When Pat Riley speaks, the world listens.

When the world listens, hot takes start flying.

Heat President Pat Riley has found himself at the center of controversy, and it – naturally – centered on LeBron James. The story stems from a question posed by a reporter at the season end press conference about whether this summer’s roster management would be easier than last summer, considering that all the major pieces seem to be returning for another season, by taking a not-so-subtle shot at LeBron – “No more smiling faces with hidden agendas”, as he put it.

So when ESPN’s Brian Windhorst heard this, he rose from the bucket of sweat that LeBron had left behind to pinch himself at the opportunity to give his hot take on the matter. And naturally he finds a way to make Riley seem like a bitter old man that is also a hypocrite that has left behind a trail of broken players in his wake.

Could you say that Riley is bitter about the way things ended with LeBron in Miami? Yeah, you could. When one loses out on a historically great dynasty, you probably could understand if there would be sour grapes. But let’s calm down on the bitterness angle, Windy, considering it’s the only time Riley has vented any kind of frustration since last July. Besides, it’s not like Riley wrote a scathing letter that demeaned LeBron as a person, then left it posted on the team’s website for four years, all because they simply lost their cash cow. No one would be that ridiculous.

Windhorst also called Riley “ruthless”, because of the way he goes about building contenders, highlighting the summer of 2010 and how the Heat’s Big Three came and how the Cavaliers weren’t capable of matching that. Although one can question how ruthless someone has to be to create cap space within the confines of the rules to bring together three stars, while having each of them sacrifice stats and money to achieve a common goal. Not quite Gordon Gekko, if you ask me, but what do I know? You want to talk about ruthless? Ask the guy who bailed on his home state by announcing his decision to do so on national television.

Yes, Riley forced his way out of New York in a play for power, but once he realized he wasn’t getting it at Madison Square Garden, he decided to go somewhere he could get that power.

(Sound familiar?)

The portion of the story Windhorst ignores is that Riley gave the Knicks every opportunity to keep him, by asking for a five-year, $25 million deal, with control of basketball operations, and a percentage of ownership. This happened because he told them. The Knicks declined and came back with a five-year, $15 million deal, not budging from that offer. That’s a tough pill for a man that helped bring a proud franchise its most success in 20 years.

So Riley quit – by fax machine, carrier pigeon, smoke signal, or “Dear John” letter – and left to Miami, where Micky Arison was more than happy to give the keys to his franchise to the most successful coach in the decade prior.

The one thing Windhorst’s column made clear is that basketball, like most professional sports, is a business, one that Riley and LeBron have excelled at mastering, to one degree or another. But to question Riley’s loyalty to his players is an insult that caused Heat Twitter to rain fire on Windhorst’s timeline. Yet it’s something that he was both right and wrong about.

Tim Hardaway was in fact traded in 2001, following his own declining skills, as well as Riley’s desire to take his team in a different direction.

Alonzo Mourning – who was not traded, contrary to Windhorst’s crack research skills – was allowed to go to the Nets. What the story is leaving out is that Mourning sat out the last season of his contract because of his ongoing battle with kidney issues, but was never waived or traded in a way to clear cap space that could have helped the Heat. Riley stuck with him, even when it seemed he wouldn’t contribute at a high level. Mourning refused (as a free agent) to take a minimum salary offer from the Heat, and couldn’t risk tying up money on a player with major health concerns.

Front office personal do this on every team, across every sport; sometimes, you just have to move on, no matter how much it hurts to do so. The Green Bay Packers traded Brett Favre because they wanted to move on to Aaron Rodgers. The Indianapolis Colts waived Peyton Manning, so they could bring in Andrew Luck. Willie Mays, Babe Ruth (Yankees traded him to the Boston Braves), and Hank Aaron were all cast away from their teams because perception was that their time was coming to an end.

Much in the same way LeBron chose to leave Cleveland and Miami, it’s a business. You might not like it, but players have a choice on where they go – whether it’s following the money or titles, it’s their call and they can do so how they seem fit. Was it pretty how LeBron left? No, but c’est la vie.

The issue I’ve had with Riley is that sometimes he can be too loyal to his guys. For all the talk about how Chris Bosh should buy LeBron a drink for getting him a max deal – ignoring the fact that the Rockets were also offering the max, but stupidity overcomes logic – the person who should really be thanking him is Chris Andersen. Birdman was the recipient of a two-year, $10 million deal because the Cavaliers had interest in bringing him on board, following Mike Miller and James Jones to Cleveland, in LeBron’s attempt to take the better qualities of the Heat’s culture up north. Riley, probably not wanting to lose another cog from his machine, overpaid the 36-year old center who now struggles to stay both healthy and productive to stay in Miami. Sure, Andersen said he was never interested in Cleveland, but he also had 10 million reasons not to be.

Then there’s Mario Chalmers, already an inconsistent player entering this season, being brought back on a two-year, $8.3 million deal, yet with no idea what his role actually would actually be. With the drafting of Shabazz Napier, coupled with the fact the Heat didn’t pick up a backup shooting guard to spell Dwyane Wade, Chalmers got shifted to that spot, even if he struggles more on offense than he doesn’t.

Udonis Haslem himself is by definition a “Heat Lifer”, a team co-captain for the better part of his career, is someone Riley hasn’t parted ways with. Yes, he was subject of trade rumors over the years – ESPNs Michael Wallace even interviewed Haslem about it in 2011, while Bleacher Report’s Ethan Skolnick even stated on Twitter that it was talked about. Of course, nothing ever came of it. As a part to help rebuild the Heat this past summer, Haslem opted out of his deal that would have paid him a little over $4 million, to sign a two-year, $5.5 million contract.

My point? All three of those deals were signed after LeBron left. That’s roughly $12 million on three players whose usefulness can be questioned who will be under contract this season. That’s $12 million that could be used elsewhere, but Riley had his reasons to stay with them. I mean, this is the same guy that won’t let Michael Beasley go away!

I don’t fault Riley for his statement, nor do I think less of him if he does harbor ill-feeling towards LeBron after what went down. But I also don’t fault LeBron for the way things ended, even if I don’t agree with how he handled it. They both created something special the last four years, but now it’s time to close that chapter of the story. The Cavaliers are in the midst of a playoff run, while the Heat could end up keeping their lottery pick and using it to acquire a key asset that they might not have had the flexibility to add because of their cap situation.

The moral of the story: life goes on. For Riley, the Heat fans, and LeBron, it’s time to continue moving forward.