One poor shooting game from Curry and people lost their minds. He was still far and away the best player on the team.
You really can't be taken seriously with phrases like "far and away".
Curry is a terrific offensive player and obviously integral to the Warriors' success. But once he has to move back over half court and play defense, he's more liability than asset. He's fortunate to have four of the best defenders in the league to play off - Durant, Thompson, Iggy and Green.
And what is "far and away" clear is that Durant and Thompson are superior two way players to Curry.
in 2015 curry was not far and away the best player on the team?
RE: RE: it's absurd that Iguodala won MVP in 2015 Â
One poor shooting game from Curry and people lost their minds. He was still far and away the best player on the team.
You really can't be taken seriously with phrases like "far and away".
Curry is a terrific offensive player and obviously integral to the Warriors' success. But once he has to move back over half court and play defense, he's more liability than asset. He's fortunate to have four of the best defenders in the league to play off - Durant, Thompson, Iggy and Green.
And what is "far and away" clear is that Durant and Thompson are superior two way players to Curry.
Don't think he was referring to this GS team, i think he was just emphasizing that Curry deserved the MVP in '15.
RE: RE: it's absurd that Iguodala won MVP in 2015 Â
One poor shooting game from Curry and people lost their minds. He was still far and away the best player on the team.
You really can't be taken seriously with phrases like "far and away".
Curry is a terrific offensive player and obviously integral to the Warriors' success. But once he has to move back over half court and play defense, he's more liability than asset. He's fortunate to have four of the best defenders in the league to play off - Durant, Thompson, Iggy and Green.
And what is "far and away" clear is that Durant and Thompson are superior two way players to Curry.
What does Durant have to do with the 2015 Warriors?
There is no doubt the Warriors are loaded. They were loaded before Durant and even more so now. I point it out all the time. But pre-Durant, Curry was far and away the best player on the team. He won back-to-back league MVP awards, both overwhelmingly so, with the second being unanimous. It doesn't take anything away from the contributions and effectiveness of the other players on the team.
It takes nothing away from, say, Scottie Pippen, to say that Michael Jordan was far and away the best player on those 90s Bulls.
RE: RE: RE: it's absurd that Iguodala won MVP in 2015 Â
What does Durant have to do with the 2015 Warriors?
There is no doubt the Warriors are loaded. They were loaded before Durant and even more so now. I point it out all the time. But pre-Durant, Curry was far and away the best player on the team. He won back-to-back league MVP awards, both overwhelmingly so, with the second being unanimous. It doesn't take anything away from the contributions and effectiveness of the other players on the team.
It takes nothing away from, say, Scottie Pippen, to say that Michael Jordan was far and away the best player on those 90s Bulls.
My bad. I misread the flow of the conversation.
I'm a big Klay Thompson guy. So while Curry was great in '15, it's the same point. He still wasn't far and away the best player on that team. You can't begin to say he shouldered the defensive responsibility that Thompson did. Thompson is a better two way player.
The Jordan compare is poor one because Jordan was a 9X first team defender and won the MVP and DPOTY in '88. He could impact the game on the defensive end.
Curry does none of that. He is a one-way player; and a player who has benefited enormously by rules that make playing perimeter defense as difficult as playing corner in the NFL. So good for him for finding his niche.
but there's a reason that Curry so overwhelmingly won the MVP and All-League awards and Klay got a single point out of 1300 potential for the MVP award (Curry got 1198 points). he got all 1310 points the following season for the MVP vote.
Also, your point about the current rules for perimeter defense are also irrelevant. Those are the rules in place. I'm not comparing Curry to anyone historically, only to his teammates in the 2015 season, so all that matters are the rules in place during that season.
Durant dodged an enormous bullet. He really blew game 1 and let Smith just move him under the basket to get that rebound. He would have been roasted for that weak effort at a critical moment of game 1 in the Finals.
But now, he's the MVP. He's very lucky Smith is a meathead.
RE: No superstar has the level of defensive talent Â
Isiah Thomas says hello. Dumars and Rodman were all time great defenders. Laimbeer wasn’t shabby either. But if you want to take elite defenders
Jordan had Pippen, Rodman, and Ron Harper who many forget was an elite defender as well.
The defense they played against Utah is forgotten. And that’s why they were so good. They defended better than they played offense.
But let's see what happens from here on out. I think Cleveland wins tomorrow & GS closes it out @ the Oracle on Monday. If Step has big games in Game 5 & 6, he could easily win MVP.
is LeBron. No one has provided as much independent value to the court as he has this series (and I'm not even referring to relative value to his team). But that'll never happen.
is LeBron. No one has provided as much independent value to the court as he has this series (and I'm not even referring to relative value to his team). But that'll never happen.
No chance of him winning if they get swept or even if they lose in 5. I know Lebron is an all time great. But it simply cannot happen. His counting stats are nice and he has played very well, but at the end of the day its all about winning.
but that was when the award was voted on BEFORE Game 7.
So in reality, the Finals MVP was never awarded to a player on a losing team.
So it's unrealistic that LeBron would win under any circumstance where the Warriors win the series. I just think that is a poor way of evaluating performance and a poor way of creating an historical marker (not as much as how baseball MVPs are voted).
I understand the reasoning of wondering how much value LeBron could provide if his team lost. But I'm not persuaded by it for two reasons.
1. On the flip side, how valuable could any Warrior be if the team would still be favored over the Cavs and expected to win even if any single one of them broke a leg the day before the series started?
2. Also, if it were game 7, and the Cavs were up 2 with 3 seconds left and Jordan Bell threw a full court heave to miraculously win the game and the championship, I don't understand how that play would somehow mean that Durant or Curry were then more valuable than LeBron.
Like all MVP awards, I think it's meant as a way to look back on the season/series and ask who the best player was-- who contributed the most independent value to help a team win.
but that was when the award was voted on BEFORE Game 7.
So in reality, the Finals MVP was never awarded to a player on a losing team.
So it's unrealistic that LeBron would win under any circumstance where the Warriors win the series. I just think that is a poor way of evaluating performance and a poor way of creating an historical marker (not as much as how baseball MVPs are voted).
I understand the reasoning of wondering how much value LeBron could provide if his team lost. But I'm not persuaded by it for two reasons.
1. On the flip side, how valuable could any Warrior be if the team would still be favored over the Cavs and expected to win even if any single one of them broke a leg the day before the series started?
2. Also, if it were game 7, and the Cavs were up 2 with 3 seconds left and Jordan Bell threw a full court heave to miraculously win the game and the championship, I don't understand how that play would somehow mean that Durant or Curry were then more valuable than LeBron.
Like all MVP awards, I think it's meant as a way to look back on the season/series and ask who the best player was-- who contributed the most independent value to help a team win.
I think in your last example, Lebron would win it. But in a 4-5 game series - I just dont see how.
His stat line is always going to be amazing since the offense is set up for him to have it. But look at your last line "value to help a team WIN." If you dont win a game, the value you brought was that you made games more competitive.
He should be the league MVP cause he carried his team to a good regular season record (and I am still in the belief we dont see beast Lebron until playoffs anyways.)
RE: RE: No superstar has the level of defensive talent Â
Isiah Thomas says hello. Dumars and Rodman were all time great defenders. Laimbeer wasn’t shabby either. But if you want to take elite defenders
Jordan had Pippen, Rodman, and Ron Harper who many forget was an elite defender as well.
The defense they played against Utah is forgotten. And that’s why they were so good. They defended better than they played offense.
True, but Thomas and Jordan were terrific defenders. They were key parts on that side of the ball for those great teams.
Btw, you mentioned that Curry gets a lot of steals. So does James Harden. And no one in their right, drug free mind would call him a great defender. So steals can be misleading...
RE: RE: RE: No superstar has the level of defensive talent Â
Btw, you mentioned that Curry gets a lot of steals. So does James Harden. And no one in their right, drug free mind would call him a great defender. So steals can be misleading...
Curry tries on defense, so him getting steals is probably a result of hustle. Harden reaches and goes for passes. H
Also, your point about the current rules for perimeter defense are also irrelevant. Those are the rules in place. I'm not comparing Curry to anyone historically, only to his teammates in the 2015 season, so all that matters are the rules in place during that season.
But the rule distorts the game. So I think it's important to assess situation through that lens.
Sure, I give credit to Curry for a great season. But it's always natural to wonder how a guy who isn't big, isn't physically imposing, etc can thrive to the point where he gets ultimate success in a league where bigger, stronger, faster usually rules. You don't find that curious?
championships are team awards. I think MVPs are individual awards. Players only have so much control over who they play with and individual honors should be about their individual contributions. If a player is on a bad team, it penalizes them twice in that they don't win team trophies because of their cast, and now they are shut out from individual awards because of their cast.
Baseball is the dumbest because players have far less impact on a team than in NBA or in the NFL.
he is not a good isolation defensive player because of his size. But he plays well enough in the Warriors defensive system. He reads passing lanes well and gets to spots well.
The best strategy for opponents is to try and isolate him into one-on-one basketball, but that's easier said than done. Guys like Kyrie and Isiah Thomas are fare bigger liabilities and one-dimensional players than Curry.
Players only have so much control over who they play with and individual honors should be about their individual contributions.
Lebron has full control, hence I dont feel bad when people claim he doesnt have enough. He chooses the team he wants, the players he wants, and tells management who to trade/trade for.
He basically called out management to sign JR Smith and Tristan Thompson. He basically said Thomas was not wanted.
Now Kyrie is different because it generally seemed to catch Lebron off guard, but we dont know what happened behind the scene.
Players only have so much control over who they play with and individual honors should be about their individual contributions.
Lebron has full control, hence I dont feel bad when people claim he doesnt have enough. He chooses the team he wants, the players he wants, and tells management who to trade/trade for.
He basically called out management to sign JR Smith and Tristan Thompson. He basically said Thomas was not wanted.
Now Kyrie is different because it generally seemed to catch Lebron off guard, but we dont know what happened behind the scene.
Agree with your points on MVP/Finals MVP.
But judging Lebron as a basketball player I ignore what he does in terms of getting teammates. I don't think Lebron the "GM" should be factored in when analyzing Lebron the player. Like I don't consider Isiah Thomas as an exec weighs down on his playing career. I guess prime example would be Vlade Divac lol.
All I've learned is that no basketball player can win with a crappy team. Especially against the greatest team probably (likely) ever. Shit, Kobe couldn't even make the playoffs when his teammates were that bad.
But judging Lebron as a basketball player I ignore what he does in terms of getting teammates. I don't think Lebron the "GM" should be factored in when analyzing Lebron the player. Like I don't consider Isiah Thomas as an exec weighs down on his playing career. I guess prime example would be Vlade Divac lol.
All I've learned is that no basketball player can win with a crappy team. Especially against the greatest team probably (likely) ever. Shit, Kobe couldn't even make the playoffs when his teammates were that bad.
I can separate Lebron the player from GM very easily. My point is I dont feel sorry for Lebron when hedoesnt win cause his teammatesarent good enough - because he is the one who is choosing who to play. And him losing continuously in the finals only hurts the GOAT arguemnt - not where he ranks compared to any other player not named Jordan. He is number 2 on my list and probably will stay there for a very long time.
The one good thing Krause and Reinsdorf did was manage the Bulls with very limited input from the players. Phil Jackson said out of the 7 PFs on their list to come to the team when Jordan came back, Rodman was last. But when they went to him management went to MJ and Pippen for approval, and they agreed. But he wasnt their first choice.
I agree Lebron as #2 to Kobe and I think the only way he could really ignite the debate amongst ALL nba fans is if he is even close to MJ in the rings category.
I whole-heartedly agree that rings as a whole is a team award rather than an individual award. But MJ 3-peating twice seems like an unrepeatable accomplishment (maybe the Warriors can replicate but MJ didn't even have as much talent as Steph/KD does now).
I'm just tired of all the Lakers fans who just spout "ringz"in any Kobe vs Lebron argument. It seems even Celtics fans for the most part back Lebrons status on the Mt Rushmore of basketball.
of how much control LeBron had in personnel (sometimes it's overblown, sometimes it's under-reported), there is a still a limit to what he or any full-time GM is able to do for a team at given points in time. There is still a lot of luck involved: drafting players who turn into superstars, players contracts coming up just in time for salary cap jumps, free agents wanting to play in certain places, injuries. The list is endless.
So regardless of how much input he has, there are still realities as to what the teams can look like. It's not liek LeBron ever had access to Steph, Klay, Dray, or Durant, for example.
At the end of the day, the teams are who they are when the ball is tipped. And so, to me, the MVP, is the one who most helped his team win in the "win share" sense.
Please end this awful series tonight. My only hope is that Durant goes off in the second half and keeps Curry from winning Finals MVP. That would amuse me.
East is just so poor. Tend to think Boston had the goods to push a series with the Dubs to 6 games.
Regardless, all the praise to the Dubs. Great accomplishment getting 3 out of 4. Think they have at least thrown their hat into a discussion of all-time best teams.
to spare us from watching this team roll to two or three more championships in a row. Unless Lebron goes to Houston or something. I don't think Lebron to Philly makes them good enough to win a championship. Does LA have enough money to sign George, Lebron and someone else too? Even if they do, I don't know if that team would even be good enough. Depends on who else they added.
Let GS win 12 in a row for all I care. Fuck Boston.
Hope LeBron does not go to Boston. Much more fun team to root for as currently constructed without him. Think Celts might lose Kyrie to the NYK in 2019 though.
Quote:
One poor shooting game from Curry and people lost their minds. He was still far and away the best player on the team.
You really can't be taken seriously with phrases like "far and away".
Curry is a terrific offensive player and obviously integral to the Warriors' success. But once he has to move back over half court and play defense, he's more liability than asset. He's fortunate to have four of the best defenders in the league to play off - Durant, Thompson, Iggy and Green.
And what is "far and away" clear is that Durant and Thompson are superior two way players to Curry.
in 2015 curry was not far and away the best player on the team?
Quote:
One poor shooting game from Curry and people lost their minds. He was still far and away the best player on the team.
You really can't be taken seriously with phrases like "far and away".
Curry is a terrific offensive player and obviously integral to the Warriors' success. But once he has to move back over half court and play defense, he's more liability than asset. He's fortunate to have four of the best defenders in the league to play off - Durant, Thompson, Iggy and Green.
And what is "far and away" clear is that Durant and Thompson are superior two way players to Curry.
Don't think he was referring to this GS team, i think he was just emphasizing that Curry deserved the MVP in '15.
Quote:
One poor shooting game from Curry and people lost their minds. He was still far and away the best player on the team.
You really can't be taken seriously with phrases like "far and away".
Curry is a terrific offensive player and obviously integral to the Warriors' success. But once he has to move back over half court and play defense, he's more liability than asset. He's fortunate to have four of the best defenders in the league to play off - Durant, Thompson, Iggy and Green.
And what is "far and away" clear is that Durant and Thompson are superior two way players to Curry.
What does Durant have to do with the 2015 Warriors?
There is no doubt the Warriors are loaded. They were loaded before Durant and even more so now. I point it out all the time. But pre-Durant, Curry was far and away the best player on the team. He won back-to-back league MVP awards, both overwhelmingly so, with the second being unanimous. It doesn't take anything away from the contributions and effectiveness of the other players on the team.
It takes nothing away from, say, Scottie Pippen, to say that Michael Jordan was far and away the best player on those 90s Bulls.
What does Durant have to do with the 2015 Warriors?
There is no doubt the Warriors are loaded. They were loaded before Durant and even more so now. I point it out all the time. But pre-Durant, Curry was far and away the best player on the team. He won back-to-back league MVP awards, both overwhelmingly so, with the second being unanimous. It doesn't take anything away from the contributions and effectiveness of the other players on the team.
It takes nothing away from, say, Scottie Pippen, to say that Michael Jordan was far and away the best player on those 90s Bulls.
My bad. I misread the flow of the conversation.
I'm a big Klay Thompson guy. So while Curry was great in '15, it's the same point. He still wasn't far and away the best player on that team. You can't begin to say he shouldered the defensive responsibility that Thompson did. Thompson is a better two way player.
The Jordan compare is poor one because Jordan was a 9X first team defender and won the MVP and DPOTY in '88. He could impact the game on the defensive end.
Curry does none of that. He is a one-way player; and a player who has benefited enormously by rules that make playing perimeter defense as difficult as playing corner in the NFL. So good for him for finding his niche.
Also, your point about the current rules for perimeter defense are also irrelevant. Those are the rules in place. I'm not comparing Curry to anyone historically, only to his teammates in the 2015 season, so all that matters are the rules in place during that season.
You saying he cant defend is just wrong. He gets nearly 2 steals a game and isnt a sieve that other superstars are.
Durant dodged an enormous bullet. He really blew game 1 and let Smith just move him under the basket to get that rebound. He would have been roasted for that weak effort at a critical moment of game 1 in the Finals.
But now, he's the MVP. He's very lucky Smith is a meathead.
Isiah Thomas says hello. Dumars and Rodman were all time great defenders. Laimbeer wasn’t shabby either. But if you want to take elite defenders
Jordan had Pippen, Rodman, and Ron Harper who many forget was an elite defender as well.
The defense they played against Utah is forgotten. And that’s why they were so good. They defended better than they played offense.
No chance of him winning if they get swept or even if they lose in 5. I know Lebron is an all time great. But it simply cannot happen. His counting stats are nice and he has played very well, but at the end of the day its all about winning.
So in reality, the Finals MVP was never awarded to a player on a losing team.
So it's unrealistic that LeBron would win under any circumstance where the Warriors win the series. I just think that is a poor way of evaluating performance and a poor way of creating an historical marker (not as much as how baseball MVPs are voted).
I understand the reasoning of wondering how much value LeBron could provide if his team lost. But I'm not persuaded by it for two reasons.
1. On the flip side, how valuable could any Warrior be if the team would still be favored over the Cavs and expected to win even if any single one of them broke a leg the day before the series started?
2. Also, if it were game 7, and the Cavs were up 2 with 3 seconds left and Jordan Bell threw a full court heave to miraculously win the game and the championship, I don't understand how that play would somehow mean that Durant or Curry were then more valuable than LeBron.
Like all MVP awards, I think it's meant as a way to look back on the season/series and ask who the best player was-- who contributed the most independent value to help a team win.
So in reality, the Finals MVP was never awarded to a player on a losing team.
So it's unrealistic that LeBron would win under any circumstance where the Warriors win the series. I just think that is a poor way of evaluating performance and a poor way of creating an historical marker (not as much as how baseball MVPs are voted).
I understand the reasoning of wondering how much value LeBron could provide if his team lost. But I'm not persuaded by it for two reasons.
1. On the flip side, how valuable could any Warrior be if the team would still be favored over the Cavs and expected to win even if any single one of them broke a leg the day before the series started?
2. Also, if it were game 7, and the Cavs were up 2 with 3 seconds left and Jordan Bell threw a full court heave to miraculously win the game and the championship, I don't understand how that play would somehow mean that Durant or Curry were then more valuable than LeBron.
Like all MVP awards, I think it's meant as a way to look back on the season/series and ask who the best player was-- who contributed the most independent value to help a team win.
I think in your last example, Lebron would win it. But in a 4-5 game series - I just dont see how.
His stat line is always going to be amazing since the offense is set up for him to have it. But look at your last line "value to help a team WIN." If you dont win a game, the value you brought was that you made games more competitive.
He should be the league MVP cause he carried his team to a good regular season record (and I am still in the belief we dont see beast Lebron until playoffs anyways.)
Isiah Thomas says hello. Dumars and Rodman were all time great defenders. Laimbeer wasn’t shabby either. But if you want to take elite defenders
Jordan had Pippen, Rodman, and Ron Harper who many forget was an elite defender as well.
The defense they played against Utah is forgotten. And that’s why they were so good. They defended better than they played offense.
True, but Thomas and Jordan were terrific defenders. They were key parts on that side of the ball for those great teams.
Btw, you mentioned that Curry gets a lot of steals. So does James Harden. And no one in their right, drug free mind would call him a great defender. So steals can be misleading...
Btw, you mentioned that Curry gets a lot of steals. So does James Harden. And no one in their right, drug free mind would call him a great defender. So steals can be misleading...
Curry tries on defense, so him getting steals is probably a result of hustle. Harden reaches and goes for passes. H
Also, your point about the current rules for perimeter defense are also irrelevant. Those are the rules in place. I'm not comparing Curry to anyone historically, only to his teammates in the 2015 season, so all that matters are the rules in place during that season.
But the rule distorts the game. So I think it's important to assess situation through that lens.
Sure, I give credit to Curry for a great season. But it's always natural to wonder how a guy who isn't big, isn't physically imposing, etc can thrive to the point where he gets ultimate success in a league where bigger, stronger, faster usually rules. You don't find that curious?
Baseball is the dumbest because players have far less impact on a team than in NBA or in the NFL.
The best strategy for opponents is to try and isolate him into one-on-one basketball, but that's easier said than done. Guys like Kyrie and Isiah Thomas are fare bigger liabilities and one-dimensional players than Curry.
Lebron has full control, hence I dont feel bad when people claim he doesnt have enough. He chooses the team he wants, the players he wants, and tells management who to trade/trade for.
He basically called out management to sign JR Smith and Tristan Thompson. He basically said Thomas was not wanted.
Now Kyrie is different because it generally seemed to catch Lebron off guard, but we dont know what happened behind the scene.
Quote:
Players only have so much control over who they play with and individual honors should be about their individual contributions.
Lebron has full control, hence I dont feel bad when people claim he doesnt have enough. He chooses the team he wants, the players he wants, and tells management who to trade/trade for.
He basically called out management to sign JR Smith and Tristan Thompson. He basically said Thomas was not wanted.
Now Kyrie is different because it generally seemed to catch Lebron off guard, but we dont know what happened behind the scene.
Agree with your points on MVP/Finals MVP.
But judging Lebron as a basketball player I ignore what he does in terms of getting teammates. I don't think Lebron the "GM" should be factored in when analyzing Lebron the player. Like I don't consider Isiah Thomas as an exec weighs down on his playing career. I guess prime example would be Vlade Divac lol.
All I've learned is that no basketball player can win with a crappy team. Especially against the greatest team probably (likely) ever. Shit, Kobe couldn't even make the playoffs when his teammates were that bad.
But judging Lebron as a basketball player I ignore what he does in terms of getting teammates. I don't think Lebron the "GM" should be factored in when analyzing Lebron the player. Like I don't consider Isiah Thomas as an exec weighs down on his playing career. I guess prime example would be Vlade Divac lol.
All I've learned is that no basketball player can win with a crappy team. Especially against the greatest team probably (likely) ever. Shit, Kobe couldn't even make the playoffs when his teammates were that bad.
I can separate Lebron the player from GM very easily. My point is I dont feel sorry for Lebron when hedoesnt win cause his teammatesarent good enough - because he is the one who is choosing who to play. And him losing continuously in the finals only hurts the GOAT arguemnt - not where he ranks compared to any other player not named Jordan. He is number 2 on my list and probably will stay there for a very long time.
The one good thing Krause and Reinsdorf did was manage the Bulls with very limited input from the players. Phil Jackson said out of the 7 PFs on their list to come to the team when Jordan came back, Rodman was last. But when they went to him management went to MJ and Pippen for approval, and they agreed. But he wasnt their first choice.
I whole-heartedly agree that rings as a whole is a team award rather than an individual award. But MJ 3-peating twice seems like an unrepeatable accomplishment (maybe the Warriors can replicate but MJ didn't even have as much talent as Steph/KD does now).
I'm just tired of all the Lakers fans who just spout "ringz"in any Kobe vs Lebron argument. It seems even Celtics fans for the most part back Lebrons status on the Mt Rushmore of basketball.
So regardless of how much input he has, there are still realities as to what the teams can look like. It's not liek LeBron ever had access to Steph, Klay, Dray, or Durant, for example.
At the end of the day, the teams are who they are when the ball is tipped. And so, to me, the MVP, is the one who most helped his team win in the "win share" sense.
Durant got a technical for telling the ref he missed a walk. Hahaha
Free throws are 12 to 2. But the first time the refs miss a call on lebron - they are cheating or screwing the Cavs.
Durant got a technical for telling the ref he missed a walk. Hahaha
scott foster is officiating, are yiu shocked?
Still amazed how he was talked up by a few here last year.
Irving, Thomas, or rose would have been a massive upgrade over him.
The off-season is definitely much more intriguing these days than the actual playoffs
Quote:
until the real NBA season starts.
The off-season is definitely much more intriguing these days than the actual playoffs
Yep... what superstar who can’t win a title can find a way and join an elite team or a team full of his friends.
Lebron, Paul George, Kawahi, CP3 are all possible guys who can be on the move.
My apologies - just saw a photo of them talking.
East is just so poor. Tend to think Boston had the goods to push a series with the Dubs to 6 games.
Regardless, all the praise to the Dubs. Great accomplishment getting 3 out of 4. Think they have at least thrown their hat into a discussion of all-time best teams.
It’s not a surprise he announced his injury himself. Lot of “I” when he speaks anymore.
If he goes to Houston, I hope everyone rips him apart.
Hope LeBron does not go to Boston. Much more fun team to root for as currently constructed without him. Think Celts might lose Kyrie to the NYK in 2019 though.
Lakers, Sixers, Cavs, Rockets, Celts.