MJ vs Lebron based on pre-season odds & finishes

[Homer38]

Basketball is obviously not 3 on 3. [b]The point is that a very strong case can be made that the 2015-2016 Cavs were a more talented team than the 2015-2016 Warriors[/b]. Once that's accepted we can get into why the Warriors won more games etc.

But I am of the belief that when a player's teams typically underachieve their talent levels, they may be something to it. Like I said the OP's data tells only part of the story and not the whole story but that part of the story should still be acknowledged.

Defense matters too....

Sure.

Those Cavs had defensive talent. Lebron himself, Tristan, Shumpert, Delly, RJ...

Not many 2 way players in this list....Great offense but average defense at best in 2016.The warriors were elite on offense and defense.

[Jaivl]

This thread is missing some links to that Nobodytouchesjordan blog.

[Kiddlovesnets]

The problem with this is that times were very different between when MJ and LeBron played. LeBron's teams are almost favored just because of HIM. He's had insane expectations since day 1 and proved himself very early in his career so that's always been reflected in betting odds and things like that.

Not exactly. Lebron in Cleveland before 2010 never had such insane expectation, except for 2008 after he just took the Cavs to finals. In fact, I already took context into that year and crossed it out from a championship window year. Lebron also wasnt championship favorite in 2019 and 2020 when he was in the Lakers. He was expected to win the title from 2011 to 2016 because he made a superteam in Miami and returned to Clevaland with another big three. Just like what happened when KD teamed up with the Warriors, except KD's Warriors actually were dominant and won the trophies when they were healthy. Lebron's Heat and Cavs, not so much, he only won 3 out of 6 times when he was favored. Its a serious misconception that Lebron's teams were favored because of him, of course a superteam would be favorite to win unless there was another superteam(ie. 2017 Warriors and 2017 Cavs).

2014 - fair that they were favored but again that was mainly because of LeBron. That Heat team was running on fumes by then.
2015 - mainly favored because of LeBron. There was a lot of question marks there but still they would've had a great chance to win if Kyrie and Love didn't get hurt OR even if Delly didn't almost die from the first few games lol.

Not really, favored because the Heat and Cavs were superteams, with Wade/Bosh and Irving/Love.

2016 - met expectations is a crazy understatement. I know it's going by preseason odds but if anything this shows how flawed that way of thinking is. Bron might have put up the best finals performance of all time on offense AND defense and still they barely squeaked by. Knowing that now, "meeting expectations" is pretty hilarious.

The Cavs were the more talented team, and in playoffs it happens quite often that star powers beat team basketball. If the Warriors were as good as their record suggested, they would've at least steamrolled into the Finals. Instead, they struggled against OKC Thunder as well, almost lost to a team that KD was barely 70-80% of his old self. The 67 wins Spurs also struggled against the Thunder and actually lost that series, which is a concrete proof that regular season record aint a good indication of teams talents/strength coming into playoffs time.

Also Curry was playing injured, while Bogut went down in game 5 with the score tied despite Warriors missing Draymond. I find a lot of people have overlooked this fact which contributes to how the 2016 ring was overrated. It was a legitimate and well deserved ring, but its definitely nowhere near as valuable as Dirk's 2011 ring when he won as a true underdog. Lebron was not an underdog, he had the best team in the league and he was supposed to win in 2016, anyway.

[McBubbles]

The problem with this is that times were very different between when MJ and LeBron played. LeBron's teams are almost favored just because of HIM. He's had insane expectations since day 1 and proved himself very early in his career so that's always been reflected in betting odds and things like that.

Not exactly. Lebron in Cleveland before 2010 never had such insane expectation, except for 2008 after he just took the Cavs to finals. In fact, I already took context into that year and crossed it out from a championship window year. Lebron also wasnt championship favorite in 2019 and 2020 when he was in the Lakers. He was expected to win the title from 2011 to 2016 because he made a superteam in Miami and returned to Clevaland with another big three. Just like what happened when KD teamed up with the Warriors, except KD's Warriors actually were dominant and won the trophies when they were healthy. Lebron's Heat and Cavs, not so much, he only won 3 out of 6 times when he was favored. Its a serious misconception that Lebron's teams were favored because of him, of course a superteam would be favorite to win unless there was another superteam(ie. 2017 Warriors and 2017 Cavs).

2014 - fair that they were favored but again that was mainly because of LeBron. That Heat team was running on fumes by then.
2015 - mainly favored because of LeBron. There was a lot of question marks there but still they would've had a great chance to win if Kyrie and Love didn't get hurt OR even if Delly didn't almost die from the first few games lol.

Not really, favored because the Heat and Cavs were superteams, with Wade/Bosh and Irving/Love.

2016 - met expectations is a crazy understatement. I know it's going by preseason odds but if anything this shows how flawed that way of thinking is. Bron might have put up the best finals performance of all time on offense AND defense and still they barely squeaked by. Knowing that now, "meeting expectations" is pretty hilarious.

The Cavs were the more talented team, and in playoffs it happens quite often that star powers beat team basketball. If the Warriors were as good as their record suggested, they would've at least steamrolled into the Finals. Instead, they struggled against OKC Thunder as well, almost lost to a team that KD was barely 70-80% of his old self. The 67 wins Spurs also struggled against the Thunder and actually lost that series, which is a concrete proof that regular season record aint a good indication of teams talents/strength coming into playoffs time.

Also Curry was playing injured, while Bogut went down in game 5 with the score tied despite Warriors missing Draymond. I find a lot of people have overlooked this fact which contributes to how the 2016 ring was overrated. It was a legitimate and well deserved ring, but its definitely nowhere near as valuable as Dirk's 2011 ring when he won as a true underdog. Lebron was not an underdog, he had the best team in the league and he was supposed to win in 2016, anyway.

1. Regular season record isn't a good indicator of team strength come playoff time, but pre-season predictions, the things with even more outdated, less tested information, are? That makes no sense.
It'd be like predicting that in 10 days time, you're going to climb up some stairs. On day 1 you lose your legs, and so on day 10 when you can't climb them you say "My prediction said I'd be able to climb the stairs but I didn't, therefore I underachieved ". Anyone that looked at the situation would have known that expectations should have been tempered as soon as you lost your legs, and that not readjusting your expectations in light of new data would lead to a faulty conclusions.

2. Kevin "Better Than 2016 Draymond Green" Love got concussed in the finals, missed a game and averaged 9 points and 7 rebounds on 47TS%. I have heard every single **** Warriors injury detailed a billion times. Curry and his ankle, Draymond suspension, Iggy and his back, Bogut etc, yet I never, EVER hear the people that call LeBron's 2016 finals overrated, bring up the fact that Love missed a game just like Draymond, and played like poop after his concussion. It's ridiculous. I reckon people don't even know it ever happened.

3. You repeatedly saying that the 2016 Cavs were more talented than the 2016 Warriors doesn't make it true. They pooped on the Cavs in terms of defensive talent.

Also, LeBron's best teammates were either injured or coming off an injury in the Finals every single year from 2012-2016, 5 years. D'you reckon LeBron's team would have been the favourite to win in 2012 if people knew Bosh would be injured for half the playoffs and Wade would be getting his knee drained? D'you reckon the Cavs would be favoured to win in 2015 if people knew that Kyrie and Love would be out for a combined 23 playoff games, including them both missing the Finals? I don't think so, which is why putting so much faith into pre-season predictions as a form of data is insane.

[Amares]

Thread is terrible, there is zero players comparison here, or any game inspection, just some subjective pre-season team results expectations that author somehow translated into players comparison. Topics on realgm project contained hundreds of posts over the years with players impact evaluation, new users should spend some months first on reading the content before making ridiculous threads. This is not ISH or ESPN, rankings are not based on MVPs rings, or all-star MVP selections.

[Inspektor1312]

Very interesting post OP, but the fact that this forum voted Lebron as the GOAT is too funny to me, gotta find those rankings

[McBubbles]

Very interesting post OP, but the fact that this forum voted Lebron as the GOAT is too funny to me, gotta find those rankings

He's not the GOAT, but I do think he's the BOAT. He's peaked too high and had too much longevity.

[picko]

Betting odds can be a useful predictor but pre-season odds are typically awful. They draw heavily on results from the previous season and contain minimal new information beyond adjusting for the biggest trades / free agency moves.

I do hope the OP didn't spend long on this 'project'. It certainly isn't a good use of time.

[LA Bird]

People have spent hundreds of hours on GOAT discussions but OP apparently thinks he has single handedly figured everything out by looking at a table of preseason team expectations. Maybe we should look at pre-draft expectations too. A player's draft position is a good estimator of their expected career value based on raw talent level.

Jordan was the #3 pick. He is the #1 player from his draft. He exceeded expectations.
LeBron was the #1 pick. He is the #1 player from his draft. He only met expectations.

Conclusion: MJ is the clear-cut better player, there's no contest at all.

[Kiddlovesnets]

1. Regular season record isn't a good indicator of team strength come playoff time, but pre-season predictions, the things with even more outdated, less tested information, are? That makes no sense.
It'd be like predicting that in 10 days time, you're going to climb up some stairs. On day 1 you lose your legs, and so on day 10 when you can't climb them you say "My prediction said I'd be able to climb the stairs but I didn't, therefore I underachieved ". Anyone that looked at the situation would have known that expectations should have been tempered as soon as you lost your legs, and that not readjusting your expectations in light of new data would lead to a faulty conclusions.

The pre-season odds are much better estimates of a team's strength because its basically calculated from addition of the raw talent of each player from the team. This is more meaningful coming into playoffs time when the star power becomes far more important than the team's tactics. We've seen often that teams like the 2015 Hawks played in a superior system in regular season with beautiful offense that just failed to work in playoffs. The expectation from 2011 and 2016 based on the fact that Lebron's team had the most talented rosters, and yet he won only 3 out of 6 times(2015 deserves a pass for two injured star teammates but cant say the same for 2011 and 2014).

2. Kevin "Better Than 2016 Draymond Green" Love got concussed in the finals, missed a game and averaged 9 points and 7 rebounds on 47TS%. I have heard every single **** Warriors injury detailed a billion times. Curry and his ankle, Draymond suspension, Iggy and his back, Bogut etc, yet I never, EVER hear the people that call LeBron's 2016 finals overrated, bring up the fact that Love missed a game just like Draymond, and played like poop after his concussion. It's ridiculous. I reckon people don't even know it ever happened.

Kevin Love is a better player than Draymond Green individually. He did miss a game yes, but he was not playing well before the injury anyway, and I am not convinced that his injury contributed to his poor stats. So why did Kevin Love play bad? You are telling me that hes a terrible player, but Kevin Love was an all-star caliber player before joining up with Lebron and already played far below his level before or after the concussion. In fact, we've seen players like Hughs, Wade and Bosh that failed to play at their expected level when they became Lebron's teammate, they all seem unfit next to Lebron. So the question is, whether Lebron's ball dominant playing style was part to blame for his all-star teammate failing to play at their expected level? And if so, why did Lebron deserve a pass because 'he had worse teammates' than the teams that beat him?

They draw heavily on results from the previous season and contain minimal new information beyond adjusting for the biggest trades / free agency moves.

Actually no, if the pre-season odds are merely determined from the previous season's performance, then the Heat and Cavs would not have been favored to win in 2015 as one was a borderline playoffs team and another missed playoffs. Lebron's teams from 2011 to 2016 were favorites to win because he colluded and formed superteams with big three all in their prime. Historically such superteams were always title favorites, unless there existed another superteams at the same time(ie. 2 superteams in 2017 Warriors and Cavaliers, one better than the other). For superteams its always ring or bust.

People have spent hundreds of hours on GOAT discussions but OP apparently thinks he has single handedly figured everything out by looking at a table of preseason team expectations. Maybe we should look at pre-draft expectations too. A player's draft position is a good estimator of their expected career value based on raw talent level.

There wasnt meant to be a GOAT debate at all 'cause MJ was miles ahead. Have you seen any serious all-time great NBA players list from major media and sports analysts that actually, had Lebron over MJ before? And yet the analysts on RealGM can defy the media consensus to make a claim that Lebron is above MJ, then why cant I present my own project to tell otherwise? This is a forum, everyone has right to make a civil discussion.

Again I want to emphasize again that Lebron's teams were title favorites for 6 straight years from 2011 to 2016 because he made his superteams. I dont blame Lebron for collusion but come on, theres absolutely no excuse to say that his teammates were bad and his competition was tough when he colluded. Once he chose this superteam path, its ring or bust. When MJ had teams good enough to win, he always won. Lebron still somehow managed a below 50% finals record after his ring chasing year in 2010, this aint a serious issue if we compare him to Shaq and Kobe, but when the comparison is MJ the GOAT you know theres a problem.

[migya]

I assume most or at least some here have seen the YouTube videos comparing Jordan v Lebron and the recent Greatest Jordan highlights video.

Jordan is the greatest and there is no real comparison, there just isn't.

[trex_8063]

Also very funny for 1986 when the Bulls finished at 30-52 and MJ missed 64 games and you say Jordan and the Bulls have been above expectation

I was sort of thinking the same thing. I mean, it all depends on how you wish to evaluate it: sure, if the Bulls are one of 16 teams in the playoffs and they were predicted to be 18th, that can be framed as a [slight] over-achievement. Given the intent of the thread (which is made apparent in the first line), I'm not surprised the OP chose to interpret the result that way.
But as an counterpoint I'd note the '86 Bulls were 18th in SRS and tied for 19th in wins (not one of TWELVE WC teams had a worse record). So from those standpoints, the Bulls barely met expecation [perhaps marginal UNDER-achievement from that standpoint].
All things considered, this seems like one that is best labeled as "met expectation".


In '90 for that matter: predicted 6th, but they made the ECF. otoh, they were only 9th-best in SRS and tied for 5th in wins. That feels like a marginal over-achievement at best (and arguably most accurately labeled as "met").


But anyway, as another poster suggested, the methodology is a bit meh to begin with because a) it's so many degrees of separation from what actually takes place on the court, and b) also has the potential to punish whomever is labeled as a dominant sure thing sooner......and the odds-makers apparently took quite awhile to take Jordan seriously.

I mean, in '87 he had a clear MVP-tier season, the Bulls had finished 14th in the league in wins, 8th in SRS, and in the off-season add TWO mid-1st round draft picks.......so the odds-makers predict 16th out of 23???

Not exactly a high bar, given the result from the previous season and the new help.
Then after finishing 7th in wins and 5th in SRS in '88, and making the semis, the prediction for '89 is......10th???
Lost Oakley, though gained Cartwright and improvement in their two promising rookies could/should have been presumed. So it does seem at least a slightly a low-ball prediction.


Meanwhile for Lebron, in his 4th season [though younger in years] after having just emerged as an MVP-tier player, the bar is set at 6th of 30. Must be that amazing supporting cast of Big Z, Larry Hughes, Drew Gooden, young Varejao, aging Eric Snow and Donyell Marshall.
The following year [same basic cast] the bar is set at 5th.

[McBubbles]

People have spent hundreds of hours on GOAT discussions but OP apparently thinks he has single handedly figured everything out by looking at a table of preseason team expectations. Maybe we should look at pre-draft expectations too. A player's draft position is a good estimator of their expected career value based on raw talent level.

There wasnt meant to be a GOAT debate at all 'cause MJ was miles ahead. Have you seen any serious all-time great NBA players list from major media and sports analysts that actually, had Lebron over MJ before? And yet the analysts on RealGM can defy the media consensus to make a claim that Lebron is above MJ, then why cant I present my own project to tell otherwise? This is a forum, everyone has right to make a civil discussion.

"Serious" and "major media and sports analysts" is an oxymoron. You thinking that Chuck, Shaq, Stephen A Smith, Skip, Nick Wright etc having opinions worth listening to is your first problem. ESPN isn't sports analysis, it's sports entertainment. From an analysis standpoint it's absolute trash. Former players have proven time and time and time and time and time again to not know what on earth they're talking about when it comes to player evaluation or even game evaluation, and sports talking heads just say what generates the most clicks.

Seriously, don't engage in the Argument from Authority fallacy and actually LOOK at what the lowly "analysts on RealGM" post. Dozens of posts breaking down 100's of players games down in minute details with thousands of words worth of analysis is inferior to SAS saying "LeBron will never be better than MJ because he's not a killer", or Jalen Rose saying "MJ is better cuz scoring titles"? Please.

And why're you getting in a hissy fit, nobody said you're not allowed to state your opinion wtf. We're just saying your opinion is badly formed.

[LA Bird]

Have you seen any serious all-time great NBA players list from major media and sports analysts that actually, had Lebron over MJ before? And yet the analysts on RealGM can defy the media consensus to make a claim that Lebron is above MJ

Oh no, this forum had the nerve, the audacity, the unmitigated gall to dare defy the opinion of serious analysts on major media. That is blasphemous. Absolute blasphemy.

[picko]

They draw heavily on results from the previous season and contain minimal new information beyond adjusting for the biggest trades / free agency moves.

Actually no, if the pre-season odds are merely determined from the previous season's performance, then the Heat and Cavs would not have been favored to win in 2015 as one was a borderline playoffs team and another missed playoffs. Lebron's teams from 2011 to 2016 were favorites to win because he colluded and formed superteams with big three all in their prime. Historically such superteams were always title favorites, unless there existed another superteams at the same time(ie. 2 superteams in 2017 Warriors and Cavaliers, one better than the other). For superteams its always ring or bust.

Actually, yes.

They reflect past information adjusted for major trades / free agency moves. Precisely what I said.

I understand the need to justify your analysis. But unfortunately it was a waste of your time, a waste of mine and a waste of everyone else's too. Pre-season betting markets just aren't very informative.

Also, if you think the Cavs were a 'superteam' (they averaged fewer than 53-wins a season across four-years) then perhaps you aren't using a very useful definition of 'superteam'. Just a thought.

[Ainosterhaspie]

It's hard to find a strong enough adjective to describe how inane a metric this is. It may not be meaningless, but it's really close.

Teams entering the playoffs or finals often have little resemblance to the team on which the odds were based. The 2015 Cavs preseason odds were based on an assumption of a healthy Love and Irving. Turns out they weren't healthy in the finals. Nets odds this year didn't account for Harden being added to the team. That makes a wee bit 'o difference. The oddsmakers (or more precisely the bettors who shape the odds) had no idea how good the Warriors death lineup would be in 2016.

Injuries, trades and unforseen improvements and declines which play out over the course of the season make it so that the league which finishes the season is substantially different than the one which existed when the odds were set. This is comparing two very different things. It's faulting or crediting a player for his performance against something which ceased to exist almost as soon as he began testing himself against it.

This argument also requires one to accept the premise that the odds accurately reflect the quality of the players and teams. This premise is highly suspect and requires a significant amount of evidentiary support before it should be taken seriously. If the odds do not accurately reflect relative quality, then the conclusion that diversion from the odds is meaningful, fails.

Put differently, the argument here is that what people predict is more meaningful than what players do. I humbly disagree.

[tmorgan]

OP, did you really just call LeBron’s style “ball dominant” in a comparison to Jordan? C’mon man. Yes, LeBron is essentially a large point guard in the playoffs, but unless you think every point guard is automatically “ball dominant”, your take is absurd. This whole thread is craziness, and I’m one that still takes Jordan over LeBron if I’m building a team to win championships. This silliness is not the reason.

Oh, and another thing: everyone’s numbers go down when they move down the totem pole on a new team. LeBron didn’t make Love or Bosh worse, they just accepted lesser roles. Do you think Jordan made Ron Harper terrible, too? He went from scoring 20 a game to scoring 8 a game on the Bulls. Jordan must be a terrible person to play with, eh? Again, c’mon man... think about what you are saying.

[NO-KG-AI]

OP, did you really just call LeBron’s style “ball dominant” in a comparison to Jordan? C’mon man. Yes, LeBron is essentially a large point guard in the playoffs, but unless you think every point guard is automatically “ball dominant”, your take is absurd. This whole thread is craziness, and I’m one that still takes Jordan over LeBron if I’m building a team to win championships. This silliness is not the reason.

Oh, and another thing: everyone’s numbers go down when they move down the totem pole on a new team. LeBron didn’t make Love or Bosh worse, they just accepted lesser roles. Do you think Jordan made Ron Harper terrible, too? He went from scoring 20 a game to scoring 8 a game on the Bulls. Jordan must be a terrible person to play with, eh? Again, c’mon man... think about what you are saying.

But while Ron Harper’s usage slid way down,hsi first full year with Jordan, the Bulls were first on offense and defense. LeBron’s never led a #1 offense, even with more talented offensive teammates like simultaneous Wade/Bosh, or Irving/Love...

That’s not full proof that Jordan is better, but it suggests that maybe more could have been squeezed our of Bosh/Love to raise the team’s total offensive level. Maybe not.

And LeBron was certainly a lot more reliant on being ball dominant than Jordan was. Is that up for debate?

[tmorgan]

OP, did you really just call LeBron’s style “ball dominant” in a comparison to Jordan? C’mon man. Yes, LeBron is essentially a large point guard in the playoffs, but unless you think every point guard is automatically “ball dominant”, your take is absurd. This whole thread is craziness, and I’m one that still takes Jordan over LeBron if I’m building a team to win championships. This silliness is not the reason.

Oh, and another thing: everyone’s numbers go down when they move down the totem pole on a new team. LeBron didn’t make Love or Bosh worse, they just accepted lesser roles. Do you think Jordan made Ron Harper terrible, too? He went from scoring 20 a game to scoring 8 a game on the Bulls. Jordan must be a terrible person to play with, eh? Again, c’mon man... think about what you are saying.

But while Ron Harper’s usage slid way down,hsi first full year with Jordan, the Bulls were first on offense and defense. LeBron’s never led a #1 offense, even with more talented offensive teammates like simultaneous Wade/Bosh, or Irving/Love...

That’s not full proof that Jordan is better, but it suggests that maybe more could have been squeezed our of Bosh/Love to raise the team’s total offensive level. Maybe not.

And LeBron was certainly a lot more reliant on being ball dominant than Jordan was. Is that up for debate?

I honestly don’t see how anything you’ve said here addresses either of the points I made.

1]. LeBron is a point guard, and that’s why he has the ball more. That’s not “ball dominant”, especially considering he averaged more assists and less shots than Jordan in both the regular season and playoffs. Unless that just means touches the ball more without shooting it himself, which is true, but not something bad as presented.

LeBron RS: 19.6 shots, 7.4 assists
LeBron PS: 20.7 shots, 7.2 assists
Jordan RS: 22.9 shots, 5.3 assists
Jordan PS: 25.1 shots, 5.7 assists

2] Regarding Harper, the point was that both Jordan and LeBron had teammates that had their stat totals plummet from previous highs. The OP insinuated otherwise. The stuff about #1 offense, while interesting, has nothing to do with what i said.

In short, while I believe the conclusion to be correct, the method used to reach that conclusion is ridiculous. Nothing more.

[sansterre]

OP, did you really just call LeBron’s style “ball dominant” in a comparison to Jordan? C’mon man. Yes, LeBron is essentially a large point guard in the playoffs, but unless you think every point guard is automatically “ball dominant”, your take is absurd. This whole thread is craziness, and I’m one that still takes Jordan over LeBron if I’m building a team to win championships. This silliness is not the reason.

Oh, and another thing: everyone’s numbers go down when they move down the totem pole on a new team. LeBron didn’t make Love or Bosh worse, they just accepted lesser roles. Do you think Jordan made Ron Harper terrible, too? He went from scoring 20 a game to scoring 8 a game on the Bulls. Jordan must be a terrible person to play with, eh? Again, c’mon man... think about what you are saying.

But while Ron Harper’s usage slid way down,hsi first full year with Jordan, the Bulls were first on offense and defense. LeBron’s never led a #1 offense, even with more talented offensive teammates like simultaneous Wade/Bosh, or Irving/Love...

That’s not full proof that Jordan is better, but it suggests that maybe more could have been squeezed our of Bosh/Love to raise the team’s total offensive level. Maybe not.

And LeBron was certainly a lot more reliant on being ball dominant than Jordan was. Is that up for debate?

I honestly don’t see how anything you’ve said here addresses either of the points I made.

1]. LeBron is a point guard, and that’s why he has the ball more. That’s not “ball dominant”, especially considering he averaged more assists and less shots than Jordan in both the regular season and playoffs. Unless that just means touches the ball more without shooting it himself, which is true, but not something bad as presented.

LeBron RS: 19.6 shots, 7.4 assists
LeBron PS: 20.7 shots, 7.2 assists
Jordan RS: 22.9 shots, 5.3 assists
Jordan PS: 25.1 shots, 5.7 assists

2] Regarding Harper, the point was that both Jordan and LeBron had teammates that had their stat totals plummet from previous highs. The OP insinuated otherwise. The stuff about #1 offense, while interesting, has nothing to do with what i said.

In short, while I believe the conclusion to be correct, the method used to reach that conclusion is ridiculous. Nothing more.

I'd quickly add that the 2017 Cavs had one of the very best playoff offenses ever (2nd on my all-time list, and 1st among teams that made the Finals. So in the regular season they may have been mailing it in some, but when the chips were down LeBron was 100% capable of leading teams to not just #1 offenses, but perhaps #1 all-time offenses. Either way, you can't look at the 2017 Cavs in the playoffs and reasonably conclude that LeBron simply couldn't lead top offenses.