One more reason to dislike Lebron...

[Fafnir]

He disses Larry and Russell on his all-time team:

PG: Magic Johnson
SG: Michael Jordan
SF: LeBron James
PF: Kevin Garnett
C: Shaquille O'Neal (LeBron almost went Kareem Abdul-Jabbar)

Pretty bold, putting himself over three-time champion Larry Bird.

Sorry Lebron, you about 5-6 years and a championship away from being able to say that.

More like 5-6 more championships.

You can't be serious. I think we Celtics fans need to come to grips with the fact that because of Lebron our beloved Larry Joe will no longer be regarded as the best SF of all time.

If he keeps playing at this level for many years sure. That is a big if.

[Roy Hobbs]

He disses Larry and Russell on his all-time team:

PG: Magic Johnson
SG: Michael Jordan
SF: LeBron James
PF: Kevin Garnett
C: Shaquille O'Neal (LeBron almost went Kareem Abdul-Jabbar)

Pretty bold, putting himself over three-time champion Larry Bird.

Sorry Lebron, you about 5-6 years and a championship away from being able to say that.

More like 5-6 more championships.

You can't be serious. I think we Celtics fans need to come to grips with the fact that because of Lebron our beloved Larry Joe will no longer be regarded as the best SF of all time.

Eh...  who cares about "regarded" by other fans?  Most fans think Shaq was better than Bill Russell.  That doesn't make them right.

Lebron won't be at Larry's level until he dominates a decade, both statistically and in terms of championships.  Larry won three MVPs and three championships, in an era where he was going up against legitimate competition.  Let's see if Lebron can match that.

I tend to agree with Brad Daugherty that his early 90s Cavs teams could have beaten this year's team.  The competition in the league just isn't what it used to be.

[CelticsWhat35]

For a guy who claims to be a student of the game and its history, he came off as incredibly ignorant.

[JSD]

Eh...  who cares about "regarded" by other fans?  Most fans think Shaq was better than Bill Russell.  That doesn't make them right.

I know Lebron has Shaq on his list or whatever but I don't hear this much. I think the majority of NBA fans know who Bill Russell is and what he did... but unfortunately you could be right.

Lebron won't be at Larry's level until he dominates a decade, both statistically and in terms of championships.  Larry won three MVPs and three championships, in an era where he was going up against legitimate competition.  Let's see if Lebron can match that.

Lebron is 24 and in terms of pace, ahead of Larry in every statical and award sense.

I tend to agree with Brad Daugherty that his early 90s Cavs teams could have beaten this year's team.  The competition in the league just isn't what it used to be.

Really? While I agree the league is a tad watered down I don't think that 92 Cavs team (The last team Larry faced in the playoffs) could stop Lebron.

[KungPoweChicken]

The early 90s Cavs wouldn't have a chance to beat the current team. Yes, Lebron is considered a better player than Larry was, and he'll be remembered as a far more dominate player. I love Bill Russell as much as the next guy. But in terms of who was the better player, Shaq is clearly the answer. Russell should be considered the better winner, not player. Robert Horry won a lot of titles; does that mean he is now considered a better player than Karl Malone? Let's put it this way: When Shaq was in in his prime, he made Dwight Howard look like a more uncoordinated version of Rasho Nesterovic.

[CelticsWhat35]

The '92 Cavs took the Bulls to 6 games, and I don't think anyone is confusing these current Cavs with the Jordan Bulls.  And if they are...well, they're just confused.

These Cavs are a very good team, but they'll also have the benefit of one of the easiest roads to the Finals in playoff history.  They started out with a Piston team that pretty much tried to fall out of the 8th seed so they could start their summer early, followed by a beat up Hawks team that doesn't know how to win on the road.  Their ECF opponent is going to either be a team without last years DPOY, and their 1st or 2nd big off the bench, who's always given them problems.  Or they'll play a team that lives and dies by the jump shot, and has shown to be choke artists.

I'm not taking anything away from what the Cavs are doing.  They're playing who's on their schedule, and to their credit, they're not playing down to their competition.  They're playing great ball, and dominating.  But this is not going to go down as one of the greatest teams of all time.  They've got a player who will go down as one of the greatest of all time, but this team is not.

[JSD]

The early 90s Cavs wouldn't have a chance to beat the current team. Yes, Lebron is considered a better player than Larry was, and he'll be remembered as a far more dominate player.

Lebron is projecting to surpass Larry but has not yet.

I love Bill Russell as much as the next guy. But in terms of who was the better player, Shaq is clearly the answer. Russell should be considered the better winner, not player. Robert Horry won a lot of titles; does that mean he is now considered a better player than Karl Malone?  

Russell was the backbone of 11 titles, Robert Horry has been a role player since day 1 at Rockets rookie camp. When looking at it in terms of era, Bill Russell is by far #1.

Let's put it this way: When Shaq was in in his prime, he made Dwight Howard look like a more uncoordinated version of Rasho Nesterovic.

What is 23 year old Shaq Vs. Dwight?

[CelticsWhat35]

Let's put it this way: When Shaq was in in his prime, he made Dwight Howard look like a more uncoordinated version of Rasho Nesterovic.

What is 23 year old Shaq Vs. Dwight?

Offensively, Shaq was better as a 20 yr old rookie than Dwight is now.

[nickagneta]

People gave Pierce loads of crap for saying he thought he was the best player in the world after winning the Finals MVP and NBA Championship.

I wonder if all those people nationwide that didn't hesitate to jump all over Pierce for his self love are as equally quick jump all over LeBron for thinking he's not just the best player in the world but one of the best player ever to live?

[crownsy]

really don't have a problem with this... i actually don't have a problem with Lebron at all.

I dont either really, other than he doesn't play for us. I hate the way the game is called for him, but thats not his fault, thats an NBA officiating problem.

That said, If you need to tell people how great you are by putting yourself on your own all time team, i think thats pretty bush league, ya.

[PaulPierce34G]

I get what the majority is saying..he doesn't have the accolades to back this up. But then that is like someone saying "Don't put Karl Malone on this team because he never won a title." even though the mailman certainly can make a case to be on such a team.  James will have another 1-3 MVP awards, will be voted/selected by coaches into every all-star game for the next 9-12 years, make at least 6-8 more appearances on All-NBA team.  I've got to say, I don't have a problem with it either. He could make a case at this current stage in his career..it may not be as strong of a case as say in another 5 years, but he can make an argument for himself.  In terms of pure talent, being so young still, he has yet to hit his prime.  He is going to be scary in another 3-5 years. 

But obviously, he is just being his normal, cocky self.  His attitude is what gives him his swagger, his confidence in his game. 



PS after being a member on this forum since October 2007, I have finally reached 100 posts. About time.

[Big Ticket]

He disses Larry and Russell on his all-time team:

PG: Magic Johnson
SG: Michael Jordan
SF: LeBron James
PF: Kevin Garnett
C: Shaquille O'Neal (LeBron almost went Kareem Abdul-Jabbar)

Pretty bold, putting himself over three-time champion Larry Bird.

One explanation I heard is that Dan Patrick (this was from an interview on the Dan Patrick show) worded the question in a way that suggested "the all time starting lineup you'd want to be on" of some sorts. 

Didn't hear it myself, so I can't say for sure.... and knowing LeBron, I wouldn't really be surprised.

And I don't mean to ruffle any feathers, but when this topic was discussed on the ESPN NBA Board, I said - obviously Bird is way ahead in terms of "All NBA" type careers... but it came down to one game and I could have Bird at his best or LeBron at his best, it's not such an easy choice for me.

[Redz]

And I don't mean to ruffle any feathers, but when this topic was discussed on the ESPN NBA Board, I said - obviously Bird is way ahead in terms of "All NBA" type careers... but it came down to one game and I could have Bird at his best or LeBron at his best, it's not such an easy choice for me.

If you grew up a Celtics fan the decision would be easier for you.  Perhaps not an objective decision, but an easier one.

[EJPLAYA]

Sorry guys, but if I have a choice of Shaq in his prime and Russell in his prime I am taking Shaq. Russell was of course amazing in his era, but if he had to defend Shaq he'd have a tough time. He gives up 3 inches and about 75 pounds to the man. You can't expect a kid in his twenties to be able to know how good Russell was either. He grew up watching Shaq and to a lesser extent Kareem. Russell is almost "fictional" to him.

As far as him putting himself in front of Bird, that is not an issue. I would expect the guy to. Just like PP said he was the best player.

There are many reasons to hate Lebron, but this wasn't one of them.

[bdm860]

Sorry guys, but if I have a choice of Shaq in his prime and Russell in his prime I am taking Shaq. Russell was of course amazing in his era, but if he had to defend Shaq he'd have a tough time. He gives up 3 inches and about 75 pounds to the man.

But Russell gave up 3 inches to Wilt too, and he fared well against Wilt.  Granted not as much of a weight difference, but Wilt was a decatholon athlete, something Shaq could never be.  I wouldn't let size hold you back from taking Russell over Shaq.