Kevin, Kyrie, and the Myth of Stardom

When Kevin Love dislocated his shoulder in Cleveland's first round sweep of the Boston Celtics, it was viewed as a devastating blow that would dampen the Cavaliers playoff run. They proceeded to take down Bulls in round two in a casual six games.

When Kyrie Irving began having knee issues against Atlanta, it was assumed that the Hawks offense would be overwhelming. Cleveland swept the Hawks in four uneven games.

Fast forward to the Finals, after losing Game 1, it was announced that Kyrie broke his kneecap and would miss the remainder of the Finals. A sweep seemed inevitable. Of course, the Cavaliers won the next two games, and gave the Warriors a real shock before going down in Game 6.

The story on the 2014-2015 Cavaliers changed many times, mostly due to injuries, but one thing remained: LeBron. 

Sure, we perceived Kevin Love and Kyrie Irving as superstars, but they probably don't fit that bill. Like the great American philosopher, Meek Mill, once stated "there's levels to this".

Yes, Love and Kyrie have big contracts, put up nice stats, and have made the All-Star game, but they aren't the franchise cornerstones they were thought to be. Too often, we crown flashy players before they achieve anything really worthy of note. The word star is used carelessly, and given prematurely to players that have never been tested in pressure situations.

Enter LeBron. The playoff field may've been weakened by injury, but he showed that he is worthy of the title superstar. With his secondary and tertiary scoring options sidelined, LeBron continued to be the primary ballhandler, scorer, post presence, and emotional leader. Win or loss, he did a bit of everything. Losing him to injury would've been tragic.

The same couldn't be said of Love and Irving. Thanks to relative unknowns, Tristan Thompson and Matthew Dellavedova, they were replaceable.