Who said it wasn't?

Butthead logic: Lebron gets double teamed=SUPPORTING CAST SUCKS.

lmao


your logic: guys in the nba knock down open shots. they are great.


gimme a break and quit trollin

LBJ fans needs to stop this madness.

Every time someone dares to say someone is better than him they act like someone just broke a ten commandment lol.

I mean really c'mon...

He is NOT on MJ's level and never will be as far as I'm concerned

No, my logic: Guys who play in the NBA are good, because they made it to the NBA, and they helped Lebron to win 60+ games twice, and go to the NBA Finals. LOL

Oh man, the fallacies in that!

its called perspective lol


we can all agree nba players are better than the guys in pickup games at the ymca

is that what you wanted us to all agree on?

I love how you say that even though he's not even 30 years old.

What if he wins the next five championships and gets MVP in all of them, giving him a seven-peat? He won't be ahead of Jordan then? Give me a break.

You're being absolutely ridiculous. "LeBron has a terrible supporting cast" is meant to be taken in the CONTEXT OF THE NBA.

OF COURSE LeBron's supporting cast is full of of some of the greatest basketball players alive. It's just that LeBron's group of teammates was OBJECTIVELY WORSE than the teammates that basically everyone else in the NBA had. Case in point: the same team was the worst team in the NBA when LeBron left, BECAUSE EVERYONE ELSE WAS CONSIDERABLY BETTER.

Example of Butthead logic #2: Not hating on a player=THEY'RE GREAT PLAYERS.

I fully expect your response to be: Uh huhuhuh #2 uh huh uh huhuhuh

Ohhh, so I've gotten that brain functioning a little bit. You still missed the point, though.

dont worry i dont need any more of an argument

cavs went from 61 wins with lebron to...... 19 wins.... without him lmao

so yah those other guys were good enough for 19 wins

Objective in what way? I'd like to see some objective evidence that they were worse to any significant degree. I think the fact that they accomplished the things they did testify to the fact that the Cavs as a whole were a strong team. Winning 66 games, nearly going undefeated at home during the regular season, making the finals, etc.

Again, they were bad because they lost the best player in basketball.

MJ was once in a lifetime, ain't happening again...

Your team isn't just doomed when you lose your best player if you have decent players still on the team lol. The Bulls went 55-27 after Michael Jordan left.

1993

The objective evidence is that, again, THEY WENT 19-63

And by this logic, the Cavs would have won how many games without them? I'm not even talking about Lebron having to face 5 guys by himself, which would obviously lead to a drastic decrease in performance, and he'd probably lose all 82 games, but purely going based off of your twisted logic, how many games would they have won? Maybe 45 or something? When they made the finals, they won 50 games, so what would they have won? 30?

You're helping me prove my point.

They still had a star player. What'd the Bulls do after they lost Pippen?

:rofl::rofl::rofl:

:usehead:

But then there are so many things lacking in Lebron that MJ was excelling at even at his age.

The man chokes every time in finals and he doesn't know how to close. Thank goodness for that supporting class because he would just fall apart.

I don't think you understand how much a once-in-a-generation superstar does for a team. It's very simple: when LeBron had his awful Cavaliers teammates, the best he could do ever do with any team is get to the Finals but get swept. When he moved to Miami, he instantly made the Finals the first year and has WON the Finals every year since after only making the Finals once with his ****ty Cavaliers teammates which is a testament to how great LeBron was that year.

You are literally the only person that has ever tried to argue this, you're being unbelievably immature by trying to pull this bull****. Everyone that knows a god damn thing about basketball knows that LeBron's supporting cast was ****, end of story. Keep going on being a five year old to prove a point just because you hate LeBron and be a ****ing man and admit you're wrong. Jesus christ. Google the topic and read what professionals if that's what it takes to drill it into your thick skull.

Why don't you just calm down lol Everyone is entitled to their opinion!

Damn dude, I didn't realize it was that important to you. I'm not trying to hurt anyone's feelings, but your argument simply isn't rational. No one's denying Lebron's impact on his teammates or anything like that, but you want this to be about how Lebron carried the team and all of this nonsense. He didn't carry his team, he was the centerpiece of several good teams, and my argument supports that. Your argument supports a series of irrational ideals that you probably got from ESPN pundits who dramatize everything to create an illusion that suckers like you will buy into.

I've stated facts, you've given me I think 3 facts: Jameson's age at the time he played for the Cavs, and Mo Williams being a reserve for Portland, and that the Cavs won 19 games after Lebron left. How those are actually relevant, I have no idea.

The fact that you can't see how that's relevant leads me to believe that you are the biggest, most imbecilic hater that has maybe ever existed and I have no desire to ever associate myself with you.

The Bulls without Derrick Rose are still a playoff team This has been proven two seasons in a row now. The Cavaliers without LeBron won 19 games. You are literally lying if you cannot see that there is a massive difference there and that it shows how bad LeBron's teammates were.

Oh, that just makes me sad all over.

The Bulls also have multiple star players. What, are you saying Derrick Rose isn't a difference maker, or that he isn't as big a difference maker as Lebron? How did Derrick Rose get into this again? And still with the 19 wins thing, huh?

Man, you're just all over the place to try and win this debate. Fine. I concede. You win, enjoy your moral victory.

exactly. The cavaliers had no other star players. How are you not understanding this. i have never been so baffled that someone can be so daft in my entire life.

I've only said it multiple times. ****, did I have to say it one more time for you to actually read it?

:bonkhead::laughing::laughing::laughing:

ll this is some of the most incredible sports ignorance i think anyone could ever see

i almost want to frame this moment so that people will believe me when i tell them someone is arguing LeBron had a good team. He had a team set up nicely for him because they were solid enough shooters when open, but with no mega superstar guiding them they were one of the worst teams to ever step on a basketball court which makes it pretty undeniable that they were not great NBA players.

I almost want to screenshot every one of your arguments and use it for an example on the Wikipedia page on logical fallacies. :rofl:

Thank goodness for Ray Allen because ya boy choked in Game 6 fo sho....

Didn't show up at all...

i think he had a triple double lol

The Spurs were leading in double digits the entire game. lol

He did not show up at all.

It was by the grace of God and a couple of dirty refs as to why they won that game in the last .5 seconds...

I've taken several debate classes and had years of speech/debate.

http://i.imgur.com/OOA8QzF.jpg

Show me on that chart (I have this chart at the top of my bookmarks, as I have a passion for debate) what fallacies I've done and give concrete examples of where they were so I can fix it. Except there are none because my argument is basic common sense.

Besides ad hominem.

i repeat he had a trip doub


it wasnt his best game


which is funny cause it was still a trip doub

I can't keep up with this thread. Slow down!

So he has a trip doub in every final series?

People who blame the refs for the result of a game fail. It's such a cop-out. The refs aren't Jesus Christ, so get over it.

I watched that game, and when they reviewed ray allen's three, Tim Duncan illegally substituted in the game and THE REFS never issued a technical foul on the Spurs because they didn't notice it.

And anyway, Duncan also should have been IN THE GAME TO GET REBOUNDS so Bosh couldn't tower over all the spurs players and snag one, which is exactly what happened.

The players win games, not the refs, and you can point the result of that game to Duncan not being in the game when he should have been.


WTH? Mike Brown had LeBron play point-forward and take top-of-the-arc threes like a pointguard. When your star player is a perimeter player, you don't throw in more perimeter shooters. The only reason it worked was because LeBron played however he felt like and drove the ball. The whole set up in Cleveland was so fing broken it's not even funny. The reason they were good was because LeBron was LeBron, despite Mike Brown trying to constrain him into doing something he was terrible at.

Refs can have a huge impact on an NBA game. And often do.

I reiterate the players win the games, not the refs.

I'm not defending the refs, they make some f'd up calls sometimes, (or they don't make calls), but there's a reason why coaches have their players watch gameplay footage: so they can figure out what they did wrong in that game, and how they can do better next time.

They're not saying, "Oh this ref didn't make that call, that's why we didn't win." What they ARE saying is, "Look, we got to defend LeBron better, (etc.) we got to do this and that, and then we'll be better off.

And I just presented an instance where the refs didn't call a HUGE violation against the Spurs, nullifying the ridiculous notion that LeBron and the heat always get favorable calls.

If you really want to keep talking about this, I can get more detailed...

Tell that to the 2006 Mavs.