Chicago Fanatics Message Board
http://chicagofanatics.com/

LeBron?
http://chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=91&t=108281		 Page 4 of 4
Author:  Nas [ Sat Sep 02, 2017 9:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
FavreFan wrote:
Nas wrote:
long time guy wrote:
LeBron hasn't exactly had to defeat many juggernauts during his glorious runs to the finals. It would be much more impressive had he done it in the West. He also has had the benefit of playing with 4 guys that will be in the Hall of Fame at some point.

Bosh wasn't a role player either. James also bailed on Miami once the going got a little rough. The last 2 seasons his been beaten at his own game. First Durant now Irving.


Doing it 7 years in the row can't be dismissed even if you aren't a LeBron fan. He's played for a championship for nearly his entire career.

I'm not dismissing it but I think it's a very poor argument in favor of LeBron. If you're basing his greatness on winning he's obviously a long way behind Jordan, Kobe, Duncan, Magic, and others.


He hasn't won the ultimate prize but I'm not sure if any other player could have beaten this Warriors team with the roster LeBron has had.
Author:  FavreFan [ Sat Sep 02, 2017 9:44 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
No player in history could. And the best part about it is that it was a direct result of The Decision.
Author:  Nas [ Sat Sep 02, 2017 9:54 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
FavreFan wrote:
No player in history could. And the best part about it is that it was a direct result of The Decision.


I can't say you're wrong.
Author:  long time guy [ Sat Sep 02, 2017 10:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
Nas wrote:
long time guy wrote:
LeBron hasn't exactly had to defeat many juggernauts during his glorious runs to the finals. It would be much more impressive had he done it in the West. He also has had the benefit of playing with 4 guys that will be in the Hall of Fame at some point.

Bosh wasn't a role player either. James also bailed on Miami once the going got a little rough. The last 2 seasons his been beaten at his own game. First Durant now Irving.


Doing it 7 years in the row can't be dismissed even if you aren't a LeBron fan. He's played for a championship for nearly his entire career.



Him engineering his way onto teams expected to get to the finals also can't be dismissed either. If it were all about his individual greatness then there would not be a need to cherry pick teams.
Author:  veganfan21 [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:33 am ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
What's over the top? All I'm doing is pointing out he's had the EC on lock since 2010. That's a fact. You've got a guy in here who gave him a "C' in 2015 when he won the finals. Again when he won the finals. With that kinda anti LeBron sentiment I guess someone pointing out facts like I am is gonna stick out.

Saying LeBron is indisposable.


Well that's crazy if we're using the dictionary definition of the word but I'm not sure why you insist on defining that word outside of the context of the discussion we're having. In every day conversation people tailor words to fit the conversation they're having. That allows me for example to say that Jordan is "impossible" to guard, or that iverson "breaks" ankles. If you want to use these words literally then I'm incorrect because it is indeed possible to guard Jordan and iverson doesn't break ankles, but no one would say that because the context is clear. So in a similar context LBJ has indeed been an "indisposable" or "indispensable" player to his own teams, more so than any other player. He's indispensable in the exact same way that Jordan was indispensable, or how Duncan was indispensable, etc.
Author:  long time guy [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 7:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
What's over the top? All I'm doing is pointing out he's had the EC on lock since 2010. That's a fact. You've got a guy in here who gave him a "C' in 2015 when he won the finals. Again when he won the finals. With that kinda anti LeBron sentiment I guess someone pointing out facts like I am is gonna stick out.

Saying LeBron is indisposable.


Well that's crazy if we're using the dictionary definition of the word but I'm not sure why you insist on defining that word outside of the context of the discussion we're having. In every day conversation people tailor words to fit the conversation they're having. That allows me for example to say that Jordan is "impossible" to guard, or that iverson "breaks" ankles. If you want to use these words literally then I'm incorrect because it is indeed possible to guard Jordan and iverson doesn't break ankles, but no one would say that because the context is clear. So in a similar context LBJ has indeed been an "indisposable" or "indispensable" player to his own teams, more so than any other player. He's indispensable in the exact same way that Jordan was indispensable, or how Duncan was indispensable, etc.



He is dispensable in a way that every player is dispensable. The methods that he uses in being "dispensed" makes him more valuable than he'd ordinarily be. James has left teams high and dry each time he has been dispensed. If he'd made his intentions known in the beginning then he could have been dealt so that the team he departs could receive a fair return in exchange for him leaving.

Any team will be hurt by the departure of a great player. If James would have told Cleveland or Miami that he was leaving neither of those teams would have declined as precipitously as they did. You can and I'm sure will argue that "he's LeBron James damnit" and as such owes them nothing.

Irving owes him nothing either. He was there for the first installment of the LeBron James vanishing act. He was the kid expected to pick up the pieces at 19 years old. He made sure that it wouldn't happen again by requesting a trade. Now let's see if a 33 year old LeBron James can get to the Finals with Kevin Love as his 2nd best player.

Boston will be the toughest opponent that he will have faced during his 7 year run through the East. No Irving nor Wade and Bosh to ride shotgun this time. Let's go. If Irving is as shitty of a player as you keep suggesting then James should have no problem running through the East again.
Author:  FavreFan [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:21 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
veganfan21 wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
What's over the top? All I'm doing is pointing out he's had the EC on lock since 2010. That's a fact. You've got a guy in here who gave him a "C' in 2015 when he won the finals. Again when he won the finals. With that kinda anti LeBron sentiment I guess someone pointing out facts like I am is gonna stick out.

Saying LeBron is indisposable.


Well that's crazy if we're using the dictionary definition of the word but I'm not sure why you insist on defining that word outside of the context of the discussion we're having. In every day conversation people tailor words to fit the conversation they're having. That allows me for example to say that Jordan is "impossible" to guard, or that iverson "breaks" ankles. If you want to use these words literally then I'm incorrect because it is indeed possible to guard Jordan and iverson doesn't break ankles, but no one would say that because the context is clear. So in a similar context LBJ has indeed been an "indisposable" or "indispensable" player to his own teams, more so than any other player. He's indispensable in the exact same way that Jordan was indispensable, or how Duncan was indispensable, etc.

It's just a weird way to phrase it. Yeah, he was the best player on his team. Nothing more.
Author:  Nas [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
Best in the league and the best talent the NBA has ever seen.
Author:  FavreFan [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:30 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
Nas wrote:
Best in the league and the best talent the NBA has ever seen.

A ridiculous statement. But then again, the "talent" aspect of sports debate is always stupid. Your talent in the NBA is what you produce on the court. That's it. LeBron is behind Jordan and a handful of others still.
Author:  Nas [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:33 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
FavreFan wrote:
Nas wrote:
Best in the league and the best talent the NBA has ever seen.

A ridiculous statement. But then again, the "talent" aspect of sports debate is always stupid. Your talent in the NBA is what you produce on the court. That's it. LeBron is behind Jordan and a handful of others still.


No it isn't. We all know naturally gifted people who never reach their potential for MANY reasons. The smartest kid doesn't always get the best grades and the most gifted doesn't always perform the best.
Author:  FavreFan [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:36 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
Nas wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Nas wrote:
Best in the league and the best talent the NBA has ever seen.

A ridiculous statement. But then again, the "talent" aspect of sports debate is always stupid. Your talent in the NBA is what you produce on the court. That's it. LeBron is behind Jordan and a handful of others still.


No it isn't. We all know naturally gifted people who never reach their potential for MANY reasons. The smartest kid doesn't always get the best grades and the most gifted doesn't always perform the best.

Over the course of 15 years the most gifted player plays the best. In a given game, that's not necessarily true.
Author:  Nas [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
FavreFan wrote:
Nas wrote:
FavreFan wrote:
Nas wrote:
Best in the league and the best talent the NBA has ever seen.

A ridiculous statement. But then again, the "talent" aspect of sports debate is always stupid. Your talent in the NBA is what you produce on the court. That's it. LeBron is behind Jordan and a handful of others still.


No it isn't. We all know naturally gifted people who never reach their potential for MANY reasons. The smartest kid doesn't always get the best grades and the most gifted doesn't always perform the best.

Over the course of 15 years the most gifted player plays the best. In a given game, that's not necessarily true.


Mike had that "it" that can'tbe measured. Everyone here takes 18 year old LeBron over Jordan because LeBron is a physical freak of nature.
Author:  FavreFan [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 8:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
That "it" is talent
Author:  veganfan21 [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 9:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
I'd say LBJ was more talented than MJ but MJ had the better killer instinct. If LBJ had that instinct he'd be the best ever, and he certainly wouldn't be 3-5 in the finals. Mj still king though.
Author:  Nas [ Sun Sep 03, 2017 9:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: LeBron?
If I could figure out the stars who had it I would never lose.
Page 4 of 4 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/