It is a well-known fact that there is some bad blood between LeBron James and Stephen A. Smith. Although the ESPN analyst has notoriously been critical of James’ actions and performances, he has been equally fair in dishing out praise where it has been deserved.
Stephen A. Smith was among the many analysts to state that the Los Angeles Lakers needed to bring LeBron James back if they wished to contend for the title. Now, in light of James’ confirmed departure from L.A., Smith tore into the Lakers for disrespecting him in his final years while speaking on “The Stephen A. Smith Show.”
“You’re a superstar in this league, getting paid $50 million. Luka comes in, and they immediately hand him the franchise, which is no crime. He feels dismissed and disrespected to some degree,” Smith began. “Then you ask him to be a third option, deferring to Austin Reaves.”
Smith touched on one of the key adjustments the Lakers made last season. With LeBron James sidelined for the first 14 games of the campaign, L.A.’s offense flourished with Luka Doncic and Austin Reaves running the show.
After James returned, he embraced his role as a key offensive contributor. But later in the season, the 41-year-old was asked to step back, allowing the backcourt duo to take over the offense. While the superstar shone even as a third option, it was clear that many were against this.
“Then after you do all of that, you’re talking about him taking anywhere from a $30 to a $40 million pay cut,” Smith continued. “Listen, we can’t just look at somebody and say, ‘Oh, they’re a mercenary, and they’re just going to the highest bid.’ That’s not what this is. Y’all got to remember. The Chicago Bulls underpaid Michael Jordan for years. And then the last two years of his career in Chicago, he got $30 million and $33 million, respectively.”
The parallel drawn between LeBron James and Michael Jordan is quite intriguing. Given how the league operated in the past, it was apparent that even a superstar like Jordan was underpaid. However, in the final years of his tenure with the Bulls, Chicago opted to compensate him fairly. To that, Smith added:
“You even had people around the league like Pat Riley and others saying that it should be entertained, that every team should chip in to pay Michael Jordan, and that cap constraints shouldn’t apply to him. Because he’s meant so much to the financial backbone of the league, everybody should play a role in paying Michael Jordan because he helped get everybody paid.”
As Smith mentioned, Michael Jordan was responsible for growing the NBA’s global popularity. With more revenue each year, virtually everyone benefited from Jordan as a brand. Although the analyst admitted that LeBron James hadn’t had the same impact, considering what he has done for the league, asking him to take a substantial pay cut did not seem justified.
For the most part, Smith’s argument seems valid. Despite being 41, James’ performance last season was noteworthy, as he averaged 20.9 points, 6.1 rebounds, and 7.2 assists per game. In every sense, the superstar forward was still deserving of a max contract purely based on his stats. Unfortunately, the Lakers’ plans to build the roster to suit Luka Doncic would not have aligned with this approach.
In light of the Lakers’ latest roster moves, it can be argued that parting with LeBron James was the right decision. To some extent, it also favors the 41-year-old, as he now enjoys the flexibility to decide his next landing spot.
With reports indicating that LeBron James’ decision concerning his next team will not be “financially driven,” several emerge as potential suitors. Still, with title contention remaining a priority, only a handful have a legitimate shot at signing the four-time NBA champion.
