RealGM

Tough choices. I can't decide between 2009 or 2013.

2012 and 2013 range he had the best mix of retaining his athleticism, but with more skill/IQ/experience

I’m in the 09/12/13 camp. I usually pick 2012, with likely 09 second. I will say though his whole 2010 season gets forgotten because of a few bad games against Boston but I don’t think any version of Lebron wins that series. After reading the peaks project though, and thinking about it more 2017 is probably better than 2016 when i’ve pretty much always had 2016 ahead. I see 0 argument for 2018. He was awful by rapm and his playoff run is so overrated due to the mediocre teams he beat to get there.

2012.

His 2009 playoffs are way overrated IMHO. At least from statistical pov.

The following percentages mean 'how much a player meant to his team from statistical pov' (they were calculated from available stats);

38.41% - 39.65%, Wilt in 1964 playoffs, 12 games (2nd percentage is about minutes adjustment)
37.24% - 42.10%, Kareem in 1977 playoffs, 11 games
36.17% - 36.17%, Wilt in 1962 playoffs, 12 games
34.24% - 39.96%, LeBron in 2009 playoffs, 14 games
33.65% - 38.26%, Timmy in 2003 playoffs, 9 games
32.17% - 36.66%, Jordan in 1990 playoffs, 16 games
31.65% - 35.50%, Hakeem in 1993 playoffs, 12 games
(These are the ones I'm aware of, the list probably can be expanded.)

I don't understand why LeBron gets 'this' praised for 2009 playoffs performance, because winning conditions have huge impacts on the numbers. Your team simply can not be this dependent on you and can win. And it wasn't like LeBron lost to an all-time great team. They lost to a team that got defeated in 5 in the NBA Finals. He simply didn't face Russell's Celtics or the Bad Boys, and force them to play a game 7.

His numbers in 'a losing effort' is not something uncanny or unheard of.


As for aspects of the game, his defense was still there in 2011-12 season. And I think his 2012-13 regular season is goat like, I don't think his playoffs performance wasn't. Overall, I've always thought 2011-12 season is the best and the most complete of LeBron.

ATG players always seem to have two peaks: their athletic-peak (mid-20s) once they develop man-strength to go with their athleticism and then their performance-peak (right around 30) when their skills and feel for the game are at their height and they still have most of their athleticism.

LeBron was more of a physical force in his Miami years but its hard for me to say his most impactful playoff games didn't come in his second Cavs stint. Have to go with his 2016 Finals performance as his best performance and possibly the best performance of all time.

2017 for me.

He was just different that season for me especially in the playoffs. He played with such ridiculous poise and control. It looked easy for him.

He was pretty damn good in the finals too.

Odinn21 wrote:I don't understand why LeBron gets 'this' praised for 2009 playoffs performance, because winning conditions have huge impacts on the numbers. Your team simply can not be this dependent on you and can win. And it wasn't like LeBron lost to an all-time great team. They lost to a team that got defeated in 5 in the NBA Finals. He simply didn't face Russell's Celtics or the Bad Boys, and force them to play a game 7.

You may be right that teams cannot be hyper dependent on one player and still win. But to me, this begs the question: Why were the Cavs so dependent on LeBron? Part of it is his natural, ball-dominant playing style, but part of it is that their supporting cast wasn't very good (relatively speaking). The fact they won 66 games in the regular season and then dominated their way through the playoffs until the Conference Finals is kind of a miracle. Cleveland may not have lost to an all-time great team, but they still overachieved like crazy, due in no small part to 2009 LeBron being a beast in both the regular season and the playoffs.

Dr Positivity wrote:2012 and 2013 range he had the best mix of retaining his athleticism, but with more skill/IQ/experience

He was not very athletic in 2012, he had gotten too jacked in 2011 and was still shedding the weight that made him that too slow in 2012.

His athleticism returned in 2013 and 2014 yeah, but I don't think he was any less athletic from 16-18.

Either 17 or 18. Those were the years he broke basketball IMO. Completely different level of skill, control and ability to read plays, while arguably matching 2013 and 14 in terms of shooting and athleticism.

Let me just say this: in the first 5 games of the 2013 finals, the Spurs did a pretty good job of shutting LeBron out of the paint. In the 2014 Finals he averaged only 18 FGA when his team desperately needed for offense. That would never, ever happen with '17 or '18 LeBron. This was by far the most aggression we ever saw from him. Miami LeBron would not ever be able to put up 51/8/8 surrounded by scrubs in a Finals game like he did in '18.

Everything else aside, when he wanted to do something, he was impossible to stop in his last two Cleveland years. Not the case in Miami.

I would take peak Jordan over '13 LeBron because some of those Playoff performances left doubts, while Jordan never did. I would take '17 LeBron over peak Jordan though, and '18 Playoffs LeBron as well.

ardee wrote:Either 17 or 18. Those were the years he broke basketball IMO. Completely different level of skill, control and ability to read plays, while arguably matching 2013 and 14 in terms of shooting and athleticism.

Let me just say this: in the first 5 games of the 2013 finals, the Spurs did a pretty good job of shutting LeBron out of the paint. In the 2014 Finals he averaged only 18 FGA when his team desperately needed for offense. That would never, ever happen with '17 or '18 LeBron. This was by far the most aggression we ever saw from him. Miami LeBron would not ever be able to put up 51/8/8 surrounded by scrubs in a Finals game like he did in '18.

Everything else aside, when he wanted to do something, he was impossible to stop in his last two Cleveland years. Not the case in Miami.

I would take peak Jordan over '13 LeBron because some of those Playoff performances left doubts, while Jordan never did. I would take '17 LeBron over peak Jordan though, and '18 Playoffs LeBron as well.

What do you think about his defense in 2018....Many said that his playoff run in 2018 is overrated because he was bad on defense.

Homer38 wrote:

ardee wrote:Either 17 or 18. Those were the years he broke basketball IMO. Completely different level of skill, control and ability to read plays, while arguably matching 2013 and 14 in terms of shooting and athleticism.

Let me just say this: in the first 5 games of the 2013 finals, the Spurs did a pretty good job of shutting LeBron out of the paint. In the 2014 Finals he averaged only 18 FGA when his team desperately needed for offense. That would never, ever happen with '17 or '18 LeBron. This was by far the most aggression we ever saw from him. Miami LeBron would not ever be able to put up 51/8/8 surrounded by scrubs in a Finals game like he did in '18.

Everything else aside, when he wanted to do something, he was impossible to stop in his last two Cleveland years. Not the case in Miami.

I would take peak Jordan over '13 LeBron because some of those Playoff performances left doubts, while Jordan never did. I would take '17 LeBron over peak Jordan though, and '18 Playoffs LeBron as well.

What do you think about his defense in 2018....Many said that his playoff run in 2018 is overrated because he was bad on defense.

I think he realized he had to focus more on offense to give his team a chance to advance, and he did (and the team advanced). As a result he had to sandbag a bit on defense, which I can overlook because he was carrying a load those Playoffs that nobody really ever has on a Finals team.

His defense was fine the next year (the numbers bear it out despite what the narrative is) so I think ability wise it was still there. Nobody else, not Jordan or anyone, could maintain high level defense while needing to put up 40/10/10 while having no help for his team to win every game en route to the Finals.

Ranking 68th on RAPM is not the trait of a goat level season not even close(18 Lebron).

I’ve got 2017.

He had his best playoffs overall that year and beasted Toronto.

He had a very good Cavs year back when I lived in Cleveland, but I can’t remember which. Still, his Cav days may have been more athletic but late Lebron was better at winning games and using his team.

No-more-rings wrote:Ranking 68th on RAPM is not the trait of a goat level season not even close(18 Lebron).

it seems that there is much more value placed on his post season performance compared to the reg season. at least for years 17&18

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:2017 for me.

He was just different that season for me especially in the playoffs. He played with such ridiculous poise and control. It looked easy for him.

He was pretty damn good in the finals too.

For me it's:

Best Overall Season Performance: 2009

Most Overall Capable Performance: 2013

Most Unstoppable Offensively: 2017

He got harder and harder to disrupt offensively as he grew savvy, but also lost that youthful motor. 2013 marks the balance where he was still doing great things on defense and was extremely savvy on offense. He couldn't repeat 2009 over the course of 100 games, but he could ramp up to a peak that was more bullet proof.

But I do think that something changed for LeBron during and after the finals where he beat Golden State. I think he's essentially unstoppable now on offense as an individual but it comes with some more glaring negatives than he had in the past.

KTM_2813 wrote:

Odinn21 wrote:I don't understand why LeBron gets 'this' praised for 2009 playoffs performance, because winning conditions have huge impacts on the numbers. Your team simply can not be this dependent on you and can win. And it wasn't like LeBron lost to an all-time great team. They lost to a team that got defeated in 5 in the NBA Finals. He simply didn't face Russell's Celtics or the Bad Boys, and force them to play a game 7.

You may be right that teams cannot be hyper dependent on one player and still win. But to me, this begs the question: Why were the Cavs so dependent on LeBron? Part of it is his natural, ball-dominant playing style, but part of it is that their supporting cast wasn't very good (relatively speaking). The fact they won 66 games in the regular season and then dominated their way through the playoffs until the Conference Finals is kind of a miracle. Cleveland may not have lost to an all-time great team, but they still overachieved like crazy, due in no small part to 2009 LeBron being a beast in both the regular season and the playoffs.

The narrative part goes very very similar for the other players I listed though.

Odinn21 wrote:

KTM_2813 wrote:

Odinn21 wrote:I don't understand why LeBron gets 'this' praised for 2009 playoffs performance, because winning conditions have huge impacts on the numbers. Your team simply can not be this dependent on you and can win. And it wasn't like LeBron lost to an all-time great team. They lost to a team that got defeated in 5 in the NBA Finals. He simply didn't face Russell's Celtics or the Bad Boys, and force them to play a game 7.

You may be right that teams cannot be hyper dependent on one player and still win. But to me, this begs the question: Why were the Cavs so dependent on LeBron? Part of it is his natural, ball-dominant playing style, but part of it is that their supporting cast wasn't very good (relatively speaking). The fact they won 66 games in the regular season and then dominated their way through the playoffs until the Conference Finals is kind of a miracle. Cleveland may not have lost to an all-time great team, but they still overachieved like crazy, due in no small part to 2009 LeBron being a beast in both the regular season and the playoffs.

The narrative part goes very very similar for the other players I listed though.

The cavs had won 66 games in 2009 ... It was legendary and he was even better in the playoffs even against Orlando

But since he lost, some will blame him...Sometimes you can not do anything .... If Dwight would have been contained as he was contained against the lakers in the finals, the result would have been different

But I'm not surprised by the critics ... A player is criticized when you lose even when you play great .... as in the same year, Aaron Rodgers had lost 51-45 in overtime against Arizona in the playoffs and some said that he was not clutch because of his fumble in the overtime ... Many forget that without its legendary game, the game would not even be close.

I will go with 16.
Btw, I think we will see a different type of peak Lebron this season, maybe another "peak" year. Not with scoring or numbers, but with AD and possibly Kawhi taking on a bigger load, Lebron could go for MVP with a 10+ assist, 23 hyper efficient pts, 8 rbs type season.

_Game7_ wrote:I will go with 16.
Btw, I think we will see a different type of peak Lebron this season, maybe another "peak" year. Not with scoring or numbers, but with AD and possibly Kawhi taking on a bigger load, Lebron could go for MVP with a 10+ assist, 23 hyper efficient pts, 8 rbs type season.

So a Magic Johnson type season!

Doctor MJ wrote:

Eddy_JukeZ wrote:2017 for me.

He was just different that season for me especially in the playoffs. He played with such ridiculous poise and control. It looked easy for him.

He was pretty damn good in the finals too.

For me it's:

Best Overall Season Performance: 2009

Most Overall Capable Performance: 2013

Most Unstoppable Offensively: 2017

He got harder and harder to disrupt offensively as he grew savvy, but also lost that youthful motor. 2013 marks the balance where he was still doing great things on defense and was extremely savvy on offense. He couldn't repeat 2009 over the course of 100 games, but he could ramp up to a peak that was more bullet proof.

But I do think that something changed for LeBron during and after the finals where he beat Golden State. I think he's essentially unstoppable now on offense as an individual but it comes with some more glaring negatives than he had in the past.

In terms of pure impact, SRS terms like ElGee and SSB use, who do you pick?

I think I'd still take 2017. I would rate 2013 at perhaps 5.5/2.0 on offense/defense, with 2017 at 6.5/1.5.