When Love was potentially available, I was quite high on him, until someone posted a bunch of advanced stats showing that his interior defense was beyond horrible, and that convinced me to stay away.
But yes, this is about James "making his teammates better," or not. Actually, I shouldn't use the phrase, because I don't believe in it. But what I think people really mean when they say it is, does the star player organize his team effort in such a way as to maximize the positive impact of his teammates, like the proverbial coach on the floor. There are basically no perfect players in the league, so the question is how to take advantage of their strengths while not exposing their weaknesses.
Nearly everyone that has played with James has done worse with him than without him. And it's not just lower numbers with fewer touches; they've been less effective, too. Bosh and Wade have enjoyed a renaissance now that James is gone.
Bosh and Wdae have enjoyed a renaissance with James gone? Really? You and I must have different definitions of renaissance. Do you measure that by wins? Because they didn't even make the playoffs last year and are painfully mediocre again this year in the pathetic East.
Maybe you mean that renaissance is in points... and yes, Bosh is averaging 2.5 more points, but that'll happen when you have to take more shots because a 27 PPG scorer leaves. But that renaissance sure isn't reflected in his shooting percentage which was 51% with James and 47% without him. And as far as Wade's concerned... he's not having a renaissance in FG % OR Points. With LeBron he was averaging 22 ppg on 53% shooting and without him, he's averaging 20.5 ppg on 46.5% shooting.
So, they're both shooting worse, Bosh is scoring 2.5 ppg more, Wade is scoring less, each are shooting more and losing more. But, yeah, major renaissance with those guys.
Love was All-NBA and now he's a soft gunner.
There were MAJOR questions about Love being a soft gunner his entire time in Minnesota. Just because you fell in love with his stats, doesn't mean everyone else did and he was criticized constantly as a stat padder who made no impact in the win-loss column.
and again, when a guy on a one-horse team goes to another team where there are CLEARLY 2 better players, it's not gonna be a shock that his numbers drop.
People were pretty excited about Larry Hughes -- no, really, look it up --
No... really... you look it up, please. He was an incredibly inconsistent player, that was dogged by injuries his entire career and had one great year right before free agency and everyone agreed that he got way overpaid.
a screw it... I looked it up for you. here's a little article that has snippets from Chad Ford criticizing the Hughes signing and all the myriad of reasons he sucked, was a terrible fit and not worth his contract in the first place:
http://www.fearthesword.com/2013/3/...y-revisiting-the-cavs-signing-of-larry-hughes
until he joined James in Cleveland, and that was the end of his career.
Injuries were the end of his career. Were those LeBron's fault as well? Or, did those injuries not really matter (before and after the Cavs). I mean, according to your theory, he was done with the Cavs at age 29, so should't he have had a career renaissance once he was gone?
J. R. Smith is going through a run of great games right now, but overall he's had worse years with James in Cleveland than at any other stop of his checkered career. On and on.
J.R. Smith on the Cavs has shot 42% and 39% from 3. His career numbers are 42.3% and 37% from 3. How is he playing worse now? Again, the only place he's "worse" is in PPG... but you do realize that's a function of becoming a role player on a team with James, Kyrie and Love as opposed to being able to gun away on terrible teams with very few offensive options, right?
I know some people disagree, and that's fine, but the evidence is pretty strong.
you literally provided zero evidence, just a bunch of statements that aren't backed up by facts in any way shape or form.
