HurricaneKid wrote:KD will never go down as a great. You cannot be a top 4 player in the league and join a 73 win team with the two time league MVP and 3 other All NBA players and pretend you get to be in that conversation. The Warriors, between the RS and playoffs were +7.7/100 possessions without him on the floor. That was better than any team in the NBA.
Counting Championships is a fools' way of measuring greatness and this is completely different than what any other player has ever done.
I hope KD and GSW win the next 5 championships because of awful takes like this.
Baddy Chuck wrote:I want to win but I also love chaos.
midranger wrote:Everyone is so hung up on "they won 70 games" aspect. What is the allowable threshold for games won the year previous so that whoever is jumping ship is no longer a pussy? What if KD went to the Spurs or Cavs? Still a pussy? What if he went to kind of a mediocre team but orchestrated it such that 3 top-5 to top-10 players would all sign with that team at the same time? Still a pussy?
Where is the pussy/not pussy cut off?
I wouldn't have minded the Clippers. They would have had to trade Blake for him but OKC would have come out miles ahead on that deal. I think a CP3/KD/DJ with Redick, etc would have been a fun team to watch.
Cavs would have been awful too. Wherever the line is, its before the team with the best record in the history of the game.
fishnc wrote:If I had a gun with two bullets and I was in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden, and LeBron, I would shoot LeBron twice.
Ron Swanson wrote:Everyone wants to talk about that 55-win Bulls team without MJ and then conveniently ignores that they were a 34-31 record team when he came back in '95, then led them to finish 13-4 down the stretch to end the year....
As a youngster I sat outside the Bulls locker-room at Mecca with then coach Kevin Loughery. This was in the season before they drafted Jordan. If I recall Loughery was smoking a cigarette at the time as you could do those things back then.
I was the only person talking with him because no one else cared about the Bulls in those days as they were so bad. That Bulls franchise was a complete and utter mess. Similar to the Packers when Ron Wolf took over. Rod Thorn was the GM of those terrible 1978-1985 Bulls teams. The man in charge, now special advisor to LED.
It was an amazing job by Jordan to turn that thing around. Granted it was a team effort as some brilliant Jerry Krause trades were key. Nonetheless Jordan flipped a bottom three franchise to the top of the heap in seven years, culminating in the first Finals win over LA. That was an accomplishment Durant will never experience. I don't blame him for going to GSW, have no issue with it. But KD didn't fulfill the mission. Jordan did.
In depth discussions here - shorter stuff on Twitter
HurricaneKid wrote:KD will never go down as a great. You cannot be a top 4 player in the league and join a 73 win team with the two time league MVP and 3 other All NBA players and pretend you get to be in that conversation. The Warriors, between the RS and playoffs were +7.7/100 possessions without him on the floor. That was better than any team in the NBA.
Counting Championships is a fools' way of measuring greatness and this is completely different than what any other player has ever done.
I hope KD and GSW win the next 5 championships because of awful takes like this.
He's good enough to singlehandedly end the league by switching teams, but not good enough to be thought of as an all time great.
These are incongruent thoughts uttered by the same poster in this thread.
Still not sure why people hate KD so much. It seems really personal for you guys.
HurricaneKid wrote:KD will never go down as a great. You cannot be a top 4 player in the league and join a 73 win team with the two time league MVP and 3 other All NBA players and pretend you get to be in that conversation. The Warriors, between the RS and playoffs were +7.7/100 possessions without him on the floor. That was better than any team in the NBA.
Counting Championships is a fools' way of measuring greatness and this is completely different than what any other player has ever done.
I hope KD and GSW win the next 5 championships because of awful takes like this.
Hypothetically, KD reinjures his foot and is out for the year tomorrow.
Who is the favorite to win the NBA Title?
And what is such a bad take about the hard facts I brought up?
fishnc wrote:If I had a gun with two bullets and I was in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden, and LeBron, I would shoot LeBron twice.
midranger wrote:Everyone is so hung up on "they won 70 games" aspect. What is the allowable threshold for games won the year previous so that whoever is jumping ship is no longer a pussy? What if KD went to the Spurs or Cavs? Still a pussy? What if he went to kind of a mediocre team but orchestrated it such that 3 top-5 to top-10 players would all sign with that team at the same time? Still a pussy?
Where is the pussy/not pussy cut off?
I wouldn't have minded the Clippers. They would have had to trade Blake for him but OKC would have come out miles ahead on that deal. I think a CP3/KD/DJ with Redick, etc would have been a fun team to watch.
Cavs would have been awful too. Wherever the line is, its before the team with the best record in the history of the game.
So you don't have a strict pussy win criteria? Just somewhere between the 57 win 2016 Cavs (awful) and the 53 win 2016 Clippers (wouldn't have minded).
midranger wrote:Everyone is so hung up on "they won 70 games" aspect. What is the allowable threshold for games won the year previous so that whoever is jumping ship is no longer a pussy? What if KD went to the Spurs or Cavs? Still a pussy? What if he went to kind of a mediocre team but orchestrated it such that 3 top-5 to top-10 players would all sign with that team at the same time? Still a pussy?
Where is the pussy/not pussy cut off?
The pussy/not pussy cut off is joining/not joining the exact same team that you just lost to in the playoffs a month prior.
midranger wrote:Am I to dislike anyone who ever made an important life decision based, in part, on self interest or some other perceived benefit?
Let's say you were a top 5 doctor in the world. Where would you rather work? A level one trauma center in Chicago where your services are desperately in need, or work 20 hours a week as a dermatologist in San Francisco applying creams to minor rashes all day?
John Hammond apologists:
emunney wrote:
Ron Swanson wrote: 9 YEARS!? like any of that matters
HurricaneKid wrote:KD will never go down as a great. You cannot be a top 4 player in the league and join a 73 win team with the two time league MVP and 3 other All NBA players and pretend you get to be in that conversation. The Warriors, between the RS and playoffs were +7.7/100 possessions without him on the floor. That was better than any team in the NBA.
Counting Championships is a fools' way of measuring greatness and this is completely different than what any other player has ever done.
I hope KD and GSW win the next 5 championships because of awful takes like this.
He's good enough to singlehandedly end the league by switching teams, but not good enough to be thought of as an all time great.
These are incongruent thoughts uttered by the same poster in this thread.
Still not sure why people hate KD so much. It seems really personal for you guys.
Any 1st team All NBA player moving to a 73 win team would **** competitive balance. That's more wins than any team ever and the last MVP NOT on the team joins the team?
And by ATG I am talking about a top 10 of all time list.
As I mentioned above, if KD was out this season his team would be the CLEAR favorite to win the title. You simply cannot impact the game enough to validate a top 10 resume if you aren't necessary.
fishnc wrote:If I had a gun with two bullets and I was in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden, and LeBron, I would shoot LeBron twice.
Some interesting proposed changes coming to the lotto:
Reform to NBA draft lottery could be voted in before '17-18 season By Adrian Wojnarowski ESPN.com
The NBA is aggressively pursuing draft lottery reform that could be voted into legislation before the start of the 2017-18 season, league sources told ESPN.
Commissioner Adam Silver is a strong advocate to de-incentivize tanking by implementing lower odds on the NBA's worst teams to gain the top picks in the draft, league sources said.
Adam Silver Commissioner Adam Silver wants to get rid of teams' tanking to improve their chances in the draft lottery.
The proposed measures would also increase the chances of better teams making a jump up into the draft lottery. The NBA's 14 non-playoff teams compromise the league's annual draft lottery system.
If passed, no changes to the NBA lottery would be instituted until the 2019 draft, league sources said.
The NBA's Competition Committee, comprised of several general managers and coaches, is expected to vote at a meeting next week on sending a formal recommendation to the board of governors for final passage, league sources said.
The Competition Committee is given significant latitude to challenge and amend the league office's proposals, and thus, could recommend none, part, or all of a proposal for the league owners to vote upon at its late September board of governors meeting in New York.
Presently, the NBA team with the worst record can drop no lower than No. 4 from No. 1, but the NBA's currently proposed legislation could allow that team to drop from first to fifth in the lottery, league sources said. This would include a domino effect through the lottery, where the second-worst record presently dropping no lower than fourth, could fall to sixth. Then, the No. 3 team could drop as far as seven, and on down, league sources said.
Currently, the teams with the three worst records have an ascending chance of winning the No. 1 pick, including (No. 3) 15.6 percent, (No. 2) 19.9 percent and (No. 1) 25 percent.
The NBA's proposal would flatten those odds, and give the three teams with the worst record the same percentage of earning the No. 1 overall pick, league sources said. Now, the worst record to the fifth-worst record has a gap of 25 percent to 8.8 percent, but new legislation would tighten that difference significantly, league sources said.
For example, the fifth-worst team would only have a few percentage points less than those teams with newly equal odds among the three worst teams, league sources said.
At the apex of the Philadelphia 76ers tanking saga, the NBA's board of governors voted down a somewhat more liberal proposal on lottery reform in 2014.
Another idea born out of the Competition Committee itself that could gather support, league sources said: No team can pick in the top three of the draft in consecutive years. For example, if Minnesota wins the No. 1 pick and drafts Karl-Anthony Towns, it can pick no higher than No. 4 in the next lottery. For now, that idea is outside of the league office's proposal but is expected to be considered in the upcoming committee meeting, sources said.
The Competition Committee is also finalizing its recommendations to the board of governors on the league's new resting plan, which would level punishment on teams for sitting out key players in nationally televised games, or multiple key players in road games, league sources said. The commissioner's office has pushed a plan of minimizing, if not eliminating, the intentional resting of players in nationally televised games.
Many NBA executives believe those new measures will effectively impact the perception of the tanking issue, what with the incentivizing of teams to play healthy starters down the stretch of the season. Many teams believe that tanking is no longer an issue in the league, and that the fear of other teams mimicking the 76ers' process has been unwarranted.
There is some fear among small-market teams that lottery reform will make it even harder for them to obtain star-level players through the draft, especially because of a pervading belief that it has become increasingly hard to do so through free agency and trades. Teams believe that the process of trading for star players has become more difficult, with agents and players warning that they'll leave come free agency and will never consider re-signing with those teams.
HurricaneKid wrote:KD will never go down as a great. You cannot be a top 4 player in the league and join a 73 win team with the two time league MVP and 3 other All NBA players and pretend you get to be in that conversation. The Warriors, between the RS and playoffs were +7.7/100 possessions without him on the floor. That was better than any team in the NBA.
Counting Championships is a fools' way of measuring greatness and this is completely different than what any other player has ever done.
I hope KD and GSW win the next 5 championships because of awful takes like this.
Hypothetically, KD reinjures his foot and is out for the year tomorrow.
Who is the favorite to win the NBA Title?
And what is such a bad take about the hard facts I brought up?
You truly believe GSW can get out of the west and then beat Lebron with a likely broken down Iguodala, McCaw, and Casspi playing heavy minutes at the 3?
Durant was already arguably on trajectory to go down as a top 10-20 player. These titles will just reaffirm that by the end of his career. Specially if he's winning more MVPs.
Baddy Chuck wrote:I want to win but I also love chaos.
midranger wrote:Everyone is so hung up on "they won 70 games" aspect. What is the allowable threshold for games won the year previous so that whoever is jumping ship is no longer a pussy? What if KD went to the Spurs or Cavs? Still a pussy? What if he went to kind of a mediocre team but orchestrated it such that 3 top-5 to top-10 players would all sign with that team at the same time? Still a pussy?
Where is the pussy/not pussy cut off?
I wouldn't have minded the Clippers. They would have had to trade Blake for him but OKC would have come out miles ahead on that deal. I think a CP3/KD/DJ with Redick, etc would have been a fun team to watch.
Cavs would have been awful too. Wherever the line is, its before the team with the best record in the history of the game.
So you don't have a strict pussy win criteria? Just somewhere between the 57 win 2016 Cavs (awful) and the 53 win 2016 Clippers (wouldn't have minded).
This makes total sense.
More like somewhere between defending Champions and a team that hasn't ever made it out of the 2nd round.
fishnc wrote:If I had a gun with two bullets and I was in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden, and LeBron, I would shoot LeBron twice.
midranger wrote:Am I to dislike anyone who ever made an important life decision based, in part, on self interest or some other perceived benefit?
Let's say you were a top 5 doctor in the world. Where would you rather work? A level one trauma center in Chicago where your services are desperately in need, or work 20 hours a week as a dermatologist in San Francisco applying creams to minor rashes all day?
If the trauma center in Chicago doesn't have an X-ray machine or scalpels or nurses, I'm probably looking for a spot that does.
I'm not sure why people pretend that they would have gone to the Nets in his situation. Because you know, balls. It's ridiculous.
midranger wrote:Everyone is so hung up on "they won 70 games" aspect. What is the allowable threshold for games won the year previous so that whoever is jumping ship is no longer a pussy? What if KD went to the Spurs or Cavs? Still a pussy? What if he went to kind of a mediocre team but orchestrated it such that 3 top-5 to top-10 players would all sign with that team at the same time? Still a pussy?
Where is the pussy/not pussy cut off?
The pussy/not pussy cut off is joining/not joining the exact same team that you just lost to in the playoffs a month prior.
So LaMarcus Aldridge isn't a pussy because he joined the Spurs juggernaut two years after they knocked out the Blazers.
Baddy Chuck wrote:I want to win but I also love chaos.
blazza18 wrote: I hope KD and GSW win the next 5 championships because of awful takes like this.
Hypothetically, KD reinjures his foot and is out for the year tomorrow.
Who is the favorite to win the NBA Title?
And what is such a bad take about the hard facts I brought up?
You truly believe GSW can get out of the west and then beat Lebron with a likely broken down Iguodala, McCaw, and Casspi playing heavy minutes at the 3?
Durant was already arguably on trajectory to go down as a top 10-20 player. These titles will just reaffirm that by the end of his career. Specially if he's winning more MVPs.
Abso****inglutely.
I don't think its even debatable.
Titles won with a team that was the best in the league before him and the best in the league without him aren't particularly impressive to me.
I'm fine with him @10-20.
And to the Dr analogy, a gifted Dr moving to a Beverly Hills office so he could hobnob with the richest celebrities is an objective waste of talent and will cost lives. We will never again get to see KD at his basketball pinnacle because he made this decision.
fishnc wrote:If I had a gun with two bullets and I was in a room with Hitler, Bin Laden, and LeBron, I would shoot LeBron twice.
midranger wrote:Am I to dislike anyone who ever made an important life decision based, in part, on self interest or some other perceived benefit?
Let's say you were a top 5 doctor in the world. Where would you rather work? A level one trauma center in Chicago where your services are desperately in need, or work 20 hours a week as a dermatologist in San Francisco applying creams to minor rashes all day?
If the trauma center in Chicago doesn't have an X-ray machine or scalpels or nurses, I'm probably looking for a spot that does.
I'm not sure why people pretend that they would have gone to the Nets in his situation. Because you know, balls. It's ridiculous.
Because of the unprecedented cap spike Durant could have gone anywhere. In my example, you could have picked from any number of good level 1 trauma centers around the country. Instead Durant choose to put rash cream on Mark Zuckerburg's butt.
John Hammond apologists:
emunney wrote:
Ron Swanson wrote: 9 YEARS!? like any of that matters
HurricaneKid wrote: I didn't realize the Bulls had won 140 games the two years he was gone PLUS 31 playoff games with the two time reigning MVP and 3 All NBA players.
I guess my memory is getting bad.
I don't know where I said that. Obviously I know it's not an apples to apples. But the point is that Bulls team was just as loaded vs the rest of the league as this GSW team is now and it didn't ruin the league and no one diminishes MJs last 3 titles because of it. Since he left they'd added Kukoc and Harper to replace him, then adds himself and Rodman back in. Yea, not apples to apples but it's more similar than people would ever admit. And of course I know the biggest difference is that the Bulls were already his team before, but I don't think he looked at 96 season and said we're too good, we shouldn't add Rodman too that wouldn't be fair. No, they did all they could to be as good as they possibly could. That team was just as stacked as GSW.
This is categorically indefensible. A 55 win team that won 1 playoff series is light years from a team that AVERAGED 70 wins over a two year period and had about 10 things go wrong in the playoffs and in G7 to somehow end up losing the game and series (unanimous MVP getting hurt in the playoffs, top 5 RAPM player getting suspended for G5 at home, Curry missing his last 5 shots of G7, the LeBron chase down block, Kyrie hitting that 3, and on and on). They would have been anointed as the greatest team ever and instead, KD joined them.
Pop was thrilled to be rid of Rodman and no one wanted him and his antics. Comparing Rodman/Kukoc/Pip to Dray/Klay/Curry is just awful. Pip was the only All-Star and the only All NBA selection for the Bulls. Curry was the first ever unanimous MVP, Dray was 2nd team All NBA and Klay was 3rd team All NBA. All three were obviously All-Stars.
Its objectively a wildly irresponsible comparison. Then again, there aren't ANY comparisons that AREN'T wildly irresponsible; because no great player has ever done what KD did.
Like I said, I know it's exactly the same and was being dramatic to prove the point. But I also think you're dismissing it way too quickly and missing the real points trying to be made.
First, for team comparison stuff you bring up. how can people say 96 team was the best ever and better than current GSW, but then also say that it's not the same because GSW was so much better than the Bulls? Second, I was saying that vs the rest of the league that team was just as loaded if not moreso, and I'd say them winning 72 games and 3 titles without being even challenged pretty much proves that. That's the real point I'm getting at, that team was just as unfair vs the rest of the league and no one complained and no one diminishes MJ for it. So these guys shouldn't be either. And no one at the time said that this team was unfair and tried to balance it out somehow, they made themselves as good as they could be under the rules at the time, just like GSW did.
The personal KD/MJ stuff yea of course isn't that close a comparison due to it already being his team already. But no one called that team pussies or not competitors because they were stacked. They became the best they could and added Rodman anyway and none of them said 'guys don't you think we should try to weaken ourselves a bit.' Just like GSW has done all they could and when they were meeting no one said, man if we get KD we'll be too good, we should probably all walk away as that's bs.
But to simplify a touch, MJ looking at himself added to the 96 team knew that team would be unbeatable once he was on it. KD knew the same thing when he did this move. I even think MJ was playing on one year contracts at the time too if I remember right. I don't think MJ was a pussy or did anything wrong, nor do I think GSW/KD are or did.
Kevin Durant is an all-time great player, but his hierarchy on that all-time list is capped given the situation he put himself in. I don't see how you could disagree with that no matter how big of a KD fan you are. Like PP said, there's something to be said about a player who takes a franchise to the ultimate heights/achievements in the form of championship success. It's expectations vs. reward aspect. It's doing something for the fans that supported you.
KD left OKC and his teammate won the MVP. KD joined another MVP on a 70-win championship favorite. He's been constantly surrounded by elite, MVP talent throughout his entire career. It just seems to me that his ardent defenders are more praising him as a business man and an opportunist rather than as an athlete who shoulders expectations for a franchise. If you don't see how that kinda muddies the waters of how people perceive the specific extent of his overall "greatness", then I don't know what to tell you.
Nowak008 wrote: Let's say you were a top 5 doctor in the world. Where would you rather work? A level one trauma center in Chicago where your services are desperately in need, or work 20 hours a week as a dermatologist in San Francisco applying creams to minor rashes all day?
If the trauma center in Chicago doesn't have an X-ray machine or scalpels or nurses, I'm probably looking for a spot that does.
I'm not sure why people pretend that they would have gone to the Nets in his situation. Because you know, balls. It's ridiculous.
Because of the unprecedented cap spike Durant could have gone anywhere. In my example, you could have picked from any number of good level 1 trauma centers around the country. Instead Durant choose to put rash cream on Mark Zuckerburg's butt.
He choose to go to the situation that best accommodated his professional goals, and assuming those goals were to win a championship, play under a great coach rather than Scotty brooks, play for an ownership group that wouldn't trade 2 of his 3 best teammates for magic beans to save a buck, and play with anyone other than Russell Westbrook... mission accomplished.
midranger wrote:Everyone is so hung up on "they won 70 games" aspect. What is the allowable threshold for games won the year previous so that whoever is jumping ship is no longer a pussy? What if KD went to the Spurs or Cavs? Still a pussy? What if he went to kind of a mediocre team but orchestrated it such that 3 top-5 to top-10 players would all sign with that team at the same time? Still a pussy?
Where is the pussy/not pussy cut off?
The pussy/not pussy cut off is joining/not joining the exact same team that you just lost to in the playoffs a month prior.
So LaMarcus Aldridge isn't a pussy because he joined the Spurs juggernaut two years after they knocked out the Blazers.
Considering the circumstances aren't the same at all, yeah, I'd say so. But if someone does think he's a pussy for it I can at least see why and am not going to act dumbfounded that someone could think that way. Aldridge just isn't close to the caliber of player Durant is and what he does doesn't warrant much discussion. I'm not sure how a team that lost in the first round is a juggernaut either.
