Cleveland will be very good- Could LeBron atually go back?

[Yoki_IsTheName]

I just dont see him being re-accepted in Ohio.

Winning will solve everything. And with LeBron in that Cavs lineup, they may start looking the other way and star to forget some of what happened in 2010, and completely erase it from their memory once they win the title.

[Celtics4ever]

Who cares it's CLE?

[Endless Paradise]

I meant after the season in a sign and trade scenario....obviously LeBrons not going anywhere this season....

Cleveland would have all the leverage in that case and I can assure you they would not surrender any of their good players.  When LeBron left for Miami, the Heat wanted to offer LeBron more money, so they approached the Cavs about a sign-and-trade and offered several first-round draft picks.  They did the same with Bosh and Toronto.

If the Cavs demanded more, the Heat could've easily walked away and just signed him outright.  It's the exact same scenario we just saw this year with J.J. Redick leaving Milwaukee for the Clippers; all the Bucks received was a few second-rounders.  If they tried to push for more, L.A. could've burned them and they would've gotten nothing for Redick.

[Fafnir]

Sign and trades no longer grant bigger contracts to players, so a sign and trade won't happen. No reason for a team landing LeBron to give away any assets.

[PhoSita]

I don't see Kyrie and LeBron as a great match.  You want the ball in Kyrie's hands 90% of the time.

[D.o.s.]

Would Shaq have gone back to the Magic after winning his titles with the Lakers to play with T-Mac?

[Snakehead]

I don't see Kyrie and LeBron as a great match.  You want the ball in Kyrie's hands 90% of the time.

If LeBron and Wade have made it work I don't see what the issue is.

This fit is better too because Kyrie is a better shooter.

I don't think any title contending team should have one player handling the ball 90% of the time.  You have other great players on your team if you're a contender and they need the ball too.  If you have a team that play that way, you're maybe a playoff team but not a real contender (for example New Orleans with Chris Paul).

[CelticG1]

I've been saying for awhile, I believe James will opt in this summer and then go to Cleveland in 2016 on a cheap contract (something way below max to help smooth things over) to finish out his career.

You can't just do that.  The union doesn't allow it because you devalue the entire market if you're the best player.

Not saying it couldn't be a bit of a discount.  But he's going to be about at the max.

the union can't stop it.

They can't but I'd bet they can be pretty influential

[Snakehead]

I've been saying for awhile, I believe James will opt in this summer and then go to Cleveland in 2016 on a cheap contract (something way below max to help smooth things over) to finish out his career.

You can't just do that.  The union doesn't allow it because you devalue the entire market if you're the best player.

Not saying it couldn't be a bit of a discount.  But he's going to be about at the max.

the union can't stop it.

They can't but I'd bet they can be pretty influential

The players are in the union and it matters.  There is an understanding between the players in the union.  Like G1 says here, the union matters and players don't disregard it.

I'm sure LeBron wants to get paid anyways.  And Cleveland can pay him is the point.

[bdm860]

I've been saying for awhile, I believe James will opt in this summer and then go to Cleveland in 2016 on a cheap contract (something way below max to help smooth things over) to finish out his career.

You can't just do that.  The union doesn't allow it because you devalue the entire market if you're the best player.

Not saying it couldn't be a bit of a discount.  But he's going to be about at the max.

the union can't stop it.

They can't but I'd bet they can be pretty influential

The players are in the union and it matters.  There is an understanding between the players in the union.  Like G1 says here, the union matters and players don't disregard it.

I'm sure LeBron wants to get paid anyways.  And Cleveland can pay him is the point.

But why would the union want to stop it?

It all starts with Snakehead's argument of the union won't allow it and it would devalue the market.  Both are just wrong.

The union acts in the best interest of the players.

If star players take minimum salaries to sign with teams.  That means there's more money for OTHER players.

What's in the best interest of the most players?
LeBron getting $25m and 14 other players get to split $45m?
Or LeBron gets $2m and 14 other players get to split $68m?

The union would fight to have the gap in pay between the top players and everyone else be larger?  Really?  Do you think the union cares more about the top 30 players or the other 420?

And markets work on supply and demand.  There's only 1 LeBron and only a handful of elite level talent.  LeBron signs for whatever, the bidding just increases for the next best player after him.  The more supply dries up, the more demand increases.

If LeBron signed for $2m (or whatever the vet min is in 2016), do you think a team wouldn't offer Anthony Davis or Kevin Durant or Roy Hibbert or Joakim Noah or Al Horford big time contracts?  Sorry, the most we can offer you is $1.9m, LeBron has set the market.  All 30 teams would still be in bidding wars to sign the next best player.  This wouldn't devalue the market at all.

LeBron didn't even sign a max deal this time around, and the market still paid players more than him.  One player does not set the market, especially on the low end, it's just not how markets work.

Anyway, this has jumped off to extreme's, as all Moranis said was "cheap" which is relative.  Cheap for LeBron could still be $15m or $10m (which is what I could see LeBron doing), it doesn't have to mean minimum or near minimum (but if LeBron wanted to, he could sign a deal like that and the union would have no problem with it or power to stop it).  The Union doesn't have a problem when Duncan and Garnett sign $10m contracts or other vets sign minimum deals to ring chase, and none of those seemed to devalue the market either.

[Moranis]

Sign and trades no longer grant bigger contracts to players, so a sign and trade won't happen. No reason for a team landing LeBron to give away any assets.

unless they are over the cap and the trade doesn't put them in luxury tax range.

[Snakehead]

The owners were already mad about the "superteam" issue, if superstars take that much of a paycut to sign more talent that's going to get even worse.  Now you have the union and owners both angry.

I'm not saying there can't be some bit of a paycut, but too much just won't happen.

And when we say they took a cut to be in Miami, lets realize the tax breaks of that state.

[Neurotic Guy]

I just dont see him being re-accepted in Ohio.

Generally speaking, I think they'd re-accept him within 3 seconds. He left them for another team not another lover.

I'd be very glad if Lebron did return to Cleveland,  VERY upset if he decides to take his talents to LA.

[bdm860]

The owners were already mad about the "superteam" issue, if superstars take that much of a paycut to sign more talent that's going to get even worse.  Now you have the union and owners both angry.

I'm not saying there can't be some bit of a paycut, but too much just won't happen.

And when we say they took a cut to be in Miami, lets realize the tax breaks of that state.

Owners I'll give you, but they're really powerless to do anything as long as the current CBA is in place.  Still I don't understand why the union wouldn't like it.  It won't devalue the market, it would mean more money for other players, etc.  (which I mentioned above).

Why specifically wouldn't the union like it?

[Celtics4ever]

LeBron only cares about LeBron.   Why would he care he left them once.   Nothing he has ever said has ever indicated that he cares about anything but himself.   I see him more likely to go to LA to replace Kobe, folks.   The stars and he can make in roads into the movies.  Space Jam 2 here we come....