Re: 2 Lottery picks for the Cavaliers
Quote:
Originally Posted by
cycloneSOULja 
I blame more of that on LeBron than on Gilbert. You have to get players who want to come. IMO, players are not huge on playing with LeBron.
LeBron had to go to Wades team to try and compete for a championship. All those guys were free agents. If LeBron had any pull, why not recruit some of those free agents to Cleveland?
LeBron might be the best player in the game right now, but he does not value winning, and is likely a huge pain in the butt to play with.
I didn't realize LeBron had the power to sign people. :confused:
Funny thing is, all last summer I never heard anyone in the media talk about how Dan Gilbert was reaching out to star players to come play in Cleveland. I know there was a rumor that LeBron reached out to Bosh (and possibly Wade) to come to Cleveland, but the only way those other two would hook up with him is outside of Cleveland (only in Miami or perhaps Chicago). Why would that be? My guess is part of it would be because Cleveland is an "undesirable" place for an NBA star to be, the other part of it would be because Gilbert is an unbelievable tool.
And if LeBron was just this "undesirable" person to play with, why was Bosh and Wade willing to hook up with him as long as it was in Miami (or perhaps in Chicago)?
Look, I'm not saying that LeBron wasn't an absolute tool in this whole thing. He lost a lot of my respect with this whole "Decision" thing. However, I for one moment don't blame him for leaving - he was well within his right to do so as he fulfilled his contract and as far as I'm concerned Gilbert never gave an honest shot in trying to surround him with relevant talent.
Re: 2 Lottery picks for the Cavaliers
The main reason LeBron didn't try to recruit stars to Cleveland is because of their cap situation. Chicago, Miami, NY, NJ, and LA Clippers were all shedding salary so they could sign max free agents, but this wasn't possible for LeBron. They used all their cap space to try to surround him with talent and win while he was there, and that strategy obviously failed.
Re: 2 Lottery picks for the Cavaliers
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdoggivjc I didn't realize LeBron had the power to sign people. :confused:
Funny thing is, all last summer I never heard anyone in the media talk about how Dan Gilbert was reaching out to star players to come play in Cleveland. I know there was a rumor that LeBron reached out to Bosh (and possibly Wade) to come to Cleveland, but the only way those other two would hook up with him is outside of Cleveland (only in Miami or perhaps Chicago). Why would that be? My guess is part of it would be because Cleveland is an "undesirable" place for an NBA star to be, the other part of it would be because Gilbert is an unbelievable tool.
And if LeBron was just this "undesirable" person to play with, why was Bosh and Wade willing to hook up with him as long as it was in Miami (or perhaps in Chicago)?
Look, I'm not saying that LeBron wasn't an absolute tool in this whole thing. He lost a lot of my respect with this whole "Decision" thing. However, I for one moment don't blame him for leaving - he was well within his right to do so as he fulfilled his contract and as far as I'm concerned Gilbert never gave an honest shot in trying to surround him with relevant talent.
He quit in the playoffs last year.
The Cavs made a lot of trades and they all had to be agreed upon by Lebron. They couldn't trade Varejao or Hickson because Lebron liked them. They tried to get Bosh, but Toronto didn't want anything from the Cavs because they were set on rebuilding. They somehow got Jamison, which was considered a great deal last year. The Cavs tried the best they could to get something with Lebron.
Re: 2 Lottery picks for the Cavaliers
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Yes13 He quit in the playoffs last year.
The Cavs made a lot of trades and they all had to be agreed upon by Lebron. They couldn't trade Varejao or Hickson because Lebron liked them. They tried to get Bosh, but Toronto didn't want anything from the Cavs because they were set on rebuilding. They somehow got Jamison, which was considered a great deal last year. The Cavs tried the best they could to get something with Lebron.
No argument. But I didn't realize that was a "contract issue" (at least not one that would hold up in court)...
As far as the proposed moves, that just tells me they limited themselves and weren't willing to get "creative" enough. As was mentioned, Chicago, New York, and Miami all cleared cap space in anticipation of free agency. If they wanted to hold onto LeBron long term, why didn't they do the something similar in order make room for someone bigger instead of surrounding him with "questionable" talent?
Re: 2 Lottery picks for the Cavaliers
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jdoggivjc No argument. But I didn't realize that was a "contract issue" (at least not one that would hold up in court)...
As far as the proposed moves, that just tells me they limited themselves and weren't willing to get "creative" enough. As was mentioned, Chicago, New York, and Miami all cleared cap space in anticipation of free agency. If they wanted to hold onto LeBron long term, why didn't they do the something similar in order make room for someone bigger instead of surrounding him with "questionable" talent?
Do you follow the NBA at all? Serious question.
If star players did not influence each other on where they went, then how do you explain Miami, or why Melo and Paul/D-Will/etc want to go to NY? Why do you think Artest wanted to go to LA originally? Did you know that KG ONLY went to Boston after Boston traded Wally Szcerbiak away (because he did not like him)?
I get the NBA is more individualistic, but these guys still want to play with other good guys. In fact, today's player is more wanting to go and team up with superstars instead of having the ego to think they can win something on their own.
Also, with Cleveland, I think you are forgetting they were the #1 team in the East two years in a row. By most people's definition, that would be a contender. They were the #1 seed, had players LeBrong liked, and had homecourt advantage. This wasn't a team fighting for a playoff bid year in and year out.
Re: 2 Lottery picks for the Cavaliers
Quote:
Originally Posted by
ISU BET is it really going to matter? there is no one in this years draft that is going to turn that franchise or any other franchise around.
the nba is a sinking ship, and the latest trades with melo, etc, ar going to cause further disdain with the fans. i just don't see how having 4-5 "superteams" is good for any league. stern wants the league to be globalized, yet it's losing popularity in the country it's played.
As much as I do not like it myself, it is actually GREAT for the NBA to have 4-5 superteams. Look at when the NBA was at its biggest peak. You had only a handful of teams that were serious contenders (Lakers, Celtics, Bulls, Pistons, Knicks, Pacers, Blazers, etc)....
Teams that are loved and hated generate more TV revenues and more attendance. The Yankees get great attendance everywhere because 1) they have a ton of fans, and 2) they have even more haters... Studies show that people turn out to root against people.
For the NBA, having the Lakers, Celtics, Knicks, and Bulls good is in their best interest.
All that will happen is people will jump on bandwagons and root for those teams. We live 3 hours away from MN. Do you think there are more T-Wolves or Lakers fans in Iowa? Duh. Even when MN was the #1 seed in the West, nobody around here cared.
If every team is equal, the perception is the sport is mediocre, and fans in general will turn away. The casual fans does not like the idea of anybody winning it. They want to see the same teams over and over. That's why the ESPNs of the world do what they do. They are not idiots.
I'm a basketball fan, and like watching entertaining teams. I love the Warriors, and Thunder, but the casual fans doesn't want to watch a bunch of guys he's never heard of, play on a team he doesn't know a ton about.
Look at the NCAA tournament. The year all the #1 seeds made it to the Final Four, it was much higher ratings than the year George Mason made it.
