Cleveland Cavaliers' Struggles Are Not Just About LeBron James

Many people, myself included, were interested to see how the new look Cavaliers would stand up in the NBA without LeBron James.

We knew that for the last seven years, the Cavaliers' success was largely due to the athletic development and skillful brilliance of LeBron James.

Because of that success—that never led to a championship—we know without a doubt that the greatest Cavalier in the history of the franchise, is a homegrown talent from Cleveland's shadow city (Akron, Oh) named LeBron James.

Furthermore, after said talent made "the decision" of his lifetime, we also learned how he truly felt about his big brother city of Cleveland in his GQ article when he reported, "It's not far, but it is far. And Clevelanders, because they were the bigger-city kids when we were growing up, looked down on us...So we didn't actually like Cleveland. We hated Cleveland growing up. There's a lot of people in Cleveland we still hate to this day."

Am I the only one that thinks turf rivalries in the NBA are childish? 

Now, there are a lot of NBA analysts and "experts" that report on the game, and I am only a Northeastern Ohio kid (adult now) that grew up, like LeBron James, in the shadow of Lake Erie's No. 1 city (yes, better than Buffalo).

Actually, just a few days ago, after Cleveland's loss to the Miami Heat and LeBron James, I listened to Greg Anthony on NBA TV say that Cleveland's woes are actually a testament to how great LeBron James is. 

Bear in mind, I am not an expert (I love baseball) and I'm not here to bemoan LeBron James, because as an alumni of The University of Akron, I am proud of the fact that one of the greatest players in the NBA, the most recognized and decorated (without a championship), is an organically, locally grown talent. 

What I am here to say that I haven't been hearing enough of from these "experts" is that we are witnessing what the Cavaliers look like not only without LeBron James, but also without Shaquille O'Neal, Zydrunas Illgauskas, Delonte West and Mike Brown. 

A lot of people would like to make the Cavs' struggles all about LeBron James, as it makes for good press, ratings and the proliferation of an already out of control egotistical marketing machine. But, the truth of the matter is, that's clearly not the case. 

Let's take a closer look. Antawn Jamison came on late in the season, but when you look at the stats per game, Shaq, Z, and D West made up for 28.2 ppg last season. They made up for more in intangibles, like size (Shaq), ability to spread the floor (Z brings size to the perimeter), plus the versatility to guard and play multiple positions (D West).

You combine these factors with the loss of the mastermind of the LeBron years, Mike Brown, you then come to understand that you are looking at not only a new team, but, with the addition of new players and one of my childhood heroes in Byron Scott, then—an entirely new system. 

If it were all solely the result of losing LeBron James, then the Cavaliers should have won a championship last year. But, as we know, Mo Williams didn't show up, Mike Brown looked confused, role players couldn't hit shots, LeBron looked lost, (elbow? whatever) and the Boston Celtics made them look amateur after having the best record in the NBA two years in a row. 

So, why now that the Cavs are looking and playing like an entirely new organization, are we putting their lack of success on the loss of LeBron James? If you could name me a team that has lost their star MVP player, as well as three very important veteran role players and their coach, and went on the next year to  be successful, I will shut my trap. But, I imagine that you will not be able to find such a scenario. 

LeBron James' ego is already big enough.  He doesn't need to think Cleveland's new reality is based solely on his brilliance.  

The Cavaliers would have been mediocre regardless, but when you add the other tangible and intangible losses they have endured, then you get a wider scope on what's really happening in Cleveland.