The LeBron Thread 2021 Off-Season Edition

[Greyhound]

No team was beating teh nets anyway so probably better to lose early and get some rest

When I said that the day LeBron got hurt, people laughed at the thought.

[nzahir]

Man it sucks that the championship may be really up for grabs if Harden is out for some time or most/all of post season

We could have actually won it all if healthy, but it is what it is

I picked MIL in 7 for a few reasons

1) I felt like nobody could guard Giannis for BKN and they should get a lot of easy baskets

2) They have some decent defenders to throw at their big 3

3) Some bias for wanting BKN to lose

4) I didn’t know if I could trust BKN to stay healthy

Harden was rushed back and now there is more physical pressure on KD, Kyrie and Blake...can they even hold up?

Hoping Mavs really win tomorrow and the bucks win this series

Some new blood would be nice for a change and a fitting end to this bizzare, awful season

[McBubbles]

Kinda crazy losing to the nets would have been worse for Lebrons rep but it’s the truth.

Nba, where first round exits > finals losses.



Also gimme healthy Davis over Lilly as a partner for lebron. He’s perfect for lebron. Obviously Lilly is the perfect offensive partner but Davis gives them the ability to be elite on both sides.

It's pretty idiot logic tbh. Losing in the finals should mean you were the 2nd best team every year you didn't win. In other words you only ever lost to the best. Instead losing to Phoenix and getting bounced out of the first round is now more legacy preserving than actually winning the damn series, winning the 2nd round, conference finals and only just falling short to the eventual champions.

is a logic that sometimes rewards losing or not trying and prefers " not losing" more than trying

if you miss the playoffs or lose early people will generally understand the star player didnt have a good enough cast to compete and not give it too much Wright

if he defies expectations and carries those teams far, then loses in finals against much stronger teams then he is criticized for being a finals loser

jordan won a ring at 34 years old, retired and dont play the next 2 years, fans swear he would have kept winning

lebron won a ring at 35, lost at 36 and now people way his legacy is ruined, has he just not played or got injured the full season these question wouldnt come and people would be saying he would have won if healthy

this obsession with finals record and punishing losses (arbitrarily) more than rewarding victories is anti competitive

it means is better to not try and not fail than to try and lose, ironically going against jordan own motto ("i have won because all the times i tried and failed before that") is literally what sports SHOULDNT be about

people who care more about finals record than losing early literally prefer not trying than trying and failing that is weak ass **** lol

tldr: if whatever criticism you have to a player would be LESS had he lost more or tried less or didnt play then that criticism is Badly thought out, it ironically is loss rewarding

thinking that only rings matter inherently rewards losing and not trying

caring more about how many times a player played bad that how many they played well inherently is anti winning too

if a player had 10 mvp years then retires and another has 10 mvp years, then get a old and injured but contonues being a winming team contributor in a smaller role then the secomd player had the better carrer

focusing on the averages, who has the better prime as only thingh that matters or caring too much about about who has the less black marks in his resume is missing the forest for the threes

The page just refreshed and deleted my response

Yeah I agree on the dumb logic and use an Olympic medal analogy to illustrate how silly their thinking is. If rings are gold and Finals losses / CF trophy's are silver, Winning six gold medals (MJ) is worse than winning six gold medals and 4 silver medals (Kareem). Winning 4 gold medals and 2 silver medals (Shaq) is worse than winning 4 gold medals and 6 silver medals ( LeBron).

Also, you can't say that "LeBron wouldn't have as many Finals appearances if he was out West" as a criticism and then also say "LeBron has a bad finals record" as a criticism. Without realising it, you're basically saying "Relative to his peers it is easier for LeBron to rack up a bad finals record, but I don't care". Or even "LeBron's career would have been better if he was drafted in the West, but I don't care."

Also x2, Magic Johnson's conference was as weak as LeBron's East and Magic had even better teammates than Lebron did, yet Magic's 9 finals are used as evidence as dominance whilst LeBron's are used as evidence of him being "lucky".

[falcolombardi]

It's pretty idiot logic tbh. Losing in the finals should mean you were the 2nd best team every year you didn't win. In other words you only ever lost to the best. Instead losing to Phoenix and getting bounced out of the first round is now more legacy preserving than actually winning the damn series, winning the 2nd round, conference finals and only just falling short to the eventual champions.

is a logic that sometimes rewards losing or not trying and prefers " not losing" more than trying

if you miss the playoffs or lose early people will generally understand the star player didnt have a good enough cast to compete and not give it too much Wright

if he defies expectations and carries those teams far, then loses in finals against much stronger teams then he is criticized for being a finals loser

jordan won a ring at 34 years old, retired and dont play the next 2 years, fans swear he would have kept winning

lebron won a ring at 35, lost at 36 and now people way his legacy is ruined, has he just not played or got injured the full season these question wouldnt come and people would be saying he would have won if healthy

this obsession with finals record and punishing losses (arbitrarily) more than rewarding victories is anti competitive

it means is better to not try and not fail than to try and lose, ironically going against jordan own motto ("i have won because all the times i tried and failed before that") is literally what sports SHOULDNT be about

people who care more about finals record than losing early literally prefer not trying than trying and failing that is weak ass **** lol

tldr: if whatever criticism you have to a player would be LESS had he lost more or tried less or didnt play then that criticism is Badly thought out, it ironically is loss rewarding

thinking that only rings matter inherently rewards losing and not trying

caring more about how many times a player played bad that how many they played well inherently is anti winning too

if a player had 10 mvp years then retires and another has 10 mvp years, then get a old and injured but contonues being a winming team contributor in a smaller role then the secomd player had the better carrer

focusing on the averages, who has the better prime as only thingh that matters or caring too much about about who has the less black marks in his resume is missing the forest for the threes

The page just refreshed and deleted my response

Yeah I agree on the dumb logic and use an Olympic medal analogy to illustrate how silly their thinking is. If rings are gold and Finals losses / CF trophy's are silver, Winning six gold medals (MJ) is worse than winning six gold medals and 4 silver medals (Kareem). Winning 4 gold medals and 2 silver medals (Shaq) is worse than winning 4 gold medals and 6 silver medals ( LeBron).

Also, you can't say that "LeBron wouldn't have as many Finals appearances if he was out West" as a criticism and then also say "LeBron has a bad finals record" as a criticism. Without realising it, you're basically saying "Relative to his peers it is easier for LeBron to rack up a bad finals record, but I don't care". Or even "LeBron's career would have been better if he was drafted in the West, but I don't care."

Also x2, Magic Johnson's conference was as weak as LeBron's East and Magic had even better teammates than Lebron did, yet Magic's 9 finals are used as evidence as dominance whilst LeBron's are used as evidence of him being "lucky".

yeah, that too, lebron is the only top 10 players who is not allowed to have star teammates

and the ones he had become overated cause they were high ppg scorers (irving, love, post injury wade) which people by default overrate

[Ursusamericanus]

It's like we all forgot that this team started 21-6 before the first AD injury. Then AD missed 31 games, LeBron 27, Gasol 20 and Schroder 11 and they went 21-24 in those games. But it was a disaster waiting to happen. Just 71 days rest between 2 seasons is just not done, especially if it is a season that technically lasted 360 days. The injuries were just a consequence of that. Because of that, other than an aging LeBron, I don't directly see roster problems. Could be better of course, but the long summer is going to do wonders for this hobbling team.

Fully agree - I have a great feeling about 2021-2022.

[Heej]

Respect for Goober switching up his trolling ways and actually getting people to engage in the Curry troll topic. It's the type of evolution I like to see

[falcolombardi]

It's like we all forgot that this team started 21-6 before the first AD injury. Then AD missed 31 games, LeBron 27, Gasol 20 and Schroder 11 and they went 21-24 in those games. But it was a disaster waiting to happen. Just 71 days rest between 2 seasons is just not done, especially if it is a season that technically lasted 360 days. The injuries were just a consequence of that. Because of that, other than an aging LeBron, I don't directly see roster problems. Could be better of course, but the long summer is going to do wonders for this hobbling team.

Fully agree - I have a great feeling about 2021-2022.

it doesnt mean to be conformist on current roster, it worked in 2020 when davis or morris of lebron were all unusually good shooting jumpers

as long as the core remains the same the defense will be strong, aquiring more shooters to sprinkle in the lineups will free lebron amd davis offensive game so much more

[Mos_Heat]

Hard to be optimistic after how Brooklyn's looked

[Mos_Heat]

It's crazy that some Lakers fans were against trading Kuzma for Bogdan

[McBubbles]

is a logic that sometimes rewards losing or not trying and prefers " not losing" more than trying

if you miss the playoffs or lose early people will generally understand the star player didnt have a good enough cast to compete and not give it too much Wright

if he defies expectations and carries those teams far, then loses in finals against much stronger teams then he is criticized for being a finals loser

jordan won a ring at 34 years old, retired and dont play the next 2 years, fans swear he would have kept winning

lebron won a ring at 35, lost at 36 and now people way his legacy is ruined, has he just not played or got injured the full season these question wouldnt come and people would be saying he would have won if healthy

this obsession with finals record and punishing losses (arbitrarily) more than rewarding victories is anti competitive

it means is better to not try and not fail than to try and lose, ironically going against jordan own motto ("i have won because all the times i tried and failed before that") is literally what sports SHOULDNT be about

people who care more about finals record than losing early literally prefer not trying than trying and failing that is weak ass **** lol

tldr: if whatever criticism you have to a player would be LESS had he lost more or tried less or didnt play then that criticism is Badly thought out, it ironically is loss rewarding

thinking that only rings matter inherently rewards losing and not trying

caring more about how many times a player played bad that how many they played well inherently is anti winning too

if a player had 10 mvp years then retires and another has 10 mvp years, then get a old and injured but contonues being a winming team contributor in a smaller role then the secomd player had the better carrer

focusing on the averages, who has the better prime as only thingh that matters or caring too much about about who has the less black marks in his resume is missing the forest for the threes

The page just refreshed and deleted my response

Yeah I agree on the dumb logic and use an Olympic medal analogy to illustrate how silly their thinking is. If rings are gold and Finals losses / CF trophy's are silver, Winning six gold medals (MJ) is worse than winning six gold medals and 4 silver medals (Kareem). Winning 4 gold medals and 2 silver medals (Shaq) is worse than winning 4 gold medals and 6 silver medals ( LeBron).

Also, you can't say that "LeBron wouldn't have as many Finals appearances if he was out West" as a criticism and then also say "LeBron has a bad finals record" as a criticism. Without realising it, you're basically saying "Relative to his peers it is easier for LeBron to rack up a bad finals record, but I don't care". Or even "LeBron's career would have been better if he was drafted in the West, but I don't care."

Also x2, Magic Johnson's conference was as weak as LeBron's East and Magic had even better teammates than Lebron did, yet Magic's 9 finals are used as evidence as dominance whilst LeBron's are used as evidence of him being "lucky".

yeah, that too, lebron is the only top 10 players who is not allowed to have star teammates

and the ones he had become overated cause they were high ppg scorers (irving, love, post injury wade) which people by default overrate

Warning, rant incoming.

I don't know which thread it was in but today I saw someone say that LeBron's 2016 championship wasn't impressive because "It's not like he had a garbage supporting cast, Lebron has never won a championship with a teammate averaging less than 20ppg in the regular season" Requiring good teammates to beat a 73-9 team is now a criticism.

And I think I mentioned it before but because there is a MASSIVE bias towards offence as you pointed out, a player surrounded by 4 good offensive players and equally bad defensive players is seen as having a stacked supporting cast, but a player surrounded by 4 good defensive players and equally bad offensive players is seen as having a trash supporting cast, so the best offensive player on a defensive minded team will get all the credit for that teams success.

Winning with the offensive teammates = You did what you supposed to do and losing = you underachieved.

Winning with the defensive teammates = You carried an underdog team to a victory, and losing = you were a valiant underdog that deserves credit for trying.

Zeke, 01 Iverson and 2011 Rose are good examples of this. Conversely, the best defensive player, on an offensively minded team will get next to no credit, like Shawn Marion. Hell, even on a team that is dominant on both offence and defence, the best defensive player will get **** all credit because people will only focus on offence. To this day millions of basketball fans think Draymond was the 3rd most important player on those Warriors teams behind Klay and the 4th most important when KD arrived -_-

That's also the reason why despite the fact a lot LeBron's finals losses came on the end of bad defence, LeBron-Ball offence is the criticism that comes after a loss. They cannot even fathom that defence can be responsible for a victory or a loss

[falcolombardi]

The page just refreshed and deleted my response

Yeah I agree on the dumb logic and use an Olympic medal analogy to illustrate how silly their thinking is. If rings are gold and Finals losses / CF trophy's are silver, Winning six gold medals (MJ) is worse than winning six gold medals and 4 silver medals (Kareem). Winning 4 gold medals and 2 silver medals (Shaq) is worse than winning 4 gold medals and 6 silver medals ( LeBron).

Also, you can't say that "LeBron wouldn't have as many Finals appearances if he was out West" as a criticism and then also say "LeBron has a bad finals record" as a criticism. Without realising it, you're basically saying "Relative to his peers it is easier for LeBron to rack up a bad finals record, but I don't care". Or even "LeBron's career would have been better if he was drafted in the West, but I don't care."

Also x2, Magic Johnson's conference was as weak as LeBron's East and Magic had even better teammates than Lebron did, yet Magic's 9 finals are used as evidence as dominance whilst LeBron's are used as evidence of him being "lucky".

yeah, that too, lebron is the only top 10 players who is not allowed to have star teammates

and the ones he had become overated cause they were high ppg scorers (irving, love, post injury wade) which people by default overrate

Warning, rant incoming.

I don't know which thread it was in but today I saw someone say that LeBron's 2016 championship wasn't impressive because "It's not like he had a garbage supporting cast, Lebron has never won a championship with a teammate averaging less than 20ppg in the regular season" Requiring good teammates to beat a 73-9 team is now a criticism.

And I think I mentioned it before but because there is a MASSIVE bias towards offence as you pointed out, a player surrounded by 4 good offensive players and equally bad defensive players is seen as having a stacked supporting cast, but a player surrounded by 4 good defensive players and equally bad offensive players is seen as having a trash supporting cast, so the best offensive player on a defensive minded team will get all the credit for that teams success.

Winning with the offensive teammates = You did what you supposed to do and losing = you underachieved.

Winning with the defensive teammates = You carried an underdog team to a victory, and losing = you were a valiant underdog that deserves credit for trying.

Zeke, 01 Iverson and 2011 Rose are good examples of this. Conversely, the best defensive player, on an offensively minded team will get next to no credit, like Shawn Marion. Hell, even on a team that is dominant on both offence and defence, the best defensive player will get **** all credit because people will only focus on offence. To this day millions of basketball fans think Draymond was the 3rd most important player on those Warriors teams behind Klay and the 4th most important when KD arrived -_-

That's also the reason why despite the fact a lot LeBron's finals losses came on the end of bad defence, LeBron-Ball offence is the criticism that comes after a loss. They cannot even fathom that defence can be responsible for a victory or a loss

yeah, lebron was on the wrong side of a lot of biases and faulty logical fllacies

the obsession with scorers as the only thingh that makes a team stacked or not

being too good for his own good when taking bad teams to finals instead of losing earlier (people will criticize more a finals loss than a first or second round one)

changing teams in free agency instead of having the luxury of a stacked team in the franchise that drafted him, other greats had stacked teams or didnt have the luxury of full free agency so their loyalty was not so tested. this is basically using off court stuff to evaluate on court stuff.
under this logic curry 2017 ring is more meritory than lebron 2016 ring or kawhi 2019

playing against great teams that dont LOOK stacked (2014 spurs, 2009 orlando) and having flawed rosters that LOOK stacked at first glance cause names (2021 lakers and 2014 heat)

the ongoing and demostrable false narrative of unclutchness that has became a self perpetuating myth

the myth he is not a great defender or the defensive overvaluing of other perimeter defenders (like kobe and jordan), he probably deserved a dpoy in 2013 more then jordan deserved one in 1988 but people used to value guard defense and stealing balls way too highly

the fact he is playing in the Internet era and being looked for any flaw possible by people who grew up as fans of older greats, while said older greats are old enough thag their grayness is starting to become mythical and their failures ignored. who brings up bird common playoff strugles, magic super weak conferences or jordan beatdowns in first and second rounds ?

the teams he destroys become retroactively trash, like if 48 win cavs sweep the 60 win raptors in 2018 is irrelevant but when 65 win bulls beat the 50 win knicks in 7 is a huge achievement, etc
hell. i have seen people in pc board say that spurs are only seen as stacked because they kicked lebron ass so is not like they were that good, when by actual level of play (rather than listing names)they were all time great (made top 10 in sansterre list for example)

he generally is judged on a different Curve that other top 10 players, wilt and hakeem only won twice, kareem was only the clear best player on 2 rings, jordan bulls almost always were the more stacked team in the 90's

if lebron wins a ring as 2nd option or betting favorite they are downvalued, lebron only is credited when winning as underdog,even when his teams are the overdog precisely because of him.

if his teams are trash without him it is handwave cause "they are constructed around lebron non portable game or somethingh", but other suppisedly more portable players teams thriving without them is handwave.

people question the ceiling of lebron ball when it literally was as effective at its peak as durant warriors offense (the difference between both teams in 2017 was defense, not offense) for stylistic reasons

the 4 titles he won look like too little until you realize that he played 9 seasons in weak teams (2003-2010, 2018,2019) and one weak post season team (2015) so 8 strong teams only (11-14, 16-17, 20, 21) and one was versus 2017 warriors and another was 2021 injured davis year by an older injured lebron (so 7 seasons where he was reasonable healthy/healthy team and had a legit supporting cast)

etc

[nzahir]

It's crazy that some Lakers fans were against trading Kuzma for Bogdan

Legit perfect for what we needed...

[MisterHibachi]

So jealous of these teams who can reliably hit open 3s.

[Fadeaway_J]

It's crazy that some Lakers fans were against trading Kuzma for Bogdan

Was that really an option?

I saw that rumour and thought Vlade must have been trying to get fired.

[Mos_Heat]

It's crazy that some Lakers fans were against trading Kuzma for Bogdan

Was that really an option?

I saw that rumour and thought Vlade must have been trying to get fired.

Hard to say how real it was, but in the end he left for nothing so...

[JVL]

Doubt Kuzma ever had any real relevant trade value.

[yoyoboy]

Post LeBron I’m for sure converting to a Luka fan. This dude is just something else.

[McBubbles]

yeah, that too, lebron is the only top 10 players who is not allowed to have star teammates

and the ones he had become overated cause they were high ppg scorers (irving, love, post injury wade) which people by default overrate

Warning, rant incoming.

I don't know which thread it was in but today I saw someone say that LeBron's 2016 championship wasn't impressive because "It's not like he had a garbage supporting cast, Lebron has never won a championship with a teammate averaging less than 20ppg in the regular season" Requiring good teammates to beat a 73-9 team is now a criticism.

And I think I mentioned it before but because there is a MASSIVE bias towards offence as you pointed out, a player surrounded by 4 good offensive players and equally bad defensive players is seen as having a stacked supporting cast, but a player surrounded by 4 good defensive players and equally bad offensive players is seen as having a trash supporting cast, so the best offensive player on a defensive minded team will get all the credit for that teams success.

Winning with the offensive teammates = You did what you supposed to do and losing = you underachieved.

Winning with the defensive teammates = You carried an underdog team to a victory, and losing = you were a valiant underdog that deserves credit for trying.

Zeke, 01 Iverson and 2011 Rose are good examples of this. Conversely, the best defensive player, on an offensively minded team will get next to no credit, like Shawn Marion. Hell, even on a team that is dominant on both offence and defence, the best defensive player will get **** all credit because people will only focus on offence. To this day millions of basketball fans think Draymond was the 3rd most important player on those Warriors teams behind Klay and the 4th most important when KD arrived -_-

That's also the reason why despite the fact a lot LeBron's finals losses came on the end of bad defence, LeBron-Ball offence is the criticism that comes after a loss. They cannot even fathom that defence can be responsible for a victory or a loss

yeah, lebron was on the wrong side of a lot of biases and faulty logical fllacies

the obsession with scorers as the only thingh that makes a team stacked or not

being too good for his own good when taking bad teams to finals instead of losing earlier (people will criticize more a finals loss than a first or second round one)

changing teams in free agency instead of having the luxury of a stacked team in the franchise that drafted him, other greats had stacked teams or didnt have the luxury of full free agency so their loyalty was not so tested. this is basically using off court stuff to evaluate on court stuff.
under this logic curry 2017 ring is more meritory than lebron 2016 ring or kawhi 2019

playing against great teams that dont LOOK stacked (2014 spurs, 2009 orlando) and having flawed rosters that LOOK stacked at first glance cause names (2021 lakers and 2014 heat)

the ongoing and demostrable false narrative of unclutchness that has became a self perpetuating myth

the myth he is not a great defender or the defensive overvaluing of other perimeter defenders (like kobe and jordan), he probably deserved a dpoy in 2013 more then jordan deserved one in 1988 but people used to value guard defense and stealing balls way too highly

the fact he is playing in the Internet era and being looked for any flaw possible by people who grew up as fans of older greats, while said older greats are old enough thag their grayness is starting to become mythical and their failures ignored. who brings up bird common playoff strugles, magic super weak conferences or jordan beatdowns in first and second rounds ?

the teams he destroys become retroactively trash, like if 48 win cavs sweep the 60 win raptors in 2018 is irrelevant but when 65 win bulls beat the 50 win knicks in 7 is a huge achievement, etc
hell. i have seen people in pc board say that spurs are only seen as stacked because they kicked lebron ass so is not like they were that good, when by actual level of play (rather than listing names)they were all time great (made top 10 in sansterre list for example)

he generally is judged on a different Curve that other top 10 players, wilt and hakeem only won twice, kareem was only the clear best player on 2 rings, jordan bulls almost always were the more stacked team in the 90's

if lebron wins a ring as 2nd option or betting favorite they are downvalued, lebron only is credited when winning as underdog,even when his teams are the overdog precisely because of him.

if his teams are trash without him it is handwave cause "they are constructed around lebron non portable game or somethingh", but other suppisedly more portable players teams thriving without them is handwave.

people question the ceiling of lebron ball when it literally was as effective at its peak as durant warriors offense (the difference between both teams in 2017 was defense, not offense) for stylistic reasons

the 4 titles he won look like too little until you realize that he played 9 seasons in weak teams (2003-2010, 2018,2019) and one weak post season team (2015) so 8 strong teams only (11-14, 16-17, 20, 21) and one was versus 2017 warriors and another was 2021 injured davis year by an older injured lebron (so 7 seasons where he was reasonable healthy/healthy team and had a legit supporting cast)

etc

You summed up almost every single dumb criticism levied at Lebron succinctly in one post. That was very cathartic to read and I agree with every word

[GSP]

It's crazy that some Lakers fans were against trading Kuzma for Bogdan

Legit perfect for what we needed...

His defense is alot better than I thought. Sactown has some legit players that are rotting in that horrible franchise.

[homecourtloss]

The page just refreshed and deleted my response

Yeah I agree on the dumb logic and use an Olympic medal analogy to illustrate how silly their thinking is. If rings are gold and Finals losses / CF trophy's are silver, Winning six gold medals (MJ) is worse than winning six gold medals and 4 silver medals (Kareem). Winning 4 gold medals and 2 silver medals (Shaq) is worse than winning 4 gold medals and 6 silver medals ( LeBron).

Also, you can't say that "LeBron wouldn't have as many Finals appearances if he was out West" as a criticism and then also say "LeBron has a bad finals record" as a criticism. Without realising it, you're basically saying "Relative to his peers it is easier for LeBron to rack up a bad finals record, but I don't care". Or even "LeBron's career would have been better if he was drafted in the West, but I don't care."

Also x2, Magic Johnson's conference was as weak as LeBron's East and Magic had even better teammates than Lebron did, yet Magic's 9 finals are used as evidence as dominance whilst LeBron's are used as evidence of him being "lucky".

yeah, that too, lebron is the only top 10 players who is not allowed to have star teammates

and the ones he had become overated cause they were high ppg scorers (irving, love, post injury wade) which people by default overrate

Warning, rant incoming.

I don't know which thread it was in but today I saw someone say that LeBron's 2016 championship wasn't impressive because "It's not like he had a garbage supporting cast, Lebron has never won a championship with a teammate averaging less than 20ppg in the regular season" Requiring good teammates to beat a 73-9 team is now a criticism.

And I think I mentioned it before but because there is a MASSIVE bias towards offence as you pointed out, a player surrounded by 4 good offensive players and equally bad defensive players is seen as having a stacked supporting cast, but a player surrounded by 4 good defensive players and equally bad offensive players is seen as having a trash supporting cast, so the best offensive player on a defensive minded team will get all the credit for that teams success.

Winning with the offensive teammates = You did what you supposed to do and losing = you underachieved.

Winning with the defensive teammates = You carried an underdog team to a victory, and losing = you were a valiant underdog that deserves credit for trying.

Zeke, 01 Iverson and 2011 Rose are good examples of this. Conversely, the best defensive player, on an offensively minded team will get next to no credit, like Shawn Marion. Hell, even on a team that is dominant on both offence and defence, the best defensive player will get **** all credit because people will only focus on offence. To this day millions of basketball fans think Draymond was the 3rd most important player on those Warriors teams behind Klay and the 4th most important when KD arrived -_-

That's also the reason why despite the fact a lot LeBron's finals losses came on the end of bad defence, LeBron-Ball offence is the criticism that comes after a loss. They cannot even fathom that defence can be responsible for a victory or a loss

All these anti-LeBron screeds are the same—they stem from a hatred of James and they pick up any narrative that they can regardless of how nonsensical it is. Cavs in 2015, 2016, and 2017 were decent in the regular season on offense but fell apart defensively without James. It had nothing to do with “LeBron ball.” Last year, Rondo + AD in the playoffs played well and were a NET positive without Lebron on court, pretty much the only time he’s had that luxury. We saw what happened—4-1, 4-1, 4-1, and should have been 4-1 if not for some trash play by the usual suspects.