Fair Is Fair

[Hards Alumni]

Starting Knicks
PG - Chris Duhon
SG - Wilson Chandler
SF - Jared Jeffries
PF - Al Harrington
C - David Lee

Starting Cavs without Lebron
PG - Mo Williams
SG - Anthony Parker
SF - Jamario Moon
PF - Anderson Varejao
C - Shaquille O'Neal / Big Z

This also takes into account that Jamario Moon is the best the Cavs could do without Lebron, which isn't the case.

I'd take that Cavs team over the Knicks in a hearbeat.  I never argued that the Cav's are the best team in the East... because I know they aren't.  Like you said, they are the 3rd best team in the East.  Do they suck without Lebron?  Of course they do!

ALL I SAID WAS WITHOUT LEBRON JAMES THEY ARE NOT WORSE THAN THE KNICKS.

[GGGG]

+1

While he was unstoppable in his prime, now he is just another guy that gets paid tons of money and doesn't understand his role.

His +/- last night was -25.

Egads...

[ecompt]

Ten years ago, Shaq's talent was as big as his ego. Now all he has is his ego. And even in Shaq's prime Wilt Chamberlain would have eaten him alive.

[reinko]

Bron Bron to the Clips in 2010.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

Starting Knicks
PG - Chris Duhon
SG - Wilson Chandler
SF - Jared Jeffries
PF - Al Harrington
C - David Lee

Starting Cavs without Lebron
PG - Mo Williams
SG - Anthony Parker
SF - Jamario Moon
PF - Anderson Varejao
C - Shaquille O'Neal / Big Z

This also takes into account that Jamario Moon is the best the Cavs could do without Lebron, which isn't the case.

I'd take that Cavs team over the Knicks in a hearbeat.  I never argued that the Cav's are the best team in the East... because I know they aren't.  Like you said, they are the 3rd best team in the East.  Do they suck without Lebron?  Of course they do!

ALL I SAID WAS WITHOUT LEBRON JAMES THEY ARE NOT WORSE THAN THE KNICKS.

Are you guys mentally challenged? I said "put LeBron on the Knicks" and they're a playoff team. I'm still waiting to hear how I'm wrong. Your fantastic and relevant team comparison leaves out one very large hypothetical presence on the Knicks.

[jmayer1]

Are you guys mentally challenged? I said "put LeBron on the Knicks" and they're a playoff team. I'm still waiting to hear how I'm wrong. Your fantastic and relevant team comparison leaves out one very large hypothetical presence on the Knicks.

Actually, they are referring to your statement in bold.  I don't think you were very clear there.  It comes off looking like you are saying that if you took James off the Cavs, they would be worse than the current Knics (w/o James).  If that was not your point then it should have been phrased different.

Without James, the Cavaliers are worse than the Knicks. Put him on the NYK and they become an instant playoff team. That said, I think it's more likely that he'll re-sign with the Cavs or sign with the Nets.

[Hards Alumni]

Actually, they are referring to your statement in bold.  I don't think you were very clear there.  It comes off looking like you are saying that if you took James off the Cavs, they would be worse than the current Knics (w/o James).  If that was not your point then it should have been phrased different.

Correctamundo.

do you think anyone would argue if you put Lebron on the Knicks that they wouldn't be better than the Cavs without him?

Where I'm from, you say what you mean, and you mean what you say.

[bartmiller#1]

The idea that LeBron would make more money or get more exposure by playing in NYC is outdated.  It's not 1962.  He doesn't need to play in NY for Madison Ave. to find him and throw him money. 

He's going to get the same amount of exposure anywhere he plays-- because the attention comes to him, he doesn't need to go to it.  He's obviously getting a max contract.  He's going to go where he thinks he can win and where he's comfortable. 

In the last 10 years the Cavs haven't just been a better team than the Knicks-- they've been a better run franchise.  Yes, LeBron has a lot to do with that.  But the point remains that the Knicks have been a nightmare-- and absolute cluster****.  They have Donnie Walsh now-- and D'Antoni-- and they will get better.  But the assumption that LBJ would want to play there "because it's the Knicks" is borderline absurd. 

What have the Knicks done in LeBron's lifetime?  Lost in the finals.  A couple times.  LeBron's done that in Cleveland. 

I hope he stays put, but who knows. 

[wadesworld]

The idea that LeBron would make more money or get more exposure by playing in NYC is outdated.  It's not 1962.  He doesn't need to play in NY for Madison Ave. to find him and throw him money. 

He's going to get the same amount of exposure anywhere he plays-- because the attention comes to him, he doesn't need to go to it.  He's obviously getting a max contract.  He's going to go where he thinks he can win and where he's comfortable. 

In the last 10 years the Cavs haven't just been a better team than the Knicks-- they've been a better run franchise.  Yes, LeBron has a lot to do with that.  But the point remains that the Knicks have been a nightmare-- and absolute cluster****.  They have Donnie Walsh now-- and D'Antoni-- and they will get better.  But the assumption that LBJ would want to play there "because it's the Knicks" is borderline absurd. 

What have the Knicks done in LeBron's lifetime?  Lost in the finals.  A couple times.  LeBron's done that in Cleveland. 

I hope he stays put, but who knows.

Your whole post seems pretty contradictory.  First you say that he doesn't need to go to New York to make more money or get more exposure, and then you say that he doesn't need to go to New York because the Knicks are a worse team and a worse run franchise than the Cavaliers are.  If he ends up going to New York, then whey is it that he went?

[bartmiller#1]

Nothing contradictory at all:

1.  Going to NY does nothing for his bottom line that he can't accomplish in Cleveland, Milwaukee, Orlando, or LA. 

2.  There's nothing about what NY has done on the court in the last 20 years that would lead LBJ to want to play there-- it's not like we're talking about the Lakers.  During LBJ's lifetime the Knicks have been nothing special. 

There's nothing mutually exclusive about those two points. 

I don't pretend to have any clue what he's thinking, and I can't really guess why he'd go there if he did.  My opinion is that such a move would be stupid.  But that's just an opinion.

[chcsportsfan]

The clippers do make more sense, big market, way better team (very young and talented, albeit raw), but the Nets do make a lot of sense with Jay-Z being a partial owner and them moving to the City...regardless a move to NYK could not be a worse situation for LBJ, ton of pressure and w/ a max contract no money available on other pieces which are necessary...