That's it, I'm done with LeBron

I read something on ESPN where some Cavs fan from Clevelend said something like "If you're gonna leave, leave. But at least let us know in private." Ummm news flash Clevelend, there really is no "private" way to let someone know you're gonna leave. Was the national tv special over the top? Yes of course, I'll give you that. But really, blame the media and ESPN for that more than anything. They know all of us NBA junkies were gonna watch no matter if we love or hate LeBron, and yep, we all tuned in. How would anouncing his decision to leave be any different if he didn't do it this way? They'd all still be pissed and/or dissappointed if he'd announced it on twitter, through a web site, through a normal press announcement or through a statement from one of his reps. And they'd still be calling him a quitter. Pretty much a no-win situation.

Pretty funny that Bill Simmons from ESPN compared LeBron's signing with the Heat to this:

Stofe wrote:Pretty funny that Bill Simmons from ESPN compared LeBron's signing with the Heat to this:

Bill Simmons is the worlds biggest Celtic teabagger so no he is not happy that one team would get a bunch of high power stars together and....wait...um...isn't that what his Celtics just did three years ago?

I was never down with him in the first place. I'm only down with guys like David Robinson, Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili, more humble champions.

Ok, so here's how I come out on all this after thinking about it:

LeBron is an egotistical, narcissistic jerk with a god complex and a sense of entitlement because people around him have enabled it since junior high. What other conclusion can I come to after "witnessing" him quit on his team this year when the going got tough then say people were just "spoiled" by his success, pouted his way off the court last year after a loss, glosses himself "The King" despite having as many championship rings as all the ClubSpurs board members combined, constantly refers to himself in the third person, and decides to hold a one hour special to really twist the knife into the hearts of the people of Cleveland.

I don't begrudge LeBron for the decision he made. From a basketball standpoint, it made the most sense. I'd choose Miami over Cleveland even if I got two job offers and Miami offered a wheelbarrow worth of cash while Cleveland offered a dump truck full. He has a dynasty in the making if he's willing to get over himself, work hard, and maximize his natural talents.

But there is something to be said for handling a sensitive situation with humility and class, neither quality that LeBron possesses and for that reason I would never cheer for any team that he's on to win a ring. And yes, that will even include if he's going against Kobe next June.

That said, Dan Gilbert was way over the line. I can understand disappointment, but going over the top and egging on an angry fanbase to the point that you threaten to expose LeBron's secrets is just as low. And promising to "win a ring before the self-professed former king" makes me believe that Gilbert has lost touch with reality. Gilbert is just as much to blame for this, as the rosters he's surrounded LeBron with would be lucky to win 30 games without LeBron. The Cleveland fans should be just as mad at Gilbert for wasting a 7 year opportunity to end their misery.

Stofe wrote:Ok, so here's how I come out on all this after thinking about it:

LeBron is an egotistical, narcissistic jerk with a god complex and a sense of entitlement because people around him have enabled it since junior high. What other conclusion can I come to after "witnessing" him quit on his team this year when the going got tough then say people were just "spoiled" by his success, pouted his way off the court last year after a loss, glosses himself "The King" despite having as many championship rings as all the ClubSpurs board members combined, constantly refers to himself in the third person, and decides to hold a one hour special to really twist the knife into the hearts of the people of Cleveland.

I don't begrudge LeBron for the decision he made. From a basketball standpoint, it made the most sense. I'd choose Miami over Cleveland even if I got two job offers and Miami offered a wheelbarrow worth of cash while Cleveland offered a dump truck full. He has a dynasty in the making if he's willing to get over himself, work hard, and maximize his natural talents.

But there is something to be said for handling a sensitive situation with humility and class, neither quality that LeBron possesses and for that reason I would never cheer for any team that he's on to win a ring. And yes, that will even include if he's going against Kobe next June.

That said, Dan Gilbert was way over the line. I can understand disappointment, but going over the top and egging on an angry fanbase to the point that you threaten to expose LeBron's secrets is just as low. And promising to "win a ring before the self-professed former king" makes me believe that Gilbert has lost touch with reality. Gilbert is just as much to blame for this, as the rosters he's surrounded LeBron with would be lucky to win 30 games without LeBron. The Cleveland fans should be just as mad at Gilbert for wasting a 7 year opportunity to end their misery.

well said as usual Stofe

icemanfan wrote:Gilbert is a classless idiot. The Spurs would have wished him well. What Gilbert did was wish him curses and promise to tell all his secrets to the press. What a total piece of s***.

This has absolutely nothing to do with how the Spurs handled it. Classless idiot? Um, no. Over the top? Absolutely. If I was Cleveland fan he said all the right things because it's how I would have felt. Who cares what other people or basketball organizations think?

icemanfan wrote:Loyal to what? He will always be one of the best to have played the game. No one in NBA history won it by themselves.

So, since loyalty is not a factor, let me get this straight - if Tim Duncan, who at least had already won one championship, left in 2000 we all should have just said "Well, thank you for your contributions to Spurs basketball, Mr. Duncan. We wish you well in all your future endeavors."

LeBron is a media whore and a Q-U-I-T-T-E-R. Hopefully he can back up his media schtick. I mean , Miami is going to be an exciting team, no doubt. I'd love to see the Spurs disappoint them.

gameFACE wrote:

icemanfan wrote:Gilbert is a classless idiot. The Spurs would have wished him well. What Gilbert did was wish him curses and promise to tell all his secrets to the press. What a total piece of s***.

This has absolutely nothing to do with how the Spurs handled it. Classless idiot? Um, no. Over the top? Absolutely. If I was Cleveland fan he said all the right things because it's how I would have felt. Who cares what other people or basketball organizations think?

icemanfan wrote:Loyal to what? He will always be one of the best to have played the game. No one in NBA history won it by themselves.

So, since loyalty is not a factor, let me get this straight - if Tim Duncan, who at least had already won one championship, left in 2000 we all should have just said "Well, thank you for your contributions to Spurs basketball, Mr. Duncan. We wish you well in all your future endeavors."

LeBron is a media whore and a Q-U-I-T-T-E-R. Hopefully he can back up his media schtick. I mean , Miami is going to be an exciting team, no doubt. I'd love to see the Spurs disappoint them.

Karmic justice would be the Spurs sweeping the Heat in next years finals.......Le Bron would lose his mind if he had an EPIC failure like that twice

http://m.espn.go.com/nba/story?w=19okm& ... &topslot=1

LeBron's big move? Been there
Scoop Jackson [ARCHIVE]
ESPN.com
July 10, 2010
Comment on this story
Facebook Twitter


Now that it's all over, maybe we can return to some semblance of reality.

To help us get there, and before LeBron James becomes Public Enemy No. 2 in the next SportsNation poll -- which seems to be happening in the aftermath of "The Decision" -- let's clear up a few things. It should send us on our way back to our normal existence.

One: This has been done before in other sports. (And no one had a problem with it.)

Two: We've seen this happen before in the NBA. (And no one had a problem with it.)

Three: Michael Jordan might have done the exact same thing. (But we'll never know.)

When Alex Rodriguez was playing in Texas (or, for that matter, in Seattle), he was considered the best player in baseball. He was very much the LeBron James of his game. He had lived up to and surpassed expectations. Still, he eventually realized he couldn't do solo all the things he wanted to get done, so he went to a team that wasn't his. He went to a place where he wouldn't be "The Man," at least not at first. He "took his talents" to New York. He became a Yankee, on Derek Jeter's team.

So the question is this: What's the difference with LeBron? Where is the profound difference between what A-Rod did in 2004 and what LeBron did Thursday night?

Here's the answer: Other than LeBron's personal connection to the city he left, nothing.

Again, this has been done before.

In 1982, Moses Malone was considered by many to be the best player in basketball, certainly one of the best of his generation, and he was still in his prime. But just after he collected the second of his three MVP awards and only one year removed from playing in the NBA Finals with the Houston Rockets, he became a restricted free agent. With his team apparently regressing (the Rockets went from their Finals appearance in '81 to out in the first round the next season), Moses decided to leave Houston and go play for the Philadelphia 76ers, a team that already had one of the other best players in the game and of his generation. A guy named Julius Erving.

See where this is going?

Dwyane Wade is Dr. J, LeBron is Moses and Chris Bosh is Andrew Toney in this analogy. The Sixers went on to win the chip the season Moses joined them, going down in history as one of the greatest teams of all time. And no one said anything about damage to Malone's legacy.

Again, we've seen this happen before.

Too many times since Thursday night, I've heard people express some form of the following sentiment about LeBron: Real ballers don't join the best; they try to beat the best. More than that, I've heard people (including on "SportsCenter") use MJ as an analogy, suggesting that LeBron just did what MJ would have never done: leave the Bulls back in the day to play for the Pistons because, at least before 1990, he couldn't beat Detroit. They're calling LeBron's decision a "punk" move.

That notion needs to be squashed right here. Fact is, Jordan never had the opportunity to test the free-agent market the way LeBron did. Jordan signed his rookie contract, then, three years into it, the Bulls put an eight-year, $25 million deal on the table that he signed and rode out until well after he'd been stacking rings on his fingers.

Bottom line: Jordan was never in the same position LeBron was. Never. And if MJ's long career in Chicago is going to be used to make a point about LeBron's decision to leave Cleveland, that not-so-little factor can't be ignored.

We'll never really know.

So before anybody else goes all Dan Gilbert on LeBron, take all that into consideration. And we can carry on with our lives.

Scoop Jackson is a columnist for ESPN.com.

http://m.espn.go.com/wireless/story?sto ... FB&w=19ol3

Time for Cavs owner to act his age
Chris Broussard [ARCHIVE]
ESPN The Magazine
July 10, 2010
Comment on this story
Facebook Twitter


I'm beginning to wonder if Dan Gilbert's real name is Benjamin Button. You know, the character from the hit movie, "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," who looks old when he's young and young when he's old. How else to explain a 48-year-old man -- an intelligent, accomplished, incredibly wealthy 48-year-old man -- sounding off like an acne-riddled 13-year-old who'd just been jilted by his first love? LeBron James has been roundly criticized for the stunning way he handled his departure from the Cleveland Cavaliers on Thursday, and rightly so. James should have informed the team of his decision to leave in person and as soon as he could, thus giving it the chance to formulate a practical Plan B rather than having to react to such devastating news on the fly. He dumped them -- and northeast Ohio -- on national TV, making the ending unnecessarily dramatic and harsh. But James is 25 years old. And though in some ways he's unusually mature for his age, he's still 25 years old. No excuses, but at that age, we can all be self-absorbed and unaware of -- if not flat-out defiant of -- proper protocol. But Gilbert's nearly twice James' age. And when you're two winters away from 50, you should know better than to act off pure emotion. If you want to react spontaneously in your living room, ranting and raving like a heartbroken teenager, immaturely pointing out flaws in the one you'd gladly spend the rest of your life with, issuing ridiculous threats that are about as likely as purple rain, and -- get this -- casting spells (apparently, like many teens, Gilbert's a Harry Potter fan), go right ahead. But to do that publicly? Uhh, two words: Grow up. But the childishness didn't stop there. On Friday, Gilbert, the owner of Fathead, dropped the price of James fatheads from $99.99 to $17.41. Benedict Arnold was born in 1741. With the way this is going, I'm expecting Gilbert to tape "Kick Me" signs to the seats on the visitors bench when Miami visits The Q next season. That'll be a good one! Let's be honest: Gilbert, and most every other owner or league executive, makes a habit of being just as cold-blooded and callous as James was in making his decision. They do it with NBA players all the time, telling them to their faces they have no intention of trading them and then picking up their cell phone and offering them to a competitor as soon as the player leaves the room. Heck, the Cavs are doing that at this very moment. Everyone on that roster not named LeBron has been available in a trade since that May semifinals series loss to Boston. Think Gilbert's told them that? What Gilbert did was especially reckless and immature when you consider how volatile the situation in Cleveland was Thursday night. With fans burning James jerseys and throwing things at murals and paintings of James, he thought it best to exacerbate their anger rather than to call for calm. So now, I'm told, James' close friends -- and perhaps even the player himself -- have been threatened with violence, told that their homes in Cleveland and Akron may be burned down. They've got friends and relatives living in the area, and Gilbert thought it right to stir up the fury of the masses even more? In his incendiary e-mail, Gilbert wrote that James' decision to leave Cleveland was "the exact opposite lesson of what we would want our children to learn." Yet in his letter, he seemed to threaten to expose potentially embarrassing information about James, writing that he plans to communicate "events of the recent past" to the public over "the next several days and weeks." Is that how Gilbert wants children to act when they don't get their way? Gilbert's diatribes -- he further attacked James' character in a subsequent interview with The Associated Press -- were hypocritical in so many ways. He called James a quitter, saying he quit in five playoff games over the past two years, yet he was willing to pay him $125 million to stay on his team. He called James a "self-declared King," yet failed to mention that it was he himself who promoted the "King James" brand throughout his arena. He said James has "gotten a free pass" and that "people have covered up for him for way too long," yet it was Gilbert who overruled the objections of former GM Danny Ferry and gave James and his friends carte blanche throughout the organization. If James was enabled, Gilbert was the enabler. Then Gilbert said James' actions Thursday night revealed "who he really is." Well, perhaps James is saying the same thing about Gilbert. Perhaps he's known all along that Gilbert didn't respect him; that Gilbert thought he was a "coward;" that Gilbert thought his "King," "Chosen One" and "Witness" nicknames were a joke; that he'd mock and trash them, and him, as soon as James was no longer making him money. Maybe that's why James didn't return Gilbert's phone calls and e-mails over the past two months -- because he knew the owner looked at him as a moneymaker and nothing more. Maybe James no longer wanted to play for someone like that: someone who, in the heat of the moment, refuses to act his age.