What is laughable about LeBron from 30-34 being able to emulate Jordans stats and impact during that same age range?
Because, as I said, they aren't remotely the same players and don't play the game the same way. LeBron relies more on his athleticism and physicality than Jordan did. LeBron has also racked 41,000 minutes, now eclipsing both Magic and Bird's entire career minutes played.
So, yes, there is room for doubt that LeBron will have another 4-5 years of play at this level.
Again, I'm a bit surprised by this being a point of contention.
I listed Kobe, Jordan, and Duncan all as examples because they share many common traits with LeBron. Champions. Top player at their position in their era. Long impactful careers with championship seasons beyond what would be considered their physical primes. Hyper intelligent players.
Again, Kobe's career should've ended 2 years ago. That leaves you with Jordan and Duncan. But you leave out an enormous number of players whose careers depended on athleticism and then suddenly declined after 30.
To use the exceptional as a way of projecting what is likely, I think, sets oneself up for failure.
It was more of a profile of a certain type of player and less about how similar their specific game was or wasn't
Ahh.. I see. Well, again, I don't think those players resemble LeBron James in any regard other than them having also won championships; which, I don't think extends ones career.
LeBron stats, percentages and per36's are getting eerily close to his first year in Miami. Why would we assume that his first year back in Cleveland with 13 new teammates, a new coach, and mid season roster adjustments would be as efficient and great as his 2nd, 3rd, and 4th seasons in Miami?
You realize you're describing a negative slope, right? This is the right-hand side of a normal distribution curve. So, of course there would be an intercept ("looking like the first year in Miami") along a plot of LeBron's career statistics corresponding to an earlier year.
This is self-evident, and surely not evidence that LeBron is somehow on an ascending trajectory.
That argument is just as strong as this idea that he is now permanently well below his peak performance level because of age.
No, it isn't.
LeBron has surely declined athletically; certainly you don't want me to explain in detail how he's regressed, do you?
And to be clear, I do not equate peak physical level as an athlete to be the same thing as peak performance level as an NBA player.
Neither do I, but that's not really the issue. The issue is how much of a contributing factor is athleticism to LeBron James' game? And I think it's fairly significant.
Is it all encompassing? No. But athleticism is a larger component in James' game than Kobe Bryant's.
These same factors affect every other legit NBA title contender. If one of their main guys went down, then correspondingly so would their chance of winning the title that year, regardless of system they played.
Not true....
Teams that heavily rely on isolation to score points depend on those players individual talents to drive the offense. Whereas teams that rely on ball movement, weaves, and screens are less affected by the loss of an individual player.
Maybe I'm making more out of your statements than are intended to be there?
Surely, but I think you and I fundamentally disagree on a few key points. I also think you are the eternal optimist, which for a Cleveland fan, is quite refreshing...
As always though I respect your opinion.
If all you are saying is that father time catches up to all and that injuries can derail championship odds, then I would gladly concede you those points 100/100 times.
That is the gist of my argument, yes.
I just figured behind your thoughts there was some envy of an actual existing NBA franchise that you consider to be in better shape to win championships over any of the next three years, especially when applying the context that father time and injuries also apply to their roster.
I have the Cavaliers as favorites to win the championship, and I've had that stance since we traded for Kevin Love. Prior to the trade, I thought we favorites to win the Eastern Conference.
I project the Cavs as the favorites this year, and likely the next. The math breaks down beyond that point because of the numerous things that need to go right that too many Cavs fans simply aren't willing to consider (like Kevin Love signing a max contract somewhere else, or LeBron James' game plummeting due to him physically breaking down).
What other tea combines the elements that gives them a projection to compete for the title in each of the next 4 years better than our own?
In 4 years Anthony Davis will likely be the best player in the NBA, alongside Kevin Durant. Who knows what could happen in 4 years.
It's hard to see where Kevin Love is going with his individual performance. I expect Kyrie to be right there as Top 5 player in the league. If Kevin gets back to playing as he did in Minnesota, then we'd have a solid team. If not, a team like the Wizards (say, with Durant?) could be conceivably better than Cleveland by that time.
But for me to say we're set for a title for the next 4-5 years while Kevin Love hits free agency twice and we have no draft picks is just not something I'm prepared to do. Maybe if we were Miami in 2010, sure, but not in
our present situation.