Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Options

Indiana's Done ...

2»

Comments

  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment blah

    George is still young. If he keeps developing, he can be a top 10 player. His offensive game should keep improving. He's a damn good player. It's pretty hard to make All NBA at forward with LeBron and Durant there.

    Despite what DNCFS thinks there is a reason why three out of 23 teams have won a title without a first team all NBA player. George isn't that.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    edited May 2014

    dnc said:

    dnc said:

    Tequilla said:

    Right now George is a 3rd team all NBA kind of player. I think he can get up to a 2nd team all NBA player. I don't think he's a future 1st team player.

    You CAN win without a 1st team player if you surround yourself with a great supporting cast. That was what Indiana tried to do here. That's blown up in smoke.

    They haven't announced the 1st - 3rd teams this year, I'd be surprised if anybody from San Antonio makes it. If so, it will be Parker as a 3rd team member.

    Do you realize since 1991 only THREE teams have ever won an NBA title without a first team player? THREE teams in 23 seasons.

    The teams? 2011 Dallas which had Dirk a former MVP, 2004 Pistons, and 1995 Houston which had Olajuwon who was a top 5 player coming off an MVP year prior plus had Drexler.

    So three times out of the last 23 champions is a nice 13%. Sure it CAN happen but it's very unlikely. Two of those teams also had a former MVP as well who was easily the best player in that particular postseason.
    This is where I have to interject correlation does not equal causation. It's quite possible that championship caliber teams get their best player recognized on such teams rather than the other way around. I don't believe that All NBA always = best 5 players in the league. Subjective awards usually suck.

    I do think you need a top 10 caliber player, at the very least, to win an NBA championship.
    Yes Lebron, Kobe, Garnett, Duncan, Shaq, Jordan were all products of being on recognized because they were on great teams.

    Perhaps you should sit this discussion out........
    Impressive list. For the most part those were all top 3 guys in the league which would make the argument stronger IMO.

    The exception is Garnett. I don't think KG was a top 5 player in 2008. Boston won anyway, because they had 3 top 20 guys in Garnett, Pierce and Allen (and probably two top 10 guys in Garnett in Pierce).
    KG was amazing that year defensively. He was considered a top 5 player in the NBA at that point as well. Also posted a 25 PER which was higher than Duncan and Dirk that year so his All-NBA was earned.

    Also you picked out one questionable guy in the 20 teams who won a title with a first team all league. IMO he wasn't even questionable. I'm dying to hear of an example where an NBA champion got a bullshit first team all NBA player to complete my stat.

    Not surprised you point out one tiny little difference and make a point. Stick to mocking Doogman and let those who actually know the NBA discuss it. This obviously isn't your wheelhouse.
    He was 10th in win shares. Yes, he had a nice PER. Whether he was actually top 5 in the league that year is highly debatable. I would have gone with Dirk or Duncan ahead of him.

    I acknowledged the rest of the list was impressive.

    Anyway, you continue to miss my point. My point is not that your stat is inaccurate, my point is that using subjective awards to prove anything is FS. Your bigger point that you need a great player to win an NBA title is spot on. Whether that player happens to make first team All NBA or not is inconsequential.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment blah
    dnc said:

    dnc said:

    dnc said:

    Tequilla said:

    Right now George is a 3rd team all NBA kind of player. I think he can get up to a 2nd team all NBA player. I don't think he's a future 1st team player.

    You CAN win without a 1st team player if you surround yourself with a great supporting cast. That was what Indiana tried to do here. That's blown up in smoke.

    They haven't announced the 1st - 3rd teams this year, I'd be surprised if anybody from San Antonio makes it. If so, it will be Parker as a 3rd team member.

    Do you realize since 1991 only THREE teams have ever won an NBA title without a first team player? THREE teams in 23 seasons.

    The teams? 2011 Dallas which had Dirk a former MVP, 2004 Pistons, and 1995 Houston which had Olajuwon who was a top 5 player coming off an MVP year prior plus had Drexler.

    So three times out of the last 23 champions is a nice 13%. Sure it CAN happen but it's very unlikely. Two of those teams also had a former MVP as well who was easily the best player in that particular postseason.
    This is where I have to interject correlation does not equal causation. It's quite possible that championship caliber teams get their best player recognized on such teams rather than the other way around. I don't believe that All NBA always = best 5 players in the league. Subjective awards usually suck.

    I do think you need a top 10 caliber player, at the very least, to win an NBA championship.
    Yes Lebron, Kobe, Garnett, Duncan, Shaq, Jordan were all products of being on recognized because they were on great teams.

    Perhaps you should sit this discussion out........
    Impressive list. For the most part those were all top 3 guys in the league which would make the argument stronger IMO.

    The exception is Garnett. I don't think KG was a top 5 player in 2008. Boston won anyway, because they had 3 top 20 guys in Garnett, Pierce and Allen (and probably two top 10 guys in Garnett in Pierce).
    KG was amazing that year defensively. He was considered a top 5 player in the NBA at that point as well. Also posted a 25 PER which was higher than Duncan and Dirk that year so his All-NBA was earned.

    Also you picked out one questionable guy in the 20 teams who won a title with a first team all league. IMO he wasn't even questionable. I'm dying to hear of an example where an NBA champion got a bullshit first team all NBA player to complete my stat.

    Not surprised you point out one tiny little difference and make a point. Stick to mocking Doogman and let those who actually know the NBA discuss it. This obviously isn't your wheelhouse.
    He was 10th in win shares and 10th in VORP. Yes, he had a nice PER. Whether he was actually top 5 in the league that year is highly debatable.

    I acknowledged the rest of the list was impressive.

    I already gave you your example of an NBA champion who got a bullshit first team All NBA player.

    Anyway, you continue to miss my point. My point is not that your stat is inaccurate, my point is that using subjective awards to prove anything is FS. Your bigger point that you need a great player to win an NBA title is spot on. Whether that player happens to make first team All NBA or not is inconsequential.

    Yet instead of saying that you decided to be a jackass like usual and snip at one little thing.

    Also I remember that year vividly nobody was upset or up in arms about KG making first team.

    The other title teams during that run were Bulls(obvious), one year of Houston(again obvious), Bulls again, Spurs(obvious), Lakers(Obvious), Pistons(exception), Spurs(obvious), Heat(Obvious, there was no centers), Spurs(obvious again), Celtics(felt it was deserved but whatever), Lakers(obvious), Dallas(exception), Heat(obvious).

    My stat was accurate but you took away from it to be FS.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    George is still young. If he keeps developing, he can be a top 10 player. His offensive game should keep improving. He's a damn good player. It's pretty hard to make All NBA at forward with LeBron and Durant there.

    Despite what DNCFS thinks there is a reason why three out of 23 teams have won a title without a first team all NBA player. George isn't that.
    On this point we agree, George isn't a top 5 NBA player and Indiana isn't winning a title unless he becomes one.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    dnc said:

    dnc said:

    dnc said:

    Tequilla said:

    Right now George is a 3rd team all NBA kind of player. I think he can get up to a 2nd team all NBA player. I don't think he's a future 1st team player.

    You CAN win without a 1st team player if you surround yourself with a great supporting cast. That was what Indiana tried to do here. That's blown up in smoke.

    They haven't announced the 1st - 3rd teams this year, I'd be surprised if anybody from San Antonio makes it. If so, it will be Parker as a 3rd team member.

    Do you realize since 1991 only THREE teams have ever won an NBA title without a first team player? THREE teams in 23 seasons.

    The teams? 2011 Dallas which had Dirk a former MVP, 2004 Pistons, and 1995 Houston which had Olajuwon who was a top 5 player coming off an MVP year prior plus had Drexler.

    So three times out of the last 23 champions is a nice 13%. Sure it CAN happen but it's very unlikely. Two of those teams also had a former MVP as well who was easily the best player in that particular postseason.
    This is where I have to interject correlation does not equal causation. It's quite possible that championship caliber teams get their best player recognized on such teams rather than the other way around. I don't believe that All NBA always = best 5 players in the league. Subjective awards usually suck.

    I do think you need a top 10 caliber player, at the very least, to win an NBA championship.
    Yes Lebron, Kobe, Garnett, Duncan, Shaq, Jordan were all products of being on recognized because they were on great teams.

    Perhaps you should sit this discussion out........
    Impressive list. For the most part those were all top 3 guys in the league which would make the argument stronger IMO.

    The exception is Garnett. I don't think KG was a top 5 player in 2008. Boston won anyway, because they had 3 top 20 guys in Garnett, Pierce and Allen (and probably two top 10 guys in Garnett in Pierce).
    KG was amazing that year defensively. He was considered a top 5 player in the NBA at that point as well. Also posted a 25 PER which was higher than Duncan and Dirk that year so his All-NBA was earned.

    Also you picked out one questionable guy in the 20 teams who won a title with a first team all league. IMO he wasn't even questionable. I'm dying to hear of an example where an NBA champion got a bullshit first team all NBA player to complete my stat.

    Not surprised you point out one tiny little difference and make a point. Stick to mocking Doogman and let those who actually know the NBA discuss it. This obviously isn't your wheelhouse.
    He was 10th in win shares and 10th in VORP. Yes, he had a nice PER. Whether he was actually top 5 in the league that year is highly debatable.

    I acknowledged the rest of the list was impressive.

    I already gave you your example of an NBA champion who got a bullshit first team All NBA player.

    Anyway, you continue to miss my point. My point is not that your stat is inaccurate, my point is that using subjective awards to prove anything is FS. Your bigger point that you need a great player to win an NBA title is spot on. Whether that player happens to make first team All NBA or not is inconsequential.

    Yet instead of saying that you decided to be a jackass like usual and snip at one little thing.

    Also I remember that year vividly nobody was upset or up in arms about KG making first team.

    The other title teams during that run were Bulls(obvious), one year of Houston(again obvious), Bulls again, Spurs(obvious), Lakers(Obvious), Pistons(exception), Spurs(obvious), Heat(Obvious, there was no centers), Spurs(obvious again), Celtics(felt it was deserved but whatever), Lakers(obvious), Dallas(exception), Heat(obvious).

    My stat was accurate but you took away from it to be FS.
    Jackass like usual? Sounds like you want to take the gloves off.

    Close race, you want to take the gloves ? You have to get down to a game you pee ? Let's do it. Let's roll .

    I'm getting tired of your hatred, negativity, under the bus and throwing people .

    Frankly , race, I'm very, very happy , I do not know you . I am glad that I do not lead to what appears to be such a pathetic life is facing find the negative in all cases . You need to find a smile . Last time I checked , it is summer . Seattle weather seems to be pretty good, now - why do not you check it out.

    You're damn wrong thing. You might think that a lot of the time, constantly spewing your opinion, you have now heard enough time , you are correct . Does not make you right .

    You talk about like a blue sky took place 12-47 . I've never seen , you had suggested during the fall , before the start of the program to Daai Olmert .

    The fact that you want to do ? You want the truth? Here is your truth.

    Emmert came to the University of Washington before the glorious 1-10 Gilby next season . The previous year ( 2003 ) Gilby enough for us to 6-6 , but the crash , including in California , we gave up 700 yards ( or thereabouts ) . This is a team of indifference , almost mediocre at best . We lost our last eight , including blowout of California , UCLA 's blowout, and the family lost Nevada. Yes, the plan is a step in the right direction.

    2002 season was another 925 next season slick example , the most remembered "Northwest Championship ." This is great . However, entry "Northwest champion the fact that " we are a 4-5 football team, is pretty much a joke 1-4 in the conference Tibet . In 2002 and 2003 , we finished the season 4-4 conference record.

    These are not very good team . This trend toward the downhill .

    Emmert plate and immediately get sadled Gilby 1-10 fiasco.

    Emmert before coming on board , Babs jumped ship after decades of mismanagement , including allowing the stadium began erosion process .

    Throughout 2003 , we are faced with slick leave, subsequent litigation ( Ci ) , Dr. feel good , and the overall chaos and softball programs and Teresa Wilson .

    Now, remember the following points : the first occurred in the University of Washington as president of the Qieaimote anywhere near .

    Things are not in great shape . I think that almost everyone knows .

    Replace the formation of a search committee Babs . BOR, on campus , and a big supporter of the school donations on their face appear eggs sick . Babs Run Country Club, they get sick and loose the way she ran the department - especially in light of what slick . They want someone serious, proper , they can count on not tarnish the university 's name. Enter Todd Turner .

    Now, it almost makes you Emmert was hired as points . He must sign the hiring Turner ? Most likely . But whatever.

    At this point, Emmert is not responsible for the football program performance in the field . Have a coach in place. It is not , Emmert football program or any other program in the athletic department 's work , supervision. This work belongs to Todd Turner . Emmert work , monitor work performance Todd Turner .

    So 1-10 happen. Gilby canned Turner ( rightly so ) . Yes, planned 1-10 . But those responsible for overseeing the program of action is correct. Turner fired coach underperforming . If I Emmert 's shoes , I can not complain.

    Coaching search occurred and Turner had his heart set on Tyrone spirit . This is Turner's lease . This is not Emmert rent. Of course, Emmert signed lease. This is good . Do you want to throw some blame him had the foresight to deny hire. This is good . But renting Emmert 's responsibility. This is Turner responsibilities. Turner held responsible Emmert responsibility rental ( he did it three years later, when Tyrone is not the answer is obvious ) .

    Therefore, Tyrone becomes 2-91-10 years after the first year . Not great. Warning signs began , especially in some underperforming , close games. But it's the first year of the regime , really hard to get too critical .

    Next year plans to go 5-7 , and there are two major events. The first major event was the loss of injured QB . I think a lot of people might say that if there had been no loss of Isaiah , we went 6-6. The second is a major event that is "Suddenly Senior " A Day unexplicable loss of Stanford 's most ruthless man had never seen football team. Similarly , there is no adequate fire Tyrone at this point . There are warning signs. Tyrone has ground almost to tell the next year is a year of action what needs to happen . In my opinion, at this point of his hands and feet .

    The next year, we lost the game the way that can not be explained . Blow Arizona - a game , we never lost a huge loss. The most ridiculous endings I have seen a guy is open 20 yards out of the timeout Apple Cup . Blowing one pair of 21:00 to Hawaii . It is at this point is a very obvious thing , does not work. Coaching change is in order. Perhaps also for AD conversion . Coaching is blocked and complicated. Ad 's head down - this is a matter of course , due to some other issues , he has such a terrible hire coach.

    Fire Tyrone after 2007 before deciding it's really hard to do a football program Emmert any controversy.

    I would say that 2008 is a Tyrone back disastrously wrong . It should never happen . You want to throw 0-12 Emmert - all my . I think that if you catch Emmert reflection , real moments , he will tell you in hindsight , he should have taken action , it is not worth the Holocaust 0-12 .

    Emmert threw under the bus in 2008 . It is his responsibility. 2004-2007 ? Not so much. By all means, please, please tell me , where he has the responsibility in 2004 and 2007 than the fact that his University. Please tell me what specific actions , he did destroy the program . You are not going to find them - they do not exist .

    Emmert your criticism is ridiculous. Your criticism of Woodward just downright funny.

    Woodward Where screwed this program ? He was only responsible for this program in the summer of 2008 a full-time role. You have to hold him to the fire during the first half of 2008 interim AD? How could he be anything , from 2004 to 2007 , he did not even participate in the athletic department is responsible ? Talk about conspiracy theories . This is probably the greatest I've ever seen one conspiracy theory .

    I do not like to lose. I do not like what I saw in the past five years. It makes me sick to my stomach many times . But unlike you, I can at least take a step back and realize that the origins of this problem before , became president Mark Emmert , University of Washington .

    If I spent my time as a " blind racial Bannon I ," and then I will believe that the only logical explanation for our failures have Mark Emmert and Scott Woodward .

    Frankly, the advice is in my life, I have seen the most stupid one crazy stupid comments .

    I do not defend " the wrong target ." There are strange being thrown Emmert way . I readily admit it. But it is not his full blame . Babs deserves blame. Gerberding worthy of blame. McCormick deserves some blame . Slick deserves some blame . Gilby deserves some blame . Turner deserves some blame . Stallone deserves some blame . I have listed the names of only three of these names have any timetable Emmert 's tenure extends to any part . This is less than half of those names .

    Frankly, race, you are a world-class ass . When I hear people in Washington state people bitch and moan - you are a crystal example of why people bitch about Washington. When I heard the bitch University of Washington fans , they complain about what you represent those who complained .

    In my opinion , you are not good at Washington University . You are not helping the program . You are not helping the university . You are completely selfish and flashy, selfish bastard .

    You are barking up the wrong tree if you want to come after me . I am not so naive as to push my head to make my ass ignore what I saw . I do not think anyone knows I would say , I would not put bluntly .

    All payments and participate in the game longer than I've been alive for you to do is give you a perception is a painful old man. Congratulations on this point.

    Thank you for those of us how not to act when we are in your shoes in the 20-30 year-old young generation .
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    Tequilla said:

    Right now George is a 3rd team all NBA kind of player. I think he can get up to a 2nd team all NBA player. I don't think he's a future 1st team player.

    You CAN win without a 1st team player if you surround yourself with a great supporting cast. That was what Indiana tried to do here. That's blown up in smoke.

    They haven't announced the 1st - 3rd teams this year, I'd be surprised if anybody from San Antonio makes it. If so, it will be Parker as a 3rd team member.

    What about Duncan at center like last year? I think Duncan at center has a shot. Same with Parker as a guard. Paul, Durant, Lebron are the locks. Parker is battling Harden for two guard. I think Ducan wins center given Gasol was hurt a bulk of the year.
    This raises an interesting question of which I do not know the answer. Duncan's first 13 All-NBA recognitions came as a forward. His last one he was recognized as the center. Was there a shift in his usage that explains this, or did they just not have a center they liked so they gave it to the next best forward? I know this year they've been playing him at the 4 with Splitter at the 5. I assume last year was the same.

    FWIW, I would support them picking the best 5 players. If there's not a true center worth selecting take another forward.
  • Options
    haiehaie Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 20,571
    First Anniversary 5 Up Votes First Comment 5 Awesomes
    Swaye's Wigwam
    What I take from all of this is that if you take the outlier teams from HNMT's list including Boston and compare them to Indiana it is still night and fucking day because all those teams had so much veteran leadership. I can't imagine even Sheed saying something as fucking stupid as he's in Shaq's head...
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes
    haie said:

    What I take from all of this is that if you take the outlier teams from HNMT's list including Boston and compare them to Indiana it is still night and fucking day because all those teams had so much veteran leadership. I can't imagine even Sheed saying something as fucking stupid as he's in Shaq's head...

    +1. Stevenson is a fucking dumbass.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment blah
    dnc said:

    haie said:

    What I take from all of this is that if you take the outlier teams from HNMT's list including Boston and compare them to Indiana it is still night and fucking day because all those teams had so much veteran leadership. I can't imagine even Sheed saying something as fucking stupid as he's in Shaq's head...

    +1. Stevenson is a fucking dumbass.
    Stevenson you expect that from. I tweeted during game two that he's Ron Artest without the charging into the stands.

    A little disappointed in Paul George's statement after this game.

    For what it is worth basketball reference breaks down what position you play.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html

    Now for Duncan they have him at 100% center which obviously isn't true but I imagine that the Spurs do go small quite a bit so he could qualify as a center. Much like Lebron at this point I consider him to be a power forward.
  • Options
    dncdnc Member Posts: 56,614
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Awesomes 5 Up Votes

    dnc said:

    haie said:

    What I take from all of this is that if you take the outlier teams from HNMT's list including Boston and compare them to Indiana it is still night and fucking day because all those teams had so much veteran leadership. I can't imagine even Sheed saying something as fucking stupid as he's in Shaq's head...

    +1. Stevenson is a fucking dumbass.
    Stevenson you expect that from. I tweeted during game two that he's Ron Artest without the charging into the stands.

    A little disappointed in Paul George's statement after this game.

    For what it is worth basketball reference breaks down what position you play.

    http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/d/duncati01.html

    Now for Duncan they have him at 100% center which obviously isn't true but I imagine that the Spurs do go small quite a bit so he could qualify as a center. Much like Lebron at this point I consider him to be a power forward.
    That's a really interesting positional breakdown.

    It definitely doesn't look like the All NBA selections use the same data BR is using. BR had him at 71% C in 07 when he was a first team forward, 94% C in 08 when he was a second team forward, 100% C in 09 when he was a second team forward and 100% in 10 when he was a third team forward.

    But, given how they recognized him as a C last year I'd imagine they will this year again, and I agree that if they see him as a C he's probably the best one out there. Which is amazing since this was the lowest PER season of Duncan's career.
  • Options
    CuntWaffleCuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,493
    First Anniversary 5 Fuck Offs 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    Christ... I tried telling you all this after game 1. It's all in the script. Pacers will win game 5 at home and then the Heat will coast to an easy victory game 6.

    Never go against the script.
  • Options
    CuntWaffleCuntWaffle Member Posts: 22,493
    First Anniversary 5 Fuck Offs 5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes
    In regards to Paul George. He has the talent to become an elite NBA player but mentally he isn't there yet. Very Lebron like when he was younger and blaming refs and other retarded shit on losses.

    I thought the Pacers had a legit shot at the title this year when the cylinders were clicking and they were playing outstanding defense and great team basketball all around. What we have learned in the playoffs is that mentally they think they are better than they are and a bunch of pussies aside maybe West. Resorting to pre-game trash talk (which Lance Stephenson sucks at) and then always having some FS excuse after they get plungered.

    PS: I never said Paul George will become the next Lebron so don't go twisting my words.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment blah

    Christ... I tried telling you all this after game 1. It's all in the script. Pacers will win game 5 at home and then the Heat will coast to an easy victory game 6.

    Never go against the script.

    You'll know if Miami wins game 5 early on based on their defensive intensity.

    I think Pacers are a mess and expect Miami to clinch on their home court.
  • Options
    RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,123
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam
    The Pacers were never any good. LeBron's Cavs always won 60+, but had no chance at a title. The Pacers are the same way.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment blah

    The Pacers were never any good. LeBron's Cavs always won 60+, but had no chance at a title. The Pacers are the same way.

    Lebron's Cavs were more like OKC with Durant IMO. I get where you are going. I never felt like Lebron was the clear cut favorite to win the title until he went to Miami.
  • Options
    RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,123
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam

    The Pacers were never any good. LeBron's Cavs always won 60+, but had no chance at a title. The Pacers are the same way.

    Lebron's Cavs were more like OKC with Durant IMO. I get where you are going. I never felt like Lebron was the clear cut favorite to win the title until he went to Miami.
    You're pressing a little with your Thunder hate. LeBron never had a Westbrook. LeBron never even had an Ibaka. The Thunder are a young team with the youngest nucleus of all the contenders. Durant's Thunder are a way more legitimate contender than the Cavs with LeBron. The Cavs were acquiring Wally Szerbiak and Delonte West and playin them 40 minutes in the playoffs.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 11,453
    5 Up Votes 5 Awesomes First Comment blah

    The Pacers were never any good. LeBron's Cavs always won 60+, but had no chance at a title. The Pacers are the same way.

    Lebron's Cavs were more like OKC with Durant IMO. I get where you are going. I never felt like Lebron was the clear cut favorite to win the title until he went to Miami.
    You're pressing a little with your Thunder hate. LeBron never had a Westbrook. LeBron never even had an Ibaka. The Thunder are a young team with the youngest nucleus of all the contenders.
    Durant's Thunder are a way more legitimate contender than the Cavs with LeBron. The Cavs were acquiring Wally Szerbiak and Delonte West and playin them 40 minutes in the playoffs.
    So you are admitting Durant has more surrounding talent than Lebron did?

    Perhaps if he doesn't win a title maybe some will finally get on him like they did Lebron.
  • Options
    RoadDawg55RoadDawg55 Member, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 30,123
    First Anniversary First Comment 5 Up Votes Combo Breaker
    Swaye's Wigwam

    The Pacers were never any good. LeBron's Cavs always won 60+, but had no chance at a title. The Pacers are the same way.

    Lebron's Cavs were more like OKC with Durant IMO. I get where you are going. I never felt like Lebron was the clear cut favorite to win the title until he went to Miami.
    You're pressing a little with your Thunder hate. LeBron never had a Westbrook. LeBron never even had an Ibaka. The Thunder are a young team with the youngest nucleus of all the contenders.
    Durant's Thunder are a way more legitimate contender than the Cavs with LeBron. The Cavs were acquiring Wally Szerbiak and Delonte West and playin them 40 minutes in the playoffs.
    So you are admitting Durant has more surrounding talent than Lebron did?

    Perhaps if he doesn't win a title maybe some will finally get on him like they did Lebron.
    When did I or anyone ever say Dursnt had less talent than LeBron's Cavs? Durant is 25 or 26. He's got time to win a championship. Jordan, Pippen, and Grant took awhile to win one too. I could see criticizing him for the Memphis series, and he stupidly was ( Mr. Unreliable). I don't know what else there is to criticize.

    LeBron took heat for the way he left and for folding against the Celtics before "The decision." I don't remember him getting that much criticism for not taking the Cavs to a championship. They wouldn't have even been the favorite if they got there.
Sign In or Register to comment.