LeBron has the worst plus/minus of any player on a good team

[ShootersShoot]

In OP's defense, I do think we're seeing evidence of a drop in defensive impact. I mean the guy is 40 so to be doing what he's doing now is still insanely impressive. But yeah, after 21 straight seasons (!!) of positive on/off, this was the first season LeBron dipped into the red.

There are, of course, other factors at play. I'd blame the learning curve of playing with Luka but I'm pretty sure he was in the red before the trade too.

Yea I agree with this..the guy is 40 expected to be a go to scorer playing heavy minutes...somethings got to give. I know he gets compensated appropriately for doing so but its a miracle he can even stay on the court for that long.

[Bob8]

In OP's defense, I do think we're seeing evidence of a drop in defensive impact. I mean the guy is 40 so to be doing what he's doing now is still insanely impressive. But yeah, after 21 straight seasons (!!) of positive on/off, this was the first season LeBron dipped into the red.

There are, of course, other factors at play. I'd blame the learning curve of playing with Luka but I'm pretty sure he was in the red before the trade too.

Yea I agree with this..the guy is 40 expected to be a go to scorer playing heavy minutes...somethings got to give. I know he gets compensated appropriately for doing so but its a miracle he can even stay on the court for that long.

I believe expectations for a player shouldn't be correlated with his age but with his salary. If you get 52 mio, your production should be elite no matter how old you are.

[ShootersShoot]

In OP's defense, I do think we're seeing evidence of a drop in defensive impact. I mean the guy is 40 so to be doing what he's doing now is still insanely impressive. But yeah, after 21 straight seasons (!!) of positive on/off, this was the first season LeBron dipped into the red.

There are, of course, other factors at play. I'd blame the learning curve of playing with Luka but I'm pretty sure he was in the red before the trade too.

Yea I agree with this..the guy is 40 expected to be a go to scorer playing heavy minutes...somethings got to give. I know he gets compensated appropriately for doing so but its a miracle he can even stay on the court for that long.

I believe expectations for a player shouldn't be correlated with his age but with his salary. If you get 52 mio, your production should be elite no matter how old you are.

Yea but thats not how the real world works..

[Bob8]

Yea I agree with this..the guy is 40 expected to be a go to scorer playing heavy minutes...somethings got to give. I know he gets compensated appropriately for doing so but its a miracle he can even stay on the court for that long.

I believe expectations for a player shouldn't be correlated with his age but with his salary. If you get 52 mio, your production should be elite no matter how old you are.

Yea but thats not how the real world works..

Those 52 mio are for sure good enough reason to question the impact of a player, who gets 1/4 of team payroll. Or maybe Lakers and their fans should just be satisfied that they can pay and watch a basketball legend in decline? I would imagine that 52 mio could be better spent nowadays, but I might be wrong of course.

[Camby_Bamby]

I believe expectations for a player shouldn't be correlated with his age but with his salary. If you get 52 mio, your production should be elite no matter how old you are.

Yea but thats not how the real world works..

Those 52 mio are for sure good enough reason to question the impact of a player, who gets 1/4 of team payroll. Or maybe Lakers and their fans should just be satisfied that they can pay and watch a basketball legend in decline? I would imagine that 52 mio could be better spent nowadays, but I might be wrong of course.

This is their current coach’s perspective. JJ said years ago on ESPN that Lakers fans nor the media should care about winning. Just enjoy him trying to win the scoring title (in a very strategic manner I may add).

Let that sink in - Lakers current coach, a couple of years ago, said that we should just ‘enjoy LeBron’; winning sold separately.

[Joao Saraiva]

It's just simple: Bron needs to play less minutes to have different effort while he's in there.

[Edrees]

Congrats Isiah Joe, at a +/- of 550, this officially means you are the 3rd best player in the NBA


What people don't realize about plus minus is that, is that having better starter teammates actually improves your plus minus. It's only having good bench players that decreases your plus minus.

If you have trash players in your starting lineup, they will blow layups, miss open shots, turn the ball over, which will, all, decrease your plus minus. YOu will get double and triple teamed more, which will decrease your plus minus.

The fact that people can't logically see this is sad to me.

If you put isiah Joe on the washington wizards i gaurantee you he would go from +550 plus minus to -20 (at least) just by virtue of having worse teammates.

[ReggiesKnicks]

I believe expectations for a player shouldn't be correlated with his age but with his salary. If you get 52 mio, your production should be elite no matter how old you are.

Yea but thats not how the real world works..

Those 52 mio are for sure good enough reason to question the impact of a player, who gets 1/4 of team payroll. Or maybe Lakers and their fans should just be satisfied that they can pay and watch a basketball legend in decline? I would imagine that 52 mio could be better spent nowadays, but I might be wrong of course.

The NBA is an entertainment entity focused on generating the most revenue. Their main selling point is the product for NBA games, but there are numerous factors that contribute to how and why the NBA generates revenue. A crucial aspect of generating revenue for the NBA is having "Stars". Stars are typically the best players, but not always.

Here is a situation that is interesting to think about, and hopefully helps you understand how contracts work:

Imagine if the NBA had no marketing, minimal overhead costs, no TV contracts, and simply played at a gym for 20,000 people to watch, analyze, and consume, then LeBron James at this moment would clearly not be worth as much as Nikola Jokic, nor should LeBron be paid as a Top 10 player.

When considering this concept, a few issues arise. First and foremost, the actual Maximum contract is underpaying many players. LeBron was underpaid from his rookie season through his 2021 season (and possibly up to 2024) because a Maximum contract was capped at 30% of the salary cap. The best players in the NBA are worth more than 30% of the salary cap, but because of the CBA, that is what they are allowed to be paid.

We now have LeBron James, who has been underpaid for 16-18 seasons. Perhaps his being paid more in his 20th season is simply making up for lost salary

At the end of the day, the NBA is a business meant to generate revenue, not pay each player a predetermined amount based on their performance. There is a trend where better players receive higher salaries, but this trend is not a perfect one-to-one correlation. A couple of reasons for this include a limited ceiling on contract values (a maximum contract) and the value players can bring to teams beyond their performance.

[ReggiesKnicks]

It's only having good bench players that decreases your plus minus.

That isn't true.

You are thinking of On/Off, not +/-.

+/- is simply how many net points your team scored compared to your opponents with you on the court.

[Capn'O]

In OP's defense, I do think we're seeing evidence of a drop in defensive impact. I mean the guy is 40 so to be doing what he's doing now is still insanely impressive. But yeah, after 21 straight seasons (!!) of positive on/off, this was the first season LeBron dipped into the red.

There are, of course, other factors at play. I'd blame the learning curve of playing with Luka but I'm pretty sure he was in the red before the trade too.

This is all that's going on, guy who definitely isn't Wilt Chamberlain. He used to be a force that you had to shift your whole defense for and who could also play a good lick of defense himself for 40 mpg. He was the singular most impactful player in the game. He's not that anymore. You can usually devote single coverage with some schemes to mitigate him and he can only play good defense in spurts. He still gets his but he doesn't destroy your whole defense and he should probably be closer to 25-30 mpg so that he's not hurting the Lakers' defense.

Calling it a black mark on his career is ridiculous though, which the OP did. Father Time comes for us all and, frankly, as a guy in my 40s I can't fathom what he's doing. He's by far the best to ever do it at this age.

[Edrees]

It's only having good bench players that decreases your plus minus.

That isn't true.

You are thinking of On/Off, not +/-.

+/- is simply how many net points your team scored compared to your opponents with you on the court.

Youre right I had it mixed up in my head and appreciate the correction.

I think that makes the stat even less meaningful than On/Off.

Let's assume we have Lebron on two different teams. The only thing I will vary is who good the starters along James are.

Scenario A: Lebron plus 4 hall of fame players
Scenario B: Lebron plus 4 average players

Doesn't Lebron in Scenario A end up with a better +/- just by virtue of better starters he's playing with? He's going to blow out teams by 30-40 when on the court. So I see this as a combination of a team/individual stat.

I'm actually convinced that many people are thinking of On/Off when they think of this stat.