Lebron's biggest undoing is that, he was too good in his first two years...

[Kiddlovesnets]

Look at Durant and Thunder, they were a horrible team for 2 straight years after getting Durant. In 2008 they got Westbrook and Ibaka, and in 2009 they drafted Harden. Then they got a super-talented team, and could've won many titles had they not made stupid decisions to let Harden go. The Wolves are going in the same direction too, as they sucked in Wiggins' first year and got Towns, the team will be contending soon.

Lebron and Cavs on the other hand, were a different story. They were contending for playoffs right after Lebron joined, and for this reason they were not able to get enough help for Lebron in his first few years at Cavs. Lebron had to leave Cavs and go to the Heat to win his two titles, now hes finally blessed with a talented Cavs team.

If Lebron was not as good a rookie/sophomore, if he was just as good as Durant or even Kobe when he just entered the league, things would've been a lot different. If Cavs had Thunder(Supersonics) record(18-64 in 2008 and 23-59 in 2009), they'd won No.1 pick in 2004 and drafted Dwight, then won No.4 pick in 2005 and drafted Chris Paul, and you have a big three and a dynasty would be around the corner. If the Cavs kept Boozer and signed Caron Butler, they'd have this rosters:

C Dwight Howard
PF Carlos Boozer
SF Lebron James
SG Caron Butler
PG Chris Paul

I see a 5-peat team in the making. So yeah, do you agree that Lebron's biggest problem was that, he was way too good in his first 2 years? If he wasnt that good, he'd help the Cavs rebuilding process much better, instead they contended for playoffs but didnt make it. The Cavs owner Dan Gilbert, however a jerk he may be, is extremely generous and willing to spend money for his team, unlike Thunder's owner. It really would've been the new 60s Celtics, and it didnt happen. Lebron could've had 5-7 NBA titles, on par with Michael Jordan, but instead he will always be the poor man's Magic Johnson.

[tmacattack33]

Interesting. But yeah that's pretty simple and pretty true.

I don't know about getting Dwight in 2004 and then still being bad enough to draft Paul in 2005 though. But yeah, if Lebron was at Durant level at age 19, Cleveland coulda gotten Dwight the following year.

And even Shaq in Orlando didn't lead them to that great of a record in his rookie year...and then the following year they got Penny with pick 3 or whatever it was.

[TheMarkMadsen]

Uhhh they were under .500 in his first two years.

And only in the east is a 35-47 record considered "battling for the playoffs"

[NBAGOAT]

Getting Dwight in 04 isn't a bad point. No way in hell they get the worst record in the league again and get Paul with Lebron and Dwight. They don't resign Boozer either since they couldn't pay him. Lebron/Dwight would definitely have a decent chance at a title however.

[Kiddlovesnets]

Do the OP know that the he-bitch didn't make the playoffs until his 3rd phucking year?

Yeah I know he didnt make playoffs in his first two years, but he still had 35 and then 42 wins, the team was 9th place in the Eastern Conference. This is much worse than simply tanking for 18 and 23 wins, as you barely missed playoffs, and you dont get a good chance in draft lottery. Id want my team to either make playoffs or just tank shamelessly.

[Prime_Shaq]

Look at how Rose's Bulls were built. It doesn't help that Cavs drafted Luke Jackson in 2004 and why didn't they have a pick in 2005?

[Kiddlovesnets]

Getting Dwight in 04 isn't a bad point. No way in hell they get the worst record in the league again and get Paul with Lebron and Dwight. They don't resign Boozer either since they couldn't pay him. Lebron/Dwight would definitely have a decent chance at a title however.

Well they wont have the worst record in NBA in 2005 for sure, but to get 3rd or 4th worst is still possible. Remember Dwight as a rookie wasnt that good, he didnt win ROY. Dwight had his breakout season only since his third year.