I was as shocked as anyone when Dan Gilbert posted his letter to the fans of Cleveland. That level of access to a team owner is very rare in and of itself. That Giblert was obviously blind with fury all filters turned off makes the whole scenario even more captivating.
I have long wondered why more public figures, particularly in the sporting world, don’t take this kind of hands on approach to the issues that are important to their fans. More transparency is a good thing and the fans that care enough to read it are smart enough to process it (speaking broadly; I know there are exceptions). For instance, let’s say you are the Suns and are involved in a free-agent negotiation with Amare Stoudamire that will cost you more than you think he is worth if you re-sign him yet know that failing to do so will give the impression that you won’t do what is necessary to win a championship. Why not buy room in the local paper and say “Here are the reasons we think Amare was worth $80 million rather than the $100 he was asking for” along with wishes for his success in the future with his new team and capped with some notes about what the game plan going forward looks like? Not everyone will agree but I’m convinced that the majority of fans, if they can at least understand your rationale, will support the franchise as it operates even if they don’t necessarily agree with your metrics.
The potential in transparency isn’t all positive though – as Gilbert’s letter makes crystal clear. I’m sure there are numbers who agree with Gilbert’s take on Lebron’s decision to leave. As for me I find it a clear case of blame shifting by a jilted suitor desperate to blame anyone other than himself for the mess he made. The Cleveland Cavaliers have now leapt to the forefront of my Most Despised Teams List (passing the Lakers) and entering rarefied territory generally reserved for the likes of the Baltimore Ravens and Florida Gators.
Gilbert received the greatest draft gift in at least an NBA generation. Not only did his franchise end up with the rights to draft the most talented player to enter the league in perhaps… ever?… but that player was a local product who not only understood his importance to the area but also actually cared.
From that fortuitous beginning the Cavs employed Lebron for 7 years. Yes, they paid him a great deal of money. I can’t imagine anyone arguing that Lebron didn’t hold up his end of the bargain. Every (and I don’t mean this rhetorically) other team in the league would have lined up to pay Lebron the amount the Cavs have to receive the performance he gave over that time span. 7 years. That is really a long time, especially in NBA years where a normal year actually amounts to something like a dog year. Yet for 7 years the Cavs failed to (a) build around Lebron for the long haul (see: Sam Presti, Oklahoma City Thunder) or (b) assemble a team competent enough to win in the short term.
Who, pray tell, is at fault there?
I personally think Danny Ferry is the main culprit. The man never evidenced a plan of any sort. Was he trying to win right now? If so he did an amazingly pitiful job. (See: Ben Wallace, Wally Sczerbs, Anderson Varejao’s contract). Was he trying to build for the future? If so, he did an amazingly pitiful job (see the wildly fluctuating minutes/opportunities given to Daniel Gibson and J.J. Hixson).
As an owner I would like to concede that you need to have basketball people making basketball decisions. Thus I can understand if Gilbert gave Ferry room to operate; that is, after all, what Ferry was hired to do. However, if you have to place ultimate blame somewhere – and Gilbert apparently wants to – doesn’t it have to rest with the man writing the checks?
Gilbert knows what he “built” in Cleveland is as shoddy as his city’s economy. How do we know? Did you notice in his letter that he called Lebron a coward? If you follow that thinking through doesn’t it dictate that Lebron leaving for more talent is cowardly, the flip side – bravery – would equate to going in to the future with not only the talent on Cleveland’s roster but the brains (and I use that term very loosely) that assembled it? Gilbert’s accusation amounts to an admission that it would be brave, based on danger, to challenge the rest of the NBA with the Cavaliers’ meager complementing cast. Dan Gilbert: take out gun, shoot foot.
The Cavs have known all along exactly how long they owned the rights to Lebron James. They have also known for at least 4 years that multiple franchises (the Knicks being the leader of the pack) were bloodthirsty to sign Lebron away from Cleveland. You can look at the list of transaction executed by the Knicks and Heat over two years and see that it was clear that Cleveland should be on alert about the exact scenario we saw play out last night.
Yet when the day dawns what was Gilbert’s best strategy to resign Lebron? “Let’s hope he feels bad about leaving his hometown.”
If you as a well-heeled owner can offer no reason more compelling than sentimentality to your once-in-a-lifetime talent then you – and pay attention here – DESERVE to have him walk on you.
I saw too that Gilbert implied Lebron had some how failed morally here, so much so that it was a poor example to children. I’ll be the first to tell you that I see nothing here that is too repulsive for the eyes of children. I can, on the other hand, anticipate that my child, if faced with the opportunity to move to a better working and living environment, will most likely take advantage of that opportunity.
What I don’t want my children learning is actually reflected in Gilbert’s reaction. I don’t want my children making an absolute mess of a wonderful opportunity. If, however, they are found in that situation the last response I would desire from them is to shift blame onto someone else. In short, I would be much happier for my children to conduct themselves like Lebron James has than I would be if they acted like Dan Gilbert.
If Dan Gilbert requires that we must assign guilt over Lebron leaving Cleveland the ultimate conclusion is that no one bears as much responsibility as does Dan Gilbert. No amount of invective or goofy-fonted tirades will change that reality.
