, he outscored his 2nd option by 10 ppg while in the 2013 Finals LeBron outscored his 2nd option by 6 ppg.

This is literally the criteria OP judges entire careers on, a 4 ppg differential by which they outscored their 2nd option over a single series sample size. A very intelligent methodology :lol[/QUOTE]


Not only did Duncan carry the scoring load (defeat max defensive attention) for the playoffs AND championship level (Finals), but his brand of ball on offense is top notch, thus allowing the GM to find the right defenders/others... Otoh, Lebron's ball-dominance is a bad brand of ball and therefore needs RIDICULOUS offensive help, thus preventing the GM from getting the right defenders/others, aka elite roster construction.. aka ball-dominators prevent elite roster construction..

Duncan barely averages more ppg than Pippen during the majority of his title runs, so yes, the one instance I specified before is literally the only reason he gets included in these discussions positively. If Parker or Manu average a couple more ppg in a single series against a 49 win team, suddenly Duncan's entire career & 20 year body of work is judged completely differently by you.

[QUOTE=3ba11;15042955]Uh... Negative

Reaves averaged 28 ppg without Lebron last year, compared to under 20 in the games they both played.

Lebron's downhill skillset simply craters the 3rd option - for his entire career - it started with Hughes and then Jamison, and then Bosh, Love, Westbrook, and now Reaves

Btw, Reaves and AD joined the Lakers in 2020, so AD was the off-ball assist target that a young ballhandler needs to develop - aka AD developed Reaves.. Remember that AD and Lebron were equal-scoring partners, so they could theoretically both get credit for Reaves' development - however, it's clear that AD was the great fit for Reaves while Lebron cratered Reaves and held him back[/QUOTE]

LeBron is the reason you know who Reaves is. He vouched for him when he was an undrafted rookie. Lakers probably never would have signed him if Bron didn't see something in him.