LABron James Discussion: Triple Triple Doubles

I'd give him a B. Short of stellar, but still very good. Had we won a couple of those close games, he's at a B+/A-. Once his efficiency bounces back he's at an A+ as the best player in the sport.

Efficiency is all it takes to go from a C to an A? Or does he need to get that triple double every night in a win to get a B from you?

It's shocking to read that anyone could consider 27.3 points, 8.3 rebounds, 8.3 assists, with 1.7 steals and 0.7 blocks "lackluster". Not to mention you're throwing his efficiency around like 46% from the field is horrendous or 77.8% from the FT line is awful. The only place he's been truly terrible from the field is the three point line where he's earned less than a passing grade.

Even so, describing 27/8/8/1.7 as "lackluster" is genuinely shocking. What other player in what era is putting that up and you're calling him "lackluster"? If Lonzo woke up tomorrow and put up those numbers in three losses, what would you have said? If Randle did it last year, what's the reaction we get? Still a "C"?

Because your argument doesn't strike me as rational. To me equating LeBron's performance to a C thus far would be the same as giving everyone else on the roster an F through the first three games. Nobody else on the roster had nearly his impact, played nearly as well, and performed nearly as admirably so if what LeBron did was a C, then the rest naturally must have been failures even respective to their expectations. Certainly Kuzma and Ingram were Fs. I'd say Rondo, Stephenson, and definitely KCP were Fs. Lonzo probably a D. Maybe Hart and McGee make it through with Cs as well? Bs? They played better than expected given their relative positions, but didn't impact the game as much as LeBron so they can't have had such great grades either.

Except LeBron didn't put up 15/7, he put up 27/8/8 which basically nobody else does. I think your scale is off even relative to expectations.

You don't need to elaborate, I understand your point. I just think it's not a very good one.

Expectations relative to what a player is capable of are understandable, but even then your threshold for "A", "B", and "C" is wildly high. It's like everyone forgets what they're actually seeing when LeBron is playing. You realize you just scoffed at Hall of Fame numbers? Who cares that he's putting up numbers nobody else in the league is putting up and he's doing it in his 16th season, he didn't make two FTs (even though he's shooting nearly 80%) so he's a C.

He's missed a couple layups (even though he's shooting 68.2% at the rim which is not terribly far from his career average of 73%), so knock him down!

How dare he be 4th on the team in Defensive Rating (112) literally just a point behind everyone's favorite defensive player Josh Hart (111) and a point AHEAD of Lonzo Ball (112).

You see how him getting a "C" comes off as hate, right? I mean the guy has to be perfect to get an "A"? He's as close to it as we could possibly ask for. Or I guess we could go back to watching D'Angelo Russell and Nick Young and Jeremy Lin. Those guys got "A"s for putting up numbers a quarter as impressive and winning just one game.

 

I appreciate that as I know you're not a particular LeBron fan. I think there's certainly room for improvement, but he's still been spectacular.

 

We can start and stop right here. I think this says it all.

He needs a 50/10/10 game to get an A in a loss. I mean... You realize that's preposterous, right? Have you purposely painted yourself into a corner here or are you serious?

That type of game has only happened 13 times in league history dating back to 1947 and only 6 players have every accomplished it. James Harden (3 times), Russell Westbrook (4 times), Elgin Baylor (2 times), Wilt Chamberlain (2 times), Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, and Richie Guerin each did it once. I'd argue Westbrook is the most stat chasing player of all time and Harden is a prop-up player from the NBA gifted with more free throws than anyone in the shot-clock era.

The game you're referring to LeBron actually had 51/8/8 with a steal and a block. That was the 5th highest scoring Finals total of all time behind Elgin Baylor (61), Rick Barry (55), Michael Jordan (55), and Jerry West (53).

So in order for LeBron to perform admirably and earn an "A" grade, he needs to be utterly historic on a Tuesday night in game 3 out of 82 in his 16th season. I think it's pretty clear you're demanding a hilariously high bar.

By the way, your analogy doesn't work either because the Ferrari is outpacing the Priuses, or Priusi as I like to call them in plural, in just about every way. You're not demanding that the Ferrari beat the Prius on the race track. You're demanding is that the Ferrari set a world record with every race which is simply impossible and a bar too high to be met.

 

I'd give Lebron a B+ thus far. Anyone else though and it's probably an A. It's just that we know what he's capable of and as gaudy as his stats are already, we can see that he's still holding back, surveying the players around him and what they can do, what their tendencies are. Honestly, it's a smart strategy. As Allie mentioned on the post game, he's trying to fit in with them rather than make them fit around him. I think it's wise in the long run and for later in our season when wins become even more important.

 

...the last Laker player I can remember who could average double digits in points, assists and rebounds every other game or two was Johnson in late 1980's.

 

So I stand by what I said originally: I hope you hold all of the Lakers players and none of your family members to the same standard.

If it takes something historic to recieve an "A", then nobody is getting "A" and your grade scale is off. If being a borderline triple double or higher every single game is a "C" then what good is your scale? If Russell, Randle, Ingram, or Ball were doing that we'd be losing ourselves in their ability. Even relative to their talent and expectations, we rode those waves at every opportunity. When Randle gave us a triple double, we lost our heads win or lose. Now we've got actual talent that can do that any night and we lose sight of what that means?