RealGM

First, growing up I always thought a team was considered an organized group of players that proved themselves loyal to one another and prepared to compete "together" ... now days, it's considered a players family friends, and accepted followers for some as they prepare to put themselves above others.

Are we about to see another group of all-star players join forces to win a title? It's interesting to watch elite players come up short and conclude that joining up with another all-star or two is the way to go ... kind of like quitting, but then rewarding yourself for quitting and telling people you really just want to win. Are these guys really winning? I call it the "Yankee Approach".

You can bet your bottom dollar LeBron will have atleast one other elite player by his side heading into the 2010-11 season, and it's looking unlikey it will be in Cleveland.

As M.Jordan says ... it's a players league. Couldn't be more true.

How do you think this player strategy will affect the league?
How will it affect "basketball" fans?

I think it goes both ways, teams and players both are loyal when it benefits them to do so, there's nobody in the NBA that's loyal as a general principle, it'd make it too hard to make good business decisions

Why do we expect athletes to act in anything other than their self interest? Why are they different than any other person?

People don't have true loyalty to their employers nowadays, because they know that employers don't feel any loyalty towards them. As long as somebody is working (or playing in the case of basketball) the right way while they are there (and are getting paid to do so), I can't blame them for leaving for a better situation when it comes up. This applies to Lebron; as far as I can tell, he is a good teammate chemistry wise and tries his hardest when he plays. What else can you demand?

And to use another example about sports and "normal" people: When I was growing up, there were always kids that went out of their way to be on a team with other good players that they knew. These players were friends, and they wanted to win. I would hardly blame them for choosing that over a random team of players with less talent.

Esohny wrote:
And to use another example about sports and "normal" people: When I was growing up, there were always kids that went out of their way to be on a team with other good players that they knew. These players were friends, and they wanted to win. I would hardly blame them for choosing that over a random team of players with less talent.

I hated those kids. When I was I kid and we were playing sports at recess, I didn't just want to win because I was playing with a bunch of other good players. I wanted to be the best, I never was but that's beside the point. I always took more satisfaction winning with a less talented team.

Imagine if Joe Mauer refused to sign an extension, wanted to "test the market", and then signed with the Yankees. EVERYONE would have turned on the guy right?

Krapinsky wrote:Imagine if Joe Mauer refused to sign an extension, wanted to "test the market", and then signed with the Yankees. EVERYONE would have turned on the guy right?

Probably. But a lot of people are hypocrites.

Krapinsky wrote:Imagine if Joe Mauer refused to sign an extension, wanted to "test the market", and then signed with the Yankees. EVERYONE would have turned on the guy right?

I would because I hate the Yankees and their method of success. But any other team I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Esohny wrote:Why do we expect athletes to act in anything other than their self interest? Why are they different than any other person?

People don't have true loyalty to their employers nowadays, because they know that employers don't feel any loyalty towards them. As long as somebody is working (or playing in the case of basketball) the right way while they are there (and are getting paid to do so), I can't blame them for leaving for a better situation when it comes up. This applies to Lebron; as far as I can tell, he is a good teammate chemistry wise and tries his hardest when he plays. What else can you demand?

And to use another example about sports and "normal" people: When I was growing up, there were always kids that went out of their way to be on a team with other good players that they knew. These players were friends, and they wanted to win. I would hardly blame them for choosing that over a random team of players with less talent.

1. We are from different worlds when defiining loyalty ... I have no problem with that.
2. In my 25 years coaching, 90% of those viewed as "the good players" usually weren't that good but were interested in playing more than most others. The other 10% were actually good. but you're right ... you can't blame them for wanting more if the opportunity is there.

I think when it gets down to it there's simply a severe lack of leadership in this country. It forces people from all wallks of life to consolidate in an effort to experience it. IMO, LeBrons "team" can't handle moving forward with out it ... as is the trend ...