MJ: "I would never have called up Larry, Magic & say lets get together."

I'm not quite sure what we're arguing here? That seems to be going on a lot in this thread.

Are you arguing that the team Jordan finally had built around him that won a championship is at least equal to the gift-wrapped team Lebron has joined? And therefore, there would not be much difference in difficulty if Lebron won? If so, I disagree, but that's another conversation.

I see what you're saying about Krause's part in the Bull's success, but I think you're underestimating how much pressure and responsibility is required of a lone centerpiece in an organization, for whom the team is being built around.

Besides, I'm referring more to the challenge when talking about the difficulty. Let's say you're at the point where you can decide to stick with a team and lead them to a championship as a centerpiece that they build around, or just join a ready made team where you are arguably considered the #1 option.

Lebron has nowhere near the responsibility to his team's success he would have if he stayed with Cleveland. Typically when I think less responsibility I think less difficulty.

 

apparently putting up 35, 8, 8, you still can do more. like i said, you only have the highest standards for the best in the L.

you would be SHOCKED if any other NBA player puts up the stats lebron does. SHOCKED.

what lebron has done is normal to us. anytime he has a bad game, we think something is wrong rather than a guy simply had a bad game.

if kobe, durant, wade, or any other superstar had a bad game, nobody goes over the top to ask what the hell is wrong with the guy?

again, only the best has the highest standards. and lebron has spoiled us.

 

Good article going back to the original MJ comment (this may have been posted, but I haven't read the entire thread):

http://espn.go.com/blog/TrueHoop/post/_/id/18416/the-michael-jordan-view-of-lebron-james



Michael Jordan has weighed in on the LeBron James, Dwyane Wade and Chris Bosh "SuperFriends" team in Miami:

"There's no way, with hindsight, I would've ever called up Larry, called up Magic and said, 'Hey, look, let's get together and play on one team,' " Jordan said after playing in a celebrity golf tournament in Nevada. "But that's ... things are different. I can't say that's a bad thing. It's an opportunity these kids have today. In all honesty, I was trying to beat those guys."


In so many ways, Michael Jordan is the most appropriate person in the world to comment on LeBron James and his legacy, but not for the reasons you might expect.

He is helping to solve one of the biggest mysteries in sports.

The question is: When James announced that he was taking his talents to South Beach, why did he instantly become the guy sports fans love to hate? What's so reprehensible about joining a good team?

He's the man

Michael Jordan was, is, and will always be the man. Yes, in italics.

You don't need me to define that, but just for fun: It means essentially the most aggressive, victorious, macho, indomitable player in the sport. The most feared, and the most fearless.

This utter lack of restraint, in the face of any challenges, is no small part of how Jordan inspires us.

Hell no I don't need help.

It's a real and valid way to view the game. You have to respect the sheer number of players, former players, executives and coaches who see the game through this lens. The best player is the man. Basically, that's the guy who, of the few superstars who produce in huge numbers and win a lot of games, is most fearless and ferocious.

This is often measured in terms of being willing to shoot with the game on the line.

When people heard that James was teaming up with Wade and Bosh, though ... wow. You know how men have this reputation as not being willing to pull over and ask for directions?

Hell no I don't need help.

Jordan, Barkley and others are making fun of James -- perhaps the most biting of all of Jordan's words was "kid" -- for getting help. If the whole idea is to show that you're the baddest man on the planet, what do we care about all these SuperFriends? (Similarly, Jordan said the other day that Bryant was the best player in the NBA. He's the most fearless, that's for sure.)

The problem with the critique is twofold. For one thing, he's not bad as the man. James shoots plenty with the game on the line, already produces like one of the two best players in NBA history (hitting at a better career rate than Bryant), wins a lot of games and even called himself leader of Team USA.

But more importantly, how do we know James' end goal is to be the man?

It's a team game. Jordan and Bryant are self-reliant types who didn't come naturally to the idea that crunch time ought to be played as a team. Both have had to be coached into passing with the game on the line.

But that they think like that doesn't mean we all have to go along. In your personal life, do you find it true that real men don't pass the ball, or share, or have friends, or smile or all that? The Jordan/Bryant way was one way to do it, but it's hardly the only way to get the job done.

When Jordan started passing -- to open teammates like Steve Kerr and John Paxson -- the Bulls started winning titles. Bill Russell owned basketball to the tune of 11 titles and he never thought it was his job to take the last shot. He was a different kind of "man," and won plenty.

Men who pull over and ask for directions may lose hombre points, but we all agree they waste less time driving around, right?

The man vs. the team

Sometimes you have to ask yourself what your end goal is: To win the individual sport of being the man, or the team sport of basketball? They usually go together. There's a reason Bryant and Jordan have all those championship rings.

But sometimes the best thing for basketball is to not put everything on your shoulders, and instead get some help.

Think about Kevin Garnett. There are several different really smart analyses to show that when he was in Minnesota losing all those games he was literally the best player in the NBA (the same analysis, over the last two years, would say James is that player now). If you use some kind of smart objective metrics, Garnett's is the name that comes up most from those years. But Garnett had no help! After he grew distraught with the team's endless rebuilding, the Timberwolves found him a home in Boston with some serious help in the form of Ray Allen and Paul Pierce. Even though Garnett did not play his best basketball in Boston, he did his best winning there, and the result has been a profound transformation of both how the world sees Garnett and how the city of Boston feels about basketball in the 2000s. It's a model anyone would want to copy -- a new home with talented teammates became a story of pure, unrestrained basketball joy for all involved who aren't Timberwolves fans.

Similarly, before the Lakers got Pau Gasol, Bryant was among the most unhappiest campers in NBA history and was caught on camera phone talking about the inadequacy of his teammates and his willingness to be traded. When Gasol arrived, Bryant started winning more than ever, and he was proved absolutely right that he could win a lot more with more with help.

Imagine if you will, crazy as it may sound, that back in the day, Jordan had somehow charmed Barkley or David Robinson to join the Bulls?

By the metrics of being the man, Jordan would have been a failure. Talk about pulling over to ask for directions. But Jordan would have been a better winner. He'd be more valuable to his team and his fans in every way if somehow he had pulled that off.

Hell no I don't need help.

If refusing help when it's available is the end goal, then in my mind we have cooked up one silly, old-fashioned definition of being the man.

Playing executive is smart

Jordan is affixed in our minds as the portrait of a winner, but take the long view of not just his playing days, but his life to date.

Through all the millions, the TV ads, the golf games and the casino trips, maybe there's nothing to regret.

But something funny happened in Springfield, Mass. Remember his Hall of Fame acceptance speech? Didn't we all come away from that with the news that life inside Jordan's shoes is not all peachy? He's bitter! About a lot of things! With the world's blessing to discuss whatever he wanted, Jordan mostly just spat insults.

One of the first things he brought up was the guy who built the Bulls team he won all those titles with, Jerry Krause. "Jerry’s not here," explains Jordan. "I don’t know who’d invite him. I didn’t. ... " All this bitterness, even though they won championships together!

The reason I bring this up is: Jordan proved right there and then that letting someone else build the roster for you can make you a very bitter man, even if you win six titles.

Players have the power of free agency, which, James and Wade have demonstrated, is one new way to solve that problem.

Jordan's career is widely seen as an example of why James and Wade ought not play together. It costs them both points as the man.

But you can also see Jordan's life to date as a textbook case of why building your own roster might be the smartest thing you can do, even if it isn't how things used to be done.

 

So what? Jamison had slightly better stats, more all stars appearances than Gasol before they were traded. Shaq was 18/8 all star in west last seaosn.

Kobe made Gasol better. Made Smush a decent starter. Made Ariza and Brown from rotten in bench to commanding MLE contracts. Who did LeBron make better? Mo didn't exactly get better numbers either.

Somehow every star not named LeBron sucked in Cavs? If LeBron wasn't such a ball hog and gave Shaq and Jamison the touches to do what they did. Maybe he's got a championship already. Cavs had a stacked team, LeBron just made them all role players.

 

It's funny how people are now making up series that LeBron quit based on that bull**** the owner said in that letter.

Nobody and I mean nobody accused LeBron of quitting last year against Orlando. Now people are accusing him of quitting in that series too.

Comical.

 

lol just like the way tmac quit on this team right?

 

I don't even know why y'all continue to go back and forth with Goodbug.

I mean he claims LeBron is a ballhog while defending Kobe Bryant. That tells me all I need to know.

 

charles smith had solid averages (10 and 6) as a bench player that yr averaging 25 mins a game, so yes i'm serious. i should be asking you if you're serious about that not being a significant contribution.

And the point was there's sginificant parts to a team, especially parts that fit, so a team should crumble witht he loss of one player...so in this case, you take several significant parts of team and replace it with rentals that dont fit, and you're asking what my point is?

Elliot was a three point threat. Wilkins was not. Maxwell shot the three worse than person, by ten percent, barely cracking 30%.

This is about teams fitting together, not individual players. If you tell me drob missed the season that's significant, but it's one guy. Now compare that to saying drob missed the season, then del negro missed 10 games, person, smith, etc....I dont care if one guy missed only 1, when you have a combination of guys in the rotation missing games they have a larger effect an that one game means more than if they missed it when the others were healthy.

I cant believe this is coming from a Rockets' fan...we should know better...we know what injuries are like and 5 games here, 10 games here, 20 games here..all by different players really adds up and takes a toll on the team's rotation and chemistry.

 

Simple question: Do you think LeBron quit in the Boston series?

I sure as hell do. Most people who are defending him are pointing to the Orlando series and saying he didn't quit.. that's nice.. but he definitely quit in that Boston series. In hindsight, looking back at the past few years, it's obvious why he would quit: he wanted out and 'winning' is the best excuse for leaving your hometown. He couldn't have joined his buddies in Miami if the Cavs would have won the championship.

 

It's not meant to be constructive criticism, it's to bring down Lebron a peg or 2, as appropriately when a superstar tries to take the easy rout to a ring.

That certainly is fair criticism but Chuck was never put in the conversation of GOAT like LBJ is today, and he was clearly on the downside of his career when he joined the Rockets.

 

MJ had multiple playoff failures just like Lebron did. Before he won his first championship you could argue that he didn't have a good enough supporting cast either. However MJ didn't quit on his team and go join say the Pistons. Back in Jordan's days no superstars would do what Lebron did when they were still in their 20's.

Yet you can not completely fault Lebron. In MJ's case his Bulls got better over the years. They drafted good players, added pieces via trades/FAs, etc. Although the Bulls lost to the veteran Pistons twice in the playoffs, you could see at the time that hteir best days were ahead of them. Lebron's Cavs did not give people the same impression. They had not improved much in the last few years and were probably as good as they'd ever be. So in that sense let me quote Jerry Krause -- organizations win championships and the Cavs were simply not a good enough organization to convince their star to stay with them.

 

You can get more by doing less. Did LeBron ever adjust for his teammates? 7 years past and he's still all drive and kick, every one was supposed to be a shooter to help his spacing. Granted he's a better 3 pt shooter now. But does he know how to play in post, how to do C&S in mid-range? And how often does he set picks for others?

 

1) the triangle offense made gasol better. he played fine with kobe in the lineup or in the bench. just like the triangle offense made kobe better. there's a reason kobe's inefficiency was at his worse when jackson was NOT coaching him (he shot 43% that year) and even pleaded for the triangle offense to be re-installed late 04-05. so it's not kobe. it's phil jackson and the triangle offense.

2) lol it's funny you said kobe made ariza better. so did kevin martin make trevor ariza better? ariza's fg% jumped 7% with martin than without.. oh damn, kevin martin is a superstar

triangle offense. go watch how that's run. even kobe depends on it.

and you're right. lebron doesn't make anybody better. i don't know why voters give MVPs to guys who don't make the game easier for his teammates. and i guess can win 60+ games in the reg. season and your teammates don't improve. you're right.

 

Why quit in the Conf Semi's then? Why not earlier in the first round? Or even in the reg season like Vince Carter? Or why not beat Boston and then quit later on in the the Conf Finals or Finals?

If this was his plan all along - just to find an "excuse" to leave the Cavs - why quit against Boston under the magnifying glass of the playoffs? I mean if he quits in the regular season, people can no longer use "the Cavs won 60 games in the regular season, they're supposed to win the whole thing" argument. Instead they might acknowledge that these guys he's playing with are mediocre and he can't even make the playoffs with them. This "Lebron quit and it was all part of his masterplan" theory is dubious at best.

 

yes, he does play in the post, but that part is still improving.
yes, he does set picks for his teammates (mo will and him play a 2 man game all the time with him setting picks for mo will)

do you know mo will gets around 2-3 assists from passing to a cutting lebron james every game?

so no, he does more than just drive and kick.

also, you forget his all-nba defense. you forget that he rebounds like a big man. he makes the team better in that sense too you know.

 

No, the only quit the Cavs showed was the last minute or two in Game 2 when they just looked like they stopped playing.

Some of you make it seem like LeBron quit for the whole series.

If LeBron really wanted to quit in that series then he would not have defended Paul Pierce the way he did.

The first sign of quitting is to slack off defensively. I think LeBron struggled but didn't quit.

 

Not the same...barkley was in the league almost tiwce as long as lebron when he did that...I think barkely mentioned that as well...that's its different when you do it in your prime and can be the main guy who helps others...as oppose to doing it past your prime when youre the one who definitely needs help.

 

Lebron had enough help, otherwise they wouldn't win 60+ games two years in a row.

Williamns, Velajao, Jamsion, Shaq etc are not nobodies. That team is way better than the team he took to the final.

MJ made his teammates better. Many of the bulls players won championship with MJ, got a nice contract somewhere else, played like D League players. His best supporting guy was developed from a rookie along side him.

 

Edit : I meant to say Game 6. I don't know why I typed 2 smh

 

Sure it has something to do with triangle offense. But P&R gives you numbers. Kobe averaged most assists in his career in 04-05 season. And no, Kobe didn't shoot well because he didn't practice in that offseason for lawsuit.

And they got 60 wins because they were stacked. Talent alone could beat those bad teams. And Cavs were really good at that. Once they met more disciplined team that knew how to counter their one trick pony offense in playoff, they struggled. But why that "LeBron offense" was insisted? Without it how did LeBron get MVPs and excuses at the same time?