Well it came to pass once again this year that the Cleveland Cavaliers were knocked out of the NBA playoffs short of their stated goal, which was of course to win the NBA Finals. This is the second straight season that they have had the best regular season record for the entire league and have been the overall number one team, and have been knocked out early. It would be different if they had lost in the Finals, but the last two seasons have seen them go out in the Eastern Conference Finals last year and the Eastern Conference Semi-Finals this season. To be honest, for some teams and fans the second round isn't that bad. My Spurs went out in the second round this year. I'm not too depressed about it though because they were a #7 seed in the West. Those seeds aren't expected to win it all and make deep runs in the playoffs. But the Cavs, oh those Cavs, they are supposed to make a run to the Finals the last couple of seasons as the #1 team, it just didn't happen for them.
There has been a lot talk too about what it was that caused the collapse of the Cavs. ESPN guys talking about it, TNT guys talking about it. I'm sure many folks from Cleveland are talking about it as well. The biggest thing that I hear is that LeBron didn't play up to his potential. He played at only about 3/4 of what he is truly capable of. He wasn't the leader that all the greats who have won championships were. Basically, what they are saying is that LeBron is supposed to be something super.
This got me thinking a little bit about the contradiction that we find in the world of sports. We want a superstar on our team. These are the guys that are the biggest names and the biggest talents. They are the ones who show up in the clutch and in crunch time. These are the guys that the fortunes of our teams rise and fall with. And yet we don't seem to want them to get to be a regular athlete.
We want two things from them:
1) To shoulder the blame when our team does badly and loses- This is what so many talked about LeBron needing to do. To put it on himself as the leader and superstar of the team. No matter how he performed in the game we want him to (and the other "superstars") to be the scapegoat, to take the brunt of the blame. Did a guy off the bench miss the game winning three as time expired? Blame it on the superstar, he should have been the one taking the shot. Did the other teams center score a career high in points that was the difference in the game? Let the superstar take the blame even though he is a point guard and has no business guarding that guy. No what it is, we want and expect our teams superstar to shoulder the blame.
2) We want to guy to the most humble person on the face of the planet when out teams wins- Now should our team pull off the win, then we want to superstar to be as humble as possible. Now rather than take credit for the win, like he took the blame for the loss, he is expected to deflect all the the praise to his teammates. The guy off the bench hit the 3-pointer as time expired to win by 1? Well he made a great shot in the face of the pressure to do so. Forget that the superstar gave the ball up to him. In a win, if the superstar takes the final shot, we would think of him as arrogant or just wanting to hog the glory and/or pad his stats. In the interview room, our superstar, when asked about that last shot that so-and-so made, is supposed to deflect all the praise to that guy by saying things about what a great shooter the guy is (true or not) and how he had complete confidence in him to hit the shot.
We want a leader that is humble in both situations. Humble enough to take the blame but also humble enough to defer praise to others. It is what a leader honestly should be willing to do. The problem though for me is that I would prefer that it be a true humility, something that is a real part of their personality. Because forced humility really isn't humility at all.
Peace and Love y'all.
