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

[Lebron23]

You sound like a parrot aka a broken record. I know you are just posting using an alternate account.

Lebron is going to win his 3rd finals MVP, and 5th MVP Award next season. Same numbers of MVP as Jordan.

[Kblaze8855]

I didn't think I needed to explain the Cavs recent situation. Of course the roster itself isn't untalented. But the players on the court in the finals were about as untalented a group of people you will ever see there.

[dankok8]

That's why the 2013 and 2014 Heat have the highest eFG% of any teams in history...

[Indian guy]

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

It's just so to see him keep repeating the same garbage over and over when all facts not only have Miami as one of the best offenses in the league during their 4 year run, but they also match-up very well historically compared to some other teams led by all-time greats. Nothing more needs to be said. 3ball's entire shtick has been thoroughly exposed with facts, but I think in his mind, he thinks if he gets the last word, he has actually proven something or 'won' the argument. But that won't change reality.

[3ball]

The title of this thread explains why Lebron's teams have lost as the favorite many times, and have been upset by teams with less or equal talent - this thread explains why Lebron's teams are always susceptible to being upset.

Losing with equal or better talent only happens when the opponent has better chemistry and brand of basketball - those are the only reasons upsets happen in 7 game series.. It happens to lebron a lot because his ball-dominance prevents his teams from playing optimal (equal opportunity), thus opening up the door for opponents to play more optimal and offset any talent disadvantage.

Otoh, MJ never lost with the Bulls when he had equal or better talent.. Ever.. His teams didn't have this susceptibility to being upset like Lebron's teams.

[NZStreetBaller]

3ball is annoyinf and repetitive but you cant actually argue with what he is saying..... he makes point after point after point. Lebrons game does favour his stat sheet like crazy. Wilt also did the same. Massive awesome stats all round. But only two championships. And we all know that great teamwork wins titles and lebron just doesnt have that. The only reason he passes is for the sake of his assist stat.

[warriorfan]

Some play for stats...

Others play for rings...

[Young X]

That's why the 2013 and 2014 Heat have the highest eFG% of any teams in history...

Was just about to bring this up. For as much as this dude talks about Bron hurting his teams offensively, they sure do post great results on that end.

Miami in 2014 had a ridiculous 57.0 eFG% with Bron on the court. You don't get those kind of results with someone who "hurts" his teams.

[Hey Yo]

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.

If that's the case, then how was Miami able to overcome the favored Thunder 4 games to 1 in 2012?

How were they able to overcome losing HC advantage against the Spurs in 2013? Games 3-4-5 were played in SA with SA up 3-2 going into game 6? You realize how hard it is to win in SA in the postseason?

[3ball]

I didn't think I needed to explain the Cavs recent situation. the players on the court in the finals were about as untalented a group of people you will ever see there.

The Cavs supporting cast was fine - Mosgov was well above-average for a Finals center... Tristan Thompson was above-average for a PF.. JR Smith underperformed, but he was great in the Atlanta series (18/8).. Delladova was like Paxson or something.

The Mavs supporting cast in 2011 wasn't much better, except they played a vastly superior brand of basketball.. Unfortunately, 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 (as we saw in 2011).
.

[warriorfan]

That's why the 2013 and 2014 Heat have the highest eFG% of any teams in history...

And this has nothing to do with LeBron James sucking the life out of the already historically weak Eastern Conference with his collusion?

[3ball]

If that's the case, then how was Miami able to overcome the favored Thunder 4 games to 1 in 2012?

the 2012 Finals makes my point - the thunder are one of the few teams that had a worse brand of basketball than the heat.... naturally they lost, despite probably having a slight talent advantage.

that's how huge chemistry and brand of basketball is - the players that facilitate it (off-ball players with low time-of-possession) are much better players and more valuable that those that can't (for example, a low-assisted, pg-style playing sf).

How were they able to overcome losing HC advantage against the Spurs in 2013?

Silly question.. Ray Allen crushed SA's soul... It happens, albiet rarely... It happened to me in hs too actually...

[HurricaneKid]

It's just so to see him keep repeating the same garbage over and over when all facts not only have Miami as one of the best offenses in the league during their 4 year run, but they also match-up very well historically compared to some other teams led by all-time greats. Nothing more needs to be said. 3ball's entire shtick has been thoroughly exposed with facts, but I think in his mind, he thinks if he gets the last word, he has actually proven something or 'won' the argument. But that won't change reality.

I finally gave up just a few days ago and put him on ignore. I assumed that someone who clearly has a great passion for the history of basketball and spends an immense amount of time posting would have SOME interest in increasingly their knowledge and understanding. But in his case that simply isn't happening. He is repeatedly caught defending positions that are insane and believes that by posting massive sheets of words he can overcome facts. You have eviscerated him for days and he is uncowed. The other day he claimed that he had crushed you. I assume he meant with the weight of his unreadable prose. His hubris and lack of self awareness is striking.

But you have done a fantastic job of late. Did you change your name or just start posting more?

[Kblaze8855]

When there are over a hundred hall-of-famers who never led their teams to anything are you people really not seeing the problem with claiming guys who led multiple title teams don't have an approach that leads to victory?


You win or you don't. Once you have won....multiple times at that.... the idea that what you are doing is not conducive to victory is out the window forever.

You can make a reasonable case that some people have a bad approach but are so talented the results don't show it. But being so good you can go down the wrong road and still get to your destination says more good about your driving ability than bad about your navigation.

Is call it a net positive.

With so many hundreds of great players who never did shit obsessing over the supposedly ineffective method of multiple title winners seems more than a little ridiculous.

LeBron has won more in the last 5 years than many franchises have in 50.

He's hardly hurting for success or glory. Losing to an underdog now and then doesn't mean his approach is wrong any more than it did when Showtime did it.

[warriorfan]

When there are over a hundred hall-of-famers who never led their teams to anything are you people really not seeing the problem with claiming guys who led multiple title teams don't have an approach that leads to victory?


You win or you don't. Once you have won....multiple times at that.... the idea that what you are doing is not conducive to victory is out the window forever.

You can make a reasonable case that some people have a bad approach but are so talented the results don't show it. But being so good you can go down the wrong road and still get to your destination says more good about your driving ability than bad about your navigation.

Is call it a net positive.

With so many hundreds of great players who never did shit obsessing over the supposedly ineffective method of multiple title winners seems more than a little ridiculous.

LeBron has won more in the last 5 years than many franchises have in 50.

He's hardly hurting for success or glory. Losing to an underdog now and then doesn't mean his approach is wrong any more than it did when Showtime did it.

I see what you are getting at but the problem I'm having with your post is that we aren't comparing LeBron to the hundreds of hall of famers. We are comparing LeBron to the top 10 ATG players, the cream of the crop. When you put LeBrons career in comparison with your average Hall of Famer it looks fantastic, but we arn't doing that. We are comparing him to All Time Greats.