Moderators: PaulieWal, Doctor MJ, Clyde Frazier, penbeast0, trex_8063
therealbig3 wrote:Unless LeBron has a massive collapse in the playoffs (unlikely), and maintains his level of play...I don't see how he's not top 5 all time. Plenty of longevity, and a peak that's arguably the greatest in history.
SideshowBob wrote:SideshowBob wrote:+1
I know I haven't really participated in any discussion prior to this, but I want to chime in here. Why indeed, is 2010 Lebron not being included? If this is a comparison of peaks and its been clear that we're trying to go beyond something as simple as just a "most successful season" list, then why exclude what might just be Lebron at his absolute best (IMO his strongest regular season), even if the playoffs were underwhelming. Allow me to present the case.
The Cavaliers finish with a 61-21 record and a 6.19 SRS, both down from the previous year, though it should be noted that the roster was riddled with absences and injuries throughout the season. Williams plays 69 games as opposed to 81, West misses 20 games in the early season, Shaq misses 29 games and posed further issues by never fitting into Cleveland's offensive system very well (of the 10 best offensive lineups Cleveland ran that year with >40MP, Shaq was in one of them), Gibson played 19 fewer games than the year before, Ilgauskas/Jamison trade caused chemistry issues with Jamison struggling particularly to fit in on the defensive end (and randomly dropping off to a 50% FT shooter after shooting 70% in WAS an shooting 73% for his career), Kuester leaving as the head offensive coach, etc.
Despite all this, they managed to go 60-16 in the 76 games that James played (he missed 4 games at the end, which Brown at the time attributed to lingering issues but later claimed was due to his elbow, both of which, could be given as an explanation for his relatively inconsistent performance in the last month or so of the regular season), and using ElGee's In/Out method, were roughly a 6.89 SRS team in the 76 games James played in, putting up an ORTG of 111.8 (#3 in the league, +4.2). On the other hand, they went 1-5 in the 6 games they played without him (close win against the Spurs at home, 1 close loss against ORL at the dead end of the season, the other 4 were very winnable games, and its not unreasonable to suggest that they would have won 65-66 again had Lebron played, which would be a slight overperformance based on their +7 SRS w/Lebron), put up a -2.95 SRS in those 6 games and an ORTG of 103.6 (-4.0).
Taking a further look at just the offense, with James ON Court:
2009: 116.4 (+8.1, #1)
2010: 116.6 (+9.0, #1)
So despite the drop overall, Cleveland's offense with James on the floor is even more impressive than the previous year, which his ORAPM seems to support (+7.1). Let's take it further and compare the performance against top 5 defensive teams (Orlando, Boston, Houston, San Antonio in 2009 and Charlotte, Milwaukee, Orlando, Los Angeles, and Boston in 2010) excluding any games James didn't play in (and one game against Boston in which Garnett did not play).
2009: 106.5 (-1.8 LA, #24) against an expected DRTG of 102.9 (+3.6)
2010: 108.8 (+1.2 LA, #11) against an expected DRTG of 103.3 (+5.5)
So what I see here is a Lebron who's running an offense even better than the year before, despite having less/weaker talent to work with. The roster was frequently changing around him, he was asked to play far more roles in various lineups and he managed to adjust and perform better than he had before.
The most evident example of this, of course, was the extended stretch at the end of January 2010 and through February 2010 where Williams missed significant time and Lebron was thrust into the De-Facto PG position. Looking purely from a box-score perspective, over this 11 game stretch James put up 31.0/6.6/10.5 on 61.8% TS with 3.8 TO. Taking it further, Cleveland posted a 115.5 ORTG (+7.9 LA) over this period, which would be tied with Nash's Suns for the best offense in the league. So not only is he able to take on the larger scoring load and creation load due to the loss of the team's secondary ball handler and playmaker, he's able to do so while effectively IMPROVING the offense and while IMPROVING his own efficiency.
Getting into the box-score, James' individual numbers look better: 30/7/9 on 60% TS (+7.1 ORAPM, +2.6 DRAPM, +9.8 overall) in 2010 vs 28/8/7 on 59% TS (+6.6 ORAPM, +2.8 DRAPM, +9.3 overall) in 2009. Prior to the mid-late March injury (whatever caused him to miss the 4 games at the end of the season), even his PER was higher than the 31.1 he finished with, somewhere above 32.0 which would be ahead of his 31.7 from 2009. I don't like putting much stock into "clutch" numbers, but I know colts has been stressing those in his posts for 2009, so again 66/16/8 on 63% TS (+37 overall) in 2010 vs 56/14/13 on 69% TS (+45 overall) in 2009.
So with all that in mind, I just don't see how Lebron's 2009 regular season at least could be considered superior to his 2010 regular season. While the 09 Cavs certainly maintained a consistently higher level of play, it seems that the 2010 Cavs were dropping off to a much lower level when James was off the floor, and thus even a greater level of lift from him would not propel their numbers to match 2009 overall (thought they were arguably even better with him on the court).
Now, the playoffs is where it gets a bit tricky. As far as I can tell, his first-round Chicago series was superior to what we saw against Detroit and Atlanta the year before (all average to above-average defensive teams) and this is DESPITE him playing far more inconsistently than usual (the elbow issue had already popped up in games 1 and 4, before the left handed free throw fiasco in game 5). Evidence, 22/8/7 on 53% TS in Games 1 and 5, 39/10/9 on 74% TS in Games 2-4. Watching that series again, in Game 5 I saw a Lebron who lacked full game aggression and exhibited a certain passivity that we saw again later in the Boston series. Again, evidence, after maintaining a 32% USG in the first four games, he puts up a USG of only 23.9%, taking only 12 shots, in a close game Game 5 no less. What would be the reasoning for that? Certainly after putting up 35/9/8 in the first 4 games it's not that he's not skilled enough to take on the defense. Nor is this Chicago team posing enough of a threat for him to give up, or lock himself out of the game due to not being mentally strong enough to handle the adversity. Is it really that far-fetched to believe that he could have been injured, and that this injury was one that could show up and affect his play one day and then not cause much of a problem another day?
There's documented evidence that his outside shooting showed somewhat of a correlation to how many rest days he had, specifically in the last month or so of the season and the playoffs. The elbow issue that he claimed to have would be something that effected exactly that, long distance shooting, so why is it so much more likely that he choked or seized up mentally or just wasn't skilled enough to cope with the tough playoff defenses, defenses that he was able to tear apart that very year?
So let's move on the to Celtics series. He plays great in Games 1 and 3, putting up 37/8/7 on 67% TS. Both games are in line with how he performed vs. Boston in the regular season (37/7/8 on 57% TS). Also, notably, BOTH games came after 3 days of rest and both were the result of strong outside shooting performances from him (barometer - 16/20 FT 80%). On the other hand, in the 4 losses, he put up 22/10/7 on 49% TS. All four were far worse outside shooting performances (barometer - 36/50 FT 72%) and un-coincidentally, all four came after only a SINGLE day of rest, as opposed to the 3 days he had before the good games. Looks like a pattern to me, one that could be easily explained by an injury that would very clearly hamper a jumpshot.
So at the end, it comes down to that postseason performance. The regular season, to me, clearly suggests that he was at a level above his previous 09 level, and the playoffs looked like they would have been the same story had it not been for the slip ups. I suppose at that point, it comes down to what you're willing to attribute the struggles to. If the faltering is attributed to the idea that he was a fundamentally flawed player who got exposed by an elite defense OR that he just had a mental breakdown in the face of adversity, then yeah, I can't really pick this season as his best one. But if you're willing to consider that he was actually hampered by injury, I think its perfectly reasonable to believe that he was better and more impactful in 2010 and 2009, and in that case I'm willing to pick 2010 as his peak year with confidence.
But in his home dwelling...the hi-top faded warrior is revered. *Smack!* The sound of his palm blocking the basketball... the sound of thousands rising, roaring... the sound of "get that sugar honey iced tea outta here!"
