DWade Got 'Clevelanded'

Before we go all soft and doe-eyed over LeBron's heroic entrance through the Cleveland city gates on a snow-white steed let's remember the carnage he left behind.  Again.  This article is about Wade but there are a lot of teams who didn't cut deals because they were waiting for him to make his announcement and some of them, like GSW who had an expiring TPE, lost assets because of he la-di-dahed his way to doing what he knew for a while he was going to do.



http://bostonherald.com/sports/celtics_nba/nba_coverage/2014/07/borges_dwyane_wade_fooled_by_lebron_james




Borges: Dwyane Wade fooled by LeBron James
After opting out, veteran is left out



Saturday, July 12, 2014 PrintEmail102 Comments
By:  Ron Borges




If NBC is looking for contestants for the next season of “The Biggest Loser” they can start with Dwyane Wade.

Wade now understands what Cleveland Cavaliers owner Dan Gilbert felt like four years ago when he was jilted by LeBron James and temporarily lost his mind. Put your trust in someone who says, “I’m all about business,” and you’ll probably end up getting the business from him eventually.

Four years ago James stuck it to a city, but at least the team he played for deserved it to a degree because in seven years they didn’t give him much help. This time he only stuck it to one guy but that guy, Wade, damn sure didn’t deserve to be “Clevelanded.”

LeBron James was supposed to be more than Dwyane Wade’s teammate. He was supposed to be his friend. But, hey, cash is thicker than blood (at least when it’s in an $88 million pile), which is way thicker than water and considerably thicker than whatever bound James to Wade apparently.

Two weeks ago Wade joined James and Chris Bosh, and opted out of the remaining two years of his contract and the $41.8 million guaranteed to him by the Heat, ostensibly to make room for Miami to do what it could to keep the Big Three together. Only problem was The Big One wasn’t staying.

Any chance he could have given Wade a wink or a nod? Any way he could have left an anonymous tweet in Wade’s direct message box saying, “Ixney on the opt-out!”? Might he have considered saying, “Think twice, my brother, because you ain’t my brother, brother!”?

He might have, but instead he did to Wade what he did to the Cavaliers and the city of Cleveland. LeBron James played him.

Maybe he didn’t do it consciously. Maybe he really believes he didn’t know he left his heart in Akron, but the idea that it just hit him in the last week that, as he put it on SI.com: “My relationship with Northeast Ohio is bigger than basketball. I didn’t realize that four years ago. I do now,” is ludicrous.

Where Wade goes from here is an open question. Not surprisingly after a dalliance with the Houston Rockets that convinced them to deal away point guard Jeremy Lin and a draft pick to the Lakers to open up cap space for him, Chris Bosh reversed field and went back to Miami last night, agreeing to a five-year, $118 million contract. Houston offered him the max at four years and $88 million, but Miami could give him the extra year and an additional $30 million, and Bosh, having learned something from watching LeBron, snatched it.

At 32 and with aching knees, Wade is not in the same boat. At times this year he seemed to have become the third wheel of the Big Three. When healthy he can still play like D-Wade, but when his knees are aching he plays like Lil Wayne, if he plays at all.

To save them and improve the Heat’s chances of getting at least to “not two rings,” Miami rested him for 28 games. He averaged only 33 minutes all season and played only nine games in 31 days going into the Eastern Conference finals. Yet he still faded in the championship series. He wasn’t alone, by the way.

Since he opted out, the Heat owe him nothing, but could admit he opted out more to help them keep LeBron than to feather his own nest. Coupled with all he’s brought to the franchise, maybe they pay him fairly, but he won’t get paid like Bosh or James did, and unless Pat Riley has lost his mind, he won’t get paid like he was going to be paid two weeks ago either, whether he stays or leaves.

In the end, Dwyane Wade sacrificed himself for his team and his friend, but it was all for naught. Welcome to the other side of the NBA, Dwyane.

Not far away LeBron was making a big deal over the fact he’d made The Decision not to repeat the mistake of “The Decision,” that faux TV game show where he finally announced he was “taking my talents to South Beach.” What was he going to say this time? “I’m taking my talents to Headlands Beach State Park?”

James also made a point of saying in an essay under his name on SI.com that “I’m not having a press conference or a party. After this, it’s time to get to work.”

It’s pretty unlikely his old friend Dwyane Wade was going to have a party either, unless it was a pity party, but it’s kind of hard to justify that when you’ve been paid $62 million and won two NBA titles in the past four years, even though you might feel like Dan Gilbert did four years ago.

“I’ve met with Dan, face-to-face, man-to-man,” James said of the Cavs owner who called him a “coward” for leaving in 2010. “We’ve talked it out. Everybody makes mistakes. I’ve made mistakes as well. Who am I to hold a grudge?”

No one. Dwyane Wade on the other hand . . .




bob




.

I recall an incident Involving wade and a certain elbow....

Apparently not only is karma a b****, but apparently she charges interest too..

I'm ok with this...

Dont care much for Wade but who really got screwed over was Udonis Haslem.

Wade and Haslem are both getting now deals with Miami.

Say what you want , but Riley seems to be a guy true to his word.

Matty wrote:I recall an incident  Involving wade and a certain elbow....

Apparently not only is karma a b****, but apparently she charges interest too..

I'm ok with this...

Well said.  I'm with you 100%.

James did it the right way this time around anyway. If Wade wants to whine about it at all, he can always do so out of the public eye.

Wade fooled..............could not have happen to a better person............the most dirty player in the NBA.............


112288

ditto

ditto

THE PUNK GOT PUNKED!

112288

dirty scumbag!!!!

There's no telling when the Karma Express is scheduled to roll into the station.


KJ

I never felt sorry for Cleveland or LeBron;the League has been too kind to them. In 2003, Cleveland was awarded the number one pick and landed LeBron. Seven years later, after coming close but no cigar, LeBron left for a better team. Cleveland was then given the soft landing of three number one picks in the next four four years, garnering Kyrie Irving, Anthony Bennett and Andrew Wiggins. That haul by his former team, a frustrating finals, and perhaps a realization that Wade is past it, convinced LeBron to back-track to Cleveland, where once again he will be joining a better team than the one he is leaving.
(How noble!)
I see calculation all around, but as a Celtics fan I think the turn of events stinks, and the real fault is the NBA's draft system and culture, which rewards tanking, caters to superstars, and dumps on team loyalty. Hawk

hawksnestbeach wrote:I never felt sorry for Cleveland or LeBron;the League has been too kind to them. In 2003, Cleveland was awarded the number one pick and landed LeBron. Seven years later, after coming close but no cigar, LeBron left for a better team. Cleveland was then given the soft landing of three number one picks in the next four four years, garnering Kyrie Irving, Anthony Bennett and Andrew Wiggins. That haul by his former team, a frustrating finals, and perhaps a realization that Wade is past it, convinced LeBron to back-track to Cleveland, where once again he will be joining a better team than the one he is leaving.
  (How noble!)
  I see calculation all around, but as a Celtics fan I think the turn of events stinks, and the real fault is the NBA's draft system and culture, which rewards tanking, caters to superstars, and dumps on team loyalty. Hawk

 

Hawk,

Cleveland has benefitted more from luck than tanking.
When Cleveland traded for Baron Davis and his bloated contract, they received an unprotected 1st round pick.
I think that should have been the 11th pick, but Cleveland was lucky to get the #1 pick and chose Kyrie Irving.
This year, they tried hard to make the playoffs. They even traded for Spencer Hawes mid season.
They again got lucky with the #1 pick when they were slotted 9th in the pre draft rankings.
Why should LeBron stay with Miami after leading them to 4 straight Finals?
Free agency works both ways. Sometimes players want to leave, sometimes teams want players to leave.
I'm not sure what you think is wrong with this system.
The league did not award any number one picks to Cleveland, they just happened to get them.

Anything that makes Wades life miserable is fine with me. Matty, you hit it right on the head! He is the dirtiest ballplayer in basketball.

As far as Cleveland is concerned, you are right, they have been the luckiest team in so many years it is sickening. I think that there should be a rule about a team getting the first pick three years in a row. I do not know how'they would do it, but, there has to be a way. It is a reward for mediocrity, and Cleveland has wallowed in it since LeBron left.

tjmakz wrote:
Hawk,

Cleveland has benefitted more from luck than tanking.
When Cleveland traded for Baron Davis and his bloated contract, they received an unprotected 1st round pick.
I think that should have been the 11th pick, but Cleveland was lucky to get the #1 pick and chose Kyrie Irving.
This year, they tried hard to make the playoffs. They even traded for Spencer Hawes mid season.
They again got lucky with the #1 pick when they were slotted 9th in the pre draft rankings.
Why should LeBron stay with Miami after leading them to 4 straight Finals?
Free agency works both ways. Sometimes players want to leave, sometimes teams want players to leave.
I'm not sure what you think is wrong with this system.
The league did not award any number one picks to Cleveland, they just happened to get them.

I think the 3 #1 picks in 4 years is the problem.



KJ

It is hard to imagine why Wade opted out. The assumption is that the big three would take less money and return for another run.

Bosh got paid and before we determine if Wade got screwed we may want to wait until the contract information comes out.

dboss

TJ, I object to a system that allows one team four number one picks in 11 years, and three in four years. I object to a draft that rewards losing but only when combined with being lucky.
If the NBA's draft were in any world other than sports, it would be a joke. Can you imagine a progressive tax system that tells Mr. So-and-So, guess what, you lucky dog, you pay no tax next year, but your neighbor, Mr. Whatsis, who lost a game of Yahtzee, will make up the difference?
The current draft system rewards losing and luck, not skill and effort, not a good business strategy. (Full disclosure: if we'd have Cleveland's luck in the last 11 years, I doubt I'd be complaining because I'd be so giddy. But we didn't and I am).
The only way to beat it that I see is the Spurs' (and traditional Celtics') method of assembling a team far superior to its individual draftees and high-priced free agents. I think Danny is taking this path, but with a League that allows one team to cut in line for dinner repeatedly, it is an uphill strategy. Hawk

It's why I so frequently talk about the draft's being a crap shoot, and depending mainly on the draft to rebuild is of very questionable merit.

Sam

hawksnestbeach wrote:TJ, I object to a system that allows one team four number one picks in 11 years, and three in four years. I object to a draft that rewards losing but only when combined with being lucky.
  If the NBA's draft were in any world other than sports, it would be a joke. Can you imagine a progressive tax system that tells Mr. So-and-So, guess what, you lucky dog, you pay no tax next year, but your neighbor, Mr. Whatsis, who lost a game of Yahtzee, will make up the difference?
  The current draft system rewards losing and luck, not skill and effort, not a good business strategy. (Full disclosure: if we'd have Cleveland's luck in the last 11 years, I doubt I'd be complaining because I'd be so giddy. But we didn't and I am).
  The only way to beat it that I see is the Spurs' (and traditional Celtics') method of assembling a team far superior to its individual draftees and high-priced free agents. I think Danny is taking this path, but with a League that allows one team to cut in line for dinner repeatedly, it is an uphill strategy. Hawk
 

What major sport does not reward losing? This is how bad teams get better.
The NFL, MLB and NHL draft completely based on record.
At least the NBA has a lottery so the worst team doesn't automatically get the best pick.
What do you recommend that the NBA does to have a better system?
Boston has done exactly what other rebuilding teams have done.
They traded away better players for worse players and future draft picks. (Garnett/Pierce/Crawford)
You more then made it seem like the league did something fraudulent with Cleveland and their draft picks.

Also, your analogy about taxes is completely incorrect.
The U.S. tax system punishes success.
What are the tax rates for someone who makes $20,000/year compared to someone that makes $2,000,000/year?

I don't know but isn't paying no taxes the reason Dwight went to Houston? Other than to get away from Kobe!

I see what hawk is getting at.  I live in a state called Taxachusetts.
Taxes have nothing to do with this issue. I will still say, 3 #1's in 4 years is wrong.

Rosalie

TJ, I did not state that the League did anything fraudulent in allowing Cleveland 3 number 1 picks in 4 years, or 4 in 11. (In other words, I have no knowledge of subterfuge). But I do think a system that allows one team to repeatedly take the presumed best college player in the nation is inherently wrong and must be changed.
As you have stated, other sports allow losing teams to pick before more successful teams, but no other sport I know of combines this with the lunacy of a game of chance. Why, the ping pong balls? Aren't they a tacit admission that owners will cheat by tanking if the draft is a straightforward process, where the team with the worst record picks first, and the team with the second-worst record picks second, etc.?
Why don't other sports adopt the NBA model? Are their owners considered more honest, and therefore not in need of ping pong balls?
I think the tax analogy works. A person making $20,000 a year typically pays far less tax than someone making 10 times more. But where in the tax system, do we spin a roulette wheel, where someone making $30,000 is required to pay less tax than someone making $20,000, by virtue of being lucky?
Doesn't happen.
Alternatives to the NBA draft system that would be improvements IMHO include rewarding losing directly as other sports do (combined with more League oversight); or distributing draft picks on a rotating basis. The current system could be improved with a provision that barred teams from receiving top picks repeatedly.
Rosalie, I'm from Longmeadow, Taxachusetts and moved to upstate New York decades ago, where the taxes are even higher!
Sam, I think we value the draft differently. If I thought it was purely a crap shoot, I wouldn't care about the system. I do think draft picks are very important and the League must address how they are distributed, perhaps especially so in this age when star players, as well as owners, are able to manipulate the system and assemble winning teams.
Hawk.

hawksnestbeach wrote:TJ, I did not state that the League did anything fraudulent in allowing Cleveland 3 number 1 picks in 4 years, or 4 in 11. (In other words, I have no knowledge of subterfuge). But I do think a system that allows one team to repeatedly take the presumed best college player in the nation is inherently wrong and must be changed.
  As you have stated, other sports allow losing teams to pick before more successful teams, but no other sport I know of combines this with the lunacy of a game of chance. Why, the ping pong balls? Aren't they a tacit admission that owners will cheat by tanking if the draft is a straightforward process, where the team with the worst record picks first, and the team with the second-worst record picks second, etc.?
  Why don't other sports adopt the NBA model? Are their owners considered more honest, and therefore not in need of ping pong balls?
  I think the tax analogy works. A person making $20,000 a year typically pays far less tax than someone making 10 times  more. But where in the tax system, do we spin a roulette wheel, where someone making $30,000 is required to pay less tax than someone making $20,000, by virtue of being lucky?
  Doesn't happen.
  Alternatives to the NBA draft system that would be improvements IMHO include rewarding losing directly as other sports do (combined with more League oversight); or distributing draft picks on a rotating basis. The current system could be improved with a provision that barred teams from receiving top picks repeatedly.
  Rosalie, I'm from Longmeadow, Taxachusetts and moved to upstate New York decades ago, where the taxes are even higher!
  Sam, I think we value the draft differently. If I thought it was purely a crap shoot, I wouldn't care about the system. I do think draft picks are very important and the League must address how they are distributed, perhaps especially so in this age when star players, as well as owners, are able to manipulate the system and assemble winning teams.
Hawk.

 
 

You said these things about Cleveland:
"the League has been too kind to them."
"Cleveland was then given the soft landing of three number one picks in the next four four years, garnering Kyrie Irving, Anthony Bennett and Andrew Wiggins."
"I see calculation all around"

So, you would rather just have the NBA follow other sports model?
How much worse would tanking/rebuilding be then?
At least now, the worst team usually does not get the #1 pick.
Cleveland tried this year. They wanted to make the playoffs.
Other sports have the same issue and even worse.
How many times have the Astros and Marlins traded away their best players?
The Astros now have the #1 ranked minor league system because of all of their high draft picks.
They have been benefitted by being a bad team.
If it was Boston that got the #1 pick this year, you wouldn't be complaining.
Boston had a higher chance of getting the #1 pick.
Just because your team didn't get it, kind of makes it seem like you are whining that your team didn't get lucky.

TJ, Yes, I said the League has been too kind to Cleveland, that Cleveland was given the soft landing of 3 top picks in 4 years after losing LeBron, and that I see calculation all around.
Are you saying that Cleveland was not awarded 3 top picks in 4 years, that this was not overcompensation for losing LeBron, or that you see no signs of calculation as players and owners jockey for position?
Your last line: "Just because your team didn't get it, kind of makes it seem like you are whining that your team didn't get lucky," was already acknowledged in my last post. I wrote that if we had been lucky, I'd be so giddy I wouldn't be complaining.
But whether or not I or anyone else complains doesn't change the facts of what has transpired: that one team was awarded the top draft prize in 3 of the last 4 years to compensate for losing an elite player, and now will get to reclaim that elite player, as well as keep its other number one picks. Cleveland now has four number 1 picks on its roster, all under 30, courtesy of League policy that rewards losing records and luck.
Fixing the system is not easy and I don't have an ideal answer. I said I'd prefer eliminating the element of chance and doing what other sports do: base picks on records COMBINED WITH MORE LEAGUE OVERSIGHT, or rotating draft position year by year, or even keeping the present system with rules that would eliminate the Cleveland scenario - in other words prohibiting one team from being eligible to receive the top pick in successive years. Hawk

Hawk,

You sure makes is sound like the league has done something intentionally toward Cleveland for losing LeBron. If the league didn't commit fraudulent activities, how can you say they were awarded those picks to compensate for losing an elite player?
Yes, the league can set parameters for not allowing 1 team to win the #1 pick a certain amount of times. I think they should seriously look into this after what happened with Cleveland. It looks like Cleveland will have a multi year run similar to what Miami just had.

League oversight does not work. Would you have wanted the league to cancel the Pierce/Garnett trade to Brooklyn because it was going to make Boston a worse team in the 2013-14 season?

Of course blatant throwing games by players or coaches will be punished.

TJ, After the dust settles, looks like we not that far apart. I'd like the League to examine how Cleveland, playing within the rules, managed to acquire 3 number 1 picks after losing LeBron, then brought him back to join them. It's the rules I question. No, I wouldn't want the Pierce-Garnett trade cancelled, cheered as soon as I heard it because it was time for the Celtics to move on and Danny did so in style. I'm not sure that trade, by itself, was the reason the Celtics' record was significantly worse than the year before. Rondo was hurt, Bradley was hurt, the coach was new, Sully wasn't in prime shape, Green was underwhelming, lots of factors at work.
Teams have to move on, transition; I get it. But my beef is with the draft, how picks are apportioned by a system that combines records and ping pong balls with results that can seem egregious to all but the lucky. Hawk