Dan Gilbert's Letter to Cavs Fans... Wow!

[Cman]

Wow.  That's got to be the most unrealistic "guarantee" I've ever seen.  Sorry, Dan, it's not happening.

I see the entertainment value in this, I guess, but I think it's unprofessional.  (And no, I don't think Lebron is very professional, either.)  It was the Cavs who chose to cater to a superstar, giving him influence over the coaching staff, player acquisitions, and plays run on the court.  It was the Cavs who compromised their roster in a misguided attempt to appease Lebron.  To now come out and mock him for his ego and his need to be "King", when they fed and enabled that ego, seems a bit hypocritical.

In short, screw the Cavs.  They got what was coming to them.

Well put, assuming there's not more to it than meets the eye.

Less seriously, I wonder how much Stern will fine Gilbert for actions detrimental to the league?

[twinbree]

Whoa. Good for Gilbert getting his bitterness off his chest. The whole thing was really quite tasteless. But the organization needs to understand that letting the FA mania build up for 2 years. Of course it was going to get out of hand in the end.

And I understand they feel betrayed but Lebron leaving doesn't make him a traitor. He never promised to stay. Unless there's more to the story than we know which the letter seems to be implying.

[Birdbrain]

I love it finally someone not being politically correct about their feelings.  How does he stay in a place for 7 years ( he loves ohio...) and not even tell them prior to the announcement that he's leaving?  I felt the whole LJ story was concocted from the first place but, they kept giving him everything he wanted so I gave him the benefit of the doubt thinking I was seeing things when It was obvious he was quitting on the court.  More power to him for leaving though that his right and it's my right to believe that he will never be looked upon as elite player in history due to him running to DWade (tail between his legs) to get some wins.  I can't stand Kobe but, you know he would never do this type of thing because he believes what he says about himself being the best.  ESPN is complicit in this facade still promoting this ' KING ' BS.  What a joke sports have become when a career loser/quitter is considered a King.  Give me Paul Pierce everyday and twice on Sundays.  He has more heart in nether region than the Queen has in whole body.

Like has been mentioned previously though Dan Gilbert is complicit as well bending over backwards for this loser/quitter so don't take my rant the wrong way. I'm just happy he didn't go out with a nice thank you for all you've done for Cleveland and was honest about his feelings.  Even he is more heart than LJ lol. 

Beating Miami will be the best thing ever and Boston is just the team to do it.  It will destroy ESPN, the bane of my existence, and this facade all in 1 shot.

Go C's.

[Fafnir]

I laughed when I read it last night, reading it again this morning its a stupid letter.

How is Gilbert going to convince a FA to come to Cleveland after throwing the best player in their franchise under the bus?

[Roy Hobbs]

What a joke sports have become when a career loser/quitter is considered a King.  Give me Paul Pierce everyday and twice on Sundays.  He has more heart in nether region than the Queen has in whole body.

It's interesting that you bring up the "career loser" thing with Lebron, but then speak of Pierce favorably.

Lebron has led his team deep into the playoffs the last several seasons, making a Finals appearance and a trip to the conference finals, along with losing to a great Celts team a couple of times.  He was surrounded by mediocre -- at best -- teammates, and yet he brought his franchise to unprecedented heights.  He couldn't get them over the final hump, but he got them to the cusp.  I'm not sure that makes him a "loser". 

Compare that to Paul Pierce, who played on some of the worst teams in franchise history.  Fans from other teams labeled him a "career loser" and a "star who puts up great stats on a terrible team".  Was that fair?  I don't think so, but the label was out there.  Certainly, Pierce had far less success than Lebron did in terms of winning.

Continuing the Lebron / Pierce comparison, Pierce openly talked about demanding a trade if the Celtics didn't get him some better teammates.  Lebron decided that he'd take his destiny in his own hands, and seek out those better teammates on his own.  In both cases, the player admitted that he couldn't win without help.

How is Pierce some sort of winner, and Lebron is a loser?  Is it due to the one championship Pierce won in his 30s?  If that's the case, don't we have to give Lebron time?  Pierce didn't have a title at age 25, either, and unlike Lebron, he'd never been to the Finals.

People can like or dislike whoever they want, of course.  I just think it's weird that people bash Lebron for deciding he cares more about rings than stats, when we've got three players on our team who came to the exact same conclusion.  Trying to win by yourself when surrounded by flotsam and jetsam is overrated.

[wiley]

I agree Roy.  What he's decided to do, chase rings over individual glory, is what most of us bloggers are usually crying out for more players to do.....team over individual, etc....

I think people should separate the despicable, media-whorish manner in which Lebron chooses to do business and comport himself generally (a big fat case of immaturity and not much else) and his actual basketball decisions.....

[Cman]

I agree Roy.  What he's decided to do, chase rings over individual glory, is what most of us bloggers are usually crying out for more players to do.....team over individual, etc....

I think people should separate the despicable, media-whorish manner in which Lebron chooses to do business and comport himself generally (a big fat case of immaturity and not much else) and his actual basketball decisions.....

Hmmm, I almost agree.  But I don't think it is as easy to separate the two.  I honestly think going to Chicago would give LeBron a better chance at winning a ring, but the egoist in him couldn't bear playing in Michael Jordan's shadow.  So he goes to Miami, the place that offers the second best chance to get a ring, but a place where he won't have to toil in the spotlight of someone else's greatness.

Now, I'll freely admit that my belief that Chicago is a better fit than Miami is a personal opinion, but I think its one that's relatively easy to back up (but a bit off topic here).

[wiley]

I agree Roy.  What he's decided to do, chase rings over individual glory, is what most of us bloggers are usually crying out for more players to do.....team over individual, etc....

I think people should separate the despicable, media-whorish manner in which Lebron chooses to do business and comport himself generally (a big fat case of immaturity and not much else) and his actual basketball decisions.....

Hmmm, I almost agree.  But I don't think it is as easy to separate the two.  I honestly think going to Chicago would give LeBron a better chance at winning a ring, but the egoist in him couldn't bear playing in Michael Jordan's shadow.  So he goes to Miami, the place that offers the second best chance to get a ring, but a place where he won't have to toil in the spotlight of someone else's greatness.

Now, I'll freely admit that my belief that Chicago is a better fit than Miami is a personal opinion, but I think its one that's relatively easy to back up (but a bit off topic here).

Actually I agree with you.  I think Lebron has made a bit of a mistake, in that I think he and Wade are too similar.  It may work and it may not, but imo Lebron could easily have won titles in Chicago.  I also think he could have won titles with the Clippers.  And I even think he could have won titles with New Jersey starting in a couple of years.  On all of these teams he would have been given all the credit.  I actually think he had some better options basketball wise....it's just that I can't fault his reasons for trying to do it in Miami.

[Roy Hobbs]

I agree Roy.  What he's decided to do, chase rings over individual glory, is what most of us bloggers are usually crying out for more players to do.....team over individual, etc....

I think people should separate the despicable, media-whorish manner in which Lebron chooses to do business and comport himself generally (a big fat case of immaturity and not much else) and his actual basketball decisions.....

Hmmm, I almost agree.  But I don't think it is as easy to separate the two.  I honestly think going to Chicago would give LeBron a better chance at winning a ring, but the egoist in him couldn't bear playing in Michael Jordan's shadow.  So he goes to Miami, the place that offers the second best chance to get a ring, but a place where he won't have to toil in the spotlight of someone else's greatness.

Now, I'll freely admit that my belief that Chicago is a better fit than Miami is a personal opinion, but I think its one that's relatively easy to back up (but a bit off topic here).

Miami offers:

1. Better elite teammates.  Wade and Bosh are simply better than Rose and Boozer.   
2. Guys Lebron is comfortable with.  He's good friends with Wade, and he seemed to develop a bond with Bosh at the Olympics.
3. A better organization.  Chicago has been accused of sticking its veterans in the back; the Miami organization is well-respected, and has a recent championship pedigree.
4. Long term, it will be easier to recruit teammates to play in Miami than it will be Chicago.
5.  Better weather.
6. A better tax situation.

Miami has its own shadow, in that Lebron has to give up some of the spotlight to Miami's established superstar who has already won a title without him.  I just can't assume that Lebron's #1 motivation was to stay out of MJ's shadow, when Miami is, in all likelihood, the team with the better long-term situation.

[Kuberski33]

Gilbert said in an AP interview that LeBron quit during the Celtics series and also in the Orlando series last year.  Wow.

I say we extend an invite to him to join CelticsBlog.  He sounds like one of us!

[papa shuttlesworth]

I think Gilbert's letter is great.  Feuds and rivalries are good.

Deep down, I don't think anyone can fault LeBron for leaving the Cavs.  He tried, did well but not well enough and the horizon looked like more of the same.  I agree with Roy that we are often proponents of players sacrificing their own stats to win.  No one can fault him for that.

What he can fault him for is the ego-maniacal circus that has been growing for the past two years and for last night's show (which I didn't watch based on principle).  There are right ways and wrong ways of doing things.  And LeBron chose the wrong way.

[Roy Hobbs]

Gilbert said in an AP interview that LeBron quit during the Celtics series and also in the Orlando series last year.  Wow.

And yet, Gilbert is the owner who wanted to give $100 million to this "quitter", and was willingly going to exploit his fanbase into worshiping him as a messiah?

That doesn't sound very smart or ethical, Mr. Gilbert.

[CoachBo]

What a joke sports have become when a career loser/quitter is considered a King.  Give me Paul Pierce everyday and twice on Sundays.  He has more heart in nether region than the Queen has in whole body.

It's interesting that you bring up the "career loser" thing with Lebron, but then speak of Pierce favorably.

Lebron has led his team deep into the playoffs the last several seasons, making a Finals appearance and a trip to the conference finals, along with losing to a great Celts team a couple of times.  He was surrounded by mediocre -- at best -- teammates, and yet he brought his franchise to unprecedented heights.  He couldn't get them over the final hump, but he got them to the cusp.  I'm not sure that makes him a "loser".  

Compare that to Paul Pierce, who played on some of the worst teams in franchise history.  Fans from other teams labeled him a "career loser" and a "star who puts up great stats on a terrible team".  Was that fair?  I don't think so, but the label was out there.  Certainly, Pierce had far less success than Lebron did in terms of winning.

Continuing the Lebron / Pierce comparison, Pierce openly talked about demanding a trade if the Celtics didn't get him some better teammates.  Lebron decided that he'd take his destiny in his own hands, and seek out those better teammates on his own.  In both cases, the player admitted that he couldn't win without help.

How is Pierce some sort of winner, and Lebron is a loser?  Is it due to the one championship Pierce won in his 30s?  If that's the case, don't we have to give Lebron time?  Pierce didn't have a title at age 25, either, and unlike Lebron, he'd never been to the Finals.

People can like or dislike whoever they want, of course.  I just think it's weird that people bash Lebron for deciding he cares more about rings than stats, when we've got three players on our team who came to the exact same conclusion.  Trying to win by yourself when surrounded by flotsam and jetsam is overrated.

With all that said, I am going to have to see these three players jell like Pierce, Allen and Garnett - and see them surrounded by quality players - before I believe this can work.

Championships are NOT won by accumulating the best basketball cards. They are won by teams blending some necessary parts of what's a fairly consistent recipe. And they are lost by equally consistent elements. You can't just expect huge egos to blend successfully. You can't expect volume shooters to necessarily co-exist. When the chips are down, which of these three players has ever pulled their club up by the bootstraps? James certainly hasn't.

So I'd be careful disparaging Gilbert. He makes a lot of legitimate points in the letter, albeit tinged with bitterness. You really need look no deeper than the circus surrounding James' decision to see the trouble ahead for the Miami Heat. I'd remind most of you that the James career is a story of a one-man show - a lot of media sound and fury signifying relatively little except a bunch of numbers that have never sniffed an NBA title. Expunging James from responsibility for never sniffing a title is short-sighted.

Saying you're chasing titles is one thing. Actually blending your game - which calls for deferral to others - is something James has NEVER done and I question his ability to do it. In fact, I flatly don't believe him. His body of work suggests that he's going to demand that Wade and Bosh defer to him. Bosh - who is laughably overrated - probably will do it. Wade, on the other hand ...

There are choppy waters ahead for the Miami Heat. They've just added the largest ego in the history of sports.

[Mike-Dub]

What a joke sports have become when a career loser/quitter is considered a King.  Give me Paul Pierce everyday and twice on Sundays.  He has more heart in nether region than the Queen has in whole body.

Continuing the Lebron / Pierce comparison, Pierce openly talked about demanding a trade if the Celtics didn't get him some better teammates.  Lebron decided that he'd take his destiny in his own hands, and seek out those better teammates on his own.  In both cases, the player admitted that he couldn't win without help.

How is Pierce some sort of winner, and Lebron is a loser?  Is it due to the one championship Pierce won in his 30s?  If that's the case, don't we have to give Lebron time?  Pierce didn't have a title at age 25, either, and unlike Lebron, he'd never been to the Finals.

Yes, but Pierce won with his team.  The team he was drafted by.  Along with that LeBron has been to the Finals in '07 in which everyone forgets.  Pierce would have left the Celtics to win, but the difference is he gave us the chance to get him the pieces and LeBron didn't.  Ok so it may have cost Pierce championships, but he stayed to his team and was...

LOYAL!

[Birdbrain]

What a joke sports have become when a career loser/quitter is considered a King.  Give me Paul Pierce everyday and twice on Sundays.  He has more heart in nether region than the Queen has in whole body.

It's interesting that you bring up the "career loser" thing with Lebron, but then speak of Pierce favorably.

Lebron has led his team deep into the playoffs the last several seasons, making a Finals appearance and a trip to the conference finals, along with losing to a great Celts team a couple of times.  He was surrounded by mediocre -- at best -- teammates, and yet he brought his franchise to unprecedented heights.  He couldn't get them over the final hump, but he got them to the cusp.  I'm not sure that makes him a "loser". 

Compare that to Paul Pierce, who played on some of the worst teams in franchise history.  Fans from other teams labeled him a "career loser" and a "star who puts up great stats on a terrible team".  Was that fair?  I don't think so, but the label was out there.  Certainly, Pierce had far less success than Lebron did in terms of winning.

Continuing the Lebron / Pierce comparison, Pierce openly talked about demanding a trade if the Celtics didn't get him some better teammates.  Lebron decided that he'd take his destiny in his own hands, and seek out those better teammates on his own.  In both cases, the player admitted that he couldn't win without help.

How is Pierce some sort of winner, and Lebron is a loser?  Is it due to the one championship Pierce won in his 30s?  If that's the case, don't we have to give Lebron time?  Pierce didn't have a title at age 25, either, and unlike Lebron, he'd never been to the Finals.

People can like or dislike whoever they want, of course.  I just think it's weird that people bash Lebron for deciding he cares more about rings than stats, when we've got three players on our team who came to the exact same conclusion.  Trying to win by yourself when surrounded by flotsam and jetsam is overrated.

Your response is exactly where we part ways in this decision.  Paul didn't bail.  I'm done.