Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Taking a Comparative Look at LeBron

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Taking a Comparative Look at LeBron

    I know the LeBron conversation is getting old and older, but I wrote this article for my Bleacher Report and they won't let me post it because I'm not authorized yet so I want to post it somewhere. Let me just preface it by saying that I put a lot of time into this, and I'm not doing it because I want to beat a dead horse. I genuinely love studying the game, so I hope you can receive this well, whether or not you agree with my points. One of the paragraphs I posted in a post here originally. Here goes:

    Lately it has become fashionable to say that LeBron can no longer be mentioned in the same breath as Kobe or Michael. This is for one of several reasons:

    1) LeBron hasn't won yet. At 25, LeBron has yet to win a ring. Jordan has 6 and Kobe has 5.
    2) LeBron doesn't have the "killer gene." LeBron can't hit big shots like Michael or Kobe.
    3) LeBron left Cleveland before winning a ring. Michael and Kobe never went anywhere before winning a ring.
    4) He went to play with Dwyane Wade, so now he will be a Scottie Pippen.

    My problem: In a search to label the best active player, people compare LeBron's career to Kobe's career. This is wrong. Kobe has the better career, but the issue is over who is better today, not five years ago. We are looking at a Kobe who has lost a step since 2005. That doesn't mean he can't be better than LeBron, but it's important to note. There's no doubting James' dominance throughout a game, as has been proven by back-to-back 60-win seasons with incredible stats. But the questioning comes with regard to LeBron's clutch performances, notably in the playoffs.

    LeBron is statistically the best player in basketball during the regular season. The argument by many, however, is that Kobe is better than LeBron because of his clutch gene and playoff performances. LeBron's detractors claim he lacks said clutch gene and in general isn't as good as Kobe in the playoffs. Through a Machiavellian lens, there is a straight answer: Kobe is better because he wins the Finals. To most, sports are indeed Macheiavellian and the end justifies the means. But there is always a story in the middle. The end may very well be consistent with the middle, but in this case it isn't. Kobe's numbers and team record have been inferior to LeBron for the past two years. These are facts. The argument then becomes: Kobe is superior in the playoffs, LeBron in the regular season.

    First I wanted to look at LeBron's end-of-game performances in the regular season. This table from 82games.com shows that LeBron, as of 2008, has more made shots in end-of-game situations than any player in the league.
    http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm
    Since then, Kobe has hit shots against the Heat, Bucks, Kings, Celtics and Grizzlies. Kobe is the best finisher in basketball. My goal is not to say LeBron is a better finisher than Kobe. But the fact that it's even close shows there is a huge misconception about LeBron's ability to finish. So I wanted to take a look at LeBron's end-of-game performances in playoffs, and also his performances during key losses in general. Since Kobe has won two years in a row, I want to note the playoff performance of Kobe vs. LeBron and also the playoff performances of LeBron's teammates compared to Kobe's teammates.

    First, I want to establish two types of clutch:

    1) End of game clutch. Dominating and unstoppable performance in the final minutes of the fourth quarter. Ex) LeBron against the Pistons 2007, LeBron and Pierce trading shots in Game 7 2008.

    2) Last possession clutch. A shot in the last possession that either ties or wins the game. Ex) LeBron's missed and made threes against the Magic.

    I wanted to take a look back at LeBron's playoff performances in general, noting every close loss to find blame while ignoring for the most part close wins. The key here is not to prove LeBron is clutch, but rather to find evidence that he is not clutch, that he does not have a "killer instinct," or that he is unreliable at the end of games. In particular, I want to pay close attention to the number of opportunities LeBron had to win games, for there is no logic in claiming he isn't clutch down the line if in a vast majority of games his team has either won handily or is too far back to compete in the final minutes. That is to say, he cannot be not clutch if he doesn't have significant opportunity to be clutch.

    Possible outcomes:

    1) If the game comes down to the wire, LeBron's actions will tell us everything, i.e. crucial turnovers, missed vs. made shots.
    2) If the game is out of reach, LeBron's numbers, the numbers of his teammates and to some degree opponents will show who is responsible for the outcome.
    3) If the game is won handily, LeBron's numbers, the numbers of his teammates and to some degree opponents will show who is responsible for the outcome.

    Under every year are his playoff averages.

    2006 PLAYOFF DEBUT
    30.8 ppg (47% FG), 8.1 rpg, 5.8 apg, 1.3 spg

    Apr 25, 2006, GAME 2 LOSS, WIZARDS: I decided to check out the 89-84 loss between the Cavaliers and the Wizards where LeBron had shot poorly. He had 10 turnovers on the night. It was a close game and I wanted to see if LeBron had missed a big shot with little time left or somehow made an end-of-game mistake. Any evidence to back up his reputation of not being clutch.

    "Hughes’ jumper made it 87-82, and James made two more free throws with 20 seconds left to pull Cleveland within three. Billy Thomas then missed a pair of free throws for Washington, and the Cavs looked as if they would get closer.
    James rushed the ball up the floor, but instead of calling a timeout or trying a game-tying 3-pointer, he passed inside to a wide-open Anderson Varejao."

    May 19, 2006: 84-82 loss to Detroit.
    "With his team needing a 3-pointer to tie, Cleveland coach Mike Brown screamed for his team to call a timeout, but before the Cavs could, James was fouled with 1.4 seconds to play. James, who went 15-of-18 from the line, swished the first.

    He pushed the second one left on purpose and Zydrunas Ilgauskas—with an unlikely assist from Billups—nearly got a miraculous bounce off the top of the glass."

    May 17, 2006: 86-84 Cavs over Pistons.
    Cavaliers take the lead with 9 minutes left and never let go. James led the league in votes for the All-NBA team...The 21-year-old phenom scored 22 first-half points on 9-of-17 shooting

    May 21st, 2006. 79-61 DET
    Game 7 loss to DET, who had home-court advantage. 27 points on 46% shooting, 8 rebounds 2 assists and 3 turnovers. Other Cavs: Big Z - 8 points, 3-8 FG, Larry Hughes - 10 points, 2-6 FG, 6 rebounds, 5 assists. Eric Snow - 4 points, 1-5 FG, 0 assists.

    Summary: LeBron plays well for two series, getting double-digit help in several games from Z, Gooden and Varejao. Larry Hughes was dealing with the death of his brother. In general, the help came spread meagerly throughout the Cleveland bench, and when it didn't come the Cavs scored in the 60's. LeBron gets a pass for losing in the second round because it's his playoff debut.

    VERDICT: OUTMATCHED. LeBron was too young.

    2007 FINALS RUN
    25 ppg (41.6% FG), 8.1 rpg, 8 apg, 1.7 spg, .5 bpg

    May 21, 2007: 79 76 Loss to Pistons
    An unimpressive game for Lebron. Key word: For LeBron. 10 points, 10 rebounds and 9 assists. 4 steals, 1 block. 33% shooting and 2 turnovers. Z steps up with 22 and 13, Hughes (30.7%) and Varejao put in 13 each. Next highest scorer is Pavlovic with 9 pts (28.5%). This is a game where LeBron's shortcomings offensively could be blamed for CLE being too far back to compete in the 4th, yet it still came down to a chance for LeBron to prove he wasn't clutch. Did he this time?

    "LeBron James dribbled at the top of the key, drove toward the basket and everybody watching in person and on TV probably thought he was going to shoot.
    He dished and the decision backfired."

    May 24, 2007: 79 76 Loss to Pistons
    Another downer for LeBron, 19 points (36.8%), 7 assists, 6 rebounds and 6 turnovers.

    Here is Clutch Fail #1.

    "James missed a shot with 7.9 seconds left, allowing Detroit to escape again with a 79-76 victory over the Cleveland Cavaliers on Thursday night and a 2-0 lead in the Eastern Conference finals."

    May 30, 2007: 108 107 2OT Win against Pistons.
    In response to his first failure to be clutch in the playoffs, LeBron scores all of the Cavs last 25 points and shoots 54.5%. It is one of the most clutch performances in NBA history, but it doesn't take the form of one last second shot and can't be put into a single highlight.

    Note: Clutch Fail #1.5: LeBron airballs a three as the shot clock expires in the end of OT 1 and the game goes to 2OT.

    Game 1 FINALS, 85 76 LOSS
    James is 14-7-4 on 25% and the Cavs roster does good in general but Cleveland can't hang.

    Game 2 FINALS 103, 92 LOSS
    LeBron plays less than three minutes in the first quarter after early foul trouble, Spurs go up by 25 at halftime.

    Game 3 FINALS, 75 72 LOSS
    LeBron: 25 points (39%), 8 rebounds, 7 assists, 5 turnovers. Z: 12. Gooden: 13. Pavlovic: 13. After that: 4, 3, 2, 0, 0.

    Clutch Fail #2: LeBron shoots a three short in the final seconds.

    Game 4 FINALS 83 82 LOSS
    LeBron: 24 points, 10 assists, 6 rebounds, 6 turnovers, 33% FG. Duncan steals the ball from James with 2 minutes left and Oberto scores to make it 74-66. LeBron hits a three, 76-69. Manu responds with an easy runner. LeBron makes another three. Manu makes four free throws in the final seven seconds.

    Series summary: LeBron steps up to the biggest stage in basketball and falls short to a dynasty. He hits big shots in game four but it isn't enough.

    Playoffs Summary: LeBron misses two game-tying shots and often shoots poor from the field. But this really was a case of San Antonio shining more than anything. Cleveland's roster, though terribly average on paper, performs and gives LeBron adequate backup. He tries and falls short, but all of his negatives are rightfully forgotten as he carried his team to the NBA Finals in his second playoffs. Maybe he is the King?

    CLE VS SAS VERDICT: UNWINNABLE. The Cavs had no shot at winning this series, no matter how well LeBron played. The Spurs were a dynasty picking up its 4th ring.

    2008 THE BIG 3
    28.2 ppg (41% FG), 7.8 rpg, 7.6 apg, 1.7 spg

    Game 5 LOSS Wizards, 88 87

    Clutch Fail #3: LeBron misses lay-up at buzzer. Some argue there was contact, but seeing as how this is a controversial statement, I am on the side that it was clean. LeBron is 34, 10 and 7 and takes responsibility for the loss.

    Game 1, LOSS 76 72 Boston.

    LeBron has a bad night. 12, 9, 9, 9 TO. He missed his last six shots, mostly lay ups.

    Game 7, LOSS 97 92 Boston

    LeBron has 45 to Pierce's 41 as they trade shots. But...

    Clutch Fail #4: LeBron misses a three with 4.4 seconds left.

    The line from Yahoo! that sums up LeBron's 2008 playoffs:

    "'That is why we have three superstars,' said Celtics center Kendrick Perkins, who had 12 rebounds.
    And Cleveland only has one."

    Series summary: Pierce, Ray and KG at the end of their primes with a budding superstar point in Rondo and a defensive specialist in Perkins is overwhelming for LeBron and the second-best Cav Big Z.

    CLE VS BOS VERDICT: SEVERELY OUTMATCHED, BORDERLINE UNWINNABLE. LeBron could have played better, but nobody was stopping the Celtics.

    LeBron v Celtics (Conf Finals): Loss. 7 games: 26.7 ppg, 6.4 rpg, 6.4 apg, 33.9% FG (11% game 1), 5.3 TO/g (10 in game 1)
    Kobe v Celtics (Finals): Loss. 6 games: 25.6 ppg, 4.6 rpg, 5 apg, 40.65 FG%, 3.8 TO/g.

    2009 THE MAGIC
    35.3 ppg (51% FG), 9.1 rpg, 7.3 apg, 1.6 spg, .8 bpg, 2.7 TO/g

    GAME 1, LOSS 107 106 MAGIC
    LeBron: 49 pts, 8 assists, 6 rebounds. Mo Williams misses last second jumper. James shoots 66% in a loss.

    GAME 4, LOSS 116 114 OT MAGIC
    LeBron: 44 points, 12 rebounds, 7 assists.

    Clutch Fail #5: With the Cavs down two, James takes a three that looks good but falls short. Van Gundy: “We had two guys on him and he made a move like a tight end, caught the ball and still got off a reasonable shot. This guy is unbelievable.”

    [B]Series Summary:[B] Dwight. Howard. Big Z had 2 points compared to Dwight's 40 in the last game of the series. LeBron was offensively countered on the perimeter by Rashard and Hedo while the Cavs had no one down low. LeBron's numbers indicate that he couldn't have done more during the series, and 1:1 ratio of missed game-winning-three and made game-winning-three is far from bad. He maybe could have scored more instead of averaging 8 assists a game, but the Cavs lost the three games in which he scored over 40. Other than that his only other realistic critique could be to turn the ball over less. LeBron was the best player on the floor every night but the Magic were a better team. Mo Williams and Z were unreliable throughout the series, each missing huge shots off of LeBron drive-and-kicks.

    LeBron vs. Magic. Loss. 6 games: 38.5 ppg, 8.3 prg, 8 apg, 48% FG

    Kobe vs. Magic. Win. 5 games: 32.4 ppg, 5.6 rpg, 7.4 apg. 42% FG

    Notes: The presence of a big to counter Howard proved to be too much for the Lakers to handle. Gasol shot 60% for 18.6ppg, but more importantly Howard scored 15.4 ppg on less than 50% from the field. The presence of Odom and occasionally Bynum also made the Lakers too much to handle for Howard, who easily played with the Cleveland front court.

    CLE VS MAGIC VERDICT: OUTMATCHED IN THE PAINT, BUT WINNABLE. Winnable only if LeBron and Mo make their end-of-game shots. Other than that, LeBron did as well as he and thus anyone could do for the series, averaging 38-8-8 and shooting 50% for three-point game-winners.

    2010 THE KING IS DETHRONED?
    29.1 ppg (50% FG), 9.3 rpg, 7.6 apg, 1.7 spg, 1.8 bpg, 3.8 TO/g

    GAME 3, LOSS 108-106 CHICAGO
    LeBron hits a three with eleven seconds left to make it a two point game. Anthony Parker shoots a halfcourt shot to win the game and misses. LeBron: 39 points, 10 rebounds, 8 assists, 5 turnovers, over 50% FG.

    GAME 2, LOSS, 104 86 BOSTON
    LeBron: 24 points (46.7% FG), 7 rebounds, 4 assists, 3 steals, 2 blocks, 5 TO.
    Jamison: 16 points, 6 rebounds.
    JJ Hickson: 13 points in 19 minutes.
    Shaq: 9 points, 4 rebounds in 19 minutes.

    GAME 4, LOSS, 97 87 BOSTON
    LeBron: 22 points (38.9%), 9 rebounds, 8 assists, 7 TO, 2 steals, 1 block.
    Jamison: 14 points, 6 rebounds
    Shaq: 17 points, 5 rebounds
    Mo Williams: 13 points, 4 assists, 3 rebounds
    Anthony Parker: 10 points, 3 rebounds, 2 assists
    JJ Hickson: 0 points in 5 minutes.

    GAME 5
    LeBron: 15 points (21%), 7 assists, 6 rebounds, 3 TO.
    Shaq: 21 points, 4 rebounds
    Anthony Parker: 14 points, 2 rebounds.
    Mo Williams: 9 points, 5 assists.
    Jamison: 9 points, 6 rebounds.
    JJ Hickson: 0 points, 4 minutes.

    GAME 6
    LeBron: 27 points, 19 rebounds, 10 assists, 9 turnovers.
    Mo Williams: 22 points, 7 rebounds, 4 assists, 5 turnovers.
    Shaq: 11 points, 4 rebounds.
    Parker: 7 points, 4 rebounds.
    Jamison: 5 points (20%), 5 rebounds.
    JJ Hickson: 0 points, 10 seconds played.

    Game 6 Summary: LeBron answers his bad Game 5 with a stat sheet filler but still loses. Mo Williams has a good game on paper but makes terrible decisions with the ball, most notably a fast break with Cavs advantage that ended with him simply running out of bounds. Jamison played one of the worst games of his life. Delonte West had several key turnovers including one pass to LeBron that went off the backboard and another crosscourt pass that went directly to a Celtic. LeBron hits two big threes in the 4th to bring the Cavs closer but dribbles off his foot in a key situation.

    VERDICT: WINNABLE... IF LeBRON PLAYS OUTSTANDING EVERY NIGHT. The Cavs could have beaten the Celtics, shown by LeBron's dominating Game 3 performance in which he scored 21 points in the first quarter. If LeBron played outstanding every night a Conference Finals would have been in reach. He was accused of giving up in Game 6 and his dribble-off-the-foot is undeniably unclutch. But there is blame to be distributed. The dissapearance of JJ Hickson is a question for Mike Brown to answer. He started 73 games of the Cavs 61 win season. During the regular season, the Cavs won 2/3 against the Celtics when he started and 0/1 when he didn't. Mo Williams shot just as poorly as in 2009 and underperformed for a player coming off an "All-Star" year. Jamison couldn't have played worse when it mattered. Morever, Garnett was unstoppable in Game 6, burning Jamison repeatedly. Mike Brown is once again to be questioned for that matchup. Varejao guarded him once and got scored on, but played perfect defense. Throw in LeBron's elbow and alleged turmoil in the lockerroom on top of all of that. Usually, an injury to your best player and lockerroom troubles in the playoffs are alone enough to end a team's postseason.

    LeBron vs. Celtics: 26.8 ppg, 9.3 rpg, 7.2 apg, 3.8 TO/g.
    Excluding game 6, which inflates series rebounding, assists and turnovers:
    26.8 ppg, 7.4 rpg, 6.6 apg, 3.6 TO/g.
    Kobe vs. Celtics: 28.5 ppg, 8 rpg, 3.8 apg, 3.8 TO/g.

    LeBron Game 6: 27 points (38% FG), 19 rebounds, 10 assists, 9 turnovers.
    Kobe Game 7: 23 points (25% FG), 15 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 turnovers.

    Obviously the argument is that Kobe performed well in the other six games, whereas LeBron was hot and cold. But Derek Fisher was huge in Game 3, carrying the team on his back in the fourth. Ron stepped up and won the Lakers Game 7 (he also shut down the Phoenix series with a game-winner after Kobe shot air). When LeBron slipped up, he had no one to pick him up and carry the team. Varejao was his most dependable teammate. He needed help in the elimination game and got the opposite, whereas Kobe got 20 points from Ron and 19 points and 18 rebounds from Pau (who had a game-winner against the Thunder in Round 1).

    LeBron's numbers on the series are good, but his bad Game 5 combined with his dribble off the foot and other key turnovers in Game 6 cancel out his stat line and late-game-potentially-heroic threes. His team generally underperformed, especially in Game 6. But in the end, it is up to LeBron to perform incredibly every night. Takeaway point: If LeBron is at fault for losing this series, it is the first time of his career.

    The 82Games.com "Game Winning Shot in the Playoffs" table has Kobe at 4/8 and LeBron at 4/8. LeBron also has one game-winning playoff assist. Since that data was recorded, LeBron has made one three point game-winner against the Magic and missed one three point game-winner against the Magic to put him at 5/9 (55%). Kobe won a playoff game against the Nuggets with free throws, but airballed a game winner against the Suns to put him at 4/9. As a result, LeBron has hit more playoff game winners and regular season game winners than any active player since 03-04. If anything, LeBron is a non-finisher who finishes when he has to. He would much rather draw the double or triple team and pass away, but when he has been forced to shoot he has relatively done a good job. He never had a great jumpshot and until recently never had a threeball (the two things required to finish Jordan-style, which is what everyone uses as the standard for being clutch), yet he has still found a way to finish games when his team needs him to.

    *Since this is such an end-justifies-means league, one could argue that games where LeBron has missed a last second shot that are a part of a series the Cavs went on to win should logically be discounted. That would knock off one against the Pistons in 2007 and one against the Wizards in 2008.*

    His dominating stats series after series in the playoffs indicate that he's rarely not showing up. His game-winning track record shows he comes through in the clutch. So why do the Cavs lose in the playoffs? Either A) because of his teammates' shortcomings in games where he played great but the Cavs weren't in reach, or B) through his own shortcomings (which often take the form of triple doubles), particularly Game 5 2010 and Game 1 Pistons 2007, where the team wasn't in reach. However, even when it is B, the stats show that there is almost always teammate shortcomings sprinkled on top. These average stats are actually not even shortcomings, they are instead simply accurate reflections of what his teammates are capable of. Does anyone think Anthony Parker should average more than 10 a game in the playoffs?

    On that note, I want to segway to teammates. In the last 30 years, only seven teams have won championships. Almost every one of those teams has had at least 2 of the following, and every team has had one. If they didn't have A, they had both B and C.

    A) 1-3 Hall of Famers
    B) Four or more double-digit scorers
    C) A dominant big man in his prime (offensively or defensively, or both)

    In 94-95 the Rockets had two Hall of Famers (Drexler and Olajuwon), six players scoring over 10 points a game and a defensively dominant big man. *The Bulls first three rings came without a dominant big and with only three double-digit scorers, but the next three came with the defensive Rodman in 15 rpg, 16 rpg and 15 rpg years at the tail-end of his prime. The 88-89 Pistons had six players over 13 ppg and three Hall of Famers, while the 89-90 Pistons had five players over 12ppg and two Hall of Famers. The 82-83 Sixers had two hall of Famers and a dominant big man. The 80's Lakers had a dominant big man, always 5-6 double-digit scorers and at one time three Hall of Famers. The Celtics had four Hall of Famers, 5-6 double digit scorers and two dominating bigs in the 80's. In 08, they had a defensively dominant big and three future Hall of Famers. The threepeat Lakers had two Hall of Famers (and two top 3 players in the league), a dominant big man on both ends of the floor. The back-to-back Lakers had five double-digit scorers and a big man that played with the best center in the league in 2009 and went 18.6 ppg and 11.6 rpg in 2010. They might not have two Hall of Famers, but Lamar Odom is the most versatile sixth man in the league, Ron Artest is one of the best perimeter defenders in decades and Bynum is a top-5 center (admittedly a weak position). The Heat in 06 had two Hall of Famers and Shaq coming off a year where he finished second in MVP voting. It's hard to judge how many Hall of Famers the Spurs have, but they have at least one year of Robinson at the tail-end of his prime and two other years of four double-digit scorers.

    LeBron hasn't played with a Hall of Famer anywhere close to in his prime. He has played with two dominant bigs who won rings but they were well out of their primes and shells of their former defensive selves in Cleveland (Shaq and Wallace). Twice in playoff years he played with a roster of four or more ten point scorers (05-06 Larry Hughes and Flip Murray were two of them, 07-08 Larry Hughes and Boobie Gibson were two of them). Seeing as how only seven teams have won championships in the last 30 years, it shows that winning championships is organizational as much as talent-based. Players are very lucky when they get to play for both organizations with great coaches and GMs and with other great players. This is not to say that the player must not be great, but franchises win because of great coaches like Phil (11 in the past 30 years), Riley (5) and Pop (4) and fantastic GMs (Dumars the year the Pistons won), just as much as they win because of great talent. In Cleveland, LeBron had neither a great coach, nor a productive organization above him, nor any seriously talented players around him. NBA history shows us this is a recipe for failure, but yet we expect LeBron to be able to do it.

    Here are some examples of LeBron's playoff averages in years that the Cavs either went deep or were expected to go deep in the playoffs. Following are the playoff averages of his second best player.

    LeBron James, 2006-07 playoffs: 25.1 ppg (41.6% FG), 8.1 rpg, 8 apg, 1.7 spg,
    2nd best player: Zydrunas Ilgauskas: 12.6 ppg (49% FG), 9.7 rpg, 2.1 bpg
    LeBron James, 2008-09 playoffs: 35.3 ppg (51% FG), 9.1 rpg, 7.3 apg, 1.6 spg
    2nd best player: Mo Williams: 16.3 ppg (41% FG), 4.1 apg, 3.2 rpg, .7 spg
    LeBron James, 2009-10 playoffs: 29.1 ppg (50% FG), 9.3 rpg, 7.6 apg, 1.7 spg, 1.8 bpg
    2nd best player: Mo Williams: 14.4 ppg (41% FG), 5.4 apg, 3.1 rpg, .5 spg

    For some perspective, here are some of the best players on championship teams, followed by the second best player on their team (shown are the playoff averages).

    Michael Jordan, 1990-91 playoffs: 31.1 ppg (52.4% FG), 6.4 rpg, 8.4 apg, 2.3 spg, 1bpg
    2nd best player Scottie Pippen: 21.6 ppg (50% FG), 8.9 rpg, 5.8 apg, 2.4 spg
    Michael Jordan 1991-92 playoffs: 34.5 ppg (49% FG), 6.2 rpg, 5.8 apg, 2 spg, .7 bpg
    2nd best player Scottie Pippen: 19.5 ppg (47% FG), 8.8 rpg, 6.7 apg, 1.8 spg, .9 bpg
    Michael Jordan 1992-93 playoffs: 35.1 ppg (47.5% FG), 6.7 rpg, 6 apg, 2 spg
    2nd best player Scottie Pippen: 20.1 ppg (46.5% FG), 6.9 rpg, 5.6 apg, 2.1 spg

    Dywane Wade 2005-06 playoffs: 28.4 ppg (49.7% FG), 5.9 rpg, 5.7 apg, 2.2 spg, 1.1 bpg
    2nd best player Shaquille O'Neal: 18.4 ppg (56% FG), 9.8 rpg, 1.5 bpg

    Shaquille O'Neal, 2000-01 playoffs: 30.4 ppg (55% FG), 15.4 rpg, 2.3 bpg (Finals MVP)
    Top 3 teammate: Kobe Bryant: 29.4 ppg (47% FG), 7.3 rpg, 6.1 apg, 1.5 spg
    Shaquille O'Neal, 2001-02 playoffs: 28.5 ppg (52% FG), 12.6 rpg, 2.5 bpg (Finals MVP)
    Top 3 teammate: Kobe Bryant: 26.6 ppg (43% FG), 5.8 rpg, 4.6 apg, 1.4 spg
    Shaquille O'Neal, 2001-02 playoffs: 27 ppg (53% FG), 14.8 rpg, 2.8 bpg (Finals MVP)
    Top 3 teammate: Kobe Bryant: 32.1 ppg (43% FG), 5.1 rpg, 5.2 apg, 1.1 spg

    Tim Duncan, 2006-07 playoffs: 22.2 ppg (52% FG), 11.5 rpg, 3.1 bpg, 3.3 apg
    2nd best player: Tony Parker: 20.8 ppg (48% FG), 5.8 apg, 3.4 rpg, 1.1 spg (Finals MVP)
    (notable others: Manu Ginobili)

    Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 1979-80 playoffs: 31.9 ppg (57% FG), 12.1 rpg, 3.1 apg, 3.2 bpg, 1.1 spg
    2nd best player(?) Magic Johnson: 18.3 ppg (51% FG), 10.5 rpg, 9.4 apg, 3.2 spg
    (notable others: Jamaal Wilkes)

    Hakeem Olajuwon, 1994-95 playoffs: 33 ppg (53% FG), 10.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, 2.8 bpg, 1.2 spg
    2nd best player: Clyde Drexler: 20.5 ppg (48% FG), 7 rpg, 5 apg, 1.5 spg

    Larry Bird, 1985-86 playoffs: 25.9 ppg (52% FG), 9.3 rpg, 8.2 apg, 2 spg
    2nd best player: Kevin McHale: 24.9 ppg (57% FG), 8.6 rpg, 2.7 apg, 2.6 bpg
    (notable others: Dennis Johnson, Robert Parish)

    Kobe Bryant, 2009-10 playoffs: 29.2 ppg (46% FG), 6 rpg, 5.5 apg, 1.3 spg
    2nd best player: Pau Gasol: 19.6 ppg (54% FG), 11.1 rpg, 3.5 apg, 2.1 bpg
    (notable others: Lamar Odom, Andrew Bynum, Ron Artest)

    The three years the Pistons won can't really be displayed like that. Their back-to-back was led by Isiah and five other regular season double-digit scorers (four in 1989-90). A young Dennis Rodman came off the bench. In 2004, the defense was led by 4-time defensive player of the year Ben Wallace and the offense by four regular season double-digit scorers.

    We wanted so badly for LeBron to be different, to be the one that can win it by himself. But he can't do it. So in our dissappointment we dethrone him. In Miami, LeBron will play with a primed dominant big man for the first time in his career. He will play with another primed Hall of Famer for the first time in his career (one who is dwarfed by Pippen on the defensive end and isn't as good of a passer). They don't have to match up to Jordan and Pippen, they are an entirely different duo. They are LeBron and Wade. LeBron came to "Wade's team" because that team was the only team that could sign both him and Bosh. If Cleveland could sign both and Miami couldn't, Wade would probably have gone to Cleveland. Same with New York, New Jersey, etc.

    All LeBron has done with his move to Miami is put himself in the company of the NBA champions for the past thirty years.
    Last edited by quinnthology; 07-15-2010, 02:56 AM.
Working...
X