After the Heat lost to the Spurs in 2014, LeBron figured (correctly) that Dwyane Wade as a player was shot, Chris Bosh wasn't going to get the job done as a reasonable #2 option, and LeBron had no chance to contend for a title in Miami.
Chris Bosh, post-LeBron, would play two years, register a total of 10 WS, and would be forced out of basketball due to health issues.
Dwyane Wade, since the 2014 Finals, has only put up 12.9 WS in 4 seasons and his best WS/48 season has been a .105 effort for Miami. He is now, for lack of a better word, terrible and should, if his name were not Dwyane Wade, be out of the league.
By joining the Cavs, James went to a club whose 3 best returning WS players (on a 33-49 club) were:
Kyrie 6.7
Tristan Thompson 5.7
Varejao 5.4
and no one else above 3 WS/
In 2014-15, James added his 10.4 WS to the mix, and he was able to get the Cavs to trade for Kevin Love.
This gave the Cavs (between LeBron and Love) 19.1 WS they did not have (James 10.4 and Love 8.7). Kyrie played better than he ever had (10.4 WS, up from 6.7) and the Cavs got 8 WS from players they eventually traded for (Mozgov, JR Smith).
Result - the 33 win Cavs become the 53 win Cavs and went to the Finals. Remarkably, in hindsight, the Cavs probably should have won that 2015 Finals series, except Kevin Love was assaulted by Kelly Olynyk in the playoffs and Kyrie Irving was physically shot by the end of Game 1 of the Finals and did not play again after Game 1. Looking at the 2015 and 2016 Finals, it is altogether possible that the Cavs with a healthy Kyrie and a healthy Kevin Love actually win both series (recall that Love had nagging injuries on and off through the 2016 playoffs as well). Perhaps the greatest confirmation of this fact is that the Warriors understood that a healthy James, healthy Kyrie and healthy Love might be too much for them and acquired the #2 player in all of basketball - Kevin Durant.
In any event, it really cannot be disputed that the 2014-16 Cavs were far superior to any team the Heat could have fielded in that time perios, and the 2015-16 Cavs actually defeated the 73-win Warriors.
So, at this point in the evaluation, we have to say that LeBron did pretty well for himself in The Return.
The 2016-17 Cavs lost in 5 to the Warriors, blowing a game in Cleveland they could have won, The 2017-18 Cavaliers were forced into a Kyrie Irving trade they never should have made (taking on a still sub-par physically Isaiah Thomas) and picked up a worthless Dwyane Wade. LeBron still led that team to a 50-32 mark and an Eastern Conference title, only to be swept in the Finals.
I heard a person on the radio the other day saying that the constant pressure on the Cavs to keep LeBron happy has "cost the club the ability to build with young players for the future." As a matter of fact, the Cavs have managed to acquire Rodney Hood and Jordan Clarkson, two younger players who have played at a WS/48 rate in their careers (outside the playoffs) that is perfectly acceptable. Same can be said of Larry Nance, Jr. So, basically the Cavs have three decent younger players and George Hill, plus whatever Colin Sexton brings them (the #8 pick in the draft). They also have a 30 year old Kevin Love who has been an all-star multiple times (certainly Love is not a top 10 or top 12 player, but he is still a low-level all-star when healthy, so, a 30 year old player who is a top 25 player in the league.
The cupboard is not bare for Cleveland. If Sexton is good, they have adequate players at PG and SG, a top-25 PF, and an adequate (albeit overpaid) center in Tristan Thompson. The Cavs are not trotting out multiple 35 year olds like the 2012 Brooklyn Nets or the Barkley/Hakeem/Pippen Rockets.
The Cavs have gone 211-117 (.643) with a title and 4 conference titles during the Return. They have an OK base to be a .500 team in the East, even if they get ZERO when LeBron leaves. The Return has been a grand success for Cleveland Cavaliers fans. More to the point of the title of this item, The Return has been great for LeBron James. He took a chance on turning around Cleveland, kept Dan Gilbert's feet to the luxury tax fire and came out looking good.
Friday, June 29, 2018
Friday, June 22, 2018
Trump Suporters Dating in D.C.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/06/22/trump-millennial-supporters-washington-dc-218833
The article has been read as saying Trump supporters/workers are having a tough time dating in D.C. My general thought after reading the whole article is, "Not really." Most of the people in the article don't really seem to care, and,like any good religion/cult, they have opportunities to hang out together and they take advantage of that. I don't see this article as really reflecting any huge problem or huge internal concern as a general rule.
Now, what are my thoughts outside of this article? Well, I am a moderate Democrat. I despise Trump, but I have some beliefs that are not consistent with the Bernie Sanders wing of the party. But as anyone who reads my Twitter feed (@hoopsmavenhm) knows, I am probably on the 70th percentile for liberal beliefs. As a white guy, that places me among the top 30% of the 38% of white men who voted against Trump, so of white guys who vote, let's assume I am top 13% liberal -- 87% of white guys in the U.S. who vote are probably more conservative than I am.
My belief (again, outside of this article) is that women who work for the Trump Administration will have absolutely no problem dating. First, they can pick from the 62% of the white male dating pool who voted for Trump (plus anyone who did not care enough about politics to vote against Trump).
Second, would I date Tomi Lahren? Yes. Britt McHenry? Yes. Would a young me date a young Ann Coulter? Yes. A young Michelle Malkin? Yes. A young Sarah Palin? Yes. Michele Bachmann - OK, close call, the wild eyes and religious fervor scare me.
So, what I am saying is that I REALLY doubt women who work for Trump are being rejected for dates solely or primarily due to their Trump affiliation.
Now, on the other hand, are there liberal women who will not date guys who are not SUPER liberal? Oh yes. Again, I am a fairly liberal guy. In 1988, working as a law clerk, I was telling a story at lunch about how I went to the bank and the "girl behind the counter gave me an umbrella for opening an account." Outrage follows -- The What? "Girl behind...." Uh, woman!! WOMAN!! NOT a girl!!!! "Well, she was younger than I...." WOMAN! Do not make me turn you in to Human Resources. The two law clerk women (see, lesson learned) did not go to HR, but did report me to the recruiting coordinator who had a partner sit me down and explain to me that to survive the summer I needed to be more sensitive and stop offending people. Again, this was 1988. The two women at issue never spoke to me again for the remainder of the summer.
Now, imagine we have moved forward 30 years and you are a male Trump supporter. The idea that you are actually a Trump supporter itself is probably a "microaggression," even if it is never announced. Now, consider beyond THAT all of the anti-liberal things that Trump has stated and stands for. He literally has admitted that he had sexually assaulted women for many years because he could get away with it! You WORK for him? Recall that two 24 year old women in 1988 literally would not SPEAK to me and wanted me fired for telling a story at an informal lunch calling a 21 year old woman a girl. (I am not kidding about this, this happened). What could the possible reaction be from women of this sort 30 years later when a dating candidate announces "yeah, the Bible says we need to put all Mexican children who are infesting our country in cages." I would suggest the reaction is not a good one.
I would also add that I knew some liberal women in law school who HATED me for not agreeing with 100% of what they said. One such person, at a law school reunion, was chatting with a close friend of mine. He stated, "Yeah, I have been hanging out with [Hoops Maven]." Reply? "Oh, wow, OK. Yeah, moving on."
So, I would estimate that being a female Trump supporter reduces your dating options maybe 2%. I would say being a male Trump supporter reduces your dating options 20-35%
That is just my opinion.
The article has been read as saying Trump supporters/workers are having a tough time dating in D.C. My general thought after reading the whole article is, "Not really." Most of the people in the article don't really seem to care, and,like any good religion/cult, they have opportunities to hang out together and they take advantage of that. I don't see this article as really reflecting any huge problem or huge internal concern as a general rule.
Now, what are my thoughts outside of this article? Well, I am a moderate Democrat. I despise Trump, but I have some beliefs that are not consistent with the Bernie Sanders wing of the party. But as anyone who reads my Twitter feed (@hoopsmavenhm) knows, I am probably on the 70th percentile for liberal beliefs. As a white guy, that places me among the top 30% of the 38% of white men who voted against Trump, so of white guys who vote, let's assume I am top 13% liberal -- 87% of white guys in the U.S. who vote are probably more conservative than I am.
My belief (again, outside of this article) is that women who work for the Trump Administration will have absolutely no problem dating. First, they can pick from the 62% of the white male dating pool who voted for Trump (plus anyone who did not care enough about politics to vote against Trump).
Second, would I date Tomi Lahren? Yes. Britt McHenry? Yes. Would a young me date a young Ann Coulter? Yes. A young Michelle Malkin? Yes. A young Sarah Palin? Yes. Michele Bachmann - OK, close call, the wild eyes and religious fervor scare me.
So, what I am saying is that I REALLY doubt women who work for Trump are being rejected for dates solely or primarily due to their Trump affiliation.
Now, on the other hand, are there liberal women who will not date guys who are not SUPER liberal? Oh yes. Again, I am a fairly liberal guy. In 1988, working as a law clerk, I was telling a story at lunch about how I went to the bank and the "girl behind the counter gave me an umbrella for opening an account." Outrage follows -- The What? "Girl behind...." Uh, woman!! WOMAN!! NOT a girl!!!! "Well, she was younger than I...." WOMAN! Do not make me turn you in to Human Resources. The two law clerk women (see, lesson learned) did not go to HR, but did report me to the recruiting coordinator who had a partner sit me down and explain to me that to survive the summer I needed to be more sensitive and stop offending people. Again, this was 1988. The two women at issue never spoke to me again for the remainder of the summer.
Now, imagine we have moved forward 30 years and you are a male Trump supporter. The idea that you are actually a Trump supporter itself is probably a "microaggression," even if it is never announced. Now, consider beyond THAT all of the anti-liberal things that Trump has stated and stands for. He literally has admitted that he had sexually assaulted women for many years because he could get away with it! You WORK for him? Recall that two 24 year old women in 1988 literally would not SPEAK to me and wanted me fired for telling a story at an informal lunch calling a 21 year old woman a girl. (I am not kidding about this, this happened). What could the possible reaction be from women of this sort 30 years later when a dating candidate announces "yeah, the Bible says we need to put all Mexican children who are infesting our country in cages." I would suggest the reaction is not a good one.
I would also add that I knew some liberal women in law school who HATED me for not agreeing with 100% of what they said. One such person, at a law school reunion, was chatting with a close friend of mine. He stated, "Yeah, I have been hanging out with [Hoops Maven]." Reply? "Oh, wow, OK. Yeah, moving on."
So, I would estimate that being a female Trump supporter reduces your dating options maybe 2%. I would say being a male Trump supporter reduces your dating options 20-35%
That is just my opinion.
Thursday, June 14, 2018
The Top 36 NBA Players of All-Time (as of April 2018)
36. James Harden
35. Steph Curry
34. Steve Nash
33. Gary Payton
32. Patrick Ewing
31. Dwyane Wade
30. Bob Cousy
29. Scottie Pippen
28. John Havlicek
27. Chris Paul
26. John Stockton
25. Rick Barry
24. Elgin Baylor
23. Dirk Nowitzki
22. Kevin Durant
21. Kevin Garnett
20. Charles Barkley
19. Julius Erving
18. Moses Malone
17. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Bob Pettit
15. David Robinson
14. George Mikan
13. Karl Malone
12. Kobe Bryant
11. Oscar Robertson
10. Jerry West
9. Larry Bird
8. Shaquille O'Neal
7. Bill Russell
6. Magic Johnson
5. Tim Duncan
4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
2. LeBron James
1. Michael Jordan
35. Steph Curry
34. Steve Nash
33. Gary Payton
32. Patrick Ewing
31. Dwyane Wade
30. Bob Cousy
29. Scottie Pippen
28. John Havlicek
27. Chris Paul
26. John Stockton
25. Rick Barry
24. Elgin Baylor
23. Dirk Nowitzki
22. Kevin Durant
21. Kevin Garnett
20. Charles Barkley
19. Julius Erving
18. Moses Malone
17. Hakeem Olajuwon
16. Bob Pettit
15. David Robinson
14. George Mikan
13. Karl Malone
12. Kobe Bryant
11. Oscar Robertson
10. Jerry West
9. Larry Bird
8. Shaquille O'Neal
7. Bill Russell
6. Magic Johnson
5. Tim Duncan
4. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
3. Wilt Chamberlain
2. LeBron James
1. Michael Jordan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)