Lebron's style prevents his team from running optimal, equal-opportunity offenses

[3ball]

PLAYOFFS

1) Heat (2011-2014) 109.8 ORTG (+4.0 over league average)
2) Bulls (1990-1993) 113.3 ORTG (+3.8 over league average)
3) Lakers (2008-11) 110.5 ORTG (+3.1 over league average)
4) Thunder (2011-14) 108.6 ORTG (+2.9 over league average)
5) Celtics (1984-1987) 113.2 ORTG (+2.8 over league average)

League-wide ORtg from 1990-1993 was 108.0, so the Bulls were 5.3 over league average, and #1 on your list..

Since your numbers are wrong, here's the year-over-year league-wide ORtg (last column):

http://www.basketball-reference.com/...NBA_stats.html


But your list means nothing anyway - Lebron's teams UNDERPERFORM given their talent - they lose despite having equal or greater talent, as they did in 2009, 2011, and 2014.

[Indian guy]

League-wide ORtg from 1990-1993 was 108.0, so the Bulls were 5.3 over league average, and #1 on your list..

It's for the playoffs only. I'm comparing playoff ORTG to league playoff average during those years. Miami comes out on top. Your whole argument is LeBron-ball falls apart against top-quality playoff competition. So why would I compare their playoffs averages to the regular season mean.

[Beastmode88]

It's for the playoffs only. I'm comparing playoff ORTG to league playoff average during those years. Miami comes out on top. Your whole argument is LeBron-ball falls apart against top-quality playoff competition. So why would I compare their playoffs averages to the regular season mean.

Speaking of playoffs, Lebron had the worst 3pt performance (23%) from someone who took 100+ shots in nba playoffs history last year.

[tpols]

Naturally, When Lebron is on the floor, his teammates are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime..

[3ball]

So I'm not sure what the point is of listing the top ORtg teams - the Thunder are on that list too - similar to Lebron's effect on a team, the Thunder players ALSO prevent their team from running an optimal, equal-opportunity offense - instead, they play a suboptimal, ball-dominant, 1-on-1 style and consequently underperform despite having ridiculous talent, just like Lebron's teams.. Similar to Lebron's teams, the Thunder lose to the teams that run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses (Spurs, Warriors, Mavs from a few yrs ago).

It's a KNOCK on a player anytime a star player loses despite having equal or better team talent (see 2009 2nd Round, 2011 Finals, and 2014 Finals, where the Heat lost with equal or better talent) - losing with better talent only happens when an opponent has sufficiently-better chemistry and brand of basketball - this never happened to MJ, because his style facilitated and allowed the best brand of basketball (equal-opportunity).. Otoh, it happens to Lebron all the time, because his low-assisted pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow a team to play an optimal equal opportunity offense.

The stats show that the Heat were worse with Wade and Lebron on the floor at the same time - this proves they underperformed compared to how they would play if Wade and Lebron played well together.

Basketball isn't an experiment to see how many stats you can get - basketball is about WINNING.. The very best wing players of all time MUST be able to get elite stats within optimal, equal-opportunity offenses, which proves their ability to play basketball at the highest team level - Lebron isn't capable of this - he can only get elite stats within suboptimal offenses that are based on him having PG-level time of possession from the SF position - this type of offense needs exorbitant levels of supporting talent to win (i.e. having a 10-time allstar and 20/10 player as your 3rd option, Bosh).
.

[Megabox!]

Poor LeBron fans man.

They gotta be pulling their hair out reading 3ball's posts.

I don't think anybody here ever reads his posts

[Replay32]

Lebron's role players are the same caliber as any other team - guys like JR Smith, Mosgov, Tristan Thompson and Shumpert are as good (even better) than the role players on other teams.. However, Lebron's low-assisted, pg-style from the sf position doesn't allow his teams to run optimal, equal-opportunity offenses.. This is why the story is always how Lebron's supporting cast underperformed AGAIN.

Due to Lebron's suboptimal, ball-dominant style, the offense of Lebron's teams are not built for teammates to make decisions - it's built for teammates to become ACCUSTOMED to Lebron making all the decisions.. When Lebron is on the floor, his teammates are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. Naturally, it's no surprise that when he leaves the floor, they collapse trying to become playmakers all of a sudden.. And again, when he's on the floor, they're just Lebron's tricks and therefore less of a threat to the defense than if they were playmakers themselves.. Multiple playmaker team > 1-playmaker team.

This is a stark contrast to the NBA's elite teams, who run more optimal, "equal opportunity" offenses that REQUIRE role players to make playmaking decisions at all times, while the star player is on the floor.. Guys like Diaw and Patty Mills don't just wait around for Duncan to toss them a dime - instead, Mills and Diaw are tasked with making plays just like Parker and Duncan are - ditto for guys like Shaun Livingston or Barnes.. So when Duncan or Curry leaves the floor, the role players just continue what they've been doing - making offensive decisions - they don't have to go from tricks waiting for Duncan toss them a dime, to playmakers all of sudden when Duncan goes to the bench - they can just continue being playmakers like they were when Duncan was on the floor.

And ditto for everyone that played in the triangle - the triangle was an equal-opportunity offense, as Phil Jackson describes here.. Every player got the chance to catch it on the post, turn-pivot, explore all the options and make a play - the lesser players like Kerr and Longley normally handed off, but they had the power to make a play if they chose.

Consequently, role players like Mills, Diaw, Kerr, and Longley play better and have a bigger impact than their more talented Cavs counterparts (shumpert, jr smith, mosgov, tristan thompson), who are just tricks waiting on Lebron to toss them a dime.. That brand of basketball has never won, and never will win..

Instead of having the capacity within his game to foster the growth of teammates, superior strategy, and an optimal brand of basketball for the team to play, Lebron can only go 2/4 by teaming up with unprecedented supporting talent (i.e. a 10-time all-star and 20/10 player as his 3rd option, Bosh).. Lebron is really a Karl Malone-level player that teamed up with Drexler and Mchale to go 2/4.

Otoh, when you have a guy leading the league in scoring by getting his points like the GIF above (off-ball) - this is highly optimal.. Playing off-ball and having a high assisted rate MAXIMIZES the play-making capacity of the team and maximizes teammates' opportunity to get an assist - MJ's and his goat scoring was a reservoir of playmaking and assist opportunities for teammates.. No wonder his role players never underperformed - his relentless off-ball game made it easier for teammates to playmake.. Here's more of MJ scoring off-ball on Michael Cooper:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...6&postcount=42

MJ's teams were eventually perceived as one of the NBA's "smart" teams that used the best strategy and had played the best brand of basketball, just like the Warriors, Mavericks and Spurs of today's game.. MJ's goat offensive sophistication enabled him to fit a goat scoring production seamlessly within an optimal, winning framework.

[COLOR="White"]In b4 tldr[/COLOR]

This guy.

[Indian guy]

It's for the playoffs only. I'm comparing playoff ORTG to league playoff average during those years. Miami comes out on top. Your whole argument is LeBron-ball falls apart against top-quality playoff competition. So why would I compare their playoffs averages to the regular season mean.

Of course, a more accurate representation of true offensive impact would be seeing what each team's series ORTG was against each opponent(their RS DRTG) they faced in the playoffs. That way, we're factoring in strength of opponent's defense. Doing that, this is what we get....

PLAYOFFS

Bulls (1990-1993) +8.9
Heat (2011-2014) +8.5
Celtics (1984-87) +6.6
Lakers (2008-11) +6.1

As far as wings(SG/SF) go in NBA history, LeBron's only superior in terms of offensive impact is MJ.

[Hey Yo]

I missed this genius post.. You're a smart man my friend.

Indeed, MJ led the league in scoring within an equal opportunity offense.. Lebron barely lead the league in scoring in a Lebron-only offense, let alone an equal opportunity one.

Agree with your ALT often?

[3ball]

PLAYOFFS

1) Heat (2011-2014) 109.8 ORTG (+4.0 over league average)
2) Bulls (1990-1993) 113.3 ORTG (+3.8 over league average)
3) Lakers (2008-11) 110.5 ORTG (+3.1 over league average)
4) Thunder (2011-14) 108.6 ORTG (+2.9 over league average)
5) Celtics (1984-1987) 113.2 ORTG (+2.8 over league average)

No one is arguing Lebron's teams had bad ORtg's - the Heat's ORtg is right there with the Thunder.. But this thread is discusses how Lebron's style affects chemistry and brand of basketball - THAT'S what allowed equal or less-talented opponents to upset his teams.. Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.

Lebron's style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity), which makes them susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball.

Lebron lost 3 times with equal or greater talent - the 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals and 2014 Finals.. But it never happened to MJ, because his style allowed his teams to play an optimal brand of basketball - opponents could never upset the Bulls by offsetting a talent disadvantage with a better brand of basketball.. That's why MJ went 6/6 and never underachieved, while Lebron is 2/6 with several upsets/underachievements on his record.

[Young X]

No one is arguing Lebron's teams had bad ORtg's - the Heat's sheer talent allowed them to produce offensively.. This thread is discusses how Lebron's style affects chemistry and brand of basketball - THAT'S what allowed equal or less-talented opponents to upset his teams.. Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.

If Lebron "affected chemistry and brand of basketball" that much then his teams shouldn't have been that successful offensively.

[Kblaze8855]

Considering that only maybe 6 or 7 people of thousands have accomplished anything he has not while he has at least 4 or 5 years left to contend I'm not sure anything needs changing.

It's kind of like when people criticize Kobe's approach when he's won five rings and was the best player for two of them. You can only talk so much shit about people so absurdly accomplished. You might as well say all but 5 people ever should be hated on incessantly.

He's won a ring or made the finals 5 years in a row. Two of his finals teams are among the least talented rosters to ever play a finals game.

He should have three rings at 30 instead of two. No one rational can really make an argument for anything worse than that. If you were great enough that your greatest criticism is that you haven't already surpassed the legacy of all but 3-4 people in the history of the game when you're 30.....you can safely tune out most any criticism.

I mean..... 3 people are really out of reach accomplishment wise at this point. Jordan, Kareem, and Bill russell.

Short of that everyone is comfortably inside a reasonable projection of where he's going to end up in the eyes of history.

Being Charles Barkley would be an immense success for even a Hall of Fame caliber talent. This dudes career is wiping the floor with the accomplishments and legacy of guys who have been mythic almost god-like figures in the game for five decades.

And he has years to add to it.
.
He's doing ok without whatever you think it is that is so greatly holding him and his team's back.

[3ball]

If Lebron "affected chemistry and brand of basketball" that much then his teams shouldn't have been that successful offensively.

No one is arguing whether Lebron's teams had good offenses or not - this thread is about how Lebron's style affects his team's chemistry and brand of basketball - THAT'S what allowed equal or less-talented opponents to upset his teams - the upsets is a large reason why he's 2/6.

Superior chemistry and brand of basketball is what allows ANY team to overcome a stalemate or disadvantage in talent.. In Lebron's case, his style prevents his team from playing an optimal brand of basketball (equal-opportunity), which makes them susceptible to getting upset by equal or less-talented teams that CAN play equal-opportunity and a superior brand of basketball.

Lebron lost 3 times with equal or greater talent - the 2009 ECSF, 2011 Finals and 2014 Finals.. But it never happened to MJ, because his style allowed his teams to play an optimal brand of basketball - [COLOR="Navy"]opponents could never upset the Bulls by offsetting a talent disadvantage with a better brand of basketball[/COLOR].. That's why MJ went 6/6 and never underachieved, while Lebron is 2/6 with several upsets/underachievements on his record.

[poido123]

Considering that only maybe 6 or 7 people of thousands have accomplished anything he has not while he has at least 4 or 5 years left to contend I'm not sure anything needs changing.

It's kind of like when people criticize Kobe's approach when he's won five rings and was the best player for two of them. You can only talk so much shit about people so absurdly accomplished. You might as well say all but 5 people ever should be hated on incessantly.

He's won a ring or made the finals 5 years in a row. Two of his finals teams are among the least talented rosters to ever play a finals game.

He should have three rings at 30 instead of two. No one rational can really make an argument for anything worse than that. If you were great enough that your greatest criticism is that you haven't already surpassed the legacy of all but 3-4 people in the history of the game when you're 30.....you can safely tune out most any criticism.

I mean..... 3 people are really out of reach accomplishment wise at this point. Jordan, Kareem, and Bill russell.

Short of that everyone is comfortably inside a reasonable projection of where he's going to end up in the eyes of history.

Being Charles Barkley would be an immense success for even a Hall of Fame caliber talent. This dudes career is wiping the floor with the accomplishments and legacy of guys who have been mythic almost god-like figures in the game for five decades.

And he has years to add to it.
.
He's doing ok without whatever you think it is that is so greatly holding him and his team's back.

Common sense. Good post

[Bosnian Sajo]

He's won a ring or made the finals 5 years in a row. Two of his finals teams are among the least talented rosters to ever play a finals game.

Are you only talking about the past 5 finals appearances? I understand his 07 team was weak, but his teams these past 5 years have been regularly top 3 in the NBA, what are you talking about?