If LeBron James Leaves Cleveland, Could the Cavaliers Be Next?

Alright, so we all know what happened in the Cavs-Celtics series. I am personally over the moon about it because I bet on the Celtics to win 4-2. But this article isn't meant to be a post-mortem on the series.

However, one thing we all know is that the Cavs losing the series has well and truly upped the ante on the LeBron James free agency debate. The general mood has moved from, "He may leave," to, "He's looking for a house in New York/Chicago/LA."

There's another, darker subplot that doesn't seem to have occurred to anyone but me in this entire melee. 

If James leaves Cleveland, could the team leave next?

I can hear the entire city shooting me down. The Cavs were around before James, they say, and they will continue to exist after him. After all, this is a team and city that survived the Ted Stepien years, "The Shot," and a generally lean decade before the entry of the Akron Hammer.

The stakes, however, have changed.

With Dan Gilbert at the helm, the Cavs have transformed into a franchise that are among the few in the NBA who are willing to spend money, including going over the luxury tax limit, to build a contender.

However, Gilbert is a savvy businessman. He knows that if James leaves, the Cavaliers go back to being another small-market team in an unpopular city for free agents. 

The difference being that they would be a small-market team paying Antawn Jamison $30 million for the next two years, Mo Williams $26 million for the next three, and Andy Varejao nearly $45 million for the next five. That's a low lottery nucleus for the next three or so years.

Not to mention they have a GM in over his head (seriously, how could anyone in their right mind turn down what essentially amounted to JJ Hickson for Amar'e Stoudemire?) and an incompetent coach.

While he could just fire both Ferry and Brown, that won't change the fact that NBA stars don't want to play in Cleveland unless they have a reason to do so. For the past few years, James was that reason.

I'm not suggesting that Gilbert will pull a Robert Irsay and moves the team out of town the night after James announces he's signed with the Knicks/Nets/Bulls/Clippers/Mexico City Sombreros expansion team (okay, that's my fantasy team name). But let's just say you were him for a second.

It's been five years since James left and he's picked up a couple of rings since then. Meanwhile, your team has gone sub .500 the past five years, and while you've managed to shed yourself of bad contracts, you're perpetually stuck in a position of mediocrity.

Think where the Pacers have been the past few years—not bad enough to get high lottery picks, but not good enough or big enough of a market/desirable location to get high lottery guys and good free agents so you're forced to overpay second-tier guys.

Your fans have stopped turning up except to boo James whenever he returns. 

Meanwhile, Seattle still doesn't have a team. David Stern has softened on the idea of a team in Las Vegas. San Francisco has a new arena and the Bay Area can easily support another team.

If you were the owner of the Cavs, what makes the most sense from both a business and basketball point of view?