What do you all think about these 2 scenarios:

Scenario 1: Pretend that the Miami Heat, and all the players on that squad during their championship years, were in the Western Conference. Would they have been able to make it through the 3 rounds of western conference teams in the playoffs? Would Lebron have the numbers (points, rebounds, steals, blocks.. exclude assists because obviously he makes the people around him better so he would probably have more assists in the west with better talent) than he had at Miami if they had to play Western Conference teams all the time? Would Miami have any championships?

Scenario 2: Pretend that Lebron spent his entire career in the West. Not any specific team.. I guess other than the Warriors/Spurs.. Answer the same questions from scenario 1.

Lebron is an incredible player...that being said, he is much bigger and stronger than everyone who guards him and the Eastern Conference has pretty much sucked the entire time he has been in the league, relative to the Western Conference.

My answers:

Scenario 1: I do not think that Miami would of been able to make it through the grit of the Western Conference and an 82 game season in the west (I know not all 82 games are against the western conference).. That team was good, but they had a pretty easy ride to the finals each year. Western Conference teams had to battle for most wins in their playoff games. Lebron's numbers would probably be a little lower, but most likely the same, thanks to playing with Wade and Bosh..

Scenario 2: If he had other superstars around him the KD or westbrook, he could probably have some championships. His numbers would definitely be lower unless he was on a team like the Nuggets or some team without a star. The Western Conference proves every year that even with superstar talent it is very hard to win a championship.

I am not taking away credit from Lebron, but that being said.. the East is bad right now. He is also extremely fortunate with his size and strength.

Oh, and to those who say "he beat western teams in the finals".. I would argue that it helps that the first 3 rounds in the east are much easier than the first 3 rounds in the west

have no idea. No one thought the warriors could win a title in our lifetimes yet they went and won one. Same with the Mavericks.

Lebron in the West would be like KD (with a title).

Narrative changes when you can't cakewalk to the Finals every year.

quote:

---

Lebron in the West would be like KD (with a title).

Narrative changes when you can't cakewalk to the Finals every year.

---

It's kind of fun to think about what team he would be on and how it affects that franchise. For instance, The Kings probably wouldn't have Boogie on their team due to Lebron elevating his team to the playoffs yearly.

This kinda reminds me of Red Son. It's a Superman comic where instead of landing in America, Superman lands in Russia. Great Superman story!

No one thought the Mavs couldn't. They should've in 06/07.

Lebrons career in the west. Definitely not as good is the answer.

Wonder what his winning pct is vs the West.

Should've in 06/07, were the second best team in the NBA in 03 also. Still have flashbacks of Kerr's 4th quarter every now and then from that series. I'm glad Dirk got his in 11, and wish Nash somehow found one of his own. I'll miss the Mavs Spurs battles when Dirk/Duncan/Manu/Parker have all moved on, which has to be coming soon, I feel like I've been saying that for 5 years now.

I would like to know that too.

I think saying it would have been like KD is pretty damn accurate.

Obviously a huge amount depends on the situation. Who's his coach? Who are his teammates?

The west is always great, but he could easily be a superstar on a yearly finals contender.

I think you could also add in here that deep down LeBron thinks/knows he wouldn't have come close to the same results in the west. Did he ever really consider a single west team during his free agency search?

quote:

---

If his teams had been in the west, he would have been undefeated in the NBA finals.


But he only would have had two trips on the resume.

---

yeah...thats 100% certain.

*eye roll*

quote:

---

I think you could also add in here that deep down LeBron thinks/knows he wouldn't have come close to the same results in the west. Did he ever really consider a single west team during his free agency search?

---

To be fair I think the only 2 options were Miami and Cleveland.

quote:

---

quote:

---

If his teams had been in the west, he would have been undefeated in the NBA finals.


But he only would have had two trips on the resume.

---

yeah...thats 100% certain.

*eye roll*

---

Dumb ass,

It is a "what if" thread on a sports message board.


What on here is 100% certain?
I suggest you visit the last page or two of the Spurs thread discussing what if scenarios from the past.

The LeBron fanboys are so sensitive now a days.

He would've still been the best player on earth for more than ten years. Not sure how his team would have done because it depends on the team.

If you designed a scenario where his eastern conference teams through the years replaced a league average team in the west, he probably gets no trips to the finals with the cavs (either run) and two finals appearances and titles with the heat.

The OP posts a great question. Ive had the same thought for many years.
Put Lebron on a Western Conference team like the Nuggets and i think his team accomplishments are probably similar to Kevin Durant.

Lebron teams have had a cakewalk to the Finals in most of the years they made it. 2011 is one of the only exceptions.

Incidentally, Lebron has 27 on 15 shots tonight. Only 4 boards and 5 dimes, though, Also 3 steals.

quote:

---

This seems to be a weird question. How would LeBron do if given a really bad team in a tough conference? I think the answer is obviously not very good. Neither would Jordan, Kobe, or Durant. Jordan and Kobe had the good fortune to be paired with some other all-time greats their entire careers, as well as strong organizations that were committed to winning.

I'm going to go the opposite way on this. I think playing in the West might have actually enhanced his legacy. Nobody remembers losses earlier in the playoffs; what sticks in everyone's mind is the NBA Finals. Nobody faults Kobe's 2006 team with Ronny Turriaf and Kwame Brown for losing early, but they do remember LeBron getting swept from the finals in convincing fashion with a similarly crappy roster in 2007. It's constantly used as a knock against him when discussing his Finals record.

It's safe to say he'd be 2-0 in the Finals if his teams had been the same, given that they beat the Thunder and Spurs, respectively, in 2012 and 2013. He'd probably have 3 Conference Finals losses in 2011, 2014, and 2015. That would get rid of the ONLY knock against LeBron, which is his Final's record.

I also think it's worth pointing out that LeBron's losses in the Finals were to the #3, #12, #34, and #45 teams of all-time by ELO rating. His 2 wins were against #32 and #36. By comparison, Kobe's losses were to #39 and #81, and he has wins over #77, #135, #157, #272, and #420. There's a pretty huge disparity in the quality of teams they've faced. The criticism thrown LeBron's way in the Final's loss to the Mavericks was fair, but otherwise he has played very well against some all-time great teams. Last year's Warriors and the 14 Spurs in particular. So if you were to throw his Heat team's into the Western Conference in the late 90's and early 00's, he'd likely have 4 or 5 NBA championships.

---

None of his Heat teams would have made it out of the Western Conference in the early 2000's. None of those teams were anywhere as good as the Spurs or Lakers. Those teams had way too much size for the small ball Heat.

I don't think the same Heat teams make it out of the 2011-2014 West. 2012 is the only year I think they would have made the Finals if they were playing in the Western Conference.

That is kind of the point of the entire thread. No one is doubting Lebron;s greatness. The point people are bringing up is that Lebron has spent his entire playoff career feasting on mediocre Eastern Conference teams.

I could be mistaken, but I think 2011 is the only year that a Lebron team faced two 55+ win teams in the playoffs.

It seems like I watch this every single year. I watch Lebron destroy a bunch of Eastern Conference teams (that would most likely be at best the 6-8 seeds in the West) and then get defeated in the NBA Finals.

How many Finals appearances would Dirk, Durant or Kobe have if their teams played in the East? How many more titles would the Spurs have if they didn't start playing great teams until the Eastern Conference Finals?

quote:

---

I don't think the same Heat teams make it out of the 2011-2014 West. 2012 is the only year I think they would have made the Finals if they were playing in the Western Conference.

---

That's a pretty hilarious assertion considering they were NBA champions two of those years. How can you sit there and contend that they wouldn't have even made it out of the West if they were capable of winning it all?

In 2012 they would have been the 3 seed in the West. They easily make it out of the first round, they would have played and massacred the Thunder in the 2nd round just like they did in the Finals, and then they would have beat a very meh Spurs team that got destroyed by the Thunder in the Conference Finals. It would have changed nothing. They would have then played the Celtics in the Finals instead of the ECF. There would have been no difference unless you're a delusional Spurs fan.

In 2013 they would have been the 1 seed in the West. Again leading to an easy first round, an easy second round against the Grizzlies, and then beating the Spurs in the Conference Finals and the Pacers in the Finals instead of vice versa. Again, you're delusional if you think it would have changed anything. They would have played the exact same teams, just in a different order. Your assertion is that they were good enough to beat two REALLY good teams in the Spurs and Pacers, but that maybe one additional game in the 2nd round would have derailed their title? Get real dude.

quote:

---

None of his Heat teams would have made it out of the Western Conference in the early 2000's. None of those teams were anywhere as good as the Spurs or Lakers.

---

That's speculation, at best. There's no doubt that the 98-03 run by the Spurs and Lakers produced some great teams (all top 30 ELO rating), but the Heat would have been a huge matchup problem for some of those teams as well. The 11-12 Heat actually rank higher than every single championship team from that period, so again you're just making stuff up. I'm not saying they'd go anywhere close to 5-0, but saying they were nowhere near as good is just patently false.

How would the 2014 Heat have handled the Duncan that averaged 25-15-5-5 in the playoffs or the 30-15 Shaq? Matchup problems go both ways.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I don't think the same Heat teams make it out of the 2011-2014 West. 2012 is the only year I think they would have made the Finals if they were playing in the Western Conference.

---

That's a pretty hilarious assertion considering they were NBA champions two of those years. How can you sit there and contend that they wouldn't have even made it out of the West if they were capable of winning it all?

In 2012 they would have been the 3 seed in the West. They easily make it out of the first round, they would have played and massacred the Thunder in the 2nd round just like they did in the Finals, and then they would have beat a very meh Spurs team that got destroyed by the Thunder in the Conference Finals. It would have changed nothing. They would have then played the Celtics in the Finals instead of the ECF. There would have been no difference unless you're a delusional Spurs fan.

In 2013 they would have been the 1 seed in the West. Again leading to an easy first round, an easy second round against the Grizzlies, and then beating the Spurs in the Conference Finals and the Pacers in the Finals instead of vice versa. Again, you're delusional if you think it would have changed anything. They would have played the exact same teams, just in a different order. Your assertion is that they were good enough to beat two REALLY good teams in the Spurs and Pacers, but that maybe one additional game in the 2nd round would have derailed their title? Get real dude.

quote:

---

None of his Heat teams would have made it out of the Western Conference in the early 2000's. None of those teams were anywhere as good as the Spurs or Lakers.

---

That's speculation, at best. There's no doubt that the 98-03 run by the Spurs and Lakers produced some great teams (all top 30 ELO rating), but the Heat would have been a huge matchup problem for some of those teams as well. The 11-12 Heat actually rank higher than every single championship team from that period, so again you're just making stuff up. I'm not saying they'd go anywhere close to 5-0, but saying they were nowhere near as good is just patently false.

---

You aren't understanding the point of this conversation. The idea is that to come out of the west, there are NO easy series, and you are worn down when you get to the finals. In the east, you cakewalk til the eastern finals usually.

quote:

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

I don't think the same Heat teams make it out of the 2011-2014 West. 2012 is the only year I think they would have made the Finals if they were playing in the Western Conference.

---

That's a pretty hilarious assertion considering they were NBA champions two of those years. How can you sit there and contend that they wouldn't have even made it out of the West if they were capable of winning it all?

In 2012 they would have been the 3 seed in the West. They easily make it out of the first round, they would have played and massacred the Thunder in the 2nd round just like they did in the Finals, and then they would have beat a very meh Spurs team that got destroyed by the Thunder in the Conference Finals. It would have changed nothing. They would have then played the Celtics in the Finals instead of the ECF. There would have been no difference unless you're a delusional Spurs fan.

In 2013 they would have been the 1 seed in the West. Again leading to an easy first round, an easy second round against the Grizzlies, and then beating the Spurs in the Conference Finals and the Pacers in the Finals instead of vice versa. Again, you're delusional if you think it would have changed anything. They would have played the exact same teams, just in a different order. Your assertion is that they were good enough to beat two REALLY good teams in the Spurs and Pacers, but that maybe one additional game in the 2nd round would have derailed their title? Get real dude.

quote:

---

None of his Heat teams would have made it out of the Western Conference in the early 2000's. None of those teams were anywhere as good as the Spurs or Lakers.

---

That's speculation, at best. There's no doubt that the 98-03 run by the Spurs and Lakers produced some great teams (all top 30 ELO rating), but the Heat would have been a huge matchup problem for some of those teams as well. The 11-12 Heat actually rank higher than every single championship team from that period, so again you're just making stuff up. I'm not saying they'd go anywhere close to 5-0, but saying they were nowhere near as good is just patently false.

---

You aren't understanding the point of this conversation. The idea is that to come out of the west, there are NO easy series, and you are worn down when you get to the finals. In the east, you cakewalk til the eastern finals usually.

---

+1000.

You are not understanding what we keep saying. With the exception of 2011 the Miami Heat had a cakewalk to the NBA Finals. They got taken to 7 games by a 49 Win Indiana team in 2013.

If you play in the Western Conference you are playing against infinitely tougher competition. Just look at this year. The Spurs and Thunder are playing in the second round and in most years two teams of this caliber would be meeting in the Conference Finals or even the Finals.
Both the Spurs and Thunder are better than the 2015 Cavaliers.

The Spurs had to face a 60 win Mavs team in the 2nd round in the 2006 playoffs....etc. Its very rare that the Heat ever had to face more than one great team in the Eastern Conference Playoffs.

quote:

---

quote:

---

I don't think the same Heat teams make it out of the 2011-2014 West. 2012 is the only year I think they would have made the Finals if they were playing in the Western Conference.

---

That's a pretty hilarious assertion considering they were NBA champions two of those years. How can you sit there and contend that they wouldn't have even made it out of the West if they were capable of winning it all?

In 2012 they would have been the 3 seed in the West. They easily make it out of the first round, they would have played and massacred the Thunder in the 2nd round just like they did in the Finals, and then they would have beat a very meh Spurs team that got destroyed by the Thunder in the Conference Finals. It would have changed nothing. They would have then played the Celtics in the Finals instead of the ECF. There would have been no difference unless you're a delusional Spurs fan.

In 2013 they would have been the 1 seed in the West. Again leading to an easy first round, an easy second round against the Grizzlies, and then beating the Spurs in the Conference Finals and the Pacers in the Finals instead of vice versa. Again, you're delusional if you think it would have changed anything. They would have played the exact same teams, just in a different order. Your assertion is that they were good enough to beat two REALLY good teams in the Spurs and Pacers, but that maybe one additional game in the 2nd round would have derailed their title? Get real dude.

quote:

---

None of his Heat teams would have made it out of the Western Conference in the early 2000's. None of those teams were anywhere as good as the Spurs or Lakers.

---

That's speculation, at best. There's no doubt that the 98-03 run by the Spurs and Lakers produced some great teams (all top 30 ELO rating), but the Heat would have been a huge matchup problem for some of those teams as well. The 11-12 Heat actually rank higher than every single championship team from that period, so again you're just making stuff up. I'm not saying they'd go anywhere close to 5-0, but saying they were nowhere near as good is just patently false.

---

You are getting way too butt hurt about this.
For starters, I clearly said that I think the Miami Heat would have made it out of the West in 2012. Im not sure why you even felt the need to respond to that point.

Secondly there is a gigantic difference in the level of competition in the Eastern and Western Conference. In 2013 the Miami Heat got taken to 7 games by a 49 Win Indiana team in the Eastern Conference Finals.

If you play in the Western Conference you would be playing a team that caliber in the first round. For example the 2014 Spurs got taken to 7 games by a a 49 win Mavs team.....in the first round.

What you don't seem to understand is that if you come out of the West (even as the 1 or 2 seed) you would playing against two and maybe three very good teams. While in the East the Heat routinely played no one great until they made the Finals.

quote:

---

That's speculation, at best. There's no doubt that the 98-03 run by the Spurs and Lakers produced some great teams (all top 30 ELO rating), but the Heat would have been a huge matchup problem for some of those teams as well. The 11-12 Heat actually rank higher than every single championship team from that period, so again you're just making stuff up. I'm not saying they'd go anywhere close to 5-0, but saying they were nowhere near as good is just patently false.

---

I just made stuff up??? Wow. Okay. I'm not making this up. The Miami Heat came along at the perfect time. A team as small as the Miami Heat rarely wins an NBA title. Their centers where Joel Anthony and Chris Bosh.
I'm going to repeat that: Their centers were Joel Anthony and Chris Bosh.
When the Warriors want to go big they can put Andrew Bogut in the game who is a pretty good defensive center and a very large player.
The Heat had no such player.

With the decline of the Kobe/Gasol Lakers there were no teams with great size to punish the Heat for their lack of size.

A team with size.....like I don't know.....maybe the Lakers with Shaq in his prime, or the Spurs with Tim Duncan in his prime would have destroyed the Heat in 5 games or less.

How in the world would the Heat have been able to stop Tim Duncan or Shaq while they were in their primes????
My God.....a past his prime Tim Duncan almost beat the Heat in 2013 and then destroyed them in 2014.

The 2011-14 Miami Heat were not that great. Put them in the Western Conference and Im not sure they win a single title. They greatly benefited from playing in a very weak Eastern Conference.

By the way, Lebron was the only Eastern Conference player to finish in the top nine of MVP voting for this season.

quote:

---

LeBron once averaged 30/8/7 and got 1 first place MVP vote in 2008.
He also averaged 27/7/7 in 04-05 season, but was only 6th place in MVP voting.
Steph is averaging 30/5/6 this year, and will probably be the first ever UNANIMOUS MVP in the NBA.
It's crazy how people don't appreciate LeBron, and always taken LeBron's greatness for granted.
The guy has been doing it since his HS days, from his rookie year, till today (13 years) he's the epitome of an all around basketball player for consistently averaging 25-7-7.
Congrats Steph for winning back-to-back MVP & you deserved it, but LEBRON is still the best player in the world.

---