Still Not Buying the LeBron-to-Euro Business

Earl Boykins, now with Italy. Kindly proceed with your life as originally planned.

Speaking of Euro-defection, I'm not backing down from my assertion that LeBron won't leave America. This despite Chris Broussard's report—from someone on the inside—that the King would consider Europe for the $50 million a year. According to Broussard, this would be "to popularize the game and himself overseas," which seems more than a little unnecessary.

Reasonable men have spoken: Matt Watson proposes LeBron stay two years, then return to the NBA as a 27 year-old free agent. In his prime, having made like four times what he could've made stateside. Ziller likens it to Jordan's baseball experiment:

Let us not forget (like we could) Michael Jordan left in the NBA in the prime of his career to play minor league baseball, which is a huge stride different than the #2 basketball league in the world. There are differences, yes: Jordan had just won three titles, baseball was a connection to his father. But the greatest star in the world left the NBA once, and it could happen again.

No offense to Zillz, but those three titles are absolutely key to the story. When Jordan left, he had already accomplished more in basketball than most immortals. LeBron, on the other hand, has never been on a top-flight team, been coached by a genius, or ever had a real shot at a ring. Broussard claims that LeBron wouldn't see Europe as the "minor leagues," but sorry, there's no way he feels the same way about a EuroLeague crown as he would the Larry O'Brien. Is James such a businessman that he's really just about his money and fame? Or, more accurately, have we gotten so cynical that we'd assume that?

When 2010 rolls around, and Bron Bron has only one MVP and an abortive Finals trip to his name, we'll see if he wants to sacrifice two years of his prime just to build his brand.

This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.