The Case Against LeBron's Detractors

If you fill out the online application to study at Harvard University, you’ll eventually arrive at a page that contains a lengthy list of conspicuously Anglo-Saxon names belonging to historically prominent, aristocratic New England families.  The instructions on this page will ask you to indicate if you have any familial relation to any of the listed surnames, so that this information can be considered when the admissions board evaluates your application.

Most applicants probably skip this page without giving it a second thought.  After all, we’re all accustomed to the notion of rich Anglo-Saxon kids being given opportunities on the basis of inheritance rather than merit.  But the still-rare phenomenon of young, black kids form the ghetto suddenly enjoying wealth that most Americans could only dream of, is a fairly recent development, and one that people are still getting used to.

This resentment is what I believe precipitated the introduction in 2007 of the NBA’s age limit, which mandated that in order to be eligible from the NBA draft, a player had to be at least one year removed from high school.  By this time, most of the league’s top draft picks were making the lucrative leap straight to the pros right out of grade 12.  There was a palpable sense among the largely conservative white male fan base that these kids were being handed their wealth on a silver platter, and that they needed to somehow pay their dues.  So the league’s solution was to force players to go the collegiate league and ply their trade free of charge for athletic programs who in turn raked in billions every year.

This same resentment is what appears to be informing the backlash against LeBron James’ decision to play in Miami next season.  The most obvious example is that of Cavs owner Dan Gilbert, who, after hearing of James’ decision to abandon the Cavs sinking ship, wrote an open letter to his former cash cow berating the young player for being a “traitor”.  To the NBA’s credit, Gilbert was fined $100 000 for his tirade, but it’s obvious that his sentiments are shared by many fans, both in Cleveland and throughout the country.  Jesse Jackson got it right when he observed that Gilbert sounded like a disgruntled slave owner whose human property had illegally escaped.

The letter revealed an overriding sense of entitlement.  The thinking was, “How ungrateful of you to just up and leave after all this corporation has done for you!”  Adding to the irony is fact that Dan Gilbert is a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist, who made his fortune peddling the subprime mortgages that eventually sent the global economy spiraling into a tailspin.  So one must be forgiven if they don’t buy into Gilbert’s pathetic attempt to assume the moral high ground.

Then this week two former greats weighed in on the situation with their own versions of sanctimonious punditry.  First Michael Jordan opined that he would never have joined forces with his rivals, Magic Johnson and Larry Bird, because he wanted to beat them, not play with them.  Then Magic, never one to be outdone, chimed in yesterday to offer his two cents, which (surprise, surprise) echoed Jordan’s sentiments almost verbatim.

Even the most cursory look at the careers of both men, reveals them to be uber-hypocrites.  Let’s start with Magic.  In 1979, Magic was drafted to the LA Lakers, a team that was already stacked and was home to one of the sport’s all-time greatest centres, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar.  As a result Magic was able to hoist his first NBA championship trophy less than 9 months after playing in his first game as a professional.  Two years later, Magic and Kareem were joined by James Worthy.  All three would eventually be named to the list of the NBA’s 50 greatest players ever, and together they won three more championships.

Like Magic, Michael Jordan began his career in a big metropolis equipped with all the trappings that one might want in their city of residence if they were young, rich and talented.  Also like Magic, within 3 years of being drafted, Jordan was joined by a fellow all-time top 50 player and future hall of famer.  Jordan and Pippen would eventually win a total of six championships together, forming the core of one of the greatest dynasties the league has every seen.

Contrast this with LeBron’s experience.  He was drafted to a last place team located in the rustbelt wasteland that is Cleveland, Ohio.  For 7 years he toiled away trying to turn the Cavs into a championship team, and for his efforts they couldn’t even supply him with a single legitimate all-star to help carry the load (at least not one that I can think of).  Can anyone really blame the kid for wanting to leave this situation and play with his two friends (who also happen to be excellent players) in an arena that’s a ten-minute drive from South Beach?  Should we hold it against him that, unlike Jordan and Magic, LeBron wasn’t born into the lap of NBA luxury.

It’s also worth noting that Jordan and Magic are among the most entrenched of all former players in the capitalist, conservative NBA establishment.  Their credentials speak for themselves.  Magic has since earned billions through his shrewd business dealings, and in 2008 he was a vocal supporter if Hillary Clinton, by far the most conservative of the three major candidates in the Democratic presidential primaries.  Jordan has always shown glimpses of his conservative leanings.  As a player he refused to comment on any political issues, and he defended this policy by famously remarking that “Republicans buy shoes too.”

As it turns out, I’m not even a big LeBron fan.  I’ve always preferred Kobe’s finesse approach over LeBron’s more brutish style.  But I respect LeBron’s talent and I have to call it like I see it.  If and when the championships start to come, there will be many who say that the rings are tainted because he had to move to a better team to win them.  I say, it’s better to be a champion on a stacked team than to risk becoming the next Charles Barkley.