Why did Lebron team defenses collapse so often in the playoffs?

[Colbinii]

I wouldn’t really say those teams had inadequate defensive talent. That seems like something you want to be true for argument’s purposes but really isn’t. In any event, if someone was an elite “defensive anchor,” then that simply wouldn’t happen. Nor were those teams even plausibly “inadequate” in terms of defensive talent except for an arguable lack of an elite defensive anchor. So the argument here would basically just have to involve conceding that LeBron was not an elite defensive anchor—which is exactly my point. LeBron was a really good defensive player in that era, but the hyperbole some engage in about his peak-level defense (suggesting he was an elite defensive anchor, etc.) is just manifestly inconsistent with the information provided in this thread. Elite defensive anchors don’t have their teams be consistently bad defensively in the business end of the playoffs, and especially not when the team is defensively talented enough to have been really good defensively in the regular season. It’s not fathomable. And it wasn’t the case with LeBron either. What is the case with LeBron is that he simply was not at the level of elite defensive impact that people here sometimes hyperbolically claim.

So the point of this thread is to say LeBron wasn't as good as the Tim Duncan/Hakeem Olajuwon/Patrick Ewing/Kevin Garnetts of the world?

And not as good as plenty of somewhat lesser elite “defensive anchors” than that too. To me it’s just an obvious point that shouldn’t even be remotely controversial or need to be said. So I don’t even really disagree with your reaction. The problem is that the point is a necessary one to make because there are people here that sling around arguments revolving around LeBron being an elite defensive anchor. They’re silly arguments, and the information provided in this thread just clarifies something that really should already be obvious to everyone.

Yeah but unfortunately the OP didn't phrase the thread like that. LeBron is elite for a non-center anchor--he just isn't on a level to erase all teammates mistakes like many Centers due to rim protection.

[OhayoKD]

Did Bron get significantly better as a defender post Miami? What was doing differently on the court?

For one, he was playing his natural position. In miami as a pf his signals/situional impact were suppressed:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=103591642#p103591642

For two, he lost the additional weight he had in Miami allowing himself to move quicker

For three, top offenses from this period were smaller allowing him to be more effective as a rim protector in the playoffs(warriors especially)

Of course this could also be phrased "was lebron a significantly worse defender from 2011-2014 then he was after or before?". Regardless, it's very silly to just curve down "not peak" signals because you don't think they're peak...Or to ignore how a team performs without its star(or how those teammates do without the star) when arguing the cast was actually better than other people claim it is

speaking of

I wouldn’t really say those teams had inadequate defensive talent. That seems like something you want to be true for argument’s purposes but really isn’t. In any event, if someone was an elite “defensive anchor,” then that simply wouldn’t happen. Nor were those teams even plausibly “inadequate” in terms of defensive talent except for an arguable lack of an elite defensive anchor. So the argument here would basically just have to involve conceding that LeBron was not an elite defensive anchor—which is exactly my point. LeBron was a really good defensive player in that era, but the hyperbole some engage in about his peak-level defense (suggesting he was an elite defensive anchor, etc.) is just manifestly inconsistent with the information provided in this thread. Elite defensive anchors don’t have their teams be consistently bad defensively in the business end of the playoffs, and especially not when the team is defensively talented enough to have been really good defensively in the regular season. It’s not fathomable. And it wasn’t the case with LeBron either. What is the case with LeBron is that he simply was not at the level of elite defensive impact that people here sometimes hyperbolically claim.

So the point of this thread is to say LeBron wasn't as good as the Tim Duncan/Hakeem Olajuwon/Patrick Ewing/Kevin Garnetts of the world?

And not as good as plenty of somewhat lesser elite “defensive anchors” than that too

How very sepcific and useful!

And of course Lebron's teams were not "consistently bad defensively at the buisness at the end of the playoffs". They were "bad in the series lessthanjake and djoker" decided to count. And of course "that defensive talent" didn't ever do nearly as well without Lebron as your perception of them would justify.

Vibes analysis per usual

So I don’t even really disagree with your reaction. They’re silly arguments, and the information provided in this thread just clarifies something that really should already be obvious to everyone.

Feel free to quote the very real arguments you've come across that you think the cherrypicked team-level numbers in some series(conveniently not counting 15-17) apparently refute.

[Colbinii]

Did Bron get significantly better as a defender post Miami? What was doing differently on the court?

For one, he was playing his natural position. In miami as a pf his signals/situional impact were suppressed:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=103591642#p103591642

For two, he lost the additional weight he had in Miami allowing himself to move quicker

For three, top offenses from this period were smaller allowing him to be more effective as a rim protector in the playoffs(warriors especially)

Of this could also be phrased "was lebron a significantly worse defender pre-2015?". Regardless, it's very silly to just curve down "not peak" signals because you don't think they're peak...

LeBron had an interesting phenomena where as his athleticism declined [and let's be real, he was still a 99% athlete for most of his second stint in Cleveland] his anticipation and feel for the game grew. He routinely found himself in better positions on the court defensively, whether it be starting a possession a half step closer to the paint or reading a play early in the action where he took a step or two in one direction or another, which masked any real decline in athleticism on the defensive end.

This was a player who quite literally locked up prime Derrick Rose and shut down Carmelo Anthony.

Rose shot 6.3% against lebron
melo shot 38% against lebron and 54% against battier

Derrick Rose struggled against him once again Thursday, going 1-for-10 with two turnovers in Game 5. Rose shot 6.3 percent from the floor in the series when defended by James, lowest among any player that defended him on five or more plays.

[OhayoKD]

Did Bron get significantly better as a defender post Miami? What was doing differently on the court?

For one, he was playing his natural position. In miami as a pf his signals/situional impact were suppressed:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=103591642#p103591642

For two, he lost the additional weight he had in Miami allowing himself to move quicker

For three, top offenses from this period were smaller allowing him to be more effective as a rim protector in the playoffs(warriors especially)

Of this could also be phrased "was lebron a significantly worse defender pre-2015?". Regardless, it's very silly to just curve down "not peak" signals because you don't think they're peak...

LeBron had an interesting phenomena where as his athleticism declined [and let's be real, he was still a 99% athlete for most of his second stint in Cleveland] his anticipation and feel for the game grew. He routinely found himself in better positions on the court defensively, whether it be starting a possession a half step closer to the paint or reading a play early in the action where he took a step or two in one direction or another, which masked any real decline in athleticism on the defensive end.

This was a player who quite literally locked up prime Derrick Rose and shut down Carmelo Anthony.

Rose shot 6.3% against lebron
melo shot 38% against lebron and 54% against battier

Derrick Rose struggled against him once again Thursday, going 1-for-10 with two turnovers in Game 5. Rose shot 6.3 percent from the floor in the series when defended by James, lowest among any player that defended him on five or more plays.

Perhaps, though I think people oversell this. That "feel for the game" was always there, right from his first playoff series:

Spoiler:

[url]

Watch on YouTube

;t=57s[/url]

I think a significant difference in his second cleveland stint was his teammates being bigger(like they were in 2009). Both those teams collapsed more without Lebron than Miami did(at least over larger samples as opposed to the tiny ones being tossed around here), but there might be a higher cieling with bigger teammates when you add in someone whose among the best ever at coordinating teammates defensively:

Spoiler:

https://youtu.be/rhcqCpoD4Ss?t=95

You can spin this both ways. Okay, Lebron needs bigger players and if we are worried about "absolute value" rather than "value over replacement", maybe Lebron(and every smaller player) looks alot worse relative to bigs overall. But of course, that logic would apply even moreso to the steph's, Kobe's, and MJ's.

If we're consistent and apply the same standard we use with other players, alot of these allegedly "adeqeately" talented defenders are negatives or nuetrails relative to position....unless they are playing with Lebron

They are largely percieved as adequate... because Lebron is their teammate. The end result is other wise bad defenses are decent to good with Lebron in the regular season and excellent in the playoffs. If you have to dismiss that because it's not his "peak"(based not on actual evidence/outcomes, but theory and perception), then you're better of just conceding your prior was wrong. I don't know what exactly the bar here for "elite defensive anchor" is, but it is clearly an advantage over the non-bigs djoker and lessthanjake like to cape for. That is not to say he is hakeem or kg(or even kareem), but that was never argued or even a logicial implication from what was argued.

It is just "very obvious" to anyone who is assessing evidence honestly that Lebron has a big leg up on all the other offensive-mega star non-bigs as a defender. If it wasn't very obvious, the skeptics wouldn't be trying to throw out 3 postseasons of evidence because it hurts their conclusion. Just like they wouldn't be trying to throw out 2009 based on a point or 2 of scoring volume, or passer-rating , or the magically "unique to football phemoneon" of progressing the ball with a dribble or a pass.

These are deseperate moves. And anyone paying attention should be able to surmise what's driving them.

[Djoker]

And of course Lebron's teams were not "consistently bad defensively at the buisness at the end of the playoffs". They were "bad in the series lessthanjake and djoker" decided to count. And of course "that defensive talent" didn't ever do nearly as well without Lebron as your perception of them would justify.

When you're bad in 10/17 of series in the ECF and Finals (and 8/9 series at one point from 2009-14), then it's more than fair to say that you're consistently bad defensively in the business end of the playoffs.

It's only in 2015 and 2016 during Lebron's prime that his team defenses held up deep in the playoffs.

[Colbinii]

And of course Lebron's teams were not "consistently bad defensively at the buisness at the end of the playoffs". They were "bad in the series lessthanjake and djoker" decided to count. And of course "that defensive talent" didn't ever do nearly as well without Lebron as your perception of them would justify.

When you're bad in 10/17 of series in the ECF and Finals (and 8/9 series at one point from 2009-14), then it's more than fair to say that you're consistently bad defensively in the business end of the playoffs.

It's only in 2015 and 2016 during Lebron's prime that his team defenses held up deep in the playoffs.

But was LeBron?

Why don't you actually watch the games like you did with Jordan?

[Colbinii]

For one, he was playing his natural position. In miami as a pf his signals/situional impact were suppressed:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=103591642#p103591642

For two, he lost the additional weight he had in Miami allowing himself to move quicker

For three, top offenses from this period were smaller allowing him to be more effective as a rim protector in the playoffs(warriors especially)

Of this could also be phrased "was lebron a significantly worse defender pre-2015?". Regardless, it's very silly to just curve down "not peak" signals because you don't think they're peak...

LeBron had an interesting phenomena where as his athleticism declined [and let's be real, he was still a 99% athlete for most of his second stint in Cleveland] his anticipation and feel for the game grew. He routinely found himself in better positions on the court defensively, whether it be starting a possession a half step closer to the paint or reading a play early in the action where he took a step or two in one direction or another, which masked any real decline in athleticism on the defensive end.

This was a player who quite literally locked up prime Derrick Rose and shut down Carmelo Anthony.

Rose shot 6.3% against lebron
melo shot 38% against lebron and 54% against battier

Derrick Rose struggled against him once again Thursday, going 1-for-10 with two turnovers in Game 5. Rose shot 6.3 percent from the floor in the series when defended by James, lowest among any player that defended him on five or more plays.

Perhaps, though I think people oversell this. That "feel for the game" was always there, right from his first playoff series:

Spoiler:

[url]

Watch on YouTube

;t=57s[/url]

I think a significant difference in his second cleveland stint was his teammates being bigger(like they were in 2009). Both those teams collapsed more without Lebron than Miami did(at least over larger samples as opposed to the tiny ones being tossed around here), but there might be a higher cieling with bigger teammates when you add in someone whose among the best ever at coordinating teammates defensively:

Spoiler:

https://youtu.be/rhcqCpoD4Ss?t=95

You can spin this both ways. Okay, Lebron needs bigger players and if we are worried about "absolute value" rather than "value over replacement", maybe Lebron(and every smaller player) looks alot worse relative to bigs overall. But of course, that logic would apply even moreso to the steph's, Kobe's, and MJ's.

If we're consistent and apply the same standard we use with other players, alot of these allegedly "adeqeately" talented defenders are negatives or nuetrails relative to position....unless they are playing with Lebron

They are largely percieved as adequate... because Lebron is their teammate. The end result is other wise bad defenses are decent to good with Lebron in the regular season and excellent in the playoffs. If you have to dismiss that because it's not his "peak"(based not on actual evidence/outcomes, but theory and perception), then you're better of just conceding your prior was wrong. I don't know what exactly the bar here for "elite defensive anchor" is, but it is clearly an advantage over the non-bigs djoker and lessthanjake like to cape for. That is not to say he is hakeem or kg(or even kareem), but that was never argued or even a logicial implication from what was argued.

It is just "very obvious" to anyone who is assessing evidence honestly that Lebron has a big leg up on all the other offensive-mega star non-bigs as a defender. If it wasn't very obvious, the skeptics wouldn't be trying to throw out 3 postseasons of evidence because it hurts their conclusion. Just like they wouldn't be trying to throw out 2009 based on a point or 2 of scoring volume, or passer-rating , or the magically "unique to football phemoneon" of progressing the ball with a dribble or a pass.

These are deseperate moves. And anyone paying attention should be able to surmise what's driving them.

You mean something like this would make LeBron's teams better at defense?

I actually found Horace Grant's defense in the finals to be absolutely fantastic. He was tough on the defensive boards and offered strong resistance at the rim without fouling much. He was just very disciplined and a workhorse. If I had to rank the Bulls defensively in this series I'd say Grant >> Jordan > Pippen. Levingston off the bench was also very positive on defense and a good shotblocker.

[OhayoKD]

LeBron had an interesting phenomena where as his athleticism declined [and let's be real, he was still a 99% athlete for most of his second stint in Cleveland] his anticipation and feel for the game grew. He routinely found himself in better positions on the court defensively, whether it be starting a possession a half step closer to the paint or reading a play early in the action where he took a step or two in one direction or another, which masked any real decline in athleticism on the defensive end.

This was a player who quite literally locked up prime Derrick Rose and shut down Carmelo Anthony.

Perhaps, though I think people oversell this. That "feel for the game" was always there, right from his first playoff series:

Spoiler:

[url]

Watch on YouTube

;t=57s[/url]

I think a significant difference in his second cleveland stint was his teammates being bigger(like they were in 2009). Both those teams collapsed more without Lebron than Miami did(at least over larger samples as opposed to the tiny ones being tossed around here), but there might be a higher cieling with bigger teammates when you add in someone whose among the best ever at coordinating teammates defensively:

Spoiler:

https://youtu.be/rhcqCpoD4Ss?t=95

You can spin this both ways. Okay, Lebron needs bigger players and if we are worried about "absolute value" rather than "value over replacement", maybe Lebron(and every smaller player) looks alot worse relative to bigs overall. But of course, that logic would apply even moreso to the steph's, Kobe's, and MJ's.

If we're consistent and apply the same standard we use with other players, alot of these allegedly "adeqeately" talented defenders are negatives or nuetrails relative to position....unless they are playing with Lebron

They are largely percieved as adequate... because Lebron is their teammate. The end result is other wise bad defenses are decent to good with Lebron in the regular season and excellent in the playoffs. If you have to dismiss that because it's not his "peak"(based not on actual evidence/outcomes, but theory and perception), then you're better of just conceding your prior was wrong. I don't know what exactly the bar here for "elite defensive anchor" is, but it is clearly an advantage over the non-bigs djoker and lessthanjake like to cape for. That is not to say he is hakeem or kg(or even kareem), but that was never argued or even a logicial implication from what was argued.

It is just "very obvious" to anyone who is assessing evidence honestly that Lebron has a big leg up on all the other offensive-mega star non-bigs as a defender. If it wasn't very obvious, the skeptics wouldn't be trying to throw out 3 postseasons of evidence because it hurts their conclusion. Just like they wouldn't be trying to throw out 2009 based on a point or 2 of scoring volume, or passer-rating , or the magically "unique to football phemoneon" of progressing the ball with a dribble or a pass.

These are deseperate moves. And anyone paying attention should be able to surmise what's driving them.

You mean something like this would make LeBron's teams better at defense?

I actually found Horace Grant's defense in the finals to be absolutely fantastic. He was tough on the defensive boards and offered strong resistance at the rim without fouling much. He was just very disciplined and a workhorse. If I had to rank the Bulls defensively in this series I'd say Grant >> Jordan > Pippen. Levingston off the bench was also very positive on defense and a good shotblocker.

If only we could look at actual winning to ballpark how much Jordan offered those Bulls defensively...
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=108083160#p108083160
Hmmm

And of course Lebron's teams were not "consistently bad defensively at the buisness at the end of the playoffs". They were "bad in the series lessthanjake and djoker" decided to count. And of course "that defensive talent" didn't ever do nearly as well without Lebron as your perception of them would justify.

When you're bad in 10/17 of series in the ECF and Finals (and 8/9 series at one point from 2009-14), then it's more than fair to say that you're consistently bad defensively in the business end of the playoffs.

It's only in 2015 and 2016 during Lebron's prime that his team defenses held up deep in the playoffs.

A 60/40 split does not strike me as particularly "consistent", especially when

A. those defenses look better factoring opposing playoff performance
B. the positives marks are generally better than the negatives

But the real piece of wool you're pulling is isolating offense and defense and ascribing Lebron the credit/blame for one as opposed to both.

By your logic, Lebron is merely only a functinonal playoff anchor....as well as the best offensive engine ever with only nash and magic having counter-cases over the last 40 years.

Worse still, an anchor is defined as an object that steadies something else. In this case that something else would be Lebron's teammates.

If we look at what those teammates do in lebron's absence....virtually all of those series have the Cavs improving significnatly defensively with Lebron while merely "some" of them have the teams improving massively.

Do the same trick with offense and Lebron is improving his team by a margin only challenged by magic and nash.

Iow, in the "buisness end of the playoffs", Lebron is

-> making defenses better by a bigger margin than you know who
-> also making the offenses better by a bigger margin than you know who

this adds up to

-> Lebon is making his teams better by a margin than you know who

And therein lies the rub...

b), c) A team build being biased towards offense does not reflect poorly on LeBron's individual defense at all. That's a question of roster construction and considering his teams' overall success, it's not necessarily a bad trade off. But it's kind of obvious OP only brought this point up to downplay how good the rORtg of LeBron-led teams are.

3 and 1 can add up to 4. 2 and 2 can also add up to 4. But 3 will never equal 4.

Over the largest most inclusive samples the player who solves 'the most high level problems" and has replicating his influence on winning across situation like no one in history also looks to be the one with the biggest effect on team success of anyone in the last 40 years.

It doesn't matter how the cat is skinned. It matters that you skin the cat. And since Kareem, no one has skinned as much of the cat as Lebron.

[lessthanjake]

Regardless, it's very silly to just curve down "not peak" signals because you don't think they're peak...

There’s some immense irony in this statement, and I want you to remember that you said it and perhaps retire whole genres of arguments you have that are exactly this.

[zimpy27]

I've been combing through some rDRtg of different teams and I noticed that Lebron's teams collapsed on defense way too often in the playoffs. Even more than just a few finals series as I believed before.

I only included the 2009-2018 stretch and only later rounds (ECF + Finals) except for 2010 where he lost in Round 2. From 2020 onwards AD is the defensive anchor and Lebron isn't in his prime anymore.

Note that rDRtg is defense relative to opponent ORtg. So any positive number means your team played worse defense than an average team did against this opponent in the regular season. Around +5 is league worst defensive level and +10 is historically bad defense.

2009 ECF vs. Magic: +4.1 rDRtg
2010 ECSF vs. Celtics: +1.1 rDRtg
2011 Finals vs. Mavericks: +1.0 rDRtg
2012 ECF vs. Celtics: +2.5 rDRtg
2012 Finals vs. Thunder: +0.8 rDRtg
2013 ECF vs. Pacers: +2.9 rDRtg
2013 Finals vs. Spurs: +1.0 rDRtg
2014 ECF vs. Pacers: +6.1 rDRtg
2014 Finals vs. Spurs: +10.3 rDRtg
2017 Finals vs. Warriors: +5.7 rDRtg
2018 Finals vs. Warriors: +11.0 rDRtg

There are several possible explanations:

a) Lebron, being the pseudo defensive anchor of these teams, is a wildly inconsistent defender. His individual struggles or lack of effort on the defensive end largely contributed to these results.

b) The teams' defensive makeup was flawed. For instance these teams not having traditional big men to protect the rim relied more heavily on pinpoint rotations to stop penetration and recover quickly. Fatigue late in the playoffs along with generally facing better offenses caused these collapses.

c) The teams were offensively slanted in essence sacrificing defense for better offense.

Honestly I think it's a combination of all three reasons.

All those seasons and series selected were on teams without rim protection. So the answer seems obvious.

West coast teams were especially focused on pressuring the rim back in that timeframe

[OhayoKD]

Regardless, it's very silly to just curve down "not peak" signals because you don't think they're peak...

There’s some immense irony in this statement, and I want you to remember that you said it.

The only irony here is you forgetting(or more maybe lying about) what I said to mask that a large chunk of your forum history is "curving" down highs the guys you like don't match:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2312865

TLDR:

Spoiler:

I literally posted the two teams’ playoff SRS outside of those conference finals, and the Bulls’ was higher. I don’t know what you’re talking about. The argument here just absolutely rests on what happened in the respective conference finals.

So the Rockets:
- are clearly outperforming the Bulls in the first round
- are outperforming the Bulls in their respective elimination rounds if taking regular season SRS at face value
- are outperforming the Bulls through two rounds if incorporating real playoff results and not taking regular season SRS at face value
… but because this is Michael Jordan, that all gets brushed off as one random single series advantage.

The only reason you can try to make it a conversation is that the Bulls blew out a 4 SRS 76ers team in the conference semifinals… immediately following those 76ers looking nothing like a 4 SRS team against the Cavaliers. The Bulls are the ones with an argument tied to one round here.

I think you might want to take a step back and think about the extent to which you’re starting at your conclusion and just trying to find a way to get there (not to mention maybe consider whether you’d feel less of a need to be rude if you weren’t doing that, and also whether you should be confidently asserting what people who watched basketball thought in a time period that you did not watch basketball and other posters did).
...
Okay, I’ve made my point and it’s a fairly obvious one that I think most people would understand and agree with. You once again have proven yourself unable to engage in discussion relating in any way to Hakeem Olajuwon without engaging in personal attacks, so I’m done discussing with you. People can read and make up their own minds.

s it me being unable to talk about Hakeem, or is it those who are so attached to their idea of Jordan that they refuse any consideration that *gasp* maybe Hakeem was a legitimately close peer.

[OhayoKD]

I've been combing through some rDRtg of different teams and I noticed that Lebron's teams collapsed on defense way too often in the playoffs. Even more than just a few finals series as I believed before.

I only included the 2009-2018 stretch and only later rounds (ECF + Finals) except for 2010 where he lost in Round 2. From 2020 onwards AD is the defensive anchor and Lebron isn't in his prime anymore.

Note that rDRtg is defense relative to opponent ORtg. So any positive number means your team played worse defense than an average team did against this opponent in the regular season. Around +5 is league worst defensive level and +10 is historically bad defense.

2009 ECF vs. Magic: +4.1 rDRtg
2010 ECSF vs. Celtics: +1.1 rDRtg
2011 Finals vs. Mavericks: +1.0 rDRtg
2012 ECF vs. Celtics: +2.5 rDRtg
2012 Finals vs. Thunder: +0.8 rDRtg
2013 ECF vs. Pacers: +2.9 rDRtg
2013 Finals vs. Spurs: +1.0 rDRtg
2014 ECF vs. Pacers: +6.1 rDRtg
2014 Finals vs. Spurs: +10.3 rDRtg
2017 Finals vs. Warriors: +5.7 rDRtg
2018 Finals vs. Warriors: +11.0 rDRtg

There are several possible explanations:

a) Lebron, being the pseudo defensive anchor of these teams, is a wildly inconsistent defender. His individual struggles or lack of effort on the defensive end largely contributed to these results.

b) The teams' defensive makeup was flawed. For instance these teams not having traditional big men to protect the rim relied more heavily on pinpoint rotations to stop penetration and recover quickly. Fatigue late in the playoffs along with generally facing better offenses caused these collapses.

c) The teams were offensively slanted in essence sacrificing defense for better offense.

Honestly I think it's a combination of all three reasons.

All those seasons and series selected were on teams without rim protection. So the answer seems obvious.

West coast teams were especially focused on pressuring the rim back in that timeframe

Was it just west-coast teams?

Pacers, Orlando, and Bulls were definitely trying to do damage inside though the shooters(and ben wallace becoming a fossil) made it especially effective for orlando

[lessthanjake]

There’s some immense irony in this statement, and I want you to remember that you said it.

The only irony here is you forgetting(or more maybe lying about) what I said to mask that a large chunk of your forum history is "curving" down highs the guys you like don't match:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2312865

TLDR:

Spoiler:

I literally posted the two teams’ playoff SRS outside of those conference finals, and the Bulls’ was higher. I don’t know what you’re talking about. The argument here just absolutely rests on what happened in the respective conference finals.

So the Rockets:
- are clearly outperforming the Bulls in the first round
- are outperforming the Bulls in their respective elimination rounds if taking regular season SRS at face value
- are outperforming the Bulls through two rounds if incorporating real playoff results and not taking regular season SRS at face value
… but because this is Michael Jordan, that all gets brushed off as one random single series advantage.

The only reason you can try to make it a conversation is that the Bulls blew out a 4 SRS 76ers team in the conference semifinals… immediately following those 76ers looking nothing like a 4 SRS team against the Cavaliers. The Bulls are the ones with an argument tied to one round here.

I think you might want to take a step back and think about the extent to which you’re starting at your conclusion and just trying to find a way to get there (not to mention maybe consider whether you’d feel less of a need to be rude if you weren’t doing that, and also whether you should be confidently asserting what people who watched basketball thought in a time period that you did not watch basketball and other posters did).
...
Okay, I’ve made my point and it’s a fairly obvious one that I think most people would understand and agree with. You once again have proven yourself unable to engage in discussion relating in any way to Hakeem Olajuwon without engaging in personal attacks, so I’m done discussing with you. People can read and make up their own minds.

s it me being unable to talk about Hakeem, or is it those who are so attached to their idea of Jordan that they refuse any consideration that *gasp* maybe Hakeem was a legitimately close peer.

I’m not sure why you’re referring to that particular thread as if that’s what I was specifically referencing. You probably did make this sort of argument in that thread (am too lazy to check to verify though), but it’s definitely a widespread theme from you that is not remotely limited to a specific thread. It’s just a whole genre of argument that you splat across thread after thread, and that you have now said is “very silly” after I used the same sort of logic to argue the opposite direction. And the fact that you did that after I even explicitly disclosed that my arguments were in part intended as a parody is very funny to me. All I’m saying is that I’d like you to remember that you said this type of argument is “very silly” and perhaps retire arguments you make that fall under that umbrella.

[OhayoKD]

There’s some immense irony in this statement, and I want you to remember that you said it.

The only irony here is you forgetting(or more maybe lying about) what I said to mask that a large chunk of your forum history is "curving" down highs the guys you like don't match:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2312865

TLDR:

Spoiler:

I literally posted the two teams’ playoff SRS outside of those conference finals, and the Bulls’ was higher. I don’t know what you’re talking about. The argument here just absolutely rests on what happened in the respective conference finals.

So the Rockets:
- are clearly outperforming the Bulls in the first round
- are outperforming the Bulls in their respective elimination rounds if taking regular season SRS at face value
- are outperforming the Bulls through two rounds if incorporating real playoff results and not taking regular season SRS at face value
… but because this is Michael Jordan, that all gets brushed off as one random single series advantage.

The only reason you can try to make it a conversation is that the Bulls blew out a 4 SRS 76ers team in the conference semifinals… immediately following those 76ers looking nothing like a 4 SRS team against the Cavaliers. The Bulls are the ones with an argument tied to one round here.

I think you might want to take a step back and think about the extent to which you’re starting at your conclusion and just trying to find a way to get there (not to mention maybe consider whether you’d feel less of a need to be rude if you weren’t doing that, and also whether you should be confidently asserting what people who watched basketball thought in a time period that you did not watch basketball and other posters did).
...
Okay, I’ve made my point and it’s a fairly obvious one that I think most people would understand and agree with. You once again have proven yourself unable to engage in discussion relating in any way to Hakeem Olajuwon without engaging in personal attacks, so I’m done discussing with you. People can read and make up their own minds.

s it me being unable to talk about Hakeem, or is it those who are so attached to their idea of Jordan that they refuse any consideration that *gasp* maybe Hakeem was a legitimately close peer.

I’m not sure why you’re referring to that particular thread as if that’s what I was specifically referencing. You probably did make this sort of argument in that thread (am too lazy to check to verify though), but it’s definitely a widespread theme from you that is not remotely limited to a specific thread.

If it's a "widespread theme", it should be easy enough of you to find an equivalent example. I'm putting my money on "was too lazy to verify"

[Gregoire]

I only included the 2009-2018 stretch and only later rounds (ECF + Finals) except for 2010 where he lost in Round 2.

You know you have an agenda when you can't even be consistent with your own arbitrary thresholds and have to sneak in a second round +1.1 rDRtg as a defensive "collapse".

Anyways, looking at the list, only the 09 ECF and the 14/17/18 Finals stand out as particularly bad defensive team performances and the obvious theme there is hot opponent 3pt shooting. The +6.1 rDRtg in the 14 ECF looks horrible on paper but considering ORtg/DRtg sometimes get wonky for outlier paces (as noted in this thread of mine) and the fact the Heat had a +18.7 rORtg in that same series, it's a nothingburger.

And OP's proposed explanations don't even make sense:
a) If LeBron is so bad that he is only a "pseudo" and not the real defensive anchor of his teams, why is he the one blamed for the team's defensive shortcomings rather than the actual anchor whoever that is?
b), c) A team build being biased towards offense does not reflect poorly on LeBron's individual defense at all. That's a question of roster construction and considering his teams' overall success, it's not necessarily a bad trade off. But it's kind of obvious OP only brought this point up to downplay how good the rORtg of LeBron-led teams are.

With all due respect, I don't have an agenda and I'm kind of disappointed you're accusing me of such. Nor am I cherrypicking. I've posted the rDRtg for 10/17 combined Finals and ECF series during Lebron's prime that his team had a positive rDRtg. And yes any positive rDRtg is quite bad because it means that the defensive performance was worse than that of an average team. It doesn't have to be 5+ or 10+ to be bad although the latter is obviously REALLY bad. The data i posted fits the theme of the thread. Why would I post other series that are irrelevant to the thread at hand. Obviously Lebron's teams weren't bad defensively in every single series.

a) By pseudo, I simply meant that he isn't a traditional defensive anchor meaning a big man paint protector.

b) c) This thread isn't about offense or rORtg. Nor did I say that the defensive underperformances necessarily reflect poorly on Lebron. I simply started a thread so we can all discuss it.

Everyone who dont have pro-Lebron agenda here ... "have agenda" ... Very good thread, man, and I think I know an obvious answer, but for the purpose to not spoon the trolls I I will not write it here.

[lessthanjake]

The only irony here is you forgetting(or more maybe lying about) what I said to mask that a large chunk of your forum history is "curving" down highs the guys you like don't match:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=2312865

TLDR:

Spoiler:

I’m not sure why you’re referring to that particular thread as if that’s what I was specifically referencing. You probably did make this sort of argument in that thread (am too lazy to check to verify though), but it’s definitely a widespread theme from you that is not remotely limited to a specific thread.

If it's a "widespread theme", it should be easy enough of you to find an equivalent example. I'm putting my money on "was too lazy to verify"

I’m not going searching through your posts for something we both know you constantly do. There’s just endless arguments of the variety of things like “The Bulls got better after I think Jordan had peaked so the team becoming better had nothing to do with him.” And now we shall inevitably commence some frivolous attempt by you to draw distinctions and claim that those arguments somehow aren’t the same type of thing you just called “very silly.”

[OhayoKD]

I’m not sure why you’re referring to that particular thread as if that’s what I was specifically referencing. You probably did make this sort of argument in that thread (am too lazy to check to verify though), but it’s definitely a widespread theme from you that is not remotely limited to a specific thread.

If it's a "widespread theme", it should be easy enough of you to find an equivalent example. I'm putting my money on "was too lazy to verify"

I’m not going searching through your posts for something we both know you constantly do. There’s just endless arguments of the variety of things like “The Bulls got better after I think Jordan had peaked so the team becoming better had nothing to do with him.”

Yes, because the Bull's team success = MJ's best signals which. came..before(and by some approaches, after) the Bulls started winning

Seems I was on the money

Everyone who dont have pro-Lebron agenda here ... "have agenda" ... Very good thread, man, and I think I know an obvious answer, but for the purpose to not spoon the trolls I I will not write it here.

As long as there's consecus

[Djoker]

A 60/40 split does not strike me as particularly "consistent", especially when

A. those defenses look better factoring opposing playoff performance
B. the positives marks are generally better than the negatives

A. No they don't. I posted the rDRtg of other teams facing them in the playoffs. 2009 Magic, 2012 Celtics, 2013 Pacers, 2013 Spurs, 2014 Pacers, 2014 Spurs, 2018 Warriors all had their highest ORtg against Lebron teams in their playoff runs. And 2017 Warriors had one slightly better ORtg against the Kawhi-less Spurs.

Thus basically 8 out of 10 of those teams had their best offensive series in those playoffs against Lebron's teams.

The only 2 that didn't are the 2011 Mavs and 2012 Thunder. Only those teams torched other teams worse.

B. How so?

But the real piece of wool you're pulling is isolating offense and defense and ascribing Lebron the credit/blame for one as opposed to both.

By your logic, Lebron is merely only a functinonal playoff anchor....as well as the best offensive engine ever with only nash and magic having counter-cases over the last 40 years.

Lebron is one of the best offensive players ever. For me personally he's 3rd behind only Jordan and Magic.

Still offense is not the topic of this thread. I won't mention it further.

Worse still, an anchor is defined as an object that steadies something else. In this case that something else would be Lebron's teammates.

If we look at what those teammates do in lebron's absence....virtually all of those series have the Cavs improving significnatly defensively with Lebron while merely "some" of them have the teams improving massively.

The bolded part is totally false.

Miami defense in the playoffs from 2011-2014 slightly improves (-0.54) when Lebron sits on the bench.



Cleveland defense in the playoffs from 2015-2018 gets slightly worse (+1.28) when Lebron sits on the bench.



These two large samples of playoff data of 87 games and 81 games don't paint Lebron as a big different maker on defense as you claim. Individual series data is just noise.

[lessthanjake]

If it's a "widespread theme", it should be easy enough of you to find an equivalent example. I'm putting my money on "was too lazy to verify"

I’m not going searching through your posts for something we both know you constantly do. There’s just endless arguments of the variety of things like “The Bulls got better after I think Jordan had peaked so the team becoming better had nothing to do with him.”

Yes, because the Bull's team success = MJ's best signals which. came..before(and by some approaches, after) the Bulls started winning

Seems I was on the money

As long as there's consecus

This is gibberish. But by all means, don’t let me stop you from systematically having a double standard.

[colts18]

Did Bron get significantly better as a defender post Miami? What was doing differently on the court?

For one, he was playing his natural position. In miami as a pf his signals/situional impact were suppressed:
https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=103591642#p103591642

For two, he lost the additional weight he had in Miami allowing himself to move quicker

For three, top offenses from this period were smaller allowing him to be more effective as a rim protector in the playoffs(warriors especially)

Of course this could also be phrased "was lebron a significantly worse defender from 2011-2014 then he was after or before?". Regardless, it's very silly to just curve down "not peak" signals because you don't think they're peak...Or to ignore how a team performs without its star(or how those teammates do without the star) when arguing the cast was actually better than other people claim it is

2nd Stint Cleveland LeBron was not a better defender than Miami Heat LeBron Anyone who says that wasn't watching LeBron play defense in 2011 or 2012 when he was shutting down superstars and could still average 30 PPG.