"IF" the cavaliers can pull off the upset

and next to every single title they will be screaming out their pathetic little qualifiers..."oh,got lucky with a miracle shot"..."oh,played a first time finalist"....."oh,played a young 1st timer again"....particularly that whiny bitch 3-ball.

just watch the narrative and assessment of the team magically and mysteriously change shud it happen.

Stop... that's the worst analogy that continues to be used on the forum. It's nothing similar when LeBron had D-Wade & Bosh.  People AR such prisoners of the moment... do you all really forget how dominate the Heat were? Especially the first 2 years! LeBron is the only person on the Cavs with experience that is relevant to the games outcome. 

let me put it in the right perspective: if cavs win the title - all the credits will be given to lbj and if they lose he will be also the loser but if blatt will be given the stage - he is a best in game coach i have ever seen and i am not exaggerating. i watched him in europe how he took the team with almost no stars and because of in game coaching got them the title beating much bigger and talented oppositions on single plays in money time.

lbj was forced on him as he was brought to build the cavs which he did until lbj showed up. the character of lbj is not that of mj that will stick with the team if they won't win. blatt - on contrary is for many years in cleveland. 

in these finals the matchups will decide the series and since both teams dominate the boards - it will be curry from outside against lbj from inside as long as he will have the knees to do it. so from games 3 or 4 you will see lots of lbj shooting from outside rather than penetrating and that moment will be the moment of kyrie and blatt. delavedova is a very smart player knowing how tosooth lbj ego but in decisive moments he will go with blatt decisions.

lbj is not doing a good service to himself acting arrogantly dismissing the coach as in nba is customary unless youre phil jackson or pop. 

i see a close series with no team winning two in a row till game 4. then it will be blatt and lbj taking over or the dubs cashing on lbj insubordination as blatt is not stupid and will know how to show lbj in his weaknesses 

come on,phixer...you'd choose NOT to have lebron as a player??...i wud have jordan ahead of him no doubt...but anyone else,i wud take lebron in a heartbeat...regardless of his mental fragility at times and weak characteristics his physical dominance more than makes up for it....just in playing terms alone he is one of the 3 most dominant ever i dare say...if you can get a decent cast around him youre good to go.

Yeah that same guy said Lebron is knicks bound LMAO

No way does he leave Cleveland TWICE

million times given the choice to have him on my team - million times i say no. because there is no more team, coaching or real basketball anymore. the worse thing is that you can never really rely on him. you never know what game is off on his notebook and at what stage he will fake a new injury. the whole concept of basketball as a team game is gone with him. sorry lbj fans - i also think he is amazing player (when he wants to) but for sure today's kids won't fall in love with basketball watching him as the whole generations were captivated by mj

yeah. that same guy is me 

what, cleveland is a hard place to leave????? been to cleveland even once?

as for not embracing a team game,we must remember that lebron is recognised as one of the very best passers in the league and the best passing forward of all time hands down no question.

not sure if he ever leaves cleveland,anything is possible i guess....but it seems extremely unlikely with all the flak he wud catch all over again and the massive scrutiny he wud face from new york media...plus he has committed,in words only,to stay in cleveland indefinitely.

false.if lebrons TEAM wins,his TEAMS will be 3-6 in 6 tries.

its absolutely baffling to me that people cant grasp the concept of teams winning titles,not individuals all by themselves...it aint golf or tennis....everyone knows that marquee players play a major role and have heavy influence in outcomes of games and series in the game of basketball......but NO MAN has ever singlehandedly won a damn thing.....sure,use rings won as supporting evidence....but NOT the entire case.

its childish in the extreme to view things completely without context or perspective and simply look at the title ledger and try and end the argument rite there...there can be dozens of reasons why a player does or does not win a title,not all of them are directly attributable to him....many,many very ordinary players have won rings,even played vital roles....whilst many fantastic,brilliant players have gone without a title over a whole career.

I made a similar response to someone else's thread concerning LBJ's legacy.  Ultimately, I believe your perspective on the reaction from the people will be dead-on, if he wins this year.  But I also believe a lot of LBJ supporters are not addressing the question of "WHY".

He chose (due to naivety, arrogance, youth, etc.) to be recognized as the "bad guy", from Day One.  I could list a few of those examples if you'd like to hear them, I'm pretty sure you're aware of a lot of them, already.

Look at Tom Thibodeau, for example.  There were rumblings from Chicago's front office that it didn't matter if the Bulls beat Cleveland and won the NBA Finals this year, Tom was going to be out.  What could have made such an adverse reaction from management?  RELATIONS.  His bosses didn't feel a warm and friendly vibe towards them from Thibodeau, he didn't keep them in the loop; seemingly giving them the "cold shoulder" when it came to on-the-court actions (maybe not listening to management on how to deal with D.Rose?).  Now he's out, just like that.  Same with Jimmy Johnson with the Dallas Cowboys, same with Jim Harbaugh and the 49ers.

That Tom Thibodeau example rings *especially* true with LBJ, considering his "judges" on whether he's the G.O.A.T. of the NBA are us, the people.  And it's not all about rings.  Bill Russell won 11 rings with the Boston Celtics, why isn't he considered the G.O.A.T.?  RELATIONS with the Boston Celtics organization and city, as he left on bad terms.  Public perception can make or break you, sometimes...

I kinda feel bad for LBJ.  And...I kinda don't, at the same time.  Whatever he gets, however he's perceived...that's what he deserves.  Good or bad, his perception is to the people is/was/will be brought upon by his actions.

yea thats rite,its not specific to sports tho...the concept of "luck"(which,lets face it,is only a CONCEPT anyways as its just wat we selectively recognise as the results of basic probability of certain events happening,only we choose to observe them over a certain timeframe,therefore branding a certain sequence of events "lucky" or unlucky")exists in all parts of life and is accepted as part of the deal...i just cannot see the point in going on and on and on and on about it.there is good luck and bad luck,if you wanna label it that,on both sides of every equation.and it seems you can be obsessively fixated on only the one side that suits your argument.

so warriors have had wat cud turn out to be minor injury scares to their 2 most important players.but it may have ZERO tangible impact on their performance in the finals.we shall find out...but it dont even qualify as luck so far so we can leave it out.

you know wat does qualify as bad "luck" by the commonly held definition of the word???...how about lebrons team losing their all-star power forward and 3rd most important player for the season??,their starting centre in varejao early in the season??,having kyrie busted up and hobbling around at exactly the wrong time of the year??,and also lebron with allegedly a variety of ailments also...those are all things that you can define as luck that HAVE and WILL definitely have an impact on the chances of the cavaliers by clearly weakening their stocks..........and yet all you mite have us believe is that cleveland were born under a lucky star and have fallen as.s first into good fortune at every turn....theres 2 sides to most things,come on man...have sum perspective and balance.....seriously.

by the way,i been so busy that i havent caught up on klays situation at all,am not aware how serious it may or may not be and didnt even know he was in doubt to miss games.......but hey,if the warriors really are this all-conquering juggernaut that many folks round these parts are making them out to be then surely ONE player,just ONE player only,wud not put a serious dent in their title aspirations???..no??..of course the guy is a key scorer and important to them but most wud have you believe that the "almighty" warriors cud throw their bench out against the eastern conference and still waltz in.

and this is exactly the point.....in this thread im asking are the warriors truly a dominant team???are they significantly better than cleveland by any and all measures??.........cos,as i said in the first place,IF they were to lose then i can see a million threads dis-crediting lebron immediately and saying how golden state were a paper tiger all along and are still too raw and fresh to the big stage and "dont play the rite style...yada yada...".........so,which is it????

let it be known NOW......cos to change the narrative after the fact just to support the irrational and inevitable lebron bashing that will take place in such a scenario is absolutely pathetic in the extreme.

as ive said,i dont feel the cavs have enuff to win this series....BUT IF they do it will obviously be largely because of james(unless dellavadova invalids every warriors starter out of the series with scrumming/rucking/tackling techniques and wins MVP that way),and that is a fu.ken GREAT team over there in oakland that he wud have beaten,rite?????

good for you...hopefully if the unthinkable shud happen you will be back to give credit where its due.