Category Archives: ’10 – ’11 Season

It’s been a while since I wrote about LeBron.  About time to get back to some hoopserving about him.

If you’ve read my other postings about LeBron (and, if you haven’t, I encourage you to click the LeBron James tag and read them), you’ve seen me write that I don’t hate LeBron.  Rather, I have problems with the way he is judged, basically all tracing from the fact that I have felt, for a while, that his hype was always a few steps ahead of his accomplishments.

Slight addendum to that feeling: I hate him now.  Not “hate” the way that I hate criminals or dictators, but “hate” in the way that sports fans hate certain athletes.  In that context, this is the purest, most intense hatred I’ve ever felt.

I’m not sure exactly when or why the hatred became so pure and so intense, but it was undeniable this morning.  I was driving in my car, listening to Mike and Mike on the radio, as they debated whether it would “mean more to” Dirk or LeBron to win a championship this year.  Mike Greenberg was arguing that it would mean more to LeBron, because, while it would be a great accomplishment for Dirk, it would “validate” LeBron’s decision to go to Miami, and bolster his legacy enough that he could start making a case for being one of the top 10, or even top 5, players ever.  Some guest on the show was agreeing with him.

My head almost exploded.

I had to pull the car over, and roll down the window.  The game I love has been hijacked by this putz, and these knuckleheads who analyze it are buying the snake oil he’s selling.

Lost upon them, apparently, is the fact that LeBron hasn’t been all that great in the playoffs this year.  It’s like they entirely overlook the main criticism about LeBron’s move to Miami; HE TOOK THE EASY WAY OUT, surrounding himself with teammates who are perfectly capable of winning without him.  The very essence of the problem with what LeBron did is that he’s now in a position to win without being great, yet these “experts” were saying that a Miami win would validate his greatness.

This got me angry.  Furious, almost.  Like any testosterone-driven, red-meat-eating manly man, when I get angry, I… get on the internet to look at basketball statistics.  (What, that’s not what testosterone-driven men do?)  The stats got me even angrier.

There’s a rant developing deep in my soul, but, at the moment, it hasn’t yet developed into words.  For now, it’s just a bunch of numbers.

Let’s look at some of those numbers.  The Miami Heat have played, as I type this, 13 games in this year’s playoffs.  Let’s look at 3 categories: points, rebounds, and assists, and see how much leadership LeBron is providing this team…

Game 1 (vs Philly): He led them in rebounds, and tied for the lead in assists.  By the way, the opening two lines of ESPN’s summary, which is entitled “Dwyane Wade’s late heroics help Heat open playoffs with tight win” say “Chris Bosh and LeBron James watched from afar when Dwyane Wade controlled the final portions of games during the Miami Heat’s championship run in 2006.  They got a closer look Saturday, when Wade helped save Miami from a Game 1 collapse.”

Game 2 (vs Philly): He led them in points and assists.

Game 3 (vs Philly): He led them in rebounds.

Game 4 (vs Philly): He led them in points and assists

Game 5 (vs Philly):  The ESPN summary of the game says “Dwyane Wade leads Heat into Eastern Conference semifinals.”  LeBron was third – yes, third – on the team in points and rebounds, and led them in assists.

Game 6 (vs Boston): The ESPN summary of the game says “Dwyane Wade, James Jones help Heat stifle Celts, take Game 1.”  LeBron was third – yes, third – on the team in scoring, and tied for the lead in assists.

Game 7 (vs Boston): He led the team in points.

Game 8 (vs Boston):  He led the team in none of the three categories.  None.  As in, not a single one.  (A/K/A zero.  Zilch. Nada.)

Game 9 (vs Boston): He led the team in points and rebounds.

Game 10 (vs Boston):  He led the team in none of the three categories.  None.  Again.

Game 11 (vs Chicago):  He led the team in assists.  He was the third highest scorer.  Yes, the third.  Again.

Game 12 (vs Chicago):  He led the team in points, rebounds, and assists.

Game 13 (vs Chicago): The ESPN summary of the game says “Chris Bosh powers Heat to 2-1 series lead over Bulls.”  LeBron led the team in assists.

Let’s tally up those numbers.  In 13 games so far, LeBron has led the Heat in scoring 5 times.  He led the team in rebounding 4 times.  He led the team in assists (including two instances of being tied for the lead) 8 times.

Many, many, many more numbers to come over the next few days.  Hatred this pure and this intense is backed up by plenty of numbers.

 

2 Comments:

  • Lusch

    I think your hatred for Lebron – deserving as it may be for shorting his legacy – is clouding your judgment about his on court accomplishments this playoffs. Lebron was a notorious late game choke artist with Cleveland yet somehow, he has managed to become THE guy late in the game for Miami. That matters more than numbers (which btw have been impressive factoring in typical reg season >> postseason stat declines) in the playoffs.

  • Tweener

    A good point, Lusch. It will be addressed in one of the upcoming parts of my rant. (Which is shaping up to be a 3 or 4 part series, and will be developed over the next few days.)

Leave a Comment:

Energy Is A Talent

Watching the Lakers lose to the Mavs was quite a trip.  In my mind, the Lakers were the favorite to win the whole thing — the only team with a superstar on the perimeter, and multiple quality big men.

My theory made perfect sense.

Until the games started.

Watching the Lakers big men be so inconsistent reminded me of a conversation I had during last year’s playoffs, with my friend JZ.  JZ is a wise old hoopserver.  In fact, he’s a member of the Jedi Council of Hoopserving Masters.

Around this time last year, I told JZ that I just couldn’t understand why some players were as inconsistent as they were.  I can’t think of a different profession where someone who performs at a superstar level sometimes, an average level sometimes, and below average the rest of the time is still regarded as useful.  Yet, in basketball, it happens frequently.  We simply accept such players as “inconsistent.”  It was flabbergasting to me, I told him, that such “inconsistent” players get paid millions of dollars and do not even exert 100% effort every time they play.

JZ explained that energy is a talent.  I think it’s an excellent hoopservation, and would only add two points of clarification:

1.  “Energy,” for purposes of this discussion, includes the thing we call “focus.”  The inability to devote the same effort to every game includes “energy,” which refers to the physical component, and “focus,” which refers to the mental component.

2.  When someone like, say, Lamar Odom, or Andrew Bynum, or Pau Gasol, looks like a superstar on Friday and a scrub on Sunday, it’s not because he isn’t trying, or stayed out too late on the Sunset Strip on Saturday night.  It’s just that energy isn’t one of the talents that made him a professional basketball player, so, even though he is exerting 100% effort on Sunday, it is 100% of a different energy level than he had on Friday.  In other words, the players who have the talent of high energy wake up every day with a high energy level, and when they exert 100% effort, it is 100% of an energy level that hardly changes.  The players who do not have the talent of energy do not wake up with the same energy level every day, and when they exert 100% effort, it is 100% of a different energy level on different days.  People who resent these players for not trying their hardest every game are missing the point.

Put a few guys on the same team who do not have the talent of high energy, and you’ll wind up with a team that looks like it has a personality disorder.  Like, for example, the Lakers.  The Lakers won two championships in a row, and looked, at times, like a juggernaut on their way to a third.  But, when their superstar (Kobe) started to slip just a little bit, and one of their other high-energy players (Artest) lost a half a step, then, all of a sudden, the team was heavily dependent on its low-energy guys.

It can work, if a few of those guys are playing at a high level each game, but it’s a risky venture.  There are lots of ways to try to win in the NBA, but talent usually wins out.  And energy is a talent.

 

2 Comments:

  • Champ

    I find the concept of energy being considered a talent an interesing one. How does one distinguish between those with varying energy levels and those who simply don’t give 100% on a daily basis though? Is the assumption that all professional athletes give 100% of their energy every day? More than half the players in the league barely play defense so how could those players be giving 100%? On another note, maybe the Lakers didn’t win the series because Kobe isn’t as good as everyone says he is. If Lebron were in his place, they certainly wouldn’t have lost.

  • ZackNovakJr.

    I think your point that energy/focus has a mental component is a crucial one. Unlike height or athleticism which are god-given talents, energy is primarily a learned skill. Some can learn it on their own, but others need coaching. Teaching players how to consistently focus is a coach’s most important job. The Lakers loss to the Mavs because of a lack of focus is therefore an indictment of Phil Jackson. One could argue that Gasol, Odom, Bynum, etc. are uncoachable, but I’d disagree. Almost all players are coachable, the coach just has to figure out how to reach each one or get rid of the ones that are truly obstinate. However, few truly obstinate individuals ever make it to highest level of their field. Gasol, Odom, and Bynum are all coachable. Phil Jackson just failed. Good thing for the Lakers that they will probably have a new coach next year.

Leave a Comment: