RealGM

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 12:36 pm**

Jordan Syndrome wrote:
2klegend wrote:I value quality over quantity. It appears Lebron case for GOAT continues to center around longevity which is something Jordan did not think when he pursuing his basketball legacy.

I hate to be pedantic but the use of the term "longevity" being used by you and another poster here to attack LeBron is disheartening during this project.

I will just say this: there are many people in this project who have LeBron and Jordan as similar level players, with LeBron playing multiple years at a level similar to that prime level they compare so similarly at.

What is great for many of us in this project as we no longer need to compare LeBron to Jordan like everyone on every media outlet is doing, and doing so at a level far below the discussion on this board. Instead, we get to compare Jordan to Bill Russell

Like I said, if Jordan knew that extending his basketball season would have such a huge impact on his legacy perception, he will continue to play until the wheel fell off. But the reality is Jordan already makes up his mind that he is going to give the league 10-12 seasons and shows his resume as such.

For Lebron, he knows he will never be able to match Jordan's resume in those time frames so his case will continue to center around building a long career, aka the Kareem route.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 1:57 pm**

Owly wrote:
2klegend wrote:I value quality over quantity.

This is a false dichotomy.
Ainosterhaspie wrote:Sometimes you get quality & quantity out of a player.

Further, it is a distortion ... no one is taking "quantity" over "quality". Joe Johnson, Clifford Robinson, Buck Williams, Charles Oakley, Otis Thorpe et al are huge minute players in NBA history. They are unlikely to make this top 100 despite being top 39 in NBA/ABA RS minutes. This is because those that think "longevity" tend to actually think in terms of longevity of quality.

To say that you don't think in terms of longevity of quality would be a fairer expression.

How about we use John Stockton has the example rather than the names you threw out - 6th in all-time win shares, and a no doubt Top 50 player.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 2:50 pm**

DQuinn1575 wrote:
Owly wrote:
2klegend wrote:I value quality over quantity.

This is a false dichotomy.
Ainosterhaspie wrote:Sometimes you get quality & quantity out of a player.

Further, it is a distortion ... no one is taking "quantity" over "quality". Joe Johnson, Clifford Robinson, Buck Williams, Charles Oakley, Otis Thorpe et al are huge minute players in NBA history. They are unlikely to make this top 100 despite being top 39 in NBA/ABA RS minutes. This is because those that think "longevity" tend to actually think in terms of longevity of quality.

To say that you don't think in terms of longevity of quality would be a fairer expression.

How about we use John Stockton has the example rather than the names you threw out - 6th in all-time win shares, and a no doubt Top 50 player.

I'm not sure I follow. How do you want to "use" him?

As you will realize from earlier discussion I am very open to rating him higher than conventional wisdom. I suspect he is underrated. I believe does provide longevity of quality.

Even, though, if one believed in raw win shares (per our previous discussion regarding longevity of quality being important, Win Shares has a very low baseline seeing sub-replacement level as value adds and so would overrate longevity) and indeed used them as the exclusive ranking tool, to use a 6th place ranking argue for him at in the first place thread place would not make sense (my hope is this is as a meta-discussion though that might be better held elsewhere?).

To engage further, you would thus need to clarify how you wish to "use" him, how it relates to my post and, ideally, clarify your position from the preceding post regarding whether a formula which ignores 8th best seasons and beyond genuinely reflects your position.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 5:49 pm**

Owly wrote:
DQuinn1575 wrote:
Owly wrote:This is a false dichotomy.

Further, it is a distortion ... no one is taking "quantity" over "quality". Joe Johnson, Clifford Robinson, Buck Williams, Charles Oakley, Otis Thorpe et al are huge minute players in NBA history. They are unlikely to make this top 100 despite being top 39 in NBA/ABA RS minutes. This is because those that think "longevity" tend to actually think in terms of longevity of quality.

To say that you don't think in terms of longevity of quality would be a fairer expression.

How about we use John Stockton has the example rather than the names you threw out - 6th in all-time win shares, and a no doubt Top 50 player.

I'm not sure I follow. How do you want to "use" him?

As you will realize from earlier discussion I am very open to rating him higher than conventional wisdom. I suspect he is underrated. I believe does provide longevity of quality.

Even, though, if one believed in raw win shares (per our previous discussion regarding longevity of quality being important, Win Shares has a very low baseline seeing sub-replacement level as value adds and so would overrate longevity) and indeed used them as the exclusive ranking tool, to use a 6th place ranking argue for him at in the first place thread place would not make sense (my hope is this is as a meta-discussion though that might be better held elsewhere?).

To engage further, you would thus need to clarify how you wish to "use" him, how it relates to my post and, ideally, clarify your position from the preceding post regarding whether a formula which ignores 8th best seasons and beyond genuinely reflects your position.

''

Thanks, I agree only looking at 7 years is not a good criteria, and was really defending someone's else point, rather than trying to just make mine. Some of what he was doing, and the calculation for prime value, intersecting with some of my thinking. My thoughts are really more similar (and probably based on) what Bill James did for his baseball ratings in the Historical Abstract, taking a combination of peak, prime, career value. I havent spent enough time to come up with my "best" logic, and hopefully will do so during this project. It's been a real long time since I made a Top 100 list, and that one wasn't ordered.

I think I'm "using" Stockton the same way you used Otis Thorpe or Charles Oakley, as an example. Stockton versus Bird or Magic is probably the best example I can of career value. I used win shares as an example, you can use WAR or any other cumulative number you want, but Stockton is going to count up more value than those two, and he's not Otis Thorpe or even Robert Parish.

And yes, I really probably don't know how to rate Stockton properly. I'm hoping this project will help be do so,

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 6:17 pm**

Owly wrote:
!

1) Oscar not getting on with a coach (that so far as I can tell wasn't a terribly good one at the pro level, and activated himself as a player after 6 whole seasons out of the game at the age of 41 ...) and him forcing a trade are entirely different things. And even then in a trade you'd get assets in return. As before for much of NBA history smart teams could lock in good players and probably only traded them if the team wasn't winning, they were very expensive (in relative terms: i.e. maybe because the team isn't making money) or they were becoming a headache (probably needing two or all three) and as before an asset return would be expected. Smart teams could and should have expected to keep their stars far beyond 7 years and plausibly to 15 or beyond.

And finally if drafting team control via rookie contract (and perhaps the near ubiquitous 2nd contract) is what matters you should be measuring the first 4 (or 7 or whatever you want decide is inevitable, which too will change depending on era but ...)

[/quote]

I'll make this a "To Do" and look to see what value teams got in return for top players; my mind goes to Oscar, who was basically dumped, Kareem, who even though he went for 4 decent players still outperformed all 4 put together, etc, Earl Monroe traded for Mike Riordan, but maybe this is cherry picking on my part.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 6:25 pm**

2klegend wrote:
Jordan Syndrome wrote:
2klegend wrote:I value quality over quantity. It appears Lebron case for GOAT continues to center around longevity which is something Jordan did not think when he pursuing his basketball legacy.

I hate to be pedantic but the use of the term "longevity" being used by you and another poster here to attack LeBron is disheartening during this project.

I will just say this: there are many people in this project who have LeBron and Jordan as similar level players, with LeBron playing multiple years at a level similar to that prime level they compare so similarly at.

What is great for many of us in this project as we no longer need to compare LeBron to Jordan like everyone on every media outlet is doing, and doing so at a level far below the discussion on this board. Instead, we get to compare Jordan to Bill Russell

Like I said, if Jordan knew that extending his basketball season would have such a huge impact on his legacy perception, he will continue to play until the wheel fell off. But the reality is Jordan already makes up his mind that he is going to give the league 10-12 seasons and shows his resume as such.

For Lebron, he knows he will never be able to match Jordan's resume in those time frames so his case will continue to center around building a long career, aka the Kareem route.

I mean MJ has gone on record and even the people/players around him have said that he was burned out needed a mental break after the first 3peat.

You are just projecting your own thoughts onto his own actions, doesn't make much sense.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:26 pm**

Just thought I'd keep spinning the ol' basketball on this delightful thread.

So uh, yeah, we just put LeBron at #1 on the GOAT list. Holy crap, it actually happened.

I remember first hearing about LeBron as a high schooler.
I remember people saying he was the kind of prospect we'd never seen before.
That if we were ever going to see a prospect and say "That guy might top Jordan", that LeBron was that guy.

I remember being skeptical. I think we all were.
I remember the day before the NCAA championship between Syracuse and Kansas and reading draft scouts say, "No, people don't understand. Melo could score 50 tonight. Melo could score 100 tonight. Nothing he could do could move him above LeBron. Melo plays small forward, LeBron plays something else entirely."

I remember the first ad campaign with LeBron. "The Book of Dimes" where what was focused on was LeBron's passing. A ton of focus got place on LeBron being "Magic-like" at the start, and this has really shaped his perception going forward. To a basketball audience whose definition was built around Jordan, this left people saying "LeBron passed because he choked" forever. No matter how many big shots he makes, if he passes and his teammate misses...he choked. (If Jordan passed and his teammate missed, then his teammate let Jordan down. Shame on him.)

I remember another early ad where LeBron literally freezes and the other players are looking at him like "What's wrong with him? Is the pressure of the moment breaking him?", and then LeBron cracks a smile and plays with confidence. I saw that and thought "Ok kid, you better pull it off then."

I remember watching his first game after telling everyone I knew not to expect him to look like a star right away. He's straight out of high school after all! And I watched and thought, "My god, he does not look like he's a teenager in any possible way. He looks like he's been in the NBA for years already."

I remember being disappointed that for all his open "I play like Magic" virtue signaling, he never brought the joy and giddy excitement that Magic did. LeBron's always been a great passer, but he's also always felt like a basketball-playing Terminator sent from the future.

That's not to say he didn't show some beautiful flair though. I've always loved his chalk toss. There's something to be said for a guy actively embracing the beauty of the phenomena for reasons that go beyond winning.

I remember that 2008-09 campaign. How LeBron looked like the GOAT, and yet in the end, it wasn't quite enough. Critics were way too harsh on LeBron for how things ended in Cleveland the first time around, but as we saw in Miami, LeBron still had stuff to learn to patch up weaknesses.

And learn he did. We saw him learn in Miami, we saw him learn back in Cleveland again, and we've seen him learn in LA. We've been with him on the journey, whether we like it or not, and now, nearing the 20th anniversary of win our relationship with him began, he's ascended our summit.

In 2006 we ranked him 72.
In 2008 we ranked him 36.
In 2011 we ranked him 18.
In 2014 we ranked him 7.
In 2017 we ranked him 3.
And now, in 2020 we ranked him 1.

And now we'll just see where the conversation goes in the days, months, and years to come. Maybe he'll stay on top forever. Maybe he'll be surpassed by someone new. Maybe we'll change our mind. It will be fascinating whatever happens.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:32 pm**

Doctor MJ wrote:To a basketball audience whose definition was built around Jordan, this left people saying "LeBron passed because he choked" forever. No matter how many big shots he makes, if he passes and his teammate misses...he choked. (If Jordan passed and his teammate missed, then his teammate let Jordan down. Shame on him.)

LeBron does pick his spots though, especially in comparison to Jordan or Kobe, clearly. And I'm not saying that's a bad thing either, I'm just saying.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:36 pm**

Doctor MJ wrote:
In 2006 we ranked him 72.
In 2008 we ranked him 36.
In 2011 we ranked him 18.
In 2014 we ranked him 7.
In 2017 we ranked him 3.
And now, in 2020 we ranked him 1.

And now we'll just see where the conversation goes in the days, months, and years to come. Maybe he'll stay on top forever. Maybe he'll be surpassed by someone new. Maybe we'll change our mind. It will be fascinating whatever happens.

Thanks for listing those rankings, very interesting. I think his ranking will always move between 1-3 depending on board participation and how the next few years go. If he wins another 1-2 rings, I think he will start becoming more of a 'mainstream consensus GOAT', if he is stuck at 4, he definitely will be ranked between 1-3 depending upon the sentiment.

Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:40 pm**

PaulieWal wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
In 2006 we ranked him 72.
In 2008 we ranked him 36.
In 2011 we ranked him 18.
In 2014 we ranked him 7.
In 2017 we ranked him 3.
And now, in 2020 we ranked him 1.

And now we'll just see where the conversation goes in the days, months, and years to come. Maybe he'll stay on top forever. Maybe he'll be surpassed by someone new. Maybe we'll change our mind. It will be fascinating whatever happens.

Thanks for listing those rankings, very interesting. I think his ranking will always move between 1-3 depending on board participation and how the next few years ago. If he wins another 1-2 rings, I think he will start becoming more of a 'mainstream consensus GOAT', if he is stuck at 4, he definitely will be ranked between 1-3 depending upon the sentiment.

Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

No problem.

If you look at the 2nd tab of my RealGM Top 100 spreadsheet called "Player Trajectory", you can see how players have risen and fallen through the years.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:45 pm**

PaulieWal wrote:Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

Yeah, especially when you have Europeans putting up 29/9/9 at age 20.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:47 pm**

PaulieWal wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
In 2006 we ranked him 72.
In 2008 we ranked him 36.
In 2011 we ranked him 18.
In 2014 we ranked him 7.
In 2017 we ranked him 3.
And now, in 2020 we ranked him 1.

And now we'll just see where the conversation goes in the days, months, and years to come. Maybe he'll stay on top forever. Maybe he'll be surpassed by someone new. Maybe we'll change our mind. It will be fascinating whatever happens.

Thanks for listing those rankings, very interesting. I think his ranking will always move between 1-3 depending on board participation and how the next few years go. If he wins another 1-2 rings, I think he will start becoming more of a 'mainstream consensus GOAT', if he is stuck at 4, he definitely will be ranked between 1-3 depending upon the sentiment.

Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

That will be both a exciting and sad moment at the same time. I guess a lot of us grew up with LeBron as the best player or near it so, will be sad to see him dethroned so to speak. I guess that is how the Russell, Wilt and KAJ fans feel...

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:48 pm**

SHAQ32 wrote:
PaulieWal wrote:Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

Yeah, especially when you have Europeans putting up 29/9/9 at age 20.

Not sure if you were just being sarcastic or agree with me. And 29/9/9 ain't what it used to be. Inflation is a bitch.

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 7:49 pm**

Doctor MJ wrote:
PaulieWal wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
In 2006 we ranked him 72.
In 2008 we ranked him 36.
In 2011 we ranked him 18.
In 2014 we ranked him 7.
In 2017 we ranked him 3.
And now, in 2020 we ranked him 1.

And now we'll just see where the conversation goes in the days, months, and years to come. Maybe he'll stay on top forever. Maybe he'll be surpassed by someone new. Maybe we'll change our mind. It will be fascinating whatever happens.

Thanks for listing those rankings, very interesting. I think his ranking will always move between 1-3 depending on board participation and how the next few years ago. If he wins another 1-2 rings, I think he will start becoming more of a 'mainstream consensus GOAT', if he is stuck at 4, he definitely will be ranked between 1-3 depending upon the sentiment.

Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

No problem.

If you look at the 2nd tab of my RealGM Top 100 spreadsheet called "Player Trajectory", you can see how players have risen and fallen through the years.

Thanks for sharing this. Amazing work.

I can already feel my man Wade going to drop a few spots this time around

Posted: **Sat Oct 17, 2020 11:15 pm**

PaulieWal wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
In 2006 we ranked him 72.
In 2008 we ranked him 36.
In 2011 we ranked him 18.
In 2014 we ranked him 7.
In 2017 we ranked him 3.
And now, in 2020 we ranked him 1.

And now we'll just see where the conversation goes in the days, months, and years to come. Maybe he'll stay on top forever. Maybe he'll be surpassed by someone new. Maybe we'll change our mind. It will be fascinating whatever happens.

Thanks for listing those rankings, very interesting. I think his ranking will always move between 1-3 depending on board participation and how the next few years go. If he wins another 1-2 rings, I think he will start becoming more of a 'mainstream consensus GOAT', if he is stuck at 4, he definitely will be ranked between 1-3 depending upon the sentiment.

Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

I actually think there's a chance he won't be no. 1 in the 2023 project.

I mean, like I've said, he's been my no. 1 since 2017 and he's only cemented his case since then, but I wonder how much of an unconscious bias the barely one week old championship had on the way people voted in this thread.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2020 12:05 am**

PaulieWal wrote:
Doctor MJ wrote:
In 2006 we ranked him 72.
In 2008 we ranked him 36.
In 2011 we ranked him 18.
In 2014 we ranked him 7.
In 2017 we ranked him 3.
And now, in 2020 we ranked him 1.

And now we'll just see where the conversation goes in the days, months, and years to come. Maybe he'll stay on top forever. Maybe he'll be surpassed by someone new. Maybe we'll change our mind. It will be fascinating whatever happens.

Thanks for listing those rankings, very interesting. I think his ranking will always move between 1-3 depending on board participation and how the next few years go. If he wins another 1-2 rings, I think he will start becoming more of a 'mainstream consensus GOAT', if he is stuck at 4, he definitely will be ranked between 1-3 depending upon the sentiment.

Also, he or MJ definitely won't stay on top forever, in the next 15-20 years we will definitely see the next contender though I strongly feel that player is not in the league yet but he's coming.

Emoni Bates babyyyyyy that kid is the real deal. Luka could get close but I'm not betting on it. I think Bates ends up being who we thought KD could've been

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:05 am**

Rather than a set in stone ranking, I have a clear Mt Rushmore of 4 players that are the GOATs in my mind, can all conceivably be considered the greatest ever, and are all on the same tier, above everyone else in NBA history:

Jordan, Kareem, Russell, and LeBron. No need to rank them amongst each other, but they're a tier above everyone else imo. I know some people may include guys like Shaq or Duncan, and that's cool, to each their own, but these 4 are my GOATs, and imo, they represent pretty much every era of basketball.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2020 1:18 am**

Holy crap. LeBron got ranked number 1.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2020 6:20 am**

lebron3-14-3 wrote:So yeah, to me, the goat debate comes down to: Yeah, you like jordan and you think he's the best (I don't like him but think he probably is, even if it is a wash with lebron basically), but how much better than these guys do you think he is to justify such a big gap in longevity?
-russell, wilt, magic, bird, shaq, hakeem he doesn't have a longevit disadvantage and he's decently to a lot better than these guys
- duncan, he has a good disadvantage in longevity but he's a whole lot better
- kobe, a bit of a disadvantage in longevity but a lot better
- malone, gigantic disadvantage in longevity but humongous advantage as a bball player

-but when it comes to lebron (I already explained, pretty big disadvantage in longevity, nonexistant, negligible or very small advantage as a player)
-kareem. A good bit better as a player, but you just can't think that 71-80 jabbar was so much worse than 87-93/96-98 to outweigh THE ENTIRETY OF KAJ'S 80S.

Other than that, hasn't lbj done so much more? Like, lebron just seems so much bigger as a figure and as a player. The lebron experience is so much bigger. I'm not much of a gamer but in italy we have the expression "to platinate a video game", from the word platinum, when you finish a game and go back to the start to complete every mission at the maximum grade, collect every item etc. After this year lebron's career feels just like that. He has done it all. Like, mj was a real assassin, just so much scoring ability, 1on1 defense, killer mentality, good enough to win year after year and be probably the best player of all time as far as domination on your peers and single season impact, but lebron is just so much more. He has played longer and had way more playoff series/runs, he has played in every condition, he has had to carry a team shoting 30 times per game (cleveland first stint, 2015, 2018), he has had to play with an elite scoring guard (irving, wade), with a big (ad), he has faced every coverage, every difensive style, he had to adapt to a changing league as far as style of play, he has destroyed every narrative, career defining games (in multiple instances he would have been buried in every cemetery in the us if he didn't show up big time), comebacks, failures (2011), game 7, legendary seasons, multiple roles, every gameplan. No bball player has a comparable career, just way too much variety as far as scenarios, solutions etc. And he just does so much more on the basketball floor.

Like, jordan was jordan. An absolute killer with a godlike midrange game, blazing quickness and leaping ability with a crazy ability to make layups. The best scorer ever, absolutely unguardable. He probably had the best first step/layup skills/midrange game of all time. 20 feet and less from the basket, unguardable. You'd need to be 6-7 with good wingspan to have a chance to contest his shots, but at that height you had no chance to stay with him more than half a step. If you were shorter, he would just rise up and score every time. Then he would pick up his assignment of d and just kill him.

Lebron just does so much more. He's one of the best passers ever. He's a god in every facet of passing. He can dominate in the post. He can playmake. He can cut. He can be the handler or the roller in the p&r. He has a fadeaway game. He shoots stepback 3s. He makes half court shots. He can just bully ball any forward. He can drive past guys. He's an help defender. He can gaurd basically any position. In this playoff run alone, he guarded westbrook (rarely but well), harden (pretty often and decently, I won't say he did a GREAT job, but he showed he could guard him and do a better job than most), he shut down jamal murray, and he dealt with adebayo most of the time from the game davis was put on butler on. He literally outrebounded adebayo 1vs1 and he played great defense on him. He's just so much "More" overall as a basketball player, he battles with bigs if they are not 7footers (obviously he can't mess with the valanciunas, embiid, adams etc, but he does a great job with small ball 5s like adebayo), defending them and outrebounding them, he scores in so many ways, he passes, he throws lobs, he finishes lobs. Other than that, he does a way BIGGER job of creating a group, motvating his teammates.

Like, I'd like even the biggest hater of lebron and fan of mj to argue with me with this. Don't you feel like lebron is capable of doing so much more, and he just IS so much more overall with how many things he experienced in his career, compared to mj or other guys?

Its not like jordan did not have any post game or a fadeaway. Similar 3pt shooters.
But other than that James is bigger and stronger.
But Bam was injured these finals. I would also say Lebron is very eager to be switched of player on defence. He would pick up butler coming over the half way line and as soon as he saw someone come he switched. He did same thing vs Kd in the finals.

But very obvious bias for lebron.
Some lost their mind when someone mentioned lebron having a sub par series in 09 ecf.
But Jordan was spamming fgs at the same ts% efg% in 86.

But everyone judges diffrently i dont care about guarding all 5 when he rarely guards pg or centers.

Posted: **Sun Oct 18, 2020 7:34 am**

twyzted wrote:I would also say Lebron is very eager to be switched of player on defence. He would pick up butler coming over the half way line and as soon as he saw someone come he switched. He did same thing vs Kd in the finals.

I came away with a very different impression. Whether or not LeBron switched was due to the offensive scheme of Miami and the defensive scheme of LA.

Butler had yet explode on the scoreboard in games 1 and 2. At that point LA was commonly switching the PnR and they were winning. Moreover, LeBron was not Butler's primary defender on many possessions. This worked in part because Butler was attacking immediately after the screen and extra defenders were in the picture to help.

In game 3 Miami adjusted by focusing on clearing out and letting Butler ISO whenever he had a defender not named AD or LeBron on him. Because Butler was having scoring success this way, LeBron had more possessions on him, but LA hadn't modified their ball screen coverage (note that LA typically didn't make major in-game adjustments through the playoffs).

In game 4 LA adjusted by putting AD on Butler and having him go under the screens. In game 5 Miami countered by adjusting the screen angle and it didn't help that AD was hurt. In game 6 LA adjusted once more by putting LeBron back on Butler, having the guards show a bit more on the screens, and this limited Butler's switches. This was a big reason for LA's halftime lead. Once LA was up by 20 it was round robin with who was guarding Butler.

Point is, there's many schematic changes that led to LeBron switching off Butler or not. In G1 and G2 the switching was inconsequential. In G3 it hurt LA but was still by design. In G4 and G5 Davis had the responsibility of guarding Butler and LeBron saw relatively few possessions as Butler's defender. In G6 what happened was the opposite of what you're saying and LA won by halftime thanks to a new look on defense that, among other things, enabled LA to avoid switches so that LeBron could defend Butler.

RealGM

RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1 (LeBron James)

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1

Re: RealGM 2020 Top 100 Project: #1