LeBron vs Curry looking only at 14-15 season to now

[Doctor MJ]

LeBron played 82 games in 2018 and posted 27/8/9 with a roster that was messed up due to Kyrie Irving requesting out.

We all know this wasn't LeBron's fault, given the history Kyrie has shown since then.

I have a hard time seeing the argument for "LeBron basically took the RS off".

Did you not see game 1? How did LeBron not give the Warriors a fight? Oh, you mean the pathetic roster of Cleveland didn't give them a fight?

Okay, so some thing to take note of:

1. While the logic of "He had no Kyrie, so he had nobody!" seems to make sense superficially, the reality is that the Cavs did BETTER without LeBron in '17-18 than they did in '14-15, '15-16 or '16-17 - LeBron's 3 years with Kyrie.

The team got worse because of their LeBron minutes. The prior 3 years when LeBron was on the floor, they had the +/- of a title contender. In '17-18 that dropped down to +1.4, he had his worst On/Off of his entire career, and he didn't lead his team in +/- for the first time since '10-11.

This is not anything that can be explained by the loss of Kyrie directly.

2. I think we have to remember that LeBron pulled one of his "I'm done with these role players, get me a new team ASAP or else" moves. If my count is correct, the Cavs ended up trading 6 of their players and multiple draft picks away before the deadline to please LeBron.

If we divide that Cavs RS into 3 chunks, it looks like this:

23-8
7-12
20-10

So this wasn't a situation where the team was left utterly lost from the start of the year but LeBron scrapped them together and they made the playoffs. They started off for nearly half the season playing at a #1 seed pace (for the East), and only then did the wheels come off...only to be put back on again after the team did what LeBron wanted, trading half the team and those future assets.

What did they get for capitulating? A re-engaged LeBron and another finals appearance.
What would they have gotten if LeBron just kept playing hard with a good attitude all year? Probably a finals appearance, and a better set of assets in the years beyond after LeBron kicked the franchise to the curb.

3. How can he coast when putting up 27/8/9? The same way Doncic can put up 40/10/10 and not really lift his team all that much. These heliocentric guys rack up numbers like crazy even when they aren't playing their best, and of course this is particularly true on defense, where in '17-18 the Cavs were ranked 29th in DRtg, and had a considerably worse rating than that when LeBron was on the floor.

4. Did I not see Game 1 of the Finals? I did, and I also know that after giving the Warriors one good fight LeBron went and punched the wall because he was a mad at a teammate making a mistake and ended up breaking his hand, and essentially handing the rest of the series to the Warriors without challenge.

A Warriors' team that was full of negative KD energy that hadn't swept anyone in the playoffs to that point and was pushed to the brink in the previous round, nearly losing, and expending everything to win in 7. Simply put, this was not a team that should have won the Finals in a sweep, and had LeBron in the Cavs put up a stubborn fight extending the series, I'd see what they did as more of an accomplishment than I do.

The reality is that this in the end was a Cavs team that did better without LeBron than prior incarnations and with him amounted to 1st round West fodder in the playoffs, which also was forced to rip apart their team and their assets to please a superstar who then left them with that mess at year's end.

I completely understand seeing LeBron as still the most capable basketball player in the world and pointing to Game 1 as proof of that capability, but in terms of what he accomplished for his team that year, the best I can say is that I'd consider him the top player in the East.

Not gonna address off the court issues, only the bolded.

1. I don't put much stock into the defence being ranked 29th on account of the Cavs having the worst defence in NBA history (at that point) the following year. Also a large bulk of your argument seems to be that the 2018 Cavs supporting cast is actually better than the 2017 Cavs and maybe even previous supporting cast, which I highly doubt. I typically hate when people ignore useful stats on favour of eye test but I saw nothing that suggested that sans Lebron's the 2018 Cavs are a better playoff team with better Championship odds than their predecessors. Their core was the same as the previous years but just worse (especially on defence) and Kyrie-less. Jr Smith, Thompson and Korver regressed massively whilst regular season improvements like Clarkson were disastrous in the playoffs. They might have for a single season, performed better, but they weren't better.

2. "The reality is that this in the end was a Cavs team that did better without LeBron than prior incarnations and with him amounted to 1st round West fodder in the playoffs".

Again this is a very very oddly constructed statement. The 18 Cavs doing better without Lebron than previous teams doesn't mean much of anything, cuz the previous Cavs are sucked without Lebron. A 2/10 is better than a 1/10, but still trash. Hell they sucked WITH Lebron let alone without him. And again the implication is that Lebron's supporting cast improved but his team results didn't, therefore Lebron made his team worse, which is ridiculous because in reality his supporting cast clearly got worse from the years before, a single season worth of on-off data doesn't change that. So it's not even a 2/10 being better than a 1/10, it's a 0/10 temporarily performing like a 2/10 against worse competition.

Then you say that the 2018 Cavs shouldn't have gotten swept by the 2018 Warriors because this Warriors team was underachieving, evidence for this being that they didn't sweep everyone for second year in a row , and then got pushed to a game 7 by one of the best teams in NBA history? Wat??? The Warriors went from a 10/10 to a 9/10. Why would the Warriors going from a 10/10 to a 9/10 mean that Lebron taking a game from them with his 2/10 supporting cast is something that should have happened?

+/- showing that the 2018 Cavs performed better without Lebron in a season Lebron missed zero games with the smallest sample size up to that point than the other Cavs teams doesn't mean much, they still sucked, especially compared to the 2018 Warriors and compared to all the competition the 2018 Warriors faced. That's like me going from not being able to defeat a tank with a sword, to me still not being able to defeat a tank with a bigger sword, and then saying I underachieved, as if that negligible improvement should have been enough to overcome the odds. This is also after seeing that tank blow up another tank. Lebron's supporting cast was so ass that they barely got out of the first round of the Eastern Conference WITH him whilst Curry's supporting cast was so incredible that they likely could have won the Finals without him, and we're talking about "Lebron shouldn't have gotten swept cuz the 2018 Warriors were worse and cuz +/- suggests the 2018 Cavs should have actually been better than the 15-17 Cavs", what?

+ Once again isn't this a Curry comparison? Lebron lost a game in which he put up a 51 point near triple double and Curry won a game whilst getting hunted on defence and putting up 11 points on 31.0TS%. Curry missing 31 more games than Lebron, an entire round of the playoffs and having, when taking into account the degree of difficulty, one of the worst games in Finals history = better than Lebron that year?

Curry in 2018 played 66 games compared to Lebron's 104, meaning Lebron played an extra 58% of the season lmao. So Curry playing MUCH fewer games, less minutes a game, whilst on one of the most stacked teams of all time, and with much less responsibility looked better than Lebron? Ok ? Am I supposed to take that at face value? I can't think of a player who would come out looking worse than Lebron in those comparable circumstances.

Key thing I want to emphasize:

When I bring up a stat that points in a particular direction, I'm not saying that that stat alone should be discussed as defining the entirety of the situation.

I bring up the fact that the Cavs actually did better without LeBron in '17-18 than in other years because the implication of what people had said prior to that was that LeBron was still doing his thing just the same way before but his supporting cast was so much worse that this explained the dropoff. Were that the case, we'd expect to see insane On/Off numbers from LeBron, but instead we saw the least impressive On/Off of his entire career.

Hence, what I'm saying is not a general statement about LeBron in that year but a specific rebuttal to what others are putting forward. To put things more explicitly:

Given that there is no On/Off indicator to support the idea that the Cavs got worse that year simply because of supporting cast, and inf act the simplistic first pass seems to say the opposite, how can others take their analysis a step further to support their initial statement while dealing with the fact that the superficial data doesn't support them at all?

Re: LeBron scored 51 points! Listen, if LeBron was doing that every game things would be different. What I'm pointing out is that people are taking one big game where his team loss as proof that he accomplished more than anyone else that year, and I think that's problematic.

[Cavsfansince84]

Key thing I want to emphasize:

When I bring up a stat that points in a particular direction, I'm not saying that that stat alone should be discussed as defining the entirety of the situation.

I bring up the fact that the Cavs actually did better without LeBron in '17-18 than in other years because the implication of what people had said prior to that was that LeBron was still doing his thing just the same way before but his supporting cast was so much worse that this explained the dropoff. Were that the case, we'd expect to see insane On/Off numbers from LeBron, but instead we saw the least impressive On/Off of his entire career.

Hence, what I'm saying is not a general statement about LeBron in that year but a specific rebuttal to what others are putting forward. To put things more explicitly:

Given that there is no On/Off indicator to support the idea that the Cavs got worse that year simply because of supporting cast, and inf act the simplistic first pass seems to say the opposite, how can others take their analysis a step further to support their initial statement while dealing with the fact that the superficial data doesn't support them at all?

Re: LeBron scored 51 points! Listen, if LeBron was doing that every game things would be different. What I'm pointing out is that people are taking one big game where his team loss as proof that he accomplished more than anyone else that year, and I think that's problematic.

Accomplished seems like a bit of a sketchy word relating to the discussion though imo. Because it obviously lends a lot of weight towards results. So yes Steph's team won the title that year. I think it's more just about what LeBron was able to do more than what would normally be viewed as part of a team accomplishment. It was in many ways a historical level playoff run that year for him. More so in context rather than results. Which I could go into a lot more but I'm hoping its not necessary.

[Doctor MJ]

Key thing I want to emphasize:

When I bring up a stat that points in a particular direction, I'm not saying that that stat alone should be discussed as defining the entirety of the situation.

I bring up the fact that the Cavs actually did better without LeBron in '17-18 than in other years because the implication of what people had said prior to that was that LeBron was still doing his thing just the same way before but his supporting cast was so much worse that this explained the dropoff. Were that the case, we'd expect to see insane On/Off numbers from LeBron, but instead we saw the least impressive On/Off of his entire career.

Hence, what I'm saying is not a general statement about LeBron in that year but a specific rebuttal to what others are putting forward. To put things more explicitly:

Given that there is no On/Off indicator to support the idea that the Cavs got worse that year simply because of supporting cast, and inf act the simplistic first pass seems to say the opposite, how can others take their analysis a step further to support their initial statement while dealing with the fact that the superficial data doesn't support them at all?

Re: LeBron scored 51 points! Listen, if LeBron was doing that every game things would be different. What I'm pointing out is that people are taking one big game where his team loss as proof that he accomplished more than anyone else that year, and I think that's problematic.

Accomplished seems like a bit of a sketchy word relating to the discussion though imo. Because it obviously lends a lot of weight towards results. So yes Steph's team won the title that year. I think it's more just about what LeBron was able to do more than what would normally be viewed as part of a team accomplishment. It was in many ways a historical level playoff run that year for him. More so in context rather than results. Which I could go into a lot more but I'm hoping its not necessary.

If we're breaking it down season-by-season, to me accomplishment is what we're talking about.

Re: many ways a historical level playoff run. I mean, competition in the East was awful and his team got swept in the Finals against a team incapable of sweeping any of their other competition. Makes me ask this question:

If LeBron quit basketball after the ECF that year while saying "Obviously we can't compete against the West, that's where all the good teams are.", would you see it the same way?

I doubt you would, and yet, the Cavs wouldn't have won any less.

[Cavsfansince84]

If we're breaking it down season-by-season, to me accomplishment is what we're talking about.

Re: many ways a historical level playoff run. I mean, competition in the East was awful and his team got swept in the Finals against a team incapable of sweeping any of their other competition. Makes me ask this question:

If LeBron quit basketball after the ECF that year while saying "Obviously we can't compete against the West, that's where all the good teams are.", would you see it the same way?

I doubt you would, and yet, the Cavs wouldn't have won any less.

Many teams that win titles are way less dialed in rounds 1 or 2 than they are for the conf finals or finals when they know they need to hit another gear. Also, Steph missed round 1 and in that game they lost to NO he goes 6-19 in 28 minutes. Houston was a 65 win team in the wcf so no explanation required I think why they were able to nearly beat the Warriors. LeBron otoh was on a 50 win team that year so that's the context under which he led his team to a finals while probably having the most overall flawless playoff run on a game to game basis we've seen in a long time. I mean he maybe had one off game out of the 22 they played that playoffs and swept the 1 seed. So idk what basis Steph has over LeBron that year other than his team was much better and could afford to have him miss entire series. Also worth noting that the Cavs closed out the season after those trades going 11-3 to get the 4 seed while the Warriors sort of coasted to 58 wins.

[tone wone]

Re: many ways a historical level playoff run. I mean, competition in the East was awful and his team got swept in the Finals against a team incapable of sweeping any of their other competition. Makes me ask this question:

Awful huh...

2022 Nuggets: 2.15 (12th)
2022 Grizzlies: 5.37srs (5th)
2022 Mavericks: 3.12srs (8th)

2018 Pacers: 1.18srs (13th)
2018 Raptors: 7.29srs (2nd)
2018 Celtics: 3.23srs (7th)

I mean, I know these are 2 different seasons but what makes Clevelands competition in 2018 awful...is it cause they won? Is the logic the cavs stink so losing to them makes you stinkier

[Doctor MJ]

If we're breaking it down season-by-season, to me accomplishment is what we're talking about.

Re: many ways a historical level playoff run. I mean, competition in the East was awful and his team got swept in the Finals against a team incapable of sweeping any of their other competition. Makes me ask this question:

If LeBron quit basketball after the ECF that year while saying "Obviously we can't compete against the West, that's where all the good teams are.", would you see it the same way?

I doubt you would, and yet, the Cavs wouldn't have won any less.

Many teams that win titles are way less dialed in rounds 1 or 2 than they are for the conf finals or finals when they know they need to hit another gear. Also, Steph missed round 1 and in that game they lost to NO he goes 6-19 in 28 minutes. Houston was a 65 win team in the wcf so no explanation required I think why they were able to nearly beat the Warriors. LeBron otoh was on a 50 win team that year so that's the context under which he led his team to a finals while probably having the most overall flawless playoff run on a game to game basis we've seen in a long time. I mean he maybe had one off game out of the 22 they played that playoffs and swept the 1 seed. So idk what basis Steph has over LeBron that year other than his team was much better and could afford to have him miss entire series. Also worth noting that the Cavs closed out the season after those trades going 11-3 to get the 4 seed while the Warriors sort of coasted to 58 wins.

Fair enough, it's possible that there were other teams capable of getting swept by the Warriors.

[Doctor MJ]

Re: many ways a historical level playoff run. I mean, competition in the East was awful and his team got swept in the Finals against a team incapable of sweeping any of their other competition. Makes me ask this question:

Awful huh...

2022 Nuggets: 2.15 (12th)
2022 Grizzlies: 5.37srs (5th)
2022 Mavericks: 3.12srs (8th)

2018 Pacers: 1.18srs (13th)
2018 Raptors: 7.29srs (2nd)
2018 Celtics: 3.23srs (7th)

I mean, I know these are 2 different seasons but what makes Clevelands competition in 2018 awful...is it cause they won? Is the logic the cavs stink so losing to them makes you stinkier

Let's note that the important difference here is that the Warriors won the title against a dominant team from the other conference in the finals while the Cavs got swept. I assure you that if the Warriors had gotten swept by the Celtics last year I'd have a much lower assessment of what they accomplished.

In terms of why I said what I said:

The Pacers were a mediocre team obviously, so getting stretched to brink by them was not impressive.
The Raptors were a regular season wonder so long as DeRozan was their main scorer.
The Celtics were plucky underdogs, but I don't think anyone ever thought they had a chance at the title. I mean, because of Kyrie's injury, their offense was led by Terry Rozier.

Further, I think everyone saw it as a given that the Cavs had no chance against the Warriors so it's weird to talk as if the performance in the East was super-impressive.

LeBron's argument that year was always based on 2 things:

1. C'mon, he's carrying absolute trash with him. Which isn't backed by the data.
2. C'mon, don't we already know he's the best? Which is an understandable perspective, but not really a season-achievement argument.

[Cavsfansince84]

LeBron's argument that year was always based on 2 things:

1. C'mon, he's carrying absolute trash with him. Which isn't backed by the data.
2. C'mon, don't we already know he's the best? Which is an understandable perspective, but not really a season-achievement argument.

The bolded seems much closer to a pro Steph argument for 2018 to me than a LeBron one. Steph misses 31 games in the rs and 6 games in the ps yet he's the best that year because his team won b2b titles and he's the engine of the GS dynasty. LeBron otoh had one of the greatest postseasons we've ever seen, missed no games and led an underdog team to the finals, puts up 51 on great efficiency in a game 1 loss yet Steph was better than him that year? I honestly don't know how that seems like LeBron just getting by on his rep or something. I think this thread is full of people penciling Steph in without giving much thought to it tbh or over penalizing LeBron for his team's roster makeover.

[tone wone]

LeBron's argument that year was always based on 2 things:

1. C'mon, he's carrying absolute trash with him. Which isn't backed by the data.
2. C'mon, don't we already know he's the best? Which is an understandable perspective, but not really a season-achievement argument.

1. What data? Are we saying the 2018 Cavs were a secretly great team held back by a toxic tyrant in Lebron?

The erosion from 2016->2017->2018 was all defensive. Under Lue they were never a strong regular season defense. Even his mid-season hiring in 2016 saw their defense actually get worse than under Blatt. He was a great postseason defensive coach when he could focus on a specific opponent but their base defense left a lot to be desired. Add in the amount of covering Lebron and Tristan had to do, once their effort started to wane (2nd half of '17) the wheels fell off because they were never that talented defensively to begin with.

Pre-trades there was absolutely nothing about that roster that suggested that they'd be anything other than bad defensively. Who was their best defender? Jae Crowder? Who C's let go cause they knew he had already lost a step as a perimeter defender (notice he remade himself in Mia/phx as a nominal PF). Tristian completely fell off a cliff leaving Lue having to decide between an high-enegy big whose now too banged up to provide energy or just go all-in on offense with Love/Frye at the 5. Outside of that god awful Kings team, pre-trades CLE may have had the worst guard and rim defenders in the league. Seriously, their guard rotation was a 36yr Wade, 36yr Caleron, JR and Derrick Rose/post hip injury IT.

Whatever ceiling a team like this has was only ever gonna be reached offensively. And not even you could spin a tale about this team underachieving offensively.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Re: many ways a historical level playoff run. I mean, competition in the East was awful and his team got swept in the Finals against a team incapable of sweeping any of their other competition. Makes me ask this question:

Awful huh...

2022 Nuggets: 2.15 (12th)
2022 Grizzlies: 5.37srs (5th)
2022 Mavericks: 3.12srs (8th)

2018 Pacers: 1.18srs (13th)
2018 Raptors: 7.29srs (2nd)
2018 Celtics: 3.23srs (7th)

I mean, I know these are 2 different seasons but what makes Clevelands competition in 2018 awful...is it cause they won? Is the logic the cavs stink so losing to them makes you stinkier

Let's note that the important difference here is that the Warriors won the title against a dominant team from the other conference in the finals while the Cavs got swept. I assure you that if the Warriors had gotten swept by the Celtics last year I'd have a much lower assessment of what they accomplished.

In terms of why I said what I said:

The Pacers were a mediocre team obviously, so getting stretched to brink by them was not impressive.
The Raptors were a regular season wonder so long as DeRozan was their main scorer.
The Celtics were plucky underdogs, but I don't think anyone ever thought they had a chance at the title. I mean, because of Kyrie's injury, their offense was led by Terry Rozier.

Further, I think everyone saw it as a given that the Cavs had no chance against the Warriors so it's weird to talk as if the performance in the East was super-impressive.

LeBron's argument that year was always based on 2 things:

1. C'mon, he's carrying absolute trash with him. Which isn't backed by the data.
2. C'mon, don't we already know he's the best? Which is an understandable perspective, but not really a season-achievement argument.

I'll be very blunt. I think degrading 2018 Lebron's playoff run, considering context, just doesn't add up when we compare him to Curry.

When has Steph had as strong a series against an elite defense, as Lebron had against the 2018 Celtics? Even Steph's 2022 Finals performance against a -5.1 rDRTG Celtics might not have been as good.

The 2018 Celtics which is considered to have similar yet much more offensively raw personnel (although you get a much younger Al Horford who might have been the Celtics 2nd best player), had a -4.7 rDRTG. You could argue the defenses were similar in ability.

Lebron in that 2018 series averaged

-32.2 points per 75 possessions (rTS% of 8.2%)
-Estimated to have created about 16.1 shots per 100 possessions

BPM-10.7
Backpicks BPM-7.9

The Cavs had a raw rORTG of +1.1 and +2.8 Team Offensive Rating.

*Disclaimer, raw rORTG involves running a weighted regression on RS numbers, courtesy of Backpicks. It involves regressing the performance of the player's team against the expected performance of the opposing team whose goodness has been calculated by a bayesian prior through the regular season.

He averaged over 41 mins per game.




Steph in the 2022 Finals series (largely considered his magnum-opus) averaged

-31.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 7%)
-Estimated to have created about 11.7 shots per 100 possessions

Backpicks BPM-7.3

The Warriors had a raw rORGT of +0.8 and a +0.8 Team Offensive Rating.

If you hold Steph's 2022 Finals series in high regard, I am not sure why Lebron's series against the Celtics can't also be viewed in a similar light.

He averaged 37.5 minutes per game.


Even for the 2018 Finals, in which Lebron has been criticized for breaking his hand in frustration, looks comparable to 2022 Steph's Finals.

Lebron 2018 Finals
-30.2 pts per 75 (rTS% of 8%)
-Estimated to have created about 13.5 shots per 100 possessions

Backpicks BPM-7.4

-The Cavs had a raw rORTG of +0.7 and a +3.0 Team Offensive Rating.

He averaged 44.75 minutes per game.

Lebron on a rate basis was arguably better than Curry offensively, and he had to play more minutes per game, presumably so his team could compete.

[SpreeS]

Awful huh...

2022 Nuggets: 2.15 (12th)
2022 Grizzlies: 5.37srs (5th)
2022 Mavericks: 3.12srs (8th)

2018 Pacers: 1.18srs (13th)
2018 Raptors: 7.29srs (2nd)
2018 Celtics: 3.23srs (7th)

I mean, I know these are 2 different seasons but what makes Clevelands competition in 2018 awful...is it cause they won? Is the logic the cavs stink so losing to them makes you stinkier

Let's note that the important difference here is that the Warriors won the title against a dominant team from the other conference in the finals while the Cavs got swept. I assure you that if the Warriors had gotten swept by the Celtics last year I'd have a much lower assessment of what they accomplished.

In terms of why I said what I said:

The Pacers were a mediocre team obviously, so getting stretched to brink by them was not impressive.
The Raptors were a regular season wonder so long as DeRozan was their main scorer.
The Celtics were plucky underdogs, but I don't think anyone ever thought they had a chance at the title. I mean, because of Kyrie's injury, their offense was led by Terry Rozier.

Further, I think everyone saw it as a given that the Cavs had no chance against the Warriors so it's weird to talk as if the performance in the East was super-impressive.

LeBron's argument that year was always based on 2 things:

1. C'mon, he's carrying absolute trash with him. Which isn't backed by the data.
2. C'mon, don't we already know he's the best? Which is an understandable perspective, but not really a season-achievement argument.

I'll be very blunt. I think degrading 2018 Lebron's playoff run, considering context, just doesn't add up when we compare him to Curry.

When has Steph had as strong a series against an elite defense, as Lebron had against the 2018 Celtics? Even Steph's 2022 Finals performance against a -5.1 rDRTG Celtics might not have been as good.

The 2018 Celtics which is considered to have similar yet much more offensively raw personnel (although you get a much younger Al Horford who might have been the Celtics 2nd best player), had a -4.7 rDRTG. You could argue the defenses were similar in ability.

Lebron in that 2018 series averaged

-32.2 points per 75 possessions (rTS% of 8.2%)
-Estimated to have created about 16.1 shots per 100 possessions

BPM-10.7
Backpicks BPM-7.9

The Cavs had a raw rORTG of +1.1 and +2.8 Team Offensive Rating.

*Disclaimer, raw rORTG involves running a weighted regression on RS numbers, courtesy of Backpicks. It involves regressing the performance of the player's team against the expected performance of the opposing team whose goodness has been calculated by a bayesian prior through the regular season.

He averaged over 41 mins per game.




Steph in the 2022 Finals series (largely considered his magnum-opus) averaged

-31.3 pts per 75 (rTS% of 7%)
-Estimated to have created about 11.7 shots per 100 possessions

Backpicks BPM-7.3

The Warriors had a raw rORGT of +0.8 and a +0.8 Team Offensive Rating.

If you hold Steph's 2022 Finals series in high regard, I am not sure why Lebron's series against the Celtics can't also be viewed in a similar light.

He averaged 37.5 minutes per game.


Even for the 2018 Finals, in which Lebron has been criticized for breaking his hand in frustration, looks comparable to 2022 Steph's Finals.

Lebron 2018 Finals
-30.2 pts per 75 (rTS% of 8%)
-Estimated to have created about 13.5 shots per 100 possessions

Backpicks BPM-7.4

-The Cavs had a raw rORTG of +0.7 and a +3.0 Team Offensive Rating.

He averaged 44.75 minutes per game.

Lebron on a rate basis was arguably better than Curry offensively, and he had to play more minutes per game, presumably so his team could compete.

Lets start from BOSTON teams. To compare these teams offensively or defensively like compare finger with ..... Expectations were totally different for these teams.

Tatum 19y - Tatum 23y
Brown 21y - Brown 25y
Smart 23y - Smart 27y DPOY
Baynes - RWIII All-NBA 2nd def team
Rozier - White (All-Defensive Voting Shares 2019-16th 2022-23th 2023-6th)
Morris - G.Williams

Al 31y - Al 35y (the only downgrade is Al, but he still got votes for Def ALL-NBA teams in 2022)

2022 BOS had two totally different parts of the RS. Guess which team was playing in PS? BOS had period with 24W-4L (103.1drtg and +17.1 nrtg) from 01.23 to 03.27 untill RW3 got injured. Now look how they defend teams with their leaders on the floor

Durant RS 116.2 ortg to PO 113.4 ortg against BOS
Giannis RS 115.9 ortg to PO 102.1 ortg against BOS (1st rnd 113.3 ortg vs CHI)
Butler RS 114.4 ortg to PO 106.1 ortg against BOS (1st rnd 120.5 ortg vs ATL, 2nd rnd 117.0 ortg vs PHI)

and

Curry RS 114.1 ortg to PO 115.8 ortg against BOS

Curry was defended by DPOY and White plus in the paint was packed by RW3. Who defend Lebron? 19y old Tatum or freakin Morris? How about Lebron's 5.7 tov in this series?

[McBubbles]

Re: many ways a historical level playoff run. I mean, competition in the East was awful and his team got swept in the Finals against a team incapable of sweeping any of their other competition. Makes me ask this question:

Awful huh...

2022 Nuggets: 2.15 (12th)
2022 Grizzlies: 5.37srs (5th)
2022 Mavericks: 3.12srs (8th)

2018 Pacers: 1.18srs (13th)
2018 Raptors: 7.29srs (2nd)
2018 Celtics: 3.23srs (7th)

I mean, I know these are 2 different seasons but what makes Clevelands competition in 2018 awful...is it cause they won? Is the logic the cavs stink so losing to them makes you stinkier

Let's note that the important difference here is that the Warriors won the title against a dominant team from the other conference in the finals while the Cavs got swept. I assure you that if the Warriors had gotten swept by the Celtics last year I'd have a much lower assessment of what they accomplished.

In terms of why I said what I said:

The Pacers were a mediocre team obviously, so getting stretched to brink by them was not impressive.
The Raptors were a regular season wonder so long as DeRozan was their main scorer.
The Celtics were plucky underdogs, but I don't think anyone ever thought they had a chance at the title. I mean, because of Kyrie's injury, their offense was led by Terry Rozier.

Further, I think everyone saw it as a given that the Cavs had no chance against the Warriors so it's weird to talk as if the performance in the East was super-impressive.

LeBron's argument that year was always based on 2 things:

1. C'mon, he's carrying absolute trash with him. Which isn't backed by the data.
2. C'mon, don't we already know he's the best? Which is an understandable perspective, but not really a season-achievement argument.

1. Re On / Off, in the regular season showing that Lebron's 18 supporting cast was apparently not ass compared to before, Lebron missed 3508 minutes from 2015-17 and 35 games, whilst he missed 902 minutes in 2018 and zero games. Considering the 389% increase in sample size between the former and latter + the fact that the latter doesn't have a single on / off instance that Lebron wasn't in the game for + the fact the latter had like 3ish different teams throughout the season, I'm fine with chalking that up to noise.

2. Why're you talking about Season Achievement? Since when has anyone not on the general board cared about Season Achievement when talking about the season? We talk about Kareem being incredible while missing back to back playoffs all the time and he achieved literally nothing in those seasons.

Onto the meat of this burger... wtf is going on Since when was Lebron's 2018 post season run unimpressive compared to Steph's?

You guys do realize that Curry would have been eliminated in the first round of the East anyway on account of him missing games again? This isn't even a fantasy scenario, this literally happened, except instead of playing with KLove and friends he got to play with KD, Draymond, Klay, Iggy and friends. How is this even a conversation. This is one of the most confusing posts I've ever seen from you Doc.

Lebron is getting such little credit for winning 12 playoff games, and for playing incredibly for 22 playoff games that you just implied that Lebron dropping an extremely efficient 34 point near triple double on one of the best defences in basketball for 4 games and still getting swept in the Finals... had as much value as not even making the Finals. You've basically just made an argument for extreme winning bias. Again, you implied that Lebron getting swept, from an "achievement standpoint" is identical to him not even playing in the Finals, A.K.A, has zero value when evaluating his season and use that as part of justification for Lebron being unimpressive, completely ignoring the fact that once again, Lebron's degree of difficulty was so high compared to Steph's that Steph wouldn't have even gotten out of the first round in Lebron's place.

"It took 7 games for Lebron to beat a mediocre team so it's not impressive". That's a general board level comment. Who cares how long it took to beat them? That's not an indicator of performance. He could have swept the 2018 Warriors and I wouldn't care if it was paired with an inferior performance. What is this results based analysis.

[ShotCreator]

Bruh

Consider it this way:

LeBron basically took the RS off, and in the Finals gave the Warriors less of a fight than any of their 3 West playoff opponents - each of whom had a better SRS than the Cavs.

So if you're giving LeBron the award for 2018, you're largely doing it on the basis of what he did in the Eastern playoffs where his team barely beat a young Boston team that wouldn't have a prayer against Boston last year or this year.

And I would suggest that there's probably no way you're doing this if you aren't already convinced that LeBron has the title belt for best player in the world going into the season, which is an approach I'm not comfortable with.

It would seem to me Curry took 2018 off, not the other way around.

The teams that took a game from the Warriors were the 65-win harden+cp3+capela Rockets and the Pelicans and Spurs, when Curry wasn't in the lineup. The 2018 cavs played 19-win ball with a similar Lebron-less rotation with love(injured during the playoffs). Even if the 18 cavs were just a 50-ish win team in the postseason, it would reflect incredible lift from Lebron's part to go with a much more statistically dominant playoff performance(especially in the finals) after playing every game in the regular season(steph did not). The better question is why the Warriors were 3-2 down to the Rockets when healthy. The Warriors had a massive talent advantage(even without iggy) and were on-pace to choke in the conference finals with KD arguably outplaying Steph(higher via impact and box-metrics).

This is just lazy analysis. And even lazier is how you seem to be evaluating impact:

None. But Lebron smokes if you include the "off" bit, sooooo

Your cynicism is unhelpful. Please restrain yourself.

For the record, there's no intuitively obvious way to accumulate on/off across seasons maningfully - I don't consider anything with regression to be "obvious" for the average basketball fan - but if you want to just go by career average On/Off in general, Curry looks pretty monstrous.

Curry: RS On/Off +11.3, PS On/Off +12.0
LeBron: RS On/Off +10.8, PS On/Off +10.3

True. You know who also looks monstrous with unadjusted on/off?

Draymond: RS On/Off: +9.6, PS On/Off: +12.6

Gee. I wonder what would happen if we adjusted for lineups...



Huh? Lebron is #1 and Steph isn't close? Well okay, maybe that's a fluke. Different creators use different means of regression, blah, blah blah...


(Yeah it's not going to get better)

First, I want everyone to appreciate just how far ahead Lebron is, per possession. In the first set, if I count Embid, the gap between Lebron and #2 is about as big as the gap between #2 Embid and #5 Steph Curry. If I apply a 100000 possession filter, the gap between Lebron and #2 Garnett is bigger than the gap between #2 Garnett and #6 Tim Duncan.

Second, let's check the possession count. Keeping in mind, that averages tend to go down the longer you play, Lebron has maintained this large advantage having played 70,000 more minutes than #2(or 3) Garnett and nearly twice as much as #6(or 7) Steph Curry.

Again, with the second-set, Lebron is dominant per-possession, posting the best, 2nd best, and 4th best 5-year marks. But what happens when we also look at the # of possessions...



See that circle? It's the Lebron system. It has 3 planets. one of them is named "2013-2017 Lebron". "2013-2017 Lebron"'s climate has 3 unique seasons, 2015 Lebron, 2016 Lebron, and 2017 Lebron. If we switch to Elgee's data(where Lebron also "cooks")...



All 3 are at the tippity top, right there with the second best season on record

(disclaimer: getting the best, the second best, or the third best season isn't significant inofitself. At a certain treshold, adjusted stuff starts misattributing value, if you want to distingush between single-season, you need to get into the weeds. What's note-worthy is how frequently a player scores near or at the top, and how you look over extended samples. RAPM is great for establishing a baseline of value, not deciding if 2004 kg is more valuable than 2016 draymond)

Regardless, 2015-2017 consistently grades out as a top-tier 3-year stretch with the adjusted stuff. And yet...

15 - Curry(easily)
16 - LeBron(very close)
17 - Curry(very close)
18 - LeBron(very close)
19 - Curry
20 - LeBron(extra super duper easy)
21 - Curry(Very close)
22 - Curry
23- Curry


LeBron has this thing of having fringe MVP RS, .

It's surprising how close LeBron is here. I think he was better but I'd take Curry's career obviously (rings aside)

'15 Curry was clearly better
'16 LeBron had the higher series/single game peak; Curry had one of the ATG seasons, so it's kinda close
'17-'18 Curry's basically as good as '16, slightly better, but doesn't show cause of Durant; LeBron has asome all-time playoff performances
'19 duh
'20 duh
'21-'22 Curry clearly but it's mega injury marred
'23 uninjured LeBron somehow better than Curry and injured LeBron outplays him in critical moments in the playoffs...

Yeah it's tough. I think LeBron's the better player and can express that "betterness" maybe 20% of the time vs. Curry who can sustain ~95% of that level longer.

Curry probably overall (by a hair)
LeBron better player

This is insane you can exclude 11 seasons of LeBron (4x MVP, 2x Finals MVP) in the best days athletically of him and it's still very arguable that he was better than borderline top10 player ever (Curry) impact-wise.

Just longevity stats some people say...

Curry better RS performer, LeBron better PS performer is a comfortable assessment to make here.

Not only that, you’re also excluding all of his all defense selection seasons, two of which he was second in DPOY voting.

I think some people forget just how good LeBron was.

hmm...

Regular Season
Let's start with 2015. To set the table, the lebron-less cavs with kyrie and love are a bad defense and average offense if you go by net-rating(-1.73 overall, 30ish wins). This is also true in 2016(-1.7), 2017(-2.81) which adds up to -1.99 for all 3-seasons. Without any of the 3, the cavs are -14.62.

With Lebron and no kyrie or love, the Cavs are +6.79. With all 3 they're [b]+10.76[/b](PBPstats). with both and without both Lebron looks historically valuable.

But maybe this is just a matter of wonky lineups/rotations? Well, we can then look at WOWY, only including games where the Cavaliers knew they'd be playing without Lebron. In 2015 they were 3-10 without Lebron. Extending our sample the Cavs out to 2017 and the Cavs were 4-23. In games without Lebron and with Kyrie and Love, the cavs were 4-11, a 21-win pace.

With Lebron, the 2015 Cavs went 50-19(59-win). Without they went 3-10 going at a 19-win pace. With all three of Love, Kyrie, and Lebron, the Cavs were 42-5(73-win) improving from 4-11 with just kyrie and love 21-win(note that's a 3-year sample, not just 2015).

What if we forget w-l and look at the o-rating and d-rating splits:




(it's probably not a matter of rotations

In summary, adjusted, lineup-splits, and wowy all seem to agree 2015 Lebron, back problems and all, was all-time valuable. It also seems that the Cavs improved dramatically on offense when he was on the floor while also significantly bolstering cleveland defensively. But how? Well, I think we can get a clue when we look at how Lebron's teammates shot with and without:


Lebron's teammates shoot dramatically more efficiently with Lebron on the floor. Incidentally, Lebron has an ast% of 36 to go with a tov% of 3:1. Lebron also isn't scoring inefficiently as he would in the playoffs(more on that later) scoring 25 points on +4.1 rTS. Finally their is the mental side of the game, and here we get back to Lebron having one of the highest bbal iq's ever:

Which is what makes LeBron so incredible because he's been the control tower on offense and defense for damn near his entire career. We've had coaches and teammates describe him as a coach on the floor. There was an article during the 2018 Finals I remember where JR Smith said LeBron's communication on the floor legitimately makes everyone one step faster on defense. And this is something he doesn't get nearly enough credit for. But this is a big deal to people who are actually in the game and around the game, because one of the major talking points about the Lakers acquiring Rondo for LeBron was about how helpful it would be for LeBron to have someone else think the game for him and organize sets and get guys to their spots.

All considered, if you combine strong scoring, great-playmaking, the ability to handle the ball and control pace alot more than anyone else(without commiting too many turnovers) and being a "control tower" like draymond is for the Warriors, it's not hard to see why Lebron can still look all-time-valuable even if he isn't at his physical peak. Combine that with still historically good non-big d, and you get an extremely yaluable regular season player, even in down year, and then we get to the...

Playoffs
For 2015-2017, the Cavs without lebron and with kyrie and love go from -1.99 to -5.05. the Cavs with none of the three go from -14.62 to -11.62. Frankly i'm not inclined to rely on these samples(a combined 280 minutes is covered here), and would recommend using the larger regular season stuff as an "off", regardless, whatever happens with the lebron-less teams, the lineups with lebron improve, The +6.79 no kyrie/love lineups from the regular season improve to +8.47(648 minutes) and the lebron and kyrie and love lineups improve from 10.76 to +14.50.

As importantly, this lineup-level improvement manifests in team-wide elevation:

Playoff Offensive Rating: +4.2 (63rd), Playoff Defensive Rating: -5.4 (44th)
Playoff SRS: +9.98 (65th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +3.72 (26th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +2.85 (32nd), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -2.37 (41st)

(2015)

While Lebron's net-rating without kyrie and love drops to +4.83(doesn't adjust for opponent quality), the Cavs post an inciredible +10 PSRS with the two co-stars basically missing half of the postseason. Moreover, with kyrie barely playing, they sweep a 50ish win srs(60-win record) Hawks team and go 2-1 up on the 67-win Warriors forcing a switch to the 73-win inducing death-lineup. Again, you may ask, how? Didn't Lebron shoot bad?

His TS does plummet by 8 points, but he also goes from scoring 25ppg to 30ppg. And whatever you think of that scoring trade-off, lebron's creation improves:


Take a peep at Kyrie Irving. While he's basically unaffected by Lebron in the regular season, his playoff shooting spikes by 9 points when Lebron is on the floor.

As it so happens, Lebron puts up goat-level playmaking-box stuff(and the best of his playoff prime(, putting up an ast% of 45 to a tov% of only 11%. In the finals, against the best playoff defense of the era, Lebron puts up an ast% of 52 on a tov% of 8 in for, at least per box, one of the best playmaking series ever.

The Cavs also improve defensively, with Lebron anchoring a -5.4 playoff defense. Check who that defense performs best against:

Boston Celtics: +7.1 / -3.0
Chicago Bulls: +8.0 / -1.6
Atlanta Hawks: +10.9 / -9.1
Golden State Warriors: -1.7 / -4.3

Detroit Pistons: +14.9 / +4.4
Atlanta Hawks: +21.5 / +4.0
Toronto Raptors: +13.3 / -8.8
Golden State Warriors: +5.3 / -6.0

Overall, the 15/16 Cavs were elite playoff defenses, elevating significantly from "ok" in the regular season(bad without Lebron), and then turning all-time great against top 5 offenses(including the small-ball warriors). While they regress a bit in 2016 in the playoffs(kevin love and kyrie irving lineups consistently look worse defensively than lineups without the two), they remain elite overall and hit another gear in the last two rounds.

There's a narrative going around that Lebron "stopped giving effort". It's true he wasn't as active as he was in miami(and especially as active as he was in 2009/2010), but Lebron was still a historically great(for non-bigs) in the regular season...

Read on Twitter

(2014 is by far the worst scoring year of Lebron's prime defensively)

...to elite big-man level in the postseason. Narrowing down into the years in question, the idea that Lebron being great defensively was restricted to the playoffs is wholly baseless:

Spoiler:

The more and more I look at it, Lebron’s 2016 defensive season looks to be one the best ever for a #1 scoring option who’s not a center and one of the best wing defensive years regardless.

1. First of all, I know there has to be other seasons in which a player was in the top 40%-50% of each of the defensive play types but I have’t seen one other than LeBron. I haven’t looked extensively, but have looked at 2019 PG13, Giannis, Kawhi, Siakam, KD (not that I thought he was a DPOY type defensive force [he’s improved greatly] but for comparisons to LeBron and his supposed horrid defense), 2018 RoCo and Roberson, 2016 Kawhi, Draymond, and LeBron.

LeBron, 2016 was not only top 50% in everything but at worst was top 27% in post up defense. Yes, there may not be many possessions in certain play types so there’s less meaning there, but every other player falls short somewhere.

Top 12% in defending the pick and roll ball handler
Top 3% in defending hand offs
Top 16% in defending the roll man in pick and roll
Top 15% in defending off of screens
Top 7% in defending in ISO
Top 27% in post up defense
Top 13% in spot up defense

Compare these numbers with these:

Kawhi, 2016—DPOY on a GOATy defensive team and maybe co-#1 option with LMA

Top 10% in defending the pick and roll ball handler
Top 22% in defending hand offs
Top 2% in defending the roll man in pick and roll
Bottom 31% in defending off of screens
Top 17% in defending in ISO
Top 29% in post up defense
Top 25% in spot up defense

Draymond, 2016—2nd in DPOY voting on a GOAT team and not the #1 option on offense

Top 29% in defending the pick and roll ball handler
Bottom 43% in defending hand offs
Top 25% in defending the roll man in pick and roll
Top 2% in defending off of screens
Top 15% in defending in ISO
Top 11% in post up defense
Top 34% in spot up defense

PG13—2019 considered a DPOY candidate and co-#1 option with Westbrook

Top 12% in defending the pick and roll ball handler
Top 23% in defending hand offs
Bottom 16% in defending the roll man in pick and roll
Bottom 27% in defending off of screens
Top 13% in defending in ISO
Top 5% in post up defense
Top 19% in spot up defense

ISO defense

LeBron: .59 points per possession (PPP), 93rd percentile
Draymond: .68, 85th percentile
Kawhi: .69 PPP, 83rd percentile

Pick and roll ball handler

Kawhi: .65 PPP, 90th percentile
LeBron: .66 PPP, 88th percentile
Draymond: .88, 71st percentile

Pick and roll roll man

Kawhi: .50 PPP, 98th percentile
LeBron: .70 PPP, 84th percentile
Draymond: .77 PPP, 75th percentile

Post defense

Draymond: .65 PPP, 89th percentile
LeBron: .77 PPP, 73rd percentile
Kawhi: .77 PPP, 71st percentile (numbers are rounded so James might have been at .772 and Kawhi at .768 or something)

Spot up defense

LeBron: .80 PPP, 87th percentile
Kawhi: .88 PPP, 75th percentile
Draymond: .91 PPP, 66th percentile

Off screens defense

Draymond: .45 PPP, 98th percentile
LeBron: .74PPP, 85th percentile
Kawhi: 1.05 PPP, 31st percentile

Hand offs defense

LeBron: .49 97th percentile
Kawhi: .72 PPP, 78th percentile
Draymond: .91 PPP, 43rd percentile

No data available for transition defense, defense on cuts, and defense on offensive rebound out backs. In his thirteenth season playing on a team that's otherwise not that good defensively, James quietly out together a great, great defensive season because he had to since his team really had maybe three other plus defenders. Unlike Kawhi and Draymond who were subpar in some categories, James was at worst in the 73rd percentile.

The argument, “well, LeBron didn’t match up against the opposition’s best scorers doesn’t really hold water because look at the overall FG% of Dray’s, Kawhi’s, and LeBron’s opposition.

Players Draymond defended: 45.5%
Players Kawhi defended: 44.8%
Players LeBron defunded: 44.7%

Regular season

Draymond Green:

Overall: 39.4 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 45.5%, -6.1%
Threes: 29.4 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 34.6%, -5.1%
Twos: 42.9 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 49.2%, -6.3%
<6ft: 51.9 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 60.6%, -8.7%

Kawhi

Overall: 39.2 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 44.8%, -5.6%
Threes: 33.7 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 34.9, -1.2%
Twos: 41.7 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 48.8%, -7.2%
<6ft: 53.5 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 60.5%, -7.0%

LeBron:

Overall: 37.4 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 44.7%, -7.3%
Threes: 32.1 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 34.6%, -2.6%
Twos: 40.8 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 49.0%, -8.2%
<6ft: 48.6 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 59.9%, -11.3%

Though you addressed the playoffs, LeBron’s defense alone in those playoffs/Finals are noteworthy because it indicates peak possible defense. Combine that with his offense and it’s the greatest of all time Finals performance.

Sideshow had an RPM estimate of +8 to +9 on offense and +5 to +6 on defense. That’s a +15 player and that’s bonkers. It’s like one of the crazy “How good would Magic Pippen” or “How good would Hakeem Curry” creations come to life.

LeBron’s defense In the playoffs was ridiculous:

Overall: 31.9 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 45.9%, -14.0%
Threes: 24.1 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 36.7%, -12. 6%
Twos: 36.6 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 50.5%, -13.9%
<6ft: 37.9 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 61.3%, -23.5%

LeBron In the finals was utterly ridiculous:

Overall: 31.6 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 47.9%, -16.3%
Threes: 29.0 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 39.6%, -10.6%
Twos: 33.3 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 53.6%, -20.3%
<6ft: 38.5 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 63.6%, -25.1%

LeBron In the finals’ last three games was I don’t know what:

Overall: 19.4 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 47.4, -28.4%
Threes: 12.5 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 40.7%, -28.2%
Twos: 25 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 52.4%, -27.4%
<6ft: 15.4 DFG%, opponents usually shoot 60.6%, -45.2

This was game 5 defense https://stats.nba.com/player/2544/defense-dash/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Playoffs&DateTo=06%2F13%2F2016&DateFrom=06%2F13%2F2016&PORound=4

This was game 6 defense https://stats.nba.com/player/2544/defense-dash/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Playoffs&DateTo=06%2F16%2F2016&DateFrom=06%2F16%2F2016&PORound=4

The Warriors shot 4 for 28 overall (3/17 in game 5, 1/11 in game 6) in those two games (14.3%) when going against LeBron and that doesn’t include his team defense, defensive rebounding, rotations, etc,

The Warriors shot 2/13 AT THE RIM against LeBron during the final three games. Had James not stopped those shots (everyone knows the blocked shot on Iggy), Warriors win.

The guy not only led them in scoring and creating offense for others, he led their perimeter defense AND was one of the best “rim protectors” in the 2016 NBA playoffs.

These were the best rim protectors in the 2016 NBA playoffs

https://stats.nba.com/players/defense-dash-lt6/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Playoffs&sort=PLUSMINUS&dir=-1&CF=FGA_LT_06*GE*3

NBA.com has stats going back to the 2014 playoffs. For players who who contested at least 3 shots per game at the rim and played at least 6 games in the playoffs, LeBron is tied with Duncan with the best single season rim protection that we have on record. He did that WHILE being 31, not at his athletic peak AND being tasked with creating his team’s offense.

These were the best defenders of three pointers in the 2016 playoffs (defended at least 3.8 threes per game, played at least 6 games)

https://stats.nba.com/players/defense-dash-3pt/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Playoffs&sort=PLUSMINUS&dir=-1&CF=FG3A*GE*3.8:GP*GE*6

At 31, Lebron looked was just as good as Kawhi in the regular season. Then he blew clear in the playoffs. Just because a guy isn't "guarding up" does not mean they aren't playing great defense:

The posts about LeBron not having enough traditional defensive counting stats pointing to a lack of activity is exactly what's wrong with basketball discourse when discussing defense. Unless you've played organized ball or have taken the time to watch professional level coaching videos on defense, you're not going to appreciate the fact that the most important thing a help defender can be on defense is a "yellow light".
Someone who's able to plug up the gaps or is far enough over on the weakside to "help the helper" and allow the closer weakside defender to fill the gap, or something as simple as tagging a roll man to fly out to a shooter and cause a record scratch is faaaaar more valuable over time than a flashy chest to chest lockdown guy.

The most valuable defensive possession is not a contest, it's when the opponent can't even shoot the ball or has to shoot the ball under awful conditions. A considerable portion of someone like Hakeem's defensive value is when opposing teams won't even attempt a shot because they know he'll be there.

LeBron is the best wing defender in NBA history at this type of defensive jiujitsu. And if he was a better man-to-man perimeter defender with better footwork and a lower offensive load he'd be the best wing defender of all time.

When LeBron studies and remembers your playbook, has the IQ and awarenesses to properly react to an offensive threat, and is either in a position to blow up the action or [u]communicate with his teammate so they can do it that provides incredible defensive value.

That the Cavs were consistent playoff-monsters...

Playoff Offensive Rating: +4.2 (63rd), Playoff Defensive Rating: -5.4 (44th)
Playoff SRS: +9.98 (65th), [b]Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +3.72 (26th)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +2.85 (32nd), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -2.37 (41st)

Playoff Offensive Rating: +11.43 (4th), Playoff Defensive Rating: -3.82 (68th)
Playoff SRS: +14.55 (8th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +5.84 (5th)
Shooting Advantage: +3.1%, Possession Advantage: +2.7 shooting possessions per game
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +3.42 (16th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -2.33 (43rd)

Playoff Offensive Rating: +13.17 (2nd), Playoff Defensive Rating: +0.01 (95th)
Playoff SRS: +13.74 (18th), Total SRS Increase through Playoffs: +6.59 (2nd)
Average Playoff Opponent Offense: +3.29 (19th), Average Playoff Opponent Defense: -1.67 (61st)

...does not mean Lebron was some rs sand-bagger with who was playing like a "fringe-mvp". Just because a metric like PER or BPm, which largely can't account for paint-protection, creation quality, ball-handling, or a player directing their teammates on both ends of the floor, puts steph up there as the "best regular season ever"(with Steph's defense apparently being on the same level as dikembe because he led the league as steals) does not mean there was some ginormous gap regarding the totality of what they offered. And what ever gap they may have been in the regular season, was wiped in the postseason:




While the Cavs consistently elevated, Curry's Warriors dropped before Durant and then turned into "playoff-risers" because Durant would actually sandbag the regular seasons in the way people act like Lebron did.

While Curry's on/off may have gone up(dray says hi), when we adjust for lineups(somewhat muting the effects of draymond and steph always playing together), we see Draymond's value go up while Steph's goes down. Incidentally, in the playoffs, the Warriors turn into a defensive dynasty.

Lebron's per-possession's advantage is all the more impressive when you consider the minutes averaged:




While I know people like to bring up the per-possession **** from 2015 and 2017 to push Curry and Lebron as comparable, that parity collapses once you account for minutes played. Simply put, Lebron was clearly the more valuable postseason player. And honestly, that shouldn't be shocking, considering that in 4 straight finals, playing a much better defense, it was Lebron who put up the better numbers while having far more responsibility both offensively AND defensively, and receiving significantly more defensive attention:

Watch on YouTube

Just because it was easier for Durant does not mean it wasn't also easy for Steph. Yet there's no real evidentiary reason to think Steph was Lebron's equal besides him happening to win. As it so happens, when Lebron beat Steph on one leg last week, everyone clamored to tell me that Steph was better, even though there's a perfectly reasonable case to be made(or at least stronger than what I'm seeing for steph>bron) that Lebron(in year 20) was more valuable in the regular season and the playoffs:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=106209275#p106209275

That Lebron in his early 30's was up there should be no surprise considering that Lebron and Steph have graded out as comparably valuable regular season players(per-possession) over the last 3 seasons(with lebron in a sub-optimal situation):
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=105221155#p105221155

That Lebron in his early 30's was up there should also be no suprise considering he also had an all-time valuable regular season in 2020 in year 17.

To finish I'll let unibro sum things up:

As a quick overall encompassing TLDR:

Lebrons RS was all time level, brought a 20-25 win team considering health to a 57 win team, its just unimpressive relative to his own scoring efforts. This was mainly because he was better defensively, in terms of IQ rotations and breaking up plays covering for teammates mistakes etc etc. he wasnt as flashy doing it though so people have his miami defense above

In the playoffs, he led ATG offenses while he was on the court relative to when other players were on the court throughout the ECF, and his defense as a whole went from All NBA-first team tier in my opinion to DPOY level (With the caveat that Kawhi and Draymond are absurd defenders so he wouldnt get first team in the RS. I think he was the second best defender in the playoffs outside of Dray, who I think things point to being one of the absolute best playoff defenders in nba history) despite not getting out of third gear until the ECF (which in every way is a practical decision)

In the finals, he struggled offensively but as a whole id assume and especially through the last 3 games he more than made up for it defensively.I think his defense went from DPOY to DPOY Signature Series level in the last 3 games

I think the 2 way impact actual does pretty far exceed everyone elses, I think hes playoff offense impact is far closer to jordan than the defensive gap, which I dont think theres any evidence that Jordan was close to that on that end, which is supported by the defense when he left being exactly the same despite kukoc and kerr and payne being the main additions and alot of their core remaining the same.

In the finals, he "struggled" offensively (really only he was passive in 2-3 games out of the 7) but his defense got turnt up to an absurd degree, GOAT defensive series by a perimeter player in my opinion by a pretty large amount

TBH, it's not that close. Explain it away however you wish, but Lebron was very clearly the more valuable player from 15-20, and honestly, you'd be hard-pressed to make a concrete case that wasn't also true for 20-23. As we just saw, Lebron doesn't even need to dominate the ball to go toe to toe with Steph(on a potential season ender having played 65k minutes). He's just better, and I'm not sure why we're always grasping for reasons to pretend otherwise.[/quote]
There's a lot here. A lot of which I don't even think gets into the purity of the conversation. LeBron's offense vs. Curry's offense and LeBron's defense vs. Curry's defense, year by year.

I want to talk about 2015. LeBron had just lost a ton of weight in the offseason for whatever reason on top of the miles, age and injuries. His body control and foot speed were completely busted.

He had lost weight and managed to get slower. Completely physically out of wack and you could see it in his performances. It was much like Russell Westbrook around 2018 and 2019. Still can see the athleticism(though diminished), but can't go full speed and stop control his body and finish. And can't change directions, burst from a stand still. LeBron's defense in the 2015 finals was all over the place. Get beaten off the dribble, on closeouts, extra effort plays. No timing at the rim. Weak contests.

IN retrospect 2015 LeBron is clearly and visibly not even a prime LeBron season. I don't see that as close at all.

Cleveland's role players were at their peaks. Mozgov put together some sort of fringe-DPOY run. Delly, Shump, Thompson all in their phyiscal primes. Cleveland was top to bottom better than the field of the East. LeBron was still good, but like 2018 Westbrook good. Not even somewhat close to Curry, Curry was better on defense than that version of LeBron.

Looking at noisy team performance splits and and on/off will just get in the way of the obvious.

Also the obvious of the lack of LeBron and Curry's offensive styles being even close to as stressful to a defense. As a general rule of assumption, if LeBron and Curry are even close on the box score offensively, LeBron is getting routed on impact. Again, this is something that can be seen and picked up by metrics but there's a lot of extreme talk getting and1'd in here.

2017 LeBron and Curry is at best, really close for LeBron considering the playoffs, where they're still really close even there.

Overall LeBron is getting compared to a guy who his offensive game is clunky and efficient compared to on every level. That's not necessarily true in 99% of comparisons between LeBron and any good player but it is true here. On top of that Curry scrapped together consecutive positive defensive seasons with elite hands, good awareness and really physical high motor defense. RS or PS.

There's a lot of hyperbole here.

[ShotCreator]

The only great defense LeBron anchored in his second Cleveland stint were the 2016 Cavs.

Mozgov blows him away in 2015, to say nothing of Shumpert or Delly.

In 2017 he was the best defender but the Cavs weren't a good defense to begin with. Which is to say a guy like 15 Mozgov easily would've topped him again. In general I suspect LeBron utterly feasted on the lack of elite offensive talent in the 17 EC. He went from having a -32.2% at rim defensive series against Boston to allowing +3% to GS in the finals.

LeBron Bill Russell'd the 17 Celtics on defense. I'd never seen anything like it, but I really believe the lack of elite players and teams built around elite players in the EC then allowed some ridiculous scenarios. Not to say the 17 Warriors weren't a ridiculous on the opposite end.


In 2018 he played bad defense. RS and PS.

LeBron's second Cleveland stint gets largely romanticized. It reminds me of certain stretches of Kobe's career. Which happens to legends but it's mythical to think 15 and 18 LeBron were tiered up over Curry. And even close to him at all in 15.

I'm reasonably high on 16 and 17 LeBron. Really low on 15 and 18 compared to most ITT.

[TheLand13]

The Pacers were a mediocre team obviously, so getting stretched to brink by them was not impressive.
The Raptors were a regular season wonder so long as DeRozan was their main scorer.
The Celtics were plucky underdogs, but I don't think anyone ever thought they had a chance at the title. I mean, because of Kyrie's injury, their offense was led by Terry Rozier.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with any of this at all.

The Pacers weren't a mediocre team. I mean they definitely weren't elite but by no means were they average. They won 48 games that season which is very respectable for a fifth seeded team. The problem that Cleveland ran into with this team is that they featured a starting line up of five players who could score from anywhere on the floor, which was a nightmare for the defensively challenged Cavaliers to deal with. Collison and Bogdanovic were especially deadly three point shooters, but their offense at times ran circles around them and Lue had no idea how to adjust. And Kevin Love, LeBron's all star teammate, had a terrible series and as a result, LeBron had little to no offensive help. In three of the four games the Cavaliers won, LeBron had a 40+ point performance on great efficiency. Again, not by any means a great team, but this series going to seven games is more of an indicator of how bad LeBron's team was than anything else.

The Raptors were still a 60 win team. That's no small feat and nothing to scoff at. But in this particular case, Kevin Love actually managed to have a really great series this time and the Raptors didn't have the same matchup advantages that the Pacers enjoyed having. Cleveland was able to expend less energy defensively and reaped the benefits of another incredible series from LeBron.

Celtics were better on both ends of the floor without Irving, so I don't really think it matters who they were being led by. The fact of the matter is, they were a really great team that year and one of the best defensive teams in the league might I add. I will admit that as time as gone by, I'm starting to fall more in line with the idea that the Celtics choked away game 7, but it still doesn't take away how incredible it was that LeBron was able to will his team to a series victory here despite the massive talent gap.

And can we talk about that bolded statement for a moment? I mean... really? Outside of the Warriors and Rockets, what team in the NBA did ANYONE think had a realistic chance at a title? Even the Cavaliers weren't expected to win. I don't really understand the point of mentioning this. That doesn't take away from how great of a team the Celtics were.

[Doctor MJ]

The Pacers were a mediocre team obviously, so getting stretched to brink by them was not impressive.
The Raptors were a regular season wonder so long as DeRozan was their main scorer.
The Celtics were plucky underdogs, but I don't think anyone ever thought they had a chance at the title. I mean, because of Kyrie's injury, their offense was led by Terry Rozier.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with any of this at all.

The Pacers weren't a mediocre team. I mean they definitely weren't elite but by no means were they average. They won 48 games that season which is very respectable for a fifth seeded team. The problem that Cleveland ran into with this team is that they featured a starting line up of five players who could score from anywhere on the floor, which was a nightmare for the defensively challenged Cavaliers to deal with. Collison and Bogdanovic were especially deadly three point shooters, but their offense at times ran circles around them and Lue had no idea how to adjust. And Kevin Love, LeBron's all star teammate, had a terrible series and as a result, LeBron had little to no offensive help. In three of the four games the Cavaliers won, LeBron had a 40+ point performance on great efficiency. Again, not by any means a great team, but this series going to seven games is more of an indicator of how bad LeBron's team was than anything else.

The Raptors were still a 60 win team. That's no small feat and nothing to scoff at. But in this particular case, Kevin Love actually managed to have a really great series this time and the Raptors didn't have the same matchup advantages that the Pacers enjoyed having. Cleveland was able to expend less energy defensively and reaped the benefits of another incredible series from LeBron.

Celtics were better on both ends of the floor without Irving, so I don't really think it matters who they were being led by. The fact of the matter is, they were a really great team that year and one of the best defensive teams in the league might I add. I will admit that as time as gone by, I'm starting to fall more in line with the idea that the Celtics choked away game 7, but it still doesn't take away how incredible it was that LeBron was able to will his team to a series victory here despite the massive talent gap.

And can we talk about that bolded statement for a moment? I mean... really? Outside of the Warriors and Rockets, what team in the NBA did ANYONE think had a realistic chance at a title? Even the Cavaliers weren't expected to win. I don't really understand the point of mentioning this. That doesn't take away from how great of a team the Celtics were.

I'll let you have the last word on the other points, but to the point you said you wanted to talk about:

The fact that the Rockets & Warriors were by far the two favorites, and thus that other teams didn't really feel like contenders, is not something that I'd say makes sense when trying to argue for why a player not on the Rockets or Warriors accomplished more than players on the Rockets or Warriors.

But beyond this, let's be clear:

This was a Celtics team that wasn't expected to be a contender after Kyrie went down, and who was seen as a scrappy team punching above their weight all year long. As I alluded to: This was the Terry Rozier team. I don't think it should be seen as crazy to discount the significance of beating the Rozier Celtics.

[therealbig3]

The only seasons I would take Steph over LeBron would be these last 3 seasons, 21-23. And his injured season in 19. Otherwise, I think LeBron has the clear advantage over Steph in every other season (15-18, 20), when you could still argue him as "prime" LeBron, albeit end of prime LeBron, and 2020 is pushing it.

[OhayoKD]

The only seasons I would take Steph over LeBron would be these last 3 seasons, 21-23. And his injured season in 19. Otherwise, I think LeBron has the clear advantage over Steph in every other season (15-18, 20), when you could still argue him as "prime" LeBron, albeit end of prime LeBron, and 2020 is pushing it.

Tbh Even 21-23 is rather tenuous for Steph. Lebron just looks as valuable by basically any emperical approach and I don't think you can really argue it was Steph who was playing in a more sub-optimal context. It's probably not a debate at all if Lebron doesn't get injured in 21 and 23.

[TheLand13]

The Pacers were a mediocre team obviously, so getting stretched to brink by them was not impressive.
The Raptors were a regular season wonder so long as DeRozan was their main scorer.
The Celtics were plucky underdogs, but I don't think anyone ever thought they had a chance at the title. I mean, because of Kyrie's injury, their offense was led by Terry Rozier.

I'm sorry but I don't agree with any of this at all.

The Pacers weren't a mediocre team. I mean they definitely weren't elite but by no means were they average. They won 48 games that season which is very respectable for a fifth seeded team. The problem that Cleveland ran into with this team is that they featured a starting line up of five players who could score from anywhere on the floor, which was a nightmare for the defensively challenged Cavaliers to deal with. Collison and Bogdanovic were especially deadly three point shooters, but their offense at times ran circles around them and Lue had no idea how to adjust. And Kevin Love, LeBron's all star teammate, had a terrible series and as a result, LeBron had little to no offensive help. In three of the four games the Cavaliers won, LeBron had a 40+ point performance on great efficiency. Again, not by any means a great team, but this series going to seven games is more of an indicator of how bad LeBron's team was than anything else.

The Raptors were still a 60 win team. That's no small feat and nothing to scoff at. But in this particular case, Kevin Love actually managed to have a really great series this time and the Raptors didn't have the same matchup advantages that the Pacers enjoyed having. Cleveland was able to expend less energy defensively and reaped the benefits of another incredible series from LeBron.

Celtics were better on both ends of the floor without Irving, so I don't really think it matters who they were being led by. The fact of the matter is, they were a really great team that year and one of the best defensive teams in the league might I add. I will admit that as time as gone by, I'm starting to fall more in line with the idea that the Celtics choked away game 7, but it still doesn't take away how incredible it was that LeBron was able to will his team to a series victory here despite the massive talent gap.

And can we talk about that bolded statement for a moment? I mean... really? Outside of the Warriors and Rockets, what team in the NBA did ANYONE think had a realistic chance at a title? Even the Cavaliers weren't expected to win. I don't really understand the point of mentioning this. That doesn't take away from how great of a team the Celtics were.

I'll let you have the last word on the other points, but to the point you said you wanted to talk about:

The fact that the Rockets & Warriors were by far the two favorites, and thus that other teams didn't really feel like contenders, is not something that I'd say makes sense when trying to argue for why a player not on the Rockets or Warriors accomplished more than players on the Rockets or Warriors.

But beyond this, let's be clear:

This was a Celtics team that wasn't expected to be a contender after Kyrie went down, and who was seen as a scrappy team punching above their weight all year long. As I alluded to: This was the Terry Rozier team. I don't think it should be seen as crazy to discount the significance of beating the Rozier Celtics.

Except it wasn't the Rozier team. Yes he was the starting PG but this was also the season of Tatum having a great rookie season and showing NO fear whatsoever in the playoffs. This was the year where Al Horford became a defensive anchor and first team all defense member while also being an incredibly valuable player for the Celtics. And let's not forget that this was a team deep with talent. Marcus Morris was considered one of the few people in the NBA who could slow down LeBron (which ended up not only not happening, but he got completely cooked by LeBron over and over again, putting that narrative to bed) and this was also a team that still had the coaching brilliance of one Brad Stevens. Were they the underdogs? Perhaps but we cannot sit here and pretend that they weren't at the very least an elite team. They more than earned the seed they had and there's a reason they took Cleveland to seven games.

And just like the Pacers series, this was another case where LeBron practically had to carry his team to victory. Doing it to the extent that he did is one of the reasons why this playoff run of his is considered legendary.

[OhayoKD]

I'm sorry but I don't agree with any of this at all.

The Pacers weren't a mediocre team. I mean they definitely weren't elite but by no means were they average. They won 48 games that season which is very respectable for a fifth seeded team. The problem that Cleveland ran into with this team is that they featured a starting line up of five players who could score from anywhere on the floor, which was a nightmare for the defensively challenged Cavaliers to deal with. Collison and Bogdanovic were especially deadly three point shooters, but their offense at times ran circles around them and Lue had no idea how to adjust. And Kevin Love, LeBron's all star teammate, had a terrible series and as a result, LeBron had little to no offensive help. In three of the four games the Cavaliers won, LeBron had a 40+ point performance on great efficiency. Again, not by any means a great team, but this series going to seven games is more of an indicator of how bad LeBron's team was than anything else.

The Raptors were still a 60 win team. That's no small feat and nothing to scoff at. But in this particular case, Kevin Love actually managed to have a really great series this time and the Raptors didn't have the same matchup advantages that the Pacers enjoyed having. Cleveland was able to expend less energy defensively and reaped the benefits of another incredible series from LeBron.

Celtics were better on both ends of the floor without Irving, so I don't really think it matters who they were being led by. The fact of the matter is, they were a really great team that year and one of the best defensive teams in the league might I add. I will admit that as time as gone by, I'm starting to fall more in line with the idea that the Celtics choked away game 7, but it still doesn't take away how incredible it was that LeBron was able to will his team to a series victory here despite the massive talent gap.

And can we talk about that bolded statement for a moment? I mean... really? Outside of the Warriors and Rockets, what team in the NBA did ANYONE think had a realistic chance at a title? Even the Cavaliers weren't expected to win. I don't really understand the point of mentioning this. That doesn't take away from how great of a team the Celtics were.

I'll let you have the last word on the other points, but to the point you said you wanted to talk about:

The fact that the Rockets & Warriors were by far the two favorites, and thus that other teams didn't really feel like contenders, is not something that I'd say makes sense when trying to argue for why a player not on the Rockets or Warriors accomplished more than players on the Rockets or Warriors.

But beyond this, let's be clear:

This was a Celtics team that wasn't expected to be a contender after Kyrie went down, and who was seen as a scrappy team punching above their weight all year long. As I alluded to: This was the Terry Rozier team. I don't think it should be seen as crazy to discount the significance of beating the Rozier Celtics.

Except it wasn't the Rozier team. Yes he was the starting PG but this was also the season of Tatum having a great rookie season and showing NO fear whatsoever in the playoffs. This was the year where Al Horford became a defensive anchor and first team all defense member while also being an incredibly valuable player for the Celtics. And let's not forget that this was a team deep with talent. Marcus Morris was considered one of the few people in the NBA who could slow down LeBron (which ended up not only not happening, but he got completely cooked by LeBron over and over again, putting that narrative to bed) and this was also a team that still had the coaching brilliance of one Brad Stevens. Were they the underdogs? Perhaps but we cannot sit here and pretend that they weren't at the very least an elite team. They more than earned the seed they had and there's a reason they took Cleveland to seven games.

And just like the Pacers series, this was another case where LeBron practically had to carry his team to victory. Doing it to the extent that he did is one of the reasons why this playoff run of his is considered legendary.

Celtics were 14-8 without Kyrie(+1.8 Net) and beat a +4.5 SRS sixers team(though they struggled against the -srs, soon to be dominant bucks...) in 5. I don't think they're strong by the standards of a conference finalist but they were still a very good team and beating a very good team on the road with 20ish win help is still all-time worthy