12:30 p.m. ET, 5/24/07 LeBron Scrutiny Excessive Posted by Kelly Dwyer LeBron James (left) didn't find much room to operate against Rasheed Wallace and the Pistons in Game 1. It's been a few days since The Pass, a well-timed and pinpoint dish thrown to Donyell Marshall in the waning seconds of Cleveland's Game 1 loss to the Pistons in the Eastern Conference finals, and the clamor surrounding The Passer has yet to die down. Upon first (and second and 112th ...) glance, it appeared as if LeBron James had a relatively easy window toward either a layup or game-tying dunk with under 10 seconds left Monday, but he instead decided to go with what seemed like his first option all along -- finding Cleveland's sometimes sweet-shooting big man for the game-winner that wasn't. The decision hasn't exactly polarized observers: Most tend to think LeBron made a mistake in giving up the ball, and many of those critics are also finding something in the split decision that they think is representative of James' attitude toward the game. Which is silly. It was a pass -- not The Pass -- and you can't chalk it up to anything more than the result of a few obvious influences that begged for a pass instead of The Dunk. Let's start with what still seems obvious: James should have attempted a shot, and if he finds himself in the same position in Thursday's Game 2, here's hoping he's does just that. Considering the fallout, I'm assuming many observers shared my initial reaction before the ball even touched Marshall's hands: "LeBron, you gotta take that!" That reaction wasn't created by a need to see James win the thing on his own or create some Jordanesque play for the ages; it was merely a visceral response to what looked like the easiest open lane to the rim the Cavs had seen all night. Had Larry Hughes been driving the ball, just replace one L-word with another. Eric Snow? Not so much. Though some intelligent observers have argued passionately in defense of the pass, it still seems like a high-percentage take for James. Rasheed Wallace, a help defender with seven blocks already to his name, was still technically on the weak side as James made his decision, hardly in prime blocking or shot-changing territory. Tayshaun Prince, who could stay in front of a '68 Mustang even without the benefit of hand-checking, was a half step behind James for the first time all night. It looked like a gimmie, even if James had to lay it in or jump off the wrong foot. But there were no gimmies, all game long, for James. It's hard to spend nearly 48 minutes adapting to that knowledge and then, in one split second, disabuse yourself of the notion that each layup attempt will be contested (or summarily rejected) by three defenders at a time. To me, this was a reaction made out of near muscle memory, not an attempt to pacify the Play The Right Way crowd and go for that proverbial win (not a tie) on the road. Again, James just didn't have a clear look at the rim all night, as Detroit's defense was that sound, and in a low-possession game with sound decisions at a premium, each suitable reaction is worth its weight in gold. When a 20-year-old Magic Johnson led his Lakers, sans Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, to a win in Game 6 of the 1980 Finals, the two teams combined for 230 points. When a 23-year-old Michael Jordan dropped 63 on the Boston Celtics in 1986, the final score (aided by two overtimes) was 135-131. The score of Monday's game was 79-76, a low-possession slugfest of the highest order. The 22-year-old James' decision ended with his team's best three-point shooter having an open look to win the game. I still don't think it the ideal move, but I also can't get too upset by it. And I certainly don't think it indicative of any fault in LeBron's makeup. He was just doing what seemed right. And, in the end, he gave his team its best chance to win, on the road, against a team that has made the conference finals five years in a row. Do you want to see him try to send it into overtime? Definitely. Was James somehow at fault for not attempting to? Absolutely not.
You chastise me in your last post for "thinking I know more than Magic", and then you spend paragraph after paragraph trying to tell Lebron James how to play the game. Typical.
I agree with ZZZ. If it had been me, I would have done a tomahawk jam on Rasheed's head, hung on the rim for a couple of minutes, then ran down the sideline pounding my chest and scowling. But that's just the way I play the game.
Sheed hits the big shot, Cleveland had enough chances. Was LeBron fouled? Ask yourself this question, would they have called a foul on Hamilton if that were MJ going to the hoop? In Cleveland, Hamilton might have been called for the foul... Bottom line though, Cleveland's lack of playoff experience shows...
thats 2 games they let go...... but you are not giving lebron credit..he has taken a mediocore team past the first round and could have easily been sitting at 2-0 in the second against perhaps the best defensive squad aside from san antonio...this kid is young and will easily develop into the MJ of the "me generation"...
Lot of talk on sports sites that it was an obvious foul. They say "hack across the arm" was obvious. The replays I saw last night look like Hamilton had his arms straight up. I didn't see any hacking on the arm foul. Prob get the call at home, almost never on the road. That shot by Wallace was half clutch, half lucky as hell.
LeBron played better last night, but do you think Wade would have made the shot or drawn a foul? How about MJ? I don't think anyone would call LeBron "Mr. Clutch" yet. Hoping that Cleveland holds home court now, this series "should" go 7 games as close as the first two games were. Either way, from what I have seen so far, San Antonio looks like the team to beat. I not sure yet that LeBron makes his team significantly better, hard to say. When they got Larry Hughes, I think they expected more, and he has not delivered. He had a 6 foot shot last night he clanked at the end. The good thing I saw last night was the smoldering anger in LeBron last night during the Q&A with the reporters. That kind of anger is what he needs, a competitive controlled anger when he loses to drive him. I don't know if LeBron will be the next MJ, they said that about Kobe, and last year, Wade looked like MJ at times in the finals much more than LeBron ever has. I continue to think they need a coach that can help shape LeBron into a champion. Someone like Riles, Jackson, Chuck Daly...someone who has coached great players to championships would be a big plus for LeBron.
Concur. The refs swallow their whistles in the closing seconds much of the time in playoff games, they are afraid to make the wrong call, and a no call appears better than the wrong call.
Not sure Lebron makes his team better? You gotta be kidding. This stuff about the smoldering anger is just more conventional wisdom that I dispute. Hoops, just like trading, is done best when one is in the zone, and not suffering from anger issues. I do wholeheartedly agree that Cavs need a different coach. I'm not at all sure he gets the respect that a coach needs to lead this team where it wants to go.