JulesWinnfield wrote:Lebron *created* a "super team", which could only be labeled as such because he joined them (and it really wasn't a super team, not when one guy leads you in scoring, rebounding and assists and is your best defender to boot). Durant hopped on to a super team. There is a clear distinction here that is unfathomably lost on many. It has to be willful ignorance, because I don't see how people can plainly miss the distinction otherwise
What Lebron did was far more ambitious than what Durant has done. Miami only had 2 players under contract entering that offseason and one was Joel Anthony. Miami was a notion, an empty plot of land. A team whipped up overnight out of thin air that would never be associated with the word "super" were it not for his presence. Golden State is a ready made juggernaut, a runaway train that Durant hitched a ride onto. You can't keep drawing these comparisons with a straight face
I'm not sure what it is in this day and age where dissenting opinions are automatically invalid. A difference of perspective isn't allowed because not agreeing is some form of internal or external deception.
Here's my perspective:
1) LeBron left a team that won 61 games and was the first seed. Durant left a team with 55 wins and a third seed. While you can argue that Durant's teammates looked better on paper (and I would concur), the competition was tougher. To me, that's a wash.
2) The early 2010 championship odds (LeBron's last season) had the Cavs at 9:2; the early 2016 championship odds had the Thunder at 5:1. Both were considered legit contenders but not favorites; again, I see it as a wash.
3) LeBron spent 7 years with the Cavs and left when he was 25. Durant spent 9 seasons with the Thunder and left at age 27. Durant stuck around longer.
3) After the Big 3 joined, the preseason favorite for the 2011 NBA championship was Miami, with 6:5 odds. The Warriors, after getting Durant, are 4:5 favorites. Slight edge to the Warriors.
So, basically, LeBron, the reigning MVP and leader of a #1 seed, went to another team which instantly became heavy title favorites. I understand that Miami was building a roster from scratch but, in the 2011 time frame, a team with Bosh, Wade and James were
clearly and
instantly viewed as the best team in the NBA, regardless of who else they had. While the whole, "Not 1... not 2..." thing was partially playing to the crowd, I certainly believed they'd win a lot of championships together and pretty much everyone else did, too. In retrospect, it took longer for the team to jell than anyone understood but that is hindsight.
So, sure, Durant is joining a Warriors that had a much better previous season, they are also losing 2 of their 5 starters and most of their bench. Durant basically joined Curry, Green, Thompson, Iguodala and Livingston. Is it that
radically different than joining Wade and Bosh in, quite frankly, a less competitive NBA environment? The situations seem extremely similar to me.
Rather than immediately dismiss anyone who doesn't see things your way, why not actually explain what is so different? I can understand someone who hates both LeBron and Durant but liking one while despising the other is puzzling to me.
“I pretty much played the last three games with a broken hand,” James said as he sat there with a softcast on the right hand.
— Mags
K. 
, but I'd at least like for them to "show their faces" so to speak. I mean hell, if they're that passionate about defending them and KD, you'd at least expect them to acknowledge them as their favorite team ... 
