The first, as all of you can guess, I’m sure, is the Cavs’ 55 point loss to the Lakers from Tuesday.
The second is the Cavs’ 68 point victory over the Miami Heat on December 17, 1991.
This is simply a reminder that, in sports, like in many things, success comes and goes. Players get old. They get hurt. They get traded. Coaches are fired. Owners sell the team. Fans stop buying season tickets. They stop watching games. They stop reading every story ever written about NBA basketball.
This is the natural cycle of things. The Cavs will, barring a true catastrophe, be back. We just don’t know how long it will take. But if it’s 20 years then so be it. I have a pretty good idea that in that time, somewhere, the Browns time will come. Or the Indians will win a division or two. Maybe both the Browns and the Indians will compete for a championship. Who knows. In Cleveland, at least, we have three teams to go through the cycle.
Many of you may remember that shortly after “The Decision,” some shithead was booted from an Indians-Yankees game at Progressive Field for antagonizing the home crowd by wearing a LeBron Heat jersey.
Earlier yesterday, there were reports that the Heat were going to reward said shithead by flying him down to Miami, all expenses paid, to take in a game at American Airlines Arena and meet the team.
Well, it turns out that those early reports were false. Or more accurately, someone near the top of the Heat food chain had the good sense to veto the idea before it could officially go through.
The question that I haven’t seen anyone ask yet is, whose idea was it in the first place?
I have a theory. And that theory is that it was LeBron’s idea.
Now, if you haven’t been reading the blog lately, you might think I’m suggesting this because I’m a LeBron hater. That I’m suggesting he wants to offer another middle finger to Cleveland. I assure you, I’m not. So what am I basing it on?
If you do, then you also probably recall that LeBron later rescinded his invitation to make court-rushing teen fan Anthony Erskine a guest of honor at the Cavs’ next game in the NY metro area.
In short, the pattern is identical: an overzealous LeBron fan puts his love for James on display in an unorthodox and unwise manner; against better judgment, LeBron is flattered by the exhibition and extends an invitation to reward the fan; then before the invitation can come to fruition, it’s abruptly canceled.
There are certainly differences between the two incidents. In the court-rushing episode, the kid actually broke the law and was charged with a crime. In the Heat jersey episode, the shithead was completely within his legal rights, but not the social contract or the rules of etiquette.
The court-rushing instance also would’ve set a dangerous precedent within the league—dangerous enough that the league office likely had a hand in LeBron’s sudden change of heart. The Heat jersey situation didn’t share that trait. It was just a shithead justifying the label at a non-NBA event. There were no precedents for David Stern to be concerned about, no larger issues at stake.
This is an important distinction because it confirms that there’s no reason that the league office would’ve gotten involved. Which, in turn, suggests that either LeBron changed his mind on his own, or someone in Miami was able to convince him that indulging this whim would be another P.R. body blow—not just for himself, but for the franchise as a whole.
Either way, this chain of events signifies a notable shift in LeBron’s mentality. If Woj and other writers were to be believed, Cleveland was the house of ‘yes’ for James during his entire run. If anyone thought it was best to deny LeBron anything he wanted, then they weren’t effective enough in their arguments to actually get through to him. A few months later, he’s either grown up enough to reflect on himself more objectively, or else Pat “King Slickback” Riley has managed to get his ear in a more meaningful way than just about free agency and championships.
Does this really have any effect on Cleveland? At the moment, no. But I think that in combination with his pseudo-apology for “The Decision,” it’s an indication that James, who has been quite possibly the most psychologically interesting professional athlete in the world for the past 5-7 years, is growing up. (He is, after all, still only 25.) I will be very interested to see how he reacts when he’s back in Cleveland on December 2nd. I suspect that his response will be more complex than most Clevelanders are willing to believe.
This year, the Miami Heat are going to serve as a great test case for one of my favorite pro sports fallacies.
Analysts and fans have a tendency to discuss players and teams as having very distinct, very specific, and most importantly, very set strengths and weaknesses. In many individual cases, this is justified. Kyle Korver, for instance, is known as a spot-up, catch-and-shoot specialist. Last season in Utah, a staggering 93% of his FGs were assisted. No one is selling him short by pigeon-holing him in that regard, and no one expects him to spend the summer trying to develop a low post game. We know what Korver is good at. We know that’s not going to change. And so we feel we know what his future holds—at least for the rest of this season.
However, people also have a tendency to do this with teams. I believe that this is a much, much more dangerous game to play.
Consider the case of the Miami Heat. Last night, they were beaten by the Celtics in Boston to the tune of 8 points. I have heard far too many people declare this to be a precedent-setting indicator of how the East will play out. The Celtics will be the battle-tested, fundamentally sound, defense-first, cohesive unit; the Heat will be an overrated experiment with impressive pieces that simply don’t fit together; and ultimately, Boston will outplay Miami in the playoffs and reach the Finals.
This kind of thinking is, frankly, not sound.
Here’s what we have to remember at this point in the season: teams’ performance can change dramatically over the course of the year. The players learn how to read one another better. They discover over time what works and what doesn’t. (I don’t have statistics to back this up, but consider the Cavs’ first game with Shaq versus their last few before his thumb injury in Boston as anecdotal evidence.)
Beyond this, rotations are altered. Injuries happen. Trades are made.
In short, the teams playing yesterday and today will not be the same teams playing in March, April, and beyond—even if their rosters remain unchanged.
This is the difficulty with projections: we make them based on imperfect information. In the case of a team like the Heat, there simply isn’t much, if any, data available to tell us about what is essentially an entirely new team. We can analyze the historical performance of individuals, but there are no models that I know of out there that can describe how those players will adapt to one another over the course of an 82-game regular season.
This is why we end up with a vast majority of supposed experts putting the Celtics and Lakers back in the 2011 Finals. Those teams are, by and large, known quantities. There’s continuity. There’s history. There’s comfort with who they are and what they do.
But there’s also a tendency to discount the probability of decline. While it’s true that players in their youth and their prime tend to maintain a great deal of season-to-season statistical consistency, everyone eventually reaches a twilight period. This isn’t to say that players disintegrate overnight. But even a modest drop in production when facing foes in their prime can be the end of a season. Based on the collective age of their core players, the Celtics are much more likely to fall victim to this phenomenon than is Miami.
So while everyone (especially those with a grudge) dances on the grave of the Miami Heat, it should be kept in mind that they will never look worse this season than they did last night. It was, after all, the first full game in which LeBron, Wade, and Bosh played a significant amount of time together; Mike Miller (who will have a greater impact than I think most people realize) was out with an injury; they played on the road; it was the first game of the season (traditionally rusty for everyone); and they were up against a team whose key components have been playing together for several years.
Likewise, the Celtics will probably never look better than they did last night. Everyone on their roster was healthy; they played with the same system that’s been in place season after season; they were hungry and motivated against the East’s next generation powerhouse; they played at home against a team with one significant injury the need for plenty of time to figure one another out.
These things will change.
We should keep this in mind for tonight’s season opener for the Cavs, as well.
As more people peg Cleveland as a likely 8-seed in the playoffs, we have to keep in mind that those projections are based on assumptions. The biggest one of those assumptions, in my view, is the notion that the roster will stay intact. Yes, it would be a good story for the LeBron-less Cavs to return to the postseason in their first year without The King. But those in the front office know that the team’s only prospects for long-term success are to completely tear down and completely rebuild. Has that process begun already? In some sense, yes. It will be significantly further along if players like Manny Harris and Samardo Samuels are true diamonds in the rough rather than just serviceable, cheap roster fillers.
But long-tenured veteran players with value to potential playoff teams—especially if they’re burdened with large contracts—simply shouldn’t be part of the plan. Jamison and Mo are the prime candidates. And ultimately, I suspect one or both will no longer be in a Cavs uniform by March. This is not a bad thing for the team. In fact, it could be a great thing in the long-term. But it irrevocably affects whether or not the Cavs finish the season in the type of position—whatever it is—where the analysts are predicting.
So when the team tips off against the Celtics tonight, they’re going to look discombobulated because it’s a new season in a new system with guys playing roles that, in most cases, they are new to. In that sense, there will be plenty of room for improvement, and I suspect they will improve as the season goes on. But we should also remember that their improvement and their final position may ultimately be tempered, undermined, or reversed by whatever roster moves Chris Grant sees fit to make between now and the trade deadline.
The only outcomes I would consider gambling on would be these: by season’s end, the Heat will look much improved; the Celtics will be in comparatively worse shape than their season-opening form; and the Cavs, for better or worse, will look even more different than they do tonight. But I know none of these things for a fact. And that, ultimately, is why I will continue to watch.
It’s been almost four months since LeBron James was a free agent for about a week, before choosing to sign with the Miami Heat. Since then, like every fan of the Cavaliers, I have gone through a whole host of emotions about the situation, about LeBron himself, and about his choice to play on another team, with different players, in a new city.
Over time, I have come to appreciate the greater implications of “The Decision” - which despite all of its flaws in terms of its execution - was a groundbreaking moment in sports history, specifically in the way that it shifted the balance of power between players and owners (read: the bosses and the employees; if there’s one thing I am, it’s anti-authoritarian). In the past, every owner assumed their guy would re-sign because they could offer the most money. Now, every agent only needs to mention “LeBron” or “The Decision” and management is in a panic (see: Carmelo Anthony and Chris Paul).
What this means to fan bases all over the country is something else entirely, and I realize it may very well have deeply negative effects. If fans sense that players aren’t “loyal” to the teams that control their rights, fans may lose interest over the long haul. Personally, I don’t know that this is a bad thing for the country - caring a little bit less about our sports teams, dropping the life or death attitude, for one that is more geared towards enjoyment and appreciation could be very healthy.
Having said all of that, the big question that’s been loitering in between the front and the back of my mind since July 8th has been the following: How will I feel the first time I see LeBron playing a regular season game for the Heat?
Initially, I was pretty certain that I would gain a great deal of pleasure from rooting against Miami the entire regular and deep into the playoffs. Gradually, however, as I’ve spent some time thinking about why we root for players and teams at all, my opinion has changed. I won’t know for sure until tonight, when the Heat play the Boston Celtics on TNT, but I feel comfortable going ahead and wagering right now that the exact opposite will happen.
I will root for LeBron James.
The thing about LeBron is that whether he was wearing a Cavaliers or not, he would have been my favorite player in the NBA. He is a remarkable athlete, a once-in-a-generation type talent, who rebounds, scores efficiently, and passes exceptionally. He plays a team game - most of the time, at least - and when it comes to sheer memorability, no one in the league is capable of producing highlights on a possession-to-possession basis like LeBron is.
Make no mistake about it, LeBron is one of the all time greats. That is something I will always be able to admire and respect. Greatness is a trait that inspires me. It is a quality I can cheer for.
When I think back on the 7 years during which LeBron played for the Cavaliers, I can only remember them fondly. I will never forget game 6 of the 2007 Eastern Conference Finals. I will always remember leaping into the air in a bar in Roswell, Georgia when he hit the nearly half court shot against Orlando in 2009, right before I turned 30. And how could I forget the endless conversations I had with Lakers fans in LA about who was the better player, LeBron or Kobe? I spent a lot of energy defending LeBron - and earned a lot of headaches along the way.
I won’t pretend that there aren’t bad moments and memories, as well. Most of 2010’s Eastern Conference Semifinals against Boston, for example. LeBron’s constant hemming and hawing about free agency, tantalizing fans in New York City while torturing those of us in Cleveland. But when you spend 7 years watching someone’s every move from afar - especially when that person is between the ages of 18 and 25 and is supremely rich and famous - there are bound to be moments of imperfection.
Truthfully, I love basketball. I love the Cavaliers. And I couldn’t help but become emotionally invested in LeBron as a basketball player, especially since I was watching him play at a time that I was also learning a whole lot about the game. It was maybe a bit immature, probably a little unhealthy, and it definitely cost me a load of free time - 82 games per year at 2.5 hours per game adds up to 8.5 days, not to mention all of the hours Tim, DAD, and I spent writing and talking about the Cavaliers.
When it comes down to it then, when I see LeBron on the floor tonight, I don’t think I have it in me to root against him. I’ve given him too much already as a fan. And he gave me a lot as a player. One moment, one decision, and a different jersey on his back are not enough for me to turn against the man, not when I greatly admire the way he plays basketball.
Be pissed at me if you want, but I can’t do it. I can’t root against LeBron James.
On the contrary, I’ll actually be rooting for him to do something historically great this year and in the years to come.
