I doubt Chris had 0-11 from threes. This would be expected of Ariza, actually it wasn't expected at all. Ariza and Harden had one of those nights, actually more than just 1 game. 2 games of extreme bad long range shooting. Harden upped his True Shooting through FTs, drawing fouls, now that is a technique but it won't bail you out in games every time.
Uh... what? You do realize that you can literally take almost any Superstar, put them on the Warriors, and they would win the championship fairly easily right? Take away Durant and put AD in there - easy ring. Take away Durant and put CP3 in there - easy ring. Take away Durant and put Kahwi in there - easy ring. Take away Durant and put Greek Freak in there - easy ring. Hell, you can even put Paul George or Jimmy Butler in there and it would be guaranteed ring. And obviously, take away Durant and put Lebron in there - they would easily win. Durant doesn't get to be the best just because he put 3 Allstars and a 73 win core "over the top." They won a championship without him, and were on their way to winning a second straight without a Draymond suspension. Are they better with him? Yes. Does that make him better than Lebron? Hell no.
Basketball doesn't work that way. OKC added Paul George and Carmelo Anthony and won 1 more game than previous year and lost in the first round just like last year. Based on your logic they should easily be better, but in reality just adding talent doesn't make you better. But sure, Paul George who went 2-16 for 5 points in an elimination game would be no drop off from Kevin Durant. Either way, my point isn't that they couldn't win some other elite player in Durant's spot, but that he is better in that role than anyone else would be. And that to me is far more important than being good at carrying mediocre roster because all NBA dynasties have multiple elite players and Durant is maybe the most portable player ever(doesn't need the ball on offense to be effective, can protect the rim and defend perimeter players etc.).
It does work that way - just not ALL the time. Sure, there are situations where systems and players don't maximize their potential, but the vast majority of the time, talent in their prime gets you wins. When the big three in Boston came together, you knew they were good for at least one ring. When the Heatles were formed, it would only a matter of time before they get a ring. When KD went to Golden State, anyone who wasn't delusional or lying knew they had the championship in the bag. I agree with you that KD is the most portable player in the league. But since when did portability make the best player? KD couldn't seal the deal with Westbrook, Ibaka, and Adams after being up 3-1. But now that he demoted himself as the ultimate complementary player to the Warriors, he's suddenly the best in the game? LOL, no.
Heatles could very easily end up ringless. They were unfavored in 2012 finals and rightfully so, Thunder was a better team and would probably win more often on a larger sample size. All Thunder role players underperformed while all Heat role players overperformed. That was an anomaly and what decided that series. Even thing like 2-3-2 format helped the Heat, they basically had HCA which was huge. Small thing like refs getting this call right could change the history of the NBA. In 2013 they got outscored in the finals and got all-time lucky in game 6 with all the series of events that happened. So no, I don't think you can say they were guaranteed to win a title eventually. Just like 2012-16 Thunder wasn't and failed to do so. Since when does portability makes the best player? It should always have mattered, it's subjective title that basically means who would you rather have on your team and there is reasonable argument that it's better to have KD on stacked team over LeBron(which is what matters more than who does better on a bad team).
Lol we wont be in game 7 of the finals of not for harden Stop with the fouls arent really fouls Give it a rest dwight
I'm not going to respond to fantasy scenarios, because it's a pointless endeavor. The Heat won two chips in four years. The Celtics won one. The KD Warriors won two. The overlying point is still consistent - the more talent (in their primes) you have on your team at the same time, the higher chance you have of winning a ring. That was my argument regarding the addition of Durant, or any other superstar in their prime. More often than not, it vastly increases your chances of winning. I'm not sure why you are trying to argue this point... I understand your point regarding failure of certain "superteams," but this is the minority. Portability is a consideration, though you're using it as the primary criteria. Furthermore, you have zero evidence that the Warriors wouldn't have equal success with Lebron instead of Durant. To use as evidence that Lebron was never on a team on the level of the Warriors makes no sense, given that neither was Durant before he went there.
Harden's better. And when Harden starts integrating mid-range and post-up to his game, it's all over.
A player that can carry mediocre players to the Finals in a weak Conference isn't necessarily a better player overall. You need multiple good players to win the championship. LeBron's ball dominant playstyle lends itself to that. But it is also teammate neutering. Durant however isn't and he enhances teammates. To use an extreme example to prove this point, compare Westbrook to Leonard. Westbrook can probably carry scrubs to the playoffs better than Leonard due to playstyle. But Leonard (at least pre-injury) is the better player.
As much as this board hates Durant and crucify him, I never said anything. I’m a huge KD fan regardless of his decision to go to GSW. I wouldn’t care what fans said if I was getting rings and still getting paid $25M+ a year. But KD will never be better than Lebron. Lebron is definitely top 5 all time. Maybe top 3. KD has THE two best shooters of all time (imo) that he’s teaming with.
So your saying durant would enhance this years 2018 Cavs team passed the Pacers , RAPS, & Celtics....... please. This is the same player who had to be “enhanced” with 3 other Allstars to win a ring.....
Swap Westbrook and Leonard in 2016-17 season. Thunder probably do worst. But it doesn't mean Westbrook is better.
When both are done, LeBron probably has the higher ranked overall career. But this thread is about right now. If all players were released and had to be redrafted but only on one year contracts, you'd pick Durant and Harden over LeBron to start this hypothetical 2018-19 season.
So you actually have no supporting evidence or data of any kind, and are just pulling s*** outta your ass. Got it.
I'm sorry but this makes no sense. If all players were released and had to be redrafted, then you do realize that talent would be completely distributed across all NBA teams, right? If that were the case, then you would have basically one superstar per team and a bunch of role players and scrubs. You yourself said Lebron is better at "carrying scrubs" to the Finals, and that KD is better at complementing all-time great teams. So, pray tell how you would gather 3 Allstars on one team AND draft KD.
