Quote:
Originally Posted by KMayUSA6060
1) 3/4 Finals included Kyrie on the Cavs roster, and all four had Kevin Love. They had the talent.
2) I'm not saying he didn't do enough. I'm saying some of his decisions were ultimately detrimental to the Cavs' success in the Finals. i.e. Pushing for JR & Tristan Thompson to get massive contracts, pushing Kyrie out, pushing for Ty Lue to be hired, his style of play/game plans, etc.
3) Ridiculous statement. Anywhere LeBron goes is attractive to players, especially players that fit the 6th man role well, something we could have used. Also, Cleveland isn't as "ugly" as it used to be - 4 straight NBA Finals, 2016 World Series, RNC, revitalization of the night life with The Flats restoration - it's been a happenin' place. The other issue was, after all of these big contracts that LeBron pushed for "his boys" to get, the Cavs were handicapped salary wise. The Cavs are DEEP into the luxury tax.
|
We will just have to disagree that the Cavaliers had equal talent to the Warriors. The Cavs do not have a second superstar on par with Kevin Durant. History has shown over and over again that you all but need a second dominant superstar to win the title in the NBA.
I don't understand your point at all when you say any place Lebron goes is attractive to players, yet earlier in the thread you made the case that him leaving would be the best thing that ever happened to the franchise. Cleveland was attractive to Lebron James because he grew up in Ohio. It is still a cold, northern city without any history of winning.
In a larger sense, I think it is a problem for the NBA that so many of the cities have almost no chance of ever winning unless they get incredibly lucky in the draft.