See, I'm just not sure that I buy that. Pierce plays better defense, and I wonder if Lebron could have shut down Kobe to the extent that Paul did. How would he have handled deferring to other players at times? I'm not sure that he's matured enough as a player to lead like Paul did last year. Throw is the fact that we'd be missing Ray Allen, and I don't think it's conclusive *at all* that we'd be better last year, or over the next two years.
Re: vs. Kobe. Though it isn't conclusive evidence, LeBron's teams are 6 - 3 vs. Kobe's teams in their career. In those games, which comprise Kobe's offensive prime, Kobe is averaging only 25.2 ppg on 42.3% FG shooting...numbers well below Kobe's averages over that stretch, and very comparable to what he produced against the Cs in this year's Finals. I can't say for sure how much of that was due to LeBron, but the Cavs haven't really had any other perimeter defensive stoppers over that stretch that would be credited with shutting Kobe down.
Re: deference and leadership. Assuming such a trade would have been made, LeBron wouldn't have needed to defer to the extent that Pierce did. LeBron and KG would have handled the lion-share of the offensive load, with Rondo and Perk playing similar roles to last season and Posey and House as shooters that don't really need the ball in their hands. So if that is a weakness in LeBron, that wouldn't really have come into play. And as for leadership, it seems to me that LeBron has been excellent at handling big-game pressure and having his team prepared/expecting to win even against favored opponents on the big stage. I really don't think that would have been an issue.
Analyzing this over the defined time frame of last year (when we already know the results) and the next two years, and assuming all other things to be equal, I wouldn't make the trade. Three stars is better than two, and one guaranteed championship is better than a hypothetical one.
The 100% known of a title last season does skew the debate, so for the sake of more reasonable analysis I try to look at it as if this trade were actually done last season. In other words, try to look at it as 3-year blank slates and not a given title + 2-more years, because otherwise it's not really a level playing field.
Re: 3 stars better than 2. I don't necessarily agree with that, because I don't think all stars are created equal. I would rather have Tim Duncan than Carmelo Anthony and Allen Iverson. I would rather have Kobe Bryant than Gilbert Arenas and Antawn Jamison. Just like McChesney's Superstar theory (
http://www.nbadraft.net/mcchesney005.html), I believe there is a difference. And to me, LeBron is a Superstar while both Pierce and Allen are stars.
If you're saying that Lebron is a better defender than Pierce, and would have played better defense in the playoffs, I think you're way off base. I find it hard to imagine our defense improving last year under any circumstances (both Paul's and Ray's defensive numbers were tremendous), and I certainly don't see it improving with Lebron James. Lebron has improved his defense, but he's got a long ways to go before being considered good.
I think that, for the defense that the Cs run, LeBron would be at least as good if not better than Pierce. The Cs defense uses KG to disrupt the entire middle of the court, Perkins to help him at the rim, and Rondo to disrupt on the perimeter. Pierce and Allen's roles are to play up on their man and force him to either shoot a contested jumper, or funnel him to the middle where KG and Perk are ready to help. I think LeBron could do that, and that it plays to areas where he has advantages over Pierce (foot speed, length). I think LeBron's defensive weaknesses are similar to Pierce's before this year, that he puts more of his energy into the offensive end due to having to carry everything. But on this Cs team, I think that wouldn't have been an issue.