All-defensive team and all-NBA teams are selected by the coaches as far as I know. Not by writers.
I have to disagree if you mean that as an absolute. Like I already said, coordinating on-court defense and making sure the team actually gets back in transition and knows when to switch and when to help matters just as much as being able to "lock down" your man. Especially since some players are impossible to "lock down" (D-Wade, Nash, Bron, Durant, etc.) and the whole point is just to have a good enough defensive rotation and help defense to make the opposing team make passes they don't want to make and shots with fewer seconds on the shot clock than they'd like. That's what makes Boston, San Antonio, Cleveland, and LA good defensive teams. It's not that they have "lockdown defenders." That's the thing -- according to your logic, Cleveland would be like one of the sorriest defensive teams in the league. But they're always near the top because good defense is emphatically not about shutting down a star player for four quarters. If there's an offensive powerhouse to take on, you make that player work by giving him lots of different players to go against and throw different combinations at him, but you don't just say "ok, Artest, go get him all game long." What would happen is Artest would get 15 minutes of game time and pick up 5 fouls. That's why LeBron and D-Wade and other players who are their team's #1, #2, and #3 option don't play that kind of defense until the final minutes of the game when they can pick up fouls and play 100% on both sides of the court.
In 2008 CP3 deserved the MVP over Kobe and KG. And the Dirk award was just a horrible decision by the NBA. They massaged the voters into giving it to Dirk when Nash deserved it more, and then the Mavs got taken out by the Warriors (karma; the Mavs thew a game to the Warriors (they sat Dirk and some other starters) just a week before the Playoffs started, and that allowed Golden State to sneak into 8th seed, and the Warriors swept the regular season series), and I think more than anything the MVP hurt Dirk's reputation. Which is a shame because Dirk is a great player.
Of course there is more to defense than just playing lockdown defense, but as far as rating individual's defensively, I believe Lockdown defense should be the first requisite to being a GREAT defender for positions 1-3. All of those players you listed have been shutdown by a lockdown defender this season (as much as you can shutdown someone who takes as many shots as they do.) For instance, Durant was shut down twice by Artest in the first round series, LeBron was shut down by Pierce/Allen twice in their series, Nash was shut down (game 1 I think? I can't recall) while being defended by Fisher/their rotation they used on him.
But alas, you're forgetting that the Celtics defensive mindset this past playoff run WAS to shutdown a teams star player for 4 quarters. They absolutely dominated Kobe for every game but game 3, where he kept making ridiculous "chuck it up" style shots. They shut down Howard for most of the series against Orlando. Shutting down LeBron was the difference in the series against Cleveland, and they did a good job against D-Wade in the first round.
Obviously star calls do hurt lockdown defenders due to the simple fact that NBA referees won't allow you to shut down a star player like LeBron or D-Wade, and instead will bail them out when they are struggling with bad shooting foul calls, or by getting the defender in foul trouble, but not always are lockdown defenders in foul trouble.
I don't see how CP3 deserved the MVP, when KG single handedly turned the worst defensive team in the NBA into the best defensive team, and carried the team during the season at times when chemistry problems were causing headaches. I assume you agree that KG deserved the award over Duncan in 02, and that Duncan deserved the award over Iverson.
Rondo is a fantastic defender. I honestly have no idea what you're watching. Because it ain't the actual basketball games being played.
Also James Posey? Are you serious? The guy has no skills at anything in basketball. He can't play defense, although that might be the best of his sad skills.
Rondo is a fantastic defender at everything BUT on-ball defense. He's an absolutely TERRIBLE on-ball defender (as seen in the series against the Lakers), and gets burnt more than any player other than Dwayne Wade because he goes for the steal or gets caught in a screen most of the time.
James Posey is a fantastic on-ball defender, he might not care about playing the game anymore, but when he does, he's top 10 lockdown on-ball defender.
Someone obviously needs to read what I wrote before commenting on it next time.
And I'm not kidding about Dwayne Wade either, he's THE WORST on-ball defender I've ever seen who's played for nearly as many years in the NBA as he has. He's obviously a fantastic help defender, but HORRID on-ball.
A defensive rebound means the other team was deprived an offensive rebound. It's not something to take for granted. Sure, sometimes teams won't even go for an offensive rebound especially if they're trying to speed up tempo, but all go for an offensive rebound more frequently than not. They fail to get them by virtue of defensive rebounding.
It's not "getting burnt" -- he doesn't risk accumulating fouls for a while because while he's sitting down the Cavs are just about one of the worst teams in the league. And honestly, LeBron holds star small forwards and shooting guards on other teams to pretty miserable shooting percentages most of the time. And I still don't see how you figure LeBron's "terrible" at forcing people to go to their bad hand, given that it's all relative anyway. Who in the league is markedly better at forcing people to shoot well out of their comfort zone, honestly? Artest isn't better at it, he just does it for more minutes per game (and accumulates fouls, but that's ok because he's not the only offensive option on his team). Same goes for other such defenders. DPOY Dwight Howard gets credit for an entirely different sort of defensive presence.
Celtic players never really have anything nice to say about anyone, and Ron Ron is ~30 cards shy of a full deck. He thinks Brandon Roy is like the best player in the league. Nash isn't a one-on-one defender -- he's a coordinator. Same as LeBron, he commands the rest of the team getting them back on D in transition, getting them to help, and so forth. Nash can't keep someone like Parker or Paul from getting to the rim, just like no-one can keep Nash from doing the same, but what he can do (and does) is put into action a defensive plan better than most other players on his team. Hollinger and others have analyzed Nash's defensive contribution on more than one occasion over the years (mostly because Nash's dubious reputation as a bad defender makes it interesting), and they've always concluded that he's an above average defender when it comes to the difference his presence makes on the court defensively.
It's not just about making the guy you're guarding shoot 2-for-12 from the field, you know.
I didn't say such a thing. I said that players and coaches in the NBA consider him a good defender. Coaches are who vote players onto the "all-X teams" and "all-NBA first team" and so forth. So that means your analysis of LeBron's defensive contributions is incongruent with what the pros think. Maybe they're all wrong and you're right, but I wanted to point it out because I find it more likely that you're wrong and they're right.
I do...
I'm a player fan and "fun stuff" fan, myself. I watch way too many games, but I watch them for the drama and the highlights and the dumb stuff players say and the stories that some players' careers become. I'm not a fan of any team per se; if LeBron leaves CLE or Nash leaves PHX or Wade leaves MIA, I'd just follow their new teams more (if they stayed as fun to watch). As for the NBA's BS, I hate it too and never let it slide if I can help it.
I'd guess around 70%-80% of the time, a defensive rebound is just whichever teammate let's the other one get the board. Pretty meaningless as far as I'm concerned (the stat itself, defensive rebounds on the other hand can be crucial parts of a game).
I consider keeping your man in front you, and stopping him from easily slicing through a defense with dribble penetration a large part of playing good defense. Obviously the game is more than that, but what separates the great defenders from the average ones is their ability to play lockdown defense. Off the top of my head I can name you 10-12 great lockdown defenders that do what LeBron can't do for a full game. Ron Artest, Thabo Sefalosha, Shane Battier, Tayshaun Prince, Andre Kirilenko, Ime Udoka, James Posey, Luc Mbah a Moute, Corey Brewer, Tony Allen, and their are more.
These are the same voters that put Dwayne Wade (one of the worst man defenders of all-time) on the first team every year defensively. They also put Rondo (another one of the worst man to man defenders of all-time) and Chris Paul (same) first team in past few years. Kobe Bryant also has no business being an 8 time first team all defender. So yes, I would have to say that I do know what I'm talking about, while these moronic writers who continuously fail year after year at selecting the correct players for most awards. How in gods name did Kobe win the MVP over KG in 08????? Or Iverson over Duncan, or Duncan over KG (02), or Dirk over Nash??? Exactly my point.
Wow, bro seriously? You're coming off as a bit of a hater if you ask me.
How can you possibly put together a case for LeBron being an "average at best" help defender? Just about everyone in the NBA considers him one of the best on help defense. And it's also kind of clear; the Cavs are one of the top defensive teams in the league and it's not in spite of LeBron. They are all about good help defense and LeBron is a big part of that.
Your claim that LeBron never forces players to go to their bad hand is just plain false. That's what LeBron does whenever he's playing one-on-one. That's exactly how he played Durant in that game where it came down to the last defensive stop; diverted to his left at the top of the key, Durant was forced to go to his bad side and ended up having his shot blocked by LeBron near the basket. Listen to him talk in interviews -- he'll often break down what he's doing on defense, and one of the things he mentions specifically is that he studies his opponents on video and learns what sides they favor on drives and such. Like I said already, take note of the number of shots the people he guards actually attempt compared to how many touches they get. The proportion is much lower than their average.
As for LeBron taking nearly every defensive play off for the first three quarters, that's also untrue. He doesn't play dedicated, lockdown defense for the first three quarters, but he still makes a major difference on the defensive end with the way he coordinates the rest of the team, the way he can neutralize fast breaks, and the shots he alters. He also manages a decent number of rebounds, which counts for something.
As for the way Pierce and Turkoglu played in the 2008 and 2009 series vs the Cavs, well just about nobody managed to guard Pierce well in those playoffs at all. He averaged his usual FG% vs the Cavs if you count game 7 where he went off for 45. Turkoglu averaged 39 FG% against the Cavs in the 2009 series; nothing special. He had two decent games and four horrid games where he shot like 1-11 and 3-12 and such. LeBron didn't do that poor a job, especially considering he was just about the only guy playing any offense on his team that series.
Overall I find your analysis to be mostly made-up stuff. The fact that it's entirely out of tune with what players and coaches think also should throw up a red flag for you. I'd bet you also consider Steve Nash a defensive liability even though nobody in the actual NBA does.
o_O If what you said were even remotely close to true, LeBron would average 45 points a game.
He's average at best, because while he'll make the spectacular block once every game or two, he'll give up a ton of easy stuff that a good help defender wouldn't give up.
Congratulations, you listed ONE game where he forced Durant to go to his band hand. Having watched LeBron every year in the playoffs for the past 5 years, I can say without a doubt he is terrible at forcing players to go to their bad hand, and gets burnt more than any "good defender" I've ever seen.
You're analysis on his fast break defense is correct, but I'm talking about halfcourt sets. He takes most halfcourt sets off for the first 3 quarters of a game. Rebounds are what they are, mostly just stat junk that is meaningless (offensive rebounds are different), the only time they mean anything on the defensive side is when someone grabs a tough key defensive rebound (once or twice a game).
As far as what the "NBA coaches and players think" any good defender knows LeBron is an average defender. Just ask KG, Ron Artest, Tony Allen, etc. Steve Nash is what he is, he's a below average defender that can keep a decent point guard infront of him, but he gets burnt on a nightly basis against any star players he's defending.
Funny, I could also say you're coming off as a fan boy, using stuff like "We'll LeBron's loved by all the coaches in the NBA!!!" yeah, because if anyone speaks against him, they get slapped with a 25-50k fine. I'm absolutely not a "hater" (who even says this word other than teenage punks and african americans under the age of 13?) of LeBron, what I am is a purist basketball fan, who won't stand for the garbage WWE that the National Betting Association has become.
You have a point, but LeBron is actually very susceptible to bad calls much of the time. I've watched just about every CLE game for the last few years and the last couple of seasons their regular-season home losses started with first quarters full of questionable calls. The Cavs get discouraged easily by bad calls. LeBron less so than, say, Mo Williams and other pansies on that team (notable exception of Delonte West, who's usually on so many meds he probably relies strictly on muscle memory to get through the game, heh). But really no-one's completely immune to it.
And the real complaints, the ones the front office issues fines for of $25k+, those come from either losing teams, or from Phil Jackson (heh). So I'm not "totally wrong" if you talk about that kind of complaining as opposed to the usual crap players get T'd up for or get discouraged by mid-game. Even "winners" can get discouraged by bad officiating mid-game in the sense you're talking about. I've even seen it happen to Nash (maybe a couple of times ever, but still).
It depends on his mindset game-to-game. There have been times when he's just gotten enraged instead and mauled the other team. LeBron's a "victim of non-calls" just about every time he drives to the basket and isn't fouled; if he didn't complain about it, he'd be a fool because complaining about it can get you the call next time.
LeBron doesn't foul the opponent on fast breaks except extremely rarely. He's also usually a perimeter/help defender until he goes into his "lockdown" mode with like 4 minutes left in the 4th quarter. When he does that, he's one of the best defenders in the league. Notice that throughout the game, even when he's on the perimeter, if his man has the ball, that guy goes for a shot maybe 5% of the time and the rest of the time gives the ball up. LeBron doesn't even need to contest shots most of the time because players are hesitant to try and shoot over him. He's a great defender; he's just not a very active defender for large portions of the game. Which makes sense -- players that defend actively for more of the game (Dwight Howard, Ron Artest, etc.) are far more likely to get into foul trouble, and the last thing the Cavs ever need in a game is LeBron in foul trouble.
You're obviously not very aware of what a "great defender" is if you think LeBron James is a great defender. Making athletic shot blocks on the fast break once a game, and playing very average at best help defense doesn't make you a good defender. Also getting burnt nearly every time you're man touches the ball (because he never forces players to go to their bad hand, instead he let's the other teams 3 determine where he's going on every drive, the sign of a bad defender). You have no business being placed on an all-defense team when you take nearly every defensive play off for the first 3 quarters. Watch the 2008 and 2009 playoffs as an example (2010 he didn't have much of a challenge, as Pierce's legs are 2 years older, and he was spent defending LeBron), Pierce and Turkoglu absolutely shredded LeBron in both of the series the Cavs lost.
How many times in a season does LeBron drive to the hoop and a whistle isn't blown almost immediately? 4, maybe 5 times?
Right, the US is the victim of the singular worst call in the World Cup this year. But they don't have a monopoly on terrible calls. Brazil had a key player ejected and suspended on one of the worst flops I've ever seen. This whole tournament has been rife with bad calls. The point is that it's not only against us. Or in the case of the NBA whomever the league has the "fix" in against. People choose to see the calls they want and tend to gloss over the other terrible calls that went their way. We get a much better view these days because of the rampant instant replay. It's an Occam's Razor thing.
I'm being a realist here. Do I have a problem with referees making poor calls, biased calls and perhaps even shady calls? Hell yes. Is there any way to ultimately eliminate it? Nope. I would love for the leagues to do their very best to minimize it, but I'm under no illusions that it'll ever go completely away. Some kind of accountability or something would be a good start. I'll agree that FIFA and the NBA treat their refs way too well.
Amusing, but also totally wrong. Winning players are the guys who don't sit around and ***** at the ref after every little call or non-call and go make a play. Examples of this would be Rondo, LeBron, Fisher, etc. You need a team with these kinds of guys to win.
Wait WHAT??????????? LeBron doesn't whine after every non call he's a victim of (LOL 1 every season maybe?) That is absolutely the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen written on this forum (obviously not a huge sample size, but a decent one.) Let's not mention the fact that LeBron has set the record for being called for the least fouls of any player in any season these past 2 years by a WIDE margin (not shady at all I guess......... considering LeBron is an average defender outside of making athletic shot blocks....) On the rare occasion the refs do swallow their whistle with LeBron, this happens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9Ty8gRjXoU or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYhSfki2z1U
The problem is refs are pampered and protected by their respective organizations way too much. If you absolutely blow a call that anyone in their right mind would have made correctly, you should be fined 20k (large fine for a ref), then if you absolutely blow another call in a span of 365 days, you should be fired. A good example of this would be Jim Joyce's famous blown call, he should have been fined for it, and told if it happens again in the next year he's fired. While this would cause refs to swallow their whistles more than it does now, it would stop all of these horrible calls costing teams championships (Celtics, Vikings, Phillies all potentially could have won the title in their respective sports last year if not for bad officiating.)
I didn't say they had to fix every draft, or force Lebron or some other superstar(s) to go to New York, I'm just saying that this opportunity has presented itself time and time again with less financially appealing options panning out. This is why New York has been terrible for a decade. There hasn't been any intervention there for at least ten years. They didn't have to do it every year, just one move to push them in the right direction would have helped, and it hasn't happened. Same with the draft. Take Bargnangi's draft. No franchise players in that draft (so everyone thought), so no reason to fix the draft. However, maybe it would have been in the league's best interest to fix the draft in the Durant/Oden sweepstakes. That didn't happen. Same with Lebron's class. Is it for the best financially that Lebron is in Cleveland? Not sure, but I don't think so. How about Bosh winding up in Toronto? It seems like they haven't fixed any of those situations which they could have fixed at least one really good draft or pushed a trade for New York sometime within the last decade, but they haven't seemed to, which is a good sign in my opinion.
And yes I know what an analogy is. But when you are trying to compare something that could potentially have lasting personal consequences and bring individual and family trauma to a business that exists to provide recreation and fun it just doesn't add up. I see where you were trying to go with it, but it was a completely terrible and ridiculous analogy.
The reason the Knicks are were they are now is one Isiah Thomas, and there was nothing the league could really do about Isiah's foolishness.
Sending LeBron to New York would have INSTANTLY brought up large talk about how the NBA Draft Lottery is fixed (as if the 85 lottery talk isn't enough), same with Durant.
The Gasol trade to me was slightly influenced by the league, but more than anything it can be attributed to the morons who run a select few NBA teams. Bad trades happen in sports (Macauley for Russell, Herschel Walker, Brett Favre, Christy Matthewson), that is definitely in the nature of sports.
My analogy was inspired by something that was on TV at the time that I wrote it, hence why I used such an extreme analogy.
I'll probably take heat for this but good freaking riddance. Niedermayer is on my list of "Players I would punch in the throat unprovoked" if I saw them walking down the street. It is because of him and Pronger than I have such a vile disdain for Anaheim. BYE BYE DOUCHE BAG![/COLOR]
There aren't many more class acts in the NHL than Scotty Niedermayer, so I see no reason why you would punch him unprovoked simply because of his style of play.
Chris Pronger I can completely understand though, who doesn't hate him?
I couldn't agree more with Lofwyr on his point about the Spurs. They are a small market team and it's not like Stern and Duncan go out every month for drinks or play golf in the off season together (as far as I know at least). It's not like he "likes" the Spurs more than anyone else and decided to push them into the finals and have them win. Duncan is boring to most people, and most people don't want to watch boring basketball. Same with Detroit. No one outside of Detroit cares about Detroit.
And what about the draft? Do you think Stern fixed the lottery so that Portland and Seattle (which is now OKC obviously) would win the Oden and Durant sweepstakes? How much sense does that make financially? Wouldn't he rather have the best players in the draft go to teams with bigger markets? For example, wouldn't it have been better for Atlanta to get that number one pick so they could have had Oden/Durant rather than Al Horford? That way they could get more exposure to those guys and make more revenue from them.
The number one TV market in the US is New York, and the Knicks have been terrible for a decade. Why hasn't Stern tried to intervene there and make the Knicks relevant again? There is a ton of money to be made there if the Knicks were on top again.
There are a lot of ways the NBA could rig the league to bring more money in, but they don't seem to be taking advantage there. Maybe some games are fixed, maybe they aren't, but if the NBA is fixing games to get more money they could fix other aspects of the league to do the same thing and that hasn't seemingly happened yet.
Hey way to compare child molestation to NBA basketball. Those have nothing to do with each other and aren't even remotely comparable.
Again you miss the point that making it COMPLETELY OBVIOUS that the NBA is fixed would reduce it's fanbase down to that of professional wrestling's fanbase.
Someone obviously has no clue what the point of an analogy is.
You're really good at making snap judgments and leaping to conclusions without any knowledge aren't you? No, I don't think the Patriots cheated, and yes I believe both of those guys used steroids, but that has NOTHING to do with NBA basketball.
Maybe all of those games were fixed, and maybe Stern was in on all of it the whole time. But why fix only some of the series? If you're going to fix some of the series, why not fix all of them that way the NBA gets the most financially lucrative matchups possible. And while they are at it, why not make all of the series go to seven games as well?
Bad calls happen. They happen all the time. Basketball is an exceedingly difficult sport to call because it is so subjective and happens so fast. In the heat of the moment at a particular angle an official might make a call he thinks he sees, or something he interprets. Unless you are that official making the call you don't know exactly what they are seeing. When you can slow down the film and watch something over and over, you might see something different. I don't think it is ridiculous to give the league the benefit of the doubt on something this serious unless there is proof.
Going off that, who's to say Stern is on it? You don't know. He might have been involved. It's possible. It could happen. You don't know though. I also think it's weak when people say 'look at the history of the shady calls by these guys'. If you only look at the questionable calls it will seem suspicious. What about all of the good, accurate, spot on calls they made? No one talks about those. I'm willing to bet that they made more accurate, good calls throughout their careers than controversial ones. No one wants to talk about those though. That's boring. There isn't any room for controversy, drama, or conspiracy there. The bottom line is that you don't know for a fact that anything was definitively fixed and neither do I. However, the difference is that I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt to the league rather than jump to conclusions and start pointing fingers everywhere just because I think I have video evidence of bad calls.
Except we have proof that some games were fixed by ATLEAST Donaghy. Which opens the door for a lot more fixing by other officials/people linked with the NBA. Therefore the league SHOULD NOT be given the benefit of the doubt. That's like trusting a child molester to babysit your children "We should give him the benefit of the doubt, there was never conclusive proof he molested those children, other than bruises and the children's word!"
And in response to the rest of your post, if Stern fixed every series, it would be completely obvious the NBA was fixed, and no one other than the 8-12 year old age group and die hard fans would watch it (like Professional Wrestling).
Lol, Bulk rares are .10-.15. You can't expect to get that for uncommons.
Of course there is more to defense than just playing lockdown defense, but as far as rating individual's defensively, I believe Lockdown defense should be the first requisite to being a GREAT defender for positions 1-3. All of those players you listed have been shutdown by a lockdown defender this season (as much as you can shutdown someone who takes as many shots as they do.) For instance, Durant was shut down twice by Artest in the first round series, LeBron was shut down by Pierce/Allen twice in their series, Nash was shut down (game 1 I think? I can't recall) while being defended by Fisher/their rotation they used on him.
But alas, you're forgetting that the Celtics defensive mindset this past playoff run WAS to shutdown a teams star player for 4 quarters. They absolutely dominated Kobe for every game but game 3, where he kept making ridiculous "chuck it up" style shots. They shut down Howard for most of the series against Orlando. Shutting down LeBron was the difference in the series against Cleveland, and they did a good job against D-Wade in the first round.
Obviously star calls do hurt lockdown defenders due to the simple fact that NBA referees won't allow you to shut down a star player like LeBron or D-Wade, and instead will bail them out when they are struggling with bad shooting foul calls, or by getting the defender in foul trouble, but not always are lockdown defenders in foul trouble.
I don't see how CP3 deserved the MVP, when KG single handedly turned the worst defensive team in the NBA into the best defensive team, and carried the team during the season at times when chemistry problems were causing headaches. I assume you agree that KG deserved the award over Duncan in 02, and that Duncan deserved the award over Iverson.
Rondo is a fantastic defender at everything BUT on-ball defense. He's an absolutely TERRIBLE on-ball defender (as seen in the series against the Lakers), and gets burnt more than any player other than Dwayne Wade because he goes for the steal or gets caught in a screen most of the time.
James Posey is a fantastic on-ball defender, he might not care about playing the game anymore, but when he does, he's top 10 lockdown on-ball defender.
Someone obviously needs to read what I wrote before commenting on it next time.
And I'm not kidding about Dwayne Wade either, he's THE WORST on-ball defender I've ever seen who's played for nearly as many years in the NBA as he has. He's obviously a fantastic help defender, but HORRID on-ball.
I'd guess around 70%-80% of the time, a defensive rebound is just whichever teammate let's the other one get the board. Pretty meaningless as far as I'm concerned (the stat itself, defensive rebounds on the other hand can be crucial parts of a game).
I consider keeping your man in front you, and stopping him from easily slicing through a defense with dribble penetration a large part of playing good defense. Obviously the game is more than that, but what separates the great defenders from the average ones is their ability to play lockdown defense. Off the top of my head I can name you 10-12 great lockdown defenders that do what LeBron can't do for a full game. Ron Artest, Thabo Sefalosha, Shane Battier, Tayshaun Prince, Andre Kirilenko, Ime Udoka, James Posey, Luc Mbah a Moute, Corey Brewer, Tony Allen, and their are more.
These are the same voters that put Dwayne Wade (one of the worst man defenders of all-time) on the first team every year defensively. They also put Rondo (another one of the worst man to man defenders of all-time) and Chris Paul (same) first team in past few years. Kobe Bryant also has no business being an 8 time first team all defender. So yes, I would have to say that I do know what I'm talking about, while these moronic writers who continuously fail year after year at selecting the correct players for most awards. How in gods name did Kobe win the MVP over KG in 08????? Or Iverson over Duncan, or Duncan over KG (02), or Dirk over Nash??? Exactly my point.
He's average at best, because while he'll make the spectacular block once every game or two, he'll give up a ton of easy stuff that a good help defender wouldn't give up.
Congratulations, you listed ONE game where he forced Durant to go to his band hand. Having watched LeBron every year in the playoffs for the past 5 years, I can say without a doubt he is terrible at forcing players to go to their bad hand, and gets burnt more than any "good defender" I've ever seen.
You're analysis on his fast break defense is correct, but I'm talking about halfcourt sets. He takes most halfcourt sets off for the first 3 quarters of a game. Rebounds are what they are, mostly just stat junk that is meaningless (offensive rebounds are different), the only time they mean anything on the defensive side is when someone grabs a tough key defensive rebound (once or twice a game).
As far as what the "NBA coaches and players think" any good defender knows LeBron is an average defender. Just ask KG, Ron Artest, Tony Allen, etc. Steve Nash is what he is, he's a below average defender that can keep a decent point guard infront of him, but he gets burnt on a nightly basis against any star players he's defending.
Funny, I could also say you're coming off as a fan boy, using stuff like "We'll LeBron's loved by all the coaches in the NBA!!!" yeah, because if anyone speaks against him, they get slapped with a 25-50k fine. I'm absolutely not a "hater" (who even says this word other than teenage punks and african americans under the age of 13?) of LeBron, what I am is a purist basketball fan, who won't stand for the garbage WWE that the National Betting Association has become.
You're obviously not very aware of what a "great defender" is if you think LeBron James is a great defender. Making athletic shot blocks on the fast break once a game, and playing very average at best help defense doesn't make you a good defender. Also getting burnt nearly every time you're man touches the ball (because he never forces players to go to their bad hand, instead he let's the other teams 3 determine where he's going on every drive, the sign of a bad defender). You have no business being placed on an all-defense team when you take nearly every defensive play off for the first 3 quarters. Watch the 2008 and 2009 playoffs as an example (2010 he didn't have much of a challenge, as Pierce's legs are 2 years older, and he was spent defending LeBron), Pierce and Turkoglu absolutely shredded LeBron in both of the series the Cavs lost.
How many times in a season does LeBron drive to the hoop and a whistle isn't blown almost immediately? 4, maybe 5 times?
Wait WHAT??????????? LeBron doesn't whine after every non call he's a victim of (LOL 1 every season maybe?) That is absolutely the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen written on this forum (obviously not a huge sample size, but a decent one.) Let's not mention the fact that LeBron has set the record for being called for the least fouls of any player in any season these past 2 years by a WIDE margin (not shady at all I guess......... considering LeBron is an average defender outside of making athletic shot blocks....) On the rare occasion the refs do swallow their whistle with LeBron, this happens: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9Ty8gRjXoU or this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYhSfki2z1U
The problem is refs are pampered and protected by their respective organizations way too much. If you absolutely blow a call that anyone in their right mind would have made correctly, you should be fined 20k (large fine for a ref), then if you absolutely blow another call in a span of 365 days, you should be fired. A good example of this would be Jim Joyce's famous blown call, he should have been fined for it, and told if it happens again in the next year he's fired. While this would cause refs to swallow their whistles more than it does now, it would stop all of these horrible calls costing teams championships (Celtics, Vikings, Phillies all potentially could have won the title in their respective sports last year if not for bad officiating.)
The reason the Knicks are were they are now is one Isiah Thomas, and there was nothing the league could really do about Isiah's foolishness.
Sending LeBron to New York would have INSTANTLY brought up large talk about how the NBA Draft Lottery is fixed (as if the 85 lottery talk isn't enough), same with Durant.
The Gasol trade to me was slightly influenced by the league, but more than anything it can be attributed to the morons who run a select few NBA teams. Bad trades happen in sports (Macauley for Russell, Herschel Walker, Brett Favre, Christy Matthewson), that is definitely in the nature of sports.
My analogy was inspired by something that was on TV at the time that I wrote it, hence why I used such an extreme analogy.
There aren't many more class acts in the NHL than Scotty Niedermayer, so I see no reason why you would punch him unprovoked simply because of his style of play.
Chris Pronger I can completely understand though, who doesn't hate him?
Again you miss the point that making it COMPLETELY OBVIOUS that the NBA is fixed would reduce it's fanbase down to that of professional wrestling's fanbase.
Someone obviously has no clue what the point of an analogy is.
Shame to see Niedermayer retiring, my all-time favorite defenseman.
Except we have proof that some games were fixed by ATLEAST Donaghy. Which opens the door for a lot more fixing by other officials/people linked with the NBA. Therefore the league SHOULD NOT be given the benefit of the doubt. That's like trusting a child molester to babysit your children "We should give him the benefit of the doubt, there was never conclusive proof he molested those children, other than bruises and the children's word!"
And in response to the rest of your post, if Stern fixed every series, it would be completely obvious the NBA was fixed, and no one other than the 8-12 year old age group and die hard fans would watch it (like Professional Wrestling).