Former NBA great Rick Barry had some pointed comments for LeBron James during an interview with Comcast SportsNet Bay Area that will air on Wednesday night.
"He's got major flaws in his game," Barry said. "He's six years into the NBA. How can a man six years into the NBA with his talent have a major flaw in his shot? How can he not use screens effectively? . . I watch the game very carefully - he doesn't use screens effectively and this is not LeBron's fault. It's the fault of the people who are teaching him. . . . There is no doubt in my mind that LeBron, if shown these things would do them, because he wants to be a great player, he wants to win a championship. As great as he is, he should be better."
Your thoughts?
The knee-jerk reaction is that it's another example of a former great being critical of the current generation and giving them too little credit but Rick Barry isn't usually the most outspoken in that regard (at least I don't recall many other examples of him doing that) and he's not making the usual "back in my day" point so the question is, simply, does he have a point with those observations? And if so, how much better "should" LeBron be?
At this point of his career, when he's still explosive and has plenty of time to develop new offensive weapons, his jumpshot is probably adequately effective despite any flaws with his mechanics and for whatever problems he may have using screens effectively, he has the size and athleticism to shoot over opponents and get to the basket at will. At some point it will become a concern as his athleticism will someday decline and he'll lose some of his natural gifts that he's using so well at the moment but that's a while off yet. In the meantime, he can continue to hone and expand his skills, as other greats have done. His six years in the league are a bit misleading too as they don't represent the experience and age of an NBA vet who also spent at least two or three years in college before coming to the NBA.
With that in mind, I'm not sure how much better LeBron can fairly be expected to be. The improvements we'll see are likely going to be these little things: shooting mechanics, effective screen use, clutch reliability, higher shooting percentages. I think there's still that unfair expectation that he's going to do something really attention grabbing like average 40 ppg or a triple double or something truly unbelievable, when he's already playing at a very high level and posting some very nice numbers.
I suppose it's natural to think that given he came into the league at eighteen and played so well from day one, but I think we need to get past the idea that he's nowhere near his prime and when he gets there, astonishing out-of-this-world numbers will follow. I believe that the LeBron we'll see in a few years will be similar to the one we see now, except perhaps with a more overall game, a few of those weaknesses turned into strengths or at least lesser liabilities and who knows, maybe an MVP award or two and a ring. But some of the ridiculous numbers that are thrown about? He's not the only great player to come along in the last couple of decades or so, if it were that easy in the modern game (or even in the early days of the NBA), more players would be achieving those numbers or coming close to it.
