Did not see the flagrant 2 call, but when down0-2, come on, Horford, leave no doubt, you're team needs you, especially without Korver. Don't know how it would have gone down with those two as games are played (strategically) different and are executed different with different personnel. But it would have to be their best chance with them, unless team effort goes up missing others (forced OT) or the coach normally played the wrong guys in wrong minutes or lineups). Some opportunities for those who stepped up might not have been there had those two not missed.
What did you mean by "is in"?Et Ty, LeBron? 14-37 shooting to get 37 points? 1 point per shot is in-LeBronish, but he's been shooting poorly anyway, not just for him. Rebounded from 0-10 and I liked the 18 rebounds and especially 13 assists.
I meant, un-Lebronish. Spellcheck for both tu and un. Tu means you in Latin and Spanish, yet it's changed to Yu? I don't have any friends I type with yu as their name, so I don't know how how that popped in the substitute words on spell check.
I meant "et tu" as in "et tu, Bruti" or whatever from Shakespeare's play on Caesar. I was saying LeBron turned in a Wesbrookesque game - a lot of points, but on a lot of shots. I don't like 37 on 37 shots. Westbrook was worse. Liked assists and rebounds, Noted he shot 14-27 after his 0-10 start. Also, noted he has shot poorly this year for him, more 30+ shot games making 10-13 or 25+ making under 10. But Cleveland does that to you, I guess. No Wade to open it up for you and the volume of shots go to you; perhaps, you are more tired. Still, I don't like average to poor shooting from LeBron.
I think his role has changed, but I don't know how much or how to quantify it.
I think his role has changed, but I don't know how much or how to quantify it.