Have a fine time next season with Mike Brown. I'm very happy he was hired as coach of the Lakers. Glad to see you like him.
You tried to attack one part of my argument by bringing irrelevant information into it (in this case, mentioning other teams' offensive efficiency instead of the James-led Cleveland teams). I'm pretty sure I know what that means; we could go at this all day.
Thats not what a strawman argument means and how is it irrelevant? The entire basis of your criticism is that a Mike Brown offense struggled against great playoff defense. I don't refute that. I'm just pointing out that the best offense in the league over that time period that had the most playoff success and led by the greatest coach of all time similarly struggled against great playoff defense.
You're still straw-manning and fail to realize it. We aren't talking about the Phil Jackson-Lakers compared against the Celtics as you tried to bring up to defend your argument. We're talking about Mike Brown as a coach. IMO, that offensive system, as I've said before, was mainly the work of JOHN freaking KUESTER!! So, don't give Brown credit for a great offense that he didn't design. I've got a new acronym for ya: ICFYS "I can't fault your stupidity!"
You are confusing two separate points. Whether or not Mike Brown was responsible for the Cavs offense and whether or not the Cavs offense was good. A) Mike Brown is ultimately responsible for the Cavs offense because he hand picked John Kuester. He is the head coach. If he had nothing to do with the offense, he made the decision to have nothing to do with the offense. Ultimately the buck stops with him. I don't why this is such an important distinction for you given that the Lakers hired Kuester anyway. Unless you are Kuester's agent its irrelevant. B) The Cavs offense was statistically great. Its struggles in the postseason were no different than any other postseason teams struggles against great defenses. It also exceeded expectations given the talent level of the squad. A strawman argument would be to misstate and exaggerate what you are saying and tear it down from this new unfair argument. Please show me where I did that. Otherwise it sounds like a word you just picked up from somewhere that you throw out whenever you are getting your ass handed to you.
I don't call repeatedly falling short of expectations "struggling"; it's called getting exposed. If you keep pointing to the great stats, don't you think that the team would have been able to finally pull through one of those years? I don't think I'm getting my ass handed to me because you're still responding to what I'm saying. Good luck with such a great offense this year with your Lakers.
