"I would never play with.."

[Reality]

We've now heard from both MJ and Magic on how they would never do what Lebron did in joining Bosh and Wade in Miami.
(paraphrasing, if anyone has exact quotes go for it or I'll try put them up later)
I'm calling b.s., find their schpeels to be both insecure and egotistical (ego in reality hidden by low self esteem).

For one thing, Magic had Kareem, Jamaal Wilkes and Coop in place already, Norm Nixon as an ample off guard, two great rolers added in 81-82 in Bob Mc and Kurt Rambo.  Add all star James Worthy from 82-83 on.  Oh and one of the best coaches of all time, Pat Riley.  Shut your piehole Magic.

True, Jordan went thru three seasons before getting Pippen and excellent roler Horace Grant and of course a real difference in coaching that being Phil Jackson.

Bird has chosen to say nothing (that i know of) and certainly with a GOAT roster he would be completely out of bounds in whining like MJ and Jordan.

Pippen and Oscar O.:
"I don't know what all the grief was about," Pippen said. "No fans, no organization, no one can decide what a free agent can do or should do or where he's going to go, and there's no reason for anyone to hold a grudge against LeBron for making that decision."

Oscar Robertson also defended James, saying the free agents were just taking advantage of the "Oscar Robertson Rule." Robertson, as president of the NBA Players Association, filed a class-action lawsuit against the league and its teams that the league settled in 1976, removing a team's option to keep a player for life and opening the door for unrestricted free agency.

Thoughts?

[Wolverine]

I don't have a problem with him wanting to switch teams.  I have a problem with the way in which he did it.

[Joe Vancil]

Well, I *DO* have a problem with him wanting to switch teams.

Why would he *NOT* want to stay in Cleveland?

Does the franchise have owners and fans that support it well?  YES, they do.

Does the franchise have a history of treating former stars well?  YES, they do.

Does the franchise have a solid roster, capable of deep playoff runs and potential championships?  YES, they do (or, in this case, did).

Has the franchise shown a loyalty to the player, paying them well, respecting and promoting them?  YES, they have.

Did the franchise make a competitve off?  YES, they did.  In fact, they made the *BEST* offer.

Add to this that it's the only franchise the guy ever played for, and essentially was his home-town team.

Look at Undonis Haslem.  He took less money to stay with his home team, and this isn't the first time he's done that.  That's a class act.

For their loyalty, Cleveland gets a couple of draft picks in the 70+ range.  Thanks a lot.  They should have told him that a couple of 70+ draft picks were worthless to them, so he could figure out a different way to get the extra year and higher raises.

LEAVING, in such a case, is bad enough.  To do it HOW he did it makes it all that much worse.

I'm sure you have problems with the way Bryant held the Lakers hostage back in 2004.  LeBron did the exact same thing to Cleveland.  The difference is that after the Lakers did everything he asked, BRYANT STAYED, whereas James bolted.

Had Bryant bolted, you'd have had a problem with it - as well you should have.  I don't understand why you don't have the same problem with James.

[westkoast]

So James Worthy and Norm Nixon are Larry Bird caliber players now?  When Kareem faded Magic was still able to take the Lakers to a finals.  At that point in time Magic could have tried to leave to play with big talent but did not.  There is a difference.


As for Jordan, Barkley, and Magic's comments I think they realize the bigger picture.  The NBA needs legit rivalries.  Not only in each conference but obviously across both.  You need the Pacers Vs Knicks rivalry in the EC.  It would be nice to still have Lakers Vs Spurs in the WC.

Had Bryant bolted, you'd have had a problem with it - as well you should have.  I don't understand why you don't have the same problem with James.

Easy.  Lebron James is a Kobe Bryant rival.  In order for Kobe Bryant to look bad someone has to be there to make him look bad (even though we know how good he is at making himself look bad).  Reality backs Lebron James with passion as a way to try to 'dethrone' Kobe in anyones mind who might like Kobe as a basketball player.

[Ted]

Easy.  Lebron James is a Kobe Bryant rival.  In order for Kobe Bryant to look bad someone has to be there to make him look bad (even though we know how good he is at making himself look bad).  Reality backs Lebron James with passion as a way to try to 'dethrone' Kobe in anyones mind who might like Kobe as a basketball player.

I have to agree with you there.

[Reality]

Does the franchise have a solid roster, capable of deep playoff runs and potential championships?  YES, they do (or, in this case, did).

Did have a chance.  So now to you he is supposed to forego that chance for a championship and stay.

Had Bryant bolted, you'd have had a problem with it - as well you should have.  I don't understand why you don't have the same problem with James.

Untrue. 
Posted numerous times i would have accepted a trade that brought Kobes over to the Spurs.

[Joe Vancil]

Does the franchise have a solid roster, capable of deep playoff runs and potential championships?  YES, they do (or, in this case, did).

Did have a chance.  So now to you he is supposed to forego that chance for a championship and stay.

Did, as in Cleveland had a real, on-going chance to win had he stayed, but doesn't now that he left.  Cleveland could have won with LeBron, but couldn't if it gets two future second round picks in place of him.

Had Bryant bolted, you'd have had a problem with it - as well you should have.  I don't understand why you don't have the same problem with James.

Untrue. 
Posted numerous times i would have accepted a trade that brought Kobes over to the Spurs.

My mistake.  You wouldn't have had a problem with it if it benefitted the team you currently call yours.  Meaning you're probably also a Miami fan, and therefore, in favor of James decision for that reason.

A better question would by what you'd have thought had James gone to the Lakers in a sign-and-trade for Brown, Farmar, Walton, and Artest.

You'd have had a problem with it.  And you should have.

Let me make my point clear:  Cleveland has treated him well, has treated past greats well, and had assembled a team with a real chance to win it all.  They didn't do wrong by LeBron, they offered him the most money, and he left anyway.  THIS IS BAD FOR BASKETBALL.  Essentially, if you're not one of a set of "special" teams, you're not going to win.  You've got the Lakers, the Heat, the Bulls, the Knicks, and MAYBE the Celtics.  Those are the "real" teams.  Every other team is essentially a "farm" team.  San An has defied the odds, and that's because of having the best (or at worst, second-best) back-to-the-basket player in Duncan (and back-to-the-basket post dominance has always been a big factor in winning).  So Orlando might figure to have a chance if Howard develops offensively (ditto for Portland and Oden).  But that's it.

That is bad for basketball.  Why do I go to a Milwaukee Bucks game, if my team will never have a chance to win, in my lifetime, unless I luck out and win a lottery by getting a losing team's pick in a trade while I'm already a good team - or getting a superstar in the lottery because my current superstar missed a season with injury and comes back with a full recovery?  Why would I, even if I lived in Milwaukee, be a Bucks fan?

If fans in Milwaukee, Minnesota, Denver, Indiana, Utah, Phoenix, Dallas, etc. lose interest in going to pro basketball games, the league is in trouble.

[westkoast]

Does the franchise have a solid roster, capable of deep playoff runs and potential championships?  YES, they do (or, in this case, did).

Did have a chance.  So now to you he is supposed to forego that chance for a championship and stay.

Did, as in Cleveland had a real, on-going chance to win had he stayed, but doesn't now that he left.  Cleveland could have won with LeBron, but couldn't if it gets two future second round picks in place of him.

Had Bryant bolted, you'd have had a problem with it - as well you should have.  I don't understand why you don't have the same problem with James.

Untrue. 
Posted numerous times i would have accepted a trade that brought Kobes over to the Spurs.

My mistake.  You wouldn't have had a problem with it if it benefitted the team you currently call yours.  Meaning you're probably also a Miami fan, and therefore, in favor of James decision for that reason.

A better question would by what you'd have thought had James gone to the Lakers in a sign-and-trade for Brown, Farmar, Walton, and Artest.

You'd have had a problem with it.  And you should have.

Let me make my point clear:  Cleveland has treated him well, has treated past greats well, and had assembled a team with a real chance to win it all.  They didn't do wrong by LeBron, they offered him the most money, and he left anyway.  THIS IS BAD FOR BASKETBALL.  Essentially, if you're not one of a set of "special" teams, you're not going to win.  You've got the Lakers, the Heat, the Bulls, the Knicks, and MAYBE the Celtics.  Those are the "real" teams.  Every other team is essentially a "farm" team.  San An has defied the odds, and that's because of having the best (or at worst, second-best) back-to-the-basket player in Duncan (and back-to-the-basket post dominance has always been a big factor in winning).  So Orlando might figure to have a chance if Howard develops offensively (ditto for Portland and Oden).  But that's it.

That is bad for basketball.  Why do I go to a Milwaukee Bucks game, if my team will never have a chance to win, in my lifetime, unless I luck out and win a lottery by getting a losing team's pick in a trade while I'm already a good team - or getting a superstar in the lottery because my current superstar missed a season with injury and comes back with a full recovery?  Why would I, even if I lived in Milwaukee, be a Bucks fan?

If fans in Milwaukee, Minnesota, Denver, Indiana, Utah, Phoenix, Dallas, etc. lose interest in going to pro basketball games, the league is in trouble.

If you think about it now the league has stretched itself so thin that it is very close to snapping.  Like you said if those small cities lose their fan base there is no NBA.  I've always said that I think David Stern prays for a Sacramento Kings or San Antonio Spurs to emerge just as much as he does a Lakers/Celtics finals.  Having small market teams do well is very important for so many reasons.

[Reality]

My mistake.  You wouldn't have had a problem with it if it benefitted the team you currently call yours.  Meaning you're probably also a Miami fan, and therefore, in favor of James decision for that reason.

Your mistake again, but I'm getting used to it. 
You're getting more and more fabrikoastal recently.

A better question would by what you'd have thought had James gone to the Lakers in a sign-and-trade for Brown, Farmar, Walton, and Artest.

You'd have had a problem with it.  And you should have.

The Lakers are still riding off the Gasol collusion.  Give them their next down time and it'll happen.

Let me make my point clear:  Cleveland has treated him well, has treated past greats well, and had assembled a team with a real chance to win it all.  They didn't do wrong by LeBron, they offered him the most money, and he left anyway.  THIS IS BAD FOR BASKETBALL.  Essentially, if you're not one of a set of "special" teams, you're not going to win.  You've got the Lakers, the Heat, the Bulls, the Knicks, and MAYBE the Celtics.  Those are the "real" teams.  Every other team is essentially a "farm" team.  San An has defied the odds, and that's because of having the best (or at worst, second-best) back-to-the-basket player in Duncan (and back-to-the-basket post dominance has always been a big factor in winning).  So Orlando might figure to have a chance if Howard develops offensively (ditto for Portland and Oden).  But that's it.

That is bad for basketball.  Why do I go to a Milwaukee Bucks game, if my team will never have a chance to win, in my lifetime, unless I luck out and win a lottery by getting a losing team's pick in a trade while I'm already a good team - or getting a superstar in the lottery because my current superstar missed a season with injury and comes back with a full recovery?  Why would I, even if I lived in Milwaukee, be a Bucks fan?

If fans in Milwaukee, Minnesota, Denver, Indiana, Utah, Phoenix, Dallas, etc. lose interest in going to pro basketball games, the league is in trouble.

westkoast

If you think about it now the league has stretched itself so thin that it is very close to snapping.  Like you said if those small cities lose their fan base there is no NBA.  I've always said that I think David Stern prays for a Sacramento Kings or San Antonio Spurs to emerge just as much as he does a Lakers/Celtics finals.  Having small market teams do well is very important for so many reasons.

The NBAs overexpansion is a contributing cause to the lack of quality we see on the court today.
Altho you picked some of the wrong cities.
At any rate, shrink the league down to 16 teams (not gonna happen) and look at some of the rockin matchup we could see.

[westkoast]

The NBAs overexpansion is a contributing cause to the lack of quality we see on the court today.
Altho you picked some of the wrong cities.
At any rate, shrink the league down to 16 teams (not gonna happen) and look at some of the rockin matchup we could see.

How did I pick the wrong cities?  Sacramento and San Antonio are perfect examples of small towns have successful franchises.  The Kings maybe not so much recently but earlier in in the last decade they were a great small market franchise.

[Reality]

How did I pick the wrong cities?  Sacramento and San Antonio are perfect examples of small towns have successful franchises.  The Kings maybe not so much recently but earlier in in the last decade they were a great small market franchise.

Your point i was speaking to expansion.
Joes cities of

Milwaukee, Minnesota, Denver, Indiana, Utah, Phoenix, Dallas,

while i agree if some of the fans bail on their teams, some of them have been down for so long it's like why did the NBA ever expand to them.

It is what it is.  Look for Marshmellow Anthony and CPaul to head to NYKs next year.
Like it or dislike it we will see some good clashes amoungst the "haves". 

[westkoast]

How did I pick the wrong cities?  Sacramento and San Antonio are perfect examples of small towns have successful franchises.  The Kings maybe not so much recently but earlier in in the last decade they were a great small market franchise.

Your point i was speaking to expansion.
Joes cities of

Milwaukee, Minnesota, Denver, Indiana, Utah, Phoenix, Dallas,

while i agree if some of the fans bail on their teams, some of them have been down for so long it's like why did the NBA ever expand to them.

It is what it is.  Look for Marshmellow Anthony and CPaul to head to NYKs next year.
Like it or dislike it we will see some good clashes amoungst the "haves". 

The Nuggets are still a popular team in Denver.  They obviously will never be the Broncos but the city loves the team.  I've spent plenty of time there.  They've also went to the western conference finals 2 years ago so it's not exactly a junkie team.  The Suns were very popular for most of this decade in Arizona and across the country.  Their time is over and not just because they lost Amare but because their true super star is just being aged out.

Mil and Minnesota, I agree with.  Though Minnesota was a good team until KG took off.  They also had a shot at the finals but lost to a better Lakers team when Spree/Cassell were there.  Indiana has and probably never will be the same since Reggie Miller retired.

[Reality]

So James Worthy and Norm Nixon are Larry Bird caliber players now?  When Kareem faded Magic was still able to take the Lakers to a finals.  At that point in time Magic could have tried to leave to play with big talent but did not.  There is a difference.

Is Kareem a Larry Bird caliber player?  Many would say yes.  So using your logic is/was Z now a Kareem caliber player?  Jamison a Worthy caliber player?  Not.

When Kareem faded Magic had already ammased 5 trophys with him.  Big difference indeed.
Also LeBron took the Cavs to the finals as Magic took the Lakers to a finals loss without Kareem and co.

[Reality]

The Nuggets are still a popular team in Denver.  They obviously will never be the Broncos but the city loves the team.  I've spent plenty of time there.  They've also went to the western conference finals 2 years ago so it's not exactly a junkie team.  The Suns were very popular for most of this decade in Arizona and across the country.  Their time is over and not just because they lost Amare but because their true super star is just being aged out.

Mil and Minnesota, I agree with.  Though Minnesota was a good team until KG took off.  They also had a shot at the finals but lost to a better Lakers team when Spree/Cassell were there.  Indiana has and probably never will be the same since Reggie Miller retired.

Yes that is my point.  Mil and MN, in spite of Milwaukees now ancient NBA title are out of the running.
Utah, Phoenix, Dallas are still competetive.

Altho to Joes point, really how many teams are in the title hunt?  Utah it seems will forever be playoff maker, playoff sort of advancer, but never Champ nor Finalist (sans 97 98).
Phoenix same deal, altho they had the misfortune of playing in the West when the Spurs talent was sufficient to overcome Poppycock.
Denver same deal (even worse) and they are about to lose playoff advancer status when Marshmellow leaves (well maybe not, lets see who they add).

[westkoast]

So James Worthy and Norm Nixon are Larry Bird caliber players now?  When Kareem faded Magic was still able to take the Lakers to a finals.  At that point in time Magic could have tried to leave to play with big talent but did not.  There is a difference.

Is Kareem a Larry Bird caliber player?  Many would say yes.  So using your logic is/was Z now a Kareem caliber player?  Jamison a Worthy caliber player?  Not.

When Kareem faded Magic had already ammased 5 trophys with him.  Big difference indeed.
Also LeBron took the Cavs to the finals as Magic took the Lakers to a finals loss without Kareem and co.

Kareem was in his late 30s when they won the back to back.  He had been in the league for 17 years at that point.  Talk about 'miles' on a body.   He wasn't exactly 'fresh', they got swept in 1988, and retired a season later.  Stop trying to re-write history.  You are trying to take one situation which is a squad and apply it to another which is a triangle.  It's not fitting, its not going to work.  Try a different approach.  Lebron James running to another team to play with TWO superstars cannot be applied to Magic being drafted to Kareem's team half way through his career.

Magic at the very end of his career took the Lakers to the finals while on AIDS medication.  Lebron took the Cavs to the finals in the area of his prime.  Apples and oranges.  The similarities is the fact that the Lakers lost to the best perimeter player to ever play and the Cavs lost to the 2nd best back to the basket player of all time.

Aside from all that, the league wasn't as watered down as it is now.  A lot of the top teams in the 80s had multiple hall of fame players and that was just to keep up.  Certainly Lebron should be good enough to beat the Magic right?  As it stands right now they have 0 hall of famers (Dwight could possibly make it, maybe not) and the Cavs had one when they played (2 the following year).  If Lebron had such a horrible team how did they win 60 games?  How come they couldn't beat the Orlando Magic who had a team lacking top notch talent outside of one position?

Sorry but as usual your argument is one sided and slanted when it involves the Lakers.  You take a shoot at Magic but won't take a shot at Michael.  You'' diminish Magic's accomplishments as the leader of his squad but won't apply the same to Larry Bird.  No sense in continuing after this post.