RealGM

I was wondering how Lukas carry job compared to that of early leBron. When assessing it we'd have to account for a few things tho:
1. Luka plays in the west that is still stronger and was a lot stronger back in the early 2000's
2. we cannot go through player by player and say "this guy on the Mavs is a better shooter than any Cavs player" because the whole league has evolved and the shot making quality across the field is clearly a lot higher. I'd imagine something like this, simplified: If there are 500 players in the league, sorted by some sort of meaningful metric, LeBron played with #200, 330, 350 while Luka plays with 220, 270 and so on.

What do you guys think, how do the cavs supporting cast compare to the reest of the league back then, how do the Mavs compare do the rest of the league? Which relative carry job is superior?

lebron

Lebron lost 3 straight playoffs with HCA, and played in a historically bad conference. Luke is in a mediocre conference but so far met expectations. The Mavs also aren't close to being as good as Lebron's Cav teams

i'm not sure it's all that close.. even with the conference strength accounted for

I think Luka is better than most versions of Cleveland LeBron(everything before 2008) and his team is better than most Cleveland versions.

jalengreen wrote:

i'm not sure it's all that close.. even with the conference strength accounted for

Does the red mean "high usage, pound the air out of the ball, other players getting cold, and team don't know what to do when they suddenly gets the ball?" as Luca was blamed for?

dygaction wrote:

jalengreen wrote:

i'm not sure it's all that close.. even with the conference strength accounted for

Does the red mean "high usage, pound the air out of the ball, other players getting cold, and team don't know what to do when they suddenly gets the ball?" as Luca was blamed for?

is hard to pound the air out of the ball from the bench, although some skilled players do it in the limited space

serious answer: the people who blame luka for that probably do the same for lebron,if anythingh they get criticized for opposite reasons

luka is accused of being low impact cause his teams do fairly well without him, lebron was accused of making his teammates worse cause they suck without him playing (is not it more simple that they simply were not that good? but whatever i disgress)

I would take current Luka over pre-2008 LeBron.

Colbinii wrote:I would take current Luka over pre-2008 LeBron.

That's pretty generous considering LeBron had won 4 playoff series and been to one finals by then, both players 4 years in the league

dygaction wrote:

Colbinii wrote:I would take current Luka over pre-2008 LeBron.

That's pretty generous considering LeBron had won 4 playoff series and been to one finals by then, both players 4 years in the league

Its close. Depends how Luka finishes his playoff run but right now--yeah, he has been great.

This Dallas team reminds me of the 2007 Cavs a lot except if Larry Hughes actually played well and if LeBron wasn't good on defense.

I'd say 2009 and 2010 Cavs vs Luka's supporting cast is pretty close, 2007 Cavs are worse, because it's not just that they lack talent but they have some weak IQ and fit guys like Hughes and Gooden in major roles as well.

It would be like if this team made the finals

Doncic
LeVert
Luwawu-Cabarrot
Harrell
Valanciunas

Bench: Looney, Vincent, Rubio

The talent is not bad compared to current Mavs but I don't see them going as far with LeVert and Harrell type dudes getting major minutes as much as 3 and D role players