jus wondering because people talk about lebrons legacy right now even though hes only 25 and how hes overrated now and he has 2 mvp's. Nash also has 2 and has never been to the finals(lebron has) and has had a better team around him then lebron has and hes near the end of his career so how is his legacy if some of ya'll use the same criteria with him as you use with lebron?..dont wanna hear the excuse about Bron being called king and built up because both have been back to back mvp's, neither has one a title and both have been considered the best at there positions for a good minute
I always felt that being on championship teams is important but overrated in terms of rating individual players. There are so many variables, outside the control of the player, that have to go just right in order to win an NBA championship.
Therefore that has no bearing on my opinion of LeBron James, who thoroughly deserved both MVP trophies because he's the best player in the game, hands down. In my opinion, Cleveland is a mediocre team that goes nowhere without LeBron.
As for Steve Nash, I always ask myself at least two questions when judging great players.
1. Does he make his teammates better?
2. Does he make difficult plays look easy?
Steve Nash qualifies big time in both areas. If you will remember, the year before he came to Phoenix they had an extremely talented squad but a horrible won-lost record. The next year, with Nash running the point, Phoenix experienced a huge transition. They became one of the most exciting teams in the league and had an excellent won-lost record.
Ask yourself where the Suns would be without Nash and that's another measurement of greatness.
Every year you see guys who were mediocre performers on other teams suddenly become excellent players when traded to Phoenix. Why? The answer is the incredible passes from Steve Nash that gets the ball to shooters at just the right time and in exactly the right position. And he makes it look so easy that you're sitting at home thinking you can do the same thing. But then I ask myself, if it's so easy, why is he the only PG doing that?
I do think Nash is somewhat overrated. He's a great point guard, but when you compare him to other players that have won back to back MVP's... He doesn't stack up. Him and LeBron are the only two players to win back to back MVP's and win no titles. Now, I will cut him a little slack. He's had to compete against a prime Shaq, Kobe and Duncan in the Western Conference.
true although kidd used to do the same thing. my point being is if people come at lebron about overrated and legacy then the same needs to be said about nash who is near the end of his career with 2 mvps and never been to the title game. him and lebron are the only 2 time mvps who havnt won a title( and lebron still has plenty of time to win one) my personal opinion is nash is a greta player but my point is if people are gonna talk about overrated with lebron an dlegacy because of what he hasnt accomplished team wise then the same needs to be said about nash
All the mvp's have had to deal with some superstar team. jordan had to deal with magic pat ewing. magic had to deal with brid zeke had to deal with bird so i cant cut him slack because of kobe and shaq. lebron had to deal with kg,ray,paul p with a worst team then nash had so if we cut slack then his would be a bigger cut seeing as nash had amare,joe johnson, while lebron had........mo williams, antwan jamison
You're right... LeBron is only 25 years old. I think the reason he's getting so much criticism is because he was built up to be SO much. He was dubbed "King James" and the "Chosen One" before he was even drafted. He was the #1 pick and signed the biggest shoe contract in NBA history before he was even drafted. He wears #23... Stole MJ's powder routine. His first game in the NBA was phenomenal. He's lived up to ALL of the hype.
I just think people expect LeBron to be that next great player. I don't just mean a normal great player. I mean, people expect him to be up there with Jordan, Bird, Magic and that group of players.
I think LeBron is held to a higher standard than Nash is, despite them both winning back to back MVP's.
As I mentioned above, winning championships involves many variables which are beyond the control of the individual player. This year's Cleveland squad is an excellent example. Without LeBron, they would be lucky if they just made the playoffs. LeBron James is so talented, and such a great team player, that he personally transformed a team that would ordinarily go nowhere into a title contender. Wow!
Ask yourself what LeBron could do with the kind of talent that LA, Orlando, and Boston has. Anyone who criticizes LeBron for failing to win a title with Cleveland doesn't understand basketball. You cannot win a championship by yourself, basketball is a team game.
As for the comments by ButlerBulldogs, I disagree. Most people measure greatness by ppg and other stats. Steve Nash is one of those rare players who completely controls the Phoenix offense. You can't measure his greatness just by numbers.
But if you insist upon doing such, make sure you add up all of those points his teams scores as a result of his incredible passes. Then combine the points from his assists with those he scores himself, and his numbers will rank right up there with the best scorers in the game.
^^^^ i agree@tezo..most are all over him because of the build up. if its one thing americans love doing its building up stars so they can tear them down when they dont win or when they make a mistake. its hard for him to get int hat bird magic jordan stage when he has mo williams and antwan. jordan had pippen magic had worthy and kareem bird had parish and mchale. its obvious that its extremely lopsided as far as teammates. i know how good jordan and magic and bird were but they dont win there titles without the help that they had
i dont agree that most measure greatness by just stats.. look at kevin johnsons stats... domonique clyde drexler,dantly..syou dont hear those guys name when people talk about the greatest. most people go by titles won by superstars stats are just a secondary part of it
Back to back MVP winners
Bill Russell - Won it three years in a row
Wilt Chamberlain - Won it three years in a row
Larry Bird - Won it three years in a row
Do you really think Steve Nash compares to ANY of those players on that list?
I clearly see your point and I would agree that Nash can't really compete with the listed players, but I guess he was the leagues most valuable player for a reason. He simply lifted the franchise to a new level, which wouldn't have happened, if not because of him.
new level?...hadnt phx been to the finals twice before?..how far have they gotten with nash?..western conference finals at best? im not tryna take anything away from him but he didnt take phx to places they have never been before. also on a side note dalls went further after nash left
Lebron became overrated when people hyped him to be better than Kobe and yet he can not carry his team and he has no to little mid range game and his post game is not that strong. Kobe has had these weapons in his arsenal for a while. Lebron still relies on raw abilities to score and until he works on that he will not be better than Kobe. Lebron is a great player nonetheless but he has to improve his offense and he needs to leave Cleveland a team that could not hide his weakness.
He does need a better midrange and post game but he needs a better team even more. reguardless how much hes hyped he has lived up to it while only being 25. He draged a so so supporting cast to the nba title game and the best record int he nba twice. nash has a mid range and deep ball and great passing yet hes never took a more talented team to the nba finals and he's north of 35. i still dont think leb ron is overrated even with his lack of certain skills because he still dominates. shaq never had many skills either but he dominated with what he could do which was overpower you and he won titles by doing just that once he had a very good supporting cast. like i said before no one player no matter how great wins it alone
I don't know. LeBron is confusing. He's phenomenal, but he's ball dominant. IF he had a great supporting cast, how would his game affect them?
It's somewhat difficult to play with LeBron. He has the ball in his hands majority of the time. He usually dribbles majority of the shot clock. He has no post game. No mid-range game. No in between game. He doesn't shoot well. He doesn't move or play well off the ball. You need to be able to do those things to co-exist with other great players on your team. Or else you'll turn them into spectators, etc.
I always find it harsh to criticize a player for winning an MVP. They don't give the awards to themselves. All the player can control is how they produce on the court. It is true that Nash has never even played a game in the NBA finals, but to me that hardly tells the whole story. Are Malone, Stockton, Ewing, Barkley and Wilkins somehow diminished by not winning a title? Sure. But does that somehow make them less than great, generation defining players? In my humble opinion the answer is no. Nash received the MVPs because of his stellar play, his ridiculous shooting %'s (50%fg, 90%FT, and 40+% 3PTs) and his part in bringing back the run and gun style of the league's glory days. For all of that, he is indeed deserving.
i agree it doesnt diminish what nash has done.. my point is that if people are all over lebron for not getting a ring at 25 then nash deserves equal or more flak for not winning it while being over 35
as far as lebron and another star i think it can work. hes more of a passer then kobe or jordan and has shown hes willing to give the ball up in crunch time( which isnt always a good thing) jordan was extremely ball dominate yet still was able to work well with another top 50 player in pippen. i think alot of his ball domination has to do with who he has on his team. he has to be ball dominate on that team. if he wasnt can you imagin how many people would complain about how he's not ball dominate enough on that team. pretty much if he doesnt win a title he's in a no win situation. if he passes too much hes too unselfish, if he shoots too much hes too selfish if he walks off and doesnt shake hands hes a bad sportsman. if he is calm hes not emotional enough. if he wins a title while doing any of this it does matter
I see what your saying, and I have to agree w/ Butler and some of the other guys that the reason for the disparity in flak given to the two players is because of how transcendent LeBron's domination has been and can be. He can put up video game type triple doubles AND have 4 blocks and 3 steals in a game. He has also been so hyped and the NBA has laid so much hope on his (admittedly) young shoulders that he will ALWAYS garner more sh^t than anyone. If he wins 2 titles it will be, "He should have won 4 or 5". In his case, it will always be that way. Nash on the other hand has the luxury of being the underdog done good. He was, remember, well on his way to being a 1st round bust before starting to have good years in his 5-6th years and eventually exploding with the Suns. He has the luxury of starting with minimal expectations, failing even those, and then becoming the great player he is through dedication and hard work, not necessarily god-given physical talent. For those reasons, he will never receive the same amount of flak LeBron does and probably for good reason. Hype breeds high expectations, high expectations breed need, and if those needs are not met= failure. LeBron is only 25, so let us not get too far ahead of ourselves!!!!!!!!!!! Great Thread!
Is Nash overrated? Probably a little bit. That being said James has been put on a different pedestal than Nash and so more is expected from him as far as a legacy goes.
Yes Nash won two MVP awards but most still don't consider him in the "greatest of all time" tier. I mean there's Magic, Oscar Robertson, Isaiah Thomas, Bob Cousy and even John Stockton (who didn't win a championship either) at the top. Nash is in the second tier with guys like Walt Frazier, Gary Payton, Jason Kidd, Nate Archibald and Lenny Wilkens. His legacy is certainly not as great as somebody like Magic.
Lebron on the other hand has 2 MVP awards at the age of 25, he almost surely will win at least another by the time his career is over and he has been expected to do incredible things from the time he was in high school. He's already being talked about as the best ever at his position with guys like Elgin Baylor, Larry Bird, John Havlicek, Scottie and Julius Erving and will probably surpass them all from a statistics perspective by the time he's 30. If he is satisfied with being one of the ten greatest SFs of all time (just like Nash will be considered one of the ten greatest PGs of all time) then his legacy is assured even without a ring.
However if Lebron wants his legacy to be as one of the greatest players ever and perhaps the greatest SF ever then he needs to win at least one championship.
King James legacy maybe in trouble depending on what team he signs to... Lebron could be the next Dan Marino... He might be 25, but when does a player that has been in the league since he was 18 decline??? Lebron has played in 600+ NBA games and at about 1,000 games players start to physically decline... The OKC Thunder are gonna be a HUGE problem in the next couple years....
Here are some things to consider:
* Imagine Kobe and LeBron changing teams the past 2 years. My guess is LA would win the NBA championship in a walkover with LeBron, while Cleveland with Kobe would NOT be a championship contender. I think the fact that LeBron makes such a lousy team a championship contender is a testament to his immense talent.
* If Steve Nash were on the Lakers the past few years, he probably would have a handful of championship rings on his fingers so that would no longer be an issue.
This brings me back to my point that winning championships goes way beyond you're individual talent and incorporates a certain amount of fate and luck that is beyond the control of the player. As great as Kobe is, the guy was incredibly lucky to be a member of the Lakers. What if Kobe played with the LA Clippers? Come on guys, winning championships involves many variables and lots of luck.
*ButlerBulldogs put together a list of incredible players and asked me if I thought Nash was comparable to any of those guys. Here's my answer.
1. All of those fantastic players mentioned had elite level talent, but far better supporting casts than Steve Nash.
2. In the two specific years Nash won the award, he was the guy who meant more to his team than any other player in the league. In other words, the outstanding performance of the Phoenix Suns was clearly a result of the stellar play of Steve Nash. I'm not saying Nash is as good as any of the players on that list, but for those two seasons, he was just as valuable to his team as any of them.
nash is overrated ?
just the better shooter ever and one of the better passer, legit hall of famer, not more...not less.
"Imagine Kobe and LeBron changing teams the past 2 years. My guess is LA would win the NBA championship in a walkover with LeBron, while Cleveland with Kobe would NOT be a championship contender. I think the fact that LeBron makes such a lousy team a championship contender is a testament to his immense talent."
It's tough to make that claim because both players are so different. LeBron is ball dominant. Everything is isolation and dribble dribble dribble for majority of the shot clock... Then use his unbelievable freak athleticism to attack the basket. That doesn't work well with other All-Star who need the ball (and I'm not just talking about passes off of LeBron's kick outs). LeBron doesn't have a post game, in between game, doesn't catch and shoot well, doesn't move without the ball well, etc. Kobe's game works perfectly with a Pau Gasol, Andrew Bynum and Lamar Odom. Kobe doesn't need the ball to be effective. He moves well without it, can post up, play the in between game, etc. He can play off of other All-Star caliber players. There's better chemistry there.
a few things:
way too early to even try and gauge lebron's legacy on this league. All we can really do is judge him based on now. RIght now, he is arguably the best in the league, certainly top 2 in my book along with kobe. However, people are giving him too much praise by calling him potentially the best ever and making jordan comaprisons. It might be valid one day, but not yet.
I've heard people say, including one adi joseph form this site, that lebron is on his own level. If the NBA stars were broken down into tiers, lebron would have his very own tier at the top. Yes, that is overrating him right there.
-Im torn on Nash. Partly becasue im not really sure where everybody rates him. How many people are calling him the best pg or saying he will go down better then Magic/Stockton? Most put paul and dwill ahead of right now. I've seen people say that Iverson is the better player form that 1996 draft. So really, take away the two MVP's (which he did not deserve in my book) and nobody is really overrating him.
Both are great. And lets be honest, right now lebron is easy to be hated on becasue the media stuffs him down our throats. The MVP's is one thing, but the comericals, the puppets, the "where is he going" articles for 2 years straight. All the lebron talk makes him losing in the playoffs easy to hate on. It would be the same way with anyone who got as much hype as he does without a single finals victory on his belt. But come next october, the lebron love will be in full effect again and people will chalk this loss up to a learning process in his career.
Llperez, let me make this perfectly clear. As much I love to watch Steve Nash play, the greatest PG of all time was Magic. I think Bob Cousy, Stockton, and Nash are right behind him.
I disagree with you on the MVP award because I believe for those two seasons, Nash was more valuable to his team than any other player. He wasn't necessarily better or more talented than the other MVP candidates, just more valuable to his team.
I agree with you when people are calling LeBron the best ever as being very premature. But I think you used the word "potentially" and when you look at it from that perspective, I agree. Keep in mind that Michael Jordan didn't become a super star until he was in his mid-twenties. That was when he finally figured out you can't win a championship while you're scoring 35 points but the rest of your team is standing around watching you go one on one.
I disagree with ButlerBulldogs on the Kobe LeBron comparison. I happen to think LeBron is more team oriented than Kobe, who for many years was criticized for being strictly a one on one player. That criticism was valid.
LeBron may handle the ball a great deal but if and when a teammate is open, LeBron usually delivers the ball to him. In fact ButlerBulldogs, LeBron has often been criticized for being too good of a teammate.
I don't think Nash is overrated as a player and only seems to get better with age.
His shooting numbers where ridic those years he won those MVP's. That being said I think Kobe should have
won it the year he scored 81 points in one game and 62 in 3 quarters. I think the voters and the medias love for the
style of play of the Suns and their hate for Kobe had to do with him getting that one. He should be a one time MVP
he was not the best player in the league that year, the next year I can give him that.
I think it is to early in Lebrons career to be talking about his legacy the guy is 25 he has at least 5
more year of dominating the NBA with his combination of size and athletic ability.
He does have to win multiple championship to solidify his place among the mount Rushmore of basketball greats.
He has that pressure on him because he is the most hyped player to step into this NBA and maybe sports
since Gretzky " the great one". Even after winning the scoring title they didn't call Mike the goat until he lead a team
to a championship.
He still as time to win and earn his name as the King and the chosen one.
Because of this is the reason people are all over Lebron, in this country if you make a claim and if people
dub a person as such he has to prove it over and over again until people fully except him too be the King.
He needs teammates that can create their own shot and a team mate that he can form a deadly pick and roll combo with.
If you watch Lebron in high school and his first year you would see that he is not really a guy that want to kill you
by scoring he want to make plays he scores now because that what people expect for him to be great and thats is
the stat in the NBA that gets the most attention.
When he was a soph in high school I saw him at the Kingwood classic in Houston TX he was doubled and 3pl teamed
as soon as he cross half court but he didn't car he played pg for his team as rack up assist and they blow out
a team full of athletes from Gulf shore academy,
Lebron is to good of a teammate, and that's why he won't be the greatest ever. The greatest ever has to be good in the clutch and carry his team and Lebron can't do that by passing all the time.
- Oh, and Nash is underrated, he's just played in an era with Kobe,Shaq, and Duncan so he couldn't win a ring.
in regards to Nash's two mvp awards. I thought the first one should have gone to iverson and the second to Kobe. But I also thought Nash should have won it the year they gave it to Dirk. Those were his best stats and even he said it was his best year. But no way were they gonna give him 3 in a row and that was too bad becasue even though i personally didnt think he deserved the two he got, i would have had no probalem giving him the third one since he deserved it.
As for who was more valuable to their team. Nash's first one he averaged 15ppg and 12 assists. He had Amare Stoudemire, Joe Johnson, and a still all nba level shawn marion around him. Leandro barbosa was a great 6th man and quentin richardson was on fire that year. Iverson on the other hand had a pretty weak squad that he led to the playoffs. He averaged 33ppg and 8 assits i believe. Im not an iverson fan and im aware he went downhill fast after that season, but that was iverson in his prime.
As for Nash's second mvp award. Kobe put up 35.5ppg and made all first team defense while leading a pretty bad laker squad to 45 wins that started, kwame, smsush and luke. That was the year he averaged 40ppg for the entire month of january. He had three 60 point games. He had the game where he single handidly outscored the mavs through 3 quarters before sitting out the entire 4th quarter. He dropped 81 against the raptors, 55 after halftime because the lakers were getting blwon out. He gaurded the other teams best player every night. Nash won 11 more games, but im pretty sure the lakers would have been about 13 wins without kobe.
Llperez, those were excellent arguments you made supporting your reason as to why Kobe deserved it more than Nash that year. Although I think Nash deserved the award, I really couldn't argue against Kobe winning it. From my perspective, they were both incredibly valuable to their respective teams. It's too bad they couldn't have two winners.
It was almost like choosing between Magic and Bird during their primes as to who was more valuable. Everyone had an opinion, but most intelligent people could accept either one as the MVP.
And Kobe didn't even finish in the top five that year.
yeah, mvp awards are honestly not something i get up in the air about. I appreciate what everyone does and as a kobe fan im just glad he got one so people cant hold that aginst him. But like butler pointed out, kobe actually finished 4th that year behind nash, dirk, and lebron. A number of voters did not include kobe in the top 5. I think there was a lot of anti kobe hate going on in the media still from the how he was percieved as selfish and ran shaq out of town.
Llperez, sometimes MVP winners are clear cut and obvious. However, when there's close competition you know very well that sports writers are just like everyone else. There are players they like and dislike and that's often more important than the actual performances.
As phenomenal as LeBron is... His style of play isn't team oriented. By that, I mean he stops ball movement. He dribbles the ball for over half of the shot clock. The ball stops moving from side to side and there's just no flow to the offense. That's great for LeBron's statistics, but not great for the overall flow of the offense. We saw that last year vs Orlando in the playoffs. LeBron put up amazing statistics, but his teammates had no rhythm. The same thing happened this year. Charles Barkley can be an idiot sometimes, but he was on point about LeBron. He kept saying that playing LeBron ball wasn't going to work against great teams and that Cleveland needed to get other players involved. Getting other players involved doesn't mean just kicking the ball out to them. It means getting them the ball in positions they like and giving them the opportunity to go to work. LeBron's style of play doesn't leave room to get other players significantly involved.
LeBron doesn't have a post game. He can't take advantage of his physical gifts in the post and draw double teams. He doesn't have an in between game. He doesn't play well off of the ball. When the ball wasn't in LeBron's hands vs Boston, he just stood in the corner. He's not a consistent catch and shoot shooter. He's not a consistent shooter at all. For those reasons, he's overly dependent on isolations and needing the ball in his hands just to be effective. He has so many holes in his game, but they're hidden by his freak athleticism and ability to amaze people.
LeBron ball is good enough to get your through the regular season, but not past a great team in a seven game series. You need other players to be in rhythm and feel comfortable with their role in the offense. Antawn Jamison never looked comfortable with his role vs Boston. He didn't even look like he was in the offensive game plan.
As phenomenal as LeBron is... His style of play isn't team oriented. By that, I mean he stops ball movement. He dribbles the ball for over half of the shot clock. The ball stops moving from side to side and there's just no flow to the offense. That's great for LeBron's statistics, but not great for the overall flow of the offense. We saw that last year vs Orlando in the playoffs. LeBron put up amazing statistics, but his teammates had no rythm. The same thing happened this year. Charles Barkley can be an idiot sometimes, but he was on point about LeBron. He kept saying that playing LeBron ball wasn't going to work against great teams and that Cleveland needed to get other players involved. Getting other players involved doesn't mean just kicking the ball out to them. It means getting them the ball in positions they like and giving them the opportunity to go to work. LeBron's style of play doesn't leave room to get other players significantly involved.
Thats Mike Browns fantastic offensive plays. It is a product of the horrible system on offense.
Mike Brown isn't creative offensively, but I think he played to LeBron's strengths.
the thing about lebron and ball stoppage is that thatsd how it has to be in order for them to win. if kobe is on that team its the same thing..same with wade now. you put bron on a team with better players and that changes the way it changed with konbe and jordan once they had better players. he still gets other players the ball and racks up assist even with the lack of talent he has around him. basically hes ball dominate on a team that he has to be ball dominate on. if hes not then they dont win as many games. when you have a supporting cast liek that then you have to be ball dominate. all great players on bad teams are ball dominate. the difference wit lebron is he can still get others the ball in scoring position while still being ball dominate.
As far as his decline i think it will be slower then other players because of how physical he is. hes has plenty of time before he has to get a post game and a consistant jumper. he doesnt deserve the flak he gets untill he starts to lose while having a very good supporting cast with him. if he had kobes,nash, joe johnsons supporting cast and still losing then theres a problem. the supporting cast in cleveland is a joke as far as being true contenders
I disagree. I don't think LeBron needs to dominate the ball like he does in order for Cleveland to be successful. He needs to do that for HIM to be successful.
LeBron would make it so much easier on himself and his teammates if he could dominate within the flow of the game. He needs to get better at moving off of screens. He needs to get better in the post and using his size to draw double teams. He needs to become a more consistent shooter. He needs an in between game, where it'd be much more difficult to defend him. LeBron dribbling for majority of the shot clock and attacking the basket is the only way he can dominate a game offensively right now. I think that really takes his teammates out of rhythm.
Antawn Jamison isn't a srub. Neither is Mo Williams. Neither is Shaquille O'Neal, even at his age. LeBron's teammates are forced to play off of his limited, but dominate due to his freak athleticism, offensive (attacking the basket) game and I think it hurts the flow of the offense. Nobody other than LeBron can get into a good enough rhythm to make a significant impact and play up to their potential.
ButlerBulldogs, let me start by saying I was very impressed with your arguments about LeBron and his style of play. Here are my thoughts:
* LeBron isn't a post player so I don't think that's a valid criticism.
* "He dribbles away half the clock"..... That's a valid point and I agree completely because as you said, it can stop the flow of the offense.
* Barkley had some good points but I would counter with the fact that LeBron isn't a PG, running the offense clearly isn't his strength. That's not how I would use LeBron if were the head coach.
* I think Cleveland needs a dominant, pass first PG who can do all of the things that LeBron is trying to do and failed miserably during the Boston series.
*I think we also have to give Boston a lot of credit for devising a terrific strategy and simply outplaying Boston and making all of the right adjustments.
On the other hand, with all of the mediocre talent on the squad, Cleveland was dominant during the regular season with the best record in the league. LeBron turned a borderline playoff team into the best team in the league and that was quite an achievement. Only a guy with incredible talent could accomplish so much with so little. Despite all of the liabilities and problems you described with LeBron's game, it wasn't an issue until they faced Boston.
In the playoff series against Boston, I think Doc Edwards proved he was a far superior coach than Mike Brown, who failed to make the necessary adjustments. In sum, even though you made some excellent observation's about LeBron's game, I think the bigger problem for Cleveland was a very poor supporting cast who failed to produce when it counted. If you factor in a head coach who couldn't make the proper adjustments, you have others who should share the blame with LeBron.
Please don't misunderstand, I think LeBron should accept his fair share of the blame, but he shouldn't be forced to put all of it on his shoulders.
If LeBron was playing in LA, he would have a head coach who would make the necessary adjustments and a coach who would make LeBron play within the flow of the offense. Therefore, I blame much of Cleveland's failure on poor coaching and a lack of talent, more than I blame it on LeBron.
Lebron is very unselfish. I happen to think he was forced to play the ball-dominant role he played due to Mike Brown's play calling too. Lebron can play with other truly talented teammates and still succeed. I think he needs certain types of role players next to him (a PG who can score/shoot and defend but doesn't need the ball too much, wings who can make open shots consistently and defend, a low post banger who plays with energy, and a mid/high post player who can be a 2nd option or at worst 3rd option). I think the Nets and Mavs would be great places for Lebron to play.
umm yeah he does..mo and antwan were no shows against boston even when they got the ball. they may not have been scrubs during the season but when they were needed most they were no where to be found so yes he had to be a bal stopper to be successful.. and that just on offense. on defense mo and antwan were even worst. shaq isnt a scrub but hes no real consistant option either. youre arguement works for the regular season but clearly doesnt for that boston series where those other guys you named sucked it up other then shaq sometimes
antwan 11-7 42 percent 18 from three
mo-13 5 21percent from 3
im sorry but that out of youre second third options just arent gonna cut it. now compare that with bostons second and third options or the lakers or even the suns... and all of them are taking at least 10 shots a game....so yeah he needed to be ball dominate because they his backup dancers were off beat
LeBron is an amazingly unselfish player. I just don't think his game is unselfish. His limitations as an offensive player really requires that a team revolve around him too much offensively.
I do blame Mike Brown, but I blame LeBron too. It's been seven years and LeBron still doesn't have a post game or in between game. He still hasn't shown he can play off of the ball.
@ Mr. 6000. Here are what you said LeBron needs.
- A PG who can score/shoot and defend but doesn't need the ball too much: Don't Mo Williams and Delonte West fit those descriptions?
- Wings who can make open shots consistently and defend: Anthony Parker fits those descriptions. JaMario Moon fits the description of a wing who can defend.
- A low post banger who plays with energy: Anderson Varejao and JJ Hickson fit this discription. I think this is why Cleveland overpaid to re-sign Varejao.
- And a mid/high post player who can be a 2nd option or at worst 3rd option: I think Antawn Jamison fits this description.
and there defense was horrible....shaq played ok for a fourth or a third option on a team that has 2 stars
basically we only see half the picture because no one knows what he would do if he had stars on his team. all we know is what he can do when he has guys on his team who you cant count on when the going gets tough. im suprised he trust his teammates like he does because kobe nor jordan trusted there teammates like that when they werent title contenders. during those times they were the true definition of ball dominate and everyone wondered if they could play with anyother star( with kobe they knew he did earlier but after he became THE MAN most if not everyone questioned if he could play with another star. lebron wasnt on there level as far as killer instinct but neither was on his level as far as getting others involved. once they got a better team and got older and wiser they were able to play with other and trust there teammates.
All of those players fit the description. But none of the players stepped up when it counted most. He needs to go to Dallas or New Jersey, were all the players can fill those roles more effectively. The defenders, perimeter scorers, and role playing energy guys on Cleveland have not proven to be good enough.
Dallas has Roddy Beaubois who will potentially be better slashing and defending than West and Williams. Jason Kidd and Jason Terry can do a fair share of scoring, defending, and passing.
They have Dirk who can score in the mid and high post and be a very legit 2nd option. Better than Jamison can.
They have Caron Butler and/or DeShawn Stevenson to can defend better than Parker and Moon, while also scoring alot more.
They have Haywood to bang down low, and Shawn Marion and Najera to provide energy and mismatches.
They provide what Cleveland's guys were supposed to, but with some extra things also added in.
exactly...on paper and by name you would think they are good back up dancers but during that boston series they were straight horrible...and thats just talking about there offense. on defense they were even worst. yet the talk is about lebron. hell even when kobe had just smush and odom..odom was a better second option then any of those guys and smush was either right there with mo and antwan or past them. no one is gonna win when you have youre costars playing like they did
And mo and antwan were taking a lil over one more shot a game during the regular season with mo shooting 44% and 42% from three and antwan shooting 48% and 32% from three. shaq actually stepped up his attempts but only put up one more ppg against boston then he did during the regular season and thats without talking about the other role players who played worst while there stats also went down even though they were still getting the touches. bostons great defense caused them all to play worst then usual but lebrons drop offs dont compare to the rest of the teams. so i have to reiterate that on that team he has to be ball dominate because everyone else has shown they cant be counted on. you dont even have to go by the stats to see his teammates pulled a hoodini
I agree with ButlerBulldogs. If LeBron tuned up his game so he could post up and hit threes on a consistent basis then he could defer from his athletic abilities, and actually let his team mates touch the ball a couple times a play. LeBron forces pretty much everything he does solely because he's not that talented on the offensive end skill wise. If he didn't have to dribble the ball up every play and always have the ball you'd probably see more confidence and urgency to win in his team mates. Really, I don't know about you guys, but its sickening to hear everyone call LeBron a great team player when he doesn't pass untill his team mates are wooed to sleep and then finally passes to them at the end of games and expect anything.
And on the topic of Steve Nash I think he deserved those two MVP's. Everyone was excited by the run and gun system, and he was the face of it all. And I've always said if Horry doesn't check him into that table then the Suns win the NBA finals that year. He got robbed, and I think his legacy will be based on the style of play he runs, and the determination and heart he shows. That man is banged up more then any other player, but still brings it every night.