Post#58 » by Ainosterhaspie » Mon Sep 23, 2019 6:47 pm
Part of the issue is you keep changing what you're talking about so the logic thread is getting broken.
You initially made a claim that the 2011 Heat minus LeBron (not replacing LeBron with Kawhi) would have won the title. That's a fairly audacious claim so I asked about it in case I was misunderstanding when you meant that the Heat with Kawhi in place of LeBron would win. You confirmed that yes you truly believed that the Heat win simply by removing LeBron because Bosh was better than '06 Shaq. (As an aside, it should be noted here that if the Heat win the title without James or Kawhi, it's hardly impressive that Kawhi could win by joining a team that would win without him.)
At that point I respond by arguing that, no the 2011 Heat don't win the title by dropping James and probably don't even make the finals. You then quote that response and pivot into talking about what the Heat would do with the addition of Kawhi which has no relevance to the point at hand. That makes the discussion fall apart.
So now there is a new train of thought, i.e. how would the Heat do with Kawhii plugged in in place of James., which is not connected to the previous one, i.e. his would the Heat do if James were removed. (The new train of thought is what the OP is about, but not what we were talking about in the posts that led up to you saying "[let's] make Wade the sidekick" to Kawhi.)
I responed to your assertion that 2011 Wade would be the sidekick by twice arguing that he would not accept a sidekick role to any version of Kawhi. I did not speak to whether the pairing would win the 2011 finals.
Datash echos my claim that Wade isn't sidekicking for Kawhi and agrees with you that the Wade/Kawhi pairing probably beats the Mavericks. For some reason you quote that and claim people are using the 1a/1b thing as an excuse for LeBron.
I reply by stating that no one is making that claim and that if they did it would be a wrong claim to make. You are confused by this because your train of though isn't rational and you aren't paying attention to the arguments being made. You are making connections that aren't there, so when someone calls out one of the premises you use to reach a conclusion for being flawed, you mistakenly believe that the conclusion is being attacked. You conclusion may be correct, but your support for it isn't.
In other words, Datash and I aren't saying the Heat couldn't beat the Mavericks if Kawhi replaced James, we do however disagree with claims you make in support of that conclusion.
Only 7 Players in NBA history have 21,000 points, 5,750 assists and 5,750 rebounds. LeBron has double those numbers.